Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-03-02 Transcription#2b Page 1 ITEM 2. MAYOR'S PROCLAMATION. b. InternationaIWomen's Month Lehman: (reads proclamation) Kan-: Here to accept the proclamation is Karen Kubby, Executive Director, Emma Goldman Clinic. (applause) Kubby: Mayor Lehman, City Council, thank you very much for this proclamation. It means a lot to the people of the region, and as usual there are lots of activities to actually celebrate International Women's Month, and actually International Women's Day started in 1909 in the United States, and the next year in Copenhagen, became an international holiday. And the United Nations has played a big role in making sure that these activities have continued throughout the decades, with really for ways that we want to talk about women's rights. First is to promote legal measures, which Iowa City has done a great j ob of over the decades; to mobilize public opinion and have international action around these issues; to do training and research; and to also direct assistance to disadvantaged groups. In Iowa City we have a couple of different ways that we're celebrating. There's a ..... if you go to the Women's Resource and Action Center website you can get a whole calen,dthar of events. There are two m,ajor events: the first one is on March 8 , actual International Women s Day, at 7:00 PM at the International Center lounge, where Victoria Fomena will do a reading, as well as some local actors will present a production of "Every Woman", which is an original look, it's a lyrical one-act play, written by a local woman and performed by three local actors. And then on March 25th at 4:00 PM, Gillian Martin Sorenson who is the Senior Advisor at the United Nations Foundation will speak at a, at the end of a conference all day actually, that the Iowa Women's Foundation and the United Nations Association are working together on to look at the vision of the future for women and girls in Iowa, so people are invited to that from 4 to 6:00 PM at the Holiday Inn in Coralville. And because there's always so many activities, I think it's really important for people to know that organizations collaborate. There were quite a few collaborating organizations to put the month's long activities together. The Iowa United Nation's Association, the Emma Goldman Clinic, Women's Resource and Action Center, The University of Iowa Center for Human Rights, Women for Peace, The Stanley Foundation, Linn County United Nation's Association, The University of Iowa International Programs, and the Iowa Women's Foundation, so there's lot of collaboration going on, and there were twenty other groups who are co-sponsoring the activity. So we are a great place for women, and we need to keep it that way, and make it even better. Thank you. Champion: Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #2b Page 2 Lehman: Thanks, Karen. (applause) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #3 Page 3 ITEM 3. OUTSTANDING STUDENT CITIZENSHIP AWARDS - Grant Wood Elementary Lehman: If the young folks from Grant Wood would come forward please? You guys are upstaging me, step back here a little bit. (laughter) Really can't have that. Today somebody was interviewing me about being Mayor, and they asked me what I liked the very best about being Mayor. I told them I wasn't absolutely positive, but at least tied for number one is this student citizenship awards. This is about as much fun as a Mayor could ever have, and ! think the Council really does share that as well. This is a time when we recognize outstanding student citizens, and you're from Grant Wood, is that right? You wouldn't know a teacher named Jan Grenko would ya? Do you know who she is? Koch: Uh-huh, ...teacher. Lehman: Yeah, she's my daughter-in-law. (laughter) Pretty cool, isn't she? (laughter) Hey, she's not just cool, she's basically perfect. Why don't....that's not funny, it's true. (laughter) I'd like each of you to give your name and then tell why you were nominated. Triplett: Um, I'm Elizabeth Triplett. Hello my name is Elizabeth Triplett. I'm eleven years old. I'm in 6th grade at Grant Wood Elementary School and my teacher is Mr. Glenn. I am involved in Conflict Mangers who helps kids solve problems at recess. I am also a captain in the Safety Patrol, who helps before and after school to make sure that Grant Wood is safe. In addition, I am a Jazzy Jumper. Jazzy Jumpers is a group that jump ropes at other schools and community events. I am also a saxophone player in band. I have been involved with helping the Alzheimer's Walk, and also doing an Alzheimer's car wash. I play softball with the Iowa City Girls' Softball Association. Also I play piano, I dance, and I play tennis. Thank you very much for this Outstanding Student Citizenship Award. It is an honor. (applause) Koch: Hello my name is Alex Koch. I am a 6th grader in Mr. Vaughn's classroom. I have been at Grant Wood Elementary for seven years. I am currently on Safety Patrol, Conflict Managers, and Jazzy Jumpers. Whenever I can I will try to help someone out. For example, when I am on Conflict Managers, I help kids solve their conflicts and other problems. When I am on Safety Patrol, I make sure that kids are safe before and after school. When I am in Jazzy Jumpers, I represent Grant Wood Elementary when I perform with jump ropes for other schools and clubs. Finally, for the past two years I have volunteered at Safety Village. I would like to thank you for this Outstanding Student Citizenship Award. (applause) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #3 Page 4 Lehman: I think your father spends more time in this building than the Council does, doesn't he? Koch: Yes. Lehman: What does he do? Koch: He's a firefighter. Lehman: I have some certificates here. Before... I did meet two very, very important people before the meeting tonight, and that's a grandpa and grandma. Now you're parents are very proud of you, but I promise you that your grandparents are even more proud of you. I'll read this award and then I'll give each of you one. (reads award) Alex and Elizabeth, thank you. (applause) Elliott: Emie, we have some older students here tonight too - a journalism class from the University of Iowa is here. (can't hear), so welcome to them. Lehman: In deed. O'Dounell: Welcome. Lehman: We'll check and see what they write. (laughter) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #6c Page 5 ITEM 6. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS. c. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY LOCATED ADJACENT TO 425 BELDON AVENUE. (VAC03-00004) (PASS AND ADOPT) O'Donnell: Move adoption. Vanderhoef: Second. Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell; seconded by Vanderhoef. I think we know... Champion: Ernie, do we have to vote on 8 before we....? Lehman: No, if there, I was just going to mention, if Council has any problems with Item 8, then we should defer this one until after we do 8. If we're all in agreement on Item 8, then this is okay. O'Donnell: No. Lehman: Discussion? Roll call. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. Page 6 ITEM 7. PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT, AND ESTIMATE OF COST FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE 2004 ASPHALT RESURFACING PROJECT, ESTABLISHING AMOUNT OF BID SECURITY TO ACCOMPANY EACH BID, DIRECTING CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, AND FIXING TIME AND PLACE FOR RECEIPT OF BIDS. A. PUBLIC HEARING Lehman: Estimated cost of this project is $369,000, which will be funded with Road Use Taxes, proceeds. Public hearing is closed. Do we have a motion? Wilburn: Move adoption of the resolution. Lehman: Moved by Wilbum. O'Dormell: Second. Lehman: Seconded by O'Dormell. Discussion? Roll call. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #9 Page 7 ITEM 9. AMENDING TITLE 3 ENTITLED "CITY FINANCES, TAXATION & FEES," CHAPTER 4, "SCHEDULE OF FEES, RATES, CHARGES, BONDS, FINES, AND PENALTIES"; AMENDING TITLE 14 ENTITLED "UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE," CHAPTER 3, "CITY UTILITIES," ARTICLE A, "GENERAL PROVISIONS," SECTION 14-3A-2, "DEFINITIONS," AND SECTION 14-3A-4, "RATES AND CHARGES FOR CITY UTILITIES" AND; AMENDING TITLE 14 ENTITLED "UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE," CHAPTER 3, "CITY UTILITIES," ARTICLE G, "STORM WATER COLLECTION, DISCHARGE AND RUNOFF," TO CREATE A STORMWATER UTILITY AND ESTABLISH A STORMWATER UTILITY FEE. Lehman: Public hearing is open. Public hearing is closed. Do we have a...? Champion: Move first consideration. Bailey: Second. Lehman: Moved by Champion; seconded by Bailey. Discussion? Elliott: I said last night, and I think I'm not alone, that I certainly have reservations about this but I will vote positively. I anticipate there will be information emerging, and I suspect that Council will find it necessary, or appropriate, to revisit this some time within the next year. O'Donnell: And I agree with Bob. I also have a problem. I think this puts us at an unfair advantage with surrounding communities. Understand it's been throt~gh the Chamber, and ICAAD, so I'm going to support it this time but I'm anxious to see how this goes over and am waiting to review this after a year. Lehman: For the public's information, this is a fee structure that the City will be initiating to pay for storm water runoff, which is a federally mandated activity that cities have to participate in, and what Mike has said is true, this has been looked at extensively by our staff, the Chamber, whatever, and we have now come to the first consideration. Is there any other discussion? Roll call. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #10 Page 8 ITEM 10. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 3 ENTITLED "CITY FINANCES, TAXATION AND FEES," CHAPTER 4, "SCHEDULE OF FEES, RATES, CHARGES, BONDS, FINES AND PENALTIES"; AMENDING TITLE 14 ENTITLED "UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE," CHAPTER 3, "CITY UTILITIES," ARTICLE A, "GENERAL PROVISIONS," SECTION 14-3A-2, "DEFINITIONS," AND SECTION 14-3A-4, "RATES AND CHARGES FOR CITY UTILITIES: AND; AMENDING TITLE 14 ENTITLED "UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE," CHAPTER 3, "CITY UTILIEIES, ARTICLE G, "STORMWATER COLLECTION, DISCHARGE AND RUNOFF," TO CREATE A STORMWATER UTILITY AND ESTABLISH A STORMWATER UTILITY FEE. (DEFERRED FROM 1/20, 2/3 AND 2/17) (PASS AND ADOPT) Kart: This should be defeated. This is your old... Lehman: This is the one that, the one that we just passed replaces this one, so we need a motion to pass it, and then we need to defeat it. Elliott: So moved. Lehman: Moved by Elliott. Champion: Second. Lehman: Seconded by Champion. Discussion? Roll call. What a very, very strange unanimous negative vote. (laughter) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #11 Page 9 ITEM 11. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 10 OF THE CITY CODE, ENTITLED "USE OF PUBLIC WAYS AND PROPERTY," TO CREATE A UNIFORM PERMITTING PROCESS, TO ESTABLLISH REQUIREMENTS FOR THE FARMERS MARKET, TO PROVIDE FOR THE NONCOMMERCIAL PLACEMENT OF OBJECTS IN CITY PLAZA ON A TEMPORARY BASIS, TO MODIFY THE PROVISION ON RESIDENTIAL PICKETING, TO CLARIFY THE CURRENT PROVISIONS REGULATING MOBILE VENDORS AND AMBULATORY VENDORS, TO CODIFY SPECIFIC ADMINISTRATIVE RULES AFFECTING SAID VENDORS, AND TO MAKE ADDITIONAL NONSUBSTANTIVE CHANGES. (SECOND CONSIDERATION) Vanderhoef: Move second consideration. Bailey: Second. Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef; seconded by Bailey. Discussion? Bailey: I've had a lot of questions about the indemnification clause when you are planning an event, and I was wondering, Eleanor, if you could talk, speak to that a little bit, and explain what that means, and when that comes into play? Dilkes: The indemnification agreement, although we've changed the wording to comport with the language we actually used, the indemnification requirement has been part of our ordinances for years. It's not an addition. What the indemnification provision does is it requires the applicant or the entity wanting to make use of our parks or our streets, and again that's a gathering of more than 25 for the streets, and more than 100 for the parks. It requires them to agree to indemnify the City. What that means is ifa claim would be made against the City, or a law suit filed against the City, for dan~ages alleged to have been suffered in connection with the use of the public property, the applicant or the sponsor of the event would cover the City for those damages, and defend the City against that claim, and they would be required to have insurance to cover that claim. Again, as we've said before, the provision of insurance is subject to waiver, if there's a demonstration of inability to obtain the insurance, or the inability to pay for the insurance. An example of when that indemnity agreement might come into play is let's say we allow the Jazz Festival to operate on our streets downtown during the summer. They agree to indemnify us for damages. Someone trips and falls over a cord strung along the right-of- way, and sues us for damages. We would look to the Jazz Festival to cover those damages, if there were any, and defend us against that claim. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #11 Page 10 Bailey: Thank you. Dieterle: Well, I noticed... Lehman: Please, Caroline, give your name. Dieterle: Sorry, Caroline Dieterle, Walnut Street. I have one more question. It really bothers me because if someone has the insurance requirement waived because they can't afford the insurance, and then them is some sort of incident, that they would then be sued for, it seems to me they have very little recourse. That's one thing. The other thing is, it seems to me that an awful lot of stuff is being thrown into this one ordinance. You know, having demonstrations and parades being treated by the same ordinance that treats vendors, for example, and the Farmers Market, and it seems to me there's a much more, um, liability for the City or for those entities, the vendors or the people who sell things on the street or in the Farmers Market, than somebody who's holding a parade, and so it seems to me, that the logical thing to do would be to have two separate ordinances, or if you wanted to keep everything in one, that the language would be clearly put in there, making the indemnification apply to the businesses, the street vendors, and the Farmers Market, where they are, those are commercial ventures, as opposed to some kind of a demonstration, or a parade, or something of that nature, which to me is a much different use of public space, and it would make sense, you know, to have an indemnification for the Farmers Market, for example, or for the...because those people are gainfully employed doing that. As far as I know, the people who play in the Jazz Festival and so forth are doing it because they love the music, and it would be a shame for them to have an incident, such as you're describing, and then have them having signed the indemnification agreement be liable for the damage that happened, which might very well not be any of their conscious fault. I mean, it wouldn't be because they started a riot, or you know, did anything like that. And it would put a damper on participation in events like that, which I think Iowa City doesn't need because I think one of the reasons Iowa City is a successful city is because it has those kinds of events that people come to from all over, and the attendance of people at those things, of course, boosts local business, and tourism and everything else, so um, I would like it if you would give some thought to separating those two things, putting them into different ordinances, or at least making the language clear so that the indemnification would not apply to people who are doing any kind of parades or demonstrations. Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. Eleanor, am I correct in assuming that, I believe the Jazz Fest does now insure themselves? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #11 Page 11 Dilkes: I would assume that they do. I don't administer those permits, but I mean, I'm assuming they have insurance to protect themselves. Lehman: Right. Dilkes: You can, it's all in one ordinance, but you can certainly eliminate that provision if you choose, from the different aspects of it. Lehman: Okay. Hansen: My name is Peter Hansen. I'm an Iowa City resident, 1203 Cambria Court. I'm on the Board of Directors of the Hawkeye Area Chapter of the Iowa Civil Liberties Union, although I'm speaking tonight as a private citizen, and not, I do not speak for the Board. We have discussed parts of though, I must say. It was brought to our attention only relatively recently, and we really haven't had enough time to study the various parts of this, I believe there's a 20-page document on your web site, dealing with changes. But some of our concerns are as follows: There are exceptions made to some of the guidelines, and it sounds as though if 26 Iowa City Kickers are mamhing down one side of the street, and 26 Iraq war protestors are marching down the other side of the street, the Iowa City Kickers don't need a permit or insurance or anything, whereas the people demonstrating against the war do, and we recognize that any time you have a demonstration or a parade or something, it can disrupt the flow of traffic and so forth, but it appears to us as though the Iowa City Kickers are going to be just as, have the same potential for disrupting the flow of traffic and so forth as people engaged in these other type of activities. There's also some exceptions made for, what I think are referred to as a spontaneous demonstration, where a permit is not needed, but a notification within 24 hours is needed, and just the way the news cycle operate these days, you often find out about something you know, evening news one night and it's sort of logical to have a demonstration noon the next day, or so forth, which doesn't allow you the 24 hours. The indemnification agreement also gave us some pause. I'm not, I guess I don't, I'm not a lawyer, and I tried to follow your description of the issues, but it still seems to me that with or without an indemnification agreement, if I'm part of a parade that goes by Emie's business and we break his window, we're liable for breaking his window, whether we've signed an agreement or not, and on the other hand, if we're parading and some bystander breaks a window in Ernie's store, you know, I don't think we should be liable for that, and yet it may have been indirectly a result of our having a parade, if the bystander is there watching the parade. So it's not exactly clear what the purpose of the agreement is to us, but again I must say I haven't studied it that much. Likewise, it appears as though ifI have an outstanding parking ticket, you can deny me the right to have a parade or demonstration, and that perhaps strikes me as a little bit extreme. And This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #11 Page 12 the issue of securing police protection. I know there are waivers, and in some instances if it's on-duty police, there's no remuneration or anything involved, but in other instances, it wasn't quite clear to me, is to how the judgment is made, and someone leading a parade or demonstration might have to procure their own security at the what might be some considerable expense. The insurance issue, likewise, as I read the proposal at least, could be problematic. Chapter 1 deals with parades and pubic assemblies. Chapter 2 with public demonstrations, and it wasn't clear to me as to the difference between the two, and yet some of the guidelines and so forth are different, and in Chapter, I believe it's Chapter 2, Section 3, it says residential picketing is unlawful. Now I realize residential picketing is defined in a certain way, but again it gives me some concern. Apparently someone is not allowed to stand in front of my house with or without a sign, and yet if they go across the street they can, and so I'm not quite sure about the logic of the role which sounds like it's based on proximity to my house, as opposed to the actions of the picketer. I can understand ifa person is picketing and shouting and threatening and so forth, regardless if their on my side of the street or the other side of the street, perhaps that should be unlawful, but if one or two people are standing on my side of the street and picketing, with first amendment rights and so forth, I don't know that that should be, I don't know that that should be illegal, so I would have some reservations about Chapter 2, Section 3, at least as it's currently written, but again, our Board has not taken any position. I'm sort of speaking as a private citizen, but mainly because we just haven't had time to examine this, these proposed changes, like we would like to. Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. Discussion? Champion: Well it's my understanding, Eleanor, that if something, if there's breaking news like the Iraqi war, for instance, and there was a big demonstration the next day, spontaneous things are not covered under this ordinance. Isn't that true? Dilkes: That's right. I think the gentleman's comment went to the length of the notice. We took the 24-hour notice out of the ordinance, model ordinances, from the International Municipal Lawyers Association. You're certainly free to reduce that notice period if you want. Champion: And it would be more for planned events? An event that's planned, and not a spontaneous event, which you really can't control anyway. Dilkes: Well there's a notice event for spontaneous events. You're not required to get a permit. The permitting requirements, that it's exempted from, but there still is a notice requirement. I think there needs to be a notice requirement because we need to know if that's going to be happening, for This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #11 Page 13 safety reasons, but it's a 24 hour notice, and if you want to reduce it to 12 or some other length of time, that's fine. Bailey: And what would notice entail? Calling up and saying we're having, we're on the Ped Mall today at noon and....? Dilkes: Well, right...well, on City property, right, not the Ped Mall, but right, yes. It would just be alerting us to the fact that there may be, you know, large gatherings of people that may create safety issues and that kind of thing, so that we can, you know, be aware of that. And we can't have people marching down the center of our streets without knowing that them may be some issues, that we need to attend to. Wilbum: I think I referred to this last time that this is modification of an existing ordinance, and it's about the use of public place or property, so, and these amendments are intended to err on the side of First Amendment rights, and it's been my experience, or to my knowledge, with the City, that any problems or a lot of concern that has been expressed, and in the few cases that I've seen while I've been on Council, have been related to someone complaining about a group being in a certain right-of-way, whether it's a protestor or that type of thing, and so in my mind this reiterates that yes folks do have a right to do this, and the notice part is important for me in terms of giving people the opportunity, again, like I said last time, whether it's assistance with safety for themselves, or if it's even something just...ways the City can support what it is they're trying to do. If it's some type of community event or protest or activity, making sure if we can offer if there is some type of waste and refuse available for folks, so I look at this as cleaning up an existing provision. Bailey: And I agree with Ross. I've always