Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-06-29 Bd Comm MinutesMINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION THURSDAY, MAY 18, 2000 CIVIC CENTER, LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Dan Coleman, Lucia-Mia Page, Jayne Moraski, Kathleen Renquist, Gretchen Schmuch, Rick House, Denita Gadson MEMBERS ABSENT: Bill Stewart, Bob Elliott STAFF PRESENT: Steve Nasby, Maggie Grosvenor, Angela Willjams OTHERS PRESENT: Alaina Welsh CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Moraski called the meeting to order at 6:30 P.M. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 24, 2000 The minutes were approved with a minor revision to one sentence on page 2. PUBLIC/MEMBER DISCUSSION OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA None IOWA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY UPDATE Maggie Grosvenor spoke on behalf of the housing authority office. She presented statistical documents with the new logo and explained them to the commission members. She explained that "pending/issued" vouchers are where people are approved for rent assistance and they are out looking for housing. There are 145 families in this category. The numbers "in process" relate to the stage in the process when the housing authority is determining household income eligibility. There are 155 families "in process". There is no waiting list except for public housing, which is unit specific. Grosvenor explained that the list is divided up because technically households are still on a waiting list until they find housing. If all leased tomorrow, for instance, then there would not be a waiting list. Grosvenor added that about 1 out of 3 may not lease in the initial period for various reasons. Renquist said that she did not understand why the 300 households who were "pending" and "in process" were not considered to be on the waiting list. Grosvenor explained that all the households were somewhere in the process. If there were people whose status was not "pending" or "issued" there would be an actual waiting list. In response to a question Grosvenor said that all applications begin to be processed within two days. Grosvenor went on to explain that before applicants are issued Section 8 assistance they have to go to a briefing. She showed the schedule with the most recent meeting which had 18 people attending. Applicants are invited to the briefings as they become eligible. Grosvernor added that a video is being developed for these briefings to save staff time. Applicants must attend the briefing before they are granted Section 8 status. The occupancy section of the report detailed the cedificates and vouchers. Everything is being converted to vouchers by HUD. There are 1,086 vouchers for Iowa City. Currently there are 1,016 families who are leased up. This means that there is a 94% occupancy rate. It is not cumulative for the year but a current snapshot of the program. In public housing there are Housing & Community Development Comm. Minutes May 18, 2000 Page 2 currently 100 units. Seven have been sold over the last two years. Public housing has a 95% occupancy rate. The Family Self-Sufficiency (FSS) program is HUD mandated. Grosvenor explained that HUD required 77 families to be signed up for the program. A grant from HUD has been secured to fund a program coordinator. Prior to having a program coordinator, Iowa City was the lowest in the state in terms of having households sign up for FSS. Within 4-6 months of having a program coordinator 100 families were signed up she believes that it shows that the program is quite labor intensive. Grosvenor also highlighted other administrative reporting that HUD requires. The Administrative Fee Report represented the operating funds information. The Housing Authority earns administrative fees from Section 8 lease ups. For every family that is leased up on the first of the month Housing Authority earns an administrative fee. The Housing Authority has 10,608 unit months this year-to-date, with the cumulative average being 89% for occupancy. These fees pay for the operation of the Authority. The multi-family tenant characteristic system was explained. It is tracked electronically through the Internet. The report, done monthly, is how HUD tracks the information. Grosvenor mentioned a HUD grant application that was just submitted. The $150,000 grant application was prepared in partnership with Goodwill. The Resident Service Delivery Model grant will provide supportive services, job training or education needed for employment, job development and business development. A strong effort is being made to coordinate services and not duplicate them. Grosvenor shared a recent newsletter that had gone out. The Tour of Homes Program was also pointed out. She noted that the carpet in one of the homes is made out of recycled plastic pop bottles. The carpet layer said that it was better quality than a lot of the carpet that he lays. The hardwood floors are from the salvage barn. The metal bar used in the home has recycled car pads. Grosvenor also noted that their office would be in the Civic Center in June. They will be closed for public traffic for a couple of days during the move. MONITORING REPORTS Iowa City IHA Senior Housing Phase 1: Coleman stated that he was not able to make contact as Bob Burns did not return his phone calls. Moraski will cover this item in the future due to Coleman's resignation. Habitat For Humanity: Gadson indicated that she would give a report at the next meeting. City of Iowa City- Housin.q Rehab: Schmuch will report at the next meeting. Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship- Acquisition & Rehab: Stewart faxed a report in his absence. Maryann Dennis indicated that the project is to purchase 18 units of affordable housing in the Iowa City/Coralville area. The project uses HCDC funds of $300,000 and $449,982 of State of Iowa HOME Funds as well as private financing and Federal Home Loan Bank monies. The State of Iowa HOME Funds have been approved, but Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship and the State are still working on a funding agreement. Consequently, no funds have been drawn from the city. The purchase of units is expected to start within a two months time span. Housing & Communi~ Development Comm. Minu~s May18,2000 Page 3 Old Brick: Page spoke with Todd Case and they have hired a fundmiser. A feasibility study indicated that $1,000,000 to $1,400,000 will be needed to complete the renovation project. They are also talking with a large contributor that may make it so that they do not have to raise a great deal of the money. He believes this should be resolved within the next 4-6 weeks. Concern was raised by the Commission that the $20,000 that had been granted in FY00 was not used. Nasby said they had indicated that Old Brick could use for some electrical