HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-05-16 TranscriptionMay 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 1 of 47
May 16, 2005
City Council Work Session
6:00 PM
Council: Bailey, Champion, Elliott, Lehman, O'Donnell, Vanderhoef, Wilbum
UISG Representative: Jeremy Schreiber
Staff: Atkins, Davidson, Dilkes, Helling, Franklin, Karr, Nasby, Schaffer, Winkelhake
Tape: 05-32
Plannin~ & Zonine
A.) CONSIDER A MOTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR JUNE 7
ON AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY
ZONE AND A SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR MWD
DAVIS ADDITION (REZ05-00001)
Franklin: First is setting a public heating on June 7 on a sensitive areas overlay for the
Davis addition - this is where the Menard's goes.
B.) CONSIDER A MOTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR JUNE 7
ON AN ORDINANCE REZONING APPROXIMATELY 25.67 ACRES BY
AMENDING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT HOUSING OVERLAY -
LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (OPDH-5) PLAN IN
ORDER TO ALLOW ADDITIONAL ZERO LOT LINE DWELLINGS
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON WINTERGREEN DRIVE (REZ04-
00017/SUB04-00017)
Franklin: Second item is setting a public hearing on June 7 on the rezoning of twenty-five
acres in South Village Green. This is one that you've had before. It went back to
Planning and Zoning. It's been revised and is coming back to you.
C.) CONSIDER A MOTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR JUNE 7
ON A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ANNEXATION OF
APPROXIMATELY 29.7 ACRES OF TERRITORY LOCATED NORTH
EAST OF HIGHWAY 218 ADJACENT TO DEER CREEK ROAD IN
NORTH WEST IOWA CITY (ANN05-00001)
Franklin: Item C is setting a public hearing for June 7 on a resolution annexing
approximately 29 acres. This is west of the Clear Creek property that we looked
at as part of the Camp Cardinal Road project. That whole master plan envisioned
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 2 of 47
some annexation to the west of our current corporate boundaries near Highway
218. This is taking our corporate limits all the way to 218.
D.) AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY AMENDING THE
SOUTH CENTRAL DISTRICT PLAN TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND
USE MAP DESIGNATION AND PLAN TEXT TO CHANGE THE
AVIATION COMMERCE PARK DESIGNATION FROM INTENSIVE
COMMERCIAL TO RETAIL / COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL.
E.) CONDITIONALLY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF
APPROXIMATELY 54 ACRES FROM PUBLIC/INTENSIVE
COMMERCIAL (P/CI-1) ZONE TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC-
2) ZONE FOR AVIATION COMMERCE PARK. (REZ05-00004)
Franklin: Okay, item D then is the big issue for your public hearing tomorrow night and this
and the following item are relative to Aviation Commerce Park. The
comprehensive plan amendment to change Aviation Commerce Park from
Intensive Commercial to Community Commercial. The maps that are before you
illustrate the change. It is to change it from this shade...from kind of purplish-red
to...from magenta to cranberry. There are some language changes within the text
that just make it then consistent with this change. Obviously the difference is the
type of uses that we would have there and this change is precipitated by our
discussions of having retail in this area as opposed to commercial intensive uses.
Are there are any questions about the comp plan changes?
Elliott: Which one of these relate to the series of memos that are later on in our materials
regarding the -
Lehman: Conditional zoning.
Franklin: The zoning. Item E, Bob.
Elliott: Thanks.
Franklin: The detail of it really is in Item E, which is the rezoning then from CIP/CI1 to
CC2. That denotes two things. One is the change of land use from the
commercial intensive to the community commercial and also, even though we still
own the property, what it signals is our intent to market all of that property for
community commercial use or retail. That's it, I guess. With this rezoning, the
recommendation that comes to you from the Planning and Zoning Commission,
on a vote of 4-1, Shannon voting No, is a conditional zoning which includes
provisions that are in the conditional zoning agreement in your packet, relative to
sidewalk and pedestrian improvements. That's a sidewalk along Ruppert
Road .... remember this is for all of Aviation Commerce Park. A sidewalk along
Ruppert Road to get to the park...the thinking being that there are going to be
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 3 of 47
more pedestrians in this area wanting to come in to this area from the Lodge -
which is one area for sure - but as this develops as retail, the expectation that
there will be more of these populations that are on the north side of Highway 1
wanting to get in here and quite likely many of them on foot. Landscaping and
screening requirements that would apply to every lot on the site. Street and
intersection improvements. We have the relocation of Ruppert Road to the north.
A left turn lane on Ruppert Road to Highway 1 and possible future signalization
of Ruppert Road at 921 or Old Riverside Drive. Then the last standard is design
standards for large retailers. Those standards are enumerated in the conditional
zoning agreement that is included in your packet and I won't go into those in
detail. This is the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, as I
said by a vote of 4-1.
Lehman: How many of these conditions were discussed with Walmart when we were
negotiating the sale of this property?
Franklin: The street improvements were discussed. The pedestrian access to Highway 1
was discussed. Landscaping and screening not specifically and design standards
for large retailers not specifically.
Lehman: Why weren't those things addressed at the time?
Franklin: Design for large retailers came up at the Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting. I mean...I think an important thing to remember here is that these
standards are for the entire Aviation Commerce Park, however, it should develop.
As we took it to the Commission, the Commission directed us to put together
standards for big box retail. We have taken standards that are used across the
nation and incorporated those.
Lehman: Do we have any reaction from the purchaser to the conditional zoning agreement?
Franklin: From Walmart?
Lehman: Yeah.
Franklin: I have been working with the site designer, the landscape architect and the
architect for the project. None of them have given me any reason to believe that
they will not be able to comply with these standards. They have not raised it as a
red flag. They have been aware of these as it's gone through the Commission.
They have the standards in detail. Whether they can speak for Walmart or not, I
can't say. All I can say is that my communications with them have been such that
they have not reacted to these standards in any negative fashion.
Bailey: But Walmart has seen these standards across the country. I'm assuming that this
isn't the first time that they have...I mean, adaptive reuse is a really smart way for
communities to ensure that we don't have big boxes sitting empty.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 4 of 47
Franklin: As I presented these standards...the building design standards, specifically, to the
architect...she said, 'We deal with these all the time.' Any questions?
F.) CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE REZONING APPROXIMATELY 29.26
ACRES FROM INTERIM DEVELOPMENT RESIDENTIAL ZONE (ID-
RS) TO PART LOW DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE
(RS-5-10.92 ACRES) AND PART MEDIUM DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL ZONE (RS-8-i8.34 ACRES), SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS,
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON SOUTH SYCAMORE STREET NORTH
OF SOUTHPOINT SUBDIVISION. (SECOND CONSIDERATION)
Franklin: Moving on Item F. This is second consideration for rezoning for a property on
Sycamore Southpoint Subdivision or Brookland Pointe, 106-lot residential. That
is the end of the Planning and Zoning items.
Lehman: Looks like you're still up.
Franklin: I am, but give me a second here...talk amongst yourselves. I need to get the right
program going.
E.) CONDITIONALLY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF
APPROXIMATELY 54 ACRES FROM PUBLIC/INTENSIVE
COMMERCIAL (P/CI-1) ZONE TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC-
2) ZONE FOR AVIATION COMMERCE PARK. (REZ05-00004)
Dilkes: While Karin is doing that....the conditional zoning agreement that is in your
packet...as you know...from other re-zonings we've done that are subject to
conditions...the conditional zoning agreement or any other additional conditions
have to be imposed prior to the close of the public hearing by agreement. This is
a little odd situation because we're the land owner here, but I think that if the
Council is included to impose those conditions as part of the rezoning, that should
be done before the close of the public hearing and I think you can do it by motion
authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign the conditional zoning
agreement prior to the close of the public hearing.
Lehman: Right, but if we close the public heating, can we have first consideration of a
conditional zoning agreement before it's signed?
Dilkes: No, no, no...you're not going to do first consideration of the conditional zoning
agreement. You're going to do first consideration of the rezoning. If you have
imposed the conditions prior to the close of the public hearing, that will be with
conditions. If you have not, it will be without conditions.
Elliott: We would have to do that tonight?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 5 of 47
Lehman: Tomorrow.
Elliott: I don't think that I am going to be ready to vote on that tomorrow.
Dilkes: If you want to have more discussion about it, you can certainly continue the
public hearing.
Elliott: That I would like to do.
Lehman: Or we may come to a resolution tomorrow night.
Elliott: That could be, I may be the only one.
Champion: As usual.
Elliott: He he.
Lehman: Okay.
Davidson: Are we ready to go here, Mr. Mayor?
Lehman: Yes.
F.) CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE REZONING APPROXIMATELY 29.26
ACRES FROM INTERIM DEVELOPMENT RESIDENTIAL ZONE (ID-
RS) TO PART LOW DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE
(RS-5-10.92 ACRES) AND PART MEDIUM DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL ZONE (RS-8-18.34 ACRES), SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS,
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON SOUTH SYCAMORE STREET NORTH
OF SOUTHPOINT SUBDIVISION. (SECOND CONSIDERATION)
Davidson: Before we get to the fun part of this...Karin's part...I just wanted to say a couple
of things.., sort of in general about the subject of Burlington Street that we're
going to discuss here tonight. We have a very interesting presentation for you
that I have to admit...I never cease to be mazed at some of the things we can do
with technology now. Burlington Street corridor through downtown and is
something that we have kind of grappled with...various issues at one time or
another.., certainly with the near south side redevelopment neighborhood taking
off and the things that we can see just coming up here shortly, it becomes even
more of an issue of exactly how Burlington Street fits it. I think you all will recall
that maybe six months ago the Council on Disabilities Group at the UI Law
School contacted us about some specific pedestrian issues that they had in terms
of people crossing perpendicularly to Burlington Street. We were able to do some
things that I think have really helped that situation with the countdown timers, the
signage indicating the vehicles must yield to a pedestrian in the crosswalk and
also adjusting some of the crosswalk timings. We have had very positive
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 6 of 47
feedback. Of course, a lot of people don't think that that goes far enough, others
think that it goes too far...and so we're trying to strike a balance here. The notion
of making this corridor into something that is an enhancement to what it is
currently. It's something that Karin and I have talked about a lot and we have a
concept here that sort of takes that to the next step. Now, what I wanted to
emphasize right up front is that this is State Highway 1, we can't do anything
terribly detrimental to vehicular traffic because ultimately Iowa DOT has the
authority over this. We are very pleased to tell you that we have done a traffic
study looking at the capacity of the roadway and I think we're all aware that
we're dealing with 25,000 vehicles a day, up to almost as many as 30,000 a day
when you get down to the bridge. We do have a few more lanes down there. The
point is we're not going to be running a lot more traffic through Burlington Street.
If you look at our volumes currently as compared to 2030 - which we used in our
analysis - there is not a terrible great deal of difference. At peak periods we're at
our maximum capacity but we do think that we can do some enhancements, which
Karin is going to go through with you, conceptually that we can do them and still
maintain adequate traffic capacity and make this into a more pedestrian friendly
corridor. Karin will elaborate on some of those things. The DOT, we're very
pleased to tell you, has bought into this concept. It's nothing but a concept
currently. We will have to show them a specific plan if and when we have a
specific plan and that will be of course with your guidance. Conceptually they
have said that in the context of downtown Iowa City, they think that what we're
proposing might be very appropriate. So, we are very pleased with that. We did
want you to know that we have taken those traffic aspects of it into consideration.
So, with that, any questions about that stuff before we launch into the simulation?
Well, then let's launch into it.
