HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-10-03 Transcription#2 Page 1
ITEM NO. 2 SPECIAL PRESENTATION
Lehman: Item 2 is a special presentation. The certificate of achievement for
excellence in financial reporting is the highest form of recognition in
governmental accounting and financial reporting for state and local
governments. Earning the award represents a significant accomplishment
by a government and its management. The certificate is awarded annually
by the Government Finance Officers Association, which is a non profit,
professional organization serving approximately 13,500 government
finance professionals representing school districts, counties, state
agencies, cities and pension plans. This is the 15th year in a row that the
City of Iowa City has received this award. Last year, only 40 cities,
counties and school districts in Iowa received this certificate. I would like
to present this Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial
Reporting for the year ended June 30, 1999 to City Finance Director
Kevin O'Malley.
O'Malley: If you would indulge me with a few remarks. As you know, the Finance
Department's- one of its major goals is to maintain the public trust in our
fiscal management of financial resources. To that end, we have created
and maintained an accounting system in compliance with generally
accepted accounting principles. Each June 30, our fiscal year ends, we
close our books and we begin the process of preparing financial reports.
Those reports include statements of position, results of operation, and
sources and uses of funds. We also hire independent auditors to assess
and to attest to the integrity of our statements. But we go one step further
as you mentioned Ernie. There is 950 cities in Iowa and only 21 cities go
to the next step. And that is to submit this report to the Government
Finance Officers Association for their review. They look at this report to
see how well we are as far as clarity, comparability and completeness in
reporting to the public. This year, again, our accounting division has
worked very hard to achieve that report. And I would like to publicly
thank them and namely my assistant- my very able assistant- Erin Herting,
her assistant controller Regina Shreiber, our senior accountant Ann
Maurer, the rest of the accounting staff which I had better name or I'll be
in trouble- Linda Kron, Deb Mejia, Jan Burr, and Pam Thodos. And I
would be remiss if I didn't extend my gratitude and thanks to my
colleagues, my department directors, their division staff, and for their
willingness to comply with our internal control and our accounting
policies. And last but not least, Mayor Lehman and the esteemed council
members- I want to thank you for your support, your recognition, and your
respect for the finance department. Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#2 Page 2
Lehman: I just have one more comment. Generally the excellence of a departmere
is a reflection of the leadership within that department and I would like to
say that we all are very, very proud ofKevin O'Malley.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#3 Page 3
ITEM NO. 3 MAYOR'S PROCLAMATIONS
a. Breast Cancer Awareness Month- October
Mammography Day- October 20
Lehman: (Reads proclamation)
Karr: Here to accept is Barbara Kamer and Karla Wysocki.
Kamer: If I could, I would like to address the council. My name is Barbara Kamer
and I am a member of the American Cancer Society Johnson County
Breast Cancer Detection Core Team. And I am a cancer survivor and I am
here in that capacity tonight. I was diagnosed with breast cancer at the age
of 29 in 1998. In that same year 57 other Johnson County women were
also diagnosed with the disease. And according to the state health
registry, 436 women were diagnosed with breast cancer from 1990 to
1998. I am one of the lucky ones because I am still here. There are
women though who are not as fortunate and women who fought their own
personal battle and lost. And it is in their memory that we honor in
October. Since my diagnosis in 1998, 5 friends- five- have been
diagnosed with breast cancer. One of them lost their battle earlier this
year. By signing this proclamation naming October Breast Cancer
Awareness Month you are helping women and men increase their
awareness and education of breast cancer. But most importantly you are
giving hope to breast cancer survivors and to their families. Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you.
b. Merete Nielsen Balsvig Day- October 4.
Lehman: Our next proclamation has someone coming from the farthest distance that
anyone has ever come to receive a proclamation that I have read. So I am
particularly proud of this one. (Reads proclamation). And Merete is here
tonight to receive this.
Balsvig: It is a great honor to be here tonight. The whole week and the next
coming days will be a great honor for me to participate in just as it was to
come here in the first place. It was an experience that I would like many
young people to have. And it was made possible by the City High parents
and students I suppose. And they were very, very good to me the year I
was here. I have had a lot of joy being here. For many years many have
been to my home as guests of my home and I have been wanting to come
back so many times. But it is not easy to leave school back in Denmark.
When you are off or when you have special occasions I have to teach.
Now I am so old that I can fixate when I want to (can't hear) so this time it
was possible to come back. And I am so fortunate that a lot of the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#3 Page 4
participants of the (can't hear) class will be here and my classmates have
been making this program so excellent for me. So I am very honored and
I hope for all the young people that are sitting behind me that they will
have the chance of getting to another country, staying with other people,
learning their habits and getting a feeling of their culture. That is to all the
young people.
Champion: Thank you.
Lehman: I must say I was really looking forward to meeting you. Mr. Thornberry
has kept me apprise some time of your coming here. And so welcome
here and we certainly hope you enjoy your stay.
Balsvig: Oh I will.
c. Fire Prevention Week- October 8-14.
Lehman: (Reads Proclamation)
Karr: Here to accept is Batt. Chief Jim Humston.
Humston: I would just like to take this moment to thank you for the council's support
of the Iowa City Fire Department. Our efforts in the next week to ten days
will be going to all of the elementary schools in the Iowa City area and
seeing approximately 2000 youngsters. And we hope to teach them good
fire behavior practices and encourage them to take that home and instill
that in their homes. So, just again, thank you very much for your support.
Lehman: Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#4 Page 5
ITEM NO. 4. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS
PRESENTED OR AMENDED.
Champion: Move adoption.
O'Donnell: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Champion, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion?
Kanner: Ernie, I have something for discussion. As most of you know, in the
audience, we are moving towards some implementation of policies to try
to cut back on excessive drinking in our bars and alcohol licensees. And I
have been pointing out the last few meetings the number of people under
the age that were arrested in our bars and try to bring out the point that we
need to hold the licensees- the bar owners- accountable. And we have
three renewals today and I wanted to read the number of arrests per visit.
For Diamond Dave's we had .17 arrests per visit. There was one arrest in
6 visits to date. Grizzly's on the south side had .06 arrests per visit. There
was one arrest for 16 visits this year by our police. And then the Hilltop
up on the noah side had 0 arrests per visit. Zero arrests for one visit. So
hopefully we will have a day when all of our bars when they are getting up
for renewal have close to zero arrests for underage drinking. Thank you.
Lehman: Other discussion? I would like to point out to the public as well as the
council, Item b(2) is a recommendation to approve MetroPlains
Development- an Affordable Housing Pool Application for $225,000
contingent upon receipt of the 2000 Low Income Housing Tax Credits.
This is another example of how this community supports economic
development and tries to aid those folks who are trying to make this a
better community. Roll call.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#5 Page 6
ITEM NO. 5. PUBLIC DISCUSSION (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA). [UNTIL
8 PM].
Lehman: This is a time reserved on the agenda for the public to comment to the
council on items that do not otherwise appear on the agenda. If you wish
to address the council please sign in, give your name and limit your
comments to five minutes or less.
Hession: Hello, my name is Kathleen Hession. I am an 8th grader at Noahwest
Junior High. We have been learning a lot about second hand smoke and I
am here today to give you my thoughts on the problem. Second hand
smoke in restaurants is not just a problem for adults, it is a problem for
everyone, including kids and teens. The other day there was an article in
the paper about how if adults don't like the smell of smoke in a restaurant
they can eat somewhere else. What about kids? We don't always get to
pick where we eat. And if it is in a smoking restaurant we can do nothing
about it. We can't just get up and leave. I also know I am not the only
teen who has been in a situation where we are around adults- or teens for
that matter- who are smoking and we can't do anything about it. for me, it
is often in restaurants. Yes, there are a lot of restaurants in Iowa City and
Coralville that are smoke free. But did you know that over half of them
are fast food and drive through restaurants? Yes, I do like Arby's but I
also like Mondo's and Mickey's too. My dad used to be a smoker. He
smoked for 20 years. I am very proud of him for he has quit smoking now
for a year. And when we go out to eat we have to carefully select a
restaurant that is either non-smoking or it has sections marked off clearly.
