Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-08-01 Bd Comm Minutes oa-o~-oo 3b(1) IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION THURSDAY JUNE 8, 2000 - 5:45 P.M. IOWA CITY AIRPORT TERMINAL MEMBERS PRESENT: Tom Bender, Howard Heran, Mark Anderson, Alan Ellis STAFF PRESENT: Andy Matthews, Ron O'Neil CALL TO ORDER: Vice-chairperson Anderson called the meeting to order at 5:47 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the May 11, 2000, Commission meeting were approved as submitted, AUTHORIZATION OF EXPENDITURES: Bender made a motion to approve the bills. Ellis seconded the motion and the bills were approved 4 0. PUBLIC DISCUSSION - ITEMS NOT ON AGENDA: Harry Wolf from Southgate Development, addressed the Commission conceming some property on the east side of the Iowa River. He said there are about three acres under the jurisdiction of the Commission that borders on some property that Southgate would like to develop. Wolf said he doesn't have a specific project in mind but he is trying to see what options would be available. The Commission members said they would not be interested in selling the property but would consider a long term lease if the property is not in the Runway Protection Zone. O'Neil will see if the property is in the RPZ. The Commission will develop a land lease that would be applicable to this property and the property in the North Commercial area. Wolf said he would develop a proposal for the Commission. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION: a. ILS presentation- 'Mark Skillman presented information from Airsys ATM, a company that markets and installs precision instrument approach equipment. He said he surveyed the property and his preliminary inspection led him to believe a precision approach can be installed on Runway 24. He explained what an ILS does and what his company could do. He said there are some concerns with the Iowa City site but he said he did not think there were any issues that could not be resolved. He will take the information he received on the site and run a computer simulation on it to see if an ILS can be sited. Other engineers in his office will look at the information and he will report hack to the Commission in a couple of weeks or so. He said Airsys is a design/build company. He said he thought the single source contractor cuts the time for construction and installation. The ILS/DME equipment itself is between $ 300,000 and $ 400,000. He said the Wtal project installed would be between $ 600,000 and $ 700,000. This does not include the light lane. b. Master Plan update- Jim Finley, from the Kansas City office of the FAA, provided information to the Commission concerning the design of an ILS approach for Runway 24. Finley said that based on his preliminary review of the approach, he thought it would be possible to design an approach with ~ mile visibility and 200 - 300 feet elevation. The lowest approach available now is the GPS approach, which is 463 feet and 1 mile visibility. O 'Nell said there is the problem of getting the project paid for. He said it would have to be moved up in the Master Plan. Some Commission members and Jerry Searle from Snyder & Associates could go down to Kansas City and talk to the people in the Airports Division concerning funding and maintenance for an ILS. Seatie said it is important to have the Master Plan update reflect a precision approach. The proper setbacks need to be incorporated. The precision approach will need to be moved up on the priority list to the 1 - 5 year projects instead of the 5 - 10 year project list. e. Terminal Building - second floor egress walkway - O'Neil said he had someone from D & N Fence look at a way to have the egress railing meet building code standards. They installed some extra braces on the rafting cables and O'Neil had the Building Department inspect the installation. He said the solution installed by D & N Fence will meet cede. The Commission directed O'Neil to have D & N complete the project if it is less than $ 2000. O'Neil asked the Commission who would pay D & N Fence? The consensus of the Commission said it was a design problem and HLM Design should pay for the installation. O'Neil will get a finn price from D & N and discuss it with HLM. FILM will have to approve the project if the Commission expects them to pay for it. d. HLM lease - Gordon The subcommittee of Anderson and Heran will meet with Gordon and have something for the Commission to review at the July meeting. e. North Commercial area: 1. Council/Commission agreement- O 'Neil said City Manager Atkins has taken the information from the NCA subcommittee and staff and is developing an agreement for the regulation of the North Commercial area. Bender said it was a positive subcommittee meeting and he thought the approval was given to move ahead. 2. Infrastructure - O'Neil said MMS is finishing the infrastructure design specifications and should be ready to go to bid in a few weeks. O'Neil will find out whether the Council or Commission will have the public hearing on the plans and specifications. 3. Marketing - Jeff Edberg and Bill Wtttig, from Coldwell Banker, gave a presentation on how they would market the NCA. They said they would like the to be the Commission' s agent to market the property. They outlined how they would market the NCA and what it would take to develop it. Anderson asked if there would be a conflict of interest with Bender if Coldwell is selected to market the property. Bender said he is not involved with the commercial real estate division. Matthews said he did not think it would constitute a conflict as long as Bender did not vote when it came time select a marketing firm or did not participate in negotiating a contract. Anderson said the City Attomey's office would clarify this. 4. Science Center - O'Neil said the Commission should send a clear signal to the Jim Larew on how they are going to participate in the Science Center. The Commission needs to decide if they will hold a lot for the Science Center, how much they are going to charge and how long they will hold the lot, especially if someone else is interested in the lot. There is the FAA requirement of receiving fair market rent. O'Neil said it was clear from the subcommittee meeting that there would not be major financial support from the Council for this project. Bender said the NCA subcommittee would meet with the Science Center as soon as the lease price for the lots is determined. f. Southwest T-hangar project - Bldg K - Matthews said the City is sending a letter to SWA, authorizing them to reorder the building. He said that because there could be litigation, if the Commission wants to discuss this in more detail, it should be done in executive session. O 'Neil said it typically takes at least eight weeks for the building to be manufactured. SWA requested an extension of 97 days before liquidated damages would be assessed. The Commission decided to wait to see how soon the building would be reordered before it decided if an extension would be granted. g. EAA lease- EAA is trying to incorporate as a tax exempt, non-profit organization. After this is accomplished, a lease will be developed for some space in the United hangar. h. Iowa City Community School District lease- O'Neil said the annual lease for the property the School District leases is due August 1. The property is in the NCA. The Commission has the ability to cancel the lease with 30 days written notice. This will be on the agenda in July. i. Rehab building lease - This property is also in the NCA. It is a month to month lease. O'Neil will send a letter to see when they will be moving and when they will be moving the building. j. Fuel site- Set public hearing - July 20,2000 at 5:45 p.m. Bender made a motion to set a pubhc hearing for the pl_ans and specifications for the fuel site. Horan seconded the motion and it passed 4 - 0, with Mascari being absent. CHAIRPERSON'S REPORT: There was no report. COMMISSION MEMBERS' REPORTS: Bender said he wanted to address the conflict of interest issue. He said the Airport Commission is community service work for him and he would not want the Commission not to be able to select the best marketing team because of him. He said he certainly would not vote on the matter and if it required him to step down, he would regret leaving the Commission but would like to see them do what is best for the Airport. Ellis asked what was happening with the Wolf mobile home property. O'Neil said he artended the Planning Department staff meeting and expressed the interest of the Commission of not having the residential use expanded. EHis said he received information from AOPA recommending how to foster cooperation between airports and residential developments. Ellis said he thought the Airport Emergency Plan should be made more specific. He said there is a FAA Advisory Circular for emergency plans. O'Neil said he has done training for the Fire Department concerning fire fighting on the Airport. Ellis and Anderson will work on the Plan to make it more user friendly. Heran said the Commission should move forward with their Section 106 study. He also said the Commission should develop a better relationship with our congresspersons to assist in getting grants and having them contact the Commission before releasing grant information to the public. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: O 'Nell reminded the Commission that they would need to get started on the educational programs for Fly lowa 2001. This would include getting the grade school age children involved with some type of contest or promotion. Mascari is in charge of the educational programs for Fly Iowa. The manager of the Burlington Airport has resigned and is going to Des Moines as the Airport Finance Director. O 'Neff said the EAA Young Eagles program is going to have an event at the Airport. O'Neil said he did not know about it until he started getting calls from people who heard about it on the radio. He said it would be better if he knew about these events in advance so there would be some coordination of facilities. O'Neil said Fort Dodge FSS contacted him and they will have a portable FFS at Fly Iowa 2001. Anderson said there was a grass fire at the Airport several weeks ago. He and Mascari met the Fire Department at the Airport. Anderson said he did not know the cause of the fire. Anderson asked if the tower painting project was moving forward? O'Neil said there was a small problem but it is moving forward. He was hoping the project could be completed before the Fly In on August 20. SET NEXT MEETING: The next regular Airport Commission meeting is scheduled for July 20, 2000,at 5:45 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was [joumed at 8:47 p.m. irperson APPROVED MINUTES 3b(2) IOWA CITY BOARD OF APPEALS , MONDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 2000 IOWA CITY MAIN LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Anna Buss, Gary Haman, Tim Fehr, John Roffman, Tom Werderitsch, Doug DuCharme MEMBERS ABSENT: Wayne Maas STAFF PRESENT: Tim Hennes (Sr. Building Inspector), Dennis Mitchell (Asst City Attorney), Bernie Osvald (Plumbing Inspector) OTHERS PRESENT: Mike Lipke- BF Goodrich-Flow Guard Gold- TempRite ETP Division CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Roffman called the meeting to order at 4:45 p.m. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES: Meeting minutes from the January 10, 2000, meeting were reviewed. MOTION: Werderitsch motioned to approve with a second by Buss. Motion carried by a 6-0 vote. HEAR A REQUEST FOR USE OF AN ALTERNATE MATERIAL OR METHOD OF CONSTRUCTION ('CHLORINATED POLY (VINYL CHLORIDE) ('CPVC) PLASTIC HOT AND COLD WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS) Lipke presented himself as a representative of the BF Goodrich Company. He began by commenting that it came to his company's attention that Chlorinated Poly Vinyl Chloride (CPVC) has not been approved by the City of Iowa City for use in construction; although it was approved in the UPC Code by the State of Iowa in 1982. He asked the board to approve the use of the CPVC. The CPVC pipe and fittings are made by the companies of Bow, Charlotte, Cresline, Genowa, Nibco and Thompson Plastics. BF Goodrich makes the resin that is used in the CPVC. The CPVC allows hot water to be carried under pressure. The original PVC would not allow this. Today PVC is mainly used for drain waste and vent. The CPVC is available in copper tube size pipe that starts at one-half inch and goes up to two inches. It is available up to twelve inches for industrial use. Most codes accepted this product in the 1960's with the UPC accepting it in 1982. This means that this product was reviewed for a long time before being approved. The pipe can be cut just as copper pipes are cut. It is joined together by means of a solvent cement that is really a weld, not a glue. The solvent cement is a dissolved CPVC resin in a solvent. When the solvent evaporates it gives a chemical weld that creates a one piece piping system. This takes place within ten minutes of application. The product sets up very quickly within approximately a minute. Lipke noted that the pipe is two-thirds salt and one-third natural gas. This means that it will not burn. It is energy efficient and provides good insulation. The pipe is a lot quieter and resistant to corrosion and erosion. Lipke went on to say that it is approved in all model codes including HUD. It also meets NFS Standard 61; which is the highest water quality standard. This means the water leaving the pipe will be of the same quality as when it enters the pipe. The pipe is used in pharmaceutical environments such as dialysis. Roffman inquired about lime and iron build-up inside the pipes. Lipke indicated that there is no problem. After twenty years the most one may see is a tea-like stain. - Iowa City Board of Appeals Minutes February 7, 2000 Page 2 Fehr asked about the rigidity of the pipe. Lipke said it would not be as rigid as copper. The CPVC pipe has to be supported every three feet. Buss asked about freezing of the pipe. Lipke commented that because it is a poor conductor it does take longer to freeze. It can split if exposed to continuous, extreme cold. Lipke commented on the one-step cement. Originally it was a primer that was generally purple with an orange cement. BF Goodrich has come up with a more environmentally friendly one- step product that actually is stronger than the original products. Two-step is still reliable; however the one-step is recommended by the company. Roffman inquired if the product has been approved in Des Moines and Cedar Rapids. Lipke said Des Moines has approved it and he is unsure of Cedar Rapids. Osvald indicated the product was not on the approved list by omission. Osvald said that as long as it is installed properly it would be a workable product. Fehr asked about fire restrictions. Lipke said that empty or full the product does meet the 25/50 flame smoke spread up to an inch and a quatier. After an inch and a quarter it does not meet the requirement if empty. However, it is not UL approved like Glazemaster. MOTION: Haman made the motion to approve Chlorinated Poly Vinyl Chloride (CPVC) to be installed according to the manufacturer's recommendations. The motion was seconded by Buss and approved on a 6-0 vote. Attorney Mitchell clarified the motion by stating that the use of the material is approved in the UPC with the exception of the installation that can be followed by the manufacturer's recommendations, He also said that alternate materials may be used according to the code. It is approved administratively according to the UPC. ORIENTATION BY STAFF: Attorney Mitchell said he would be going through the findings for variances, etc. He plans to do this at the next meeting. OTHER BUSINESS: None The next meeting is set for March 6, 2000. ADJOURNMENT Haman moved to adjourn the meeting with a second by Buss. Meeting adjourned at 5:25PM. J' n Roff~o ' /~-'/C)" CI (") f Appeals Chair Date Minutes submitted by Le Ann Dunne-Tyson hisbldg/min/boa2-7-00.doc IOWA CITY BOARD OF APPEALS MONDAY, JUNE 5, 2000, 4:30 PM CIVIC CENTER LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Anna Buss, Gary Haman, Tim Fehr, Wayne Maas, Tom Werderitsch MEMBERS ABSENT: John Roffman, Doug DuCharme STAFF PRESENT: Tim Hennes (Sr. Building Inspector), Sarah Holecek (Asst. City Attorney), Gary Klinefelter (Housing Inspector), Roger Jensen (Fire Marshall) OTHERS PRESENT: Jessie Smith (representing Attorney Martin Diaz who represents Lewis Investments), Attorney Davis Foster (representing Iver Cairns) CALL TO ORDER: Vice-Chairperson Werderitsch called the meeting to order at 4:43 p.m. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES: Meeting minutes were reviewed from the February 7, 2000, meeting. MOTION: Buss motioned to approve with a second by Ham an. Motion carried by a 5-0 vote. PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF APPEAL OF DECLARATION OF DANGEROUS BUILDING AND ORDER TO VACATE AND REPAIR OR DEMOLISH BUILDING LOCATED AT 426 BAYARD STREET, DESIGNATION OF HEARING COMMITTEE AND SET HEARING DATE AND TIME: Attorney Holecek outlined the procedures in going through with the appeal process. Martin Diaz had filed an appeal, representing the representative of Lewis Investments. The procedure for addressing the appeal would be for the board to appoint a committee to serve as hearing examiners to conduct the hearing. She recommended the designation be limited to three individuals in order to dispense of the open meeting issues. The hearing would consist of an on- site property inspection and then a formal hearing at the Civic Center. Attorney Holecek went on to note that this property had been cited under Chapter 3 Section 302 items 4,8,12 and 13 of the 1997 Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings. The committee would be making their judgment based on the criteria set forth in the code. The hearing committee would forward a formal report to the board following the hearing. The committee was established with the following board members: John Roffman Wayne Maas Anna Buss Werderitsch was designated to serve as the alternate and would be present only if one of the above-designated members was unable to serve. Iowa City Boa~ of Appeals Minutes June 5,2000 Page 2 Foster spoke as a representative of Iver Cairns; who had been a professor at the university. He now resides in his home country of Australia. Cairns brought a lawsuit against Chuck Johnson stating that Mr. Johnson had diverted his funds and that they had been traced to the property in question. This suit is set for trial on July 10, 2000, alleging that Iver Cairns is the owner of the property as the funds have been traced to the property. Lewis Investments is the record holder owner of the property with Attorney Diaz representing them. On June 19, 2000, a deposition will be taken of Richard Blackburn, who was the last president of Lewis Investments to get his opinion on who owns the property. The hearing date was set for June 20, 2000, at 3PM. Attorney Foster indicated that Cairns purchased a mortgage on the property and so he is also the first mortgage holder. Attorney Holecek stated that the ownership issue would be secondary to the structural issues. She said everyone who came up in a title search had been notified of the action. It was not clear to the board if they would be able to get inside the building; however Holecek stated that the action would move forward based on the exterior inspection. Attorney Foster commented that they would be very willing to cooperate in this matter; however it is unclear as to their ability to cooperate at this point. DISCUSSION OF CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTORS: Buss began by stating that the Landlord's Association has had a number of people who have spoke to them about carbon monoxide detectors. She has also visited with the Housing Department regarding the issue as well. The problem had always been that if the city would come up with the idea it may be perceived that they would be imposing another layer of government on citizens. She said that carbon monoxide is a problem and some landlords have had close calls. She asked the Board if something could be done to require carbon monoxide detectors in rental units. Klinefelter had pointed out that some buildings have hot water heat, so it would not be necessary to install them in those units. Buss went on to say that landlords seem to be willing to take action to get carbon monoxide detectors installed and she would like to see some guidelines put into place and give a timeframe to have them installed. Maas inquired about the decibel requirements. Klinefelter said there are a number of issues that would have to be dealt with regarding the issue. Jensen spoke regarding the NFPA720 that was published in 1998. It is part of the national fire codes and standards. He said that it was a recommended practice for the installation of the carbon monoxide equipment. The fire service fully supports the installation of carbon monoxide detectors. They have been upgraded in recent years to be more reliable. He said there are not a lot of false calls related to carbon monoxide. Werderitsch suggested a joint meeting with the landlords and the homebuilders to present a seminar. Klinefelter indicated the Housing Department does support the initiative. He went on to recommend Tom Griner of Iowa State who is a national expert on carbon monoxide. Werderitsch also felt testimony from a landlord who has installed them would be helpful. OTHER BUSINESS: Klinefelter advised the Board that another property is being recommended for demolition at 300 McLean Street. Iowa City Board of Appeals Minutes June 5, 2000 Page 3 ADJOURNMENT Haman moved to adjourn the meeting with a second by Buss. The meeting adjourned at 5:15PM. , ' Date son hisbldg/rnin/boa6-5-00 .doc 08-01-00 3b(4) IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES REGULAR MEETING - THURSDAY, - JUNE 22, 2000 Administrative Conference room - 5:10 PM Members Present: Winston Barclay, Linda Dellsperger, Mary McMurray, Mark Martin, Shaner Magalh~es, Lisa Parker, Linda Prybil, Jesse Singerman, Jim Swaim Staff Present: Barbara Black, Susan Craig, Larry Eckholt, Debb Green, Kara Logsden, Martha Lubaroff, Liz Nichols, Others: Jeff Davidson, Assistant City Planner, Joe Fowler, Director of Transit and Parking, Fred Lucas, Press Citizen, Jim Waiters. CALL TO ORDER: President Martin called the meeting to order at 5:10 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: A motion was made to approve the regular minutes of May 25, 2000 by Singerman/Dellsperger. In follow-up to a discussion item, Dellsperger commented on the smoking in front of the doors; near the entrance to the Library. Craig had previously asked the City Attorney's office how close to entrance smoking can be banned, and will confirm details and let the Board know. The minutes were then approved unanimously. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: Building project and follow-up from joint meeting with Council. Jeff Davidson, Assistant Planning Director, and Joe Fowler, Head of Transit and Parking were available for a discussion about parking. Martin opened the discussion by commenting on the joint meeting we had with City Council at which time Council was clear about not holding 10t 64-1A for library parking. He asked Davidson and Fowler to comment on what options we might have to improve parking for library patrons. Davidson explained that he was extremely sensitive to the issue of parking and what it means to people. He explained that there is a very good opportunity for development on 64 1A once the library plans are finalized. Once this happens and the lot is redeveloped, he believes that parking can be put into that facility. Recognizing that on-street parking is a feature that people want and that the perception is that it is more convenient than ramps, another possibility would be to incorporate a plan to alter the street and permit angled parking, into the library's expansion project. If the Board feels that this is something they would like to do, Davidson recommended making that known to the City Council. Fowler suggested several options: time limits on meters could be adjusted to 35 or 45 minutes for library patrons to force more turn-over, the Dubuque St ramp could be reconfigured so the ICPL Board Minutes bottom level could be a drive-in for short term parking to enable library patrons to come in for quick stops, or a number of spaces could be set aside for users who held permits similar to Senior Center permits for Chauncey Swan ramp. City Council would have to approve any of these options. Questions: How much control does the City have regarding negotiating for parking with a potential developer? David responded that the City has a lot of ability to negotiate with a developer. Some ideas that were suggested for a developer could be a subterranean level of parking for library users, or a covered walkway from Dubuque St ramp to Library. The City could require either of these. How practical could it be for a walkway to go from the parking structure across 64 1A to the library? The elevation would have to be such that traffic in both the alley behind the hotel and city plaza could be handled. A question was raised about what developers are required to do about parking? There is no requirement in the downtown zone. If a developer wants to provide parking, permission has to be granted by City Council. Swaim asked about the size of the current bus station and Wilson site on Gilbert Street, including the former "You Smash Em" building as a possible site for an expanded library. It is approximately ¼ block. Moving the substation would be very costly. Would developers that are interested in 64 1A be interested in this site with the existing building? Davidson said that an empty lot attracts developers; this building would be an encumbrance. There are no current plans for the Recreation Center to expand. Davidson thought they might be interested in the future in the Gilbert Street site. If parking permits were assigned who would handle the administration? Fowler replied that the Library would have to identify the users and manage project similarly to the Senior Center. Craig said she would want to see those permits going to special populations that need improved parking to attend the library; like families with small children and senior citizens. If we wanted to pursue angled parking would it add cost to our project? Yes. It wasn't done in this block due to lack of space without reconfiguring the sidewalk. In our case Council would have to approve reconstruction of sidewalk to allow angled parking. The cost would come from our bond referendum with an estimated expense of between 950 and 9100 thousand. Martin suggested we make a formal request to Council and go on record as requesting these options. In response to a question from a Board member, the possibility of using bar code technology like library cards to control some aspect of parking could be an option. Martin thanked Davidson and Fowler for coming. Do we want to do anything to pursue parking options between now and November 77 We do have the issue of a recommendation for Park and Read on our agenda for August. We could schedule a discussion about other options. Why couldn't we consider all of the ideas and prioritize them. Let's do something quickly. Martin asked for volunteers to meet, draft a parking proposal, bring to Board and then send to Council. Our visitor, Jim Waiters, spoke to the Board warning that it was not the Board's job to solve the City's parking problems; that it was a problem we could not solve, and could damage us during the referendum election. Singerman responded that we are obligated to provide what our patrons want. We may not be able to solve the problem, but showing a good faith effort demonstrates that we are trying to respond to concerns. Martin believes the Board takes the matter of responding to concerns seriously. He feels that it is a show of our effort to describe the need and present options to the Council. Prybil, who had just completed "office hours" reported that she repeatedly heard comments from patrons coming to the library about parking. ICPL Board Minutes Martin repeated his request for volunteers to work on a parking proposal. Magalh~es, Dellsperger and Singerman volunteered. Magalh~es will call the meeting. Draft policy on naming designated areas in the new building to recognize major donors was discussed. Eckholt pointed out that this outline followed pretty closely the chart that consultants did for the feasibility study. He used their criteria to develop the list designed to raise 3 ~ million dollars. There could be deviations from the plan and its levels. It is important to note that no level of gift would change the name of library. The list identifies significant spaces although the Recognition Committee will be sensitive to wishes of the donor as well as to the best interests of the Library. There is no naming policy on record. Dellsperger suggested that we develop a theme to name rooms if a donor did not want his/her name used or if a donation of a high enough level did not come in. She wanted the Board to be thinking about names other than A, B and C. A motion to adopt this policy was made and seconded by McMurray/Prybil. It was suggested that a statement be added to the policy saying that the final decision on naming would be made by the Board of Trustees of the Library. Eckholt will add it to #7 and move that statement to #2. Efforts will be made to keep Hazel Westgate's name prominent in relation to the Storytime Room. Swaim reminded the Board that they have made an effort to keep away from procedure and criteria in a policy. Eckholt felt that in this instance it was important to provide a framework for fund raising. Martin called for the vote. It was unanimous. Swaim moved that we go into executive session at Craig's request, for the purpose of a personnel matter. Dellsperger seconded. A verbal vote was called for. All voted Yes. The tape recorder was turned on. A motion was recorded requesting coming out of Executive Session. New Business: Director Evaluation: The Evaluation Committee met with Craig. They made recommendations based on the evaluations completed by Board members. After reviewing with Craig during closed session a 6.5% increase was recommended. There was no discussion. A vote was called for. All voted Yes. Draft FY00 accomplishments and FY01 goals for City Annual report: Craig reminded the Board that we talk about it at the June meeting. She will use Board discussion to draft a report for next month's meeting. Once revisions are made, it goes to the City for the City Annual Report and is then included in the Library's Annual Report. Suggestions for FY00 accomplishments were: Adopted Held Strategic Planning session Referendum on ballot Office Hours Free Parking Approved Friends Foundation fundraising plan Approved naming policy Studied remote access options ICPL Board Minutes Plan for expansion Council approval Approve architects Design meetings Started infant program More adult programming Suggestion for FY01 Goals: Pass referendum Successful campaign; raise money Implement parking issues Public input after referendum for outreach User's survey Study expanded hours and satellite options Staff Reports The Summer Reading Program is going very well with approximately 1425 kids signed up. The theme is Cosmic Connections Six staff members will go to American Library Association annual conference in Chicago the 2nd week in July. We take the opportunity when it is in Chicago to send more people. Development Office report. Annual fund is at $97,000. Time is running out to meet the goal of ~ 100,000. They will hold the books open until July 1. They are working on recruiting campaign chairs, and honorary chairs for the new campaign. Kate Milster, Development office assistant, has turned in her resignation. She's taken a position as a guidance counselor in West Branch schools. She will be here through August 4. Eckholt says a "Quiet" fundraising capital campaign will begin in the fall although some strategic announcements that will create a sense of excitement will be coming out. Access channel survey. Craig provided a sampling of a portion of the survey that concerned the Library channel. The City funded the survey that looked at all the local access channels. She said the complete document is available for anyone who is interested. Logsden was pleased that ICTC did the survey. She said it validated some of our strategic plan initiatives; like local history and children's viewing. The Library Channel's programming of library events and public events was also well received. It also validated the extra work that that has been done and is being planned. President's Report: Martin reminded Board that they were to look at the evaluation process used for the director. Dellsperger and McMurray will work on it so any new procedures are in place by next spring. July is typically the month for the board to go to dinner together. Dellsperger invited all to her house. Her offer was eagerly and graciously accepted. ICPL Board Minutes Martin spoke to the Board about the intense year this will be for all Trustees and encouraged the Board to assist Craig with what lies ahead. We need to all step up and speak to the issue enthusiastically. Barclay reported that there would be a daily call in talk show taking place on WSUI. KSUI will start having a Sunday p.m. program featuring local cultural news. He suggested that this would be a good opportunity to promote the expansion. Dellsperger announced that in her role as DPO president, she met with two individuals regarding a school district plan for a big publicity campaign encouraging parents to be part of their children's reading success. They are looking at the possibility of schools staying open in summer for library usage and maybe school libraries remaining open one night a week. The discussion is in the very early stages. Dellsperger wants to see that our children's