Franklin: Launch. (Laughter) Okay. This is a simulation that was put together by a class
at the Department of Urban and Regional Planning at the University. Dr. Allen
Peters called me about a possible project for his class to work on and this is the
one that I chose. What we did is that we kind of imagined Burlington Street many
years hence. At this point, we're coming up Burlington from the West, past the
Old Capitol Ramp and coming to the intersection of Clinton and Burlington
Street. On the left is the imagining of what it would be like to have a large urban
building on that comer and likewise the Hieronymus Project on the right hand
side on that comer. As you proceed down Burlington Street, what we're seeing
here is the median that would be proposed with plantings or something in the
center of it. Now, hang on your hats here...you need your Motrin...Motrin?
Whatever that thing is that you take for motion sickness. Dramamine. Yeah,
because this can kind of send you off. This is an interesting way to see how you
can imagine a building put in our downtown even though it isn't there now and
what it would potentially look like. Obviously here you're looking at a birds-eye
view and now we're coming to Dubuque Street and where the transportation
center - look, it's done! - coming around the Clark project which is there. Then
we've done a little bit of fantasizing as to what might be here in the future. The
Firestone building - pardon me?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 7 of 47
Champion: White storage buildings?
Franklin: Well, no, don't .... ignore the white ones that are not finished yet. Here, the
building on the right is the Firestone Building but re-imagined as a four-story
urban structure and then the one that is just east of there is the telephone building.
That is from a picture that we have of what building was there before that blank-
walled huge thing was built. We think it might be underneath the skin. We're not
sure of that. Obviously we wouldn't know until we took it down.
Lehman: You're going through a red light. (Laughter)
Franklin: Yes, but you can do that in this kind of thing!
Lehman: RJ's here, ! saw it! (Laughter)
Franklin: This is so cool, too. Well, we're going the speed limit or slower. We're going to
spin back the other way...we're doing a U-ey in the middle of Burlington and
Gilbert and kind of trying not to hit that pole and coming back down the street.
You can get a sense here of what I might look. Obviously. We're not talking
about the City going in an creating these new buildings but what we would be
talking about as far as the City project and enhancements to Burlington Street is
the median that Jeff spoke of. As he's said, we've done some traffic study's
already to look at it in terms of lengths of those left turn bays, which are an
important part...and now we're going to go on around the transportation center
and away from Burlington Street. This is not exactly how the transportation
center is going to be because you don't see the outdoor play area of the daycare
center. I wanted to give you an idea of a tool that we can use to simulate what the
future might look like when we have projects now that are proposing a specific
building...not maybe with this program where you have the movie...but we do
have another software program that we'll be using in my department that will
enable us to place that building in the context so that you'll have a sense of what
is going to be there as we look at other projects. What we want...would like from
you all at this point is just to know whether you want us to pursue any further
looking at the enhancement's on Burlington Street, specifically the median
enhancement. It's not something that you need to decide tonight. We won't be
doing any more work on it unless we get direction from you that you'd like to see
that happen. DOT was quite enthusiastic about, which as Jeff said we were
pleasantly surprised. One of the things that they are enthused about is the fact that
you would be controlling some of the traffic movements on Burlington Street and
thus making it safer. Also, that median has the opportunity for channelizing
pedestrians, getting them to the comers and we would need to put something in
those medians to make that actually work.
Lehman: Isn't that a relatively inexpensive sort of project? The medians?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 8 of 47
Franklin: Yes.
Lehman: I mean, it's not like putting in a new street?
Franklin: Heavens no.
Lehman: I think it's fantastic. I love it.
Bailey: (Can't hear) currently to put in a median as designed?
Davidson: What we've done...and we have...we went block by block and figured out how
long the left turn lanes need to be and it varies as you might imagine and it results
in these relative small but I think workable mid-block portions that could be
something, as Karin said, could be designed in such a way that pedestrians could
not go through them...and could be perhaps with a low-maintenance type of
vegetation be very attractive. As we have been working on this the last year or
eighteen months, I've tried, when I've been out places, and all of you travel...I
was down at Hot Springs, Arkansas last summer and there was arterial, very
similar to this, Central Avenue in Hot Springs...beautifully landscaped...of
course their climate is a little bit different down there...beautifully
landscape...very high volume...very, very high volume... I would dare say as
high a volume as Burlington Street perhaps. Everything from Fleur Drive in Des
Moines to Michigan Avenue near Millenium Park in Chicago...they've done
some very nice landscaping. A little bit larger scale, obviously...but this sort of
thing of trying to put an arterial street in to a context that it's not such an
expressway is something that a lot of communities are doing and deeming
appropriate for a downtown setting where you want pedestrians to be a little more
comfortable.
Bailey: Is it a problem for snow plowing or emergency vehicles? I mean, because now
emergency vehicles if they have three lanes can actually theoretically swing
around.
Davidson: Uhhm...that's a good question. We see the notion that there are several alleys,
they're not in every block, but there are several alleys through this corridor that
you would no longer be able to go left out...now, we consider that a positive thing
in terms of traffic safety because that's probably you're most dangerous
movement along the corridor is the uncontrolled left out. Those would all be right
in, right now. I guess, Regenia, to the degree that an emergency vehicle would
use that...you wouldn't be able to do that any more.
Franklin: I think the next steps we would take, if you want us to go forward with this, is we
would have conversations with property owners that are going to be affected by
this, in terms of having right in, right out. There's probably only about two or
three. We'd also have to look at the emergency services, we'd have to look at a
more refined design for this - taking into consideration cost and maintenance.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 9 of 47
Then, it would be working it in to our capital improvements program that would
come before the Council if we were to continue on this...probably in January or
February.
Elliott: The things in the middle...the medians as you call it...are you looking at those
functionally as safety islands or just something to divide traffic? I grew up with
safety islands and it seems to me, especially with some elder people for whom it
takes a great deal of time to cross the street having them be safety islands would
be an appropriate way to go.
Franklin: We'd have to look at whether we could do that. I don't want to mislead you into
thinking that we absolutely could because with the left turn lane...these get rather
narrow at the point at which you would want people crossing.., so it's something
that we'd have to look into as to how we would work that into it and still maintain
that left turn lane and I frankly don't know at this point, Bob.
Davidson: Those things are about four feet wide where the left turn lane sets, so they would
provide a refuge area - but obviously a relatively narrow one.
Bailey: They would channelize pedestrians so they cross as particular area.
Franklin: They could. Now, you'd have to put something in them as you look at even that
illustration that is up on the screen now. In the center part, yeah. Anywhere
where it narrows down to this four-foot wide space you couldn't put any kind of-
well I suppose you could put a barrier...but then it wouldn't have the function of
the cross - that's another thing we'd have to look at is how to design it such that it
would channelize to the extent that we wanted it to.
Davidson: We all know, Melrose Avenue and Iowa Avenue, you can walk across those
medians because the curb is a standard curb height. If you make the curb height
higher or you plan something in it that enables you to not walk through it then
maybe we can accomplish that, if that's what we decide to do.
Bailey: Something that would make is safer along that corridor.
Vanderhoef: When you say it narrows down...just this schematic right there makes it look like
the westbound traffic as only one lane.
Davidson: Yeah, there's no pavement markings on there. We're not talking about changing
any of the lane widths. Existing curbs would remain exactly where they are.
We've got 12 foot lanes, 14 foot center lane...what would happen is that that
center lane...you'd carve out the parts that you need...right now it's a continuous
left turn lane...you'd carve out the parts that you need for left turn lanes and what
remains is what would become your median islands.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 10 of 47
Franklin: We've got a lot of left turn lane storage in this one because this is where
Burlington would intersect with Clinton, so you see that narrow part there.
Davidson: Even though it looks like single lane, we're talking about the same number of
lanes.
Franklin: This is three lanes with the turn and then two on the other.
Elliott: I really like the idea that his impedes jaywalking and I hope that you do look at
the possibility of them being safety islands. I think that would be good. It's
going to be simply more attractive too, but it will be most of all functional.
Franklin: Yes. What I was going to say too is another aspect of this is to collaborate with
the University on what they're doing with the rec center and their crossings.
When you think about it, this would be a major entrance into downtown Iowa
City as you're coming across the Burlington Street bridge. Think of what you see
now and what you could possibly see in the future.
Davidson: Karin did raise a good point that through JCCOG, the University has actually
already requested this design to be taken down to the bridge. We stopped it
Madison. In conjunction with their new rec center that they're building on the
corner of Burling and Madison, they're very concerned about pedestrians from the
Quad, Hillscrest, Reinow side of Burlington getting across the street to that rec
center. They see this as something that can possibly be a design solution - as
least getting towards that.
Franklin: Okay?
Lehman: Are we okay with it? That's a go.
Vanderhoef: Thank the students for their work.
Franklin: It's fascinating how they do that.
Lehman: Okay, agenda items.
AGENDA ITEMS
ITEM 16. COMMUNITY COMMENT
Elliott: I called Dale this afternoon and told him that I...there is going to have to be more
information for me to cause me to vote yet on the Mediacom agreement to go
thirteen years. I think with that technology virtually exploding at this time, to
sign an agreement for thirteen years is just not appropriate.
Bailey: Can we spend a little time on that?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 11 of 47
Lehman: Yes, Dale, would you like to respond?
Helling: Sure.
Lehman: Why don't you come on up.
Helling: Certainly the question of the length or the duration of the franchise is one that you
may have different opinions on. Basically, we took the approach after we had
started to discuss this matter with the Mediacom folks...given where it looked
like the final agreement would go that we should try for a little longer term. A
couple of things about it that I'll mention: 1) We did, in the current franchise and
in this new one, I think we require pretty much everything that we can require of
the cable company under federal law in terms of technology, customer service
standards...a lot of that is set by the FCC as well as the rate-regulation issue. We
did include a state-of-the-art clause that basically if they increase the technology
and sort of modernize the other systems that they have in the surrounding area
that at some point in time that it triggers a requirement to do upgrades in Iowa
City the same way that they do the other systems - assuming that they would do
those before they did ours. One of the very important things is that it does
maintain the current level of support of local access. That's always been a high
priority in Iowa City and it's one where they certainly exceed the federal
minimum for how they have to support local access. There are some service
enhancements, if you've gone through that list that I sent you about a month or
two ago and I've sent you another copy of it, involving the emergency response
system. Also, they're going to help pay for some additional origination sites if we
want to do more cable casting of things going on downtown and some public
service announcements that they're willing to give us. Also, I think very
important, and it's not real obvious, but frequently they have short-term - well,
not frequently but unfortunately...well, less-frequently that they used to have -
they have short-term outages and it used to be that if a person's service was
interrupted then that person couldn't request any kind of rebate unless it was out
for eighteen hours and that goes down to four hours and the cable company is
pretty comfortable with that because of their ability now to minimize those kinds
of outages. I think one more thing I'll just mention and that's the...I believe, the
flexibility that is built it again to the current franchise but extends out...we've
tried to tie a lot of requirements in their to federal laws and federal policies so that
if those do change and I'm not saying on the horizon that looks like they will, but
if they do change there is some language built in to both the franchise and
ordinance that allows us to, for instance, increase the level of regulation or
regulate rates to a greater extent if that is something that is allowed. So, there are
a number of things that I think are in the current franchise and will continue with
the new one that we want to maintain. Bottom line for me is that I think with the
exception of the local access support, which I'm not sure could get that same
thing if we didn't extend for a significant period of time, other than that...I think
we can agree amongst the consultant, staff, and I, I think that would agree that if
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 12 of 47
we start over again and we do a new franchise agreement, it's not going to be all
that much different from the current one because as I said before, a lot of it is tied
to federal standards, policies, and guidelines.
Lehman: Is this an exclusive franchise agreement?
Helling: No, by federal law it never has been. It's not exclusive.