I do not blame this hassle on my dad but on all of the restaurants that are
either all smoking or are one big section cut down the middle where it is
still smell worthy. You know what I am talking about. The big
restaurants that say there are two sections but you can still smell the
smoke. Many people think that kids are not aware of the dangers of
second hand smoke but we are. My personal development teacher, Mrs.
Gehrke is the one who brought all of this to my attention. She told me that
53,000 people die every year from second hand smoke. To think, all of
those times that I sat in the smoking section that I could be taking in so
much tar into my lungs. I know I am not only speaking for myself but for
all of my peers when I say that we don't want anything to do with that.
Like I said before, 53,000 people die every day from second hand smoke
every year from second hand smoke. Do you want to be number 53,0017
Thank you.
Lehman: Let me point out that last night the council unanimously recommended to
the city attorney's office that we prepare an ordinance that will make
restaurants smoke free in Iowa City.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#5 Page 7
Jones: Hello, my name is John Jones. If you will excuse me, I wrote my name.
That is why I walked up here. I want to start by giving some credit where
credit is due. I brought a visual aid for us. The Daily lowan has actually
had some articles about alcohol policy and has discussed some things
about students talking about ideas for alternatives to drinking alcohol on
their own valition. And of course the Daily lowan has done a good job of
reporting how many people are arrested for underage drinking. I heard a
few things just from the news about city council entertaining a couple of
ideas- maybe revoking licenses or charters for the businesses that sell
alcohol. That seems reasonable. But then I also heard something about
limiting drink specials and tonight Mr. Wilburn told me about out of sight
sales. And, I mean, I hear the council is trying to find a better way to
(can't hear) which is, we already have laws against underage drinking,
let's make it somehow better. We already have laws against public
intoxication, somehow let's make it better. You know, we need more
enforcement somehow that is going to fix the problem. Obviously it is not
going to fix the problem. Being more punitive is doing nothing. We can
have arrests and arrests and arrests day after day after day and everyone
knows it is still the same. And I am terribly dismayed that the city
attorney bothered to even entertain the idea that the city could impose
some kind of limit on drink specials. It took me ten minutes- a ten minute
search on Lexus to find at least five Supreme Court cases that said you
cannot limit the prices of commerce- of consumer goods. It is a violation
of the Sherman Act. Okay? And that kind of regulation is limited to the
federal govermnent. Cities just cannot limit the price of alcohol,
especially in alcohol cases. There was one case from the 1940's where
California had a price control for raisins. It was a very limited program
that will not apply at all to alcohol. It is totally unconstitutional. There is
one case where a city set up a zoning ordinance to limit the billboards by
in fact limiting the number of billboards per space, of course that put a
limit on the cap of how many billboards can be around. That control
affected the market. But it was a secondary effect, not a direct effect.
You just cannot have a city ordinance that says people at bars cannot sell
alcohol at a certain price. You cannot do that. And I am just astounded
that the city attorney once again, the same person who said let's have
police walk into people's houses, tell them they are too loud, kick them
out of the house and then give them a ticket for public intoxication. That
in the city we have lots of students where people live in all kinds of
alternative housing, that you just create a system where we have more
animosity. If we want to reduce incidents related to alcohol, i.e. violence
or something like that, let's do something more proactive. Let' s have
students ride with the police. I was here four years ago and I said the
same thing. Let's have students ride with the police. My stepfather was
an admiral in the navy, he was commander on the ship, he had pilots who
thought they were god's gift to earth and he told them [to] get in those
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#5 Page 8
police cars. You ride around and you see what the police have to deal
with, you see how it is a hassle and not one of his pilots ever got arrested
for being drunk in public. And I don't know if you guys have been in the
military but I think pilots are kind of the group that like to get drunk and
get rowdy. As soon as we get some empathy and get some dialog between
students and police, we are going to be able to diffuse the situation so you
don't have to come up with a punitive solution to every time. More
punitive action to try to resolve something. More over, why don't the
police come and give breathalyzer tests to people at random? Not with a
punitive idea but just an idea to say hey, your blood alcohol level is. 15,
that is a little bit high. I participated in an event at the Student Union
where we had people who drank as much as they could for about five
hours and then we went and did a demonstration with the police. We had
people blowing an alcohol level of .2- they weren't arrested on the spot.
They could have been. Why weren't they? Because we were trying to
show people what it means if you drink too much. What kinds of levels
and limits you should put on yourself. We weren't trying to give punitive
measures to people. We were trying to help people and inform them. So
why don't we have police do that? You are having them go into the bars
anyway. Why don't you have police say here, just blow into this and hey,
maybe you want to take it easy from now on or something. Let's do
something proactive. Let's get the students in relationship with the police
and not always, you know, this idea of undercover cops. Is that going to
fix anything? The main thing you are going to do is motivate people not
to go to the bars. What are they going to do then? Drink in the dorms.
Drink in the frat houses. Drink in apartments. Go to Coralville for god's
sake. I mean, there is a lot of alternatives that can happen once you start-
and I am finishing in a second- but once you start this punitive repression-
you know, there is a reason why a lot of people use Ecstasy in this town.
You can't smell it, and you don't get busted for public intox if you are on
it and it feels good. So, you know, when you start cracking down on
certain substances that people want to use for recreational use you are just
going to motivate them to either do it some where else or do something
else. So I say let's do something proactive. Let's make this city a better
place. And let's not put things that are constitutionally illegal on their face
into the city ordinances. Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you.
Warth: Hi, I am Ali Warth and this is Sara Witz, and we are thirteen and we are
both from Northwest Junior High and we are in the 8th grade. And we are
here to represent the students and our generation. We are both actually
talking about second hand smoke as well as Kathleen. And I just want to
say yes about the ordinance. Thank you so much. I think I was aware of
that earlier but it is a really good thing to have and it is definitely needed.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#5 Page 9
Every day in personal development we are taught about second hand
smoke and how it can affect us and our health and everyday life. My dad
used to smoke but not around me. And it affects me and his health- but it
really has nothing to do with it. Public smoking is just exactly the same.
It is affecting me. It is affecting our students. And the kids- there is
nothing that we can do about it. We can't say you can't smoke. It is a
public place and I realize that it is for the public but they are endangering
our lives because of their mistakes. And like she said, 53,000 non-
smokers do die every year. I don't want to be one of those people and
neither does Sara. None of us do. And really it is not called for. It affects
everything. Ms. Gehrke, our personal development teacher, told us about
a weekend where they went around to restaurants and requested that they
have a weekend of smoke free environment and their prices- they made
more money. And not- because they got people in and they got them out
of there. People that smoke, they want to sit and they want to smoke for a
little while longer. And not only that but they don't have to wash the
walls once a year and they don't have to repaint the walls once a year.
And that costs so much money. Just to have it smoke free, it is not only
better for our health but it is not going to affect us in the future when we
are older and when we probably could get cancer. But we are not going to
be sick like that and we don't want to be because of other people' s
mistakes. But also it is saving the businesses so much money. I don't
think- they need to listen more to us and we need something to (can't hear)
there is nothing that we can really do.
Witz: And also about the (can't hear)- like they don't have to repaint the walls.