said that I think this clarification of an ordinance that is currently on our books, and I think it makes it clear to people who are organizing, what needs to be in place, and what the permitting process looks like. I mean, you can basically check things off with a list to get a plan for a public demonstration. Wilburn: So basically it's let us know what you're going to do so we can be supportive, and we can let people know who are against whatever it is you're doing, like a protest, that these folks do indeed have a right to do what they're doing. Lehman: Other discussion? Elliott: I just...a clarification, but Caroline, all right for her to go ahead? Dieterle: Just one more thing, if you would at least make it public and have it reflected in the minutes possibly? I don't know how detailed minutes you This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #11 Page 14 keep. This discussion, or this, what I'm about to say, or if you would agree to it, or whatever. In your packet you also have a forward that I sent to you about the arrest of protestors in Texas, and if you're following it at all, some of the other controversies across the Nation that have to do with the WTO and the whole business of GAT and NAFTA, and you know, the joblessness that some people think that's created. There have been demonstrations that have not really been followed in the news, in the media that are corporately controlled, so you almost have to be on internet news, or have an alternate source of news to really find out about them in any detail. I happen to have some people who actually attended those, and had pictures. There are films around that you can find that were taken by people who were on the spot, and these people were, in the minds of many and certainly in mine, they were exercising their First Amendment rights in a peaceful manner, but this did not prevent them from being harassed and ultimately arrested, and held, because basically of what they were doing, and I, that is the reason why I am sensitive I guess about this ordinance. Because I don't want Iowa City to become a place where people are afraid to go out and do that kind of thing. Having seen some of this footage of some of these things that occurred, you know it really means you've got to be fairly young and reckless if you're willing to go out and put your body on the line in the street to say that you think the government is doing something wrong. That isn't right for the University. It isn't right for the city of Iowa City. It isn't right for the United States, and I want to be sure that this Council understands that this ordinance is not to be used for that kind of thing if you adopt it. Champion: I agree with you. Elliott: While the next person is signing in, just clarification. I think the demonstrators are not responsible for reactions to the demonstration. Isn't that what you are... ? Dilkes: The example that was just given about somebody breaking Emie's window, or a bystander throwing a rock into Ernie's window, that's not a situation where I see there would be a claim against the City for that. I mean, when we're talking about indemnification, we're talking about a claim against the City, someone alleging negligence on the part of the City, like we had a pot hole that was too big and somebody fell in it. It's that kind of thing, but I don't see the intentional throwing of a brick into Ernie's window as stating a claim against the City, and I don't think indemnification agreement would come into play in that instance. That's similarly the examples that have been given of, you know, a bomb falling during an event, or hecklers damaging City property. Those are not likely to be claims against a city in which the indemnification agreement would come into play. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #11 Page 15 Lehman: Thank you. Fales: My name is Evan Fales. I apologize for having gotten here late. I just wanted to call the Council's attention very briefly to one ambiguous, I think ambiguous clause in the part of this, this legislation that concerns picketing private residences. I am much in sympathy with having such regulations on the books, though I think they may raise some slightly thorny civil rights issues, at least in theoretical cases. But if the intention is to prevent picketing of a private person in their private residence, and if you look, this would be on page 6 near the top there, under B, it says that nothing in this legislation shall prohibit, and if you look at 3, a person or group of person from marching without stopping at a particular private residence. I assume that the intention there is that there is nothing in the legislation intended to prohibit marchers from marching along the sidewalk, past private residences, presumably on their way to somewhere else. I think someone who read this and wanted to picket a private residence, could claim that they were in conformity with this legislation, so long as they all marched around in a circle, right along the sidewalk there, and kept moving. And I presume that is not your intent, so if it's not, I would suggest perhaps rewording that in a way that would clarify that. Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. Any other discussion? Champion: Is that a problem? Dilkes: The residential picketing provision is crafted in accordance with an 8th Circuit decision, the Circuit that governs our area, and I'm comfortable with it. The idea is that the courts have said that people should not be subject to focused picketing at their home, picketing that focuses on their home specifically, so the idea of this is to, and it's, the language can be difficult at times, but the idea is to prohibit activity that essentially is directed at one private residence. And I'm comfortable with the language. Lehman: Okay. Roll call. Motion carries. Karr: Motion to accept correspondence. O'Donnell: So moved. Wilburn: Second. Lehman: A motion and a second to accept correspondence. All in favor? Opposed? Motion carries. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #12 Page 16 ITEM 12. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 4, ENTITLED "ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES," CHAPTER 5, ENTITLED "PROHIBITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS," AND TITLE 10, ENTITLED "USE OF PUBLIC WAYS AND PROPERTY," CHAPTER 9, ENTITLED "PARKS AND RECREATION REGULATIONS," SECTION 2, ENTITLED "PROHIBITED ACTIONS IN PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS" TO ALLOW FOR THE SALE, POSSESSION, AND CONSUMPTION OF BEER AND WINE UNDER LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES PURSUANT TO A WRITTEN AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY. (FIRST CONSIDERATION) Champion: Move first consideration. Vandethoef: Second. Lehman: Moved by Champion; seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion? Dilkes: Do you want me to explain the changes? Lehman: Explain the changes that were made into the ordinance that we... Dilkes: The ordinance that was in your packet this week was quite narrow. At your discussion last night, and it would only have allowed the City to reach agreements with entities, non-profit entities, for sale of alcohol in the City parks. The Council last night expressed interest in being in a position to enter into an agreement with an entity, such as the Jazz Festival, or some downtown festival, that wanted to have beer tents, or be able to sell alcohol in some location on city streets downtown. So with that in mind, I revised the ordinance, the one that's in front of you, in a couple of different ways. Number one, the place where these things can be held has been changed from City parks to not only City parks but public rights-of-way, streets, and public grounds, not including buildings, so that would be parking ramps, the Civic Center parking lot, the streets downtown, that kind of thing, but not city buildings. I have