staff is involved. There are models at other libraries we could look at. Swaim reported on a meeting that he attended. He heard a speaker who talked about the importance of libraries working with at-risk youth. He will obtain a copy of the study. He also visited the new West Liberty library. They raised $2.3 million for their library and have made a room available to United Action for Youth to use twice a week to do an at-risk program for kids. Magalh~es reported on his attendance at a local government affairs committee meeting with the Chamber of Commerce. They discussed whether or not to forward recommendations to the chamber board about recommending support for certain local issues. The Library referendum was first on the agenda. The Committee made a motion to forward a recommendation. There was a second and then the motion was tabled. A task force was formed to study the issue more closely to determine costs and benefits for the Chamber to support this project. John Beckford, President of the Chamber will meet with Parker and Magalh~es to explore issues of how the business community will benefit by library's expansion. Disbursements and Visa Visa Expenditures for May, 2000 were reviewed. Disbursements for May, 2000 were approved after a motion by Singerman/Swaim. Agenda items for July Report from Parking subcommittee. Review draft of Board's annual report, Adjourned at 6:45 p.m. Minutes taken and transcribed by Martha Lubaroff 08-0'1-00 3b(5) MINUTES IOWA CITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION MONDAY, jUNE 26, 2000 - 5:30 PM CIVIC CENTER LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Cathy Weingeist, Terry Smith, Steve Hoch, Jim Pusack MEMBERS ABSENT: Betty McKray STAFF PRESENT: Drew Shaffer, Dale Helling, Andy Matthews, Bob Hardy, Mike Brau OTHERS PRESENT: Beth Fisher, Greg Thompson, Rick Kames, Jon Koebfick, Kara Logsden, Carl Se~ RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL None. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION Kames reported AT&T has provided Shaffer with a response to the questions from the City regarding cable modem service and is gathering information for a response to the questions regarding the audit. Weingeist reported that she met with Iowa City Community School District Superintendent Lane Plugge to provide him with a copy of the local access survey and discuss how the schools might better utilize the education channel. Plugge is particularly interested in getting events that are already taped cablecast on the channel. PATV's telethon went very well. The goal was to raise $3,000 and $3,100 was raised. Shaffer noted the letter in the packet from AT&T agreeing with the rate resolution that was sent to the City Council. This demonstrates that funds allocated for rate regulation is money well spent. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Pusack moved and Hoch seconded a motion to approve the amended 6/12/2000 and 6/26/2000 minutes. The motion passed unanimously. ANNOUNCEMENTS OF COMMISSIONERS None. SHORT PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS None. SUBSCRIBER ISSUES Shaffer reported that he received 12 complaints-3 about the rate increase, 2 wanting competition, 1 about bad signal quality, 1 about the digital channels fading in and out, 1 about a billing problem, and 3 about problems with cable modems. Kames said that cable modem service calls are still being handled by @Home' s centralized call center. If subscribers are having technical problems they may now call the local office. Service is provided on Monday through Saturday. Outages will also be serviced on Sunday. In regards to rate increases, Pusack said that the City should provide information on comparable cable rates to consumers. Shaffer said the City is gathering that information, as well as the number of channels offered. Shaffer said that when consumers contact him with complaints about rates he discusses competition, options such as direct broadcast satellite dishes and the efforts the City made to bring McLeod to Iowa City. Shaffer does not go into detail about the McLeod negotiations at the request of McLeod. Shaffer said the recent newspaper article about those negotiations was incorrect. Helling said he is drafting a letter to McLeod. Hoch asked about cable competition nation- wide. Shaffer said that there is now more competition in larger cities, but is rare in cities the size of Iowa City. AT&T REPORT Kames reported AT&T has provided Shaffer with a response to the questions from the City regarding cable modem service and is gathering information for a response to the questions regarding the audit. Pusack asked if any action had been taken on his inquiry into the possibility of blocking the titles of programs on the digital program guide that are on blocked channels. Karnes said he has contacted AT&T's program guide provider and informed them of the suggestion, but they have not indicated that they were considering this change. Pusack said that blocking the titles would improve AT&T's service. SENIOR CENTER REPORT No representative was present. LIBRARY REPORT Fisher reported the Library's Summer Reading Program is in full swing and is cablecast live each Thursday at 3 p.m. The last Lunch at the Library program for the year, a Jazzfest preview, will be held on Wednesday. ECC REPORT Se~ reported that a series of speakers were taped for cablecast in association with the Linn County Leaming Alliance. Sponsors are still being sought for the Tomorrow's Careers Today program. The program focuses on careers with local companies. Channel 9 in Cedar Rapids is Kirkwood's partner in the program. If the program comes into fruition, 40 hours of programming would be produced. Weingeist reported that she met with Iowa City Community School District Superintendent Lane Plugge to provide him with a copy of the local access survey and discuss how the schools might better utilize the education channel. Plugge is particularly interested in getting events that are already taped cablecast on the channel. Pusack said there is also interest in live coverage of some school events. Pusack asked if Kirkwood has any classes or programs where students might provide video production services. Set said there is a student group that works with Kirkwood staff and tapes some events at Kirkwood. Set and Mary Jo Langhome will discuss this. Weingeist said that Plugge intends to be talking with the high school principals to gauge interest of teachers. Hoch said the Commission may wish to consider allocating pass-through funds to the schools to facilitate more programming. PATV REPORT Thompson reported that Paine is on vacation. Paine will be meeting with the principals of the schools in an effort to get some of the schools events on PATV. PATV's telethon went very well. The goal was to raise $3,000 and $3,100 was raised. MCLEOD REPORT No representative was present. LEGAL REPORT Matthews reported that he has begun work on a draft of an ordinance to establish customer service guidelines for cable modem service modeled on an ordinance agreed to by AT&T with Fremont, CA. CITY CABLE TV REPORT Hardy reported that the Media Unit again provided election results. Coverage of the general election may include two commentators. The Friday Night Concert Series and the Saturday jazz concerts coverage has been going quite well. Shaffer noted the letter in the packet from AT&T agreeing with the rate resolution sent to the City Council. This demonstrates that money allocated for rate regulation is money well spent. Looking forward, the Commission has several tasks to consider. A Triennial Review needs to be done, according to the ordinance. The Triennial Review is a review of the cable company's performance over the past three years. Work on the Commission' s bylaws and the cable modem ordinance draft is being done by Matthews and the Commission will need to address them at some point. Smith referred to the local access channel programming report included in the packet. The charts are intended to identify the types of programming on the access channels. The charts show how many programs and the amount of programming hours of new programs or program replays, community programming and whether the programs are produced by the channel or by an outside source. The programs provided by the Community Television Service and the Senior Center are identified as an imported program. InfoVision reports show how often the system is in use and how often it was available at different times of the day. Weingeist said that some imported programs by PATV might be considered community programming, but the chart' s scheme would not indicate this. Smith said that imported programs would not count towards the 33% requirement for community programming included in their contract. Community Programming is defined as produced by the staff or PATV producers. Pusack said this may need to be re-examined as there may be differing interpretations of that definition. Hoch said there needs to be some definitions of the categories included. Pusack said he does not care ira program is produced internally at PATV or by an outside (imported) source. Hoch said that if a tape comes to PATV from the Senior Center and is about the community, it is community programming. Smith said that differentiating between imports from within Iowa City and outside was considered, but given the relatively small number of programs involved in those categories the charts would become more difficult to read. Pusack said that the categories listed may not be discrete categories. You could have new imported programs that were community programming. Smith noted that data from past CTS reports averaged about 9-14 hours out of 400~500 and didn't even cut a line on the graph, therefore they were included in other categories. Pusack and Hoch said the chart confuses content and source. An internal new program could also be a new community programming. Brau said that in that case PATV would consider that a new community programming. Internal new programs are those that are produced by the channel, but not considered community programming. Pusack said that the Chamber of Commerce could make a tape independent of PATV that deals with the community. In that case, it could be considered an imported program, but not a community programming, even though it might, in fact, be community programming. Brau said that programming data can be compiled and presented to the Commission in any form they wish, but it must first be made clear what information the Commission desires. Staff will continue to work on the program report form until it evolves into a satisfactory product for the ICTC. LOCAL ACCESS SURVEY DISCUSSION Hoch moved and Pusack seconded a motion to table this item. The motion passed unanimous. CSPAN IOWA Shaffer referred to the document in the meeting packet and said that it is for their information and does not require action. Commissioners are encouraged to make suggestions. The document will be sent out to a number of people and organizations. ADJOURNMENT Hoch moved and Pusack seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously with Smith absent. Adjournment was at 6:43 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cable TV Administrator 08-0t -00 3b(6) 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 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 I 1, 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 officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by la w, 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 ware 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 #99-08, 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 #99-10. 