The employees- it kind of like- they have to- a lot of them are our age and
they work there and if it is non smoking there then they don't have as big
of a chance to get second hand smoke or whatever because they have to
work to keep the (can't hear). And that means they have more employees
that want to work there because they aren't in danger of that. And we
don't want to grow up having cancer from never smoking a cigarette but
because of other smokers. We are not trying to offend the smokers. We
kd~ow that they can get addicted really easily and when they were our age
they didn't get the information that we got. And that that is not their fault.
We already know kids that already smoke- probably because they think
that they look cool. But in reality they don't really. And these kids will
probably get cancer when they grow older. And we don't want to really
be a part of that even if we didn't smoke. We aren't going to talk on and
go on about health issues that you can get from smoking or inhaling
smoke because most of you know these. We just want to remind you that
what you are doing to your health can affect the others and that we don't
really want it to affect us if it doesn't have to.
Lehman: Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#5 Page 10
Ballinger: Hi, I am Beth Ballinger. I am a member of CAFI~- a grassroots
organization that is proposing an ordinance for smoke free restaurants.
Although the smoke free ordinance is not being discussed tonight, I have
some information, which I believe you should have as it impacts all of
you. Big tobacco has come to town masquerading as the National
Smokers Alliance or the NSA. They are offering compensation or p, aying
individuals to organize opposition to a smoke free ordinance. CAFE
welcomes public discussion about a smoke free ordinance but we are very
concerned that outsiders are attempting to buy their way into our
community in such a way. Big tobacco has no place in this discussion.
The majority of people in Iowa City have already indicated that they want
smoke free dining. They have told us that in a recently conducted survey.
Let me read to you a message that the NSA released last week. "The Iowa
City council is considering an ordinance sponsored by a local anti-
smoking group- Clean Air For Everyone" We are not anti-smoking- we
are anti-second hand smoke. "That would ban smoking in most public
places including restaurants. CAFI~'s draft proposal will likely be
discussed by the city council at a work session on October 2. If passed,
you may no longer be able to smoke in your favorite establishments, as
business owners will be prevented from serving their valued smoking
customers. Now is the time to join together with concerned business
owners to fight back against the anti-smoking zealots in your community.
It is imperative that every NSA member in Iowa City contact Mayor Ernie
Lehman and your city council members to voice your opposition to any
new smoking restrictions. Encourage them to continue to allow business
owners to serve all of their customers the way they see fit without
unnecessary government intrusion." Thank you Mayor Lehman and city
council members. We hope you act as quickly as possible on this very
important health issue, which you discussed last night at your work
session.
Dieterie: I am Caroline Dieterie. I am here to talk to you about drinking downtown
and surrounding issues. I have lived in Iowa City for a long time and I
have worked since 1980 as an advisor for students. So I know students
pretty well. I would like to start by saying that a couple of years ago at a
meeting in these chambers the question was asked why does ChiefRJ
Winkelhake wear his gun when he comes to city council meetings in his
civilian clothes? His reply was "I am a police officer first and a citizen
second". I found that troubling at the time and as the time has gone by I
have found it more and more troubling. I would like to read you very
short portions of two articles that appeared in the papers this week. This
one was given- this just appeared this morning: "Council gives drinking
policies priority over smoking issues. Council puts drinking ordinance at
top of list." It says, "Evidence would be gathered by asking intoxicated
persons concerning what establishment they were at and if they sold
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#5 Page 11
alcohol. Undercover agents would also be stationed in establishments to
monitor and observe alcohol sales, said police RJ Winkelhake, chief. We
would work in cooperation with other surrounding departments because
our officers are too well known downtown, he said." This one says, "City
officials defend new jail decision." Now, that was an error- it was the
county officials. But, never the less, the quote in this that is interesting is
from David (can't hear), a member of the Jail Overcrowding Study (can't
hear) Site Selection Committee, who presented his findings to the board.
"The conclusion we reached after looking through all of the facts and
figures is that people are being put in jail for things they weren't put in jail
for in the past", he said. "It was just a question of mathematics". Well, no
kidding. If you look at the August intakes at the jail you find that there
were 650 people total taken into jail. The Iowa City police department
was responsible for 430 of these- or 66.2%. Coralville, only 8.5%. The
Sheriff, 14.5%. Now, if you look at the bookings of the people who
actually then are booked into the jail and you count up the Iowa City 49%
and the people who were sentenced by the court 15%, most of which were
probably Iowa City people and the UI, which was 10%, mostly students
probably- that comes up to nearly 74% of the people in jail. Iowa City is
only paying 60% of the bond issue for this jail. People are afraid of the
police. I was warned about coming here to talk to you and said I could
expect retaliation. This is not a healthy situation. Fear leads to hate and
mistrust of all authority. As the gentleman who was here earlier said, it
doesn't contribute to any kind of solution to the problem. I hear amongst
the students- because amongst the youth hate and mistrust leads to outright
revolt eventually- I hear amongst the students that the orange pajama party
is getting to be a fashion statement. Now, that is not fight either. It is not
right for people who live here all of the time to be afraid of the police and
it is not fight for the students to be looking at orange pajama party as a
fashion statement. I think it is time to say enough. You as the council of
the City of Iowa City are basically responsible for what happens with your
police department. It is time to say that we do not need any more new
police officers. That we do not need police dogs anymore. We do not
need bean bag shotguns. And we don't need ninja suited people sneaking
around in people's backyards sniffing to see if they smell anything. And
we don't need undercover police officers going into downtown
establishments and bullying the people who are there- asking to buy drugs,
dragging them into the street and searching them and finding 0nly 35 cents
in their pocket after all of that. It is infuriating. It makes anybody who
ever hears about it angry because it is a direct violation of the 4th
amendment fights. In case you have forgotten what your fourth
amendment rights are-
Lehman: You need to wrap this up Caroline.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#5 Page 12
Dieterie: All right. Remember that the fourth amendment protects people against
unreasonable search. And boy oh boy, this town is not doing what it can
to preserve the fourth amendment. And I want you to think about this real
carefully when you think about the jail and about your budget. Thank
you.
Major: My name is Charles Major and I live on 7 Blue Stem Court in Iowa City.
And I just want to strongly and heartily back the smoking ordinance
proposal that is being talked about. I am a respiratory therapist and to
breathing tests on people. I test about 1800 people a year and about 50 of
those people have not smoked. They are all veterans. We lose 1000
veterans a day and the majority of smoking is related to their deaths. And
it hurts their quality of life. I think the 8th graders got it right. On the
drinking I want to hear more from the police and hear what their solutions
are and also from the students. I hope that the smoking- that you will
consider what the smoking ordinance- including bowling alleys in it.
Bowling alleys are one of the only indoor places where you can smoke
now. And it affects any- particularly small children. Thank you.
Lehman: Thanks Charlie. Any other public discussion?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 13
ITEM NO. 6b. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE
ZONING DESIGNATION FROM LOW DENSITY MULTI-
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RM-12) AND NEIGHBORHOOD
CONSERVATION RESIDENTIAL (RNC-20) TO MEDIUM
DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-8) FOR FOUR (4)
PROPERTIES ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE 900 BLOCK OF
IOWA AVENUE, SEVENTEEN (17) PROPERTIES ON THE 900
AND 1000 BLOCKS OF WASHINGTON STREET, TEN (10)
PROPERTIES ON THE 100 AND 200 BLOCKS OF SOUTH
SUMMIT STREET, FOUR (4) PROPERTIES ON THE EAST SIDE
OF THE 10 AND 100 BLOCKS OF GOVERNOR STREET, THREE
(3) PROPERTIES ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE 1000 BLOCK OF
MUSCATINE AVENUE, AND FIVE (5) PROPERTIES ON THE 900
AND 1000 BLOCKS OF COLLEGE STREET.