Lehman: Federal years go we had on the ballot an authorization to allow...I think it was
McLeod to come in and the public passed it. I guess I'm getting at....this
franchise agreement would not preclude any other cable company from coming in
to the community?
Helling: Absolutely not.
Lehman: So it is non an exclusive agreement for any period of time. Anybody can come in
and compete with them if they wanted it.
Helling: The only thing .... you would have to be comfortable with whatever that other
company was proposing.
O'Donnell: I kind of agree with Bob. I have problems with a thirteen year franchise
agreement. As far as calling in for repair, I really don't think that's a benefit
because I have called in and I've never gotten anyone to answer the phone.
Expanded basic is, I think, up around $50. Surrounding communities get more for
less. That bothers me. I don't know we arrived at thirteen. I would like to see a
three-to-five year agreement.
Helling: How we arrived at the thirteen was twelve years and it was going to expire -
er...the current franchise doesn't expire until next spring and were looking at
about this spring to execute the new franchise so it became twelve years plus that
year. That's how we got there.
Lehman: What are the disadvantages of a thirteen-year franchise agreement when anybody
else can come in any time they want and compete with Mediacom?
Bailey: I think park of the challenge, and this is just a philosophy that I have, is when we
negotiate for utilities for franchise agreements, I think there needs to be more
direct benefits to citizens. Maybe that's limited by federal law...I know that we
set basic cable rates by resolution but we can't touch any of the others. One of the
most frequent - well, besides the customer issue which is somewhat addressed in
this, I hear this...people are interested in something like an ala-cart. Something
between this family that is up the $50 and the $13 one. Is that something that is
not allowed to be negotiated in the agreement?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 13 of 47
Helling: Well, you can negotiate anything but they're not required, certainly under federal
law, to do an ala-cart offering and most cable companies, in fact none that I know
of, are doing that any great extent because of...the way they put things
together...I think if you want to do that there's folks from Mediacom who would
be willing to explain why they don't do that...but it does...it represents a greater
expense to them to buy these services where they can get a package and put it out
to everybody.
Bailey: I'm not disputing that these are good positions for the City and good benefits for
the City, but if you look at it strictly from the citizen's point ofview...I don't see
the direct benefit. Now, I'd be much more interested in a long-term franchise
agreement if people were singing the praises of this particular organization.., that
they were getting what they wanted. I think we should try to negotiate something
like that if we're going to go for a longer agreement. Otherwise if it's sort of just
standard and benefiting the City, I agree with Mike 3-5.
O'Donnell: If there is something we truly don't like, I would rather negotiate it three years
rather than thirteen years. Thirteen years...I don't know...there's probably a
good reason for that, but I just really have trouble with that length of a franchise.
Helling: You know, in the process when this first started, we did bring a number of folks
together in the community with a variety of interest to the extent that we could
identify and we talked about an extension and some of the benefits there would be
and so forth and there is a large consensus of agreement that that was probably a
good way to go and you know we put it together and held the public hearing.. ~the
commission held a public hearing...I'm sure you saw it advertised in a variety of
places and only one person showed up and basically it was a customer service
complaint which should have been, you know, taken care of.
O'Donnell: It probably weren't the same people who have called me.
Helling: Probably not.
Champion: Why are our rates higher than other areas? What explanation do they give for
that? That's what I hear people complain about.
Bailey: They are.
Helling: That's one of the complaints that Drew probably hears the most but we have no
regulatory over...I think there are some...there's some reality but there's some
myth about what people are getting and for what prices.
Champion: I think they're paying a lot. That's why I gave up cable. I could do the dish for a
lot less and get more.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 14 of 47
Helling: In terms of this system versus others...either a Mediacom system or other systems
that operate in Iowa or other parts of the country. All the information that we
have indicates that we're pretty much there in the middle with a lot of other cable
companies - er cable customers around the country. The only ones that we know
of that are significantly lower in terms of...you know...comparatively anyway are
some of the municipal systems and they are able to do somewhat better because
there's not the profit margins.
Vanderhoefi Is there any advantage to looking at the thirteen-year and say 'either party can
open every four years'?
Lehman: That's not an agreement.
Helling: Well, then what you have is a four-year franchise.
Vanderhoef: Basically, but barfing any huge difference because I keep looking at technology
and how it changes and I certainly don't understand all that technology and never
will, but it's still is out there and what changes that happen over the long-
haul...there certainly are people who will come to us and tell us these things are
available and we're not getting them for our dollar. . . if they turn up in the market.
Helling: I'd have to have a little more information about what they're talking about
because I think, in terms of the cable service, and you have to remember this
franchise is for cable TV, now they have high-speed internet and all that...but we
can't regulate that. That's not a cable-related service, according to the federal
government and the FCC. In terms of cable itself...with the tiers they have...with
the digital, the on-demand services...I think we're pretty competitive and we
provide a service for the citizens here through Mediacom that's pretty comparable
to what most other people have.
Lehman: Now, if the federal government should allow regulation of the high-speed internet
and whatever, according to the terms of this franchise, we could then negotiate
that as well? If it becomes regulated by the -
Helling: We have preserved our right to regulate if we can so that's not something I think
we'd even need to negotiate. We would regulate to the extent that the federal
government would allow. Assuming that's what you'd want to you and I assume
you would.
Elliott: There have been several things specifically talking about ala-cart menu and price.
Mine concern really is much more philosophical than that, I guess. In a field that
is so highly technological, I think signing such a long-term agreement is just not
in the City's best interest. In thirteen years...I don't know how long it took our
country to put a man on the moon after Kennedy said we wanted to do it...but
thirteen years is just too long for a technological industry to have an agreement
with us. That's just a personal, reasonably well-informed opinion.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 15 of 47
Helling: My only response to that from our standpoint is that we looked at that and we saw
technology developing in the areas that are not subject to necessarily a cable
television service franchise. Certainly there are new technologies developed and
there are a lot of reasons or incentives for the cable companies to keep up with
that of course:
Champion: Not if you only have one.
Helling: I'm sorry?
Champion: Not if you only have one, then you don't have any incentive. What happens if we
vote this thirteen-years down?
O'Donnell: We go three to five.
Helling: You give us some direction on what you want...if it's a five-year franchise that
you want then we'll go back and try to see what's in the mix for a five-year
franchise. I suspect that the shorter...as you're probably well aware, the shorter
the franchise, the less of the commitment, I suspect, the cable company is going to
want to make in some of these areas.
Wilbum: I'm sorry, Dale, could you walk us through...I guess I'm looking for the relative
strength, if possible, of the state of the art clause. Is it...does that reopen the
entire contract or does that...
Helling: No, it doesn't. I don't have it in front of me. Basically what it says is that if other
companies, correct me if I'm wrong, I believe if other Mediacom systems in the
state upgrade to a certain level that within a certain period of time they will
upgrade Iowa City as well. In other words, that's our insurance that we're not left
behind...that they invest their money in technological advances in other systems
and leave us behind. I don't know, Randy...if...Randy is representing
Mediacom...Randy Brown and he can probably tell you better than ! can from the
cable company's standpoint.
Lehman: Sure. You need to speak into the mic, Randy.
Brown: Good evening. The technology clause ensures for the City that if we go in and
make an upgrade or change or add a service that within a reasonable amount of
time we would do the same thing in Iowa City. I will tell you that we are
currently offering BOD-SVOD technologies that in some of the larger cities in the
United States aren't being offered. Chicago is just beginning to launch VOD.
San Francisco...a bit portion of San Francisco currently don't have VOD and that
is the most current state of the art. We have been...probably not the first deployer
of new technologies but we certainly aren't the last. We're not a TCI, we're not
an AT&T, that is standing back and letting the other operators pass us by. We're
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 16 of 47
currently working on launching a telephone service which would be available, I
guess, no later than early 2006 in Iowa City, a voice-over IP service that will offer
to all the customers to compete with Qwest - so those technologies we're working
on. We stay current with them. We've made a large investment in the City,
we've upgraded the plant without a franchise requirement to do so, we've added
nodes, improved the high-speed service, we're currently getting ready to upgrade
the speeds of our high-speed service to 5 mgs and those things are all being done
with out franchise requirements as those just keep us competitive and Mediacom
has made a large investment in the City. We've tried to make improvements to
the plant and the customer service and the areas that matter to the citizens. We're
always going to have people who are going to have issues and complaints but
we're certainly making the investments in technology to stay current and stay
competitive. If we don't, the Qwest's, DishNetwork and those sort of things are
all going to pass us by. We've also deployed Digital Video Recorders in the
community, High-Definition - we're adding High Definition products in the
coming months, so we're trying to remain on the cutting edge to remain
competitive. If we don't folks are going to take Dish, you guys are going to lose
your franchise fee and we're going to lose business.
Lehman: How would your method of operation change with a five-year franchise as
opposed a thirteen-year?
Brown: It would certainly impact our ability for commitments on PEG, how much we'd
be willing to do there. The current agreement preserves the PEG and the PATV
funding at the current levels. I don't know that at the five-year level that we'd
want to renegotiate all of those things.
Lehman: Well, if Council is interested in not accepting the thirteen-year agreement that has
been negotiated, I think that we really must tell these folks what we have in mind
for a shorter term and not just say no.
Baiiley: I'm interested in a longer franchise agreement ifI could see some direct customer
benefits. Improved service is one thing - but the actual provision of these
channels and these kind of innovative ala-cart menus are what people are actually
calling for, I think that would be something that would be negotiated. These are
City benefits but I don't see citizen benefits.
Lehman: Address the ala-cart issue. I think that's something...
Brown: Ala-cart has really been a difficult issue. It's not something that we wouldn't like
to do...and it's really controlled by the programmers. These programmers come
to us and say 'You know what, ESPN, ESPN-2, whatever the products are - you
need to carry those on your expanded tier and we won't let you carry them on an
ala-cart basis unless you want to pay a higher amount in the programming costs.
We're not talking another $.25 per sub, we're talking in some instances...some of
these programmers want to double the cost to us if we want to carry them on a
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 17 of 47
ala-cart basis or they're just flat saying now. A majority are just saying they're
not going to allow it. Now, federally, if the federal government would step in and
mandate them to negotiate that kind of carriage, I think it could potentially
happen.
Bailey: I assume you're lobbying for that kind of freedom and flexibility, right?
Brown: The only way it will work is if we go to a completely digital world. I'll be honest,
if we had to do it in today's analog world, it is a very, very cumbersome and very,
very expensive process to do. Once the digital divide is crossed and the FCC
mandates 'Okay, here's the cutoff date for digital, then we can control it through
the customer's television set with a cable card or through a box on the tv.
Bailey: I think the challenge that people see is that you've got your basic, a third of which
is local access program, which although to some people is not exactly the most
exciting programming for everybody and then you've got your family cable
which is up towards $50.
Brown: $45.95.
Bailey: Yeah, $45.95 - I've got it right here. So there is nothing really in between and I
think that's the frustration for people.
Brown: I think it's a frustration for us. I think there are customers that are out there if
they could pick and choose. Right now, programming deals that we're
negotiating, programmers are just not willing to discuss it. We've been down...I
don't know if you call our industry at all but Rocco Commisso, the chairman and
CEO has been very vocal (TAPE ENDS)
(Tape 05-32 - Side B)
Brown ..... costs, rates, we did get ESPN to finally come back to the table and quit hitting
us for 20% a year but there are concessions there as well. The programmers are
really in control of when and if ala-cart would happen unless the federal
government steps in and mandates something.
Lehman: How do we negotiate this thirteen year? Do we have a consultant on this one?
Dale, would you explain that?