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 #00-01 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. 08-01-00 3b(7) POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES - July 11, 2000 CALL TO ORDER Vice-Chair P. Farrant called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. ATTENDANCE Board members present: L. Cohen, P. Farrant, P. Hoffey, and J. Stratton; Board member absent: J. Watson. Staff present: Legal Counsel C. Pugh and PCRB Assistant S. Bauer. ICPD Lt. M. Johnson and Chief R. J. Winkelhake were also in attendance. CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by L. Cohen and seconded by J. Stratton to remove item "c" and item "d" of the Consent Calendar for separate consideration. Motion carried, 4/0, Watson absent. Motion by L. Cohen and seconded by P. Hoffey to adopt the Consent Calendar, as amended: a. Minutes of 6/13/00 meeting b. Copy of e-mail correspondence from R.J. Winkelhake dated 6/29/200 c. Memorandum dated 7/5/00 from Chief Winkelhake regarding PCRB Complaint//99-08 d. Memorandum dated 7/7/00 from Chief Winkelhake regarding PCRB Complaint//99-09 e. ICPD June Training Report f. ICPD Training Newsletter g. ICPD Training Bulletin 00-40 h. ICPD Training Bulletin 00-43 ICPD Training Bulletin 00-44 ICPD Training Bulletin 00-45 General Order - Harassment and Sexual Harassment ]. Quick Reference to Federal Firearms Laws Motion carried, 4/0, Watson absent. Chair Farrant recognized Police Chief R.J. Winkelhake, who apologized for the late response to the Board's requests for information regarding PCRB Complaint #99-10. Winkelhake informed the Board that the delay was his responsibility. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL · Receive PCRB Public Report #99-10 · Receive PCRB Annual Report (7/1/99 to 6/30/00) ITEM "c" and "d" of the CONSENT CALENDAR Memorandum dated 7/5/00 from Chief Winkelhake regarding PCRB Complaint #99-08 Motion by L. Cohen and seconded by P. Hoffey directing legal counsel to prepare a response to the Chief explaining the premise on which the Board based the statement in question. Motion carried, 4/0, Watson absent. Memorandum dated 7/7/00 from Chief Winkelhake regarding PCRB Complaint #99-09 In his memo, the Chief asked the Board to consider the possibility of providing advance information to officers who are invited to a name-clearing hearing whenever the Board's report includes comments on issues that are not specifically addressed in complaint allegations. The Board discussed the option of changing the SOP. Staff was directed to put this item on the agenda for the regular meeting in August. Legal counsel was directed to research the feasibility of changing the SOP. [Board member L. Cohen left the meeting at 7:15 P .M.] ANNUAL REPORT The draft of the annual report was discussed and amended as follows: 1. Make the appropriate changes throughout to reflect eight reports issued during the reporting period. 2. Page 2, Meetings, last paragraph, "... at least 60 hours ... for a total of 300 hours." 3. Eliminate number "8" under '1~oard Concerns and Issues. 4. Page B, Board Education, eliminate "Hold forums (minimum of two a year)." Motion by P. Hoffey and seconded by J. Stratton to approve the PCRB Annual Report, as amended, and forward it to the City Council. Motion carried, 3/0, Watson and Cohen absent. PUBLIC DISCUSSION None MEETING SCHEDULE , Special Meeting July 18. 2000 · Regular Meeting August 8. 2000 · Special Meeting August 22. 2000 BOARD INFORMATION None STAFF INFORMATION S. Bauer - reported that Bob Hardy, Cable TV, will be present at the July 18 meeting to discuss the feasibility of producing a PCRB videotape. EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by J. Stratton 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 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, 3/0, Watson and Cohen absent. Open session adjourned at 7:26 P.M. REGULAR SESSION Regular meeting resumed at 8:03 P.M. Motion by J. Stratton and seconded by P. Hoffey to approve PCRB Public Report on #99-1 O, as amended, and forward it to the City Council. Motion carried, 3/0, Watson and Cohen absent. ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by P. Hoffey and seconded by J. Stratton. Motion carried, 3/0, Watson and Cohen absent. Meeting adjourned at 8:03 P.M. 4 08-0'1-00 3b(8) POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES - July 18, 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 (7:05), P. Hoffey, J. Stratton, and J. Watson. Staff present: Legal Counsel C. Pugh and PCRB Assistant S. Bauer. Sgt. J. Steffen and Bob Hardy were also in attendance. CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by L. Cohen and seconded by P. Hoffey to adopt the Consent Calendar: a. Minutes of 6/13/00 meeting b. Memorandum dated 7/11/00 from David Schoon regarding Iowa City Business Outreach Survey 2000 Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL · Receive PCRB Public Report #99-10 · Receive PCRB Public Report #00-01 · Receive PCRB Annual Report (7/1/99 to 6/30/00) VIDEOTAPE Bob Hardy from the City's Cable TV Department discussed with the Board the feasibility of developing a videotape for the PCRB as an educational tool, which could be used on the government channel and also used at service club presentations. Hardy's comments included: · A recommendation for a 10-15 minute informational video · The cost to the Board would be shared with Cable TV, 50/50, to include time and materials. · Hardy would develop the initial script, working with one or two people from the Board during the development and production stage; the Board would have final approval of the script. · Requests that the Board formulate a point of view or theme for the video. · Estimated the time to produce the videotape to be three months, depending on availability of people involved. · The video would be of broadcast quality, thereby allowing for other opportunities for distribution. · To start the process, he would need from the Board: 1. A paragraph or two outlining the Board's intent 2. A list of the five major issues · The procedure Hardy follows in developing a video is: 1. develop script 2. review script 3. set up shooting date (Board would be responsible for scheduling individuals to appear in the video) 4. rough-cut (script and visual) Suggestions and comments from the Board included: · It should explain the ordinance, its origin, function, structure, accomplishments, goals, reactions to what the Board has done, how citizens can use the Board, whether the ordinance is needed. · Address issues that might be controversial · Present a balanced point of view with testimonials, possibly to include the Chief, the police union, a city council member, community people. · The video should be interesting and useful. Watson suggests the video could assist with the Board's goal of providing more service group presentations. It was the consensus of the Board that the concept be addressed with a pros and cons approach. Staff was directed to put this item on the agenda for the regular meeting in August for further discussion. NEW BUSINESS None OLD BUSINESS Following review and discussion, Motion by J. Stratton and seconded by P. Hoffey to amend the PCRB Annual Report approved 7/11/00 and adopt it as revised 7/18/00. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. Staff was directed to prepare a letter to the Chief requesting updated internal investigation logs. Legal counsel advised she has not prepared a response yet to the Chief regarding his memorandum dated 7/5/00 regarding PCRB Public Report #99-08 and requested further clarification. Watson and Farrant will assist in preparing a draft for the next meeting. Cohen recommended that the Board review an ICPD policy, procedure or practice every month, starting August 8. She also expressed her concern that the Board needs to follow-up on its past reports. Staff was directed to include policy review selection on the next agenda. The Chair was directed to invite the Chief to the August 8, 2000 meeting to discuss with the Board its recommendation in its Public Report on Complaint #99-08. Chair was also directed to write a letter to the Chief asking about the availability of officers to speak to the Board on various topics. PUBLIC DISCUSSION None MEETING SCHEDULE · Regular Meeting August 8, 2000 · Special Meeting August 22, 2000 (J. Stratton will be absent.) · Regular Meeting September 12, 2000 BOARD INFORMATION None STAFF INFORMATION None BREAK (The Board took a break from 8:15 to 8:25 P.M.) EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by J. Stratton and seconded by P. Farrant to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section 21 .E (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 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 8:26 P.M. REGULAR SESSION Regular meeting resumed at 9:05 P.M. Motion by P. Hoffey and seconded by L. Cohen to approve PCRB Public Report on #00-01, as amended, and forward it to the City Council. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. The Board directed Chair to respond to correspondence received from the complainant on 7/13/00 regarding PCRB Complaint #00-01. ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by L. Cohen and seconded by P. Hoffey. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. Meeting adjourned at 9:10 P.M. 4 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: Report of PCRB Complaint//99-10 DATE: July 11, 2000 CC: Complainant Steve Arkins, City Manager R. J. Winkelhake, Chief of Police Officers involved in Complaint. This is the Report of the Police Citizens Review Board's (the "Board") review of the investigation of PCRB Complaint #99-10 (the Complainant") BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Section 8-8-7B(2), 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 8-8-7B(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 99-10 Page :~ BOARD'S PROCEDURE The Complaint was received at the Office of the City Clerk on December 29, 1999. As required by Section 8-8-5 of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Police Chief for investigation. The Chief's Report was due March 28, 2000. The Chief turned in a report March 28, 2000, which included the complete case file. The Board returned the Chief's Report to be revised consistent with the standard format for his reports. The revised Report was received April 17, 2000. The Board voted to review the Complaint in accordance with Section 8-8-7 B. 1 (a), which means the Board will review the complaint on the record without requesting additional information. At the Board's meeting on May 23, 2000, the Board voted to change the level of review in accordance with Section 8-8-7 B. 1 (e), which means the Board will perform its own additional investigation. The Board requested additional investigative information from the Chief on May 25, 2000. At the meeting on May 23, 2000, the Board voted to request from the City Council a 60-day extension of its report deadline to August 1, 2000. Such extension was granted. The Chief responded to the Board's request of May 23 by memorandum on July 5, 