The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1998-10-20 Transcription2a Page 1 ITEM NO. 2a OUTSTANDING STUDENT CITIZENSHIP AWARDS. (Helen Lemme Elementary) Lehman/Item 2, it's one of those deals where you have the best up front. Outstanding Citizenship Award I would ask Nic and Gabi to step forward and we'll make these. This is one of the fun things that we get to do on council, present citizenship awards. You know, I think council are very very proud of the young people we give these awards to but you folks need to know how proud the parents are and I could tell you how proud grandparents are. I know about that. So if you'd like to read your thing for us. Gabi MacKay/I'm honored that my fellow students at Lemme chose me for this award. Even though I've learned leadership and cooperation from my participation in band, orchestra, and swim team, I think my classmates selected me for this award because of the ordinary things I do every day. They have often said that I am one of the friendliest persons in the grade. One person said that she was sad because her sister moved to go to college and when she saw me smiling her day brightened up. I try to be helpful and patient when people have questions or are confused. I try to be positive and encouraging and I try my hardest at most everything I do. Nic Coffman/I wish to thank my classmates for choosing me to represent them for the Citizenship Award. I believe citizenship is goodwill towards others which means being responsible, helpful, respectful, and encouraging. I believe that leadership is being helping others to accomplish goals. I'm determined to help others by helping them feel welcome because they are important to me and should be to others too. I have learned through my involvement in church, scouts, music, sports, and school that being a good citizen requires an open mind and a good heart. I'm grateful that my friends and classmates believe I have these traits. Lehman/Thank you. And I bet we all really wished we could've read the same thing. That' s really cool. I want to read one of the awards and they're both the same. For his outstanding qualities of leadership within Helen Lemme Elementary as well as the community and for his sense of responsibility and helpfulness to others, we recognize Nic Coffman as an outstanding student citizen. Your community is proud of you. Presented by the Iowa City Council. Nic. And Gabi for you. Thank you very much. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 ITEM NO. 3a Page 2 ITEM NO. 3a MAYOR'S PROCLAMATIONS. Lehman/Item 2 is Mayor's proclamations. The first proclamation is Founder's Day Proclamation which is the Rotary Club. That one I read at 6:00 this evening. Pardon me it's Toastmasters. I read that one this evening at their meeting and their Founder's Day I believe the Toastmasters were started in 1924 and at their meeting tonight I read that proclamation. The second one is Change Your Clock Day. Do we have someone for that? Karr/No we do not. Lehman/I think that's relative to, it's this weekend? Karr/Change your clock. Change your battery. Lehman/Right. Daylight Savings Time. The third proclamation [Reads National Business Women's Week Proclamation]. Karr/Here to accept is Sandy Kunde. Lehman/Sure. Take the microphone. Sandy Kunde/On behalf of business and professional women of Iowa City. I thank you for your recognition of National Business Women's Week. I urge all citizen' s to vote November 3 for the Add Women Amendment to the Iowa Constitution and we'll be sponsoring a public meeting highlighting this amendment tomorrow night, October 21, at 7:00PM at the Iowa City Public Library. And everyone is invited to attend. Thank you. Lehman/Thank you. Before we do item 4, Iris Frost's joumalism class is with us again this evening. We certainly want to welcome you. Hope we don't keep you up too late. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 Page 3 ITEM NO. 4 CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR AMENDED. Lehman/Item 4 is consider adoption of the Consent Calendar as presented or amended. Moved by Thornberry, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? Thornberry/One item, on, Mr. Mayor, on #5. The preliminary cost estimate of the project for the Willow Creek Recreational Trail has gone from $304,681 to $400,00. For what reason? Lehman/These are just estimates. I don't know that the first one was- Atkins/At the time of the preparation of the agenda, we had had a very early estimate and we wanted the most accurate figure, particularly with since we're applying for federal which is a percentage of the most accurate figure. That's why we amended it for you. Norton/Ernie, I have one little comment or question. One of the items in the Consent Calendar this week is accept the annual report from the Police Citizens Review Board and there's a number of items in there, a number of recommendations in there that seem of considerable import or consequence. And I trust we're going to be scheduling a session at some point in the not too distance future to go over that report and see what they're suggesting perhaps some changes in their general structure and purview. Lehman/Would it be appropriate, we are going to defer item 20 which is a resolution to adopt their standard operating procedures and guidelines. Would it be appropriate to amend the motion to delete that item and- Dilkes/I don't think so. I think they can accept the report. You're not taking any action by your just saying we got it. Lehman/But what I think we are doing is accepting the report, not approving or disapproving, just- Dilkes/Correct. Kubby/But at our informal we could talk about all the PCRB at one time. Norton/Get it on the list. Kubby/As long as we have enough time and it's not like a ten minute scheduled conversation. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #4 Page 4 Norton/We need to schedule a session some time to focus on the PCRB annual report. That's what and not just proceed with the procedures. We'll do that next time but I'm talking about these more fundamental recommendations. They're relations of their investigations to that done by the police department itself for example. Lehman/And I think that is going to be discussed at the meeting of the 17th if I'm not mistaken. Atkins/The annual report is very much up to you all. Dilkes/We're going to recommend deferral of action on the operating procedures until the 17th. Lehman/Right. Norton/Well I just hope that I'm clear that there are two different issues. Lehman/Yes. I think we are very clear on that. Very good. Other discussion. Roll call- (yes) Motion is carded. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #5 Page 5 ITEM NO.5 PUBLIC DISCUSSION (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA) [UNTIL 8:00 P.M.]. Lehman/This is the time on the agenda that we have for public discussion. It is reserved for comment on any item that does not appear on the agenda. If you wish to address council please sign in and limit your discussions to five minutes or less. Rene Paine/Hi. I'm Rene Paine. I live at 823 Ronalds Street in Iowa City and I'm the director of Public Access Television here in Iowa City. I would just like to extend to the council and to the community personal invitation to our grand reopening actually. We've moved out of the library this summer and are now residing at 623 S. Dubuque Street. Our grand reopening will be this Friday from noon to 7:00PM and the Chamber ambassadors will be there at 2:00PM to cut the ribbon officially. So once again, I invite all of you to attend that. There will be cider and cookies and you can tour the facility and see the services that we have to offer. Thank you. Kubby/Thanks Rene. Lehman/Thank you Rene. John Jones/Hi. I would agenda. My name's John Jones. I just clarification. I really can't stay that long so like you move that I could make comment to some of the things on the Lehman/If you're here to discuss the ordinance relative to disorderly house, we're going to have I think some lengthy discussion at that point and I really would prefer that we have it at that point in time. Jones/Okay. Then could I just make a quick comment about something else and then maybe? Lehman/Sure. Jones/ Okay. It's almost related which I hate to say but the question about the ordinance changing the smoking ordinance. I don't know about you guys but every place I go in town I've seen someone try to buy cigarettes and they say can I see an ID. So I don't think the city needs to change any kind of ordinance or anything. It's being enforced pretty well. And then again the law itself isn't really doing anything regardless so I don't think you need to change anything but I'll make a comment about the disorderly house later. Thanks. Lehman/Okay. Other public discussion? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #5 Page 6 (Audience)/I heard you say we're going to have a discussion later on the disorderly house. Lehman/That's correct. (Audience)/I'll have an opportunity. Lehman/That's correct. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #6 Page 7 ITEM NO. 6 PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS. Lehman/Item j (Reads item #6j) Moved by Kubby, seconded by Norton. Discussion. Kubby/I assume we're keeping off the last part of the comment on the agenda in the letter that we're not sending that section of the letter. Lehman/I think we have- did we not receive a copy of the letter as changed at tonight's meeting? Norton/Are the staffs, the two staffs going to get together and see what they can do? Lehman/I discussed this today with Supervisor Jordahl and as per our conversation last night the Board of Supervisors is interested in meeting with the council to discuss items in the fringe area which proposed actions might violate that agreement. In other words, prior to taking action that might violate our agreement, we will sit down, discuss those actions, and in some cases we may find we need to tweak the agreement but at least we will understand much as we do with P/Z why the county doesn't agree with or why they cannot comply with our agreement. Kubby/Um-huh. Lehman/And there is agreement on the part of the Board of Supervisors. I think those meetings would include city staff as well as county staff. And we will be talking shortly about two items this being one that we've had to send letters requesting denial. And in the future my expectation is that any action that would be in violation of the Fringe Agreement would be discussed prior to that action being taken by either the city or the county. Kubby/And I would hope we would use the opportunity to try to persuade a majority of the Board of Supervisors to not continue the way they have been voting on the two items in history in recent history. Because there's still a chance to change the vote on the Eyman property. But we're not going to meet before then are we. Lehman/The Eyman property has final consideration on Thursday, the day after tomorrow. Kubby/So we should be calling our elected representative for the county and put a little pressure on them. Norton/Are you thinking Ernie that in such discussions that is more than tweaking of or substantial changes in the fringe area might evolve? Lehman/I think- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #6 Page 8 Norton/For example clustering in Area B. Lehman/I think that that is absolutely a matter of what the council and the board decide. Norton/At that point. Lehman/Among themselves. And I really think, I think it's a very positive step. I like to think that if we have- We try to make agreements that cover every possible situation. I think that no matter how hard we try there may be situations that aren't covered and this would give us an opportunity to keep that fringe area agreement a living sort of thing that we can all live with. So I'm very pleased that they're interested in meeting with us. O'Donnell/But this item will definitely be on the agenda. Is that right? Lehman/Well the Eyman property which is one that we sent a letter previous is up for final consideration on Thursday. Norton/This item will be. That one won't. Right? This item will be. Vanderhoef/The Eyman won't. Lehman/The Eyman property will. I believe that's their final consideration on Thursday. Norton/That's the one at Herbert Hoover and 1-80, fight? Lehman/Um-huh. Kubby/And I really think that if the Supervisors got calls from three or four of us explaining to them why we think the Eyman property zoning change would be against the agreement and why we don't want them to vote for it, that it would be a powerful move on our part to do that. They certainly heard from out staff but if we're silent, I mean they heard from Ernie but if they haven't heard from the rest of us, one of the interpretations is, well they don't really care and they're not that worked up about it. But I think, I mean there's two big points. One is the principle of the agreement and the second one is it's not good planning that commercial out there fight now. Norton/They've certainly heard from me and I subsequently listened to their proceedings and this they seem to stomp right on that. They figured that part of that property had been changed to a commercial kind of use and things compatible with it otherwise you'd leave a remnant that was not in some sense suitable. So I think they did hear us. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #6 Page 9 Vanderhoef/However previous council also sent a letter on the original siting on that one so it's historically we have not wanted there at all. Thornberry/I have not condoned their. Norton/I understand. Kubby/We can go down quietly. Lehman/Certainly anyone on the council. Vanderhoef/They can hear me loud and clear, I don't want it. Lehman/Well anyone who wishes to express themselves to the board certainly I think should do that, not only council but certainly feel free because their final consideration is on Thursday. But the process of meeting with the county will start taking place in any future situation where there would be a violation of the Fringe Agreement. All in favor of sending the letter-(ayes). Item carried. Karr/Can we have a motion to accept correspondence? Lehman/Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by Kubby. All in favor- (ayes). It's been carried. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 10 ITEM NO. 7 PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, BY AMENDING SECTION 8-5-5, ENTITLED "KEEPING DISORDERLY HOUSE," TO PROVIDE FOR POLICE INITIATED COMPLAINTS AND TO PROVIDE FOR POLICE AUTHORITY TO RESTORE ORDER AND DISPERSE PERSONS FROM VIOLATING PREMISES. Lehman/(Reads agenda item #7) Before we start the public heating, I would like the City Attorney to basically explain how this amendment if you will would change the present ordinance. What we would expect in way of changes? Dilkes/We currently as you know and back up for a minute. We've got, I've given you all a redlined version of the disorderly housing ordinance which shows the changes. The highlighted sections are those things that are being added. Everything else is already there. There have been no deletions. So we currently have this ordinance that prohibits an owner or a possessor of property from permitting a disorderly house and that is defined as, and I'll just go ahead and read from the ordinance, as no person shall permit or suffer to continue without taking legal steps to prevent the same any quarrelling, fighting, or loud disagreeable noises to the disturbance of the neighborhood or general public upon any premises owned by the person or in the person's possession. That's what we currently have. Basically if you have a party at your house that is creating a disturbance to the neighborhood, that's an actionable, that's a crime. And we can charge that currently. The changes to the ordinance do a couple of things. It adds some, it puts some additions or adds some things to what behavior is prohibited. It includes disorderly conduct which basically just refers to our disorderly conduct ordinance which we have so it would incorporate the activity that's prohibited by that ordinance. It also includes a catchall phrase which says, conduct that threatens to cause injury to persons or property. The reason that we included that is because you simply cannot enumerate every activity that might be threatening to persons or property. And I give you an example. The throwing of beer bottles from one house to the other across a public way at times would clearly I think be injurious to persons and to property. The second thing that the ordinance does is that it says that can be disagreeable not only to the neighborhood but also to the general public, to the disturbance of the general public. And it says that for purposes of that, a police officer can be a complainant. There has been some interpretation by local magistrates that because it says disturbance to the neighborhood there have to be a complaining neighbor in order to meet that proof threshold. The second, the third thing I guess that the ordinance does or the changes to the ordinance would do is that once an officer determines that there's been a violation and issues a citation, the officer order dispersal, order the party- the people at the party to disperse. And then at that point if people don't obey the order that would be an additional citation and they could be charged with violating the ordinance. One of the things that that does I think is it gives the police officers some leverage over not just the host but over the party goers who This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 11 are very arguably contributing to the situation and so it doesn't rest solely on the shoulders on the shoulders of the host. There's a couple of things that this or a number of things that this ordinance does not do. One, it does not change the rules regarding or the constitutional rules regarding search and seizure clearly it can't change those rules and we wouldn't propose to do that. Secondly it does not provide discretion or require the exercise ofjudgement by police officers that they don't already exercise daily not only in connection with this ordinance but in connection with a host of other ordinances. I've seen some correspondence to you that argues that discretion is inappropriate. The better things are breaking a speed limit, 45 in a 30 mile per hour zone or over the alcohol limit for drinking while intoxicated. Unfortunately life isn't quite that simple. And we have a number of ordinances and there are a number of state laws where police officers have to make judgment calls about whether a particular set of circumstances or facts which they observe or witnesses report to them fall within the parameters of a crime. I'll give, there are a number of examples. Our currently disorderly house statute frankly, our begging ordinance, our indecent exposure ordinance, our public urination ordinance, possession of alcohol under the legal age, assault crimes. Is something threatening or is something not threatening. These are the type ofjudgements that police officers have to make all the time. By way of analogy, I note that the state law chapter on public disorder which outlaws rioting which makes rroting a crime for instance and that just is a group of three or more people coming together in a violent manner or threatening injury to persons or property. There is a specific section in that state statute which allows a police officer to order a riot to disperse and order- would make it a violation of that chapter to disobey that order. I don't think it's that dissimilar what we're doing here. Another analogy is that in our ordinances we're allowed to abate a public nuisance if that public nuisance, and we can do it if it's an emergency. If it's creating harm to others that's imminent to persons or property we can abate that nuisance, terminate that nuisance without notice. I think basically here you're talking about a balancing of private property interests with the public interest, what one can do with their own private property and how that affects the public interest so- Kubby/So, Eleanor, if under our current ordinance an officer goes by a place and sees that there is quarreling or disagreeable noises currently, what do they do? Dilkes/You'd have to direct that question to the- I think we've got Captain Hamey and Captain Widmer here so in terms of what they actually do, that probably would be a question better directed to them. Kubby/Do they go away and hope that a neighbor calls in? Dilkes/In terms of what we're hoping to accomplish by the ordinance as I understand it is that there has been some interpretation by magistrates who make the rulings This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 12 here that because it's a disturbance to the neighborhood you must have a neighborhood complaint. You must have a neighbor who is willing to come forward and I do understand from captains that there have been instances where neighbors have not been willing to come forward. You may want to get some more information. Kubby/Okay. Some time during the public heating, I don't need it the answer to that tight now but at some point tonight you could explain what you do when your discretion would say the disorde~y house ordinance as it's currently written has been violated what our officers do. That would be helpful to me and maybe to the public. Lehman/The public heating is open. Thank you, Eleanor. John Jones/I'm a little shocked after reading this. It doesn't really make a lot of sense. Here you know if there was a public disturbance we have a problem because if the police officer gives a citation and they're the initiating person, they're not part of the neighborhood then somehow the person can't get a fine. But in the meantime when an officer goes to someone's house and says you're causing a disturbance. Here's a ticket even ifit's not good and tells people cut out the noise. Leave now if you don't live here, people do it. And the goal of limiting public disturbances is to limit public disturbance not to give tickets. So if the goal is to have good community police relations to limit the disturbance from a party or what have you on a weekend. We already have that law. And police officers already have that power people understand that. Just on the face of it this kind of language does a really bad thing for Iowa City. We know we have certain weekends when there' s more people than others. We have certain people who are drinking underage what have you. There's already a formula for confrontation with the police and the people that live in these houses or are having a party or what have you. What we want to do is make it easier for the neighborhood to come back to order, for the police to regulate people, and to limit confrontations that can be violent or get out of hand. And if some police officer has the power to say you guys are too loud. It's 2:00. It's 2:30 what have you. Let's go home now whatever and people can say fine. Okay no problem. But when it's busting down the door per se and issuing fines and all this thing, we're not creating a solution okay. We're just adding to the conflict. So if the goal I mean ever since Eric Shaw was shot I noticed a significant change on the Iowa City Police officers. You know being courteous on the street, how are you nice to see you this kind of thing. But lately with supposedly this drug activity going on in one part of town it's back to more confrontation again. And we don't want that. I think the best analogy here would be skateboarding. Right? We don't want skateboarders. We don't want skateboarders. Let them skateboard out in the parking lot for God's sake. What do they do? They go there. They don't bother anybody. Everybody's happy. You don't need to give tickets. You don't need to make a new law. You don't need to This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 13 to have a new ordinance. You don't need to give the police more work to do. You don't need to create more confrontations. You need to get rid of the problem. And what we want to say is if neighbors hear a party and it's too loud, they should be able to call the police. They should go down to the house and say, people said it's too loud. Turn down the music. Go home. What have you. And if people don't do that, then you're creating a public disturbance. I think we already have laws about that. But we don't need the officers to initiate this kind of thing. People call and complain all the time. What we really want is people, neighbors to go to someone's house and say okay you guys that's enough. And we want people to say okay, you're fight. Or we don't want to say well go call the cops. Go that's the law. We don't want that. We want to dissuade confrontation. We want to make things better. We want to make things more harmonious. We want people to handle their own problems first of all. But then we want the police to come in and regulate things not simply issue tickets. And any kind of language that changes so we can say here's a good laundry list. Sure we're going to add 15 different definitions of things you did wrong. That doesn't help things. Okay so that's all I have to say and I hope you just vote against this. It's silly. And one more thing. I mean how about checking in other college towns, other cities where they have this kind of language and see what it does, okay. My dissertation's on crime and policing and in the Netherlands the goal is to limit confrontation, create cooperation. So I'm saying let's do that. Get fid of this language. It's silly. Thanks. Mark Brown/Are you ready for my comment? Lehman/Certainly. Brown/I want to support the- Lehman/Give us your name first and address. Brown/405 Ronalds Street. I want to support the recommendation of the police department and the city attorney. The previous speaker overlooks what happens in real life. If an elderly person is disturbed by a neighborhood party they may not physically feel like getting up and going out at 2:30 in the morning to complain to neighbors. And even if we're talking about people in good health who don't have a particular reason not to go over and talk to their neighbors, this is the worst way to foster neighborly relations by having people contact each other when they're annoyed with each other. You don't promote good will this way. There is this definite intimidation involved between party goers and a neighborhood that they're partying in. I've had polite words with neighbors about car alarms and so on and then son of a gun for no particular reason my house gets vandalized not long after. And this was not a confrontation just polite words asking somebody to get the car adjusted. So neighbors don't want to confront each other about parties. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 14 It's much better if they can call the police and let professionals who know how to talk to people go and talk to them. It should never come to this point where party goers at 2:30AM are out in the street making noise in front of a house have to be told to go home. At 2:30AM you're disturbing the neighborhood if you're outside having a party. So the previous speakers attitude is just plain nonsense. He's not interested in consideration between neighbors. He wants to have his way and neighborhood be damned. I am interested in how this action would affect the enforcement of the noise ordinance as opposed to a disorderly house ordinance. Can the police now make their own complaint about a noisy party not disorderly otherwise? So this would help with the noise ordinance enforcement which does need some help from time to time. I'm in a neighborhood a block away from what used to be the frat neighborhood before they went into decline and of course they're moving out. People are not in frats now that want to party because they're going dry so they're spreading out into the other neighborhoods and having parties and my neighborhood is one of them fight across the street from me. And I think the police need a little help with this enforcement. Because party goers if this ordinance is passed will have more of a tendency to move inside where they should party if they're going to make noise late at night. Now there'll be fewer confrontations with police if they do that. The other thing is that there probably aren't so many noise complaints made when the noise outside is just conversations which can be quite loud and carry for a block or more from some parties even when there's no music outside. As far as I'm concerned, it's still a noise ordinance violation but it's hard to pin on these people. It's hard to get any action taken unless you can, under the noise ordinance. If you can call it disorderly behavior it takes care of a problem that's not so easily addressed otherwise. One other thing is that I'm not sure what the present policy is. I was a renter for many years in this town before I finally got a little piece of property myself. As a renter I found it difficult to make a complaint to police because they wanted to talk to the property owner who wanted to make a complaint. So this ordinance allowing the police to make a complaint would serve a lot more people than just property owners. And I believe this ordinance may help in deterring the spread of gang activity in this town which is a great concern to property owners and to everyone. I believe that's all I have to say. Thank you. Lehman/Thank you. Osha Davidson/I live in a largely student neighborhood also where loud parties often keep my wife and myself and our four year old son awake several nights of the year. And wanting to be a good neighbor I sometimes let the festivities continue far into the night. Sometimes when things get out of hand and there's a lot of angry voices or fireworks, too many fireworks, I do call the police. I don't like doing it, but I also don't think that it's fight for my four year old son to be frightened by bottle rockets exploding against the side of our house. So I have a lot of sympathy for the viewpoint that says let the police enter the situation on This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 15 their own. Give them the discretion to close down a rowdy party whether or not neighbors have complained and in all deference to our able city attorney, I believe when you change a policy so that the police are now allowed to enter, to be the complainant where before that role was reserved for the community, that does increase police discretion. At any rate, I wish I could support this policy but I can't. The idea of granting wider discretionary powers to Iowa City Police Department at this time in our city's history frankly concerns me. Two years ago after police shot and killed Iowa City Resident Eric Shaw I stood at this very same spot and asked Police Chief Winklehake if the officers involved should've had their guns drawn in those circumstances. And he answered it was up to their discretion. And I asked shouldn't they have announced their presence before going into Eric Shaw art studio as emphasized in their own state training guidelines and the response again was it's up to their discretion. When I asked why didn't they call the business owners to see if anyone might be working late again I was told it's up to their discretion. And just last week the Police Citizens Review Board ruled that an officer was vicious and violent during a traffic stop, unnecessarily escalating a situation that was a routine matter into a hostile situation. I would think that it's safe to say that that officer exercised poor discretion in that case as well. And this is the context which you're considering expanding the discretionary powers of the Iowa City Police Department. I think what we've seen emerge over the last few years is a pattern that suggests that for whatever reason, problems of leadership and perhaps in training, the ICPD may have some problems when it comes to exercising discretion. These are red flags, flags of caution and I think you should think twice before expanding the discretionary powers of the ICPD until we can be certain that that discretion will be properly and safely exercised. Thank you. Lehman/Thank you. Norton/Can I ask a quick question? Lehman/Yes. Norton/I'd like to ask you one quick question, Osha. After the police are, let's suppose you call the police