Lehman: The public hearing is open. Karin, would you like to- I would like Karin
to just briefly give us an overview of what this is and then we will
continue with the hearing.
Franklin: This is a rezoning of 43 lots from a combination as it is zoned now of
RNC-20- which is a neighborhood conservation zoning at 20 units per
acre and RM-12 a multi-family zoning designation of 12 units per acre.
The request is from neighboring propeay owners- residents of the area-
who wish to have this entire area, the entire 43 properties, down zoned to
RS-8, which is a residential single family zone which permits single
family and duplex construction. What has been recommended by the city
staff and by the Planning and Zoning Commission is that the majority of
the area be down zoned from the RNC-20 and RM-12 to RNC-12 and that
the section that is noah of Washington Street bound by Washington and
Lower Muscatine on the noah side of Washington be down zoned to the
RS-8. The RNC-12 would permit the continued use of the properties as
they are now. It would not allow new construction of multi-family
developments. It would allow only new construction of single family and
duplex. In the RS-8 area, there would- there could only be single family
and duplex and any uses which were of a higher density than that could
not continue. That is, they would be- I misspoke- they can continue, they
would be non-conforming. In the RNC-12, they are treated as
conforming. And that is an important distinction because in the RS-8 if a
propeay is destroyed by 100% of its assessed value it can only be rebuilt
to what is permitted in the RS-8 zone which is single family or duplex. In
the RNC-12 zone if a property is destroyed to 100% of its value, it can be
rebuilt to the density that it has today. This is very similar to the rezoning
that was done on Governor Street and Lucas recently, brought by a group
of neighbors in an effoa to stabilize the area. To basically hold it as it is
today. I think the difference here is that this has been far less contentious.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 14
We had four protests during this process. Those were protests against the
RS-8 and in the area that in now being recommended for RNC-12. So
therefore at this point in time we have no formal protests to the rezoning
that is being proposed by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Questions?
Pfab: Yes Karin. I would like to ask you- you had mentioned- because this is
some information I have just leamed this afternoon- you had mentioned
that there were protests. Could you describe those a little bit what you
mean by that?
Franklin: That is when a property owner formally states their objection to the
rezoning that is being requested. And those protests initially came in
under the original request of the neighbors, which was to change it from
the RM-12/RNC-20 to RS-8. And so those protests- the formal protests
that are written and notarized- were against the RS-8 zoning. And it was
all for properties south of Washington which is now being proposed for
RNC-12. We have received no formal protests to the RNC-12 to date.
Pfab: So it was individual property owners that were opposed to RNC-12?
Franklin: To RS-8.
Pfab: So I understand that as a result of going to the 12 zone- I am just going to
use the numbers so I don't screw them up- there will be how many- the
potential loss of single family dwellings- can be converted from single
family dwelling to duplexes will be how many?
Franklin: Let me look that up.
Pfab: I think at the present time you said 17 can be lost- can be converted to
duplexes.
Champion: It wasn't that many.
Franklin: If the entire area is rezoned to RS-8, two single family properties have
adequate lot area to be converted to a duplex. That is in the entire area. If
the entire area is zoned RNC-12, 13 single family properties have the
opportunity to be converted to a duplex.
Pfab: So there is 10 additional- the potential of losing 10 single family homes to
become duplexes?
Franklin: Yes.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 15
Pfab: Additional. Okay.
Franklin: Right.
Pfab: Because I didn't hear you mention that last evening. Somebody brought
that to my attention.
Franklin: That is just based to on the lot size. That is not looking at the structure on
the property or whether they can provide the parking because of
topography or where the building is on the lot. So that analysis is based
exclusively on the lot square footage that is required for a duplex in the
two zones. So I think it is- that is the maximum that you could
conceivable get but there may be fewer if the building does not lend itself
to a duplex or if there is not enough physical space on the lot because of
the topography to actually provide the parking.
Pfab: Is that a number that someone could research and get back to us with?
Franklin: If the majority of the council requested that I could. I will tell you that it
takes a lot of work because you have to look at the interior of the
buildings, you have to look at how much space on the lot there is to put
the parking. For a duplex you have to have four parking spaces. For a
single family dwelling you only have to have two. And so it would take a
considerable amount of work.
Pfab: Can I ask you one more question?
Franklin: Sure.
Pfab: And that is, if you were going to make a estimate- a reasonable estimate-
how many do you think there would be that would not qualify out of the
ten? The ten additional ones.
Franklin: I can't tell you that off the top of my head.
Pfab: That was my question.
Kanner: Karin I had a question. Is Muscatine between Washington and Iowa
Avenue considered an arterial street? At that point?
Franklin: Yes. Muscatine, Iowa would be considered part of the arterial system. Is
that your question?
Kanner: Yeah. Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 16
Lehman: Thank you Karin.
Cassell: I am Martin Cassell. I live at 1002 E. Washington. And my wife and I
made the application.
O'Donnell: Sir, I can't hear you. Could you speak into that microphone?
Cassell: I am Martin Cassell. I live at 1002 E. Washington St. My wife and I
made the application for the rezoning. I have a few overheads to basically
summarize the reasons why we made the zoning application and a diagram
to illustrate various things. If I can present those to the council.
Lehman: Bear in mind as you start these that you will have five minutes so if you
can get through them we would like to see them all.
Cassell: I will try to make this as brief as possible.
Lehman: Thank you.
Cassell: When we initiated this application our main purpose was at the top there-
to preserve the neighborhood as it is. It is a (can't hear) neighborhood.
Roughly 45% is single family housing. There are four- sorry three
apartment complexes and the remainder are older rental properties in the
area. We like the neighborhood- that balance. And in some respects it is
kind of a microcosm of Iowa City and it reflects almost exactly the
(changed tapes) We are also interested in encouraging stability in the area.
Many people- there are 11 families in the area with small children. Many
of them have expressed concern that the current zoning regulations make
it uncertain that they will make a long-term commitment to stay in the
area. This was a- this leads on directly to the third point that the zoning
classification at the moment doesn't really reflect the usage of the
properties. The current zoning is very multi-family RM-12 and the high
density residential neighborhood conservation RNC-20; when in fact as I
think I can show you on the map here that the properties of(can't hear) are
those that are single family dwellings. The ones with the black borders are
rental properties and one of the areas there up on 1002 College is an
apartment complex and the blank area in the Iowa Washington Muscatine
avenue block is an apartment complex- two apartment complexes, sorry-
that aren't affected by the current rezoning. The- another big issue that
made us go to the efforts of requesting the rezoning was the overwhelming
support we had for the rezoning effort. Every person in a single family
dwelling- property owners voted for the ordinance to be changed to RS-8.
Two thirds of the non resident rental property owners also agreed with an
RS-8 zoning. We have had letters of support and verbal comments of
support from the Woodlawn residents, from the Iowa City Historical
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 17
Preservation Commission, from the Summit Street Commission and from
the College Street Historic district. And we also did a survey before we
did the application of the tenants in the region and virtually unanimously
the tenants also supported the preservation of the neighborhood by an
appropriate zoning ordinance in that regard. Again, if I could just
demonstrate the support in this area- (can't hear)
Karr: Sir, sir-
Lehman: You have to talk into the microphone.
Cassell: I do apologize. The two properties- the three properties in red are those
that have sent in letters of opposition against the rezoning ordinance. The
two properties that are stippled initially opposed the rezoning but with the
approval of the staff recommendation for an RS-8 RNC-12, those two
property owners made a verbal commitment to support the RNC-12 which
is staffs recommendation in this regard. So we have fairly extensive
support from the local neighborhood and from surrounding districts for
this particular request. Finally I would just like to point out some of the
benefits-
Lehman: In the microphone please.
Cassell: I keep forgetting about it, I apologize.
Lehman: That is okay.