2000. The Board met on March 28, April 11 and 25, May 9 and 23, June 13, and July 11, 2000 to consider this Complaint. FINDINGS OF FACT The complainant was arrested late in December in the early evening as he was parking on Washington Street near the police station. The arresting officer had received information regarding a possible O.W.L of a vehicle occupied by two black males fitting the description of the complainant's vehicle. Officer A located the car being driven in an erratic fashion. Officer A then lost sight of the vehicle, but later located it as it was being parked in an erratic manner. When Officer A made PCRB 99-10 Page 2 contact with the operator he/she concluded the operator was intoxicated as he was unsteady on his feet and his speech was slurred. Part of this stop is on video but there is no sound due to battery realfunction. The complainant informed the Officer that he had no driver's license and that the car he was driving was not his. Officer A left the scene to enter a nearby bar where the car's owner allegedly was located. There he found the second person that had been in the vehicle. This individual claimed he did not know the driver, but had obtained a ride from him from another bar. The complainant had been left with Officer B who had also responded to the radio call regarding a possible Operating While Intoxicated. When Officer A indicated via radio that he was with the suspect, Officer B drove to Officer A's location and arrived within 1.5 minutes. A third person, Officer C, is referred to in both Officers' narratives, but it is not clear when he/she arrived. When Officer A returned from the bar he informed Officer B that he had an appointment and requested Officer B to complete the O.W.I. investigation. Officer B agreed and as it was very cold, "advised" the complainant that they would go to the Iowa City Police Department to conduct sobriety tests. The complainant was placed in the back of Officer B's patrol car without handcuffs. He was advised that he was not under arrest at that point in time. Officer B then drove the complainant to the Iowa City Police Station. The in-car recorder of Officer B supports this event, although the complainant reports that he was "walked" to the Police Department. Officer C remained at the scene to take care of the car. At the station the complainant was administered a number of sobriety tests (H.G.N. and Walk and Turn) on which he did poorly. The complainant was asked to take the One Leg Stand Test and a P.B.T. Test, but refused. Officer B then advised the complainant that he was under arrest for Operating While Intoxicated and requested that he sit in the intoxilyzer room. The complainant became agitated and indicated that he would fight before he was done. Officer B read the Iowa Implied Consent Form to the complainant who interrupted the reading several times and refused to take the test and to sign a form. During this time two officers, D and E, were sent to the area by the dispatcher because of the complainant's PCRB 99-10 Page3 behavior as observed on the video. The complainant stood up and said, "it's time to fight." When the complainant arose, so did Officer B, D, and E. Officer B pulled his OC from its case and indicated it would be used if the complainant became resistive. The complainant was handcuffed behind his back and the cuffs double locked. The complainant was then taken to the "front report writing room" so that Officer B could type the charges. As the charges were being typed, the complainant rose from his chair and approached Office D. Officer D asked the complainant to sit back down, but he refused. Officer B arose and assisted Officer D in attempting to sit the complainant back down. As the complainant resisted, Officer E took him to the ground as the complainant was flailing and screaming threats. Officer E held the complainant on the floor until a transport car was obtained. The complainant was then assisted to his feet by Officer E and walked down the hall towards the car. As Officer E and the complainant approached the Gilbert Street door, the complainant planted his feet and pulled away from Officer E who then again took him to the ground. The complainant, after being helped to his feet again, pulled away and tried to run through the Gilbert Street door. Officer E grabbed the complainant's arm and pulled him rearward as he impacted the window with his head. The officer received an injury to his left elbow. The window was shattered completely onto the outside walkway. The complainant's head was photographed after he was placed in the squad car to document absence of injuries. The complainant resisted placement in the squad car. His feet were secured with flex cuffs and he was taken to the University of Iowa Emergency Trauma Center and examined and X-rayed. Then he was taken to the Johnson County Jail on three charges: Operating While Intoxicated- Third Offense, Driving While Barred, and Interference with Official Acts Causing Injury. CONCLUSION The complainant indicated that he had no complaints regarding his treatment by Iowa City Police Officers until after he was handcuffed in the police station. His account of what happened and which officers were involved differs from that of PCRB 99-10 Page 4 the officers. The complainant charges that excessive force was used in three different contexts. Allegation #1. Handcuffs were placed on the complainant too tightly. Complainant states that handcuffs were placed on him so tightly that they left marks on his wrists and prevented him from sitting. He indicates that behavior perceived as resistlye and threatening by officers was a consequence of his efforts to get the officers to respond to his complaints and to loosen the handcuffs. The Chief's Report states that Officer B normally checks handcuffs for tightness by placing his fingers between the cuff and the wrist. Officer B does not have a specific recall of checking the cuffs, but to check the cuffs is his normal procedure. The Chief's Report states there is no indication in the medical reports that the complainant suffered injuries to his wrist. The Chief's Report noted that the aggressive conduct of the complainant would cause pain and discomfort from the cuffs. The Board finds the Chief's conclusion that there is no evidence that the handcuffs were on too tightly is supported by substantial evidence, and is not unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious. Allegation #1 of the complaint is NOT SUSTAINED. Allegation #2. Officers threw the complainant to the floor and struck and kicked him. The complainant states that after refusing to take the sobriety test he stood up and asked the officer who was trying to test him to loosen the cuffs. When refused, he continued to try to show the officer that the cuffs were too tight. The complainant states "at least" two other officers came into the room and started hitting him, then threw him on the floor where one officer kicked him in the face. The Chief's Report states that the complainant wanted to fight with Officer B throughout the processing of the arrest and that he became more and more agitated as the charges were completed. His hat and glasses were removed by Officer D to facilitate the use of pepper spray if necessary. The complainant became more abusive. When Officer E walked into the room the complainant backed into the officer who then placed the complainant on the floor to gain control. The Chief's PCRB 99-10 Page 5 Report noted that the officer's actions in taking the complainant to the floor were consistent with the department's use of force policy and that there is no indication that the officers struck and/or kicked the complainant. The Board finds that the Chief's conclusion that the officers used only the amount of force necessary to contain and control the complainant is supported by substantial evidence, and is not unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious. Allegation #2 of the complaint is NOT SUSTAINED. Allegation//3. Officers forced the complainant's head and upper body through the glass in the upper part of an exterior door at the police station. The complainant states as he was being taken down a hallway to be transported to jail he was held by two officers, one grasped the handcuffs behind his back and raised them up. The complainant stated that as he neared the exit door he could see no one there to open it. When he tried to lean back to see the door he was grabbed and his head rammed into the door striking the metal portion "by the door handle, right below the window." The complainant stated that he backed up and tried to straighten up and the next thing he knew he was put through the window of the door. According to the Chief's Report, as the complainant was being moved toward the rear door of the station, the complainant moved to face and challenge the officers following him and he was taken to the floor by Officer E to control him. When assisted to his feet the complainant pulled away from the officer and ran toward the windowed rear door, put his head down and drove his head through the window. Officer E grabbed the complainant, stopping him from seriously injuring himself. The Board finds no reason to dispute the Chief's conclusions that the officers used only the amount of force necessary to contain and control the complainant; the officers did not force the complainant into the door glass. The complainant was responsible due to his attempt to run forward. The Chief's conclusion is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious. Allegation #3 of the complaint is NOT SUSTAINED. PCRB 99-10 Page 6 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 #00-01 DATE: July 18, 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//00-01 (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 00-01 Page BOARD'S PROCEDURE On February 11, 2000, the Complaint was received at the office of the City Clerk. As required by Section 8-8-5 of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Police Chief for investigation. At its meeting on February 22, 2000, the Board discussed the timeliness of Complaint #00-01 and found that, although some portions of the Complaint are subject to summary dismissal by the Board, other portions of the Complaint are timely and will proceed. The Board voted to review the Complaint in accordance with Section 8-8-7 B. 1 (a), which means on the record with no additional information. The Chief of Police was notified by letter on February 25, 2000 that allegations regarding officer conduct in the Complaint occurring prior to November 14, 1999 exceeded the 90-day limitation for filing of complaints, Section 8-8-3 D. Those were considered untimely and were summarily dismissed by the Board. Allegations contained in the "Basic Facts" document attached to the Complaint form under "Part 4. Police's Hidden Agenda?" relating to a January 2000 discovery, and under "Part 6. Falsified Testimony in Court by the Other Driver and Police," are timely and should be investigated. The Board requested in the correspondence to the Chief all portions of the case file relevant to the timely allegations. The Chief's Report was filed with the City Clerk on May 10, 2000, with a number of attached documents, including the incident report, accident report, citation, arrest warrant, interviews, statements, and trial notes. The Board met on February 22, May 23, June 