some night on a party. Don't they have to exercise discretion at that point as to what to do? Davidson/There' s no question. Norton/And if your word doesn't say there' s a chargeable offense going on here. Davidson/Clearly. And as the city attorney already pointed out police are asked to exercise discretion all the time every day. What we're talking about now is increasing the scope of that discretion. And all I'm saying is that at this point in This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 16 time I don't think that's a good idea. I think we should slow down on that. We have a Police Citizens Review Board that's doing a very good job of reviewing things. They've hit their one year anniversary. I believe they have a report either pending or already tumed in. And I think before there's talk about expanding discretion there should be an examination of how the police department is already exercising their discretionary powers. That's all. Does that answer your question? Steve Parrott/2714 Femdale. I work for the University of Iowa and I'm a member of the executive committee of the Stepping Up Project, but I'm here speaking for myself even though I would have to say many of the ideas come from other members of the committee. I didn't think of this myself. I urge you to adopt the amendment. I think it's a way of changing community expectations. It's a way of saying you have the fight to party without alcohol if you're of the age. That doesn't give you the fight to serve underage people. And it doesn't give you the fight to infringe on your neighbors fights by noise, by damaging their property or by threatening them or assaulting them if they ask you to tone things down. I think the ordinance correctly put the burden of civility on the party goers. I don't think neighbors should have to initiate the complaint if there are problems. That responsibility should be on the party hosts and the party goers. I would say there's no single thing we can do to eliminate drinking to get drunk which is really the problem that we're talking about here. So that shouldn't be the standard by which would judge an amendment like this. I think the standard should be will this reduce the problem and I think this ordinance has shown in Ames for example that it can work so I think it's worth a try here. I would also ask that you don't assume that all University of Iowa students oppose any or all controls on alcohol. I think we, the Stepping Up Project, may have given you some statistics from the Harvard survey that shows that there's a range of opinion even among students about even things like whether kegs should be regulated. So please keep that in mind. In all this discussion I think there's a sense that ifnobody's getting hurt we shouldn't do anything. But the point is people are getting hurt. I think the Harvard survey shows that very clearly even in Iowa City among University of Iowa students who are non-bingers, some of them may dfink a little bit but they don't binge, nine out often report that they have been harmed personally, socially or economically by the bingers. So these people you know aren't often mentioned. I think that's kind of a group of underdogs that deserves your support. And I understand the concern about giving too much power to our police department. I think that's a separate issue. I agree that it's a very important issue. It's one we have to discuss. It's a related issue. But I think if there are concems about the manner in which our laws are enforced, issues not- the answer is not to throw out the laws. The answer is to improve enforcement. Thank you. Lehman/Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 17 Merrill Hamilton/715 N. Van Buren. I've addressed you informally before about our problem. I live across the street from what had become a party house. This had been what I called a party house. Anyway it was house where there were frequent parties. And the woman I bought the house from last March left, sold her house in part because of the behavior of the tenants in this house. This is a list of the police calls about 27- CHANGE TO TAPE 98-115: SIDE 2 Hamilton/-all kinds of things mostly related to partying. Loud party. on porch. There's one here called bat removal. Often times they would carry baseball bats and say death to neighbors because we had complained. So in some of these, I mean most parties are fine. I think most of the people who are in favor of this ordinance are not against parties. I face four rooming houses. They all have parties in them. Just last weekend one lasted until after 1:00. It was fine. They don't have it every weekend. It doesn't last four days every weekend which is the case with this particular house. I have to agree with Osha's reservation about police discretion. This amendment does not really address the problem that we had with this particular house. There was no problem with people making complaints. There are 27 of them fight here. Someone called in every one of these complaints. The police did not stop the behavior in this house. It took the neighbors getting together and basically getting the press out in front of their house, photographing them while their parents were there that finally stopped the behavior for now. I've overheard, you know I live right across the street, I've overheard the police come for these calls and to tell you the truth the response to very similar behavior and very similar calls goes all over the place. Sometimes they come and they're very angry and really get very disturbed and tell them they're going to throw them in jail. Sometimes they have thrown them in jail in this house. Sometimes they come and they're very chummy. I mean I don't think there's a whole lot of guidelines here as far as what the police do in these situations. And this was a house that was well known to be driving the neighborhood crazy. As a matter of fact people from the neighborhood before I bought my house went down to the police department and said you guys have got to do something. The behavior continued. And so I think I have ambivalence about this ordinance. I don't think it's going to solve the problem. I think this is the police problem, an attitude problem. Not just for the police but of the whole community. The Northside is sort of considered to be a party neighborhood. Now when I bought my house across the street it said historic district. It didn't say party district. And so I think this behavior is tolerated in some places in the city and not in others. And I think I'm not for cracking down on all parties. I'm all for being reasonable about behavior and I think there is no consistency right now. I think if it's just a one party and it isn't outrageous, that's fine. I think if the city and the police know this is a house that has party after party every weekend and This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 18 people are moving out of the neighborhood because of it, I think something should be able to be done and I think it could've been done without this ordinance. So I guess I've come down for this ordinance but I think there has to be more done too on attitude and the attitude of the police. Thanks. Lehman/Thank you. Brian White/I am also a member of the executive committee of Stepping Up however the reason I come to you tonight is I'm also the president of the student government on campus and so I'm setting my role in Stepping Up aside. I want to come and talk to you today about the role of the student, that the students and questions and concerns that they have with the policy. First off I want to commend city council on the progress that they have made thus far from the first keg registration policy to this legislation that's being discussed. There's definitely progress that can be noted from the point from the first initial keg registration ordinance to this one. Secondly I come tonight not standing against or not standing for the policy. To this point student government has yet to come in agreeante as to whether they stand for or against the policy. We're opening our doors to hearing student concems and I want to bring a few of the concerns to the table tonight. One of the first ones that I want to bring is the clarification which John Jones mentioned earlier. The terms in the policy that is being addressed tonight are vague. I just call for some clarification maybe it's within the large ordinance. I have to come today saying that I haven't read the entire, I've read the changes but I haven't read the entire ordinance. But words such as loud, noise disturbance, just the disturbance part, they strike a bell in our heads wondering what that means. Giving the police the discretion to define those terms ifthat's the case or whether they are to fall in alliance with the terms stated in the noise policy that city council has put out. So we call for some clarification on those terms. Secondly we call to ask if there are abuse procedures in place by offering this policy allows police to have their own discretion whether a party should have be broken up or not or whether they should write a ticket or not. And whenever you give discretion to the police you open the doors for abuse and we want to caution the city council here to look into that to see how you can guarantee students that this process if put through the police will not abuse the process. It's mentioned before that it's happened. It's happened in the past not with this process but it's controversial with the Eric Shaw case. So we definitely know that our police department isn't perfect and the concern needs to be addressed to the students directly and to the community. And a possible suggestion and also with the police discretion thing is to have classes for the police officers to update them of the new policy and what that discretion means and the guidelines between that so they can act on that. And then finally this is a direct effect on students regardless what the ordinance says or doesn't say to the students but the reason why this came up was not for parties all throughout Iowa City but for the problem parties that students have had on campus either high school or college students and we just want to This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 19 caution city council on voting yes fight away to this issue without consulting the students. It's nice to open a forum here for people to talk but not everybody can come on a night like this and if the concern is to be pushed beyond this point to agreeance of the policy, we wish that city council would open a forum on campus so call students can have access to it or they can be questioned and briefed on what the process is all about. And I actually have one other thing to say. Is there' s a lot of factors being shot around that I've heard tonight every where from police discretion to police in the community relations but also remember that the police and student relations is a major concern on the reputation between the police and the students might not be where the police department feels it should be and the factors that I've mentioned and the one factors I've mentioned previously and that one fight there but the police student relation should all play in effect as to whether you pass this ordinance or not. They all need to be weighed heavily and the big question that I want to leave you is this the way to solve the problem. If the problem is that people aren't calling and complaining or they feel scared to call in complaints, we have address is this the way the fight to access that problem and to work with that problem. Maybe we need to look at alternative ways also whether educating the community and other students so that they don't have the fear. Letting them know the policies that their names are kept confidential if that is the case when they call in complaints. So they don't get their house spray painted or egged or whatever. I just want to leave you with that comment is this the best way of solving the problem. And I'm open for any questions. Kubby/And do you have a suggestion? We're probably going to- we're going to vote on this in two weeks. Is that the schedule? Is this an ordinance that takes three considerations or is the amendment just one vote and then it's amended? Dilkes/No. It's a three. Lehman/It takes three. Kubby/Because I really like your suggestion of having an on campus discussion about this and would love to be involved and I'm sure some of the council members would. White/ Yeah. We could set that up. This may be difficult to do but I'd like to make a further suggestion. Student government being representative of the student body would like to have a say in the ordinance and the way we can do that is through passing legislation in our student assembly meetings. We're having one tonight unfortunately which means the next one will be three weeks or a month from today on the third Tuesday of the next months. I know that the vote is in two weeks but if you could possibly push that so we can get a resolution in either supporting or not supporting this. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 20 Lehman/It takes three positive votes by the council to pass the ordinance which means it would take from tonight's meeting it would take probably eight weeks. The first passage in two. The second in four. The third one in six weeks and then December 1, yeah. So we are talking even if this moves as ordinances frequently do and receives approval at each stage it would be I guess six weeks before it could be approved and then it has to be published. There is a fair amount of time in there. Norton/Isn't it likely to even be longer then that Ernie, if any changes in the wording? We're not going to do that tonight but I certainly have some concerns myself about the detailed wording and if there's any changes made would make that time somewhat longer I take it. Kubby/Unless we continue the public hearing. If it just changes a word that doesn't change the intent of the ordinance then we don't care. That' s okay but if it's a big change. Norton/Well I don't know. I don't know whether it'd be big or not. I'm not finished thinking. Kubby/Thanks Brian. Lehman/Let us know if you set a meeting. I realize it's very difficult to get with our schedule seven of us together at one time, but I do believe that most of us would be amenable to visiting with students about this. White/We've done it in the past. Champion/But it wouldn't have to be all seven of us. The discussion could be. Lehman/No. Individually whatever. White/Thank you. Jim Clayton/119 E. College. I'm having trouble with the perspective and the issues and shades of gray that are being painted. I have a whole bunch of things to say. I'm not going to say them. I've got something else now. I hear the word discretion. That word's not in the ordinance. It says authority. It doesn't say discretion. I see an image being painted of police officers driving around town looking for parties. Believe me. We don't have enough police officers to drive around town and look for parties. If there's an ordinance being violated and you as an individual notice it and want action on it, you're going to have to call the police. And you may have to call them again and again and as some people have testified you might get an uneven response. One time you get an officer that's aggressive and tries to put the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 2 1 problem at rest. And another time you get an officer who puts his arm around your fender and says come on let's please not do this again. We have a lot of ordinances on our books that are there for the circumstance when it arises that the officer has the authority to act. We don't have a party house on every block in town. We don't have a party house every night. It is not an issue of discretion or gray. We are talking about people with baseball bats and we need to worry about discretion? Or people shooting bottle rockets at somebody's house and this takes discretion? I think not. I think this is what we call black or white in the real world. It's yes or no. It's a ticket or no ticket, but it's not gray and it's not discretion. We asked you a long time