also removed the provision that limited purchase by patrons, ticketed patrons, because once we expand the ordinance beyond the Riverside Theatre type of situation, that just really didn't make sense to require that somebody going into a beer tent downtown have a ticket. I think the control mechanism would have to be that you can only consume and sell alcohol within the authorized area, the area that you are not only authorized by city agreement, but by virtue of your state license to sell alcohol. So that's been changed. We have removed the provision that referred to only entities holding regular activities, pursuant to agreements with the City. That kind of limited it to entities that are affiliated with the City, such as Riverside Theatre, and hold regular activities, every year, every month, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #12 Page 17 whatever, with the City. That has been removed. I also eliminated in the previous ordinance I had included an exception to the under-19 ordinance which prohibits persons under the age of 19 from being in licensed establishments. I had included an exception. I have removed that exception. If we're going to be expansive I just didn't see how we could do that. And then finally, the ordinance has been changed to provide that the term of the agreement cannot exceed one year so that you would review each agreement every year. Champion: And the 19 ordinance is 10:00, is that correct? Dilkes: 10:00. O'Donnell: Well, I think the key here is it's consumption of beer and wine under limited circumstances, and that was important to me and I'm positive that each case is going to be looked at on an individual basis so... Wilburn: Another important part to add to that, Mike, is that with the annual, with the one-year allowance, it gives us a stronger mechanism to deal with problems. If there's problems with some activity, that some group would have, then we're in a stronger position relative to someone with an alcohol permit only. We would deny such a request, Council would deny such a request, if there were problems associated (TAPE ENDS) Champion: I've heard several people talking today, that they thought this was in conflict with the Council's previous stance about alcohol. This doesn't mean that we are endorsing minors drinking, or that we're endorsing binge drinking or excessive drinking. I think most of us feel that there's nothing wrong with having a beer or a glass of wine, and where you consume that is not important, as long as it's with some guidelines, so I'm very comfortable with this ordinance, and I think it's...loosen the rules. Elliott: I've gotten enough phone calls, but I wouldn't say I'm comfortable with it, but I think I favor it. I will vote in favor of it. I also think that I owe some folks an apology. It was pointed out to me last night that I used the word elitist in a pejorative context when referring to the people who wanted this (can't hear) Riverside Theatre, and I apologize to that. That's uncalled for. Mills: Emma Mills, 1121 4th Avenue, Iowa City. My question, a lot of them you have answered, some of your Council people which I contacted today have answered, but my question is: who is going to provide, and who is paying for, the controls around these areas? Iowa City Police, or is it private police or what? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #12 Page 18 Lehman: Emma, my assumption is, and correct me if I'm wrong, but when someone makes an application to get a permit to do this, I am assuming that part of that application process would require sanitation. If it's a large enough area I'm sure we could require that they pay for police, and so on, so I would think that could all be part of the agreement with the City. O'Donnell: And it should be, that's a good idea. Lehman: But I mean, I assume that should not be a problem to make that a part of the agreement. Mills: Well, as I say, I was wondering about the sanitation, which you have mentioned, and they, I assume, will be responsible for that area arotmd there, for the payment of the protection? Or does it say .... Lehman: I believe, if I'm not mistaken that the ordinance that we looked at, they're required to have insurance, they're required to have dram shop insurance, they're required to, there are significant number of requirements that would be probably enough requirements that very few people would even apply, would be my guess. Mills: And she, Champion brought up the subject of underage drinking. Now I assume that the police or whoever is doing the protection, would be within the area from time to time to see that grandma, grandpa, or mom and dad, aren't passing liquor to the 16 year olds? Lehman: I assume that would be very similar to the way we police the bars. Mills: Ur-huh, thank you. Champion: Thank you. Bailey: So, it's my understanding that police can inspect just the way they do in bars? Champion: Oh sure. Dilkes: When you get a liquor license you open yourself up to inspection. Bailey: Without notice? Dilkes: Yes. Lehman: I'm going to give the minority opinion (laughter). Champion: As usual. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #12 Page 19 Lehman: No, that's not always as usual, Connie. Champion: Oh I'm just teasing. Lehman: Uh, I have a real problem, and I have a problem with it for a number of reasons. I guess if we were to allow the serving of wine and beer at the Shakespearean performances and that's as far as it ever went, I guess I couldn't complain about that at all. I mean, I think that's probably within limits. It's controlled, and certainly that's a responsible organization, and my fear has been that we would try to expand it. We proved that last night. Instead of an ordinance that would allow the serving of alcohol at just the Shakespearean thing, we decided to expand it. The expansion would allow us to have beer tents downtown where we have over 50 bars, selling beer anyway. We're talking about events such as 4th of July, I'm assuming. Perhaps Arts Fest, and those sort of things, which I think are family events. These are events where moms, dads, grandparents, and children are, and I do not believe that alcohol is important to those events, particularly when you've got 56 bars within two blocks. So I'm not going to support this. I think this is, I think it's inappropriate in our city parks. I think it's inappropriate on our city streets. This Council, and the two Cotmcils before this one, have struggled mightily with issues relative to alcohol, and I do not believe this is a step that I'm willing to take in that direction, particularly...well, no, particularly, as I just read, our policy...we're a different community than many other communities, with some of the difficulties that we have. I understand where other communities do not have the same problems. I do think that we, in dealing with this in this fashion, I do not feel it is consistent with the kind of controls and the kind of things we would like to see happen in Iowa City, and I certainly don't think it's consistent with the efforts that this Council and previous Councils have made, relative to alcohol issues. So, that concludes the minority report. Other discussions? Champion: Well I just would like to point out that if it becomes a problem, we certainly will have to rescind this ordinance, but I remember there was a lot of talk about how allowing the restaurants that have sidewalk cafes to serve wine, that that was going to be a terrible problem, and it hasn't been a problem at all. So if it's a problem, I'm totally willing to look at it again and respond accordingly, but I think that these are all going to be...anybody who's going to apply is going to be a very responsible group, and I don't think it's right to say it's okay for the Shakespeare Festival to do it because they're better people, and maybe Jazz Fest isn't even interested. I don't even know if there's anybody else interested. But