Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-05-12 Transcription#1 page 1 ITEM NO. 1 Extend Sympathy Lehman/ Before we start the Special Presentations, I know I speak for the rest of the Council when I'd like to extend to the Craig Standish family the deepest sympathy of the City Council and the City employees on his untimely death. Thomberry/ Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #2 page 2 ITEM NO. 2 SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS. Lehman/ Now we'll move to our Special Presentations for Longfellow Elementary School. Will Zach, Dirk, and Carolyn come forward? Okay. Zach Buxton/ Hi, my name is Zach Buxton. I'm a sixth-grader at Longfellow Elementary. I'm the youngest of four boys in my family, and my parents are Becky and Jim Buxton. I've always taken my schoolwork very seriously, and I work hard to do my best in all I do. In addition to academics, I also enjoy helping others and being a leader. I'm currently serving on the Longfellow Site Council, and I am President of Longfellow Student Council. I'm also playing the part of Stefan in our Unit C musical, Freedom Bound. Outside of school, I do such activities as playing in the Iowa City Firebirds, playing Iowa City boys baseball, Iowa City Kickers, flag football, and wrestle on the Iowa City City High Mat Pack Wrestling Club. I also help my community by mowing lawns and house- sitting. I appreciate the Iowa City Council recognizing my classmates and me for our leadership and community achievement. Carolyn Minchk/ Hi, my name is Carolyn, and I'm a sixth-grader at Longfellow. I'm first chair cello and play the flute. I'm very involved in church and go to a youth group about once a week. I'm in the musical Freedom Bound, and babysit a couple of times a week. Between everything I've mentioned, and practicing my cello almost a half hour every day, that doesn't leave much time for homework. Nevertheless, I always have my homework accurate and in on time. And I'd have about an A average, if we got grades. I usually help people with, I usually work with people who need extra help, so I can assist them when needed. No matter how tired I am, I never sleep through classes. Thank you for giving me this award. It really means a lot to me. Dirk Marple/ Hi, my name is Dirk Marple, and I'm very honored to be picked for this award. I live in a great community with many outstanding citizens. In school, I am a member of the Student Council, Safety Patrol and a member of the Ath- olympia team. I'm currently in a play called Freedom Bound. I was chosen last summer to go to Start-base leadership camp in Des Moines. I help with the SHARE program distributing food. I enjoy baseball, soccer, wrestling, bowling, football, playing chess, and I'm a black belt in Tae Kwon Do. I want to thank the City Council for giving me this award, my teacher, Miss Jackson, my fellow classmates, and my family. Thank you. Lehman/ Well, I'd like to say first of all that the City Council doesn't give these awards, these kids earn them. I think it's just great. I'm going to read one of these, and This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #2 page 3 then I'll pass these out.. "For her outstanding qualities of leadership within Longfellow Elementary as well as the community and for her sense of responsibility and helpfulness to others, we recognize Carolyn Minchk as an Outstanding Student Citizen. Your community is proud of you. Presented by the Iowa City Council, May 18th." Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 //3 page 4 ITEM NO. 3 MAYOR'S PROCLAMATIONS. a. Older Americans Day - May 13 Lehman/ Item//3 is Mayor's Proclamations. The first one is Older Americans Day (Reads proclamation.) Marian Karr/ Here to accept is Charity Rowley. Charity Rowley/ As you notice on the program I've given you, tomorrow is a special day at the Senior Center, where we will be showcasing different things that seniors are involved in, both at the Senior Center and in the community at large. We start off at 8:30 in the morning with a continental breakfast. We have the showcase in the morning. Of course, we have the community lunch during the noon hour. And then later on, we will have a talent show, and end up with refreshments, oh, probably about 3:00, 3:30, 4:00. It'll be a full day, and I hope that all of you will take an opportunity to come and see what we have going on. Kubby/ Thanks. Lehman/ Thank you. b. Peace Officers Memorial Day - May 15 Lehman/ The second one is Peace officers Memorial Day. (Reads proclamation). Karr/ Here to accept is Iowa City Police Chief Winkelhake. R. J. Winkelhake/ Thank you very much. That's my speech. Thomberry/ Thank you. Lehman/ You know, this is also another special week that we don't have a proclamation for, but I think someone on the Council, it's very near and dear to them. Dee? Vanderhoef/ Yes. This is American Nurses Week. And being an old nurse, a non- practicing nurse, it's real important to recognize these people who work so hard in our hospitals and in our homes, they come to us, they take care of us. Their work is never done. And I had an opportunity this last winter to spend some time at a hospital with my husband, and I recognized how this continues to change, and This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #3 page 5 how important their education is, and their dedication to continue to give good care. And I wish them well this week. Thomberry/ Very good. Lehman/ Thank you, Dee. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #5 page 6 ITEM NO. 5 PUBLIC DISCUSSION (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA). Lehman/ Item #5 is Public Discussion, items that are not on the agenda. We would ask that you sign in with your name and address and limit your comments to five minutes. Tim Wolfe/ My name's Tim Wolfe. I own Iowa City Cleanup and Transfer. We've been a family-owned business in Iowa City for about 23 years now. We've got a small problem, and I think it's going to affect the City considerably. We have one of our competitors in town that's already put in a small transfer station and will be hauling his trash to Illinois. The problem that we have with this is that he'll be paying $20 a ton, we're now paying $48.50 and $53.50 a ton, which is one of the highest priced landfills in the state of Iowa. Most of the landfills in the area here around us are anywhere from $30 to $37 a ton. Muscatine has an $8 million transfer station. They charge $37 a ton. I'd really like to have the City consider lowing their landfill fees to be more competitive, because if they don't, they're bound to lose 40% of all the garbage that goes into the landfill, and that is the three largest private haulers. We'll have to do what we have to do to compete. We're a local company. We support, you know, we buy local. We'd like to stay with the Iowa City Landfill, but to give you an example, for three months, our landfill bill is $116,000. I can haul the same amount of trash to Illinois for $46,000. That's quite savings. So, I have a little letter here that I'd like to pass out, and you can kind of look it over and stuff. But I really think the City needs to look at this. They've already lost one of their private haulers. He will not be back to the landfill. He's already got his set up. We have an engineer looking at it right now, because it's something that we have to do to be competitive. Champion/ Ernie, are we going to look at that, figures to, you know? Lehman/ Well, I think that this is something that we're probably going to want to put on a Work Session and discuss sooner, rather than later. Steve Atkins/ Okay. Wolfe/ I think, you know, it's very important, you know, that they be competitive. I know that it would extend the life of your landfill, but I think the cash flow is something I think the City really should look at. I'd hate to see people maybe living in a private home maybe paying $30 or $40 a month for private pickup just to support a landfill. O'Donnell/ Tim, did you say that's a three-month period? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #5 page 7 Wolfe/ That was a three-month period. My landfill bill was $116,000, and I could have took the same amount of trash to Illinois for $46,000. Champion/ Are those figures in your letter? Wolfe/ Yes. Norton/ Does that include your shipping, your transportation and all that? Wolfe/ In the transportation, it would add about, I could still do it for less than $35 a ton. Norton/ Okay, but that wasn't in the figure you gave. Wolfe/ No, that was just the landfill fee. So you could add another $15 a ton on there and that would come out with it. So it might be another $15,000 or $20,000, but you're still talking about you know, half of what we pay here in town. Norton/ Yeah. Wolfe/ And to give you an example, the City of Dubuque, BFI which is a national company is up there in Dubuque. They came to the city, they haul 40% of all the garbage that went into Dubuque, and they said if we can't get a better rate on our landfill, we'll haul it to our own landfill in Illinois, and Dubuque lowered their landfill rates 40%. You know, I think it's something that you really need to look at, because we have to do it, we have to be competitive. Kubby/ We have to look at it, but we also have to realize that we get a lot more out of our landfill than other communities in that we have household hazardous cleanup days, we do tire collection, we have good closure, post-closure, long-term financing, because we're responsible with how we do our landfill, and so all those things have to be put together and we should look at them all. Wolfe/ Absolutely. And I agree with that too, because I would like to see more from the landfill myself. But the problem is, you also have to look at the money situation. I mean, if you took 40% of the taxes out of Iowa City, it's going to cause a problem. Kubby/ Landfills rates are different. Lehman/ I think it's a very, very complicated situation. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #5 page 8 Wolfe/ It is. Lehman/ For the City because of State laws and Federal laws and transfer stations and whatever. It's not, it isn't really simple, it's something that we really are going to have to sit down and talk about. And I talked a little with Steve about this. I talked with some other folks, and we do need to address this, I think. And I don't know that there's an easy answer, I don't know that there's really an answer. But I think it is something that we need to talk about. Kubby/ And I appreciate you not just saying forget Iowa City and wanting to dump here, because we should take responsibility for our own waste locally. Wolfe/ Absolutely, absolutely. Kubby/ Instead of it being shipped and creating problems for Illinois, we should take care of our own problems. Wolfe/ Well, here's one problem we're up against already. You've put a cardboard ban into effect come the year 2000, from what I understand, or you're going to. That has nothing to do with him out there, because that landfill accepts cardboard. So once again, the customers that I have, I'm going to have to charge extra for cardboard. The customers he has, he's not, because he doesn't take it to the Iowa City Landfill. Norton/ Of course they're going to run into problems too. Illinois doesn't have infinite space, either. Wolfe/ They're going to -- Norton/ They're going to run into that problem. (Can't understand) is going to ban fiber, too, I think. Wolfe/ They've got 480 acres there, and they can take anything but nuclear waste. Norton/ Just turn Illinois into one big dump. Kubby/ And they'd take that if they could. Wolfe/ They'd take that if they could. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #5 page 9 Kubby/ They would. Wolfe/ The day I was there, there was two transfer trailers that came from Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The landfill in the United States is a big deal. Right now, Laidlaw hauls their trash to Michigan from Canada, because they own a landfill in Canada. I mean, they ship it by train and everything now. Thornberry/ Tim is my hauler, and I asked him to come tonight and present this to us, because I didn't have an answer for him. He asked a question, and we just didn't have an answer, and we need to talk about this. And when there's a landfill that's accepting everything but nuclear waste, that includes tires and batteries and -- Wolfe/ Oh yeah, everything. Asbestos. Thomberry/ You know -- Wolfe/ They take it all. At $20 a ton, well, they charge a little more for your asbestos and stuff, of course, but the flat rate is $20 a ton. They will sign a piece of paper for every community that I haul that will give them no liability at all. Thomberry/ Yeah. Wolfe/ Their pockets are deep. It's a $10-$12 billion a year company. You know, I mean, their pockets are deep. Champion/ Who would every thought there'd be that much money in trash? Wolfe/ The largest company right now makes $14.5 billion a year. Thomberry/ That's "b" billion. Wolfe/ That's billion. Lehman/ Well, obviously, there's something we've got to address, and I really appreciate your coming. Wolfe/ Yeah. Lehman/ And I, it's not going to be an easy thing for us to. Wolfe/ No, it's not. It's not easy for me, either, but you know, I -- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #5 page 10 Champion/ I hope the haulers will let us try to work through this before they -- Audience/ (Can't hear). Thomberry/ He is. Audience/ (Can't hear). Thornberry/ That's the reason that Tim's here. Wolfe/ That's the reason I'm here. I want to support my local community, you know. I'm a local business. I started out here in a one-ton truck. We've got 10 trucks now and fourteen employees, you know. I mean, but I have to do what I have to do to be competitive, and when he's paying less than half, it causes problems. Lehman/ Thanks. Champion/ Thank you. Janelle Rettig/ My name is Janelle Rettig and I'm here to speak to you about the Housing Authority's proposed changes on the definition of"family" -- Lehman/ That will be coming up later in the agenda. Rettig/ Oh. I was told by the City Manager that there wasn't a public hearing, so I should -- Lehman/ There's not a public hearing, but there is, there will be -- Rettig/ There will be an opportunity to speak? Lehman/ At the agenda item, that would be the appropriate time. Rettig/ The City Manager's office said that. Thomberry/ Well this is, this is a public discussion for items not on the agenda. When it comes up on the agenda, then you're, you can -- Rettig/ I'm sorry, I misunderstood what the office said. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #5 page 11 Lehman/ That's fine. Kubby/ You're welcome to (can't understand). Atkins/ No, Janelle, I don't think you misunderstood. It is not a public hearing, but apparently, the Council is going to exercise the option of calling you up when the item's up. Rettig/ Okay, that's fine. Thank you. Lehman/ Yeah, sure. Mark Johnson/ Hi, my name's Mark Johnson. I'm with Johnson Builders. I had a conversation with Ernie about a week or so ago, and Ernie asked me to see if I was interested in coming up here to speak. You'll have to forgive me a little bit, because this is the first time I've ever been up front talking. I live in Iowa City. I'm an Iowa native. I'm a homebuilder by trade, and I build homes in Iowa City. And I guess my company's name is Johnson Builders. I've been building for approximately eighteen years. I've received many honors. I've done speaking at state universities. And I've been very successful with many working municipalities for many years in other areas. I came back to bring my family back to Iowa City to raise my family, and hopefully retire here. I have struggled with Iowa City and the Building and Safety Department for approximately two years. I am looking for some help from you, and I am requesting some sort of a Work Session, or some sort of an action to be done with the Safety department to create better harmony and consistency between the builders and the City of Iowa City. I am also part of the local Home Builders Association, and I am on the Legislative Committee for the local Home Builders Association. And this is another reason why I guess I feel very strongly about it. And I have given my report to them, also, as I will be giving you a report. What I am here to do, I guess, is help discuss some of the problems I've had, and hopefully, I'm going to give you a folder that outlines some of the things that I'd like to see, some positive changes that I hope will occur. And some of them that I'd like to see would be some sort of a communication resource for the City to give builders on interpretation issues. There's very poor communication between the City and the builders. And one of the problems that I have is when we have a violation, or a code violation, a lot of times, it's based on an interpretation. And we want to know, first of all, what the code is, so that we can look it up and research it. Second thing is, we want to know what their interpretation is, and how they're interpreting. And third of all, we want to see remedies. We want to see how the problem's going to be solved. Numerous situations, I've asked for this through the Building and Safety This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #5 page 12 department. I've been told that they don't have time for it. I've asked them to please talk about it. I've become frustrated. I've gone through the proper channels and gone through, up through the head of the Building and Safety Department, and basically had the door shut on me. I also think that there are some production issues as far as inspections, that would greatly help the builder in order to meet his projects on time, and to create a better atmosphere between the builder and the Safety Department, and cut out some inspections that really have, I guess, little importance and can put trust in some of the utility companies and some of the licensed people that the State has licensed or the City has licensed. One of the problems that I have had is I guess I feel that some of the codes I feel have not been enforced uniformly. Sometimes they wish not to enforce codes, but then they decide to enforce them later. There's no notification period. A lot of times, it creates a problem for me, or for other builders, in order to try to even bid a job realistically, when previous jobs have never been enforced, and they're now becoming enforced, or they're taking different interpretations on situations that cost us a great deal of money, and they're not telling us this until the final inspection. One of the biggest things that I guess I look at is I see myself as a customer. I pay between $800 and $1,000 for a permit, on top of taxes. And I guess, I'd like to put you in a situation as a business owner, and I think that you would expect to have a great service for what you have, and to have a good atmosphere and relationship with the City for those services. And I would like to see the City of Iowa City improve on some of those. On some of the issues that I've discussed, after going through the City, I am a member of the National Home Builders Association. I did call them up. They do have a person that works with the UBC Code, helps the interpretations, and is a very good fact-finder. I gave them a lot of the issues that I have had, because as builders, networking is part of probably the greatest thing that we can do, and the Home Builders have a great networking ability. I posed them with the questions of our interpretations, and the majority of them were sided with me. They go by national interpretations, not local interpretations. But even at that, I still can't get an interpretation in writing from you City so that I can go from one job to the other with any consistency. I am enclosing a report. I would like to request a Work-Study Session to be done on the Building and Safety Department. I'm hoping that this will create more efficient inspection procedures, producing valuable days lost to the builder, and creating affordable housing. I'm requesting a communication resource to eliminate interpretation issues in codes and classifications in Iowa City; provide some notification time, 90 days preferably, to enforce codes and interpretations; produce a written means of answering such issues; create a timely manner to respond and resolve such issues in a positive manner. And I'd like to, I guess what this report does, it highlights only some of the issues as a builder. There's many other issues in land development, multi-family and commercial, that aren't This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #5 page 13 being addressed here, and I'm talking to you as a builder, a home builder in particular. I am willing to participate upon request to answer any questions by Council prior to or during the Work-Study Session. And again, I have sent this to the local Home Builders Association in hopes of them participating, and hopefully producing this so that we can have a better Building and Safety Department. I think we have a great opportunity right now. We have three new inspectors in the department. And I'd like to see them go to the next level in Building and Safety by creating a cutting-edge system, a positive work philosophy, and streamlining the building and safety process for being the most proactive instead of reactive type situation. Kubby/ Steve, don't we have kind of an ad hoc committee of builders and contractors and our appointed folks and staff that this would be a perfect topic to gather those people together again for? Atkins/ Sounds fine to me. Kubby/ I mean, I'd rather have it go to them first and give some recommendations to us. Norton/ Didn't we have, we had a task force on this very issue, didn't we? Atkins/ We did, definitely. We just did this. Kubby/ Yeah. And so I'd like to have us direct staff, funnel this to them and have them report back to us. Norton/ Is that group still in place? Atkins/ Oh, we can reconvene them. Kubby/ We can call them together and add some new folks. Atkins/ We'll reconvene them. Norton/ Yeah, because there was a big, elaborate study done on many of the issues that you're citing within the last couple of years. Johnson/ I can honestly say that those issues haven't been resolved. Norton/ Oh, they haven't been resolved. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #5 page 14 Johnson/ And I'm having a great deal of issues. Lehman/ Well, in all fairness, and I was on the Council when this occurred, and we did get a report back from the Home Builders, and I believe there were like six or seven items. And those items, ! think, were resolved to the satisfaction, I think, of both the Housing Department and the Home Builders. Some of the things you're talking about, and we have asked, we've had builders tell us for a long time, and probably forever we will, that they don't like this or this or this. And we continually have said give us a list of the things that you don't feel are right, now, and that's exactly what we need. And when we've asked for the list, what we've gotten back, we have resolved. Now, I think that Karen's suggestion is probably good. If we can reconvene that committee, and you can meet with the committee along with the staff folks, go over these things, and then we could get from that committee, you know, their recommendations. But our problem has continually been we have asked and we have not received. I think your giving it to us. Johnson/ I was recently on the Legislative Committee, I've just been on it for two meetings now. And I agree with you. I think that part of the things that they had done, they had picked and chosen some main topics, and they didn't want to give a real large list to overwhelm and to try to do things, and again, this is just from a builder's perspective, it's not from a commercial builder, it's not from a land developer and a lot of other issues. And I guess that's why I'm speaking to you from Johnson Builders standpoint, not from the committee standpoint. They are anxious to get going. We're, they want to become more active, and that's why they've solicited, they had a one-person team at that point. Now we have four to five people. Now they know that this situation needs to be turned to a more positive situation, and they really want to work with everybody and be a part of it. I think a lot of home builders do, too. And I have had a lot of issues that have just almost, almost stopped my construction company, and has taken away the trust between me and the City. And it really bothers me. I have never had, in eighteen years, I have never had to come and stand up before Council. Everything has always been done through the Building and Safety Department. Everything's resolved. If you have a problem with an inspector, or an interpretation, it's always answered. It's always, if necessary, put in writing. And they distribute it. I think there needs to be a communication resource, whether you need to register contractors, or get it through a building resource for people to pick up, or whatever, that the City of Iowa City should have on interpretations for consistency. I have a situation right now where I'm straggling with them. I talked to the national Home Builders, and they're saying they're way out of line. There's no way that they can even interpret this. And they're trying to tell me that a double-door in a basement is considered a garage. And we've talked and talked This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #5 page 15 until I'm blue in the face. I went clear up and thought I had it all resolved, re- inspected, boom. I lost a closing on that. It cost me a lot of time and effort and I guess, you know, I can get the interpretation from the national people, but I think that our City should be handling that, and it should be handling it in a better, smoother, and I still don't know what their interpretation is. Because I asked for it in writing, and I was told, flat blank, I will not put it in writing. Kubby/ Well, those specific examples will be helpful, I think, for the committee, and I think that we've agreed that that's a good route to go, so we need to get some folks together. So thanks for your specific. Lehman/ I think we can do that, we can get the committee together, and you can bring your concerns. And I think you'll find that we are just as anxious to do this in an expeditious manner as you are to have it done. So, it's always been a matter, I think of communication. Johnson/ So, and I think that they're good people, I think that they just need, I think there needs to be a meeting of the minds, and again, something established as a communication resource to make it better. Vanderhoef/ Mark,-- Lehman/ We will set up a meeting and get a hold of you. Vanderhoef/ Your original request was a meeting with Council. Are you okay with having just the committee reconvene, or are you still wishing a Council member to sit on that committee or something like that? Johnson/ I think that, I guess I'd leave it up to you, but would a Council member have more impact than the committee? Norton/ It'll then come to us. Vanderhoef/ It's not a matter of impact. Johnson/ I'm putting my trust in what you guys feel is best. Kubby/ Their recommendation -- Johnson/ What I've done is I've outlined something to really help, I'm the type of person, ifI have a problem, I try to get a solution. I want solution-makers, I don't This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #5 page 16 want problem-makers. And that's what I've tried to do. I've tried to not outline the problems, but outline also some of the solutions that I feel need to be done in order to make us go forward. Because that's what we want. We want a positive industry. We want a relationship that's going to make the City and the builders both work together in harmony. Lehman/ I think we all do. Johnson/ You want me to give these to you? Lehman/ Give that to the City Clerk and she'll see to it that we get copies. We'll make copies. Kubby/ We'll get copies. Johnson/ Thank you. Lehman/ Thank you. Kubby/ Marian said they'd be in the next packet. Lehman/ Okay. Thomberry/ Okay. Karr/ Could we have a motion to accept that correspondence? Thornberry/ So moved. Kubby/ Second. Lehman/ Moved by Thornberry, seconded by Kubby. All those in favor- (ayes). Motion carried. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #6c page 17 ITEM NO. 6c PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS - Consider an ordinance conditionally changing the zoning designation on a 1 O-acre tract located on the south side of Melrose Avenue and west of West High School from Low Density Single-Family (RS-5) to Planned Development Housing (OPDH-8) to permit an 80 dwelling unit retirement community. (REZ98-0002) (Second consideration). Lehman/ (Reads agenda item #6c) Third consideration will not be made until after, my understanding is there's a building permit which will not be issued until a sewer line's hooked up. Thornberry/ Move adoption of the ordinance. Lehman/ Moved by Thornberry. Vanderhoef/ Second. Lehman/ Seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion? Roll call-(yes). This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #6e page 18 ITEM NO. 6e Consider a resolution approving a preliminary plat of Walnut Ridge, Parts 6 and 7, a 66.68 acre, 20-lot residential subdivision located at the north terminus of Kennedy Parkway. (SUB98-0001) Lehman/ (Reads agenda item #6e). This has also been approved by the P/Z Commission, and recommended by staff, and I think it's subject to the approving of a Sensitive Areas -- Thornberry/ Site license. Lehman/ Site plan. Norton/ It has been approved, I take it. Thornberry/ Yeah, it has been approved. O'Donnell/Yeah, they've been approved. Lehman/ They have? Okay. Norton/ Move adoption of the resolution. Lehman/ Moved by Norton. Vanderhoef/ Second. Lehman/ Seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion? Roll call-(yes). This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #7 page 19 ITEM NO. 7 PUBLIC HEAR1NG ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAPS. Lehman/ (Reads agenda item #7 and comment) P.h. is open. Rick Fosse/ Would you like some background, first of all, on what we're up to, or are you keeping it brief?. Lehman/ This is a very unusual sort of thing for, I think from us to do, because of the impact of our actions. So if you'd like to just briefly explain. Fosse/ Sure. First of all, what we're doing tonight is a public heating on the proposed map amendments. The maps were originally done in the mid '70s. They were redone in 1985 to reflect the changes along Ralston Creek along the North and South Branch Extension Basins, and now we're redoing them to show the effects of what we learned from the flood of '93 and also in areas where we've experienced development, or there have been other changes that we've noted. There is no approval by the Council at this point in the process. After we get the public input, we'll go back and incorporate that input into the maps where appropriate, and we've gotten some good input so far. And from here, it'll go to FEMA for their review, and approval, and there'll probably be some exchange of information at that point. And then it'll come back to you for adoption, and then use for Flood Plain regulations. And if you like, I can take the time to show you the areas in town that we're revising. Otherwise, you know, I know we've got a lot on the agenda tonight. Lehman/ Well, I think the important thing, Rick, for the public to realize that this map is not the end of anything. If the property is incorrectly designated, it can be changed by coming down and proving that the property is or is not, according to the map, as I understand it. Fosse/ Well, if there are properties on the fringe of the flood plain, for instance, where they think it's above and they'd like to confirm that, FEMA has what they call an Elevation Certificate. And the property owner needs to hire a registered land surveyor to certify the first floor, or the lowest floor of their house. And with that information, they can get their flood insurance rates adjusted, possibly, or get what's called a Letter 0fMap Amendment for that particular property. Thornberry/ Well, once they're designated in a flood plain in Iowa City, they're there, is that correct? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #7 page 20 Lehman/ They can change it. Fosse/ That's what the Letter of Map Amendment is all about. That can show that indeed they are above the flood plain, and that's something that, you know, we don't change the maps every time we get a Letter of Map Amendment, because we get probably five or ten of those a year. But that's something that, if I were the property owner, I would record that information with my deed so that it runs with the property and people can keep track of it. Thornberry/ Is this a big change from what it has been, Rick? Fosse/ Perhaps the most significant changes are occurring along the Iowa River, and in some of the, well here, let me show you on the map. Thornberry/ I mean, I don't remember what it was before, so I don't, I can't tell what the big difference is. Fosse/ We're seeing some changes along here in the Parkveiw Terrace area. Now, what we're finding, and that's part of what we're working on in the public review process is that our profiles are probably going to be adjusted downwards there about 4/10 of a foot, versus what we'd first come up with here. But it's still higher than what it was on the old maps. Also, in this part of town, along Willow Creek, especially along the main branch of Willow Creek, we found that the flood profiles have gone down in that area, because development has worked in our favor because of the stormwater detention basins from development. And the Interstate has worked in our favor as well, because it holds water back. We've found that both our North Branch and South Branch detention basins are accumulating sediments, and that's something that, while they still function adequately now, but it's something that we need to keep an eye on and think about getting some of those sediments out of there. And that's why we looked at those areas. Norton/ What does a person have to do then? Do they have to bring more than just to get a surveyor, do they have to have aerial photos or other kinds of evidence about where the water was in '93 and so forth? Fosse/ No, no. For the existing maps that are in place now, or these once they're enacted, it's all keyed off the elevation that goes with the maps. And if the survey shows that it's above or below that elevation, that's what makes the determination. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #7 page 21 Norton/ And that's the elevation of the first floor, not the, you're not talking basements here, are you? Fosse/ I might ask from some help from Sulo Wiitala on that. Sulo Wiitala is the engineer with Shive Hattery who's been working on the project with us. Sulo, can you come up? Sulo Wiittala/ Really there's a significant elevation on a house that's in that flood plain is the lowest level of the ground that touches the structure. If the lowest elevation of the ground that touches the structure is below that our profiles show, then it's in that flood plain area. If it's above, then you're okay. Lehman/ Nothing to do with basements. Wiittala/ Well, ifa builder puts in fill and raises his structure with fill, then there's a second item that he has to satisfy. Then, that basement floor has to be above that elevation, also. Lehman/ The original elevation. WiittalaJ That's right. Lehman/ Okay. Fosse/ Other questions, or should we open it up to the floor? Lehman/ Open it up. O'Donnell/ There is a method to adjust this flood plain map. Is that correct? Fosse/ There's a method for adjustment for individual properties, and that's that Letter of Map Amendment. O'Donnell/ Okay. Fosse/ The maps themselves will remain, you know, they'll look the same. It's the Letter that runs with the property. Lehman/ Any other comments from the public? Rick, you did -- Oh, no, there we go. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #7 page 22 Joye McKusick/ Rick, I think you and Sulo both have some things. My name is Joye McKusick, and I spoke to you at the last Council meeting, and at that point, addressed several issues of concern that I had, and I want to share with you all tonight that I have been so very, very pleased with the cooperation that I have gotten, not only from those of you on the Council who've been particularly supportive and helpful of me, but also Rick Fosse who has spent considerable time and several telephone calls, and the folks from Shive Hattery as well. So, I couldn't have asked for more response, and positive support and wonderful explanations as far as any of us can figure out some of the FEMA regulations. But at least to know what sort of thing I can expect, and what sort of things are going to be expected of me. So, I wanted you all to know how much I appreciated the time you gave me two weeks ago. The appropriate issues, as far as I'm concerned, are being very well and competently addressed. Thank you. Kubby/ Thank you. Lehman/ Thanks for coming down. Anyone else wish to speak? P.h. is closed. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #8a page 23 ITEM NO. 8a AMENDMENTS TO THE FY98 OPERATING BUDGET. a. PUBLIC HEARING Lehman/ (Reads agenda item #8a). State legislation mandates municipalities amend their annual budgets by May 31 st. We've got detailed information on the amendments. We've got a book that is too thick to read, but we're going to have a p.h. on that. P.h. is open. Don, would you just give us a thumbnail sketch of what it is that we're doing so the public knows why it is we're doing it, and what, oh my goodness. That's not a thumbprint, that's -- Don Yucuis/ Right on page 100--. Now, this is required by State law, we cannot spend more, Council has to authorize the budget, and if we spend more in State categories, we have to answer to the State and answer to the people, so we have to make sure that we've budgeted enough and we can't exceed that in expenditures. So what this document does is it amends the budget based on projects that have been changed, new ones that have come on, ones that we've deleted, and we've quite a few deletions this time, as far as modifications, mainly to the Capital Improvement Projects. In total, we've decreased the current budget by close to $16,000,000. That's the overall budget, that's not just General Fund, but that's everything. So, what this does is it makes us legal in the State's eyes. Lehman/ This is basically routine? Yucuis/ This is routine, yes. Norton/ Are we doing this twice a year, or just once? Yucuis/ We're doing this twice a year, and the rationale for doing it twice a year is if, what we do on the first amendment is we carry over budget authority from the prior year items that have not been paid out cash-wise, but they're ongoing projects, and we carry over that budget authority in most cases in August, from the prior fiscal year. And the reason we do that is to make sure that we're in compliance with the State law. The Department of Management would look at if there was any complaints or appeals for our budget, they would look at what our approved budget was by the City Council. And if we exceeded any of the State categories, they could come back and say well, you can't tax for that, or you can't budget for that, and you might need to change your budget and move things around and not do some projects. And so we're trying to make sure we're in compliance with the State to make sure we don't get hurt. To make sure we don't have to go to the State and appeal to them and say we really need to do those This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #8a page 24 projects and you're telling us not to. So we're trying to comply with the State law. Norton/ They look at it in those four categories of community protection, is that the category you're talking about, new development? Yucuis/ Yes. Norton/ Community Development, Home and Community, Environment, and Policy and Administration. Yucuis/ Correct. Those are the four areas that they look at on the expenditure side. They really don't look at the revenue side that much. It's mainly the expenditure side, and you have to stay within your budget authority within those four categories. Lehman/ Do you think the State actually reads all of this? Yucuis/ I don't think they read it. But if you have an appeal of your budget, they're going to read it, and you're going to go to Des Moines and you're going to have to appeal your case to them. Lehman/ This is documentation, on other words. Yucuis/ Correct. Lehman/ Thank you for not reading everything you have there. CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 98-62, SIDE B Lehman/ Okay, any question for Don other than what we have had? Thank you, Don. Norton/ I'm submitting some suggestions, you know, some categories so I know exactly why things happen. That's all. At least more reasonably, a little more detail, in other words, I'm trying to find out whether it was mis-estimates, whether it was overruns, whether it was unexpected things. I think if we could identify some categories, it would help me understand a little better how to read this. Yucuis/ Any questions that you have, I will be happy to answer. If not today, we can answer them at a later time. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #8a page 25 Kubby/ Thanks, Don. Thomberry/ Thanks, Don. Lehman/ P.h. is closed. Kubby/ Move adoption of the resolution. O'Donnell/ Second. Lehman/ Moved by Kubby, seconded by O'Donnell. (yes). Any further discussion? Roll call- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #9 page 26 ITEM NO. 9 IOWA CITY'S FY99 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN, THAT IS PART OF THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN (CITY STEPS), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT SAID PLAN AND ALL NECESSARY CERTIFICATIONS TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGNATING THE CITY MANAGER AS THE AUTHORIZED CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER FOR THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN. a. PUBLIC HEARING Lehman/ Now, we asked the Committee for, if they wished to re-evaluate a couple of items on this. They have told us that they stand by their original recommendation. There has been no recommendation other than the one that we originally received. P.h. is closed. Karr/ Could we have a motion to accept correspondence? Vanderhoef/ So moved. O'Donnell/ Second. Lehman/ Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by O'Donnell. All in favor- (ayes). Motion carded. b. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING. Thornberry/ Move adoption of the resolution. Lehman/ Moved by Thomberry. Kubby/ Second. Lehman/ Seconded by Kubby. Discussion? Roll call-(yes). Norton/ Ernie, I should have commented this before, we should express as usual our thanks to the Housing and Community Development Commission for their hard work in sifting all the requests they had, with less money this year to deal with and bigger and more and larger requests, and a tough job of cutting it down and then dealing with challenges to that decision. I thought they did an excellent job. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #9 page 27 Lehman/ I think that's exactly right, Dee. They worked with us developing the guidelines, followed their guidelines, made the recommendation. I'm pleased that the Council accepts it. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 28 ITEM NO. 11 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ADOPTION OF THE CHANGES TO THE SECTION 8 ADMINISTRATIVE PLAN AND PUBLIC HOUSING ADMISSION AND OCCUPANCY PLAN FOR THE IOWA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY PROGRAMS. Lehman/ (Reads agenda item #11). And I guess maybe we should read this. (Reads comment). Karr/ Could we have a motion setting it on the floor for discussion? Lehman/ Yes. Do we have a motion? Kubby/ So moved. Thomberry/ SECOND. Lehman/ Moved by Kubby, seconded by Thornberry. Discussion? I think Doug, you have something to give us up front. Doug Boothroy/ Based on our discussion Monday night, Council raised a number of different questions about changing the definition of"family" and I'd like to recommend that we defer action on the definition of"family" for a couple weeks while staff has an opportunity to get legal opinions and feedback from HUD. There just wasn't enough time from last night's meeting to tonight's meeting to do what was necessary. And I would prefer to have a good definition, a definition that's defensible, and one that we're comfortable with before we go forward. So, if you wish, I would like to make that recommendation. Lehman/ So you're recommending that we amend the resolution by deleting item #4 to be deferred to a later date? Boothroy/ Definitely defer it, so that we can bring it back up for discussion, but giving us more time to get the necessary research so that we can deal with some of the issues that you raised. Norton/ We're deleting which? Lehman/ Item #4 on the resolution is "To change the definition of"family" to meet HUD and Equal Opportunity guidelines." This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 29 Kubby/ But Doug, the questions last night were not really about the legality of those definitions, it was whether or not we can have a local preference stating that households with dependents will be on a higher priority than households of adults only. Boothroy/ Right. We haven't confirmed that answer one way or the other. Kubby/ But I want to be clear that that's what we're talking about, we're not talking about whether Iowa City can choose to use our own definition of "domestic partnership". That's not the issue. Boothroy/ That's not the issue. But that particular point that you made seemed to be a turning point with regard to whether or not this thing was going to work. Kubby/ Right. We just need to be clear what it is we're talking about. I didn't think it sounded very clear. Boothroy/ Okay, right, yes. Kubby/ Thank you. Boothroy/ Thank you. Lehman/ Does Council wish to amend this by deleting Item #4 to be considered, deferred to a later date? Thornberry/ I would like to recommend or to move that number 4 on the resolution be -- Norton/ Deleted. Thornberry/ Deferred to a later date. Unknown later date. Kubby/ Does that, I mean, we have a lot of people here who want to speak with us, and they've waited as long as people can continue to speak so that -- Lehman/ Yes. Thomberry/ I've got a resolution on the floor, and if there's a second, I'm willing to hear anybody and everybody. Champion/ Oh, I'll second it. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 30 Lehman/ We have a move to amend the resolution by taking item #4 and to deferring it indefinitely. That's the motion? Thornberry/ Yes. Lehman/ Made by Thornberry, seconded by Connie. Discussion? Kubby/ Well, I'd like to suggest that we table this motion, hear from the public, and then we can put that motion back on the table. What people have to say tonight may make or break my decision to vote to defer that. Champion/ The reason I -- Kubby/ I want to give them the opportunity to persuade me. Norton/ It'll also depend on what we hear from HUD about what we can and can't reasonably do. Vanderhoef/ That's right. Champion/ I think it's a good idea. Thomberry/ I would like (can't understand). Champion/ Because we're going to have a lot of discussion tonight, and I think we all need to mull over what we do tonight. O'Donnell/ Absolutely. Thomberry/ But I would still like to move the question of the resolution. Norton/ Okay. Lehman/ Well, we, Karen, I think you made the motion to table this, is that correct? Kubby/ Yes. Lehman/ Is there a second to that? Kubby/ I want to hear from people first, before we vote on deferring. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 31 Lehman/ Is there a second to the motion to table? Then the motion dies for lack of second. Discussion? And I think at this point, we can certainly take discussion from the public. Kubby/ I-- Lehman/ Go ahead. Thomberry/ I still -- Kubby/ Sorry, no. Norton/ Let's hear. Vanderhoef/ We'll hear from them. Thornberry/ On the resolution, and then listen to the public. Vanderhoef/ Come on, Janelle. Janelle's waited. Karr/ Excuse me. Wait, wait. Moving the question ends debate. Lehman/ All right. Is there a second? Kubby/ We need a second and a 2/3's vote. Karr/ That's correct. Lehman/ It ends debate on the amendment. Is there a second on the motion to move the question on the amendment? Kubby/ Well, I guess that I -- Norton/ Wait a minute, wait a minute. Kubby/ I'd like to suggest that we don't need to be moving the question. We can talk to each other. Norton/ That's right. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 31 Lehman/ second. Discussion? from the public. Kubby/ I-- Lehman/ Go ahead. Thornberry/ I still -- Kubby/ Sorry, no. Norton/ Let's hear. Vanderhoef/ We'll hear from them. Thomberry/ Is there a second to the motion to table? Then the motion dies for lack of And I think at this point, we can certainly take discussion On the resolution, and then listen to the public. Vanderhoef/ Come on, Janelle. Janelle's waited. Karr/ Excuse me. Wait, wait. Moving the question ends debate. Lehman/ All right. Is there a second? Kubby/ We need a second and a (can't hear) vote. Karr/ That's correct. Lehman/ It ends debate on the amendment. Is there a second on the motion to move the question on the amendment? Kubby/ Well, I guess that I -- Norton/ Wait a minute, wait a minute. Kubby/ I'd like to suggest that we don't need to be moving the question. We can talk to each other. Norton/ That's right. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 32 Kubby/ We can have a conversation. Dilkes/ But the motion's been made. Norton/ (Can't understand). Karr/ (Can't hear) to move the question? Champion/ I seconded. Dilkes/ To move the question or to second the motion to delete? Thomberry/ She moved to -- Champion/ To defer. Norton/ Amend the resolution by deleting item #4. Dilkes/ Correct. Thomberry/ I moved the question and Connie seconded it. Lehman/ No. Ditkes/ No, I think -- Lehman/ I don't think Connie knew that she seconded it. Dilkes/ Did you second the move, the motion to move the question or the motion to defer? Champion/ The motion to defer. Dilkes/That's okay. Lehman/That's correct. That motion has been made. There is a motion to move the question which would mean that there would be no further question on whether or not we delay. Thornberry/ Can I withdraw my motion? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 33 Lehman/ Your motion's withdrawn. Kubby/ Thank you, Dean. Lehman/ Go right ahead. Vanderhoef/ Good job. O'Donnell/ Roberts' Rules, I'll tell you. Norton/ There you go, right. Janelle Rettig/ Again, my name is Janelle Rettig and I've lived in Iowa City for nine years, and we've owned a business for almost four. I'm here to talk about the issue that's on the table, and that's going to be deferred. And I think that's a good idea, because I think this is a much more serious issue than Federal Assisted Housing. And let me try to explain why I think that's the case. Iowa City's Human Rights ordinance defines "family", which would include people who are in a domestic partnership, or eligible to be in a domestic partnership, and are either registered that way or eligible to be. And what I understand that the Housing Authority is asking you to do is to continue to make other Iowa City departments consistent with our own Human Rights Ordinance. What is at stake here, by some of the rhetoric that's been going on, is the definition of"family". You are not being asked to define the federal govemment's definition of"family", nor are you being asked to define the State government's definition of"family". And you're not being asked to make a comment on whether same-sex marriages should be legalized or not. What you're asking to do, and what HUD is giving you the authority to do, is to define how you define "families" in the City of Iowa City. We've defined families for 25 years as the same-sex partners are a family. And with the rhetoric that's saying that we're not a family, what is at issue here is not Federal Assisted Housing, which may or may not be utilized by very many people. What is at stake here is how we as Iowa Citians define "family". Currently, my partner and I, who are approaching our ten-year anniversary, are defined as family under the Human Rights Ordinance, are defined as family should one of us work for the City government or the University and get insurance benefits. We're defined as family if we want swimming passes, which recently was changed. We are not defined as family as Assisted Housing. HUD has given you the authority to change that, and to make that consistent with everything else in this City, and to continue to go through the Code and to continue to go through our rules and regulations and to be consistent. Whereas it This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 34 currently stand, and thank God we are not in need of assisted housing, but you are already, as I understand it, same-sex couples with children are eligible for assisted housing. Straight couples with children are eligible for assisted housing. Elderly people, disabled people, heterosexual couples who are married, without children, are eligible for housing. The group that is excluded are same-sex couple without children. And they are excluded for no apparent reason. And in contradiction with our own Human Rights Ordinance. Now, despite what everybody thinks, the City of Iowa City has passed a Human Rights Ordinance which all of the rest of us in town are required to follow, and thank God we are. That you can't fire us, you can't discriminate on that basis on housing, on credit, employment, and other things, based on sexual orientation. But the City of Iowa City is not required to follow its own Human Rights Ordinance in its own dealings with its citizens. And I think that's what's at stake in this debate. Not, and I mean, this is, started out as federal assisted housing, and some of you I've talked with today who are concerned that this is subsidizing a particular lifestyle. What is at stake here is the definition of family that the City of Iowa City is going to abide by. And I think that definition of family needs to be consistent throughout all of our codes and all of our regulations. And so I just want you to think about that as we delay this, that you are defining family and being asked to make it consistent with all the rest of our codes. You are not being asked to make a determination on whether same- sex marriages should be legal or not. Thank you. Lehman/ Thank you. Pat Harvey/ Good evening. My name is Pat Harvey and I'm Chair of the Iowa City Human Rights Commission. I've been on the Commission going on six years. This is my second year as the Chair. There's nothing that I can say tonight that's better than what was already said. But in wanting to represent the Commission as well as in my own heart as, my husband and I have been citizens of Iowa City since grade school, so 1 think we've seen the development of the town quite a ways and it's come quite a long way. But it's come a long way in the Human Rights area as well, and I'm proud to have been a part of that the last few years. But when I first joined the Human Rights Commission in '93, I thought I knew a lot about Human Rights, having grown up in a city where we see a lot of diversity, a lot of differences of opinions, differences of feelings, that are all, for the most part, accepted. So I thought I kind of had a good basis of what I was getting myself into. But as I've had a chance to work on cases through the Commission, work with other Commissioners, other City staff members, and being able to get out more in the community as a representative of the Commission, I've learned so much more. And I think one of the things that I've fully come to understand as I work for the City is that Human Rights is another This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 35 name for simple fairness, or at least that's what it should be. It's a way for us to measure our behavior, a way for us to take care of our responsibilities, and to make sure that we just don't grow too comfortable with people that are like ourselves. And I want to make sure that the City's open and fair to all of our citizens. The proposal that you have before you, and the thoughts of the deferment of item #4 is very important. It's another example of how the City can take the right steps to make sure that all of its benefits, all of its ordinances, are administrated fairly to all of its citizens. The proposal is not about preferences. It's not about special treatment. It's not about sexual relationships. It's solely about fairness in making sure that you exemplify what's already in your Zoning Code, and what's already in your Human Rights Ordinance, and what's been there for many years. I hope that you will think about this seriously and support and exemplify what the City Zoning and what the Human Rights Ordinance exemplifies, and not to treat divisions or different sub-sets differently among the City's populace. Treat us all fairly. Represent the City all fairly. That's all we're asking for. Thank you. Lehman/ Thankyou, Pa. Jeremy Price/ My name is Jeremy Price. I'm a graduate student at the University and a member of COGS, the graduate students tinion, and also a member of the local branch of the International Socialists Organization. And I have here a petition that a few of us have been circulating just today, since 6:00, and I'd just like to read it to you, having you know that most of the people have signed it, and a number of people outside the Civic Center signed it before we came inside. Concerning, of course, the issue on the table. (Reads petition). And I'd be happy to leave with you the signatures that we've collected here today. It seems to me that to vote in contradiction to the spirit of this petition on either of these two issues would be little more than mean-spiritedness, and I would urge also that as we're all here, so many of us with a great deal of concern about this issue, I would like to see, in the interest of democracy and in the interest of responsible government, a vote on this issue this evening while those of us who are interested in the question at stake here are here to witness the results. So I'll just place this in the hands of the Clerk. Kubby/ Motion to accept correspondence. Price/ Thank you. Lehman/ Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 36 Vanderhoef/ Second. Lehman/ Moved and seconded to accept correspondence. All in favor- (ayes). Motion carried. Osha Davidson/ Good evening. My name is Osha Davidson, and as a former member of the Iowa City Human Rights Commission, I felt obligated to come out and talk about this issue tonight. And again, as Pat said, I don't know what I can add really, after the articulate and heartfelt and well-reasoned arguments already made. And also, I feel embarrassed, Pat's lineage being here so long, since grade school, I've only been here for 25 years. I feel like a newcomer. Vanderhoef/ She's only 26. Davidson/ Hey, I hadn't thought of that. This really is an important issue, and I know you all understand that. And there's, it has the potential to be divisive, and it also has the potential to be healing in the community. And I liked what I read that Councilor Champion had said about not moving backwards. Because that's really what would be represented by voting down this proposal. It would be a move backwards. All this proposal means is that we do bring all aspects of the City, at least one more aspect, into compliance with what our Human Rights Ordinance, and what our commonly felt and commonly perceived view of what a family is, just make that standard throughout. It is an important issue, and it's a contentious issue. And it affects a lot of people. And by telling them, by voting against this, what you're telling them is they're somehow lesser than other groups of people. You're singling them out. And that shouldn't be done. There shouldn't be special rights, but neither should there be special discrimination. And I'm afraid that's what's at issue here. I just urge you all to keep your eyes on the prize of what this is all about which is human rights and human dignity. And Councilor O'Donnell, I remember you called me before the election and said, talked to me about your passion, very articulately, about your passionate view and belief in human rights. And I would just urge you not to lose that passion and to follow through with that by making sure that this is a uniform approach to human rights and how we define families. And giving dignity to all families in Iowa City. That's what Iowa City stands for. Thank you. Champion/ I also think it's important, and I'm surprised you didn't point it out, that when you deny people basic rights that other citizens have, you also provide feed for prejudice by other people. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page37 Jim Throgmorton/ Hi there. My name's Jim Throgmorton. Janelle, Pat, and Osha made the points I wanted to, only far better, so I'm not going to blather on. I just want to make one observation. I think his name's Rob, the fellow from Johnson County Builders who just spoke to you about trying to achieve greater harmony between the City and builders. And quite rightly, you listened attentively and with empathy. And just as you will strive to follow his advice, I'd urge you to speak and act in a way that will achieve greater harmony between the City Council and the gays and lesbians that live in this community and who are citizens of this community. Thanks. Lehman/ Thank you, Jim. Carl Beyerhelm/ My name is Carl Beyerhelm. I'd like to just follow up on the remarks made by my predecessor here in terms of harmony between the City and gays and lesbians. I speak as a heterosexual. And I believe that if we narrow the definition of family as has been proposed, it will affect not only gays and lesbians, it will also affect, in a very divisive way, heterosexual people and the "traditional family". I would like to see this resolution be passed as it stands for the sake of everyone. Lehman/ Thankyou. Kubby/ Thank you. Dave Hemingway/ Thanks very much. My name's Dave Hemingway. I actually live in St. Louis, although I'm very proud of the fact that I come from a century farm family in the Iowa City area. And quite frankly, I think it might be more advisable ifI simply send a letter when I understand all the details. But I've come up from St. Louis specifically to be available while the planting season is going on, and on, and on, it seems like, due to the weather. And it's, I'm very fortunate in that I have a good job in St. Louis, and don't require assistance for housing, and have a generous and understanding employer who can spare me while I come up here, given severe health problems that my mother's been undergoing. And I guess the point that I wanted to make is that any of, that you should bear in mind as you consider this legislation, whatever it is, any difficulty that results to the gay couples who may suffer or have more trouble finding housing as a result of the action you take, or have more difficulty with their budgets because of it, it doesn't only affect them, but it affects the heterosexual parents that most of them, like myself, came from. And it, I guess I'd just like the Council to bear in mind that whatever definition of family you use here, that's one part of a family unit which typically includes heterosexual parents, heterosexual siblings, who are in a This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 38 position to be supported in their occupations and raising their children. I don't have children, just for whatever reason, not because of my affectional preference. But the, any adverse impact that this legislation might have on gay children may very severely hamper the ability of the family unit, which includes not just that son or daughter who's gay, but the ability of the family as a whole to work with one another and to fill in for the gaps when there isn't insurance, or not enough insurance, and not enough help to take care of a parent or a sibling who's in trouble. I appreciate your hearing me on that point which I hope I've expressed clearly, and thank you for the opportunity. Kubby/ Thanks for coming in. Lehman/ Do we have any discussion from Council? The amendment on the floor is to defer. Is there any discussion on the amendment? Kubby/ Well, I guess we're in the same place as we were last night, after heating folks. Lehman/ I think there's information we asked for last night that Doug alluded to that we don't have. Norton/ When it comes down to the priority question and so forth, I don't know, it's -- Kubby/ I mean, actually, our Human Rights Ordinance says that we shouldn't discriminate on the basis of whether there're dependents or not. And so -- Norton/ Well, that's the question that needs to be clarified, whether you can exclude all couples. I think in reality, the housing assistance goes to people who are disabled or elderly or both, right? And families of whatever form that involve children. Those are the high priority, I would assume that those are the high priority categories. Then when you go beyond that to couples, and if we go to include couples, then it's my judgment of course, we ought to include all couples. The question of whether that's a different form of cut-off, but it's a matter of priority, so that's what I'm trying to figure out whether that's legitimate that if you decide that the limited money ought to be focused on the families with children, basically, plus disabled and elderly, rather than on couples of any sort. But if you include couples, I'm certainly not going to divide those into two groups, those who can and those who can't. That'd be ridiculous. In my judgment of course. Thornberry/ Dee, I agree, wholeheartedly. If you're going to include homosexual couples, then you've got to include heterosexual couples, and it's all couples. It's This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 39 the, it's not the lifestyle, so much as the availability of money to meet the best need. Norton/ But I understand that we're deferring because that may be clarified through discussions with HUD, or discussions among ourselves. I don't know. But I don't want to defer it just to be deferring it, because I've got no problem voting. Thornberry/ I don't, either. Kubby/ But Dean, currently, heterosexual couples without children can receive services, correct? Maggie's shaking her head. Norton/ But they're not officially in the HUD guidelines. Thornberry/ If they're, only if they're married. Norton/ They're not explicitly in the HUD guidelines, couples aren't. Kubby/ Well, I'm saying that they're receiving services now. Norton/ They may be, but they're not explicitly in the guidelines, as I understand it. Kubby/ You should come up, Maggie. I'm trying to figure out -- Norton/ Maybe they should be, but they're not in what I read. Thomberry/ No, it's not shifting at all, right? Maggie Grosvenor/ They are. Do you want me to get the definition? It's defined by blood, marriage, adoption, governmental, that definition is already in the policy. Norton/ That's the zoning ordinance isn't it? Kubby/ (Can't hear) for heterosexual couples, if you declare yourselfa couple, you're a couple in the State of Iowa. Grosvenor/ Right. Kubby/ Isn't that right, Eleanor? Norton/ Wait a minute, that's coming from the zoning definition, isn't it? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 40 Kubby/ Through common-law? Norton/ Being incorporated as -- Thomberry/ It's the common law after a set period of time. Norton/ This is why we're deferring, because we need -- Thornberry/ I believe it's down to one year. Norton/ Some clarification. Eleanor Dilkes/ There's no -- Kubby/ Let's see what's going on. Dilkes/ There's no set period of time to create a common law marriage, but it's the holding out of yourself a married couple and the things that go along with that. It's not a set period of time. Norton/ What are the guidelines for family composition? Dilkes/ I think, that's a number that floats around, but that's not a -- Champion/ It'll be outdated in the next several years. Thornberry/ Like I am. Grosvenor/ I don't want to mis-quote, so I'm going to read it. Norton/ Okay, read what the HUD definition is for family composition. Grosvenor/ Okay, it lists it, a, b, c, d. And this term is used restrictively within the housing assistance program. And the issue, it's number (a), "Persons who have a legal family relationship of blood, marriage, or adoption, or other operation of law." Norton/ For other operations. Well then, that seems to conclude it. Thornberry/ That would exclude. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 41 Norton/ That excludes it, so we have to modify that one. Lehman/ Well, I think that's the question. Grosvenor/ That's the question. Lehman/ So the question is, do we want, the question here right now -- Norton/ How does HUD get away with having such a restrictive definition? Grosvenor/ HUD doesn't define it. That's that clause I read out of the federal regs that says it leaves it to a housing authority to determine. A family is a single or a group of person. Period, said, done. They define elderly. They define disabled. They define family with children. The rest of it, they leave to individual housing authorities. Vanderhoef/ And the question that did not get answered is whether any of these groups with or without children, for instance, can be weighted and moved higher on a housing list. Grosvenor/ And that's a separate issue. Vanderhoef/ That's-- Grosvenor/ That's entirely separate. This is strictly definition, because unless you are defined as a family, and understand, single people can be defined as a family, unless you are defined, you are not eligible to receive housing assistance. It's the way the law reads. You have to define them. Then, you can prioritize them. Norton/ Can you tell us how many families, how many couples, presently have housing assistance, or is that __9 Grosvenor/ No. I can't tell you that. I can tell you 48% -- Norton/ I understand that 48% are disabled or elderly. Grosvenor/ Right. I can tell you that. And 52% are families. But it doesn't designate a childless family or just a couple being a family. Because the current definition says you just have to be married or related by blood. You could have sisters. You could have mother and daughter. That's a family. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 42 Norton/ Well I think we ought to get the language cleared up and straightened out clearer than what it is here. That's the only reason I'd like to defer is because I think the language is garbled as it stands, pardon me, as it stands. It needs to be clearer, what we mean here, and it needs to be consistent with our Human Rights Ordinance. And that's why I would vote to defer. I'm not voting to put off the decision, just to get it straight and make sure we're not making two mistakes. Champion/ I did have some phone calls today, insinuating that we were going to give couples who weren't heterosexual housing preference. And that's not what's intended. I think it's important that we make that clear. This just allows eligibility. That's all. Grosvenor/ Right, right. Kubby/ So, Dee, because you're part of the turning key here, because the question about local preference for presence or absence of children is really separate from the definition, and we'll get an answer yes or no from HUD, can you explain to me more clearly, I'm getting more confused now about what the connection is between the definition of family and the decision about the preference for the presence or absence of children. Vanderhoef/ I thought they were tied together, and I was not willing to commit off the cuff without having this sorted out last night. Kubby/ Okay. Vanderhoef/ Okay? I've had a lot of phone calls today, and I'm real clear that it's time to move forward and identify couples as families, whether it be heterosexual or whether it be homosexual. I recognize, for me it's a human issue. It's an issue of fairness. I heard that word used awhile ago and find this to be very true for me, also. It's a matter of, we are all human, we all have wants and needs. They are not different, no matter what skin we have, what preference we have, what our size is, what our religion is, we are human. And this is where I come down, is we're human beings. Yes, if you call it discrimination, I would prefer to use a preference of children in the families as being the first ones to receive assistance in that, I recognize that that is still discrimination of a sort. And my whole way of giving to people is to recognize that the children are first in my heart. Kubby/ Dee, we still need to get the answer to that question, because many of us were interested in that question. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 43 Vanderhoef/ That's fight, we do need it. Kubby/ But does that prevent us from moving forward on what we have before us and then having that come back to us, and if we do, if we can legally have that, once people are eligible that there would be -- Norton/ Priorities. Kubby/ A pfiofity system that we can have it come back to us. Norton/ We could proceed that way. Yeah. Vanderhoeff We could proceed that way, although I am listening from Dee and a couple of other people, that the language in this is just not quite, quite clear. And I'm real happy to defer it for, till the next meeting if that's what you want to do. Norton/ I have no problem. Thornberry/ For whatever it takes. Vanderhoef/ For however long it takes until people are comfortable with the language and we're clear on what we're voting on. Thomberry/ That's fight. Kubby/ Although I would like to make the observation that the two places that we're changing things, one is from our Human Rights Ordinance, the language is clear, it's already on our books, it's already what we live by. The other one is in our Zoning Commission, it's already on the books, it's already functional, it's already what we live by. So I think it's all here, and we're functioning with it, and we haven't had problems with those definitions in terms of zoning or in terms of our Human Rights Ordinance. So, I would like to maintain that because those changes are written in those ways, we could go forward. Norton/ We could proceed with that, and then quite separately consider the matter of priorities, right? Kubby/ When we get an answer. Norton/ Because that still seems to me important. I kind of agree with Dee on that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 44 Champion/ Well, it would probably alleviate a lot of people worrying if we proceeded with it, and you wouldn't have to come back and talk to us again. Margaret Loose/ Can I be recognized? Norton/ (Can't hear) in which case -- Loose/ My name is Margaret Loose. I'm a graduate student at the University and a member of COGS, the graduate student union. And I'd like to support the sensible solution that Karen Kubby is proposing, and that is that we move forward. Frankly, as a member of this audience, all the discussion about language, and did we get the right information and so on and so forth last night, feels, pardon me if I represent you, like obfuscation. Champion/What does that mean? Loose/ We're clouding a very simple moral and justice issue into a matter of legalese, legal language. It is not a matter of legal language. We've gotten, I mean, granted, to a certain extent there is legal precedent that we have to acknowledge. But the legal precedent in Iowa City, as established in our zoning, as established in our Human Rights policy is that we recognize same-sex couples. And all of the talk about HUD and all of the talk about Des Moines feels like obfuscation. In the interest of responsive government, here are your constituents. We bid you to change this language to reflect an inclusiveness that reflects the people of this City. Respond to the people. That's my request. Champion/ (Can't hear) don't we do that? Kubby/ Well, not everybody, I mean we just vote no about deferring. Thornberry/ I don't think we should do this, and I don't want to be railroaded. Lehman/ Let me just make a point. I think that there's, we're talking about a reorganization of the Housing Department that has a lot of ramifications, not just the definition of"family". I don't think anybody up here, and I may be wrong, but I don't think anybody up here objects to the reorganization of the Housing Department in making it as efficient and making it work as well as it possibly can and help the most people it possibly can. I would really not like to see us vote and have a vote be split because there is a misunderstanding or a misinterpretation or those who would like to wait and have a better definition on item #4. I would This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 45 personally rather see us vote unanimously to pass this, consider item #4 at a later date, and possibly unanimously pass that when it needs the approval of Council, than to see us vote and have it appear four or five years from now. Dilkes/ Mr. Mayor, I'm sorry, but I believe that's a separate item, the reorganization is item # 12. Lehman/ This is all part of a package, as I see it. Maybe I'm wrong. Dilkes/ I just wanted to make sure you understood it was a separate item on the agenda. Lehman/ Right. Kubby/ But Ernie, I would disagree with that. Because whether or not we reorganize the office, -- Norton/ That doesn't, yeah. Kubby/ These issues would still be coming before us. Norton/ And they won't change. Kubby/ And so I see them as completely separate issues. So I would, personally, as an individual, disagree with that. Norton/ We have to move along here. Lehman/ Well, are we ready to vote? Champion/ So-- Kubby/ We've got a motion to defer. Lehman/ It's a motion for deferral. Karr/ To delete item #4 and defer indefinitely is the motion we have on the floor. Lehman/ Right is that a roll call or a motion? Karr/ It's a motion. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 46 Lehman/ All those in favor- (aye - Thomberry, O'Donnell, Lehman). All those opposed- (nay- Vanderhoef, Norton, Champion, Kubby). Karr/ I'm sorry, could I have a show of hands? I'm sorry. Lehman/ They ayes first. Karr/ Ayes first. Lehman/ To delay. Karr/ Ayes to defer. Lehman/ To defer. And the nays? Okay. Discussion on the original motion? Kubby/ I also had a concern about the minimum rent, and I brought it up last night, but two years ago is when we went from the $0 minimum rent to $25, and I'm concerned that doubling it within two years is too much, and I would like to move that the minimum rent be increased to $35. Lehman/ Is there a second to that motion? Norton/ I'll second that. Lehman/ Moved by Kubby, seconded by Norton that we amend it to leave the minimum rent at $25. Is that correct? Kuibby/ No, increase it to $35. Norton/ No, no, to move it to $35. Lehman/ $35, I'm sorry. Increase it to $35. Discussion? Kubby/ I think it's important that some rent be paid, and I don't have a problem with it going up gradually. But I think the steepness of it going up does create problems for people, even with having a hardship provision based on certain criteria that is fair and consistently used with people. I just think going up that high that fast is too much. O'Donnell/ I think Maggie answered that question last night when she said it's to encourage people to find employment. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 47 Kubby/ I don't think that kind of money is going to make or break that kind of decision, but it might make or break how many potatoes you buy and how many hours of child-care you get. O'Donnell/ Well, I think we should vote on it. Lehman/Further discussion? All in favor of the amendment say aye- (ayes - Kubby, Norton). Opposed- (nays - Vanderhoef, Lehman, Thornberry, O'Donnell, Champion). Karr/ I'm sorry, that's 2-5? Lehman/ 2-5, yes. Champion/ What were we voting on? Norton/ Might as well have roll call. Kubby/ (Can't hear). Karr/ Well, I'm sorry but I can't, everybody isn't voting. Lehman/ Norton and Kubby voting in the affirmative. Champion/ I'll vote for the $35. Lehman/ That's Norton, Kubby and Champion in the affirmative. In the negative, I guess you can figure the rest out. Karr/ Yes. Yes, I got that. Vanderhoef/ I have another motion. Lehman/ All right. Vanderhoef/ I voted not to defer item #4, but in deference to Councilors who would like to support the rest of this issue, I would make a motion to separate item #4. Champion/ Oh, sure. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 Lehman/ You mean, to vote on it separately? Vanderhoef/ Sure, vote on it separately. Kubby/ I would support that. Lehman/ Motion by Vanderhoef, second by Kubby. Discussion? that the entire Council can vote on all of this -- Thornberry/ On one, two and three. Vanderhoeff On one, two and three, that's correct. page 48 The effect of this is Thornberry/ To eliminate federal preferences, to establish a local preference to the homeless, and to increase the minimum rents of public housing section 8 (can't hear). Lehman/ And then four would be voted on -- Vanderhoef/ Separately. Lehman/ All in favor of the amendment to vote on this separately, say aye- (ayes). Opposed- (none). The motion is carded. Thornberry/ That's 7-0. Lehman/ Okay. 7-0s we can have. Any further discussion on the motion, the resolution as amended, which would be as it's written with item #4 being deleted for separate consideration.? Roll call- (yes). Kubby/ Move adoption of number four to be included in all of this. Norton/ Second. Lehman/ Moved by Kubby, seconded by Norton. Discussion? I will not support this, and I'm really not happy about it. There are things I would like to know about this that I don't know yet, and I'm pleased that we've separated this, because I certainly favor the resolution. And I may very well be able to support that, but at this point, I want more information, and obviously Council is not willing to do that at this point. Roll call- (yes; Lehman, O'Donnell and Thomberry voting no). Motion carded. We're going to take a short break. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #11 page 49 BREAK This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #12 page 50 ITEM NO. 12 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE BUDGETED POSITIONS IN THE ASSISTED HOUSING DIVISION OF THE HOUSING AND INSPECTION SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND AMENDING THE AFSCME PAY PLAN. Lehman/(Reads agenda item #12 and comment). We talked about this last night. Is there a motion to approve it? Thornberry/ Move adoption of the resolution. Lehman/ Moved by Thornberry. Vanderhoef/ second. Lehman/ Seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion? Tairi Sackfield/ I gave a paper for everybody to have, part of the AFSCME contract. I'm Tairi Sackfield, president for the bargaining unit of Johnson County area employees, AFSCME Local #183. I'm not coming before you tonight to challenge Maggie or Doug's ideas of saving money. AFSCME's always been very successful with the City in reaching agreements in that area. I am coming before you tonight to ask you to delay this vote on the reorganization of the Housing, Assisted Housing Department. Two of the reasons, I'm just going to share two of them. There are several more, but two of the reasons is first and foremost, this just came to AFSCME's attention less than two weeks ago. we've had one meeting concerning the proposed changes that Maggie and Doug have suggested. According to last night's transcripts, they've been thinking about this since February of 1997. And if you look at page 19 of the piece of paper that I gave you, the last sentence of"b", "Reduction in Force" CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 98-69, SIDE A Sackfield/ In order to provide the most equitable treatment to employees who are to be laid off. The second thing that I would like you to look at is number one under that. "The City will attempt to accomplish reduction in force by attrition." Both of these, when they discussed them with us, we were told that seven people were going to be laid off. There was going to be different job classifications in that department where employees who have been there for 20, 25, and 30 years, will have the opportunity to apply. The next item, number two, "an employee whose This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #12 page 51 job is to be eliminated may be transferred to vacancies within the department." There's obviously going to be vacancies within the department. The jobs are going to continue. Operations for assisted housing is going to continue. We want our employees to stay there. We don't want them to have to apply for these jobs. There's a lot more work that needs to be done here, and by a vote being cast tonight in favor of reorganization is totally subverting the bargaining