Cassell: I am used to wearing a portable mic. The benefit to Iowa City of this
rezoning ordinance- first it is a preservation of a rather beautiful part of
Iowa City. There are many old trees there, many old buildings. Much
effort has gone in to maintain the area and even to renovate the area. Why
be concerned about preservation of a beautiful area? Firstly, it motivates
the residents to remain in the area. It motivates the residents to maintain
and update the properties. It is also an attractive area for walkers. I have
talked to several people walking dogs in the neighborhood and various
joggers. They don't live in the area but they come through the area
because it is a beautiful peaceful part of Iowa City. Also I think
maintaining areas of this nature maintains a positive image for Iowa City
as a whole. Many people who have come to visit u~ from outtide Iowa
City and also from other countries comment on how nice the area is and
that they wish that in their cities that efforts were made to preserve these
types of neighborhoods. Finally I think too that efforts need to be made
by the council to preserve single family neighborhoods because of the
impact on downtown. This is a near downtown neighborhood. There is
continuation and potential growth (can't hear). Many of the people, local
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 18
residents, don't use downtown for entertainment or alcohol consumption
purposes but actually use the businesses downtown as the local
neighborhood businesses. In addition, most of us walk downtown (can't
hear). So we alleviate not a substantial but a none the less present
problem with parking. I would be happy to answer any questions you may
have as well.
Lehman: Martin I would just like to mention this is really- after the Governor Lucas
Street rezoning which we did some time ago, we asked the staff to look
and see what other parts of the community might suffer the same sort of
consequences that potentially might have occurred there. And this frankly
is precisely what we were talking about. And you are right, there is
tremendous support for it. Steven?
Kanner: Martin, one of properties that objected was the River City Housing
Collective at 200 South Summit. And can you tell me some of their
objections and did you talk to the board of directors that rims the house?
Cassell: We tried on two occasions to contact those people. We at least for the
information that was received prior to the Planning and Zoning Committee
meeting, we had nothing on paper. We were not clear at any stage what
their objections were.
Kanner: Did you go to a board meeting?
Cassell: No, I didn't go to a board meeting. We could not contact- this is the
communal living house just along from the Summit Street apartments- is
that correct?
Kanner: Cooperative living that is owned by a non profit board of directors.
Cassell: We had contact with the gentleman who runs the Leighton House
cooperative. He said to us he was- since it was outside of the area to be
rezoned he really had no opinion either way and didn't want to make any
opinion. But as regards to the cooperative on the opposite side, we have
received no contact from them. And I don't remember seeing (can't hear)
Planning and Zoning Committee meeting any formal statements of their
objections.
Kanner: How many tenants did you talk to and what (can't hear).
Cassell: I can give you those figures from the sheets. It was roughly somewhere
between thirty and forty tenants.
Kanner: And what number supported the move to RS-8?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 19
Cassell: All of them but there was one individual who basically didn't care either
way. But all of them said yes it is a very nice neighborhood, we like
living here, it is peaceful, it is quiet. Many of them are graduate students
and other professionals in the area. And many of them said that they had
likely moved into rental properties in the area because of the nature of the
neighborhood.
Lehman: Thank you.
Kanner: The Leighton House is on the- it is not a cooperative but it is I believe on
the rezoning at College and Summit. They are the old fraternity house.
Cassell: (can't hear). We were under the impression that this property was
excluded from the rezoning.
Franklin: No, Leighton House is in the consideration for the rezoning. And also, we
did not receive any formal- to my knowledge- any written protests from
the Summit Street cooperative. We had nothing in the file for that.
Lehman: Thank you Karin.
Thompson: Hello, we are representatives for the RCHC, the River City Housing
Cooperative.
Lehman: You need to give us your name.
Thompson: I am Jacob Thompson.
Lehman: And sign in please.
Thompson: I guess we are very concerned about the rezoning of the property. It is
kind of going to put us in a tight bind if we ever want to expand and we
do- we are essentially a family housing in practice, maybe not by blood
but we do try to preserve the family neighborhood and what not. I am
going to turn it over to Dylan.
Tack: I guess-
Lehman: You will need to give your name as well and sign in.
Tack: My apologies. My name is Dylan Tack and I also live in the Summit
house. I guess just to clarify what we are in case not everyone is aware of
it, there is currently about 18 people that live there. It is a communal
living arrangement. There is a real diverse group of people there. We
have some students. There are people in the house that are family
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 20
members. I guess first of all if someone could answer some of our
questions as to what the impact of that would be. Like if the rezoning
would be on our house.
Lehman: Have you talked to the staff at all about this?
Tack: No we haven't.
Lehman: Is this the first that you have done anything about this?
Tack: Yeah, we have received some letters and they honestly don't make a
whole lot of sense and so that is kind of why we came.
Lehman: Council is not going to be able to answer those questions. Staff may be
able to answer those questions. In fact, I suppose depending on the
number of questions we have might try that. But this really isn't a
question and answer. If necessary we could continue this. Those letters
that you have got were notices that we were going to be rezoning your
property and the questions you had should have been addressed at that
point. It is not too late to ask the questions. Don't misunderstand me. We
will get your answers.
Wilburn: Since tonight is the public hearing are you suggesting maybe that they
could meet with staff and then they will have an opportunity between then
and when we look at this to vote on it?
Lehman: If that is what they would and council would like.
Wilburn: I am just asking what your (can't hear).
Pfab: I suggest- is this something that we may want to continue?
Lehman: That is what I am suggesting, I don't know.
Pfab: I would encourage that.
Lehman: Karin, would you- could I address you for a moment? Is there any
immediacy involved in this rezoning?
Franklin: No. I mean, you wouldn't be voting on the first consideration until your
next meeting anyway. So you could continue the public hearing-
Lehman: We could conceivable continue the public hearing, close it and vote on the
first consideration?
Franklin: And have your first consideration and be on the same track as you were.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 2 1
Vanderhoef: Does that put us at the 60 days?
Frm~lin: Pardon me?
Vanderhoef: Does that put us at the 60-day moratorium?
Lehman: I don't think there is a problem with that.
Champion: We wouldn't be voting tonight anyway.
Vanderhoef: No, I mean two weeks from now.
Franklin: No, you would be fine.
Lehman: We would be voting at the same time we ordinarily would anyway.
Would we care to- let me- would we care to continue the public hearing
until the 16th and at the close of that hearing be prepared to vote on it?
Champion: Right.
Pfab: So moved.
Lehman: Okay Irvin, that is voting the same night we close the hearing.
Pfab: That will be after a continuation of the hearing.
Lehman: I know that but it is still voting the same night we close the hearing.
Pfab: Are you trying to remind me?
Lel'nnan: I want to be sure this is okay.
Kanner: Second.
Dilkes: Can I suggest that you don't want to continue the public hearing yet
because you have got lots of other people here who want to talk.
Lehman: I know, but I am suggesting for these folks who have questions that it
would be probably more appropriate to direct those questions to the staff
and then come back- you can speak tonight but the questions you have,
you need those answers from our staff between now and the 16th. So any
comments other than that please feel free.
Kanner: But also I think some questions might be appropriate in a general sense
and we obviously have some miscommunication between the Summit
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 22
house and the initiator of the application. There was no communication
going on. And I have a big concern about that because we have been told
there is all of this communication happening and all of this contact and it
hasn't happened.
Lehman: He just told us they got the letters.
Champion: They got the letters, they ignored them.
Lehman: What do you expect in the way of contact?
Kanner: Well, no- I am not talking from our point of view. I am talking about from
the presentation we just had from the previous person. So I would like to
hear some general questions- maybe don't get into the specifics- and I
think it would help me in making my decision to hear some of their
concerns and their questions in a general sense. If you can do that and
leave out perhaps some very specific ones- some of your concerns might
be more helpful.