it's, and there might be 50 bars downtown, and it might be a family event, but there's a lot of alcohol served at family events. Weddings. Funerals. Parties. That doesn't mean it's used to excess, and I think we always think This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #12 Page 20 of alcohol in excess, and not alcohol in some responsible manner, and so I think we just need to be fair. To say if it's done responsibly, we'll do it. If not, we'll stop it. O'Dormell: And I agree with that, Connie, and it isn't against the law in Iowa to consume alcohol if you're 21 years old and I'm sure that's going to be enforced. Same rules apply. I'm going to support this, and I look for it to be a good opportunity, not only for the Shakespearean Festival out there and Riverside Theatre, but I really don't think it will be detrimental to Iowa City. There are 50 bars downtown and they're confined. The same rules apply whether you're in a bar or in a tent, so I'll support it. Champion: I have one more comment. Have you heard enough out of me? (laughter) O'Dormell: I have. (laughter) Vanderhoef: When you're done then I'll just make a comment. Champion: It's just, you know, that it amazes me in America and their attitudes about alcohol because if you go to Europe, and many of you have been there, alcohol is everywhere, and it's on the street, and every street vendor is selling a beer with a hot dog, or not hot dog but whatever they call them. But, you know, it's...used with great discretion it's not a problem, and I'm glad to see it's kind of loosening up a little bit because it's discretion that we're talking about, and I hope it works. O'Donnell: I'm sure it will. Dee? Vanderhoefi Well, I'm optimistic on this, and one of the things that got me thinking first off was Bob talking about loosening it for other things, for other locations, besides the theatre, and it wasn't a secret when the theatre folks came to us. They said we need another revenue to keep this arts piece happening in Iowa City. We need some revenue to increase our productivity, and to bring in additional plays, keep them here for the length of time. So when you extrapolate that on into our other community events that are always looking for fund raising, trying to get their activities to support our community, and the things that we like to do. So if this is a way for the Arts Fest to generate a few dollars to support the Fest, and it's done responsibly, and like we've talked about here, it will be under the same guidance as the bars so why not give it a try and keep some of these activities going that are positive for our community. So I will support it. Lehman: Roll call. Motion carries, 6 to 1, Lehman voting in the negative. Karr: Motion to accept correspondence. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #12 Page 21 Wilbum: So moved. Vanderhoef: Second Lehman: Motion and a second to accept correspondence. All in favor? Opposed? Motion carries. We've been asked to take a short break, which we shall do. (BREAK--TAPE OFF) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #14 Page 22 ITEM 14. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ANNUAL BUDGET EXCLUDING HUMAN SERVICES AID TO AGENCIES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2005. Lehman: We had the public hearing on this last night. Do we have a motion to approve? O'Donnell: So moved. Vanderhoef: Second. Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell; seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion? Bailey: I would like to make an amendment to the budget as presented. I have some problems. I'm very supportive of the airport. I think it's one of Iowa City's assets but I have some concerns, given some recommendations for cost efficiencies, and I feel that it could be run in a more cost effective manner, and I was disappointed with the results of the management team rejecting some of the recommendations by the consultant, and yet not coming forward with any of their own ideas about how to make that airport more cost effective, and I don't think that the City should continue to support the airport at the level that it's been supporting it, and I would like to see us remove $10,000 from their budget and transfer that to Parks and Rec, or another department that is making due, doing more with less. Lehman: Is them a second to that amendment? Champion: I'll second. Lehman: Discussion on the amendment? Karr: Just a clarification. Remove $10,000 from the airport, and place in Parks and Rec, or another? Is that correct? Bailey: Parks and Rec. Champion: Well, I don't want to second that, but I would second your motion to remove $10,000 from the airport budget. Would you amend your motion so I could second it? Bailey: (can't hear) Lehman: So the amendment is to remove $10,000 from the airport budget. We didn't say where we're going to put it. If we don't say where we're going to put it, does it go into contingency? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #14 Page 23 Atkins: Transfers automatically to reserves or contingency, right. Lehman: Right. So the amendment is .... all right. Discussion on the amendment? Champion: Well I think Regenia's comments were very appropriate. And I think we need to make it clear to the airport that we are not going to continue subsidizing it at the level that we have been subsidizing it, and they're going to have to come up with some way to either decrease their budget or increase their revenue. And I've been a strong supporter of the airport. Elliott: I think Regenia's comments, obviously, thought was given to her comment. I appreciate that and respect it, and I will support it. Lehman: I concur. For those in the public who don't know, we authorized a $15,000 strategic plan study or some sort of word for the airport and that word came back very critical over the way the airport had been operating. It gave a number of recommendations to be implemented by the airport. Few, if any of those, have been implemented. And I think we need to indicate our what I feel is a collective very, very support for that airport, but also a very, very strong support for good management of the airport. O'Donnell: Very good. Lehman: Other comments on the amendment? All...we just need a roll call? Karr: No, we need a motion. This is a motion on the amendment so we need just a voice vote. Lehman: Yes, all in favor of the amendment, indicate by saying aye. Those opposed? The amendment carries. Other discussion? Wilbum: Emie? Deeds: Hello. Lehman: We had the public heating last night. Deeds: And this is not a time for public input or discussion? Lehman: The public hearing....I'll give you a minute. Deeds: Oh. Lehman: But we did have a public heating last night on the budget. Go ahead. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #14 Page 24 Deeds: Appreciate it. My name is Lyle Deeds. I am a citizen and a tax payer here in Iowa City, and I'm just also an employee of the City, most specifically w/th the Iowa City Fire Department, and I'm just rising to, in opposition to, the section of the proposed budget on page 6, item number 13, about loss of general fund positions throughout the City, and while the Fire Department is no more vital cog of the city than any other particular department, according to this particular document, we are loosing 25% of the overall 16 positions being laid off and while as I stated, be it police, be it library, be it a parks worker or anybody else, they have a vital role in providing services to this particular community. The Iowa City Fire Department is no more or no less a service to the citizens of this community, but I might argue that in times of dire straits or emergencies, the fire department might have a little more input in the outcome of that particular emergency than say other positions. I'd just like to say also that the city has invested in numerous dollars, time, effort, training, to not only the fire fighting positions