Helling: Actually, we ended up using the same consultant we used ten years, Bryce
Williams out of Washington, D.C. They're not hear tonight. Obviously the
public hearing is basically on the ordinance, but they're so integrally tied together
that you want to talk about them all. We were going to wait and see how things
went, but certainly Jean Rice or Don Williams are on standby and ready to come
back when you have your public hearing on the...when you consider your
resolution on the franchise but you can't do that until after you've passed the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 18 of 47
ordinance amendment. Now, the ordinance is probably 98%, 99% the same as it
has been in the past. It's really the franchise agreement that provides for the kinds
of things we're talking about here.
O'Donnell: When was the last time period, Dale?
Helling: Ten years.
Wilbum: I have a question for Eleanor. I know we can't speculate on any changes in
federal law that might happen, but in terms of this state of the art clause, if
services weren't being offered that we found out other areas were being offered,
in terms of following up or even to the point of litigating, can the City act on
single case complaints or learning of fact that Cedar Rapids or some other town in
Iowa were being offered a service that is not being offered here. Does one case
do it? Do we have to build up several? I guess I'm just looking for-
Dilkes: I think the best that ! can tell you is that we've really relied very much on Rice
Williams to advise us in connection with this agreement. I think we're
comfortable with the state of art agreement...what particular facts would lead to a
positive outcome in litigation, I don't know...but I think this is the best that we
can do. What I'm concerned about...just hearing the Council talk...and
again...particularly with Andy gone out of my office...we have relied pretty
much completely on Bryce Williams. They are experts. We can get them here if
you want to talk to them about it - but you can't negotiate in a vacuum and what I
hear all you doing is saying 'I don't want the thirteen years' but then I don't hear
what you're going to end up giving up as a result. That...I don't know if you
need more information about that or what but that's what seems to be missing
from this conversation. We can certainly get Bryce Williams to give you some
more background information about that or get here and talk to you about that, but
I don't think we can just say 'I don't like thirteen years' and tell them that we
want five. I don't think that's good negotiating.
Helling: If we know specifically what your concerns are for instance in the area of
customer service so we can address those individually...that's fine...there's a lot
of customer service, there's a lot of technology - as you know if you'd read
through the ordinance and franchise - that's in there and we'd have to know what
it is that is unsatisfactory and then try to deal with that specifically.
Elliott: I just think...what happens in let's say six years there is a breakthrough and cable
is able to be carded through telephone lines and we could plug in something
county-wide simply through telephone lines...what if there is a breakthrough in
wireless capability?
Helling: There is nothing in here that would prevent that from happening.
Elliott: Then why do they want thirteen years?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 19 of 47
Brown: Basically, a longer term allows us to be able to do more things on the front-end of
a franchise and it also preserves the PATV funding without completely
renegotiating those...to your point of over the phone lines...that's available
today...there is a VDSL product available out there today. That's what is being
deployed in North Liberty by South Slope. So that does exist today it just
depends on the operator. I don't know what direction Qwest is looking as far as
that goes.
O'Donnell: I don't know about everybody else, but if we want to start negotiating, I'd like
three-to-five and I don't want to have to give up anything. That seems like a good
starting point.
Lehman: I would assume...a longer franchise agreement would be more beneficial when it
comes to investing capital in the City. I would think that would be the biggest -
Brown: Absolutely. It would give us time to recover our investment that we've made.
Lehman: Isn't that the biggest reason you're looking at a longer one?
Brown: That's part of it. I think as we met with Drew and Rice Williams, we talked
through what would happen with the funding of the channels, the capital grants,
all those things come in to play and they're all based on term and how much we'll
put out on the front end that we can get back over time.
Champion: I guess what I'd like to see is some comparative rates from other cable companies.
Lehman: But the rates aren't negotiable.
Bailey: We only set basic by resolution. We're really tied.
Lehman: Right.
Vanderhoefi I think what we're doing is we're still reacting at this point to complaints from
citizens and I think Regenia has nailed it completely that the citizens are saying
'Don't do it unless you give us certain benefits' and they don't recognize and
probably we didn't either to a certain extent that certain things are not negotiable
for us or that truly they are far more expensive like the a la carte menus and those
type of things and it's not probably going to be able to be done at this point in
time. Later on, it may be.
Helling: When you're talking about complaints from citizens, I don't know if you're
talking about phone calls that you have received or the complaints that the City
has received. Drew keeps track of all of those and he can put together something
for you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 20 of 47
Vanderhoefi I know he reports them in their minutes all the time so the .... certainly from four
or five years ago, the complaints are noticeably down.
Helling: They are and some of those complaints are about rates and of course the response
has to be that we don't regulate rates. Same thing for the a la carte or other types
of services. So... if you want that, we can certainly put that together for you and
let you know the kinds of complaints that we get and to some degree how they're
resolved.
Vanderhoefi They're all in the minutes, actually.
Bailey: I certainly got calls though.
Vanderhoef: I did too.
Bailey: I try to connect them with Drew but I don't know if they follow up with them.
Vanderhoef: The only calls that I've gotten in the last few days has just been don't give a
lengthy one...we want to hold them to the fire or some such thing without giving
me any good input on what they think we can do.
Bailey: I think people want to see something for this thirteen-year franchise and if we
hear that it can't happen, I think I probably need to hear from the consultants,
what is the range that can provide direct citizen benefit. I think it's unconciabile
for us to move ahead with a lengthy arrangement if we're not providing direct
benefit to our citizens in a franchise agreement.
Wilburn: PATV funding is one thing. The cable rates and our inability to influence that
every year...(unclear- Bailey speaking)...when that comes up every year, no
Council member is willing to first or willing to second and then we sit there for a
while and somebody speaks up and does it and we...I suppose that part of that is a
little frustration about that. My concern was that if we're going to do some type
of longer contract to make sure that we do have in place ways to either get
customer...like you said, that part of the agreement is still in tact to make sure
that those customer service things are being addressed and I guess my questions
were just...with Bryce Williams, if we can.., if we're not getting something that
they're getting somewhere else, then we should have a vehicle to do that and
that's probably the best that we can do.
Elliott: I would just be in favor of a three-to-six year agreement. I guess I could
compromise if it were shown that there were significant benefits to the citizens for
a long-term contract that would be a compromise on my part, but I would...but
I'm looking at three-to-six years at this point.
Lehman: Well, it would seem to me...ifthe majority of the Council has concerns relative to
the lengthy of this franchise that tomorrow night if those things surface and
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 21 of 47
remain there that we should probably continue the public hearing. Basically I
think what we need is a Council education. I don't think that we know what
we're talking about.
Helling: If you choose to continue the public hearing, we can have the consultant come in.
They are the experts.
Lehman: Have those folks come in, explain it when we reopen the public hearing and then
Council, based on that discussion, can decide whether or not the length of time is
reasonable and what...we don't know which items are negotiable, which one's
aren't, we don't know anything about what it costs to do this or that or whatever.
That's obviously why we hire a consultant who knows what they're doing. It
sounds to me, if this goes tomorrow night the way it is going tonight, we continue
the public hearing, ask the consultant to come in, reopen the public heating, have
that person be available to answer questions for Council folks and perhaps do a
little background work prior to the public heating.
Champion: Ernie, I think you're right. I think the Council needs some education because
we've all had some phone calls. We've all heard complaints over the years about
cable and we hear complaints about parks, we've heard complains about
everything. I think we just need some education. I think when...I think the cable
company has improved it's public relations and it's repair record.., customer
service I think has improved. I'm not entirely against a thirteen-year contract. I
think I'd like to know what Regenia is saying...what more can we give to the
customer. So, I'm not saying that I'm not going to support this contract, I'm just
saying that I'd like to hear some more information first.
Lehman: I think the cable company enjoys the same position as the telephone company, the
utility company, all of those folks who basically have...I hate to use the word
monopolies - but they're all franchises - everybody hates the people they have
to .... they can't get cable except from you. The truth of the matter is anybody can
come in and offer cable. If they chose not to, it's because the market is too small
so we get to hate you. The same thing is true when we get the electric bill, the gas
bill, the water bill...I think its human nature to be frustrated when we don't...if
we had five choices, nobody would complain about anything.
Champion: How many cable subscribers are there in town?
Helling: 19,000.
Champion: 22,000?
Helling: 19,000.
Champion: 19,000? Has anybody here had more than ten phone calls?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 22 of 47
Lehman: No. One.
Champion: Think about it.
Lehman: Okay, that's the way we'll do it tomorrow night.
Atkins: Ernie, while Dale is still up there. Tomorrow night's hearing is on the ordinance.
Helling: The ordinance, that is correct.
Atkins: Not on the franchise agreement. So...maybe when we open that ordinance so the
public understands what they're commenting about this is not a rate discussion,
etc.
Helling: It's pretty difficult to separate the two for the purpose of the hearing.
Bailey: I think that point is well taken. A lot of people don't realize that the franchise
agreement has nothing to do with rates.
Lehman: In fact, most of us around the table. This ordinance enables us to do a thirteen-
year franchise. Does it require it?
Atkins: No.
Lehman: So, in other words, we could have the public hearing, pass this, enable this and
still not approve the franchise agreement and insist on a...okay.
Helling: I'm not really sure quite frankly, if we were to renegotiate something different
that the ordinance would necessarily have to be changed. It might, in a few
places.
Lehman: Just enables us to do what was negotiated.
Helling: Do you want to do this at the formal meeting in two weeks or do you want us to
schedule time on the work session?
Lehman: That's up to Council.
Champion: I think it should be a public hearing so that the public can hear it.
Lehman: I would agree with that but are we comfortable with passing an ordinance that
enables us to approve the franchise agreement or do you want to wait and do
both.., basically the public's perception is that they' re connected.
Bailey: I think we should do something that is clear to the public.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 23 of 47
Lehman: So we just continue the public hearing...and I think it would be a matter of...I
don't sense that there is a sense of urgency from a time stand-point on this.
Helling: No. I think we'd like to get it done as quickly as possible just like anything else.
Lehman: What I'm getting is that we have the consultants scheduled...a consultant who can
come to a council meeting at his convenience, so we don't have special really
expensive trip, whatever.
Helling: Well, they work for us. They're ready at any time.
Lehman: We'll wait until tomorrow night. If we continue the public hearing, we'll just
give direction to have those folks come in. We will hopefully get some coverage
in the press, people will know what's going on.
Dilkes: Maybe we can get some tentative dates from them...so we know when to
continue the public hearing.
Helling: I think they could probably be here two weeks from tonight or two weeks from
tomorrow.
Lehman: Okay, that's fine.
Dilkes: If we can confirm that for tomorrow night (unclear).
Helling: The other thing I would just ask in terms of what are these customer service
concerns and so forth. The more specific you can be with the consultant as well
the more they will be able to .... because we have an idea...we know pretty much
was is negotiable and what isn't but we need to know what the concerns are and
then we can respond to that.
Lehman: Are you asking the council folks to get a list of those sorts of things to the
consultant prior to the reopening of the public hearing?
Helling: No necessarily.
Lehman: Or just that we have them available that night? Okay.
Elliott: I think as Regenia pointed out. What it comes down to is that most people in the
city, I think, are interested in how much it costs them to turn on their TV and get
ESPN and Lifetime and CBS and NBC and that sort of thing. That's what they
interested in.
Lehman: But it's the basic American right to hate the cable company.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 24 of 47
O'Donnell: You know, Ernie, you keep saying that. It's not about that. I don't think anybody
hates anybody, they just want the biggest bang for their buck. You know...the
question is why aren't we getting more. The only that seems to be going up is the
rate. We're not getting more channels...that's questions that I would like
answered.
Lehman: We'll do that.
Dilkes: The problem is that I think you all need to be somewhat sensitive to is the more
you complain about the rates and act as if you have some kind of control over that
the more that furthers that expectation out there that you do have control over the
rates and you don't.
Champion: I think it's also to remember that it's a small number of people who are
complaining and how many people does it take to call you to delay action?