work, which would be in the neighborhood of $18,000. The funds would be related to the installation of the elevator. OLD BUSINESS 2000 Community Development Celebration: Nasby suggested to the members proposed sites for the celebration. They were the Community Mental Health Center, Miller Orchard Park and Salvation Army. The group agreed that the Community Mental Health would be a good option. The volunteers for the sub-committee were Renquist, Schmuch and Moraski. Update of Discussion of Location Based Criteria: Nasby began by saying that the Council discussed this at their May 15th work session. Staff was directed to move forward with a study of group living facilities. Information will be presented to the Council and if needed, Council will .provide additional direction. The study will probably take about six months. This Commission and the Planning and Zoning Commission may be involved depending upon the findings and the Council's actions. It appears to be mainly a land-use issue. South Pointe Lots- Disposition Nasby noted the memo included in the packet. Council discussed this issue also on May 15. They would like to give Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship and the Housing Authority each one lot. A public hearing will take place for the disposition to Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship. In response to a question, Nasby said that the council would like to keep one lot for the Affordable Dream Home Ownership Program. NEW BUSINESS Nasby advised the members that Hannah's Blessing is required to take cam of some legal issues and surveying before purchasing the building. They have discussed a pre-award for $5,000 for the preliminary work. The remainder of the CDBG money will be used for the purchase price. He noted that if FY01 CDBG funds are not obtained the $5,000 would have to come out of the Contingency Fund and this pre-award would not affect future grants. He said this information was so citizens will be advised as per HUD's requirements. The members thanked Coleman for his service to the commission. A letter was presented to him signed by Mayor Lehman. ADJOURNMENT Renquist moved to adjourn the meeting with Coleman seconding the motion. The meeting adjourned at 7:05 PM. Minutes submitted by Le Ann Dunne-Tyson. ppdcdbg/rnin/hcdc5-18-00. doc /'~V'~F't 6/29/00 Iowa City Human Rights Commission April 25, 2000 - 7:00 p.m. Page 1 ~j,,.~ MEMBERS PRESENT: Ma~ Larew, Charles Major, Diane Ma~in, Rick Spooner, Mettie Thomopulos, Jan Warren MEMBERS ABSENT: Janice Simmons-Welburn STAFF PRESENT: Heather Shank OTHERS PRESENT: Dave Leshtz, Jacob Wilkin, William Greiner, Steve Kanner 1. CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Warren called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m. 2. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Minutes unanimously approved from the March 28, 2000 meeting. 3. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: 4. Dave Lesh~ - Guest Speaker Dave became an Iowa Civil Rights Commission (ICRC) member in April of 1999. During the last year the ICRC voted to develop a subcommittee to explore issues raised annually by the Iowa City Human Rights Commission regarding discrimination based on sexual orientation. The three new Commissioners appointed to the ICRC volunteered to seNe on the subcommittee. After exploring the issues it was determined that the ICRC would: (a) Begin to track and repo~ to the Commission the intakes and complaints not covered under the ICRC's jurisdiction; (b) Have staff provide information to Commission about existing policies and legislation relevant to sexual orientation; ~ Discuss sexual orientation and related issues during retreat; (d) Clari~ the legal role of ICRC in making recommendations to the state legislature. Dave asked for suggestions of individuals to speak to the ICRC regarding sexual orientation issues. Some suggestions included, Bill Crews, Diane Finne~y, and PFLAG (Parents & Friends of Lesbians and Gays) Dave indicated that the ICRC did not meet last month but they are meeting May 20. He also mentioned that the ICRC has named both the EEOC and HUD as groups it can collaborate with. In addition, Frank Iowa City Human Rights Commission April 25, 2000 - 7:00 p.m. Page 2 Tribble will be conducting a series of accessibility lectures across the state. 4. NEW BUSINESS: Legislation has been introduced regarding racial profiling in Iowa but there is no real momentum to do anything substantive. Shank explained her response to the Press Citizen's editorial which confused the Iowa City Human Rights Commission with HARRT. The Commission indicated that it would go forward with the poster campaign that was initially developed with HARRT and the Affirmative Action Office in response to incidents at the Dental School. Benson & Hepker have offered to design the poster free of charge. Jehle and Howe and Thomopulos agreed to purchase the ribbon that will accompany the posters. Shank agreed to write the letter to accompany the posters. 5. OLD BUSINESS: Shank said Janusz Bardach accepted the HRC's request that he speak at the next Human Right's Breakfast and Jan Warren agreed to write Dr. Bardach a letter thanking him. The town meeting addressing racial profiling has been postponed until the Fall because the Commissioners have been unable to meet and plan. Shank brought to the Commission's attention the Procurement Policy and memorandum dated April 4, 2000 regarding the purchasing of goods and services by the City of Iowa City. Shank mentioned that these documents came about after Councilperson Steve Kanner inquired as to origins of the city uniforms. This inquiry led Shank to do research on the issue of sweatshops. Mr. Kanner mentioned that the City's procurement policy was limited to just the canceling of the employee purchased t-shirts. Warren indicated that the policy was more comprehensive. Mr. Kanner asked that the Commission recommend to the Council that it sign the proclamation drafted by the Students Against Sweatshops and codify anti- sweatshop legislation in the Human Rights Ordinance. Shank indicated that the issue regarding sweatshops and the students' position was very complex. The students wanted the University to withdraw from the Fair Labor Association and join the Worker's Rights Consortium. The University joined the WRC but did not withdraw from the FLA. The students alleged that the FLA is made up of businesses that after agreeing to, failed to monitor their business practices. The companies found to be guilty of this include Gap, Nike and Liz Claiborne. While some of the Iowa City Human Rights Commission April 25, 2000 - 7:00 p.m. Page 3 companies as mentioned above are guilty of deception, the WRC has not conducted an investigation. Mr. Kanner indicated that perhaps representatives from the University and the SAS could attend the next meeting. The Commission indicated it would take it under consideration and reach a decision after discussion. 6. REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS: Major indicated that he was a graduate in the Citizen's Police Academy. Major does not believe the officers racially profile. 7. STATUS OF CASES: The cases are progressing nicely. There hasn't been any word from either lawyer on the case that was recently unsuccessfully conciliated. 8. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. HRC032800.doc IOWA CiTY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Zb-~ - IOWA CiTY CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MAY 23, 2000 - 7:00 P.M. % ~, _.~ MEMBERS PRESENT: Maureen Howe, Joan Jehle, Charles Major, Diane Martin, Janice Simmons-Welburn, Rick Spooner, Mettie Thomopulos MEMBERS ABSENT: Mary Larew, Jan Warren STAFF PRESENT: Elizabeth Harken, Heather Shank OTHERS PRESENT: David Burnett 1. CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Thomopulos called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. 2. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Discussion of the April minutes was tabled until all commissioners had a chance to review the document. 2 3. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: The City Council requested that the Human Rights Commission (HRC) make a recommendation as to whether the Council should pass the resolution drafted by Students Against Sweatshops (SAS). The draft resolution suggested by SAS is a recommendation that the University of Iowa immediately withdraw from the Fair Labor Association (FLA). Martin said that no matter how the HRC feels about the issue, the City does not have any jurisdiction over the University. A suggestion at the previous meeting to add something about this to the ordinance would not make sense either because they would have no enforcement authority. Jehle asked if the Commission could do something other than make this recommendation; for example, could the HRC issue a statement to the Council? Major said he believed the HRC should make this recommendation because the Council wants to know where the Commission stands on the issue. He thought this would be more effective than simply saying this is not in the HRC's jurisdiction. He said he would vote to recommend to Council to pass this resolution. Iowa City Human Rights Commission May 23, 2000 - 7:00 p.m. Page 2 Thomopulos said she believed the recommendation to pass this resolution would be a moot point and did not see what effect this would have. She agreed with Martin and did not see the point in recommending a "barren" resolution. Major said if the HRC voted this down, they would be setting a terrible precedent by tacitly approving the FLA and approving sweatshop abuse. He thought the City Council was simply asking whether the Commission would support this resolution, not whether it could be enforced. Spooner responded that the HRC is obviously not in favor of sweatshops, but he did not feel well informed about all sides of the issue. Martin said the complexity of this issue was one of the points raised at a conference she and Shank had at'tended. Martin said people who work with human rights in these countries have seen the flipside of sweatshop labor (such as prostitution) and do not see a clear-cut solution. Strong statements against sweatshops need to go hand in hand with working with the economies of the areas. Shank added that the representatives who have worked in the countries say the conditions for children who work are often better than the alternative. She said one of the human rights workers had been involved in setting up a fund for children that would allow the children to work while receiving an education. Shank noted that this is a complex issue, but the issue before the HRC is simply whether the Commission wants to recommend that the City Council advise the UI to withdraw from the FLA. Thomopulos said the pros and cons of the issue could be discussed forever, but the issue before the HRC is whether they should make this recommendation to Council. Howe said she agreed that this was out of their jurisdiction. Major said that he did not believe the FLA would ever do much because they are in the pocket of the corporations. He said the HRC does not have to solve the sweatshop issue, but the Commission does need to request that the Council recommend to the UI to go against the FLA. He noted that the Council will also debate this and he would not have a problem with making this recommendation. Public Hearing Opened David Burnett, Students Against Sweatshops (SAS), said the issue is the difference between the FLA and the Worker's Rights Consodium (WRC). He noted that no organization wants to take jobs away from people. To Iowa City Human Rights Commission May 23, 2000 - 7:00 p.m. Page 3 further educate commissioners about the issue, he offered additional information about both groups. Burnett explained that both the FLA and the WRC want to improve conditions; however, with the FLA, a lot of concessions were made to industry. For example, when factories are inspected, workers are told not to talk to the inspectors. In addition, the information is not made public, as it will be with the WRC. Burnett said some of the benefits of the WRC include: the organization is affiliated with universities; information about the industries will be made available to the public; and the WRC will hold subcontractors accountable. For example, a subcontracting company cannot "cut and run" (close the factory and move) when there is a problem. He said neither organization has actually done anything. However, the FLA has certified companies as Fair Labor Organizations. This has been ineffective because the FLA will only check on the company once per year for three years. The WRC instead plans to conduct repeated checks of a company in order for a company to maintain its certification. Commissioners asked who financially supports each organization. Burnerr said the WRC is supported by universities while the FLA is supported by corporations. Martin clarified that the students' objection to the UI belonging to the FLA is because of its structure, and that the Ul's position is to wait and see while belonging to both organizations. Burnett added that the UI also has major contracts with companies such as Nike and Reebok who are big FLA supporters. The corporations are pushing for the UI to stay in the FLA. He said SAS believes that it should be the other way around; that the UI should be able to tell corporations what they want. Major said that he would argue that the FLA has had its chance for three years but has not done anything. Now, the WRC, which is made up of universities, has a chance to do something. He added that he did not see why they should stick with something that does not work. Thomopulos noted that she