Tack: I think I can do that. I guess our biggest concern is with either the RS-8 or
12 we would be, you know, not- I want to say non conforming I realize
that is probably not completely technically correct. But in either case it is
going to place some restrictions on what our cooperative can do. And I
really think that our house is a very positive thing for the neighborhood.
Anyone that has seen the house I think would support our opinion that we
do maintain a nice property. And it is really an important part of the
neighborhood. The types of questions we had is the impact on 8 vs. 12.
When it talks about expansion, you know, does that mean- obviously we
don't plan on bulldozing the house and building a new one but if we are a
non conforn~ing entity does that mean we can't as an example remodel our
kitchen. Those are the types of questions I guess we would kind of like to
have answered.
Lehman: And those questions staff can answer for you very, very easily.
Tack: Okay. Could you clarify your suggestion then- how do we get in contact
with the staff?.
Lehman: Well Karin Franklin is here from the City Planning and she can direct you
either to a member of her staff or herself. And you can certainly make an
appointment to come in and discuss this. They can tell you precisely how
this will or will not affect your property. And then at the continuation of
the hearing (can't hear) you will be able to speak with a little more
informed position. You may find that you are able to do- basically the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 23
way it is right now. There may not be something that you are opposed to.
But until you get those answers you are really not going to know.
Tack: Well, we will try to get those answers then before the next meeting and
my apologies for the confusion on my part.
Lehman: No problem. That is what our staff is there for. It is a shame you didn't
respond to the letters you got informing you of the rezoning.
Tack: The impression that we got from the letters was that was the notification
and this was the meeting to attend in order to-
Lehman: It didn't tell you of a Planning and Zoning Commission meeting?
Tack: Okay, thank you.
Lehman: Thank you.
Boylan: My name is Brianne and I have written my name in and I apologize again
for our lack knowledge of the procedures here. The letter didn't mention
much about anything except for this meeting. So this is all we knew and
we tried to get- we have three of the board members here tonight. I am
one of them- I am the secretary. Our main question is buying vs. building.
For me, it seems that it is saying that- it is talking about like destroying
something and building up a new thing but what about buying? If we
were to buy a house in the area could that be a multi family use or would it
have to then conform once it has changed hands? And the not for profit
concession that might possibly be put in there and that perhaps non for
profits could be exempt from the-
Lehman: Those are questions again that the staff is going to have to answer for you.
Boylan: Okay, thank you.
Lehman: Okay? Thank you.
Gersh: Hi, my name is Frank Gersh and I live at 1123 E. College. I am not in the
area to be re:toned but I am right next door so the houses across the street
which face backward onto Washington Street are going to be affected. I
am here to support the neighborhood proposal for RS-8. Let me give you
a little background. I have lived there for 20 years and owned this house
for 20 years. I have raised my 2 boys there. They are 14 and 8. I was
very active to get the block made into these college historic districts. We
had neighborhood meetings, we had Doug Russell out, we had the
commission out. It finally got made into a historic district 3 years ago.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 24
And that has been very beneficial. The people have remodeled their
houses, taken off metal siding, put on additions, really done some major
work. And it is an RS-8 area. I don't think the- I am glad the P&Z
commission did some down zoning. That is good. I think it needs to go
further and do the whole neighborhood RS-8. Partly because people are
going to want to fix it up more and keep it a good neighborhood. And also
because it is a very stressed neighborhood. Since I have lived there for 20
years I have seen the whole neighborhood become more crowded and
more noisy- all of these things. I don't want it to turn into another sort of
South Johnson area which is what could happen very easily. If it is not
completely down zoned into RS-8 then as Karin Franklin noted, some of
the single-family dwellings that are in the area under consideration can be
made into duplexes. That will result in more people being there, more
noise, more like South Johnson and I don't want to see that happen.
Already the people across the street, my neighbors, are saying that if it
isn't down to RS-8 they are going to sell and move out which means that
probably more rental units across the street. I really don't want to see that
happen. Right now, as Dr. Cassell said, many of the people in this area
shop downtown. I have a small business in Iowa City, a psychology
practice. I like Iowa City. I want to keep this neighborhood the way it is.
Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you.
Easton: Hi, my name is Ron Easton. I am here kind of representing the owner at
911 and 915. However unfavorable that may be. The lot at 915 is
currently vacant at the time. I know he is not in favor of the rezoning.
Kanner: What street?
Lehman: Washington Street?
Easton: Washington Street, excuse me. I am also a builder in the area. I run
Easton Construction. I have been considering building something on the
lot at 915 which is now vacant. To build a duplex on that lot- the
investment wouldn't pay off. I don't know that the father in law- I know
he hasn't been contacted on this rezoning issue. What are we going to do-
to devalue that lot and to look at only being able to build a duplex there,
the investment- it wouldn't pay off. It wouldn't be worth the investment
to build a duplex on that lot. And that is strictly from an investment
standpoint. I know he is not in favor of the rezoning situation. I don't
think there has been the communication going on that was indicated
earlier. I got a phone call last night to come to this meeting because they
received the letters in the mail as far as the rezoning issue. But as far as
direct communication on how some of the owners feel I don't think there
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 25
has been the communication that was put forth here tonight anyway. If it
does get down zoned to duplex only you will look forward to seeing that
lot sit empty for a while because number one it will depreciate the value of
the lot and again to build a duplex on it the investment that it takes it just
wouldn't be a worthy investment. We will probably come to your next
meeting.
Lehman: Thank you.
Cizadlo: Hello, my name is Ted Cizadlo and my wife and I own the property at
1005 Muscatine Avenue, which is in the area. Listening to the debate
tonight- I wish there was a way that we could tell the properties like the
Summit Street Cooperative from full boar as dense as you can get them
apartment complexes that care nothing about the way the neighborhood is.
But I am not sure there is a way to tell those two apart. I think it is real
important to make a strong statement that this is a neighborhood that we
want to stabilize to keep it the way it is. I have watched just up the block
from me on Washington Street one house and then a threat to another of
becoming split up into apartments. At the last zoning committee meeting
one of the property owners I think spoke quite eloquently about the fate of
a house that has that done to it. You can take a nice single family
dwelling- maybe it is a large old house- and once that house has had say
four different electrical services put into it and four different apartments
made, nobody has enough money to turn that back into a single family
dwelling again. It just doesn't happen. I think we have- the gentleman
who spoke before me spoke of it just not being economically feasible to
put up duplexes on these houses. If it is possible then when one of these
single family dwellings goes down 100%, it seems to me very likely if it is
possible to put up a multi family dwelling there of some sort, that is going
to be the lucrative thing to do and that is what is naturally going to happen.
And this neighborhood will slowly erode until that is all there is in this
neighborhood. I think you have just got to drive a nail in this thing and
say stop it right here. Let's keep this thing exactly the way it is. Let's
affirm this neighborhood for what it has become and stop the slow spread
of what can happen.
Pfab: As far as zoning from either 8 to 12, what were your feelings on that?
Cizadlo: I strongly am in favor of 8. I think that is the strongest statement you can
make. I believe from- I have to say it is very confusing. I have been to
the hearings on this and have listened to all of the debate and listened to
all of the explanations. It sounds to me like 8 says you can keep it the way
it is and 12 says you can expand it. At least that is what I have heard. It is
a very difficult thing to understand I've got to tell you. I have heard it
both ways. I have heard people say 8 means we have to change. I have
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 26
heard people say 12 means we have to change. And I have heard people
say 12 means we can expand. We don't know. It seems to me the most
powerful statement you can make is: let's let what is there stay there- not
necessarily run them out. But let's not go any further either right? If one
of these houses goes down let's not allow it become anything else. Let's
put it back up as a house again.