Lehman: Okay. Thank you. The next time is Council Appointments.
Vanderhoefi Have we finished agenda items?
Lehman: I'm sorry, agenda items. Sorry. That's right. Other agenda items.
Vanderhoef: It just seems that since its 7:30 that we ought to be done with them.
Lehman: Any other agenda items?
Bailey: I had two.
Lehman: Yes.
ITEM 3(e) 4. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING JOB DESCRIPTIONS FOR
THE CITY MANAGER, CITY ATTORNEY, AND CITY CLERK.
Bailey: These are on the consent calendar. Number 4. When we were looking at job
descriptions, I just wanted to flag that in the job descriptions there's no mention
of technological skills and I think that's particularly important for the Clerk. I'm
not interested in necessarily changing it now, but we should look at it again next
year because Marian does a lot with technology and I think that should be
included in a job description for our City Clerk. I think that's key.
Vanderhoef: I had one also, while we're talking about job descriptions, if you don't mind.
Bailey: Go ahead.
Vanderhoefi For some reason in the City Attorney's job description, it talks specifically about
the number of employees...6 .... and the other two we don't talk about the number
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 25 of 47
of employees. So, if we could put a more generic description in there and take
that number out I think it's appropriate because when you get part-timers and so
forth...just indicate that it is the City Attorney's prevue to higher within her own
budget.
Bailey: I had a question for Eleanor about this next item.
ITEM 3(e) 5. CONSIDER THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST LICENSE AGREEMENTS
BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND ASCAP (AMERICAN
SOCIETY OF COMPOSERS, AUTHORS AND PUBLISHERS) AND THE
CITY OF IOWA CITY AND BMI (BROADCASE MUSIC, INC.)
Bailey: I know this is for music. What kind of arrangement do we need to support the
neighborhood movies? Do we have some sort of copyright?
Dilkes: We've dealt with that.
Vanderhoefi Neighborhood what?
Bailey: Movie night.
Dilkes: This is just music. These entities only deal with music. We're currently talking
to the video licensing people making sure that we've got our I's are dotted and
our T's are crossed on that.
Bailey: Since we just approved a P1N Grant for a movie night...
Dilkes: We've dealt with it before and we had thought we were covered. There may have
been a difference of opinion between us and the video licensing people but we're
trying to work that out.
Bailey: Okay, thanks. That's all I had.
Lehman: Okay.
Vanderhoef: That's all I had.
Lehman: Okay. Council Appointments.
COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS
Lehman: Okay. Council Appointments. We have nobody for the Airport Commission or
the Airport Board of Adjustment. Library Board of Trustees we have two
vacancies and four applicants.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 26 of 47
Champion: I'd like to nominate Mary Lee Dixon.
Bailey: I like Meredith Rich-Chappell.
Lehman: Okay, we have Meredith Rich-Chappell and who is the other one?
O'Donnell: Tom Martin.
Vanderhoef: And Tom Martin.
Bailey: Connie said Mary Lee Dixon.
Champion: I like Mary Lee Dixon and Regenia said Meredith Rich-Chappell. Somebody can
throw another name in there too.
Elliott: Tom Martin's name is in there.
Champion: He's very qualified and don't misunderstand me but he's only been a resident for
three months and I think sometimes that people need to have a feel for our library,
as a library user, to have some feeling for the community. It doesn't mean that he
wouldn't be wonderful, but that would be the only reason ! wouldn't support him.
Elliott: Connie, there is a flip side of that. Sometimes it is good to have someone new
who is not familiar with everything our library has done, who is familiar with
what's happening in other places, and who takes a fresh look the library. I think
those fresh looks often times can be beneficial.
Champion: You could be right.
Vanderhoef: That's the approach that I take with it. Certainly we have a marvelous library and
the people there understand the programming. I was interested in also just an idea
that Meredith mentioned to me on the phone, I said 'Well, whether you are or are
not appointed, I hope you will take your idea to the board for consideration.' But
I would like to support Tom Martin.
O'Donnell: I would like to see Tom Martin.
Lehman: Alright. How many support Tom Martin, show of hands. Okay...one, two, three,
four...okay, Tom Martin is appointed. How about Meredith Rich-Chappell?
Champion: Who was the fourth?
Bailey: I was.
O'Donnell: Who did you have?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 27 of 47
Elliott: Now Connie doesn't like you.
Champion: That's not true.
Bailey: She'll like me on the next vote.
Lehman: Okay, Tom Martin it is. Meredith Rich-Chappell? We have one, two, three,
four...okay we have done it and that is vacancies. Are we going to take a quick
recess?
CDBG & Home Funds
Lehman: With the Council's permission, we're going to go to the CDBG HOME Funds. I
think that will be a shorter discussion. Steve Nasby, I think I saw you here.
Wilbum: In that case I will not participate in this discussion. I work for an organization
that receives CDBG funds and cannot participate as I have a conflict of interest.
Nasby: Good evening. At the last City Council meeting we approved the FY-06 Annual
Action Plan for Community Development Block Grant Funding. You wanted to
meet again in two weeks time to talk about the terms because there were a number
of organizations that requested waivers to your existing investment policies. I
submitted a memo that is in your work session packet. Really, before we get into
coming up with specific options, we need to have the question answered from
Council. 'Do you want to entertain grants, as far as an investment policy, for the
CDBG monies?' If you do then we can come up with some specific policy
recommendations and get those back to you.
Elliott: Grants as opposed to loans?
Nasby: Grants as opposed to a repayable loan, yes. We had talked before...there are
several types. Really for this the terms of this conversation, if we give it then it
kind of becomes a grant...so we'll work in that grant versus loan context.
Lehman: I would favor grants when it comes to projects of rehabilitation where the life of
the improvement, for example replacement of a heating or air-conditioning
system or the remodeling of the new floor coverings or something, that does
not...the depreciated value is so small that for it to be attached to a long-term
project is...and I think particularly with agencies.
Nasby: That is something that we had talked about, too. These maintenance/repair things
versus capital improvements, not with like our housing rehabilitation
program...where if he had to rehabilitate someone's home, we'd put in a water
softener - I'm sorry, water heater and new flooring. That would be in the terms
of a loan that they would pay back. We do do those types of things with
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 28 of 47
homeowners. You're talking about non-profits in this case but as far as you know
what we do do with these dollars. We've done it both ways.
Vanderhoef: What about then the difference between when the agency owns their own facility
versus when it's a rental facility? That's where I have a little problem. I think
one of them that I can think of right now that bothers me a little bit is a parking lot
resurfacing.
Nasby: That one actually HCDC recommended not funding the parking lot portion of that
project. They're not going to do that because that was on leased property.
Vanderhoef: That's one that would have bothered me because it was a longer term capital
improvement to landlord rather than to the agency itself.
Champion: That's a good point, Dee.
Bailey: Tuckpointing is a longer-term capital improvement and is site specific. I think
that's the Old Brick project, right?
Elliott: Steve, do you have any examples of where a loan, obviously if we could make
them all loans we'd be better off, if you can recycle th.e money and use it
again...but so many times the agencies...it's not financially feasible, that's the
reason they need the money. Could you give us an example of instances where it
would be appropriate for the funding to be a loan as opposed to a grant?
Nasby: Some of those examples would be the larger capital improvements like we were
talking. If we helped someone.., several years ago we helped an organization
purchase a building. The acquisition of Tower Place Condo by United Action for
Youth. They acquired a piece of Real Property. That was an investment of Block
Grant dollars and their dollars. That's a long-term asset that will appreciate in
value. In that case, having that conditional occupancy repayment, as long as they
use it for the terms of which they got the money for, there is no interest, no
payments, but once that ceases, it's all paid back. Which, is different then if we
were replacing flooring or the water heater in an agency facility.
Champion: But when they quit using, they would be able to sell it so they would have a way
to pay that money back.
Nasby: But in some of the rehabs too. The investment that we make, depending upon the
level of that investment, may add value to that property or help it appreciate in the
near term.
Bailey: Would it make sense to use a dollar-amount benchmark? That could also be a
way to approach it. If we make grants of $10,000 or below...or to claim balance
loans of $10,000 or below for these kind ofrehab projects and other thins as
conditional occupancy.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 29 of 47
Lehman: The problem I have with that is that I think the replacement of a water heater or
something like that is a legitimate expense that we can expect to be reimbursed
for at some time. Replacement of heating and air conditioning systems might be a
hundred times as much and something that we wouldn't expect to be reimbursed
for if it's a long term. Also, I suspect it would make a difference.on the
ownership of the property. If it's owned by the agency, I think we would treat it
differently than if we were requesting money to be invested in someone else's
property.
Nasby: I think we would be inclined to make a larger capital investment in something that
the agency is going to own versus a lease. I know that's something that HCDC
talked to about the organizations that were leasing. 'How long is your lease?
How many options do you have for renewal?' before they would entertain even
the Block Grant money in that project. The Commission does sort through those
types of things.
Champion: Do you have a suggestion to address what we're trying to say here?
Bailey: We have some criteria. I think we're developing some criteria for declining
balance loans. Its ownership, the depreciation schedule it sounds like, and then
type of the project.
Nasby: I didn't bring you specific proposals because until we decide we want to forgive
some of these dollars or do them as grants, there is an unlimited number of
proposals I could bring to you as far as options. I think what I had heard from
you the last time was...well...in some cases the loan is appropriate and in some
cases the declining balance or forgivable loan or a grant is appropriate. I think the
approach that Regenia suggested maybe looking at a dollar threshold or at least
some years as a threshold, maybe it is a grant but they earn it over a period of
time. Three, five, seven, ten, twenty years.
Lehman: Could we also use rehab as opposed to capital improvements? Rehabilitation
being treated in different way than a capital project? For example, you replace an
existing heating and air conditioning system, which is a rehab, or you put an
addition on a house which is capital investment.
Bailey? Right.
Nasby: We can try to address it that way.
Bailey: Well, ownership seems to come into play as well. I think it's key.
Nasby: Okay, would you like us to put together some of those options based on those
basis and bring them back to your next meeting?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 30 of 47
Vanderhoef: Let's see what we can put together with that.
Lehman: I think it would be easier if you put something together...it's always easier...and I
think this was helpful.., but it's much easier to critique something that is already
written down. If we don't like it, if it jumps out or if you think it changes, you
can do it. Are we willing to let Steve put something together for us and then we'll
go from there.
Nasby: So you are interested in doing some type of forgiveness?
Champion: The distinction for me is between the profit and the non-profit.
Nasby: Sure, and the monies we're doing, public facilities are almost always non-profit.
Champion: They are?
Nasby: The public facilities monies. The housing ones can split. We're talking about the
public facilities projects here.., and then the other two...there were two other
things in there about housing. We didn't have a policy for tenant-based rent
assistance or direct home-ownership assistance.
Lehman: I thought your suggestion was pretty good.
Nasby: That's what I looking for. If you're interested in a suggestion for tenant-based
rent assistance, because it is rent assistance like Section 8, there really is not a
repayment vehicle for that so that would be a grant and direct home-ownership
assistance...where it would be a repayable loan but sometime out in the future so
as not to impose a burden on the home owner.
Atkins: Steve, before you sit down...
Vanderhoef: I have one too.
Atkins: Go ahead, Dee, I'll wait.
Vanderhoefi One of the things that comes up every now and then for very large capital projects
and it has to do with these public/private projects and management and
development fees. I'm a little uncomfortable maybe because the feds put
maximum amounts for each of those in a percentage off of the total project cost
and I'm not sure that the maximum allowed by the feds is appropriate for Iowa
and for Iowa City. I would like some information to see whether we are or are not
in the ballpark for what those costs are in our area versus in a metropolitan area
on the east and west coast perhaps - where the feds their numbers one-size-fits-
all.