but all others, and only to have that, in the words of past Council and department heads, the number one resource that this particular community has are its employees, and to see that a budget being balanced on the back of employee lay-offs while technology or equipment, etc., is being purchased, I just feel is wrong for the citizens of this community. Thank you. I appreciate it. Lehman: Thank you. I really don't think Council disagrees with what you've said. Let me just say when it comes to the purchase of equipment, those sorts of things are done through capital outlay, not from the general fund expenditures, that unfortunately, or fortunately, however you view it, the general fund is the fund from which we have to fund all of our salaries, and I don't think any of us have any doubt that the fire department is more important than some of our departments. I mean, it's a matter of public health and safety, and I don't think any of us are pleased that we can't keep the number that we would like to. At the same time I don't think that, at least from my conversations with you, Steve, and your conversation with Council, we're not at the level we'd like to be. We don't feel there is a compromise of public safety, and I think that's the big issue, and we're going to try to get back where we belong as quick as we can. Deeds: Understood. Thank you. Wilbum: I just want to....I said this last night but I also want to mention it tonight, just want to thank Steve for some foresight last year, and the Council, in making decisions related to the recommendations from staff to begin a planned way to manage our way through some of the financial struggles. We're moving along pretty solidly, not having some difficulties, and facing some difficult decisions that some cities who didn't address it are, they're having those problems, and they're magnified. But I, you know, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #14 Page 25 this year, by not, they're not taking action last year. I saw one conununity looking, they were, one option was to get rid of 31 positions. Apparently they are going to make the decision to increase property tax so again, just well done and well done to Council for making the tough decision last year and sticking with it. O'Donnell: I second that but there are also Councilors sitting here that are interested in building a new fire station and staffing it, and doing that as soon as we can. And that was said last night at the budget discussion but just wanted to reiterate that. Champion: We're buying the land so when times get better we'll... Lehman: I think we're committed to that. Other discussions? Vanderhoef: Budget time is never a fun or an easy time when revenues are low, and revenues don't appear to have any positive upswing in the near future. The state rollback leaves us in this position every time it drops. It appears on one hand for a property owner that "oh my taxes go down" because of the rollback, but at the same time, that rollback cuts into our general fund, and that's where we hire you good people, and we can't continue to do it if we don't get support from the state legislature, and putting a floor on the rollback, it certainly has been a high priority for all of the cities in Iowa to get a floor put in on the rollback, and they've been asking for 50. It has not happened. The state legislators are not in to rebuilding our whole tax structure, and I don't feel that it will happen this year, but certainly anything that our public can do to contact our legislators, and work on it this next year to say that cities can't keep taking these kinds of hits if we are to truly support the services that are given to us to support. So I would welcome all of you to help us in this endeavor, and certainly we'll get back on our feet here towards hiring again, but that's going to come from building our taxes, not from the state legislature at this point. Lehman: Roll call. Motion carries. Elliott: Ernie, ifI may? Lehman: You may. Elliott: I just voted to approve the budget. A DI reporter last night asked me ifI was satisfied with the budget and I said "no, I doubt that any Council member or any staff member is satisfied with the budget; I doubt that there are many people in the public who are". One of the things when I came on the Council less than two months ago, I decided that I would look to the veteran Council persons for leadership, and I would look at the broad brushes of the budget, but I was not able to get into the specifics more. I This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #14 Page 26 hope that the Council, within the next two or three months, will work with the City Manager and other staff, and that we will work on a plan for the funding and a time schedule for a fire station on the north side, and staff for the fire station. Similarly that we will look at the law enforcement needs of our local police, and that we will work with staff, and we will see that there are some things that happen. I feel rather strongly about that. O'Donnell: Well said. Lehman: Thank you, Bob. Wilburn: Ernie, I have a conflict of interest with the next item, 15. I work for an organization that is an applicant, recipient, and must not participate in the decision. Lehman: Okay, thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #15 Page 27 ITEM 15. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ANNUAL BUDGET FOR HUMAN SERVICES AID TO AGENCIES FOR THE HSCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2005. Vanderhocf: Move the resolution. Bailey: Second. Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef; seconded by Bailey. Discussion? Champion: I'd like to make an amendment that we take part of that $10,000 to replace the reduction that we did in the human services budget. Lehman: Is them a second? Bailey: I could support that. Lehman: We have a motion and a second to take the $10,000, you said the $10,000, is that what you said? Champion: Well the reduction...for... Lehman: You said part of it. Champion: It might... I'm not sum. Lehman: All right, but the amendment is to take $10,000 reduction from the airport budget and put it in the human services funding. Champion: I say that because many of the human services agencies that we fund are under a lot of stress right now economically because the economic times are not at the best. As economic times get bad there's more and mom demands made on our human services and a lot of the things that we fund give direct aid to people. For instance, the Crisis Center, Shelter House, a couple others....give direct, free medical clinic, provide direct, free services to people who need it, and they never have enough money, so I think it would be a very nice, good thing to do with that money and it's not a lot of money. It's not going to help our contingency fund that much, but it would make a lot of difference to some of those agencies. Bailey: I not only think it would be a good thing to do, I think it's a smart thing to do. These are organizations that are addressing some of the toughest issues that are in our community, and I think it's important that we support that work as a Council because these are the agencies that create a better city for us, so help support that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #15 Page 28 Elliott: I don't disagree with anything that's been said. Just on general principles, I would prefer that we talk about this with staff and see if that is in fact the best and most appropriate use of those funds. I certainly can't disagree with anything that either one of you has said. I just think that now might not be the best time to look into that in depth, which I think needs to be done. Vanderhoef: I'm going to agree with you on that, Bob. I want a little time to think about this, knowing some of the places where we took cuts throughout the budget, I'm not prepared to say what we might do with that money. Lehman: Well, I would