still believed the HRC was not there to address these issues; the issue was whether to make a recommendation that is restricted to asking City Council to do certain things. She thought this was a separate issue from deciding what should be done about sweatshop labor. Shank asked why the UI could not remain with both the FLA and the WRC and compare the responses from both organizations regarding a particular Iowa City Human Rights Commission May 23, 2000 - 7:00 p.m. Page 4 business. A decision could be made as to the better organization based on the thoroughness of the responses. Would it not be good for the UI to evaluate individual companies, rather than designating "bad" companies as belonging to the FLA and "good" companies as belonging to the WRC? She questioned whether the UI could make an individualized assessment. Burnett said the WRC will make its findings public but the FLA will not. He said the watermark indicating that a garment was made by a company belonging to the FLA will have a greater impact on consumers than a public document released by the WRC that shows the same company's violations. Burnerr said being in both the FLA and WRC muddles the waters. Spooner said he wanted to know what voting to make this recommendation would mean. He asked if the Commission knew enough to make this recommendation or if they were just wasting time. He said he would not want to indirectly tell the University to do something without knowing all sides of the issue. He said voting against making this recommendation would not mean that he approves of sweatshop labor. Howe asked what the corporations have at stake. Burnett said corporations in the FLA have $30 billion in licensing contracts at stake. He noted that only a couple of companies belong to the WRC because the WRC would make them do things that cut into the profit margin. Burnett stated this is a complex issue and that is why SAS is requesting support. Public Hearing Closed MOTION: Major moved to make a recommendation to Council to pass the resolution drafted by Students Against Sweatshops (SAS). Jehle seconded the motion. Thomopulos asked if there was any further discussion. Major said if commissioners did not vote for this recommendation, they were really saying the FLA is okay. Other commissioners disagreed with this statement. Major said this is what it would look like to the public. Spooner said he simply felt that he did not know enough to make this recommendation, but would commit to learning about the issue. Martin said that for her, voting against this would mean that she's voting on the situation. She would vote against the recommendation because the HRC does not have any jurisdiction and because the Council does not have any jurisdiction over the University. Simmons-Welburn said that she also questioned the appropriateness of this recommendation. She wondered Iowa City Human Rights Commission May 23, 2000 - 7:00 p.m. Page 5 about the Council's role because the Council has no control over the UI. She added that she wondered what message this would be sending. Thomopulos said that she did not see how one could make a motion and then state how one's vote would be perceived. Howe said she understood the FLA has problems, but was not convinced with the history of the WRC. The motion was defeated by a vote of 1-7. Commissioners agreed they would like to express that they support the City's procurement policy and desire that the City continue to be aware of the issue. Thomopulos asked for volunteers to draft a separate statement. Because a second meeting would need to be called in order to approve a statement, Simmons-Welburn said she thought the minutes would clearly explain the Commission's decision not to recommend to Council to immediately make this recommendation to the UI. Thomopulos agreed that there had been enough discussion. 4. NEW BUSINESS: Gay Pride Parade - June 17, 2000 Shank said the HRC has always sponsored a table at the Gay Pride Parade. Thomopulos and Simmons-Welburn volunteered to work at the table from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. Major and Martin volunteered to work from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. Howe said she would assist throughout. Simmons-Welburn said that she would buy a new tablecloth for the table. 5. OLD BUSINESS: Substantial Equivalency Shank said she received a call from someone at HUD who stated that there was a typographical error in the revised ordinance. Therefore, a revised draft would need to go before City Council before Iowa City's ordinance would be deemed substantially equivalent to the Federal Fair Housing Amendments Act. Shank said the ordinance has gone before Council at least three times since 1994. She referred the call to Eleanor Dilkes who advised the typographical error could be corrected by the codifiers. The last time Council reviewed the document, HUD said the Human Rights Office would simply need to send a copy of the revised ordinance in order for it to be approved. Iowa City Human Rights Commission May 23, 2000 - 7:00 p.m. Page 6 Human Rights Education Training Conference Martin attended the conference and thought it was wonderful. She said they did activities with children and adults based on the United Nations (U.N.) Declaration of Human Rights and some other covenants of the U.N. Many of the covenants have not yet been ratified by the United States. The primary attendees were the before- and after-school workers from the local school district. Each person received books of activities (one for activities with children and one for adults). Martin added that the Stanley Foundation helped to fund the conference and had underwritten the materials along with Minnesota's Office for Human Rights. Posters/Ribbons At the April meeting the Commission indicated that it would go forward with the poster campaign that was initially developed with HARRT and the Affirmative Action Office in response to incidents at the Dental School. Benson & Hepker offered to design the poster free of charge. Thomopulos said the posters and ribbons will be prepared and members of the HRC will distribute them to businesses. Shank would let them know when these were ready for distribution. 6. REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS: Jehle said she scheduled a slot on Dottie Ray's radio show to talk about the Human Rights Breakfast. Jehle and Spooner were scheduled for Tuesday, August 1 st at 11:30 for coffee and 11:45 on the air. Jehle also reported that the Hate Acts Rapid Response Team (HARRT) would sponsor lunch at the synagogue as part of an effort to recruit new members. Jehle said Major (who had left the meeting) had asked her to mention that the Supreme Court of Vermont ruled that committed homosexual relationships should have the same rights and privileges afforded to married straight couples. Major told her that it is very close to being passed. Supporters are asking people to please add their names to a list (which Jehle had) and then email the list to their friends. When the list reaches 50 people, they are asked to forward a copy of the list to the governor. Howe reported that two students from the UI law school were involved in writing legislation that was passed. It would allow small businesses to receive an assisted-device tax credit. The ADA only covers businesses with 20 employees or more. 7. STATUS OF CASES: Iowa City Human Rights Commission May 23, 2000 - 7:00 p.m. Page 7 Shank said they are doing very well. She noted that an error in April's case status report was corrected. Martin asked what "investigative summary pending" meant. Shank said it means the interviews are complete but they have not had time to write the summary. Jehle reminded everyone that commissioners help with stuffing envelopes for the Human Rights Breakfast nominations letter at the July meeting. Shank said people were confused by the Human Rights nomination form the previous year. Martin asked if they were confusing people by asking for nominations by category. Instead, they could request the nominations and then the nominating committee would be responsible for placing them into the appropriate categories. Martin said they should remember to request nominations for businesses. Shank said that she would send a list of past winners to all commissioners. 8. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m. HRC052300.doc 6/29/00 MINUTES Agenda item 3A IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES REGULAR MEETING Meeting Room A Members Present: Linda Dellsperger, Shaner Magalh~es, Mary McMurray, Lisa Parker, Linda Prybil, Jesse Singerman, Winston Barclay Members Absent: Mark Ma~in, Jim Swaim Staff Present: Barbara Black, Maeve Clark, Susan Craig, Larry Eckholt, Debb Green, Heidi Lauritzen, Kara Logsden, Martha Lubaroff, Liz Nichols Others: Fred Lucas, Press Citizen CALL TO ORDER: Vice President Parker called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes for the regular meeting of April 27 were approved unanimously after a motion by Magalh~es/Prybil. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Building Project: A referendum date has been approved by City Council. It will take place November 7 with the general election. Several Board members attended the informal and formal Council meetings at which discussion and formal voting took place. It passed unanimously and there were supportive comments made. The Board reviewed the fundraising report that included recommendations of the ad hoc Friends Foundation Committee. The Friends Foundation made some changes to the initial recommendation from Hartsook Consulting firm. They established a timeline and set a goal of ~3.5 million. $1.5 million would be used for capital expenses for the building and the remaining ~2 million would increase the endowment to provide income for operating expenses. The second issue raised in Craig's memo dealt with adoption of guidelines related to naming different areas in the expanded library facility in honor of large donors to this campaign. Craig asked for a discussion that could lead to support of this plan. Board asked what parts of the building would be appropriate and/or what size of a gift would be worthy of naming. They asked Eckholt for recommendations. Eckholt replied that it is in the Library Board's authority to set the standards. Craig stated she was in favor of naming rights for almost any room within the building, but not in naming the entire building. The largest contributor will be the Iowa City taxpayer. The Board's endorsement would be adequate for now. It was suggested that Linda Dellsperger and Linda Prybil, the Board's representatives to the Foundation could meet with Eckholt and Craig to establish guidelines. They will be drafted for the June meeting. ICPL Board of Trustees Agenda item 3A Minutes of Meeting May 25, 2000 Page 2 Barclay moved that the Board endorse the concept of establishing appropriate donor recognition levels for gifts. Magalh~es seconded the motion. Another issue that is tangential, according to Eckholt, is the large number of recognition plaques already here in the building. There was no further discussion on the issue. Passed unanimously. Singerman suggests that people who have given in the past and honored with plaques should continue to be recognized. Details of the recognition policy will be discussed at the June meeting. Barclay moved that we endorse proceeding with the fund raising plan as proposed by the Foundation. Singerman seconded. Parker thanked the Foundation for their work on this ambitious project. All in favor said Aye. Craig recommends having a discussion of the issue of parking with the Council. Craig believes that there are options for parking. She used the Senior Center as an example of a downtown city facility that uses a permit system.. Everyone doesn't need the most accessible parking. What we hear most are complaints about the elderly, young parents with small children, and people with physical problems. Ways to improve access for these groups can be suggested to Council. "',. Dellsperger thought that incorporating a bookdrop into the parking lot was a great idea. She is in favor of whatever we can do to incorporate a bookdrop into parking downtown. The assumption is that with a new building there will still be parking on Linn Street. Craig said that with a new entrance to the lot we could possibly increase street parking by one spot. Singerman said that she thought the Board made it very clear to Council that we wanted parking to remain across the City Plaza and she hopes that they heard us. Dellsperger suggested that we use the interviews conducted for the Hartsock report to present comments about parking to Council. A large number of people interviewed spoke strongly about parking. Craig summarized an earlier memo to Council from the Director of Parking & Transit about an increase in parking revenue when the Linn Street lot became available. Atkins suggested at one time that the Linn Street lot could be refurbished and made more attractive at the time that a new building was constructed. Is there support from Council for continued library parking on that site? Council has always wanted to develop something on that parcel of land. Maybe we should have been more forceful in getting the Council to commit. Dellsperger would like to see an effort made, in conjunction with this discussion, to encourage people to use the ramps once they are completed. Offering free parking in the new ramp might help quiet some of the complaints. Singerman is supportive of the idea of asking Council for the lot for a period of five years and asking them to refurbish it as well. Perhaps we could offer an alternative to them, that would keep the parking