ago, months ago, to put a keg ordinance in place and the council resisted that and we sent you a copy of the Ames ordinance which is what this is modeled on and you kind of said we already have something like that maybe we can fine tune. I can remember our city manager saying we needed something that would keep us from having police officers sent to the hospital because they were trying to do something about a party. And to keep something that would keep our fire department on the job instead of climbing back in their trucks and leaving the scene of a fire because they were afraid. So I don't see a problem with discretion. I see a problem with giving our officers the kind of authority that they need to step in to these situations where we have people that are out of control. Most of the problems you here about come from a relatively small area of our community. I didn't see any of you nodding your heads saying that happened next door to me. Don't write off this part of the town. There's people who live here that have children. There are families. There are families. There are students that are trying to study at night. And w are talking about a very small number of people. A tiny minority who cannot consume alcohol responsibly and so the rest of us suffer because of that. Alcohol costs our society a lot of money because of its use irresponsibly by many of our citizens. Don't let it cost a family a good night's sleep. That just isn't fair. Lehman/Thank you, Jim. Pat Hamey/Captain of Field Operations. I think Karen Kubby requested some clarification as to what we do now currently at a party. Under the current ordinance we do. We go to a party. We would request the individuals to stop the party. We give them a warning. Give them a fair chance to get it back under control, take it inside, or do what they need to get it quieted down to satisfy the neighbors. That doesn't always happen. Quite often it does. The majority of these students in parties are very cooperative, but there are a certain number that never are. And in this ordinance it not only makes the host responsible for what' s going on in the party, it puts some of that burden on the party goers as well where they are responsible for their actions at the residence where this is going on or wherever it might be. In entirety in this ordinance, it clarifies what is expected of the host and the party goers: the noise, the conduct, things along those lines. And there seems to be some paranoia about officers discretion and the officers being This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 22 offended by the party and coming to this party and jumping in and trying to break up disperse parties that don't seem to be bothering anyone else. Well that's not the case. The officers would go to a party only on a call. They're not going to stop because they see a party going on and try to break that party up. There' s a number of citizens who when they reach the point where they want to call the police they're afraid to because they're afraid they're going to be injured. There will be retribution against their property or themselves. And they won't divulge their names. They'll call but don't want to be a complainant. If the officer goes and it gets to the point where they need to file a charge, currently you need a witness. And those people are afraid to come forward and in this ordinance this would allow the officer to testify in court as to what was going on and the judges would accept that. yes it would be better to have that complainant with you, but the officer can verify that this was what's happening and it can be upheld in a court of law. This ordinance is watered down as they said earlier a lot from the original one where they wanted to register the kegs and so forth which would've been a lot of work for everyone. I think this one is really in line of what the Iowa City community needs. Kubby/So Captain Harney, if currently there's not neighbor complaint and an officer's driving down a street and notices a party that is loud. It is getting rowdy and people are out in the yard. Maybe they're drinking on the right of way or whatever, the officers could stop now and ask them to disperse it but in order for a citation to stick you need a witness? Hamey/Yes. We could stop. Normally we will not unless we have a complaint about the party. If no one is being offended and there's nothing going on that no one appears to being injured or anything like that, the officers will not go into that party. Kubby/But if you do see people not having- They bolt across the street or urinating in public or vandalizing. Those are the charges. I mean it wouldn't be necessarily disorderly conduct. Harney/Right. Those you could address individually but not necessarily as to the party and the host and so forth. Kubby/Thanks for that clarification. Dilkes/We have- Let me clarify one thing. I don't currently prosecute them, but I have and we have at least when I was doing them in front of the magistrates they would accept a police officers testimony that there had been a complaint. We wouldn't actually have to have the complainant in the courtroom. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 23 Hamey/They will accept the officer's testimony however they prefer to have a neighbor or someone who has been. Dilkes/That's right. That's accurate. Kubby/So with or without a neighbor complaint currently an officer who sees something that's inappropriate, use your discretion and can ask the party to quiet down. Go inside. Break up. And they may or may not do it, but you do that now. Harney/Well we don't do a lot of that. We can. For the most part we do not because if so no one is being offended by a party or it's not too noisy we don't want to get involved in someone's party. Kubby/Thank you. Norton/Okay, I'd like to ask pardon me. Go ahead, Connie. Champion/I have a question too. I mean I have problems with this ordinance. It doesn't mean I'm not going to support it. I think we need the ordinance. But I do have problems with granting more power to police and I don't mean that in a negative sense. But what sort of criteria do you yourself envision as a general regular policeman using to approach a party. Just give me an idea about what kind of criteria you as an individual would use to approach a party that you thought was out of hand. Harney/Are you talking under the guidelines of this ordinance? Champion/Yes. Something specific not these vague words we have in here. Hamey/Well right now even if this ordinance was in effect the officers are not going to stop at a party that they see unless there is a complaint or there is conduct going on such as a fight or something like that where you're going to stop and address that particular situation at the particular party. And if it was just a fight in the yard, the officers would probably break that up and allow the party to continue. Talk to the host. They probably wouldn't disperse the party at that point. If there was a later situation where something similar arise at that point they would address the dispersal of the party. Champion/And the other thing that bothers me is we have a disorderly house ordinance and the person that was here with the list of this house that had like 36 or 40 complaints in a year's time and there were only two citations given. Hamilton/There were 27. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 24 Champion/27 complaints and two citations. And this is obviously a house that has disturbed a lot of neighbors, so how is this ordinance going to improve that situation? Hamey/This ordinance would help in a situation like that. quite often what happens is you go to a party repeatedly like that. unless you know who the leasee of the property is or who the host of that party is, you can't do lot with those individuals as far as issuing a citation. Quite often the individual who you talk to the first time has gone and the party has continued. In this ordinance it would give the officers the authority to say okay the party' s over and it gives those people attending the party the responsibility to leave when they're asked to. Thornberry/They don't have that fight to do that now? Harney/Not really. We can ask them but we really don't have the authority. Lehman/Under this ordinance if they did not disperse when you ask them to they could be charges. Hamey/Yes. They could. Lehman/Now they can't. Hamey/No. Lehman/Okay. Norton/This ordinance adds the term disorderly conduct to the ones that were there before. That' s a new term. Disorderly conduct. Is that too broad a term? Hamey/Disorderly conduct is a broad term but it's spelled out in the state code as well as in the city ordinances so we pretty well follow the guidelines of the way that's defined. I couldn't really give it to you verbatim right now. Norton/But a lot of cars parked on the parking off the street on the grass. Would that cause you to- If you drove by a party like that would that cause you to stop? Would that be the kind of thing you'd- Suppose there's a lot of cars parked manifestly illegally. Hamey/No. Not necessarily. The officers might stop and issue citations or tickets to those cars that are parked between the sidewalk and the curb on the parking and so forth. But that's not enough to try to try to disperse a party. You may walk up to a party and ask them to move those vehicles first is which would be the appropriate approach. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 25 Norton/How do you respond to the question that the enforcement or response is very variable. Does the department have a program where people are talked to so that you get fairly uniform response? People are saying we get different responses depending on who shows up. Hamey/Well I think you're dealing with personalities. I may address you differently than someone else may. There's a number of ways if someone goes to a party and knows someone there they'd try to get the good side of them to help disperse a party or get it back into hand. Sometimes we'll go to parties where they're out of control and the host will ask for help. Will you please it's gotten out of hand help me disperse this. And we do that as well. So it depends on the circumstances situation in each case. O'Donnell/I would think also Pat that normally when a squad car pulls up that that would change the whole attitude of the party wouldn't it? Hamey/In most cases it does. Not always. Champion/It would change mine. Lehman/But I think that there's somehow this change is creating the image that suddenly the police officers are going to be out in force looking for parties all over town. As I see this, it gives you better tools to deal with complaints that you get. But if this were in place, how would you envision this affecting the numbers of parties that you probably would be involved in? Harney/I don't think the parties are going to change that much. There's a certain- The majority of the students are going to school, studying, go out and they'll have a drink. Do what ever. There are a few party houses that we go back to repeatedly. Lehman/That's not going to change. Harney/And that's not going to change. We'll have to address those year after year or week after week. Lehman/But this gives you a better method to address the situations that you currently have. Doesn't really change the numbers of, I just can't envision with the work that the officers have to do that you're going to spend your time running around looking for parties. But if you do find one it would be nice to have the tools to see to it that this party should be controlled rather than having to go back repeatedly and not being able to do much about it. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 26 Hamey/Yes. It's more clearly defined in this ordinance what is expected of those people attending the party and the host. And it spells out what's expected, more or less what the officers are going to do. If these things are going on, they're going to address those issues. They're not going to go in and start handcuffing people and arresting them and taking them out. They're still going to give them the opportunity to get it under control before they have to disperse the party. Lehman/Thank you very much. Thornberry/I'd like to move to accept correspondence in order to reference a letter. Lehman/Moved by Thomberry, seconded by O'Donnell. All in favor. (Ayes) Motion carded, Thornberry/The letter I wanted to reference was sent to us by Carol Scott Downer who is head of the department of surgery at the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics wrote a very short paragraph that she hoped that we would support this ordinance in passing this ordinance. Lehman/I believe that in passing that motion accepting correspondence we will in effect put in the record all of the correspondence that we have received pro and con regarding this ordinance. Thornberry/That's fight. A couple of other things that I would like to mention at this point and like you say it takes three readings. Educating the party goers, educating the college students or party goers whoever they may be sometimes is like preaching to the choir. Those that care will listen. And it might change their behavior. Others that just don't give a damn are going to continue doing what they're doing. Those that walk or swagger the neighborhood as we have heard and heard before from some of the neighbors living in the area fear retaliation from some of these people. And probably fightfully so. If I had some inebriated party goers washing the neighborhood with spray paint and chains as was mentioned earlier and baseball bats and so on, yeah I think I would think twice about calling in a report. The police department already exercises decision making many many times a day without spelling it out so to speak in an ordinance so they're very accustomed to making decisions and decision making and very seldom I would imagine are any two situations exactly alike. You go to one party and then you go to another party. It's not going to be exactly the same. Very seldom do they act the same way. Some are fearful when the police, whew there's a police car outside. And I went to college and I said- I think all of us. And I was in one of those parties, ooh there's a police car out front. Oh he must want you. He doesn't want me. It changes the tone of the party immediately until they're gone. Ooh he's gone. Now let's go. It happens. I'm sorry. It happens. It's a fact of life. But very seldom are there two situations exactly alike and I doubt- you know people This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 27 act and react to the way of the interaction. If the police officer pulls up to the house and he meets a bunch of people who are very belligerent, he may act one way. If they're very condescending he may act another way. But very seldom are the situations alike. He in a genetic sense. Champion/How about she in a generic sense. Lehman/Well and I don't think this ordinance changes any of that. Thornberry/No it doesn't. Lehman/Is there anyone else who would like to speak? O'Donnell/I've heard words tonight and I've got really sore throat tonight so I normally sound this bad any way. But I've heard words like intimidation. Confrontational. Underage drinking. And I think we're all aware that there are very few people involved in this but they are making it difficult for everybody. Baseball bats. Death to neighbors. Driving the neighborhood crazy and fear of retribution. I think we do rely on the police department's discretion on a daily basis and I'm probably going to support this. Lehman/Any other comments? I guess I would- from the public? Do we wish to close the hearing? Norton/Yeah let's do. Kubby/If you want to speak you should come up. Lehman/If you're going to speak you're going to do it quick because the hearing' s about to close. O'Donnell/It's a pretty quiet public I must say. Lehman/Right. I'm looking for somebody. Richard Twohy/I live in Iowa City sandwiched just a couple of houses in between two sorority houses and luckily we're only two blocks from the police department so we may be safer now. But I am real unhappy about somehow