13, July 11 and 18, 2000 to consider this Complaint. PCRB 00-01 Page 2 FINDINGS OF FACT In August 1999, the complainant was traveling on Hwy. #6 and had come to a stop on the roadway at an intersection when a truck came from behind and struck her vehicle on the left side causing minimal damage. The complainant did not exchange sufficient information with the other driver and left the scene, saying that she would take care of it later. The other driver reported the accident to the police later that day. The complainant failed to report the accident as required by Iowa law. In September 1999, Officers A and B arrived at the complainant's apartment to question her about the accident. Officer A explained to the complainant that a business card and telephone messages had been left but there had been no response from the complainant. The complainant said she had been on vacation and did not have time to return the call. The officers completed that accident report and drew up a citation for leaving the scene of an accident. When presented with the citation, the complainant refused to sign the citation. The officers made several attempts to explain that signing the citation was only an agreement to appear in court. After continuing to refuse to sign, the complainant was advised by Officer A that a warrant would be issued for her arrest. Later in September 1999, Officers C, D, and E were involved in the serving of an arrest warrant on the complainant at her apartment. The complainant's parents, recently arriving from China, were also present. The complainant explained she could not go with the officer because her parents were visiting from China. A great deal of confusion followed due to language, since the parents did not understand English and the complainant was refusing to go with the officers. Some scuffling occurred and the complainant was restrained and taken to jail. In December 1999, a jury trial took place. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty on the charge of leaving the scene of a property damage PCRB 00-01 Page 3 accident. A verdict of guilty was found against the complainant on a charge of interference with official acts. On February 11, 2000, the complainant filed PCRB Complaint #00-01. Those allegations found to be timely and under consideration by the Board are the following: Allegation #1: Police's hidden agenda. Allegation #1: False testimony during court on December 6, 1999. Allegation #3: Discrimination based upon her gender and race. CONCLUSION Allegation #1: Police's hidden agenda. The Chief makes no mention in his Report of an alleged police hidden agenda as made by the complainant. The only reference to a police hidden agenda was found in the Complaint and appears to be based upon a discussion with the police by an ex- boyfriend, who is the father of the complainant's child. The complainant also believed the frequent visits to her apartment by the police were not to investigate a small car accident but were also part of the police's hidden agenda. Since the allegation had not been addressed in the Report, the Board sent a letter to the Chief on June 22, 2000 asking for a response to the allegation so that the Board could continue its review and file its Public Report in a timely fashion. The chief responded with follow-up correspondence addressing the allegation of a police hidden agenda on July 5, 2000. In the follow-up correspondence the Chief noted that Officer A had attempted to contact the complainant during a two week period from August 21 to September 5, 1999 by telephoning the residence, leaving a notice on the outside of the door, and checking the parking lot periodically looking for the complainant's vehicle. Other officers also checked the parking lot from time to time. This is considered routine police practice. PCRB 00-01 Page 4 The ex-boyfriend contacted the police department on August 24, 1999 looking for the complainant so that he could exercise his visitation rights. An officer responding to the call for service attempted to aid the father in locating his child. The officer did not mention this particular "call for service" to any other officer. In further review of all documentation accompanying the Report and the absence of any information which would lend credence to the allegation made by the complainant, the Board finds the allegation is not supported by sufficient evidence, and the Chief's conclusion that no hidden agenda existed is not unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious. Allegation #1 of the Complaint is NOT SUSTAINED. Allegation #2: False testimony during court on December 6, 1999. The statements made by the police and attached to the Report coincide with the testimony as viewed in the jury trial notes. The Board finds that the Report's conclusion of no inconsistent or false testimony on the part of the officers is supported by sufficient evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. Allegation #2 of the Complaint is NOT SUSTAINED. Allegation #3: Discrimination based upon her gender and race. The officers were following standard police procedure in conducting an investigation of a property damage vehicle accident and attempting to locate the driver responsible for not reporting the accident. They made several attempts to contact the complainant, including leaving telephone messages on her answering machine and leaving a business card under the door. The complainant was not taken into custody when she refused to sign the citation, although the officer had the authority to do so. After explaining the matter for nearly 30 minutes, the complainant was told before the officers left that a warrant would be issued. When the officers returned to the police station, the watch commander made an attempt to contact the complainant by telephone. PCRB 00-01 Page 5 The Board finds the Report's conclusion that the allegation appears to be based entirely on speculation and perception is supported by substantial evidence, and is not unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. Allegation #3 of the Complaint is NOT SUSTAINED. PCRB 00-01 Page 6 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD July 1, 1999 to June 30, 2000 General Responsibilities The Police Citizens Review Board (PCRB) was created by Ordinance No. 97-3792 of the City of Iowa City on July 15, 1997 (amended by Ordinance No. 99-3877 on April 28, 1999 and by Ordinance No. 99-3891 on July 13, 1999). The Board was established to assure that investigations into claims of police misconduct are conducted in a manner which is fair, thorough, and accurate, and to assist the Police Chief, the City Manager, and the City Council in evaluating the overall performance of the Police Department by reviewing the Police Department's investigations into complaints. The Board is also required to maintain a central registry of complaints and to provide an annual report setting forth the numbers, types, and disposition of complaints of police misconduct. To achieve these purposes, the Board complies with Chapter 8 of the Iowa City Code and the Board's By-Laws and Standard Operating Procedures and Guidelines. PCRB responsibilities: 1. Review investigations of complaints of police misconduct · Review the Chief's reports in a manner that is fair, thorough, and accurate , Issue public reports to the City Council 2. Help the Chief, City Manager, and City Council evaluate the overall performance of the Iowa City Police Department (ICPD) · Maintain a monitoring system for tracking complaints · Provide an annual report to the City Council · Review practices, procedures, and policies and make recommendations for change · Recommend ways for the ICPD to improve community relations and be more responsive to community needs 3. Assure the citizens of Iowa City that the ICPD's performance is in keeping with community standards. · Seek and accept comment, opinion, and advice · Hold periodic community forums to gather public input and to inform the public PCRB Annual Report FY '2000 - 1 Activities and Accomplishments Meetings The PCRB holds regular meetings on the second Tuesday and special meetings as necessary. To address complaints during the period covered by this report and to handle a variety of administrative tasks and other activities, the Board held 23 meetings, each lasting one to three hours. The Board also met once with the City Council. Board members assigned to review investigations of complaints and prepare written reports for the City Council spent an average of four hours per complaint to complete these tasks. During the period covered by this report, Board members each dedicated at least 60 hours to the work of the PCRB (for a total of 300 hours). Administration During the year, the City Manager approved a proposal that the Board apply for membership in National Association for Citizen Oversight of Law Enforcement (NACOLE), a national organization for citizen review boards. NACQLE provides a variety of relevant services, such as national statistics and information, training, and expert testimony. The NACOLE membership was established at the associate member level and the Board Chair will routinely be listed as the PCRB's contact. A senior member of the Police Department now routinely attends the open portion of PCRB meetings. Complaints Number and Type of Allegations The Board received 12 complaints in the reporting period covered by this report: nine in 1999 and three to date in 2000. Eight public reports were issued. Four complaints are now under review. One complaint under review contained several timely allegations and several allegations that were dismissed as untimely. The following data are based on the 24 allegations in the eight complaints reported on. Seven of the eight complaints contained more than one allegation. PCRB Annual Report FY '2000 Allegations Stop or arrest made on basis of race 4 Officer did not explain reason for stop or arrest 2 No probable cause 2 No medical treatment offered 2 Excessive force 2 Intimidation to consent to search vehicle 1 Officer rude and antagonistic 1 Not advised of right to refuse breath test 1 Breath test poorly administered 1 Officer slapped drink from complainant's hand 1 Officer threatened to use OC spray 1 Complainant was left in police car for 15 minutes 1 Failure to Mirandize 1 Officers had previously harassed complainant 1 Officers planted controlled substance 1 Officer made inappropriate comments to the press 1 ICPD gave media copies of police reports 1 Level of Review The Board decided, by simple majority vote, the level of review to give each report, selecting one or more of the six levels specified in the City Code: Level a On the record with no additional investigation 7 Level b Interview or meet with complainant 1 Level c Interview or meet with named officer 0 Level d Request additional investigation by Chief or 0 City Manager, or request police assistance in the Board's own investigation Level e Board performs its own additional investigation 0 Level f Hire independent investigators 0 Complaint Resolutions The Police Department investigates complaints of misconduct of police officers. The Police Chief summarizes the results of these investigations and indicates in a report (the Chief's Report) to the PCRB whether allegations are sustained or not sustained. (If complaints are made against the Chief, the City Manager conducts the investigation and