available; for example any development include designated spaces for library. Craig suggested that we send Council a memo and ask for a meeting to discuss parking and leasing vs. selling of commercial space which has never been settled. The memo could or could not lay out what we are asking for; for example, a minimum of five years with refurbishing. That could be in the memo or could be in a conversation. We should refer to the assumption made by the Board that we would have access to this lot when we all agreed to this option. Barclay recommended that a memo could be drafted that included reference to this assumption. Craig Indicated some dates for a joint meeting; June 12, 19, July 17. ICPL Board of Trustees Agenda item 3A Minutes of Meeting May 25, 2000 Page 3 She will draft a memo from Board discussion and run it by the Building Committee for approval with a target meeting date in June. Outreach/Access Issues Craig included a memo to the Board in an effort to clarify distinction between what libraries call outreach to special populations, and expanding the library in some way away from the downtown building. The public is bringing the latter to the Board rather than the former. She requested a conversation about timing, preference, and a specific plan. What process would the Board use to determine exploring a branch vs. bookmobile? Does the Board want to decide between a bookmobile vs. branch, a timeline, and how to pay for it? Or should the Board reach out to the people who represent the various constituencies, inform them of constraints, etc. and ask for their input before a plan is put together? Magalh~es says we wouldn't even be having the conversation. if we hadn't gotten suggestions from people and he favors getting public input. McMurray feels that it could muddy the waters to move ahead with something like this while we are attempting to get a new building. Why ask the public about something like this now? Singerman thinks that some people feelsthat we don't listen and that we should give them a forum in which to discuss the issue. McMurray would not object if these choices had no costs tied to them. If we are to pass the referendum we need to keep a clear message right now. We can talk about those kinds of services after the referendum. Start the planning process after the election. Craig brings it to the Board now because staff is reviewing the Strategic Plan. The Board will look at it in July. If the Board wants to direct Craig to make recommendations, this is the time to bring it forward prior to budget development. Dellsperger agrees that we should wait until after the election and that it would confuse things if this comes forward before the bond referendum. If we talk about it now, people will think they don't have to vote for expansion downtown. Singerman feels that it is our mission to seek public input. She suggested developing a standing committee to deal with access issues. Prybil says that we have already gone on record that we support downtown expansion but also feels that we should not address other options during the next six months, Barclay thinks that a greater danger would be that some people may believe that it is an either/or situation. Parker raised the question of making the decision as a board vs. asking for public input. In general Board is in favor of having the discussions after the election and therefore any recommendation would be included in the budget request for FY03. No action was taken except to agree to schedule time in the fall when we could talk about putting together the public discussion. NEW BUSINESS Policy Reviews: Community Relations: this regular review brought no recommended changes from the staff. A question was raised about customer service training. The Library typically provides such training at Inservice Day. During the year, several staff members usually attend customer service training offsite. ICPL Board of Trustees Agenda item 3A Minutes of Meeting May 25, 2000 Page 4 In response to a question, a variety of surveys are conducted; by phone, surveys related to output measures. Dutput measures are no longer required. We will be conducting a user survey in FY01. Public Relations: No change was recommended. No discussion. Both policies were accepted as reviewed with no changes. STAFF REPORTS Regional Reference Office is moving out. We have been receiving 8991/month rent for the space and additional income for reimbursement of expenses. They provided backup reference service for two regions in Iowa that benefited smaller libraries. With the advent of Internet in small libraries, it has become unnecessary to staff the office in order to answer a very few reference questions. The service will be missed. They will contract with a Regional office in Ames and pay per question. This makes an office available to us. We have talked about .:~ accommodating a frequent request for word-processing and resume 'software. We are tentatively thinking about using the space for three or four dedicated word processors and a printer (pay for print). We can recycle older computers. We did not staff the RRO except for backup when someone was gone. What type of staffing would be needed for word processing? Page staff will get people started like they do with the Web. Next month our Board meeting will be in the second floor Conference Room. We will go on a tour of Technical Services to see the new furniture. Children's Day - June 11. Iowa Arts Festival has a lot of wonderful activities planned this year and it is back downtown. It is the Kick Off for the Summer Reading Program. Green invited Board members to volunteer. DO report in packet. Questions: about transfers of funds for acquisitions. Goal for the annual is 8100,000. Of that 860,500 is budgeted in FYO0 for materials. If that goal is not met, it will not get spent. Collection money can come from another source. Eckholt explained that in this transitional year of switching the Endowment Fund with the Sustaining Fund, they haven't caught up with themselves yet. But it is expected we will raise at least 860,500 for the collection Magalh~es asked Eckholt if he felt the passage of referendum could harm fundraising? Eckholt responded that a major campaign could affect the annual fund drive and regardless of what happens, we need a larger endowment. If the bond issue fails, we'll still go ahead with the fund raising. Many people who use the library are not Iowa City residents, they live in the County. Those people could be solicited for fund raising. ANNOUNCEMENT FROM MEMBERS Magalh~es reported he received a complaint about people smoking outside the library doors. This is the second inquiry that has been made. Craig will work with the City attorney to clarify what we can ban from entrance areas. ICPL Board of Trustees Agenda item 3A Minutes of Meeting May 25, 2000 Page 5 Swaim reported on his recent "office hours". He requested a second sign and a table set up at the South entrance. The Board is in agreement that we should schedule all through the summer. Alternate Saturdays and weekday hours, evenings. Some times when there is a lot of foot traffic. A booth on Children's day was suggested. However we would have to be careful to not campaign and at that event it would be difficult to distinguish Iowa City citizens. Maybe incorporating an idea like that as part of the campaign along with visits to neighborhood centers would be an idea to pass along. A campaign committee is being formed. They will meet on June 5. COMMITTEE REPORTS Committee to evaluate Director: Craig's self-evaluation along with evaluation forms' for the Board to complete were distributed. They are due to Lubaroff by June 6. The committee will meet and make a recommendation to the Board at the June meeting. COMMUNICATIONS .