Champion: That is basically what RNC-12 does. It stabilizes the neighborhood.
Cizadlo: I think you can chop up houses into duplexes and there is at least ten or
eleven I think properties in that area that are great risk. I think eleven is
the number we had that are at great risk for being chopped up. And again,
it is not the same anymore. A single family dwelling that is owner
occupied is not the same as a duplex that is rented out. And it doesn't
have the same impact on the neighborhood. Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you.
Mostafavi: Hi, my name is Kaveh Mostafavi and I am here representing the
Mostafavi family and the Mostafavi business. Our main objective tonight
is to ask the council to agree with the recommendation.
Pfab: Could you tell us where you live?
Mostafavi: We own the rental property on 1002 E. College Street.
Pfab: 1002?
Mostafavi: The 6-plex.
Pfab: Okay, that is fine.
Mostafavi: We are asking the committee to agree with the recommendation made by
the City Planning and Zoning Commission. Four years ago we made a
$650,000 investment and bought the land at 1002 E. College and put up a
6-plex. And four years ago we were allowed to do this. And now today
they want to take this away from us. With the RS-8 zoning we would only
be allowed to have three persons in a four-bedroom property right now.
That means only three people could rent a four-bedroom apartment.
Which would deplete our investment and leave us pretty much close to
bankrupt. Right now, we have just enough money to pay taxes to the city
and have enough for our living expenses. This is our business. We put a
lot of effort- we have been committed for the past four years to maintain
this property and to make it look as nice as possible. And at the last
meeting the other people have agreed that our property is maintained to
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 27
the highest ability. They do agree that it looks nice. It is not out of shape
in any way. We keep it to the tiptop shape. And we are here to say that
we do comply with the RNC-12 but we do not with the RS-8. And with
the growing University and the growing support of the University this can
be expected, this will be expected, and this issue will come up in the
future. And we are just asking the council to be fair and to just take our
point of view even though we are the minority in this issue.
Lehman: Thank you.
Champion: I did read you letter or your little letter you wrote when you sent it back to
Planning and Zoning. And it was really well written and I understand
your dilemma. But when you pay- I just want you to understand that you
said how much you pay in property taxes per month to the city- but it is
not just us. Okay? You are paying it to the city and the county too.
Mostafavi: Exactly. We are just saying that if-
Champion: I wish we did have all of that money.
Mostafavi: We are just saying if was tumed into RS-8, we would not have an
adequate amount of money to pay the taxes.
Champion: I understand. It was a well-written thing you wrote.
Mostafavi: Thank you very much.
Pfab: I have a question. Is it possible that that property could be taken out of
that part since it is right on- it is a comer?
Mostafavi: That issue came up in the Planning and Zoning Commission and if is
something like that were to happen you would have to come up with a
scheme, a symmetrical scheme, to make the area look somehow
symmetrical. You can't exclude one certain property from the whole
community.
Pfab: I was looking at it here and I was thinking that it was at the comer of the
whole scheme but I see there are other properties across the street now that
I look at it.
Mostafavi: And they proposed maybe- nothing has been done about it yet- but the
four properties on the comers of College and Summit to be excluded.
Pfab: I see we also have excluded the properties on the noah side of Washington
between 918 and 936- is it possible that this could also be done?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 28
Franklin: What we ran into was an issue of spot zoning. The properties on the north
side of Washington Street, if you look at that in the context of this whole
area, are pan of an RNC-20 zone and would not be a spot alone. If you
take the Mostafavi property and you keep that as RNC-20, and to the east
of it is RS-8, to the noah of it would then be RNC-12 potentially, across
the street would be RNC-12- it would be an RNC-20 single lot within
these other zoning designations. And this is the issue that was Mr.
Mostafavi is referring to that occurred in P&Z. That there wasn't a way to
get around that zoning issue. But that is why the RNC-12 was proposed
because Mr. Mostafavi's property retains the rights that it has fight now
under RNC - 12.
Pfab: Okay, what is to the east of this property? What is the zone?
Franklin: RS-8.
Pfab: So it would be spot if you went to RS-8?
Franklin: No. What he would have to have would be RNC-20- he would have to
have something higher- if you take it out of the rezoning it is zoned RNC-
20 right now. And so what you would have would be an RNC-20 with
RS-8 and RNC-12 around it.
Pfab: And that is not permissible is it?
Franklin: That is spot zoning because it is a spot.
Pfab: So you are saying that was the strongest motivation to move from an 8 to a
127
Franklin: Not the Mostafavi property alone, but looking at the whole impact of the
RS-8 on this area. If in fact the goal is to stabilize- that is hold it in time
as to what it is right now- the RNC-12 allows you to do that by allowing
those existing higher density uses to stay as conforming. The conversion
that Mr. Cizadlo referred to of the single family to duplex, yes, that change
can still occur. And that is why they want the RS-8. But if you want to
stabilize, the RNC-12 is the closest thing to stabilization. The RS-8 means
that any property here that does not have a one or a two on it, if it is
destroyed it is gone.
Pfab: So in other words it looks like the only way he could protect himself is
pray for no tomadoes and (can't hear) the property.
Champion: No.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 29
Franklin: No. Under RNC-12 Mr. Mostafavi's property has the same rights that it
has right now, tornado or not.
Champion: He will be fine.
Pfab: No, no. I mean an 8. If he was an 8 then-
Franklin: Yes. That is right.
Lehman: Thank you.
Kanner: Karin?
Mostafavi: I would just like to make one last point. With this building we are not
looking to expand in any way. We are not looking to add on to make the
neighborhood look in any way, shape or form unusual. We think it is a
beautiful neighborhood and that is why we chose to build a building there.
Pfab: But if it gets to 12, you can have a potential deterioration of the
neighborhood as more single families are converted into duplexes. So you
could lose the value of the neighborhood to you also. But as long as it
doesn't take anything away from you, it just says that there is a potential.
Mostafavi: Right, under RNC-12 we are still allowed to rent out to four people for the
four bedroom apartment. But we cannot add on in any way.
Pfab: I just want to ask you a question because I don't know the answer. Is it
possible that if it went to 8 that you could continue to operated as long as
you are- as you are as long as the property is in tact?
Mostafavi: No sir. We would only be allowed to rent out to three people for the four
bedroom apartment.
Pfab: You would have an absolute down zoning in that property to (can't hear)?
Is he correct? Okay.
Mostafavi: Thank you.
Lehman: Thanks again.
Tank: My name is Jack Tank. I own a property at 1019 E. Washington. That is
the spotted one on that particular one. I attended the meetings- first of all,
just so you know too, John Yapp has been very good about returning all of
my calls and answering my questions. I was as dumb as a post on most of
these things when we first started. John has spent no less than five or six
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 30
times with me personally understanding exactly and getting the
information. He provided a very good chart showing the different density
levels- because that is all we are talking. We are not talking about parking
or any of those other issues. This is only a density issue that we are
talking about. And the one chart provided some of- the material that he
provided before shows very clearly the amount of the square footage that
you have to have for different sizes. With an RS-8, I have a 4-plex, I
would be non conforming. Our property, my wife and my property would
be non conforming. With an RS-12, and again he has been very clear in
discussing this- the staff has been- I can change bathrooms around, I can
change my porch around- I can't expand to five apartments. My numbers
don't work that way. With 12,750 feet you can't do it that way. But on
RS-12- RNC-12, I will get the numbers right here- I could maintain the
property that I have and enhance the property. I could not do that in an
RS-8 with the four-plex I have. The property was built about 1910 and it
has plaster on the walls so it probably hasn't been remodeled in the last 50
or 60 years. I understand the concerns of many of the people here as they
live there and I understand the emotional issue. I have put a good amount
of money into the property. I plan to keep it a good property. I feel like I
have good tenants. I try to maintain the property. I try to conform with
many of the looks around the place. I have spent way too much money on
a metal roof just this last year. Those are all long-term things. I plan to be
a long term player. And definitely an RS-8 classification would be a
taking of that bundle of rights I have. It really disturbs me that- that would
be an economic problem from my perspective. An RS-12- an RNC-12,
excuse me, I will get that right yet- if the place did bum down I could put
back according to that RNC-12 1 could put back a four-plex. I have to
conform with all of the new rules and regulations as far as how it looks.