Lehman: That's a good point.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 31 of 47
Champion: I think we're all interested in that.
Atkins: Is there any question about timing? I suspect that if you have discussion in
June... this wouldn't be operational much before July.
Nasby: July 1 is when we sign contracts. I think we would be able to sit the next Council
meeting if we can reach a consensus.
Atkins: I'm thinking of the recipients signing a contract and they're not exactly of what
the financing is, other than the dollar figure.
Nasby: It would be after the next Council meeting.
Atkins: So we really need to move quickly.
Nasby: Yes, we do need to decide next time.
Vanderhoef: Fast track for these contracts, otherwise it's a year from now.
Lehman: Thank you. Okay, now we'll go to the alcohol discussion. Ron Berg from
MECCA is here. As you recall at the last meeting he asked for a few minutes of
your time.
Berg: Good evening. Along with me tonight is Rick Dobyns who is part of our Alcohol
Awareness Work Group that has been working on this issue. First of all, I want to
thank you for the chance to talk to you tonight. We're not going to present a lot
of facts. As Mayor Lehman has pointed out previously, I think there has been
more information presented to the Council on this single issue than any other
issue in the history of the world. We do want to take just a few minutes to point
out some of our recommendations and then hopefully we'll have a chance for
some discussion. The Alcohol Awareness Work Group began meetings in August
of 2004. It was organized by Ralph Wilmoth, from the Health Department, and
Rick Dobyns who simply were concerned about the amount of underage and
excessive drinking that they saw in our community. So, we began to meet, began
to invite people together to present to us their views and ideas on the topic and
have met ever since August 2004. During that time we have asked for and
received input from the Iowa City Police Department, Iowa City Administration,
the Stepping Up Project, Student Health, University of Iowa College of Public
Health, University of Iowa students, University of Iowa central administration,
the Iowa City Schools Central Administration and the principals from both high
schools, we had juniors and seniors from City High School come talk to us, we've
had input from the Johnson County Sheriff and we've had input from general
concerned citizens in Iowa City- all involved since August 2004. As I step back
and look at what has gone on...I can't help but recognize some similarities
between what I have seen in the past twenty-four years working in substance
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 32 of 47
abuse when we're working with a family who is concerned about a loved one.
We start to have certain reactions to that. Some people deny that there is an issue.
Some people rationalize, try and make excuses and cover up, and I think as a
community we are starting to have some of the same reactions as the alcohol use
issues that we see here in Iowa City. Specifically, I think that we have tried in the
past to deny that there is a problem - although I feel as though we've moved
beyond that. I think there is general consensus now that there is a problem and
we need to do something about it. I think that we have tried to rationalize...as a
family member might rationalize by saying 'It was a hard work day, they were
under a lot of stress so it was okay that they drank.' In a public sector, what I see
happening is that we start rationalizing saying that 'kids need a place to socialize,
I did that when I was that age, it's just college students and a phase that they're
going through.' So, we start to come up with these rationalizations that make
things okay. Also, sometimes I see family members enable the loved ones. So, if
I drive to the bar and get the beer then the person won't have to drive and risk
getting an OWl offense on top of everything else. I see the Iowa City Community
and in general our society is starting to enable things. We say if we let the kids
drink downtown or encourage them to drink downtown, it will be safe, it will
keep it out of the neighborhoods - so it's a healthier place to do something as
opposed to the risk that is involved in going to their house or out in the
community. When I'm working with families dealing with a loved one...if all of
the family members are involved and on the page, they can do an intervention.
An intervention requires a strong leader to say 'Let's go to this person, tell them
we're concerned, tell them what we want them to do.' What we're looking for
now is some leadership to make that intervention in the Iowa City area. We
finally have all of the family involved. We've got the City, we've got the
University involved, the County government, we've got downtown businesses,
we've got the bar owners. In the past twenty-four years I can never remember a
time when we have had so many different people talking about this one single
topic. We've got an opportunity to strike and to make some changes and I hope
that we can do it. Specifically, we think that working with the University, the
schools, the County, the businesses, religious communities, neighborhood
associations, that we need to enact some policies and ordinances that will
establish low tolerance for excessive and underage drinking and related behaviors,
create a culturally responsible use of alcohol that frowns on excessive alcohol
consumption, clearly support a vibrate, active downtown, encourage a wide-range
of eateries, social gathering places, encourage interactions among ages from the
very young to senior residents, and be welcoming to visitors. We're asking for
your leadership to make these changes. Not just the 21 ordinance but that in
conjunction with several other steps that the Council has considered and other
people have talked about and start to make an effort with the problem of alcohol
in this town. With that, we encourage some questions and discussions.
Vanderhoefi What specifically...intervention kind of projects would you like us consider?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 33 of 47
Berg: Let me just go back to the last work session. Somebody made a comment that
we're trying to find the silver bullet. There is no silver bullet for this. We can
take many, many different things. Things that the University has done in
enforcing the drinking with college students, notifying parents when they're
arrested, they're requiring that students go for evaluations, we need 21 ordinances
or other ordinances that will restrict the access. We know for a fact that if you
restrict access to alcohol or you restrict access to tobacco, that youth consumption
goes down. So, we need some ordinances that will restrict access. We need to
involved the school district with this. I'm trying to think off the top of my
head .... zoning ordinances have been considered.., all of those in combination, we
think, will start to have an impact but we can't just hang our hat on one single
solution. We need to get started.
Wilbum: A question I have for you. You mentioned the different areas that you'd like to
see leadership in addressing the low tolerance for access. I've tried to view the 21,
the prior 21 ordinance - since we don't have a 21 ordinance - as one of those
components or arrows that you would use to shoot at the problem - the multi-
dimensional aspect to it. If we continue to wait to address that specific
component of it, what do you foresee happening or what might be the
consequences of not addressing that particular aspect over, let's say, a year's
period of time.
Berg: Well, I think we have to send a message not just to people in Iowa City but other
communities around here that this is no longer a party town. It's going to be a
responsible town. The longer we wait to enact some steps the longer we will
continue to have underage drinking in the downtown area...the longer we will
continue to tolerate an excessive level of drinking.., and along with both of those
instances some personal harm that some people experience. Not everybody,
certainly, but the longer we allow things to continue, the longer you allow the
chance for something very serious to happen to individuals. Really, it all comes
down to what happens to an individual. We've got an opportunity here that we
can enact some change.
Schreiber: I appreciate your analogy...talking about specific alcohol-abuse problems and
putting them in the context of the entire city. What do you do when someone has
a specific problem? You go after that specific problem, correct, in your
individual analysis? Are you aware that 74% of public intoxes are people over
the age of 21 and 87% of OWI charges are people over the age of 21? My
question is why do we try to solve a problem that isn't the crux of the issue by
going 217 Why do we try to solve a problem of underage drinking, which isn't
the main focus and shouldn't be the main focus of the problem. Don't you go
after the root of the problem?
Dobyns: In your packet of materials, it shows what I consider to be an epidemic. It shows
the pattern of bar increases in downtown Iowa City from 1975 into the current
time. As mentioned before...the issue of a magic bullet. There is no magic
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 34 of 47
bullet. What we're talking about is expanding and looking at multiple problems
and trying to find...Will the 21 ordinance solve all those problems? Certainly it
won't and we've addressed that. From a public health point of view, the graphs
that you have in front of you show what I think is an epidemic. You have a slight
increase in the population of Iowa City and the University and you show an
incredible number of increases in the bar situation. I think addressing that small
area is important. From a public health point of view, ifI can just decrease a
percentage who are participating in adverse behavior by a few percentage points
then ! get the Nobel prize in public health. There isn't one...but that's what we're
trying to look at. We're trying to look at this from a small approach. Something
that we can handle...the underage drinking. Ron talked about...if you can just
start to turn around. Look at those curves and look at how they increase. If you
can just start to stem the tide just a little bit and start to work on one problem you
start to get to what we call a tipping point. You've changed a culture. Did I
answer your question sufficiently?
Schreiber: Well, actually I think you raised another good question and that is from a public
health standpoint...have you stood in the basement of a local house party at any
time in the last few years? A local kegger?
Dobyns: I think that's a rhetorical question.
Schreiber: I have personally and it's .... I'm sure you can appreciate the dangers from fire
hazards to female safety to the excessive drinking that goes on when you have a
cup for $5 and an unlimited supply of keg beer and nobody to supervise anything
along those lines. From a public health standpoint...how do you address that
issue. You're trying to stem the tide and curve it - but you're curving it away
from. It's not a solution by keeping it safer or more organized. You're turning
the tide towards something that is more dangerous in a sense, is that not more
dangerous or do you have a response?
Dobyns: I have a response. With all due respect, you're turning the tide toward a great
many issues of public health - all of which have their own importance. Again, we
have no silver bullet. I could bore you all to tears with possible solutions to all
those things...but we're hear to address this one concern. I would be happy to
address the issue of rapes in the city community but again - that isn't the issue
here. The issue here is one of underage drinking.
Schrieber: Why is that the issue, is my question. Because the facts show undisputedly that
that isn't the issue here and that shouldn't be the issued. The issue should be
public intoxication charges and OWI charges and this isn't coming from people
who are under 21 so why are we making in the issue?
Lehman: Jeremy, 5% of the kids get 24% of the violations statistically. (TAPE ENDS)
95% get the other 76%. People 18-20 don't represent more than 5% of people in
the bars. If you look at the spectrum of age... 18 on up...you have 5-6% of the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 35 of 47
drinkers getting 24% of the violations. All of those 21 age and older get 76%.
Now, I would say that that is a huge problem.
Schrieber: So 5% of the people in the bars are under 21, you're saying?
Lehman: Just look at it statistically, it's easier to figure out. Far and away there is a much
much higher rate by kids who are under 21.
Berg: I would like to add that our target is not just specifically the 18-20 year olds. Our
target is the culture that is supported in this community around excessive and
underage drinking. People don't go to the University Northern Iowa... you don't
hear about people driving from Iowa City to go to parties. It's the other way
around because we have a reputation and a culture here that supports the drinking
and we need to do something that targets the culture and support of drinking.
Schreiber: Do you know which Regent school is in the top 15 of Playboy's National College
Party Schools?
Berg: I know the binge-drinking rate at the University of Iowa.
Schrieber: It was Iowa State and not Iowa.
Berg: I know the binge-drinking rate here at Iowa. We would be happy with being
mediocre.
O'Donnell: We just sat and talked with a group of legislatures and we're talking about
increasing fines. What effect do you think that will have?
Berg: I think it will have some effect but again it has to be along with everything else. I
think they doubled the PAULA fines this year and I think that will get some
people's attention. If you...you can conceptualize all the drinkers in the
world...and all the drinkers in Iowa City...some people are going to go into the
bars, they're going to get fake ID's, they're going to pay...nothing is going to
deter those people. On the other end there are people, regardless of what we do,
will not go into a bar and will not drink. As we move public policy, we include
more or less people in those who chose not to drink. Increasing the fine will
move the bar a little bit. 21 ordinance will move the bar a little bit. Zoning
ordinances can move the bar. Those are all things that we can do that can move
that bar in terms of (can't hear).
O'Donnell: Do you think the University of Iowa can take a more active role in this?
Berg: Sure, I think we all can.
O'Donnell: What do you think we can do?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 36 of 47
Dobyns: There are multiple areas of leadership in the community. The University is of
course one.
O'Donnell: I would like to address specifically the University of Iowa.