although I read the papers and I watch TV and all but I haven't noticed whatever crisis brought about this move to expand the police powers like this. I don't know maybe there was too much noise in my neighborhood and I wasn't able to see it or hear it on TV. But to me I know from experience that the police in this city don't take a back seat to anybody who is I mean they're not waiting for somebody to riot or be out of control before exercising their authority and they do it firmly distinctly and on a This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 28 regular basis. And this isn't the time to talk about whether they ever get out of hand. Apparently we're only talking about non-uniformed, non-unarmed people getting out of hand. But I don't understand what it is that the police department here in Iowa City and come to know what tools they lack in order to take care of a rowdy and disorderly situation. Has there been one that they haven't been able to control with or without this new ordinance7 What this thing says and of course I'm not even looking at the ordinance just the few little public words. It says this would meet the goal. Whose goal? Of explicitly authorizing police involvement before a disturbance is out of control. If it's not out of control then it's not an improper disturbance, is it? Are we going to say nobody can- it's like you know another ordinance that a dog better not bark above eleven decibels between the hours of- If it's not out of control then supposedly free human beings in a responsible society are going to exercise their fight to assemble peaceably. Thornberry/Is an underaged drinker necessarily out of control, Mr. Twohy? Twohy/All by itself?. Thornberry/Yes. Twohy/I don't think so. Thornberry/It's against the law though. Twohy/Okay. Thomberry/Okay. Twohy/But it does seem to me that we are never going to find the kind of peace and community serenity that we would like to have if the main goal of the police is to enforce the law. We ought to send the legislature home and leave them home for a couple of years because there's new laws all the time. There' s no organization of law enforcement people who can possibly enforce all the laws and they keep making new ones. That can't be the goal. They are selective and they have to be. But it seems to me that the real priority purpose for a good police team in a city like ours is to keep the peace. That's the most important priority. If their attitude is to keep the peace we would see far fewer I would suggest a ridiculous arrest and citation that are causing no harm but are technically violating some kind of law. Our police, it is an armed militia and I realize that more than half of our police officers don't even live in Iowa City. Is that true? Lehman/Is that relevant? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 29 Twohy/I don't know. It certainly seems like it to me because if we have an occupying armed force of people who don't even live here but are coming in and we're paying lots of money in insurance settlements and so forth for violent actions and our police chief when a rather conservative back sitting Police Citizens Review Board has upheld only two complaints out of the 28 or whatever it is but the one that they most recently did, it was in the paper just this week, said that the officer involved, Officer Batcheller, had acted viciously and violently. Were those not the terms? Lehman/I don't think they were but we can't discuss that. That is not- Twohy/In terms of a public issue I hate the fact that now it's going to be covered under something called personnel. You know that is- I would sure like to see why and who has the authority to cover up any public awareness of things because it's a personnel matter. But what we do know, what little we know is that the board found officially that the police chief's recommendation that simply this officer be given additional safety training was unreasonable. The police chief was unreasonable in this situation. They're asking us- Lehman/Mr. Twohy. We're talking about disorderly. We're not talking about. And you made a comment that I really disagree with and I'd like to point it out. Twohy/You're very welcome. Lehman/You said that if we're having a party and they're not bothering anybody, leave them alone. Why do we have preventative medicine? Why do we do things to prevent things from happening? Why do we do things to keep things to keep things from getting out of order? Who better understands the situation at a party then officers who are called time after time? They see a party. It's potentially a party that can get out of control. They stop. Fellas, gals, take it easy. You're a neighborhood. You've got kids sleeping, whatever. It gives them the opportunity to keep things under control. Twohy/Can't they do that right now? Didn't they do that last week? Didn't they do it last year? Lehman/I think it's kind of enabling. Twohy/This gives them the authority as I understand it Mr. Mayor to go up there even though we have this marvelous ordinance that says a neighbor, anybody who wants. It doesn't have to be a neighbor, can make an anonymous complaint. You know there's not going to be any more or less retribution or fear of it if a person doesn't make a complaint. If somebody rowdy at a party thinks that there's going to be trouble or feels retfibutive, they're going to act retfibutive regardless of who This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 30 makes the complaint. Right now the complainant can be anonymous. But at least it keeps the police from being both the complainant and the enforcer. All they next have to do is become the jury and then we can do the whole thing in our system of justice with just one uniformed person. Lehman/That's not what we're intending to do. Twohy/Otherwise give the context that we have with a police department with a recent and grandly recent now record of not responding appropriately with its authority to police excess, now we want to say that police now can- they don't even have to wait for anyone even anonymously to make a complaint. They can be the one complaining and then they slap with the citation or the cuffs for resisting because now they've been authorized to be the complainant themselves. Why is that necessary? Why wasn't it necessary until almost the end of 1998? Thomberry/If there are a bunch of cars parked in front of a party house, Mr. Twohy, and the officer goes up because of the excess noise and public urination, all these things are written out here. And they go up to this house without a neighborhood complaining because the neighbors may be in fear of retaliation or retribution. Twohy/Although they're anonymous. Thornberry/Pardon me. Twohy/Although the neighbors are anonymous. Nobody has to stand up and say they did it. Thomberry/There name has to go one the court record if there is an arrest made. Twohy/Is that true? Is that true, city attorney? Dilkes/No, that's not necessarily true. Thornberry/But there has to be a complaint made before the police can do an arrest. Twohy/Sure but they can be completely anonymous and never have to be on the court record. Thornberry/I would rather have that person, I would rather have that person talk to and see how in the world they're going to get home as opposed to driving drunk and killing somebody on the road. Twohy/Do the police officers need this new power to do that? They should be doing it now. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 31 Lehman/We're not going to get into where we're taking testimony, not arguing. Twohy/It just seems they have all the authority they need right now and to make them also not even have to have anybody even want to to complain even anonymously. So they can arrest you for disobeying their complaint on the spot is a- It's not how we ought to be doing it in America. There's a lot of countries where they would preventative medicine. We don't need that here. And I think it's a mistake. Kubby/Is it possible we could add the authority to disperse a crowd to a current ordinance and not change the complainant, who the complainant is? Dilkes/Yes. There' s lots of options out there. Norton/that' s why I say I think it should be understood there's one reason we're debating this and listening to discussion about it. Is it because the question of whether this ordinance adds significantly to what can be done now. Whether it really facilitates importantly. That's what we're trying to decide. We're getting testimony on both sides of that issue as to whether this really improve the present situation. And that's what it's about. We're going to hear some more. Tom Widmer/I'm a captain with the Iowa City Police Department. I want to be brief. As I read this ordinance, I see that this ordinance actually takes away from the discretion we're currently using. I see it in a positive way. If you read the old ordinance we have been operating in gray area for a long time. Our officers who I feel are very skilled, one of the first things an officer in the City of Iowa City learns on a football weekend is how to handle the loud party crowds. They become very skilled. I guess it bothers me and I think, I don't want to belittle anyone but to think that not expect that certain officers are going to act differently in certain situations and officers sometimes we teach them not to mirror back the behavior they have. But we have officers that are better at this than others. Some times some are strong. Some are weak. I guess that just goes without saying. But I see this ordinance as spelling out. The only thing that it gives us now that we don't have. I think it's clearing up a loop hole that's almost been there. Some of our magistrates demand as part of their point of discretion in finding somebody guilty of a disorderly house that there is a complainant other than the police department. I would venture to say in fact I can only think of a couple of instances when this ordinance would've played into effect. The officers don't have the time to go out and hunt for parties. The pictures been painted that we're going to go out and look for quote a party. Again council I challenge you. If you want to see a party ride with an Iowa City police officer on a football weekend and look at the different types of parties we have. The officers do not have time. When they're spilling out in the street we can take care of those. When there's loud party calls we can take care of those. What we're looking at is for large parties that start on This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 32 private property that stay on private property where we do not have the authority to go in and shut a potentially dangerous situation down. Very few and far between. And so I would say that probably 99 times out of 100 it's going to be business as usual. But now you've given us even more guidelines to where our discretion has been taken away because it's been written out what authority we have to go and make that call rather than just being vague and saying we need to stop the loud parties. So I see it as a good thing. I see it as a healthy thing and I see it as something that yes we constantly work with the officers. We are going to be held accountable by the magistrates. We're going to be held accountable by complaints coming in to PCRB. We're going to be held accountable by the supervisors who are watching the charges that are filed. If the officers are using more discretion as you say or as it has been said than what we should then it will be found out and that problem will be taken care of through training. So I see it as adding to a tool for the unusual circumstances that we have. Lehman/Thank you. Hamilton/Can I say one more thing? Lehman/Certainly. Hamilton/I think there's, in a college town this gets really complicated. It really does. I think we need a lot of discussion with the university and I think the community needs to decide what they want as far as standards really. I think that's really important. And I don't mean to put it all on the police or all on the partiers. There's just a wide variation in parties, in reactions to parties in different neighborhoods. I think there really has to be some community discussion here in deciding on what kind of standards we want. And I think the university needs to be involved in this because a lot of these parties involve university students. Lehman/Thank you. Dilkes/Mr. Mayor, I have one comment I want to add. I just want to make sure this doesn't get lost in the shuffle because there's been some comments about the vagueness or the alleged vagueness of some of the terms: loud, disagreeable, that kind of thing. First of all loud and disagreeable are terms we've already been using and have been used for a long time and I just want you to remember that it's not the police officer that makes the decision about that. I mean they make a decision to charge but it's the judge that makes the decision as to ultimately whether something is loud or disagreeable and they've been quite able to do that. Lehman/Thank you. Close the public hearing. I'm sorry. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #7 Page 33 Kubby/That kind of happened fast. I know Dee was saying that he might want to propose some changes. If they're big changes, the public heating is closed we're going to have to readvertise. That's a consequence of the gavel going down. Norton/I guess I didn't speak fast about it. I don't know. Kubby/It doesn't hurt to continue it. Vanderhoef/We can always amend. Norton/We'll have to fine tune or amend later I suppose. You can always do that. Lehman/It isn't necessary to close the public heating. If we're thinking of substantive changes that we would require and I guess they would have to be rather substantial to require another public heating would they not. Dilkes/Well first of all there's not a public hearing required on this ordinance. Lehman/Oh okay. Dilkes/You chose to have on. Lehman/Fine. Fine. Champion/But there's always opportunity for public input. Vanderhoef/And we can always make amendments if we are in agreement that we need changes. Norton/And we may want to meet with some students, too. Lehman/Sure. We are going to take a short break. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #8 Page 34 ITEM NO. 8 CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 8, CHAPTER 6, SECTION 1 ENTITLED "SALE OF CIGARETTES TO PERSONS UNDER EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE" OF THE CITY CODE TO PROHIBIT THE USE OR POSSESSION OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS OR CIGARETTES BY PERSONS UNDER EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE. (FIRST CONSIDERATION) Lehman/(Reads agenda item #8). Moved by Thomberry, seconded by Norton. Discussion. Kubby/When this is enforced, is it possible to have a listing of the geographic location of where the citations are given? Champion/What do you mean by that? O'Donnell/Other than downtown. Kubby/Yeah, some people would agree that it is important to enforce this downtown because that is where some minors are congregating and where they are smoking and I guess I don't want it to be the only place where we are enforcing this ordinance and so that would help us monitor to make sure that is not happening. Champion/Is it any citation that has a location on it? Lehman/I think all citations have addresses. Kubby/Some things are easily tracked, that I want the listing of just the geographical location of this enforcement of this ordinance, that I could just get that and get a bunch of addresses. Okay. Widmer/(Cannot hear). Dilkes/You are going to have to come to the mic or- Kubby/We need it clear and loud. Widmer/. Yes, it is possible to run a query in our system just by the disorderly house charge and it will spit out a location, depending on- CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 98-116 SIDE 1 Lehman/It will also tell you where the violations occurred, not necessarily where the enforcement occurred. Widmer/Yes, that's- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #8 Page 35 Lehman/You can enforce it. If there are no violations, there will be no record of having- Widmer/You can run it two ways. You can run by violation where an actual citation was written or by complaint as the gentleman who came up here just a few minutes ago had a print out of that particular address which addressed all of those complaints. So it could be done either way. Lehman/But my point is that if there is an area where there are no violations and no complaints, it will not appear on your records because there have been no citations and no complaints. Widmer/That is correct. Lehman/Which means the areas that have the highest violations are obviously going to be the ones that have the most charges. Widmer/Correct. Lehman/What does that prove? Champion/I think the problem Karen is having, she just doesn't want to implement downtown. But I think when you talk about an ordinance like this, if a young teenager is smoking in their backyard, they are probably not going to get a citation. If they are smoking downtown, that is the most likely place they are going to get a citation or in a public area. So I would think that most of these citations would be in public areas. Lehman/I am sure they would be. O'Donnell/Some place where they are seen readily. Kubby/I guess I want to do this on the front end and the back end of this enforcement. I guess I would like us, because I support this because it allows us to have some local discretion and like John Jones was saying earlier, why do this because it is not really going to do anything. But what it does do is because we prosecute these violations, the city does, not the county as a state code violation. That we can say we will drop this civil charge if you pick up cigarette butts for two hours. Or we will drop this charge if you go through the MECCA smoking cessation or smoking education program. We have the opportunity to do things a little more humanely and working with people as individuals instead of just saying here is the fine. So that to be is the power of this. But I guess what I want to do on the front end is to direct the Police Department. I don't mind us enforcing this This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #8 Page 36 downtown. I don't want it to be the only place that we enforce this law. And that I want to see that on the back end just to see that it is happening. Tom Widmer/I guess I would point out, too, that it has been my personal observation that not a majority of these but a large number of these are a result of the Police Department being contacted and saying we hxave a contract with this person that is living in this situation, they came in with cigarette, we want you to issue a citation. Kubby/Because you are involved in the juvenile justice system? Widmer/Yes, either a probation officer or a group home leader, someone of that caliber. Also we get calls from the schools, City High and West High, from the neighbors as well as the school. This comer, we know where the popular comers are and it is, I would say in those areas, it is far more reactive than it is proactive. The officers don't go up there and sit and wait. It is much more reactive. Kubby/A question came up last night. Do you- If you catch a minor smoking or chewing tobacco, do you then take away the rest of the tobacco products? It is a violation? Widmer/Yes, now they don't do a body cavity search or anything to make sure. Generally, the kids, until they become street-wise, they will give them up very quickly and they are taken away from them. It isn't an exhaustive search. We don't do this as a major crime. But they are asked for and sometimes it will be where, what do you have in your pocket and they will give them up. So, yes they ask. Norton/On possession or sales? Widmed Possession. We have done some things with sale and we are- Captain Hamey could probably address that. We have a grant that we have used. It is pretty much across the state of Iowa where we are actually going in and attempting to make buys. It keeps the merchants on their toes and allows us to see where the kids are buying. There are places that they know that they can get them. But the focus of this, I believe, is on the possession itself. Lehman/Strictly possession on this ordinance. Champion/I did see a policeman downtown who caught a young girl who had sent an older gentleman who hangs around down to buy two packs of cigarettes and a policeman just happened to be walking down the pedestrian mall and he saw her with the cigarettes and he just took them and opened them and poured Coke on them and threw them in the trash. I thought it was great. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #8 Page 37 Lehman/Cruel and unhuman treatment. Okay, thank you. Other discussion. Roll call- (Yes) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #9 Page 38 ITEM NO. 9 CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 14, ENTITLED "UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE," CHAPTER 3, ENTITLED "CITY UTILITIES," ARTICLE E ENTITLED "WASTEWATER TREATMENT WORKS INDIRECT DISCHARGE," SECTION 4, ENTITLED "PRETREATMENT STANDARDS," OF THE CITY CODE TO AMEND PLANT INFLUENT ZINC STANDARDS. Lehman/(Reads agenda item #9). Does anybody want to move the adoption? Moved by Thornberry, although not explained, and seconded by Norton, also not explained. Does anybody like to discuss. Kubby/I would because zinc is a metal and allowing more metals to come into our plant and to possibly go through our plant is something that we should understand that we are allowing in doing this. And I leamed a lot about zinc in the last couple of days and it kind of points out a consistent critique I have with our process sometimes that, you know, we get this Friday afternoon and I have the weekend to try to find somebody outside of our system to teach me about zinc or to give me a second opinion or a different perspective about what we are doing and it makes it very difficult. In the future, because I have a feeling that we might be changing other metal standards for our wastewater treatment plant, that we get some more documentation from our wastewater superintendent to educate us about how this came about, what the effects will be on our plant, on finances and on the environmental health of the river where we are putting our effluent after we treated the water. The zinc, I don't think for my very short term and unscientific research, will be a huge problem because- And the reason we are looking at this is because Proctor and Gamble has been increasing their production of dandruff shampoo at the plant and one of the major components is zinc and we are using some 1982 standards and there has been more research done to look at what is the effect of possible increased amount of zinc coming into the plant, in the sludge that we put on farm fields which is a public health concern, then. You have to ask the question is this safe for the animals eating the feed or therefore the humans eating the meat and then the humans eating the direct crops that we might eat and our sludge that is being put on, does it effect the microbes in our plant because that costs us money if it kills them off and studies found that we could be three times-The most stringent standard that we have fight now in terms of the microbes and the sludge. And we are within state and federal standards for this and that. That it is probably the only reason why I will support this tonight. Because, I really want us- If this metal were selenium which as larger environmental effects that I personally, I mean that I know about. That I would want to defer it or I would want to get some information. So I guess if this becomes a trend, I would want us to get more educated before we vote on changing. These are environmental standards that we have to understand before we put our okay on these things. I was told by Dave Elias, our wastewater superintendent, that with these new standards of allowing three times the amount of weight per day of zinc coming in, that we have room for Proctor and Gamble to This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #9 Page 39 do what they want to do. Then there is a 10% fudge figure meaning that if one day they go up a little bit we will still be within the standards. Plus it leaves headroom for another industry that might have zinc as a by-product in their wastewater to come in so that we are not trapping ourselves and being limited in what we have to do or have to have big public expense to allow another industry to come to town. So I feel pretty good, I feel pretty confident about that in its limited amount of information. Norton/I would like to add a little to that, Karen. Seems to me that this kind of an ordinance should come to us with a staff report in some ways. You have gotten your staff report from Dave directly. But it is pretty complicated and we need to know the origins of the request. Were they initiated by Proctor and Gan~ble? I take it that they were. You have no idea how complicated the waste treatment process is. How delicately engineered and varied it can be, depending what is in there, it costs money. For example, does this cost us any more money? I would have thought there be a brief staff report. I would just like to put that on for future reference. Kubby/It will not cost us any more money on the front end in terms of any equipment needed at the plant to accommodate this. And because the microbes- And this will end up in the sludge. We won't be putting more zinc into the environment according to the DNR and I need to thank publicly Bob Libera at the Geologic Survey for doing some researching and talking with me today. Norton/Does it entail any extra charge to Proctor and Gamble, for example? Atkins/No, not that I know of. Kubby/It doesn't cost us anything but we still monitor zinc according to- They are tested on a weekly basis and so if the zinc amount starts to creep up, our folks will notice that immediately and say you are going above your standards, you can't do that, you need to pretreat at the plant and only give us the new amount of zinc and so there is some constant monitoring and that is the other kind of safeguard. Lehman/So we won't be zinc free, we will just be low zinc. I am assuming that all of these sort of things were looked at prior to this being recommended to us. I am sure that our folks would have- Atkins/We are cleared through the EPA and DNR. Lehman/I mean this was all done before it was every given to us. Atkins/I will prepare a metals standards summary to just familiarize you. We will prepare that for you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #9 Page 40 Kubby/I know- From people I hear from who talk about wastewater issues which I must admit are not huge in number. But they are worrying about the amount of heavy metals or any metals in the sludge that we are then putting on farm fields. I just want to make sure that I am educated about this before I vote for this. Lehman/Roll call- (yes). This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #13 Page 41 ITEM NO. 13 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT SUBMITTED TO THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION REGARDING THE IOWA INTERSTATE RAILROAD-CRANDIC RAILROAD INTERCHANGE RELOCATION PROJECT. Lehman/(Reads agenda item #13). Moved by Norton, seconded by Thomberry. This is a project that is being constructed in Iowa County to alleviate much of the rails traffic on the City of Iowa City. There was some concern as to whether or not it had a negative impact in the Amana area and it said that the investigation had been completed at the expense of the railroad and findings of no adverse effect upon the historic property has been determined in each case. Discussion. Norton/I think people need to understand that as this proceeds, it is not going to- There will still be some switching in Iowa City but perhaps less frequent. Is that right on the south side where we get intercepted a lot? The tracks aren't going to disappear. I think people need to be- O'Donnell/The engines will still be running down there, too. Lehman/All we are talking about here is the impact on the historic neighborhood. Roll call- (yes). Motion carded. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #14 Page 42 ITEM NO. 14 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE WATER FEATURE CONCEPT CALLED "WEATHERDANCE" FOR THE NEW DOWNTOWN WATER FEATURE AND AUTHORIZING NEGOTIATION OF A CONTRACT WITH THE ARTISTS ANDREA MYKLEBUST AND STANTON SEARS. Lehman/(Reds agenda Item #14). Do we have a motion? Moved by Norton, seconded by everybody. I think we have discussion. Kafin, would you like to- Do you have pictures of it? A rendition, just something. This is something that we are all very interested in. This is the feature that will be included in the second part of our downtown revitalization effort which hopefully will take place next summer. Franklin/This is an overview of the water feature which is based on a weather motif and basically is a concept of a weather front moving in from the west. It then forms an arch of water at these points here with the jets that flow over and form an arch that you can walk through without getting wet. This area here is to portray the landscape of Iowa, the farm fields of Iowa. This will all be flat. It will be done in granite. There will be decorative manhole over, one for storm sewer which indicates a storm motif and then for the sanitary sewer, a compass in an agficulture motif. Lehman/Kafin, the location is very close the location of the present fountain, is that not correct? Franklin/That is correct. It is almost fight where the present fountain is. The manhole covers are shown on this board with the storm sewer and then a comer of the sanitary sewer. These squares will be in the feature that is to portray the wind. Champion/Lightning, isn't it? Kubby/Lightning and wind, I think. Franklin/Lightning and wind, yes. Champion/It is wonderful. Norton/I bet you get wet walking through there. Some clown will step on the jets. O'Donnell/This really is going to be a nice addition to downtown. I think it is great. Lehman/Mike, do you think it is better than a hose and a bucket? O'Donnell/I supported that at first but I do like this. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #14 Page 43 Vanderhoef/I would just like to put out for sure that the artists have said that this design will come in at $70,000 which is in our budget to produce art. Kubby/I know that I was one of the many council people who were at the original presentation of the three artists who were selected by the selection committee to make proposals and then from those three, this Weatherdance was selected. And some of the people that were there, I am not quite sure why they didn't speak up because it was the time to speak up. But there were a couple of people who felt that this was too trite. That it was too easily grasped. That we needed something a little more abstract that would have more lasting power and I like the fact that I can explain it. I like the fact that this can become a feature that many of us could explain to become kind of a tourist thing. Let's go to the fountain and as part of being a host to people who come to town, whether they be intemational visitors or family and friends, I can talk about- You know, I know something about this and make the art accessible. I also like that it is basically perfectly fiat and so it is physically accessible for everybody in the community. There are a couple of things that I would love to see because I know this is just a concept. I would love to have the pool of water a little bigger so that people could wade in water without having to get near the jets. I hope that can be figured out and still have things work out in the artist's concept. The other thing that I suggested at the public meeting was that we have a little plaque which will come out- We have $75,000 I think in the plan for the artists concept and materials and they are at $70- for now. Although we know there might be some overruns. Take it out of that extra $5,000. A plaque that kind of has an artist statement so that their concept can be part of the work in perpetuity. The other thing I would really love us to do is either with this artist, and this is kind of an aside, to contract with them to get more sewer and water and storm water covers for all over downtown so it is maybe a consistent design in a certain area. Then maybe later have a contest for arts for other places in town because those two things are pretty mundane, storm water and waste water. But they are really an important function of what we do, dealing with those basic city services and make the mundane artful. I think it would be lovely. The other thing I really like is the fact that the four directions are in it. The weather and the four directions connect us to the past, they connect us to the future and bring us all together. So I really support this concept. O'Donnell/If we want more interaction with this fountain, maybe my garden hose and bucket could come into- Vanderhoef/One of the things that was important to me just to begin with, the whole concept, was the safety issue and I think we have addressed that nicely and a granite is a non-skid kind of material. So that wet granite is not going to hurt. Another thing that I was really very interested in is the fact that at times we can shut the jets off and expand the use of that public space for certain activities and This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #14 Page 44 not be worried about working around physical property that is sitting out there in the middle of the plaza. Lehman/I think it is important that we recognize that most of the things that we have expressed appreciation for is as a result of our Arts Advisory Committee and their effort in working with the folks who have designed this and they were interested in the kinds of things that we have been complimenting this project about. They did a great job and I certainly owe them a big thanks. Vanderhoef/Absolutely. Lehman/Roll call- (yes). Motion carded. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #15 Page 45 ITEM NO. 15 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION TEMPORARILY CLOSING A PORTION OF JEFFERSON STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT FOR TEMPORARY USE OF PUBLIC RIGHT- OF-WAY BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA. Lehman/(Reads agenda item #15). Moved by Thornberry, seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion. Norton/Now this is just the street? There is nothing or no interruption of the sidewalk there, fight? Just half of the street? One lane of the street, is that correct? Lehman/Well, it is in the temporary use and closure of city r.o.w. along Jefferson Street as necessary during construction to secure the site against pedestrian and vehicular traffic. Norton/Are they closing the sidewalk? The picture didn't look like that. Rick Fosse/There will be some closure of the sidewalk in there. Norton/This is the one by the Physics Building, yes? Fosse/Right and it will probably be for most of the duration of the project because they are going to have to stage the work from the sidewalk side so they aren't working out into the other lane of traffic. Lehman/And this is for about a period of three months? Fosse/ Yes. Now the work- They anticipate the work is going to occur in mid-winter. Now if the weather is kind to them, they will be able to put down the concrete base and insulate it and then put down a temporary asphalt surface until around the middle of April or early part of May where they will take up the temporary asphalt and put down hot mix which you can't get in the winter time and that is why that has been extended to May 10. It is to allow for that pavement restoration. If they do the work and it is very cold in January, then they are going to need to hold off on the concrete work even until around in April. Lehman/Is there- Karr/The comment has been changed to read that it is expected to be finished no later than May 10. Fosse/I am sorry, Ernie. Sometimes we get a break in the weather, most of the time we don't. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #15 Page 46 Vanderhoef/And they are aware that we just assume not have the street all dug up at graduation time? Fosse/That is fight. I talked to them about it today and they have the same concerns. Vanderhoef/I appreciate that. Lehman/I suspected you might have. Roll call- (yes). This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #16 Page 47 ITEM NO. 16 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH JAMES AND LORETTA CLARK, FOR TEMPORARY USE OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR A PORTION OF MARKET STREET IN IOWA CITY, IOWA. Lehman/(Reads agenda item #16). Moved by Thornberry, seconded by O'Donnell, Discussion. Norton/Now this is just sidewalk I take it? It doesn't get into the street this time? Vanderhoef/It is the r.o.w. Lehman/I think that is correct. Roll call- (yes). This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #17 Page 48 ITEM NO. 17 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FUNDING FOR THE AIRPORT COMMISSION TO PROCEED WITH CONSTRUTION OF A 120' BY 140' AIRCRAFT HANGAR BUILDING, INCLUDING 20' BY 60' OFFICE AREA, AT THE IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. Lehman/We have been asked by the Airport Commission to defer this item until November 3. Moved by Thornberry, seconded by Norton to defer to this until November 3. All in favor- (ayes). This item is deferred. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #18 Page 49 ITEM NO. 18 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO LEASE APPROXIMATELY 3.7 ACRES OF CITY-OWNED LAND ON THE LOWER PENINSULA TO THE BENEVOLENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS OF THE U.S.A. CORP., LODGE NO. 590 FOR USE AS A GOLF DRIVING RANGE, AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR NOVEMBER 3, 1998. Lehman/(Reads agenda item #18). Moved by Thomberry, seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion. Thornberry/We will need Steve to talk with the Elks. Lehman/I think from the discussion last night, they may be some things that we would be interested in exploring and negotiating with the Elks. But until such time that that negotiation takes place, we are agreeing to defer this. All in favor- (ayes). Item #18 is deferred. Karr/Could we have a motion to accept correspondence? Lehman/Moved by Norton, seconded by Vanderhoef, all in favor- (ayes). Carded. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #19 Page 50 ITEM NO. 19 CONSIDER A MOTION SETTING PUBLIC DISCUSSION FOR NOVEMBER 3, 1998, REQUESTING PUBLIC INPUT ON THE PROPOSED BALLOT LANGUAGE AND POLICY STATEMENT REGARDING THE IMPOSITION OF A LOCAL SALES TAX. Lehman/(Reads agenda item #19). Norton/Ernie, did you say November 37 Lehman/October 29, 7:00 in the evening. Moved by Thornberry, seconded by Vanderhoef. Kubby/And Mr. Mayor, we are doing two dates, October 29 and November 3 and that was what the motion was. Lehman/The hearing will be continued from the 29th until the 3rd but we will have- And that meeting will be discussion of the ballot language for the sales tax only. There will be no other items of business on the agenda. Kubby/On the 291h? Karr/On the 29th. Lehman/On the 29th. Karr/Just for clarification, you wanted it advertised for both dates? Lehman/That is fine. I think that is okay. It is also important to note that the discussion is going to be relative to the language for the ballot and the policy statement, not the pros and cons of the local option sales tax. All in favor- (ayes). Karr/Could we have a motion to accept correspondence? Lehman/Moved by Norton, seconded by Vanderhoef, all in favor- (ayes). Champion/Can I just ask a question relative to our last vote here? Lehman/yeah. Champion/If we advertise- It seems to me that we would advertise the p.h. for October 29 at 7:00 and that night we would continue it rather than advertise both days. Dilkes/The difference is that if you advertise for both days, you have to hold a p.h. for both days as opposed to advertising for one and then deciding whether you are This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #19 Page 51 going to continue it at that time. So you are- With the way- As we understand it, you have locked yourselves into p.h.s on both of those days. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #20 Page 52 ITEM NO. 20 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE IOWA CITY POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES. Lehman/This is an addition to the agenda. (Reads new agenda item #20). Norton/Move this item be deferred to November 17. Lehman/Moved by Norton, seconded by Thornberry. Discussion. Norton/Well, we just received the materials. We have hardly had time to digest them. Lehman/We haven't had time yet. So that is fight. Karr/Could I note for the record the reason you are deferring them is to allow staff time to review, not just that you got them. The City Attorney's Office had requested deferral to the 17th. I just want them to know that I put it on the agenda. Dilkes/We thought it best because there had been a recommendation to you from the PCRB to forward them to you now. But because we haven't had enough time to look at them, we need you to defer. Lehman/We will get the staff report and recommendation on the 17th? Dilkes/Right. Lehman/All in favor- (ayes). Motion carried. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #2 1 Page 5 3 ITEM NO. 2 1 ANNOUNCEMENT OF VACANCIES. Lehman/(Reads agenda item #21). There's a tremendous opportunity on eight different boards and commissions for folks in the community to become actively involved in city government. I certainly would encourage anyone who has an interest in any of those boards or commissions to contact any council member and we can certainly try to explain what the duties are, and for an application you can contact our city clerk in the civic center. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #23 Page 54 ITEM NO. 23 CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION Lehman/City Council Information. Who would like to be first? O'Donnell/I don't have a problem. Lehman/You don't have a problem? Well, would you like to be first? O'Donnell/I would like to be first. Last weekend was extremely busy, we had the Hospice Road Races. Tremendously successful I understand like a $150,000 dollars raised. Lehman/Right. O'Donnell/St. Wenceslaus had their annual turkey dinner and I understand like fifteen hundred people. Cub Scout Pack 210 had a pancake breakfast at St. Pat's, and these were all tremendously successful. Lehman/Iowa played Indiana, didn't they. O'Donnell/Iowa played Indiana. Thornberry/It wasn't too successful. Champion/And Indiana was very successful. O'Donnell / We won't talk about that. But is was a great weekend, a lot of things got accomplished, there was a great deal of spirit shown in Iowa City. I want to encourage everybody to attend the sale tax meeting the 29th and November 3rd. It's very important, we need your input. It's very important for the city. Champion/I just would really like to encourage everybody to vote. I feel strongly that we need more representation from people out there to vote. I also encourage people to vote to put women in the constitution. I know a lot of men think it's trivial but I get tired of being called he. Lehman/You're still a good guy. Thomberry/We like you. Kubby/I have a couple of the events that are happening for the Women's Resource and Action Center (WRAC). In the continuing series of social change series that we have been putting on- Monday, October 26th the nuts and bolts fundraising for Andy Robinson is kind of a fundraising guru for progressive organizations and This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #23 Page 55 social service nonprofits will be coming to town to impart some wisdom and help train us to raise more money more effectively. That's from nine to four, so that's an all day thing. It costs fifty dollars to do this, but there's also scholarships available and if you want to register you can call the WRAC and 335-1486. WRAC is also putting together, I think this is at least their second year of putting together a whole series of information about women and money. It's called Putting the Pieces Together, and the first one of the series is on October 28, on budgeting credit and privacy, at Hills Bank in Coralville from 6:30 to 8:30. Some of the other topics to watch out for are in January, investing and retirement planning, in March simple living, in April planned giving and in June the legal aspects of domestic partnerships. These are a couple of things coming up that you might be interested in. At Hickory Hill today, which is a normal event in my life, Boy Scout Troop number 230, the folks working on their eagle badges were again out there putting all the downed trees that have been turned into chips, and putting them onto the trails. It was very much appreciated, and I got to speak to some of them, they were having a good time and it takes a lot of energy to fill the wheelbarrows, haul the wheelbarrows up to all these remote places, and do it again and again and again. So their energy is appreciated and I hope it helps them get their eagle badge. We had something in our work session minutes which we didn't vote on this formally, but there was definitely a majority of people wanted to do this, and that is supporting the Iowa City Downtown Association requests for six thousand dollars to purchase decorative lights. I guess I just wanted to formally and publicly protest, not the lights themselves, but the particular amount of money. We have agencies who vie for smaller amounts of money that have to go through a budgeting process and a public hearing and filling out budget form process for the city before they can even vie for any city dollars. I don't mind participating in this. We participate with some supervised staff time, we participate in paying the electricity bill, and we participated maintaining the lights once they're up. I think those are really important parts of a parmership, and I wouldn't even mind donating half the cost of the lights, which would be three thousand dollars. But I do object to paying the full cost of the lights. I think that the Iowa City Downtown Association and its members and even its nonmembers should participate in this partnership and just basking in the lights but should help pay for them as well. I know I'm in the minority although I'm not a minority of one on this issue. I know that. Norton/You aren't a minority of one, no. Kubby/No, I'm not a minority of one. Norton/There are several who share your thoughts. O'Donnell/You're definitely a minority. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #23 Page 56 Norton/That's right. Kubby/Well. You can take that many ways. Norton/I want to add- Kubby/I have more things to comment on the lights. Norton/Yeah, go ahead. I thought you were wound up. Kubby/Some of the decisions that we made two years ago just brought up a bunch of things in talking about the vote on the parking ramp, and taking down the Harmon building in Eastlawn to commercial historic buildings. Asking Mercy Hospital to not act so quickly on demolishing two historical buildings on the comer of Gilbert and Bloomington, and saying no to that. Which I think is not a very community spirited decision, and wish that they would choose to behave differently to get some of the more realistic amount of time to react differently to those houses that are being demolished. And maybe to start thinking about commercial historic districts. We kind of have focused on residential historic districts, and I know that the surveying historical commercial districts is on the pending lists of historic preservation commission, and it hasn't been rising very fast to the top. Before more redevelopment happens downtown, before redevelopment happens out of Burlington Street, I would really like to see them to a survey of those areas for historic buildings so that before a project is before us we can have the information about the significance of the buildings. I would hope that there would be a majority of people on council would want to, I wouldn't want to direct them to say this is your top priority, but to say we'd like to see this move along, and that they can decide their exact priority. But to say that there's some interest in council in looking at some commercial historic properties downtown and south of Burlington specifically. Norton/I would think it would be nice to have that if they can handle it. I don't know where they'd put it, but I think we should have it. I would be very nice to know ahead of time. Champion/There is some work being done on the Noahside about the historic commercial district there, and it's difficult to get enough qualifying buildings to be designated and I think there's a couple buildings that apply, so that may happen over there. It would not include those houses on Eastlawn. Kubby/But we could also, I mean we have this local landmark designation as well as the national one that a whole district because there's not enough contributing buildings, at least those buildings could be designated. Pass that on to the Historic Preservation Commission that there' s some interest on that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #23 Page 57 Thornberry/Would that be a voluntary thing with the building owner, Karen? Or would it be mandatory that they- Kubby/Well it matters how it all comes down, I mean if it's a historic district, historically how it's done, and I think it's dictated by the ordinance, that the majority of people who live in that district or the individual designation- it was the most properties from the first batch of designations we did were voluntarily were wanting to do it and a couple people protested, and then we voted on whether we would keep those people who protested in, and I can remember what happened. Thornberry/The ones that did not want to be in the historic buildings registry did not have to be. Norton/Oh yeah, that's right, that was individual buildings. Thornberry/Right. Norton/I think I would support that, Karen, I think that we're starting our capitol improvements review, that might help us identify some particular areas that we wanted to take a look at sooner rather than later. Some of the activities we're planning might- In other words, there are so many places they might look. I might help tell them look, we are thinking about this particular area, could you take a look at some of the structures there. I think we need that. Kubby/I mean, so is there enough interest in council to ask Historic Preservation to just talk about this. I mean, it is on their pending list. Norton/Give it a little more attention, obviously. Kubby/I have one last thing and I have gifts for you tonight. It is not really that exciting of a gift. It is a booklet. I have one for Madan, for the public record, and an extra one for Steve, too. And what this is and I have lots of these at home. So it would be available for the public. It is a study done by a group called the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy for the State of Iowa and it is called Choices For Iowa, Building a Better Tax System and you know, taxes are kind of boring and people fill overwhelmed by them. But a lot decisions we make in terms of lobbying our legislator in terms of deciding how to tax health, what is the appropriate source of money for certain kinds of projects. What the state offers us is important for us to understand and these folks used to be called Citizens for Tax Justice and I don't know if that rings a bell for anybody but anyone who wants one of these documents can call me at home. I am in the phonebook. My last name begins with a K. And these folks are notorious for not dumbing down the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #23 Page 58 information but stating it in a way that you can understand what is going on and they have a lot of understandable charts and graphs and one of them that really stood out for me is one that basically states that over the last six years, some of the tax changes at the state level have really done nothing for- What is so funny? Thomberry/Go ahead, Karen, we are listening. Kubby/People were laughing, I didn't think taxes were that funny. That for- Thornberry/I was just getting tired. Kubby/That for middle income and lower income, the tax structure has either put a higher percentage of burden of taxes on them or have done nothing for them in terms of tax cuts or tax raises. But for upper income Iowans, that taxes have been reduced and I think that that information is really important because we have got an election coming November 3. I think it is important to ask candidates what they think about this, if they think it is fair. What they propose they do about it, one direction or another or nothing. I think it is important for us to understand Iowa's tax system better so that we can be more effective lobbyist on issues that are important to cities across the State of Iowa. I encourage you to read this and if anybody wants a copy, get a hold of me. Lehman/Karen, do you know who funded this study? Kubby/You know, I don't know how they get their money. It is Citizens For Tax Justice. They are definitely not a fight wing group, I will tell you that. It is a grant from the Joyce Foundation in Chicago but I don't know the Joyce Foundation or what their politics are. O'Donnell/(Can't hear). Kubby/Yeah, they have some mistakes in their graph so there was a delay in putting this out. So they had to, by hand, put in the correct graphs in there so they weren't putting out false information. Norton/I want to add comments on three additional events, Mike, that took place last weekend. It was a busy weekend indeed. One, the open house at the Park House up on Jefferson Street which anybody can walk by and enjoy and see the benefits of Hodge Construction people did in renovating that structure. The inside is obviously new but the outside is really, I think, a beautiful example. The Historic Preservation Commission had an interesting Saturday morning workshop called Old House Forum and a very very fascinating discussion, discussing how you could take care of an older house, how you can put on additions, how you can paint and how you shouldn't. It was extremely interesting and a good crowd, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #23 Page 59 amidst all the rain. And there were a couple of open houses at the new Crisis Center Building last week on Tuesday and Thursday. There is a wonderful new facility for the Crisis Center that they have needed for years. They are a couple of coming events, particularly one that I want to mention. Obviously the Human Rights Breakfast in Thursday morning. I think reservations were due for that already. That is coming up Thursday morning. PCRB is having another forum, an open forum, on Tuesday, October 27 from 7:00 to 9:00 in the Newman Center. Again, seeking input from the community about issues related to the police in our community and that is open to the public. That is October 27, 7:00 to 9:00. This one is being held at the Newman Center. They had asked particularly to hold some of these meetings in facilities other than the city because some people may feel intimidated, if you wish, coming into any city facility. So they are going to hold some in different places around the community. Lehman/That is also the night of our CIP. Norton/Oh, I know. I want to add that we start our work on the CIP program and this usually gets into commitments of one kind or another towards large projects that have huge implications and I encourage people who want to hear that discussion. I don't think they get to talk but they can hear us talk which I am sure will be delightful about these issues. That starts on Tuesday night as well at 6:00. Doesn't it begin at 6:00? So we have ample time. I will stop with that. Other issues I will talk to Steve about. I am still concerned about downtown lighting. I still think it is- I feel like I am inside the HyVee or a surgery ward down there. I think we need to think about it. Champion/It is going to be toned down, good. Lehman/I don't think so. Most of the comments I have had- Norton/I don't know. The man is going to be in town this week and they are going to discuss the whole business, I think. Lehman/Most of the comments that I have received from folks who have been downtown thoroughly love it. O'Donnell/That is everything I have heard, too. Lehman/Get sunglasses for council people. Kubby/There is varying opinions about that up here. Thornberry/I thought you said you were downtown the other night and thought it was already toned down and it wasn't. You thought it was fine. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #23 Page 60 Norton/Wait until the trees are gone and nothing but snow down there. You guys will have eye problems. Lehman/We will get the snow removed. Vanderhoef/Okay, I will just add one more thing. I hope you are looking at adding the lights all the way out to 1-80. I would like to make an entry statement with lights coming in from 1-80 which would also address some of the concerns that I heard at the Student Senate at the University and their concern about lighting out along the- CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 98-116 SIDE 2 Vanderhoef/Across from the Mayflower. So I hope we can find someway to do this in our budget. I have two or three things. A couple of meetings, actually. One of them is tomorrow. We have been notified by the county and invited to come to the library tomorrow between 3:00 and 5:00 to meet Lisa Dewey who is the new director of the para-transit system called SEATS. And we, at the early part of the meeting, if you caught it then, PATV will be having their open house on the 23rd. At 2:00 PM will be the ribbon cutting of their new location at 621 South Dubuque. Then a couple of other things. I will be attending the National League of Cities, December 1 - 6. That means I will be missing a formal council meeting on the 1st. If I go later than that, then I will miss my committee meeting of the National Energy, Environment and Natural Resources Committee meeting. So I will be absent on the 1 Norton/Can I ask? Is anybody else going to that. I may go to the latter part of it, not the first part. But it runs through the 6th doesn't it? Vanderhoef/It runs through the 6th. Karr/Not at this point, no. Kubby/I also will be gone at that same council meeting. So we will be down to five. Norton/If I go, I won't go until after the council meeting. Vanderhoef/Okay, the committee meets on 9:00 Wednesday morning. So ifI stay for a council meeting I miss the other one. Kubby/You would have to drive all night. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #23 Page 61 Vanderhoef/I would be real good in the morning. I also have been notified this week by the State League of Cities president that I have been reappointed to the state legislative committee for another year. Kubby/Good, thank you, congratulations. Vanderhoef/Thank you. Here is the biggest thing for congratulations. Not to be out done by our mayor. On October 7 my son and daughter-in-law, Jill and Curt Vanderhoef, delivered me a new baby gift granddaughter, Diane Christine. Lehman/Congratulations. Vanderhoef/Thank you. Norton/I thought you were going to say twins there for a minute. Lehman/I have still got you beat. Vanderhoef/You have got twins, I know. I have good three girl babies, granddaughters. Lehman/Mr. Thornberry. Thomberry/Dee, I thought you were going to mention the railroad tracks on 6th Avenue are completed, on Highway 6 by-pass. They closed the street for a week and got the railroad done. I thought you were going to mention that. Norton/Did it hurt your business? Thornberry/I was- It hurt the Burger King business on Boyrum considerably again. This is the second year in a row I have been down. I thought I would be filing a claim with the city. Several others have done that and have gotten big bucks. Everybody else went up I am sure because I didn't have much business because of Highway 6 by-pass. But anyway, it is open now. Norton/The detour worked better than I expected. Thornberry/The detour was a disaster. It is done now. I noticed that Captain Irish Parkway is ready to be poured, is that fight? I mean, they have the little things sticking out of the ground- They have got it all drained and everything. I think it is ready to pour. They put them on the ground- It is inside the cement once it is poured. Atkins/You mean like the re-bar? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #23 Page 62 Thornberry/The little things. Atkins/The re-bar. Thomberry/The reinforcing bars are all in place. Looks like they are going to be pouring soon. The last thing I have got is I am going to be presenting Bob Bowlsby a scholarship in the name of a current student athlete at the pre-game show of the Wisconsin game and this is a scholarship presented by Burger King Corporation and all of the Burger King franchises and I will be presenting that on field to Bob Bowlsby for the Wisconsin game. That will be fun. Vanderhoef/That will be fun. Lehman/That is significant. I have a couple of things that haven't been mentioned. I know most people think everything possible has already been mentioned. Believe it or not there are a couple that haven't. The Deer Task Force will be meeting tomorrow at 5:30 PM and that is a group that has done a stellar job of working with the community in trying to control the deer problem that we have. I know that at least their plans are to have a harvesting or shooting of the deer in January. But they are going to be discussing that and I am sure other issues tomorrow at 5:50 PM. Is it here in this room? I think it is. Then I have something that I just can't keep from you any longer. Sometime ago the council agreed that a police dog might be a good thing for our police force for building searches and various other things that are commonly used in a number communities in the state and around the country with some tremendous success. And we agreed that we would fund a police dog. My understanding is that R. J. has contacted a place in Minneapolis where the dog will be coming from I believe the first of the year. We also, at that time, I was contacted by a number of folks who expressed an interest in helping to fund the animal. Today I was told that the Johnson County Independent Insurance Agents have agreed to fund this dog to the tune of $10,000. O'Donnell/That is fantastic. Lehman/That is the first contribution. We have sent out a number of letters and I am personally extremely gratified. I think that we- I think that it is a great thing for the Police Department and I am really pleased to know that there is public support for this dog which I think will be a great thing for the people of the community and for the police force. The first contribution I received the message by phone. I was called yesterday and they told me today we are going to decide how much to give, not whether or not to contribute. And after their meeting today I received a call they are going to be giving $10,000. Thornberry/Do you know what the on-going cost of this dog is going to be? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #23 Page 63 Lehman/I do not know what the on-going cost of the dog is. I do know that they also asked what that cost was and my take on that is they may be interested in helping us maintain it. Champion/You could have an endowment fund. Vanderhoef/There are a lot of other people who have offered. Kubby/And for replacement in seven years. Isn't that about what they are lasting? Vanderhoef/And there are others that want to or are planning to donate. Lehman/Well, I have some rather enthusiastic support from folks. We have just sent letters. I am really optimistic that this will be a very very successful campaign. Vanderhoef/I am too. Thank you. Norton/It will be a multi-purpose dog. Lehman/Right. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098 #24 Page 64 ITEM NO. 24 REPORT ON ITEMS FROM THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY. Atkins/If Dee Vanderhoef was on the legislative committee of the League and I am on the executive board, does that make me her boss? Lehman/Do we have a motion to adjourn? Moved and seconded (Norton/O'Donnell). All in favor- (ayes). Meeting is adjourned. Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of October 20, 1998 F102098