~, A letter from Thistlethwaite thanking those responsible for the "What Makes it Great" series. This series was co-sponsored by the Library and Hancher Auditorium. DISBURSEMENTS Visa expenditures for April, 2000 were reviewed. Disbursements for April, 2000 were approved unanimously after a motion by Singerman/Magalh~es. SET AGENDA ORDER FOR JUNE MEETING Evaluate Director Building Joint Meeting with City Council Follow-up on establishing fund-raising guidelines Tour of Technical Services Minutes taken and transcribed by Martha Lubaroff POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES - June 13, 2000 CALL TO ORDER Chair J. Watson called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. ATTENDANCE Board members present: L. Cohen, P. Farrant, P. Hoffey, J. Stratton and J. Watson. Staff present: Legal Counsel C. Pugh and PCRB Assistant S. Bauer. ICPD Captain T. Widmer was also in attendance. CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by J. Stratton and seconded by P. Farrant to adopt the Consent Calendar, as amended: a. Minutes of 5/23/00 meeting b. ICPD General Order - Less Lethal Impact Munitions c. ICPD May Training Report d. ICPD Training Newsletter e. ICPD Training Bulletin 00-32 ICPD Training Bulletin 00-34 g. ICPD Training Bulletin 00-37 h. ICPD Training Bulletin 00-38 i. ICPD Training Bulletin 00-39 5/30/00 correspondence from NACOLE After a brief discussion, Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Receive PCRB Public Report #99-08 ANNUAL REPORT Following discussion, the Board decided to follow the same format for the upcoming annual report as was followed in last year's annual report. Bauer reported the deadline is August 1. P. Farrant and S. Bauer will prepare a first draft for the July 11 meeting. VIDEOTAPE S. Bauer presented the concept of possibly developing a videotape about the PCRB as an education tool. The video could be shown on the government channel. It could also be used by anyone (board members or staff) at presentations. After discussion, the Board directed Bauer to explore this idea with the City's cable people to see if they could do it, the cost, timeframe; the Board also requested that someone from the City be present at the Board's regular meeting in July or August to discuss this concept with them. NEW BUSINESS None OLD BUSINESS None PUBLIC DISCUSSION None MEETING SCHEDULE · Regular Meeting June 13, 2000 · Special Meeting June 27, 2000 (Watson will be absent) · Regular Meeting July 11, 2000 (Watson will be absent) · Special Meeting July 18, 2000 (City Attorney's Conference Room) · Special Meeting July 25, 2000 (Watson will be Absent) · Regular Meeting August 8, 2000 BOARD INFORMATION J. Watson was contacted by Jeff Carlson of the Press Citizen to provide a "question and answer" article for their Sunday edition. STAFF INFORMATION None EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by L. Cohen and seconded by P. Hoffey to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section 21.5 (1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22.7(5) police 2 officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. Open session adjourned at 7:40 P.M. REGULAR SESSION Regular meeting resumed at 8:40 P.M. Motion by J. Stratton and seconded by P. Farrant to approve PCRB Public Report on/199-08, as amended, and subject to further amendment following a name-clearing hearing. If the officer involved waives a name-clearing hearing, the Public Report, as amended, will be forwarded to the City Council. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. Legal Counsel C. Pugh was directed to communicate with the City Attorney to inquire about the progress in the Board's request to the Chief on May 25, 2000, regarding PCRB Complaint/t99-10. Legal Counsel C. Pugh was directed to draft a letter to Chief Winkelhake regarding complaint interviews. Staff was directed to schedule a name-clearing hearing for the officer involved in PCRB Complaint #99-08 for Tuesday, June 27, 2000, 7:00 P.M, The first draft of PCRB Public Report/100-01 will be discussed at the next meeting. ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by John Stratton and seconded by P. Hoffey. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. Meeting adjourned at 8:55 P.M. 3 POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City IA 52240-1826 (319)356-5413 TO: City Council FROM: Police Citizens Review Board RE: Public Report of PCRB Complaint #99-08 DATE: July 13, 2000 CC: Complainant Stephen Atkins, City Manager R. J. Winkelhake, Chief of Police Officer(s) involved in Complaint This is the Report of the Police Citizens Review Board's (the "Board") review of the investigation of PCRB Complaint #99-08 (the "Complaint"). BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Section 8-8-7 B, the Board's job is to review the Police Chief's Report ("Report") of his investigation of a complaint. The City Code requires the Board to apply a "reasonable basis" standard of review to the Report and to "give deference" to the Report "because of the Police Chief's...professional expertise." Section 8-8-7 B.2. While the City Code directs the Board to make "findings of fact," it also requires that the Board recommend that the Police Chief reverse or modify his findings only if these findings are "unsupported by substantial evidence," are "unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious," or are "contrary to a Police Department policy or practice or any Federal, State or local law." Sections 8-8-7B.2(a), (b), and (c). PCRB 99-08 Page I BOARD'S PROCEDURE The Complaint was received at the Office of the City Clerk on November 17, 1999. As required by Section 8-8-5 of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Police Chief for investigation. Because the Complaint was partially in reference to an incident that occurred in August, 1999, and partially in reference to media reports beginning in October, 1999, the Chief and the complainant