Dobyns: Okay, as far as increasing the areas of recreation...that they're already working
on in terms of their recreation building. We've discussed with them issues of
extended what they did with Planet X. Learning from problems they had with
Planet X and going on from there. I think the University is very aware of the
ability to...with students that are identified as having problem drinking in
addition to the State changes, the Dean of Students Office is very much going
after those students and trying to affect some changes. Our own group is working
with multiple parties that is developing classes which will begin next year in
terms of more healthy behaviors in terms of drinking. Public Health and Health
and Human Leisure are working on this and they have two sections already and
plan to increase more based on classwork at the University of Minnesota that is
currently becoming more popular.
Champion: I also think, Mike, you have to realize even though I'm not sure the 21 ordinance
at this point, is that a lot of young people in this community are not U of I
students who come here for the weekend or who come here to be entertained.
O'Donnell: I'm aware of that. To me, this is an issue that needs to be addressed by the
University of Iowa, the City of Iowa City, the Police Department and the students.
I think it's very important that we have all of those voices. In my mind that's the
only way that we can make this better.
Bailey: I don't know if you had an opportunity to read Bob's memo in the packet, but I
agree with that and I think that's one of the things that Mike is reiterating. Not to
shoot a sacred cow - this community - but one of the things that I've noticed
since living here is the tailgating on football Saturdays. It creates an interesting
culture and I'd be interested in hearing what you're doing to address that because
I think that that creates and sets an example and creates the culture in this
community far more than our downtown. Our sports drive what we do far more
than our cultural disctrict. I would just be interested in heating ideas for
addressing that particular area.
Dobyns: I'd agree with that. I bike from home to work on Melrose on football Saturdays.
I'm right there with you. We've mentioned that to the University, that we're very
concerned about the need for the University leadership to set forward along with
the City in terms of making some changes there. We are a group of people from
the community. We can't force anyone to do anything. We can suggest,
ask .... we've done with the University...I've done with the University with them
and their leadership what Ron and I are doing with you right now .... having these
conversations about these very issues in terms of having them do what they can in
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 37 of 47
terms of changing the culture. I acknowledge the difficulty of who is going to
step forward first.
Vanderhoef: Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me several years ago...and much of the
information that I've received from Stepping Up from various studies and so
forth...there were statistics about the younger a person starts regular drinking the
more apt they are to be in a substance abuse situation - an alcohol as an end
result. So, when I look at this whole issue...ifthat is true, I look at access and if
one can delay access on a regular basis...I'm not saying there aren't going to keg
parties and so forth, but to leave class, whatever, and walk across the street and
get into the bar and be able to use a fake ID and have access to a couple of beers
after class instead of a cup of coffee or Coke or whatever. That's one of the
access things. Another thing to expand on Ernie's statistics on the percent.
Unofficially, I kind of read through the arrest records and use age 25 as a cut-off
because I figure we still have students here that have not left but have been here
continuously and if you take the 25 and under for the OWI's and Public Intox and
so forth and add that into this whole big picture, we've got a culture that definitely
is moving higher and higher into this and there isn't anything that says 'Just
because you turn 21 you're going to stop drinking' or that you can stop drinking
without some intervention. The access is still the biggest problem that I see out
there and to change the culture it needs to be the every day culture of what you do
after class, what you do to relax with your friend for an hour or two before your
dinner and your study time.
Berg: The age of onset...the predictor of whether or not you will develop a problem
with substances. The younger the age that you first start drinking on a regular
basis, the greater the chances are that you will develop a problem later in life.
Controlling access is one of the issues that this is most easily addressed through
public policy. The other things that need to go along with it are family education,
family support. Those are not as easily reached through public policy as what
access can.
Wilburn: I want to go back down...and I guess this will be my final comment or question of
you. To your analogy of the family intervention or the group intervention of an
individual. I suppose the main point of that is that everyone has a role and it's
important for those roles to act in concert to get that person the treatment. I
personally look at...you mentioned all the looks...everyone has a different
role...I don't look for the City to do treatment. That's what MECCA does. I
don't necessarily look at the City to do education. That's where the University
and Public Health can come in to play. Even with the City...the
role...enforcement and enforcing the liquor laws...and enforcing the State
drinking age of 21, it just seems to me that a reason that I've support this...you
know, you're talking about focusing on...those things, in my opinion, are in
place. We've got RJ, our Police Chief, and they do stop people regardless of their
age who are drunk driving and give them the test. They do, if someone is
intoxicated, regardless of their age and being served, those things happen...there
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 38 of 47
is enforcement in place. So, it just seems to me that we have a policy that is not
congruent with the rest of your efforts, the University's efforts, and the City's
own efforts. Is that a sensible...
Berg: I think you explained my analogy better than I did.
Elliott: He's good. I had a couple of things. One, I think that sometimes...this is a
problem, it's a societal problem. Students come here...not only students...but
people come here with an immaturity that doesn't allow them to handle alcohol
well. They come here with far much more money than they've ever had before.
We have profileration of bars and I say again, I would like...I very much respect
and appreciate the work that you do and I hope that we can get a group together. I
don't want you people to work on something, and the Stepping Up to work on
something and the bar council to work on something, the Council to work on
something...I want us all to come together, list the things that are possible, list the
things that we can do and then attack that. A couple of things. When you put so
much emphasis on 21 and over - you take the emphasis off of the problems. I
think that we sometimes start looking for younger drinking and drinkers instead of
problem drinkers. You mentioned that the earlier an individual consumes
alcohol, the more probability that there will be a problem. How then do you...the
people with whom I've talked to have been in Europe in some of the homes where
drinking is just a regular staple of their everyday life and they don't have the
problems. To me, that's the core. I don't think there is anything we can do about
the fact that families are not preparing young people to be mature adults. I want
us to get all these groups together, find out what we can do, and I wouldn't vote
for 21 and over until we have comprehensively looked at this and addressed this
situation to decide what we can do...for instance 21 and over when it happened
before, not by ordinance but by practice, there was a...and Rick, you, and I and
Ralph talked about this. There was quite a bit of a problem with the private
parties which are infinitely more dangerous and more destructive than the bars. I
would like to see how we're going to address that because there are so many more
private residence in which people live who appear to be part of the drinking
problem. So, I want to address this comprehensively and I want to listen very
carefully to what you have to say. Jim Clayton handed me a thick piece of
material about what the University is doing. I want to look at that very carefully
because we all have to work together. 21 and over may be one of the things we
need to do. I think we need to look at this as soon as we can, we need to look at it
comprehensively, we need to do something effective.
Dobyns: Bob, when you and I talked with Ralph Wilmoth, since then we have met with all
the constituencies that Ron mentioned that represent a very diverse group. The
downtown bar group - we have met with them and they have been invited to our
meetings as well. So, there's been wide opportunities for participation. I'm not
exactly sure how much more discussion, like Ron said, we've discussed this at
length over a long period of time and certainly with a wide variety of different
groups. So, I think we've gotten a lot of opinion and we've certainly made that
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 39 of 47
available. I think all of you on the Council could speak to the fact that you've got
a lot of opinion, a lot of diverse opinion thus far.
Lehman: We've been talking about this almost since the first day I've been on the Council.
That's a long time. There has never been a lack of discussion. There has never
been a lack of looking at options. We have looked...you weren't on the Council
for nine of those years, but we have looked at just about every available option,
we always talk about this should be a combined effort and I do believe the
University is working at addressing this issue...but I think that for some reason
we have real problems with trying to take the first step. It's kind of like we say
that people are speeding through a school zone. Some are going eighty miles per
hour and some are going one-hundred. The speed limit is twenty. The law is
twenty whether you're going one-hundred or you're going eighty - you're still
breaking the law. We don't seem to grapple with that. I don't sense at this
particular point in time that there is support on the Council to do the sort of things
that we have to do. From my perspective here on the table is that this Council is
going to wait until at least after the first of the year to give the bar owners an
opportunity to come back to us. If my perception is wrong, tell me.
Elliott: I want to get together a group, right now, that sits around a table and looks at
everything we can do and say "We can do this, this we can't do...we maybe can
do this...let's look at it...these we can't do...' and let's do it.
Lehman: But we know what we can do and we won't do it.
Vanderhoef: We've got our list right in front of us here, Bob. What we can do as leaders at
City Council. These are things that we can show that we are interested in
changing the perspective of our City. We can do these and we need to be the
leaders to bring the others along to do the other things.
Elliott: What are doing about zoning? We haven't really looked at that not since I've
been on this Council.
Vanderhoefi That's what I mean. Right here on this memo page, we have the things that we
can do.
Champion: I think we ought to do some of them.
Vanderhoefi I think the 21 is the start. The access is the start. Then all of these other things
that will get us moving off the dime...talk is cheap and it's been going on for far
too long.
O'Donnell: Let me ask a question. We heard at one Council meeting that there was a young
girl that had a party with twenty-five kegs. Those kegs did not come from the
downtown bars. We heard another party that had twenty or thirty cases of beer. I
guarantee you that they did not come from a downtown bar.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 40 of 47
Vanderhoefi You were there?
Schreiber: I might have been. (Laughter)
Vanderhoef: Thanks, Jeremy.
O'Donnell: But I guarantee you...there's access to it Dee but the access is throughout the City
and what I've said all along...I want Iowa City to be on a level playing field with
everyone else around us. That's very important to me.
Lehman: But we aren't with Cedar Rapids, Quad Cities...almost every major city in the
state is 21. They come here because they can drink.
O'Donnell: If you think that we can try another Planet X...
Lehman: I'm not talking about that.
O'Donnell: I know, but that was suggested, and put rocks up a wall and climb it...it was
participated...the University participated in that and it did not last. The education
process is the way to do it. I'm not ready to vilify every student that goes to the
University of Iowa and I'm not ready to vilify every business for what I think is
the action of very few.
Lehman: We're going to have to continue driving through school zones at 70 miles an hour.
Thank you very much.
Champion: There are some things we can talk about and things that we can do before we go
to 21.
Bailey: Before we go to 217
Champion: Before we go to 21...before we vote for going to 21.
Schrieber: We as students absolutely want to be...I promise you not a single student likes
walking in to see other people puking, not a single student likes people passed out
and having be carried off the hospital. That's exactly why Mark Kresowik and
the Executive Committee is trying to get the student perspective involved in the
same way of educating and having...what's the date of that Mark? We've already
discussed this...Wednesday, May 25th...we want to get students to get together
and figure out ideas on how we can be a part of this process because we don't
want to just lay it on...we don't want to leave it up to you guys because if it goes
to 21 we're not on a level playing field with people like Illinois and Indiana and
other Big Ten schools in the area because we have no reason to attract people and
that's scary because of the intellectual and financial capital. We want to make
sure that we have good ideas coming from students where we can help reduce the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 41 of 47
culture. We agree that the culture of public intoxication is bad but we don't have
the ability to limit access that you guys think and that's what scares me.
Wilbum: I think the ideas and the fact that you're all here and talking about it is
wonderful...but I will point out that in the near history...I don't know if you're
painting the students as being uninvolved or unempowered but the fact that we
don't have a 21 ordinance now shows that the students did have power and were
involved.
Schreiber: I agree and I would love to see the students get involved like that. I hope that we
can all work together the way that we have been in the recent history.
Champion: There was one thing on Eleanor's list that I asked about and I don't know if it has
support from the other Council members...but I really am disappointed that the
bars haven't truly incorporated the monitor program that they promised us two
years ago or three years ago. When was it? To me, that would be an effective
tool to curb some of the excessive drinking downtown. Eleanor said that it would
be possible that we could write an ordinance that would demand that they have a
monitor for so many persons per occupancy. I do support the bar owners and I
really think they're trying and I think it's just going to take them a little longer but
there are things that they said they would do every time we've talked about going
to a 21 ordinance that still have not been done and one of them was the bar
monitors. That was something they brought up when we originally voted down
the 21. It was part of the thing that really swayed my vote at the time because I
thought it could be effective because some of those bars are very big and people
have to go to the bar to get a drink...am ! correct? I've not really been to one
when they're functioning...those big bars.