concur as well. My biggest reservation, and I absolutely agree with Connie and Regenia, but I am very reluctant to increase funding to any, any department or agency, because I have no, I have no confidence whatsoever that we're going to be in a better position next year for funding, and if we increase funding, whether it be to the human service agency or some other department within the city, whether it be Parks and Recreation or Library or whatever, they're going to be, I believe, expecting that sort of level of funding next year, and I do not have any confidence that we can do that so I won't support the amendment. I think it should stay in contingency. Champion: I think that's a valid point except the only thing that's not valid about it is that we have, at different times, taken money from that fund that we allow to grow and distributed it with a one-time distribution. Lehman: We can do that during the year. That's what contingency is for. I just am not willing to allocate it at this point. Champion: Okay. Lehman: Other discussion on the amendment? Elliott: I...you may bring that up say at the next meeting or a month from now, and I might find that yes, you're right, I agree. But right now I'd like to wait. Champion: Okay. Lehman: Any other discussion on the amendment? Those in favor of the amendment, please indicate by raising your fight hands. I see two. Those opposed to the amendment, same sign. There are four. The amendment is defeated 4 to 2, Bailey and Champion voting in the affirmative. Other discussion? Roll call. Welcome back. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #19 Page 29 ITEM 19. Council Appointments: Champion: I'm asking the Mayor if he'll separate those appointments and vote on them separately? Lehman: We can do that, although I think we have, I'm going to ask that we defer one of those for two weeks. Elliott: I would agree. Lehman: All right. Let me go through these. If we wish to make any adjustments after I go through them, we can do it. At last night's Council meeting, we made the decision to appoint Carl Williams to the Airport Commission. Dorothy Maher to the Civil Service Commission. James Pronto and Michael Gurm to the Historic Preservation Commission. And I would ask that the Council, as part of this motion, defer the appointment of the person at-large to the 16th of March meeting. And Telecommunications Commission, Brett Castillo. Could we have a motion approving those appointments and the deferral? Elliott: So moved. Bailey: Second. Lehman: Moved by Elliott; seconded by Bailey. All in favor? Opposed? Motion carries. Kart: Motion to accept correspondence. O'Dormell: So moved. Vanderhoef: Second. Lehman: We have a motion and a second to accept correspondence. All in favor? Opposed? Motion carries. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #22 Page 30 ITEM 22. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION. Lehman: Council time. Elliott: I would like to echo the earlier comments, compliments, to the staff on putting together a budget, and the Council that preceded when Regenia and I came on the Council, I thought you folks did a marvelous job of putting together the three-year budget a year ago, which really took a lot of the pressure off this year. So to staffand to the previous Council, my compliments on a job well done. As I said, I'm sure almost no one is satisfied, but I think it was done about as well as it could be done. But I reiterate about my need for a time frame and doing whatever needs to be done for fire and police protection, and to welcome the students from the University journalism class. I'm sure that perhaps one of the most exciting times you've ever spent (laughter), and we would encourage you to come back. O'DonnelI: I don't think you could pay them to come back. (laughter) Lehman: Next time they come back they will be paid. (laughter) Connie? Champion: I just want to thank the Mayor for the proclamation on International Women's Month. I want to thank all the women in the past who have fought for women's rights. I think it's interesting, my grandmother was 50 years old before she could vote. My mother was the first generation in our family who could vote at age 21. I think that's pretty incredible when you think about how long women have been around. (laughter and people talking at once) And I just want to thank all those women who fought so hard for women's rights or I might not be sitting here today, and probably a lot of you wish I weren't present, but thanks women, thanks women of yesterday. (laughter) O'Donnell: There's absolutely no way I can top that. (laughter) Lehman: You're right. Don't even try. Dee? Vanderhoefi I'll just second the motion for Connie. (laughter) Lehman: Ross? Wilburn: I just wanted to mention to the public that this Sunday at 5:00 PM, Table to Table a food, a reclamation organization, is having their annual banquet fundraiser at the Sheraton, so please call Table/Table to find out how to get tickets. Also just wanted to congratulate the young folks who participated in the Black Law Student Association's oratory competition. I was a judge for that, and there's some pretty impressive college and high This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #22 Page 31 school students. A high school student won it. I was jealous. (laughter) Oratory skills .... Elliott: I had to work the Iowa game. I couldn't do that. I thought that would have been very enjoyable. Wilbum: It was fantastic. Bailey: I just want to echo the sentiments that Connie expressed and celebrate Women's Month by doing something that promotes gender equality in our state because as far as we've come, we've still got a long way to go. Elliott: I can tell you, just to add on to that, my mother was a schoolteacher and I remember when there was a different salary schedule for females and males, and the school board saw nothing wrong with it. Lehman: Surprise. There still is. O'Dormell: Yeah there is. (laughter) Lehman: Two things. This morning I was over at the University Rec Building and I witnessed approximately 1,000 young folks from our grade schools in a jump rope event for the American Heart Association. You know, that screaming mass of humanity with energy that I can barely remember. I look out there and I see all those kids, and you know, what we're really doing, we're looking at the future of Iowa City in these young folks. But they were out and they spent two hours jumping for the Heart Association, which I think is tremendous, and the fact that my daughter-in-law organized it had nothing to do with it, but it was a great event. They do that every year, and it is just incredible the number of kids that show up. And briefly, I did spend three days in Washington on your behalf, and I can't tell you how impressed I am with the Technology Corridor concept, where people from Iowa City, Cedar Rapids, Coralville, North Liberty, Hiawatha, Johnson County, Lynn County, go to Washington, and speak ~vith one voice, instead of each of us going and begging our Congressmen for individual projects. This is a group, this time, of 45 people, who I think made a very, very strong case for the Technology Corridor, which is if you rate this country and places to develop for technology industries, this corridor is one of the top places in the country, and I am so proud that the two conununities have chosen to do this, and really they do speak with one voice. It was a great trip and I think, we have in the past I think been very fortunate with allocations from our, congressional allocations to the Corridor, and I think we will continue to. Steve? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004. #23 Page 32 ITEM 23. REPORT ON ITEMS FROM CITY STAFF. Atkins: Nothing, sir. Lehman: Eleanor? Marian? Do we have a motion to adjourn? Elliott: You bet. Lehman: And a second? All in favor. Motion carries. Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of March 2, 2004.