were informed that parts of the Complaint appeared to be filed too late (i.e., not within 90 days of the incident complained of). The Chief and the complainant were both informed that the Board would consider the timeliness of the complaint at its meeting on December 14, 1999. The complainant provided no additional information for the Board to consider regarding the timeliness of the Complaint. On December 14, 1999, the Chief submitted a memorandum to the Board that described the actions of the officer and procedures for handling juvenile cases. The Board considered the timeliness of the Complaint at its meetings on December 14 and December 28, 1999. On December 31, 1999, the Board informed the Chief and the complainant by letter that complaints about the officer's conduct in August, 1999, were found to be untimely and were summarily dismissed, but that other complaints about the officer's conduct were timely and should be investigated. The Board requested a complete copy of the case file. On January 6, 2000, the Board requested from the Chief, in addition to his Report, a copy of the complete case file and any videotape regarding #99-08. On February 9, 2000, the Board received a memorandum from the Chief (dated January 18, 2000) that provided additional information regarding PCRB Complaint #99-08 and that requested the Board dismiss the Complaint in its entirety. On February 25, 2000, the Board reiterated to the Chief by letter that the Board had found that certain portions of the Complaint were timely and should be investigated. Because the Chief's PCRB 99-08 Page 2 Report was originally due on February 15, 2000, the Board granted the Chief an extension to April 6, 2000. The Chief completed his Report and submitted it to the Board on April 6, 2000. The following documents were included with the Report: Summary of Discussions with Juvenile Intake Person, Summary of Conversations with the Assistant County Attorney, Summary of Discussions with Brian Sharp of the Press Citizen, and Summary of Interview of [complainant] by the ICPD Interviewer. The interview with the complainant was conducted on October 28, 1999, which was approximately three weeks before the Complaint was filed. At its meeting on April 11, 2000, the Board voted to request from the City Council a 45-day extension of its report deadline to July 5, 2000. Such extension was granted. On April 13, 2000, the Board requested a copy of the entire case file, including: a copy of the officer's supplemental report, and transcripts of interviews with the complainant, witnesses, and the officer subject of the complaint, by April 20, 2000. The Chief informed the Board by memorandum on April 19 that there was no supplemental report by the officer, and that interviews had not been recorded, so there were no transcripts. The Chief further informed the Board that the case file was written in August, 1999, and reminded the Board that it had dismissed "that part of the complaint." On May 2, 2000, the Board informed the Chief that it wished to review facts of the case as recorded by the officer in August, 1999, and again requested case file documents by May 9, 2000. On May 17, 2000, a copy of the case file was received from Sarah E. Holecek, First Assistant City Attorney. The Board voted to review the Complaint in accordance with Section 8-8-7 B. 1 (b) and (e), which means interview/meet with complainant, and performance by Board of its own additional investigation. The Board met on PCRB 99-08 Page 3 December 14, 28, 1999, February 2, 2000, April 11 and 25, 2000, May 9, and 23, 2000, and June 13, 2000. FINDINGS OF FACT In August 1999, Officer A responded to a call about an older woman who was being harassed by some children. Officer A located the woman, who reported that four children threw sand and dirt in her face, kicked and hit her, and threw her groceries into a creek. The woman identified two of the children as daughters of the complainant. Officer A spoke with the two children and reported that they admitted to the actions. Officer A subsequently filed Juvenile Complaints charging both with assault causing injury. At a later date, a juvenile court officer recommended that the two children be charged additionally with robbery. The additional robbery charges were subsequently filed by the County Attorney's Office. In October 1999, the incident and subsequent charges were reported in the news media. The news reports included statements from the complainant, the complainant's older daughter, Officer A, and two Assistant County Attorneys. On November 17, 1999, the complainant filed PCRB Complaint #99-08 with the following allegations which were timely: Allegation 1: The ICPD gave the media copies of police reports and caused the subsequent publicity, including the publishing of her daughters' pictures. Allegation 2: Officer A made further inappropriate comments to the press regarding the incident. CONCLUSION Allegation 1: Court information used for the media stories came from the public record at the County Courthouse. Additional information about the incident came from press interviews with the complainant and her daughter, county officials, and Officer A. The photographs of the children PCRB 99-08 Page 4 were not provided to the press by the Iowa City Police Department. The Board finds that the Chief's conclusion that the ICPD did not provide copies of police reports to the press or cause the publicity about the incident is supported by substantial evidence, and is not unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious. Allegation #3 is NOT SUSTAINED. Allegation 2: Although the Board believes that some of Officer A's remarks to the press were imprudent and potentially prejudicial, they were made on the basis of the officer's knowledge of the incident and in response to statements of the complainant and the complainant's older daughter. In addition, Officer A's remarks to the press appear to be within the guidelines set out in the Policy Manual of the Iowa City Police Department, Section 402.3 RESPONSIBILITY OF OFFICERS TO SUPPLY INFORMATION. The Board finds that the Chief's conclusion that Officer A did not make inappropriate comments to the press is supported by substantial evidence, and is not unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious. Allegation #4 is NOT SUSTAINED. COMMENT It is the Board's opinion that Section 402.3 of the ICPD policy manual is too broad. We agree with the basic premise that police officials should be responsive to requests for information from the public and the news media. However, we recommend that the policy be changed to 1) permit the Chief to designate a primary spokesperson for the Department for issues or incidents that are potentially sensitive or high profile; and 2) more clearly restrict the release of information that is not factual in nature. PCRB 99-08 Page 5