Elliott: When you were functioning or they were? (Laughter)
Champion: Do you have to go to the bar to get alcohol or are there wait staff?.
Schreiber: Generally you're getting your vast majority of drinks from the actual bar. So,
there isn't anybody monitoring where those drinks are going and who is
consuming them. You could be falling down drunk at the table and consume
another beer. That's the kind of thing I thought this monitoring system could
prevent and decrease some of this excess drinking that I think is our problem.
Elliott: I don't know that it lends anything to our discussion but I think as it is with any
problem, it's a minority of the entities that are causing a vast majority of the
problem and it certainly would be if there is any possible legal way to address that
aspect of it that's one of the things that I'd like to see. Is there a possibility to do
anything about that?
Bailey: From a safety perspective, because I was out Friday night with police officers, not
partying, I didn't graduate so I didn't get to party. Capacity issues. I was
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 42 of 47
wondering if that's something we can address as well because it does seem to be
that between fire codes and safety and also monitoring becomes a larger challenge
in a larger venue. I think that's something that we need to look at because the
bars get very, very crowded and the big bars get very, very crowded.
Vanderhoefi To go along with that and I'll get Eleanor in on this to. When we're talking about
occupancy for the big bars and so forth and in the memo we talk about it has to be
the fire department inspection which is an added layer. I don't know whether
there is any way that the police officer, who may already be on the premise and
walking around, can be the first alert or some such thing to bring someone down
or whether they could ask them to clear the bar...that it's overoccupied.
Bailey: We now have a new position that says that occupancy were part of the position. I
think maybe there is some linkage there in the fire department.
Dilkes: I think the enforcement of occupancy restrictions is just a question of resources
and how we dedicate what resources to it and that's really a question for Steve
and RJ and the fire department.
Atkins: I did think it was an issue that you wanted to take on.
Vanderhoef: I want to take it on but I'm looking at the staffing of it.
Atkins: The new fire inspector, part of that responsibility is to do the periodic checks on
over-capacity.
Vanderhoef: But I think there ought to be a first step piece in there that maybe the police can
even call someone out if they can not clear the bar for occupancy, I don't know
what...
Atkins: Clearing the bar, Dee, that's not easy. What you do is stop the entrances at the
door as people leave...you say 'fifty people have to leave' or something like that.
That's been my experience.
Champion: You wouldn't close it down.
Atkins: No.
O'Dolmell: I don't know how long we're going to talk about alcohol. On a positive note, we
have business owners downtown now that are actually policing other businesses.
I think that's a tremendous step. That's something that we would have never
dreamed of. All of us that have discussed this nothing but alcohol. Ernie has
been here twenty-two years and I've been here ten. That's an extremely positive
thing that is happening downtown. We appointed a commission to look into this
and I think they have come up with some ideas. Just think about it as we sat here
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 43 of 47
seven or eight years ago. We have businesses policing other businesses. That's
extremely positive.
Lehman: And we have fifteen more percent more bars and more violations than we ever
have.
Vanderhoef: Please don't say that we appointed them because that's not right. Okay, one other
thing, Connie. With your monitors...I believe the monitors are great, however I
have a problem with the monitors are of the peer group. I think it makes it
terribly difficult for a monitor that is nineteen or twenty walking around to walk
over and say 'You're not supposed to have alcohol in front of you' and 'You're
not to be drinking' and so forth. I think there is a maturity that I would expect in
the monitor that is out of the peer group.
Wilburn: That would conflict with state law, wouldn't it?
Dilkes: I think legislating a monitor is going to be very tough. You may legislate a
monitor but trying to enforce, trying to make sure that they're doing what you
want them to be doing...it's really hard to think about writing that legislation.
We could write it. They say the monitor must do such and so and such and
so...but enforcing it, gosh, that's going to be tough.
Vanderhoef: It's just like they aren't enforcing it within their own group.
Bailey: Another idea that isn't on this list and I don't know if it's possible...other areas of
that done this and this is to license your servers and bartenders, so if there is a
violation we require licensed servers in our establishments in Iowa City and if
there is a violation of serving somebody who has had too much to drink or is
underage then that person can't get a job doing that anywhere in the community.
I think that might...that peer group and that pressure might alleviate some
because basically somebody is saying 'I'11 lose my job, forget about it.'
Dilkes: Although I think that our compliance checks...the stings that they've been doing
to determine if servers are serving underage persons. The compliance rate has
gone way up...so I think that is a away, in terms of the serving of the alcohol, that
progress is being made.
Bailey: I'm just saying that you could reduce some of the peer pressure to serve to
underage. You know, you serve and you break the law, you're not employable.
Essentially.
Dilkes: One thing that I wanted to bring up is that I had some discussion with Leah after
their presentation about these bar crawls the regulation of bar crawls. I don't
know whether the group has addressed that as a group and whether they can get
some buy in to not honor the bar crawls...the entities honoring the bar
crawls...there was talk about them wanting us to legislate that and it's not clear to
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 44 of 47
me whether there's been some...whether that group has had some ability to get
the bar owners to buy into not honoring the bar crawls. I think you need to know
what before we would proceed with legislation on that.
Champion: You also mentioned in here when we talked about zoning before...this would be
long-term future stuff...but didn't I read somewhere that we could just sell all
over town...instead of dividing the town into zones that a bar couldn't be within a
bar couldn't be within 500 feet from another bar. Is that in here? Did I read that?
Lehman: Bob Miklow's memo says that some cities have done that.
Dilkes: There are a variety of possibilities with zoning legislation. The proximity of bars,
how many in one area, that kind of thing. As Bob's memo pointed out, there are a
number of very difficult issues with the zoning. Number one, you've got
grandfathering of existing uses. The sale of a bar does not change...ifthe use is
still the same you continue to be grandfathered. There are also that very
complicated issue of defining restaurants and bars and if someone anticipates
being a bar and therefore...let's say someone anticipates being a restaurant and
they move to a bar depending on where your percentage of alcohol and food is,
that's going to be a very difficult enforcement.
Champion: Except by doing some kind of zoning we could prevent the growth by any more
bars.
Dilkes: But you'd have to grapple with those issues...the restaurant/bar distinction, etc.
Bailey: We don't want to limit new restaurants.
Dilkes: Which is why I think...my recollection is that Council rejected that when they
discussed it the last time.
O'Donnell: Well, I don't want to talk any more about this.
ITEM 9. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 14, ENTITLED "UNIFIED
DEVELOPMENT CODE," CHAPTER 3, ENTITLED "CITY UTILITIES,"
ARTICLE H, ENTITLED "SOLID WASTE," SECTION 8, ENTITLED
"STORAGE OF SOLID WASTE" BY AMENDING SUBSECTION E, ENTITLED
"LOCATION OF SOLID WASTE CONTAINER," AND BY ADDING A NEW
SUBSECTION F, ENTITLED "DOWNTOWN SOLID WASTE CONTAINER
CODE" TO ESTABLISH A PERMIT SYSTEM FOR STORAGE OF SOLID
WASTE CONTAINERS IN THE DOWNTOWN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY.
(SECOND CONSIDERATION)
ITEM 10. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ADOPTING PERMIT SYSTEM FOR SOLID
WASTE CONTAINERS IN THE DOWNTOWN ALLEYS INCLUDING
PROVISIONS FOR APPLICATION, ISSUANCE, DURATION, INSPECTION,
SUSPENSION, REVOCATION, REMOVAL, FEES, AND INSURANCE.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 45 of 47
Lehman: Are we ready to wrestle with alleys? Mr. Atkins will you report to us on alleys
now that we're all paying attention?
Atkins: I assume at a meeting a couple of weeks ago that this was a go project and so
therefore we've done lots of things in the last couple of weeks. We have changed
the alley clean-up schedule. Hopefully you'll see some difference. We now do
three days a week and we're doing it between 3:00-7:00 in the morning on
Monday's, Wednesday's, and Friday's. We've met with all the haulers. We have
an application for dumpsters that has been prepared and is ready to go. There are
some minor changes...that's in the ordinances that I need you to adopt so we can
proceed. We've ordered stickers, identifying labels to be placed on the
dumpsters, we're spec-ing right now a vacuum unit which we would hope to have
in place maybe even as early as this summer that will make the alleys hopefully
even cleaner. It's going to dual-purpose. We have an idea that we may want to
order a vacuum that's big enough. You know how sand gets in the middle of the
road in the winter time? Well, we have trouble removing that. The vacuum that
we'd like to order would allow us to do that.
Lehman: A super sucker, eh?
Atkins: A super sucker, yes. There were some questions about why I didn't talk to the
property owners. I did not. I did talk to some who called out of curiosity. There
are eighty property owners in the downtown. I did not deliberately call a meeting
of the businesses. I estimate that there are about two-hundred businesses in the
downtown. I made the assumption that you say clean up the alleys - we're
pressing ahead and we're cleaning up the alleys.
Champion: They look a lot cleaner today.
O'Donnell: They look good.
Champion: The only question I had was the time zone for the dumpsters being emptied. That
seems pretty narrow to me.
Atkins: We didn't have one. We allow the haulers and the business to make that decision.
Champion: I thought you had it in the memo.
Atkins: In the memo we talked about it. No, we're not going to do that. I want as much
of a relationship between the hauler and the business to occur naturally without
City regulation. What we're regulating is those dumpsters need to be clean,
locked, licensed, and then I'm hoping with that, that that will take care of most
everything.
Vanderhoefi What are we looking at for license fees?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Page 46 of 47
Atkins: $25 we're estimating. $50 for the grease.
Karr: First year is free.
Bailey: First year is free.
Champion What about...how are we going to handle people dumping trash on top of the
dumpsters?
Atkins: We will make the assumption that it's hauler A that owns that dumpster and
there's trash on the top of it then hauler A is who we talk to. You'll need to call
in a complaint or we'll handle it routinely. ! think many of those are going to go
away. We believe it's going to go away. The pricing is between you and your
hauler. If they charge you more...the haulers, according to Rod, the
superintendent of refuse, are so far pretty much on board. They know what we
expect of them - that we want it clean.
Bailey: So when can we move to the front of the buildings? (Laughter)
Atkins: Give me two more weeks on the back of the buildings...
Elliott: The front of the buildings and the middle of the streets for parking.
Champion: It looked nice for graduation.
Atkins: We believe that if we stay ahead of it, we're going to do to okay. With three
times a week, we think we can stay ahead of it.
Lehman: Any other questions for Steve?
Atkins: Any other suggestions, just let me know. I'm trying to do as minimally-intrusive
things as possible.
Champion: Litter begets litter. Ugliness begets litter.
Atkins: Ungodliness?
Bailey: Forget about it. (Laughter)
COUNCIL TIME
Lehman: Any council time?
O'Donnell: Tomorrow night.
This represents only a reasonably accurate txanscription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.
May 16, 2005 City Council Work Session Pag~ 47 of 47
Schreiber: Can I just say real quick? A student, actually one of the executive members,
asked me to ask you guys...they're doing the Iowa Pride Parade, the LGBT is and
they would love to have some City Council representation possibly.., somebody
maybe marching in the parade or something along those lines.
Champion: When are they doing it?
Schreiber: I believe it's June 18 and I think it's a great thing to show support.
Elliott: June when?
Schreiber: I will definitely be marching.
Vanderhoef: I have marched in it before.
Bailey: I usually attend.
O'Donnnell: Why don't you drive the convertible?
Schreiber: I'll have him come in tomorrow and talk about it.
Lehman: Okay, tomorrow night.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the May 16, 2005 Iowa City Council Work Session.