unit contract, and I feel that we can reach an agreement if you just instruct staff to go back and deal with AFSCME on this. Lehman/ Thank you, Tairi. Champion/ Steve, I may need some help with this. This is a reorganization of a department and not a reduction because of a budget cut. Are the two treated differently? Atkins/ Well, I think you have to say that it's a reorganization of a division within a department. Champion/ Okay. Atkins/ And secondly, as far as budget reductions, there is none that I recall that substantially apply to this organizational change. However, all of our projections indicate that we are going to get a declining federal dollar with respect to our Assisted housing program. we're trying to anticipate the changes that are going to occur. And I think if we can contract some change from five-year contracts for certificates and vouchers to one-year contracts, I mean, clearly, it's our judgment that financial changes are on the horizon. Lehman/ Go ahead. Jan Apel/ My name is Jan Able, and I was born and raised in and around Iowa City, and I've been on housing because I'm disabled, totally disabled. And I feel that the people that are there now are the best people for the job because they look at all the changes that's gone on over the years and they've adapted to them, and they're there to help the tenant, and they're also there to do the best job possible for the people. And I feel that by changing them around and making them feel like they're not sure from one day to the next whether they're going to continue with their job really isn't fair to the work that they've put in. And I just don't feel that this proposition that they've come up with is very good at all. I don't think these people deserve to feel like maybe six months down the road they're not going to have their job. And it might be a little too late for some of them to be able to get This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #12 page 52 able to get another job. But I feel that whatever changes are made, they're going to be the best people for that job, because they can do it. Thank you. Lehman/ Thank you. Doug, I think this is a public meeting, we did have some discussion last night, but I think there's a couple issues that I think we should, you should address for the public, and a couple of these were brought up by Teri, and I think you can probably tell the public as well as the Council. One is to do with the amount of time prior to the action that we're talking about doing, the ability to reduce folks by attrition, and the question of transfers within the department. Boothroy/ Well, I think a couple of those are contract issues, and I would -- Lehman/ That's fine. Boothroy/ Defer to Dale, because he's the one that deals with that issue. The only one that is not a contract issue that you mentioned, I think, is the issue of time. And the decision on the reduction, that there would be a reduction in one staff person, was not reached until shortly before we prepared the memorandum and got that ready. So, it's not true to say it was arrived at in February. I didn't know it in February. Lehman/ Well, there wasn't a decision made. Kubby/ But the idea of the reorganization. Lehman/ There wasn't a decision made until just prior to their being notified. Boothroy/ There was not -- Lehman/ Your decision to want and the reorganization was made just prior to notifying (can't hear). Boothroy/ Right. Lehman/ Okay. Boothroy/ We crystallized it just before. Lehman/ Dale, could you --? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #12 page 53 Dale Helling/ I think, to address the attrition item first, in a normal reduction in force that's precipitated by a lack of funding or whatever, normally that's identified farther in advance, and it's sometimes possible to do that by not filling vacant positions that come along. And that essentially is what we try to do by attrition, if a vacancy occurs, you simply don't fill it, anticipating that something's going to happen. To apply that here would be to say that we don't, we wait until there is a vacant position before we do a reorganization, and that could be weeks, months, years, we don't know that. So clearly, I think that we're not in violation of this agreement by not doing it by attrition, and clearly, it's only an attempt to accomplish it by attrition. If you felt, for instance, that you wanted to do this by attrition and so you want to wait until there's a vacancy, I can't tell you when that might occur. Lehman/ Well, let me ask you this. If folks who apply for these jobs, if they are not hired, as vacancies become available in the department, will they have any preferential treatment? Helling/ They would be able to bid internally on any position within the City if they're not -- maybe I can clarify something before I answer the second question about the reduction in force. In the meeting that we had, we simply tried to identify status, and it seemed to me, and I still believe this is the correct definition, that anybody who is in a position and that position is eliminated, should be treated for contractual purposes, as if they are in a lay-off position, even though there are new jobs that they can apply for. And so we try to, that's what I was trying to do was say what status I believe the contract puts them in. And I think they do, I think it is the equivalent of a reduction, or a lay-off status, and I think that they should be treated accordingly under the contract. The second thing that was talked about was the number two that says "an employee in a job to be eliminated may be transferred to vacancies within the department." May is permissive, and I think it's permissive for a reason. I think when this language was negotiated, it's been talked about in the past, the permissiveness comes about in the fact that neither should we be obligated to transfer somebody into a position that they're not qualified to perform, nor should an employee be forced to take a position that they don't want just because they're being laid off from another position. And so that's why the language is permissive, and I don't think there's any obligation to transfer them to another position. By the same token, if it works out, it's possible. Kubby/ Dale, is there a way that we can allow people to slide into the new positions and let them have the option of saying yes, I want to be downgraded or upgraded, or if they don't want to do that, that they then have that lay-off status so that they then can have those rights to apply for other jobs within the City for a year? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #12 page 54 Helling/ When you say "let slide into a position", do you mean basically transfer them? Kubby/ Yes. Helling/ Well, I think we have to be careful because of the criteria that I just talked about. You want to make sure that somebody has the ability to perform that job. In this case, we're creating new positions, so we have to look at individuals to make sure they can perform the function of the job. Kubby/ I'm asking, can we do that? I mean, we talked last night about training and everything and that for people who had potential to do the job, that they would get training, so we know that that's out there. So I'm just asking the logistical question, not, if we put everything else aside, can we do that? Helling/ Well, we might be able to negotiate something like that. The question I guess, two questions come to my mind. And number one, is that the best way to fill the new positions. I think there's also the question of the fact that you have new positions and there's other sections of the contract that cover internal vacancies, so I think we'd have to have some sort of agreement with the Union that to give these people preference over other internal applicants who also have the right under the contract to apply for those positions. So, there's a protection of the rights of other employees besides them. And that's part of the contract as well. Kubby/ Right. But I guess my big concern is that it's our, it's not the decision because of the individual behavior or the employee, or dissatisfaction with their work product that we're doing the reorganization, is my assumption here. Helling/ That's correct. Kubby/ And therefore we know people have skills, we know people have longevity with the program. People have been through directors that we have let go. They have been there without directors. And I think that if it's possible for us to negotiate this and spend some more time talking about it, I'd like us to spend some more time talking about that, to see what can be negotiated to see something that is fair for all employees. And for the department, last night, our time-frame was if we vote yes tonight, the notice goes out tomorrow. And I think that's a little too quick when there's some possibility for continued discussion. And that's what I'd prefer for us to do at this time. Audience/ (Can't hear). This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #12 page 55 Helling/ Could I just make one more clarification? And that is in terms of staff, we're trying to work this through with the Union. We met with them two weeks ago and, at least my feeling is, that the door has always been open, and it still is. You know, I don't have any problem with meeting and talking about how to apply the contract and how to get through this process. But I don't know, I have to go by the contract and I have to go by my interpretation unless somebody comes and says we need to discuss this. Kubby/ I want to -- Helling/ Because we are bound by the contract. Kubby/ I want to hear -- Champion/ But they are Union, like the secretary and the people who run the Union, I'm not familiar with. Are they full-time people, or do they hold jobs, and is the secretary a part-time position? Or is it done? Kubby/ You mean the secretary of the Public Housing Authority? Champion/ Yeah, no, no, of the Union. Kubby/ You mean the President of the Union? Champion/ Or any officer. Tell me about it. Kubby/ Are the officers in the Union full-time City employees? Sackfield/ Not necessarily. Champion/ Okay. Kubby/ You need to come up to the mic. Champion/ I mean I'm going to support this reorganization because it's going to be beneficial to our recipients. But I also am very concerned about the possibility of people losing jobs. And I hope we can work something out to, not to allow that to happen. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #12 page 56 Sackfield/ Well, that's what's going to happen, according to the meeting, the only meeting that we have had. They said seven people will be out of a job. Champion/Well, that's not really true. Kubby/ They can apply. Thornberry/ But all seven can't apply for the three, four, five, six jobs. Sackfield/ No, there'll be six jobs. Thornberry/ So there'll be one reduction. I do have one question for Dale, if you're finished, Connie. Champion/ I'm done, ! think. Thornberry/ Which gives the employee more benefits, more opportunity? Is it the reduction in force or the lay-off status? Helling/ Well, reduction in force is one way to result in lay-off status. Thornberry/ I'm sorry? Helling/ A reduction in force is one way that puts people in a lay-off status. This, this would be a way, also with the reorganization, that some people who don't qualify for the new positions might be in lay-off status. A person who's laid-off has some advantages in competing for jobs against outside applicants. They compete on the same basis as they do otherwise for, in competing with jobs with internal applicants. Thornberry/ Okay. But they would have a leg up on anybody applying for the Housing Program Assistant positions. Is that correct? That would apply. They would have a leg up over someone that is not currently an employee of the City? Norton/ Right. Helling/ Right. If you want, I can give you the language in that. Vanderhoef/ And did I understand last night that the lay-off possibilities continue out there for one year? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #12 page 57 Helling/ The possibilities of bidding as an internal applicant, even though you're not currently in an employment status, that's correct. Vanderhoef/ Okay. Norton/ I've got a question. I, something disturbs me about this, because obviously an organization can't be locked in one shape forever, and things change. On the other hand, changes can be handled in lots of different ways. I have some trouble that perhaps if you put it on paper and draw sketches, it looks neat to switch to this parallel structure like that. But if you look at the people you've got, and their goodwill and all the rest, and their good work, as far as I know, otherwise they'd presumably be gone. So you'd think you might try to find a way that would define the new jobs in a way so that the people, most of the people involved could shuffle into the new ones, or get the new title, or something like that. I just, it seems to me excessively harsh to throw it all up in the air and kind of start over again, rather than, it might take a long time, it might take a year to get to the new entity. But after all, we've been presumably struggling along, I assume effectively, I hope reasonably effectively, well, for years, haven't we? Thomberry/ Well, obviously, Dee, they've looked at this and -- Norton/ Well, I know, but I'm looking for an easier transition. Kubby/ Right. I think I'm looking for a more -- Norton/ Comfortable transition. Kubby/ Yeah. One that we know the, not necessarily the end results of, but because there can be more discussion of maybe a more humane, or knowing a little more clearly what the status of individuals are. I mean, when you look at our process, we got this information on Friday. we're making decision about the whole structure of a really important division of a department. We're looking at seven people's livelihood over the weekend and making a decision. And two weeks of discussion, although it doesn't sound like there was lots of them between the City and the Union, and it just doesn't seem fair. And I would like us to defer this to allow, I'm uncomfortable saying yes to the organization until we know more clearly what the possibilities are for how the individuals can be dealt with in the new system. I want those discussions to take place. Champion/ So maybe some concern about the implementation of it? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #12 page 58 Kubby/ Yeah. And so I don't want to vote for it until I'm more clear about that. And so I'm going to -- Thornberry/ It's funny you should want to delay this one when -- Norton/ Well-- Kubby/ Nobody's job's at stake. Lehman/ Our, Dale, let me ask you this. Irregardless of the time-frame fro doing this, are the rules and regulations regarding the re-employment, if you will, of the folks who are laid-off governed by the Union contract? Helling/ Yes. Champion/ Yes. Lehman/ In other words, we do not have, as an employer, a great deal of discretion in how we handle a situation where jobs are eliminated and those people are allowed to apply again. Is that correct? Helling/ Well, certainly we have discretion in the sense that you determine if somebody meets the qualifications for the job. Let me give you an example. Somebody asked about the advantages in lay-off status over an outside employee. And I'm paraphrasing the contract, I'm not reading it, but if a person in lay-off status applies for a job and they meet the qualifications for the job and it's determined that they can perform the job, then they get the job even if an outside applicant is more qualified. Norton/ Oh, okay. Helling/ When they're competing with an internal employee, then if they have to be shown to be relatively equal, or the employee, or the applicant who's most qualified and is head and shoulders above the other would still get the job. O'Donnell/ But if we have one of these employees that are applying for a job in the new structure, they're going to be on probation, is that right? Helling/ They would be subject to a probationary period in a new job. However, it doesn't have to be a six-month probation, taking into account previous experience and so forth. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #12 page 59 Kubby/ I guess, you know, I'm -- Thomberry/ Are all the new positions, I understand, are paid better than the positions that are being eliminated with the exception of the two? Is that correct? Norton/ Wait a minute. Kubby/ Think about if you were a 24 year-old, a 24-year employee. You get downgraded and you have to be back on probation, and you're doing more and different work. That's the kind of organization it's going to be. Norton/ On the other hand, this is -- Thomberry/ On the other hand, are we in the business to employ people or provide service? Norton/ This is presumably a quasi-business. We're trying to be reasonable. Kubby/ The difference -- Sackfield/ That was my request, that we go back to the table. Kubby/ And talk about it. Sackfield/ And get this thing a little bit more organized, and then you guys vote on it. Lehman/ May I ask what you would hope to accomplish? Sackfield/ Well, it's obvious that our interpretation of some of the contract language is not the same as Dale's. And we can go about figuring that out in a lot of different ways. I don't want for people to be unemployed while we're figuring that out. I want to figure it out and then go through the reorganization process. I don't want the employee's being stuck in the middle of something that's going on, you know. And litigation or arbitration or mediation or any of those things. I think that, you know, I would prefer, and the employees would prefer if we get it straightened out, and then. Kubby/ To just sit down and talk it through. Sackfield/ Right. And come up with specifics. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #12 page 60 Thornberry/ How long would you propose that this would take? Sackfield/ Oh. I don't know. Dale, we did equipment in less than a month. Helling/ Two things. Number one, there's no intent to lay all these folks off and debate about this. That division has to operate. And so what would happen is, it would continue to operate as it does until a certain date, at which the changeover would occur. Lehman/ Do we know that date? Helling/ No, we don't at this point. Kubby/ I think we need to. Vanderhoef/ I think we set that after the vote. Helling/ We project that, yeah. Kubby/ I would move that we defer that for one month. Norton/ Well, I have another question before we go to deferral. Would it --? Kubby/ That's fine. Norton/ Is it necessary that we jump all at once? To this nest of program assistants? Suppose you could easily transition four people and you had a couple that didn't transition for awhile because you were waiting for some other opportunity for them to make a lateral transfer to some other department. Is that, you have to have all five in place for it to work? Thornberry/ The answer was yes. Lehman/ I guess I have a question for you, Doug. What would you anticipate as the time-frame, until this transition would be completed, if in fact we did vote on this tonight? Boothroy/ Are you saying how long would it take to qualify people? Lehman/ Well, until -- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #12 page 61 Boothroy/ I'm not sure, there's a couple of questions being asked. Maybe a technical question here that deals with the contract. Lehman/ Well, the flowchart that you gave us showing the new hierarchy, if you will, as opposed to the new one. How soon would you expect that to be functional? Boothroy/ We would like to have that functional sometime in the middle of June to late June. Lehman/ You can train those folks to do these program assistants positions in thirty days? Boothroy/ We are planning on making that effort, and we're planning on taking some time to shut down the operation for a short period of time so that we can have some intense training. Lehman/ What happens during the thirty-day period to the folks who are currently working there? Boothroy/ I think that's a contract question that I'd ask Dale. In terms of, you mean in terms of whether they have a lay-off status or ? They continue to be employed in their job. Lehman/ They continue to work? Boothroy/ Right. Until we make that transition. Lehman/So their job continues until the date-specific. Like, let's just say, for June something or other, that's when we're going to be up and running under the new operation. At that point in time, those other jobs are no longer in existence. Kubby/ But that -- Vanderhoef/ It would seem to me that as long as those employees are continuing to work, that I'm concerned about employees who sit there wondering for additional weeks and week to get going on it. And as long as they are being fully-employed just like normal, to move ahead with this, and get a decision for them. Boothroy/ That's what we're trying to do tonight. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #12 page 62 Vanderhoef/ Yeah. And there are two ways of looking at taking care of employees. And there's certainly an amount of stress when the question is still sitting out there, is this going to happen or is that going to happen, and so on and so forth. And I guess I lean towards taking care of employees in that we've got the month to train and to work with the Union to see what can be accomplished that takes care of the employees in the very best way possible. Kubby/ But, Dee -- Vanderhoef/ So, in other words, I'm ready to move ahead with this tonight. Kubby/ One reaction I have to that is that I agree that there's stress put on people when they don't know what the outcome is. And I really hear and feel that point. But the process we're using is all on, it's not a negotiated process. Norton/ Yeah. Kubby/ It's a one-sided process that we're dictating, or that the department is dictating, and that there may be some great solutions that the Union and the employees and Doug and Maggie and Dale can all sit around together to foster that on a group terms. It's good for the department. It's good for the people that we serve in the department, and also, it's good for the individual employees. And by voting tonight, we're going to go ahead with the one-sided, with our, with the plan as laid out, and there's no room for that negotiation to then take place. So I'd rather put that negation -- Vanderhoef/ I guess what I might respond to that, Karen, is the fact that any time during that hiring process, am I not right, that that process could be stopped if they saw something else that they would choose to -- Kubby/ But it's guaranteed that it doesn't happen unless we have some oversight of this, and -- Vanderhoef/ What's guaranteed? Kubby/ If we defer this, and have those negotiations and those discussions take place and we withhold voting on it until we hear further how those discussions go, we're guaranteed that there's motivation on everybody's part to participate fully in those conversations. And it gives us a little more leverage. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #12 page 63 Thornberry/ I agree that I don't want to put these people in limbo for a long period of time. That's why I'm, I think that we should vote on it now, and then have the month or month and a half, or two months, or whatever it takes to do the reorganization so that they would know that yes, I'm going to apply, or no, I'm not going to apply, I'm going to look for something else within the City. I don't think it's fair to put these people in limbo and let them know that this is going to happen and be working with the, with all the parties involved. And so that there wouldn't be that consternation of the employee. Norton/ I wish I had some feeling that the people who are affected, that is, the employees, are in question, right, in general, bless the concept that we're looking at. I'm not sure that that's the case. Is it, Dean, do they have to? Thornberry/ I'm not sure -- Lehman/ Well-- Norton/ Do they have to? Because they've got to work in it, many of them. Atkins/ Well, we're not here to negotiate the reorganization. we're here to seek your approval. We will negotiate the impact and implementation in a fair and equitable fashion. Norton/Well, that's the other side. Atkins/ But up here, this reorganization is proposed to you by your staff, to you, and we ask for your blessing on it. Kubby/ And I want to withhold approval for the reorganization until we've figured this all out. Boothroy/ I also want to reinforce that staff evaluation, staff assignment is why you hire Maggie and I. This is a management decision, and this is something that is based on what we think is the best way to move this organization forward, in terms of customer service and productivity. Kubby/ That's-- Lehman/ I think that's a very good point, in that if the department does not function up to our expectations as a housing authority, which we are, you are the person who will have to answer to that. Now, I think, as being in that position, I feel it's This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #12 page 64 important for me to listen to what you, I don't want to tell you how to do your job and then criticize you if the job doesn't work right. I mean, you're calling the shots. It's your call. If this works, or, you work for me, baby. I mean, and I think Kubby/ Not really. Lehman/ Well, ultimately, we are the Housing Authority, and Doug works for us. And I think it's a matter of confidence in our staff, I really have a great deal of confidence that we will be as considerate as we possibly can in the handling of these employees. Because I think this is a critical issue. It's obviously something that impacts them greatly, and obviously is of great concern to the Council. But obviously, the running of the department, running it in an efficient way that maximizes the benefits to the folks that we are trying to serve, is the job that we're charged to do. Vanderhoef/ Absolutely. Lehman/ I'm not opposed to, and I think we should act on this, and at the same time, admonish you, as I'm sure you will, to be as considerate as we possibly can in the way we treat these employees. Kubby/ Ernie, your argument is exactly why we should defer, because once we approve this reorganization, it's out of our hands. Norton/ That's right. Kubby/ It's up to Dale and, and the reading of the contract to go through the process. Once we vote for this, it's hands-off as policy-makers. That's why we shouldn't do it without some more discussion. Sackfield/ Could I address --? Norton/ We do address the policy. Either we bust the policy or not, don't we? That's, if I could get a tangible reason for, a tangible result of the deferment, that's what I'm not clear about, what we would get in two weeks. Sackfield/ I'll give you one. I'll give you one. Norton/ Okay. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #12 page 65 Sackfield/ Let's say that the Union doesn't agree with how the cards fall during this reorganization. We would go through the grievance process. Okay, let's say that five out of the six people didn't, weren't slid into those jobs, and we felt that they were adequately -- Kubby/ Qualified? Sackfield/ Qualified to do those jobs. We would go through the grievance process. Now, the grievance process from step one to arbitration, I've never seen it take less than six months. So then you're looking at laid-off employees who are in litigation, or arbitration, when we could have just tried to reach an agreement in the first place, and gone into it together. Kubby/ Well, let's give it a couple weeks, or give it a month. O'Dormell/ I don't see what we gain. Kubby/ Well, I move that we defer this item until June 16th. Lehman/ Do we have a second? Norton/ I'll second that. Lehman/ Motion and second to defer to June 16th. Any further discussion? All those in favor, aye- (ayes). All opposed- (nays). Kubby and Norton voting in the affirmative. The motion is defeated. Is there further discussion? Thornberry/ Champion/ I move to call the question. We don't have a vote. Thornberry/ I can do that. Lehman/ If you would forget that motion, I would call for a roll call. Thornberry/ Well, I'll call the question. O'Donnell/ We have a speaker here. Dilkes/ Is there a second on the- ? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #12 page 66 Kubby/ No, it's a (can't hear) Thomberry/ (Can't hear). Norton/ Then you've got to have a two-thirds vote to get that called. Lehman/ All right. We have a motion to call the question. Is there a second? Died for lack of second. Please go ahead. Annette Martinez/ My name's Annette Martinez, and I'm here on the Housing Authority. I'm here to tell you that the people, I've been on leased hosuing for over a year. I'm totally disabled. And the people that are there need to stay there where they're at, so that they can continue to help the people of Iowa City and wherever else, you know, they come from. They need to be able to stay at their jobs and not take their jobs away from them and give them to someone else that's not qualified for the job. We need Housing Authority, and we need the people that are there to stay there so that they can continue to work for the people of Iowa City. And I'm one of those people. Thank you. Lehman/ Thankyou. Chjampion/ Do we have a motion on the floor? Lehman/ Yes, we do have a motion on the floor. Kubby/ I'm going to be voting no on this, even though I am for increased efficiency in the office. I think there are some things that can be done, but because once we vote for this it's out of our hands, I don't feel comfortable doing that. And I think that a month deferment was not that big a deal for the organization, and would allow a much more friendly kind of discussion about this amongst the parties. Because once, because it's out of my hands, or out of the group's hands once we vote for it, I can't support it at this time. Norton/ Well, l'm going to vote yes, because I say, I think the staff has heard our concerns, and the best we can do now is hope that they will implement it with all due concerns for the people involved. Lehman/ I concur with you, Dee. Champion/ I'm sure they will. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #12 page 67 Lehman/ I will vote in the affirmative, as well. And I do think, as a matter of policy, we have charged these folks with running the department. This is their recommendation. I'm willing to accept their recommendation. Roll call- (yes; Kubby -no). Motion carried, Kubby voting no. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #15 page 68 ITEM NO. 15 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 98- 162 WHICH AUTHORIZED THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST A CONTRACT WITH ROHRBACH, CARLSON P.C. FOR THE DOCUMENT PHASE OF THE CIVIC CENTER THIRD FLOOR AND POLICE DEPARTMENT SECOND FLOOR EXPANSION PROJECT. Lehman/ (Reads agenda item #15) This was a resolution that was passed at the last Council meeting, and the contractor is wishing not to proceed. Thornberry/ Move adoption of the resolution. Lehman/ Moved by Thomberry. Champion/ Seconded. Lehman/ Seconded by Champion. Discussion? Thomberry/ Oh, rescinding the resolution. I'm sorry. Lehman/ Roll call- (yes). Motion carded. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #16 page 69 ITEM NO. 16 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST A 28E AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTIES OF BENTON, CEDAR, IOWA, JOHNSON, JONES, LINN, AND WASHINGTON, AND THE CITIES OF CEDAR RAPIDS, IOWA CITY, AND CORALVILLE. Lehman/ (Reads agenda item #16 and comment). Is there a motion? Thornberry/ Move adoption. Lehman/ Moved by Thornberry. Vanderhoef/ Second. Lehman/ Seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion? Vanderhoef/ I guess I'll just comment. This 28E agreement has been in place for a number of years, and all this is is making a minor change that Iowa City will be signing legal documents for their one vote, Coralville will be signing one, and Johnson County will sign one, and previously, these three votes have all been assigned to be signed for by the County. And this is agreeable with the JCCOG. Kubby/ I appreciate you work on this, and the cleanup job on helping the City. Vanderhoef/ Thank you. Lehman/ Roll call- (yes). Resolution carries. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #18 page 70 ITEM NO. 18 CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION. Lehman/ Council time. Dee? Norton/ A couple of items. One, I just want to comment that the peninsula meetings starting a week ago Saturday, with an all-day session, or most of the day, with 60 or so people involved, and helping to get our thoughts together about the concept of the peninsula was, I thought, a really interesting exercise. And then it went on through the week, and people dropped in, and it culminated in a review Friday night of where they were. And it was really, I think, an impressive effort. And a number of people who were involved, not Council members, but other citizens who were involved, said it was really a tremendous learning experience. And I think a great product will come out of it in July, is that the next time we see those folks? But it was very exciting. Vanderhoef/ Could I add to that? Norton/ Please. Vanderhoef/ I understand that a video was taken of that Friday night meeting, and I wondered when it might be shown. Does anyone know when it will show up on the Government Channel? I'm looking forward to seeing it. I was unable to attend that night. I was there the previous Saturday. But, I would hope that that would -- Lehman/ Well, while you were -- Norton/ And one of the points I want to make about their effort was that, you know, they come from Florida, for example, but they spent a lot of time trying to understand Iowa City, specifically, and took a lot of pictures and incorporated a lot of notions locally. And I thought that was really impressive. They got to know the scene pretty well. Kubby/ They measured. Lehman/ Well, Dee, along the same lines, they not only knew Iowa City, they even visited the surrounding areas. They made references to the streets in the area, people who've lived in this community. They were an incredibly (can't hear) group of folks to work with, and our thanks certainly go to the Parkview Church for giving us a place to meet. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #18 page 71 Norton/ Yes. And Karin and Bob Micklo in the Planning Department, and Scott, and all the rest of them. Lehman/ Well, the Mayor will have a letter thanking those folks. Norton/ Oh, very nice. Champion/ Oh good. Lehman/ We've already arranged for that. Norton/ The next thing I'd like to ask, and maybe I'm -- Champion/ I've going to comment on something about the same thing, so long as that's what we're discussing -- Norton/ Do. Champion/ Is that I want to commend the past Council for hiring those people, because I'm going to get all the credit for it, and I really appreciate that as a positive note. And the other thing is is that they're doing the same thing now in Austin, Texas, but they've vacated their airport. They have this huge hunk of land. Lehman/ I wish you hadn't said that. Kubby/ Yeah, I kind of like that. Champion/ Whoops. Norton/ We'll have to have them pack. Champion/ And everybody down there is incredibly enthused about this neighborhood concept that they're going to develop, too. So it is catching on all over the country, what we can do different in how we're developing our cities. Norton/ One other, I wanted to ask, and maybe the Council would help me, I've had a lot of inquiries about our thinking about the ramp on Iowa Avenue. And a lot of question raised about it. Many of them refer to the vacancies in the other ramps. And it seems to me, maybe we need, maybe this is something that we could get, but I think we need an update on where we stand on the vacancy rate in the other ramps. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #18 page 72 Atkins/ Vacancies in the other ramps? Sure. Norton/ And also, what's happening to the permit spaces that we held back? Lehman/Dee, I think there's one other factor there, that that ramp was really precipitated by the discussion of Iowa Avenue. Norton/ Yes. Lehman/ And the vacancies in the other ramp won't be nearly as significant when Iowa Avenue's built, if in fact that occurs. Norton/ True. But I would just like to kind of check up on the ramps, because it's still a factor. No, I understand it's mainly related to the Iowa Avenue, but that doesn't seem to be really well understood. Atkins/ We'll prepare a report for you. Norton/ In general. I think we're going to need to do a good deal more to make it clear to people what, why we're proceeding as we are with that. My final comment is, I read the report from Rob Winstead about the railroad crossings, and it's mildly, or it's not, it's heavily disappointing, as always, right? Lehman/ That's surprising. Norton/ I, you know, we're going down there with a whisk broom or something. We're not getting the job done. I don't know. I'm going to have to go to the legislature to figure out how to get crossings repaired. It's just not happening. Lehman/ Good luck. Vanderhoef/ What is the cost? Atkins/ The cost is not -- Vanderhoef/ To mill them. Atkins/ Outrageous. The cost of repairing a railroad crossing is not outrageous. It just happens to be their responsibility. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #18 page 73 Norton/ Between the tracks? Atkins/ Yeah. And-- Norton/ Where the holes are. Atkins/ And it simply takes forever and day, and of course you can't just go in arbitrarily and do it because trains come through. If you had a policy and you wanted to step up to the plate and say we're going to do this and be a lot more aggressive about it, I don't think for a load of money, you could probably go in and take care of a whole bunch of them. The railroads would probably hug you. Kubby/ Can we use road-use tax money for that? Atkins/ I would think we could, Karen. I would think we could. Kubby/ We should maybe make a note for our budget discussion that are going to be pre- budget. Norton/ Yes. Kubby/ To add that for the Capital Improvements Plan. Norton/ I am sick of it. Kubby/ I mean, it makes me sick to take on the railroad's responsibility. Champion/ I have a real problem doing that. Kubby/ But it's a matter of, there's safety issues and convenience issues and car maintenance issues. But it's something to talk about. I don't know that I would agree to do it. Lehman/ Well-- Norton/ Well, we keep beating our gums about it, but we can't seem to get anybody in there with a hammer or a pickax or whatever's required. Kubby/Well, get the phone number to the head of the railroad. Maybe we need to step up that end of it. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #18 page 74 Thornberry/ Let me ask this. Is the railroad property private property? Can we go on there without permission and fix a railroad crossing? Atkins/ That was my point, is that if we're going to go on there, I assume we're going to say let's not have any trains for a few days, people, while we're working on these things. Thornberry/ Well, let's talk about it for all summer. Let's not have any trains all summer long. That'd help. Atkins/ And I'd have to ask Eleanor. I think there's almost like a whole body of law with railroad and crossings and -- Dilkes/ Yeah. Norton/ Let's see what we can find out. Let's get aggressive is what I'm saying. Lehman/ I think I hear kind of a sentiment to at least find out a rough idea of what it would cost us if we did it ourselves. Norton/ And it would shut me up a little bit, too. Lehman/ Well, I think we all feel the same way, Dee. Thomberry/ We got the Green Machine. The least we can do is fix it. Atkins/ You felt the same way to shut him up or to build the railroad. Lehman/Well, I don't know, the Green Machine didn't work. Atkins/ Yes, it does. Norton/ It's working fine. Lehman/ Dee? Vanderhoef/ Okay. I had railroad and cost of milling on, so thank you for doing that. And I had peninsula property on. A couple of things to report, activities this last week. A week ago, Sunday, I was asked to greet a group of visitors from Osaka, Japan, who were here specifically to see what facilities and what opportunities were available to children with disabilities. The Downs Syndrome and other This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #18 page 75 disabilities of this type. These people were so impressed with what Iowa City had in services. They couldn't believe what our Recreation Department provided for the special populations. They brought a small gift, and it's going to be out in the case out there. I accepted it for the City. Champion/ (Can't understand). Vanderhoef/ Pardon me? Very interestingly, one of the gifts was made by parents of young children, the toddler group, and they made a paper balloon of very, very fine paper. It's astounding what they could do. And then there's some nice notepaper. And little coaster kinds of things. And in return, I gave them, with Steve's permission, I called the next morning, I felt a little bad I didn't have it there that night, but I gave them City of Iowa City pins which I understood they wore proudly all the time they were here. So, be aware that we have a fine program in services for disabled people in Iowa City. The other opportunity I had this week is my German exchange student, Christoph Benkert who is here from the University of Frankfurt, in the MBA program, his parents arrived, and I had an opportunity to bring him down to meet Steve and some people here in City Hall, and then tour them around the City, because this gentleman, Knut Enchert, he is the Mayor ofAlse, a city just outside of Frankfurt. And if he said it once, he must have said it several times, how clean and how pretty our city is. Champion/Good thing we cleaned it up. Kubby/ Puts those complaints into perspective. Norton/ Thank to the Green Machine. Vanderhoef/ Well, he saw Mercer Park, he saw City Park. He saw the Airport. He saw Public Works. He saw City Hall, and all the places sort of in-between, so -- CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 98-69, SIDE B Vanderhoef/ Someone came and visited us and thought we were pretty snappy. Okay, that's all I have. Lehman/ Dean? Thornberry/ I have nothing. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #18 page 76 Lehman/ Karen? Kubby/ Yeah, I have some things I forgot to say last night, and some other things. One is that there's a Teddy Bear Drive going on. I don't know if you've seen barrels around town, but it's a program to help make a child's life more bearable with the gift of a teddy bear. They're requesting that new bears be given in the barrels that are located in various places which I'll outline very quickly. And these bears will go to children who are receiving services through the Domestic Violence Intervention Program. And you can drop bears off at the Old Capitol Mall, the Upper and Lower level, downtown banks, at First National and Hills and Iowa State Bank, at the Iowa City Public Library, and at the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics at the Pastoral Services office. So, donate a bear. A couple other things. We have this new thing called, it's actually not new, but we have another one, a speed monitoring trailer. And it's been up on Muscatine this last week, and it is really effective. Norton/ It's wonderful. Kubby/ I mean, especially because we design our arterial streets so that you feel safe going higher than the speed limit, it really is a check on how you're driving. And people who are interested in this can actually get the City to put it in your neighborhood. And we have one that Neighborhood Associations can borrow. They can get trained on how to set it up. I think it's two little suitcases that aren't too heavy. Atkins/Right. Kubby/ Or you can set it up so that as people drive by, it has this huge digital screen that says how fast you're going. And it really has lasting effects. I mean when I saw it, and you could tell everybody was trying to get it to say 25, so that you were at the speed limit, but days later, you're still remembering that that was there, and it checks your speed even in its absence for a little while. So, if people are interested in that, they can call Doug Ripley, Traffic Planner, at 356-5254 if you want to borrow that for your neighborhood. Coming up in June, we have a paint and household battery collection day on Saturday, June 6th. It's going to be at the Iowa City Transit Facility, at 1200 South Riverside Drive. We're going to take appointments, so you need to call and at this, it's not a generalized household hazardous waste day. It's focused only on oil- and latex-based paints, and dry- cell batteries, so car batteries aren't allowed, just household batteries. So if you're interested in that, be looking for the phone number. We don't have it yet. I This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #18 page 77 noticed tonight as I was coming into the Civic Center for the meeting that some of the skateboard ramps are back in the back of the Civic Center parking lot. And I'm really happy to see them, so this is kind of a welcome to the skaters back in the Civic Center parking lot, and a reminder to those of us who drive that after 5:00 p.m. is it? Atkins/ 6:00. Norton/ 6:00. Kubby/ To not park in the easterly-most section of the Civic Center lot. There are signs up there, but we've gotten lazy and we'll have to remind folks. But we welcome the skaters back. It's an exciting sport to watch grow and change and watch people learning it out there. I have just a couple more things. One of them is that when we were talking about, what was it, last week, about the cemetery expansion? One of the things that we had toyed with in previous discussion was, if we're going to take eleven acres out of usable parkland, are we interested in seeing if there are ten acres to replace that with. And we never got back to that discussion when we talked about the cemetery. Thomberry/ Karen, I think that was parkland. Norton/ On the eastern side. Kubby/ No, I said used as parkland, not that it, that it was cemetery land, but it was functioning as parkland, and do we want to replace those acres so that when that loss -- Norton/ Well, let's take it to Park and Rec, the Park and Rec Commission ought to, and part of that Northside Development planning, wouldn't they think about that as -- Kubby/ Maybe we could just say, will you think about this, and if you want to give us a recommendation, we'd be happy to hear it. Is that okay with people? Champion/ I'm kind of concerned with the lack of park space on the west side. Kubby/ Yes. And we are going to follow up with that. Vanderhoef/ The committee, I understand the Parks and Recreation Commission is looking towards being a little more proactive in identifying land in areas that are This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #18 page 78 deficient. And that would probably drop Hickory Hill on a lower priority. However, as land develops out there, why there may be opportunities. Kubby/ Right. Because when we do the, when we implement the open space ordinances in areas adjacent to Hickory Hill, maybe the open space could be right next to it so that it has the feel of continuous parkland. Norton/ We've talked with Karin in the planning out there about some kind of buffering of that edge of the park. And that may mean some additional space, or at least room for a row of trees or something so that that park is buffered properly from whatever may happen beyond it. Kubby/ I remember us talking about this. I knew that we hadn't made any decision, but didn't want to just let it go. I have another Parks and Rec issue. Someone came to my office hours last Thursday, and I thought we would receive a letter in our packet. She said that she had sent it in, but maybe the timing just wasn't right. Where the swim club usually uses the pool three days a week, but they're using it five days a week and there are, I mean, it's good for the swim club, but there are some effects on swimmers at Mercer in terms of, you know, there are fewer lanes for the public, lanes are shorter in the shallow end, they're longer, they have to do a longer route, and some of the elderly folks, or folks who don't want to swim the full length because they're used to all year, they're kind of in shape to do the short lane -- Atkins/ Karen, that letter came in late, and we're preparing a response. So you should be getting that shortly. Kubby/ Okay. One last thing. I wanted to acknowledge and thank Dee Vanderhoef because I know that you really struggled with the issue about the definition of "family", and I just wanted to say I appreciate the energy that you put into that struggle in your own mind. So thank you. Vanderhoef/ You're welcome. Lehman/ Connie? Champion/ I'm done. O'Donnell/ Nothing. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #18 page 79 Lehman/ One quick thing. I had an opportunity to have lunch with the seniors a week ago, I think it was last, a week ago yesterday. And I think most of us are going to have that opportunity. Atkins/ I said, you fit right in. Lehman/ I fit right in. They're a great, and I believe we're going to be asked individually to have lunch with them. Champion/ Oh great. Lehman/ Periodically, if they ask you, go, it's a great time. They're wonderful folks, and they're really interested in what's going on in the City. Champion/ And they're our age. Lehman/ They are. They're a great bunch of folks. And I would certainly encourage you to go. Steve? Atkins/ Not a thing tonight, sir. Lehman/ Eleanor? Dilkes/ Nothing. Norton/ I should say, I did go to that CVB thing today at West High. There were only five of us there, a couple of business people and three people from the CVB and myself. And the mechanics of the network were not always smooth. But after they got some glitches cleared up, it went pretty well. And we did see some of the ads that are being presented to other states about Iowa. And discussed some of the issues about what the Convention and Visitors Bureau might be doing. And it was quite interesting. And I think at some point, when they may want to ask people, the Council as a whole, or more representatives of the Council to come and see and consider what we might need to do to make our pitch for this area, and Iowa as a whole, better. But it was very interesting. Vanderhoef/ Has the rest of the Council ever received the new CVB book? Norton/ I think I did. Vanderhoef/ Promotion book? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298 #18 page 80 Champion/ I can't remember. Vanderhoef/ I got one because I was out there. And I imagine Connie maybe had already gotten one. But it has just gotten out, so. Champion/ I still have your book, so I'll get that back to you soon. Vanderhoef/ That's okay. I think it would behoove us to give Wendy a call and have her send some up for Council. It's really quite nice, and it's quite different than the old one in that it has, all right, shush, Dee. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of May 12, 1998. F051298