prepares and submits the reports.) The Board reviews both the citizen's Complaint and the Chief's Report and decides whether the allegations should be sustained or not sustained. The Board prepares a report for the City Council, with copies to the Chief, the officers involved, the PCRB Annual Report FY '2000 - 3 City Manager, and the complainant. None of the 24 allegations listed in the eight complaints for which Board reports have been released was sustained. The Board made comments and/or recommendations for improvement in police policy, procedures, or conduct in four of the reports. The following are synopses of the Board's comments and recommendations: · A complainant stated she felt she had been intimidated into consenting to a search of her car. The Board noted that in his Report the Chief cites the importance of securing voluntary consent for vehicle searches and recommends that the officers named in the complaint review department policy on traffic stops and the law concerning consent to search. · A complainant alleged that the officer used an inaccurate Preliminary Breath Test (PBT) unit to conduct a breath test or administered it incorrectly. Since there was no record that the officer had signed out a PBT on the date of the incident, it was not possible to determine the accuracy of the unit that he used. The Board recommended that the Chief assure that appropriate administrative policies and procedures be developed and/or followed, to permit routine identification and tracking of each PBT unit in the field. · A complainant sat in her car for nearly an hour while the officer who had stopped her for minor traffic violations waited to receive confirmation of information about her out-of-state license and registration. The complainant stated that upon receipt of the information, the officer ordered her to get out of the car and it was impounded. Considering the lateness of the hour of the stop, the time of the year (late fall) and the complainant's expressed concern that she was not dressed appropriately to walk home, the Board concluded that it would have been common courtesy to a citizen in this situation to offer her assistance in arranging transportation. The officer's failure to do so is inconsistent with Section 208 of the Police Policy Manual. The stop lasted nearly an hour. The Board suggested that a review of department policy, procedure, and practice when a simple traffic stop is of very long duration is warranted. Although there was a video of the stop, there was no audio record. The Board affirmed that it is most desirable that officers verify that audio is functioning during such stops. In this case, since the complainant alleged that the officer had harangued her, the audio record would have been a valuable part of the case file. · It is the Board's opinion that Section 402.3 of the ICPD policy manual is too broad. The Board agrees with the basic premise that police officials should be PCRB Annual Report FY '2000 - 4 responsive to requests for information from the public and the news media. However, it recommended 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. Name-Clearing Hearings The ordinance requires that the Board not issue a report critical of the conduct of a sworn officer until after a name-clearing hearing has been held. During this reporting period, the Board scheduled two name-clearing hearings. Both officers waived the right to the hearing and did not attend. Mediation Officers and complainants are notified by mail that formal mediation is available to them at any stage in the complaint process before the Board adopts its public report. All parties involved must consent to a request for mediation. The Board received one request for mediation from a complainant, but the officers involved declined to participate, upon advice of the union. Complaint Histories of Officers City ordinance requires that the annual report of the PCRB must not include the names of complainants or officers involved in unsustained complaints and must be in a form that protects the confidentiality of information about all parties, while providing the public with information on the overall performance of the Police Department. In addition, at one of its first meetings, the Board independently agreed that it did not wish to use the names of officers or complainants in cases in which complaints are sustained. The Board and the Police Chief agreed to use only the unique code numbers the Police Department has assigned to each officer. In 1998-99, there was a great deal of debate over a proposal to discontinue the use of these individual unique identifiers and replace them with a numbering system that would not have permitted the Board to identify (by identifying number only) patterns in complaints against officers. After lengthy deliberations that included several presentations by the Board, the City Council agreed not to change the ordinance but to retain the current practice of preserving officer identity through use of individual unique identifying numbers assigned by the Police Department. The Board continued to follow this practice during the period covered by this report. PCRB Annual Report FY '2000 - 5 Complaint Histories Thirteen officers were named in the eight complaints this report covers. Two officers were named in two; the rest were each named once. ICPD Internal Investigations Logs The Board reviewed the ICPD Internal Investigations Log, provided by the Chief of Police on October 5, 1999. Complainant Demographics The following is demographic information from the eight complaints discussed in this report. Because complainants provide it voluntarily, the demographic information is incomplete. All eight complainants provided some demographic information. Category Number of Complainants Age: Under 21 1 Over 21 7 Color: White 3 Black 4 Latino 1 National Origin: US 1 African 4 Mexican 1 Unknown 2 Gender Identity: Male 4 Female 3 Unknown 1 Sex: Male 5 Female 3 Sexual Orientation: PCRB Annual Report FY '2000 - 6 Heterosexual 4 Unknown 4 Marital Status: Married 1 Single 3 Divorced 1 Unknown Mental Disability: No 1 Unknown 7 Physical Disability: No 1 Yes 2 Unknown 5 Religion: Lutheran 1 Baptist 1 Pentecostal 1 Unitarian 1 Unknown 4 Race: Caucasian 3 Black 4 Latino 1 Some demographic information that was not provided on the sheet attached to the complaint form was taken from the first page of the complaint form. Board Concerns and Issues The Board's concerns and issues include: 1. Continuing to address concerns about limits on/obstacles to access the information the Board needs to do a thorough review of the Chief's Reports. Exploring all appropriate ways of obtaining the information we need to execute fair and balanced reviews. 2. Continuing to monitor and address issues related to race-based traffic stops and other race-based (profiling) issues in policing. Reviewing a full year of results of the Iowa City Police Department's new policy on collection of information on race for all traffic stops as soon as they are available. PCRB Annual Report FY '2000 - 7 3. Continuing to address concerns with limits on the authority of the PCRB and with the deferential standard of review in the complaint process. 4. Continuing to work on specific areas of concern with respect to department policies, procedures, and practices. 5. Non-participation of officers in mediation, name-clearing hearings, and release of transcripts. 6. Sunset clause in the Ordinance 7. "Report card" from the City Council PCRB Goals for 2000-2001 Mission · Review investigations of complaints of police misconduct · Help ensure that police department is responsive to community needs Goals 1. Board Education · Continue to streamline Board procedures · New Board member briefings 2. Community Education · Hold forums · Provide information aimed at improving officers' understanding of the Board's function and educating the public about the PCRB · Develop a video about the PCRB 3. Policy/Practice/Procedure (PPP) Review · Continue to review general police policies, procedures and practices. · Address the perception of discriminatory enforcement · Community relations Board Members John Watson, Chair Patricia Farrant, Vice Chair Leah Cohen Paul Hoffey John Stratton PCRB Annual Report FY '2000 0 8 -0 1-0 0 ~-.. RULES COMMITTEE MEETING July 26, 2000 Committee Members Present~ Lehman, Champion Staff Members Present: Karr Historic Preservation Commission By-Law changes. The Rules Committee reviewed the changes, as suggested by the Commission at their June 8th meeting and unanimously recommended adoption with the changes underlined. ARTICLE I. MEETINGS Section 1. Regular Meetings. Regular meetings of this Commission shall be held once each month. In addition, a date and time shall be reserved for a second' meeting each month for the purpose of reviewing Certificate of Appropriateness applications. If no applications are filed for review at the second meeting, the meeting need not occur. o8-o.~ -oo MINUTES 3b(10) SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION TUESDAY, JUNE 20, 2000 MEMBERS PRESENT: Lod Benz, Joanne Horn, Jay Honohan, Bill Kelly, Deborah Schoenfelder Carol Thompson and Mary Kathryn Wallace MEMBERS ABSENT: Allan Monsanto and Charity Rowley STAFF PRESENT: Michelle Buhman, Linda Kopping, Susan Rogusky, and Julie Seal, GUESTS Ruth Bell and Nancy Adams Cogan CALL TO ORDER Honohan called the meeting to order at 3:10. MINUTES Motion: To approve the May minutes as distributed. The motion ca~ed on a vote of 6-0. Wallace/Hora PUBLIC DISCUSSION None. PARKING FACILITY/SKYWALK STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITFEE - Hora/Honohan The Committee has raised approximately $66,000 for the skywalk to date including a $5,000.00 donation from Hills Bank. The Committee is in the process of developing a fund raising plan of action. Some potential fund-raising ideas were discussed. The Committee is also investigating additional grant options. ACCREDITATION REPORTS- Honohan; Hora; Wallace Sub-committee #3 is in the process of developing a new Mission Statement and Goals for the Senior Center. Sub-committee #2 has had two meetings so far and is in the process of working on the action plan. Sub-committee #1 will be meeting after the commission meeting this evening. AARP REPORT - Kopping Sign-up sheets, daily schedule and logs were distributed to Commissioners. It appears that effort is being made by the members of the AARP office to revitalize the AARP office and operations. SENIOR CENTER UPDATE Ooemtions - Kopping The punch-fist for the Fire Sprinkler and Ceiling Tile Project has yet to be completed. The City is retaining five percent of the total project cost until the project is complete and passes all inspections. New ofrK;e fumiture for the professional staff is scheduled for delivery in July. MINUTES 2 SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION TUESDAY, JUNE 20, 2000 Kopping has also been working on staff evaluations. Pm,clmms - Seal An update of July programming was presented. Volunteers - Rogusky An update of volunteer programs and opportunities was given. COUNCIL OF ELDERS - Cogan A report from the Council of Elders was given. CITY COUNCIL - Horn No report available. _ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS - Monsanto No report available. Motion: To adjourn. Motion carded on a vote of 6-0. Schoenfelder/Hora The meeting adjourned at 4:45.