Brick around places, everything else has to be submitted to the city. There
is a thing of things this big and I am not saying that is wrong, I am just
saying that that is a very obvious thing to have to be done. So I have to
conform to the neighborhood and everything else. I officially have not
said between the RNC-20 and the RNC-12- RNC-8 definitely is a hardship
on my particular property. This is a long-term play from my perspective
and I feel it is an unfair taking from a legal perspective. RNC-8 makes it
my property non-conforming. I am on the south side of Washington
Street- 1019 if you want to look at the map.
Champion: You don't have any problems with the RCN-12 though? That allows you
to- RNC, whatever!
Lehman: It is okay. We are going to get this fight.
O'Donnell: Sooner or later.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 31
Tank: What was that again?
Champion: You don't have any problems with the RNC-12 zoning that allows you to
keep your property as it is?
Tank: I think that I have thought about it quite a bit and I would say that I would
say that that would be my best recommendation at this point. And I have
talked to several of the other owners. Some are ambivalent. Some are
uninformed completely and don't understand the differences clearly. I
guess that is their situation. And again I am going to say very clearly John
Yapp has been very concise and clear and has provided all of the
information on 4 or 5 occasions and has clearly, clearly told me exactly
what I have or don't have. Any other questions?
Lehman: Thank you Jack.
Kanner: Karin, I had a question for you. I like the idea of RNC-12 for the whole
area and combined with- we had some information I think from the
applicant talking about the trend over the last 20 years or so and how it has
been moving toward single family- even without the zoning it has been
moving towards- the proposed rezoning- it is moving towards single
family. We were talking about spot zoning before. The property from
936 to 1030 Washington just strikes me as a bit of spot zoning in going to
RS-8 for that. It seems that it would lend itself to the RNC-12 also.
Especially with three rental units- one of them being a four-unit rental
property. And I was wondering if you could talk to that for a moment and
tell me your reasoning for not including at least that part of Washington. I
can sort of see the other comer around the comer with the RS-8.
Franklin: Well, it had to do with the potential for conversion to duplexes in this
particular comer- and I am including that whole comer that is bound by
Washington, Muscatine and Iowa until you get over to the multi family
properties there. It does not, I don't believe, fall in under the spot zoning
concern because across Muscatine is RS-8. So basically your zoning
boundary line is going to include that too. Now, obviously related to your
question before about the arterial, one could argue that point. But the
reason that it was recommended by the staff for RS-8 has to do with the
ability to convert the single family residences there to duplexes. I mean,
that whole- all of those properties in there- the eleven, I think there is
eleven properties in there- one of them is a multiple. All the rest are single
family. Under the RNC-12, six properties or more than half of them,
could be converted to duplexes. Under the RS-8, only one of them can be
converted to a duplex based on the lot size. And so, again, it is that the
issue of looking at stability in that particular microcosm of the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 32
neighborhood- to keep that as much the way it is, the RS-8 works better
there. Now, that does create one non conforming property- the four-plex.
Kanner: And if those 6 recommended for RS-8 by the staff that are on Washington
St. there- I would assume that the skinny ones perhaps would not be able
to fit a duplex?
Franklin: No-
Kanner; How many of those 6 would be able to be duplexes?
Franklin: Four of them. Based upon the size of the lots. Now, you could put a
skinny duplex on them. You could put a- a duplex need not be next to
each other. A duplex can be a flat- an up and down. So, you know, I
don't know that physically one could not put a duplex there or that those
houses could not be converted. As far as the lot size goes, there is enough
square footage with those lots under the RNC-12 to convert them to
duplexes.
Kanner; You said four out of the six?
Franklin: Yep.
Lehman: Okay, we are going to take one more and then I will entertain a motion to
continue the public hearing or take a break- one or the other.
Champion: Both.
Sale: I apologize, I actually had to go to a University function tonight so I am
sorry that I am late and I hope that I don't repeat too much that other
people have said. My name is Hillary Sale and I live at 1016 E. College
St. I am one of the active participants in the down zoning proposal.
Several people who live on the street where I live have worked hard with
the people who live on Washington Street to bring this proposal before
you tonight. We are very, very concerned about maintaining this
neighborhood as a multi use, multi flavored, multi textured neighborhood.
We don't want it to change in that sense and we don't want it to change
either direction.
Pfab: Would you permit me- what was the address you said you were at?
Sale: 1016 E. College Street. We don't want any more large apartment
buildings in the neighborhood. That is clear from our proposal and that is
clear from the testimony from most of the residents of the neighborhood
that you have heard. That is not to say that we are not in favor of
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 33
affordable housing or rental housing. We have lots of rental housing in
our neighborhood and we welcome it. We are also, however, in favor of
encouraging the single-family use that has come into being more and more
in our neighborhood. We are glad to have people who want to live in our
neighborhood and own their homes. And our neighborhood is one of the
few affordable neighborhoods within walking distance to town. We are
people who live in town, who eat in the restaurants downtown, who shop
downtown, who truly live in Iowa City. And we don't want to have to live
elsewhere. And many of us will choose to live elsewhere if we can't
maintain the type of neighborhood that we have. I want to stress actually
that I am here to ask for more than what the Planning and Zoning group
did. I was very disappointed by what they did. I was disappointed
because the residents of some of the homes asked to be down zoned and
can't seem to get it. And I don't understand that. That is not to say that I
don't understand the balance of politics but when I look at the zone that
Mr. Kanner was just addressing I say, all of those residents- including that
one non conforming use at 936 are in support. The only person who has
protested in that area is Mr. Klinefelter who sent in a form. He objected-
he is the one with the 4, the number 4, on the picture of his house- because
his actually would be a non-conforming problem. The other end of that
block where there are three ones, a two, a four, and a one- that is the
Governor end of the block- every single home owner there- whether they
live there or whether they live out of state- either testified in favor of RS-
8- not RNC-12 but RS-8- or sent in a form, the ones who live out of town.
That is, the ones who have rental properties support down zoning to RS-8.
They wrote notes about how they want to protect this neighborhood and
protect the older homes. How they were thrilled that someone took the
initiative to do it. As I understand it, the same is true of the opposite side
of Washington St. with the exception of I gather, of somebody who might
have testified tonight on that block opposed. But prior to tonight, there
had been no opposition to RS-8 in that entire zone. And with the
exception of Mr. Tank- and I gather Mr. Hayek filed something- most of
the other block was supportive. I want to stress that this is a neighborhood
surrounded by RS-8. It is a historic district. And the reason to keep it that
way is so that is won't (changed tapes) is to prevent that from happening
again in what is largely a resident dominated neighborhood. Finally,
because I am the person who spoke to the people at Summit St. and I just
talked to the people who came tonight, I thought I would just say that we
did meet with them. Unfortunately or fortunately, given the kind of
housing it is, the residents turn over at Summit St. and perhaps the ones
that they spoke with don't remember or either are no longer there. I know
some of the people because there was a woman there who has babysat for
me regularly and no longer lives there. People just come and go there.
But we did meet with them. We did talk to them and many of them signed
petitions early on adamantly in support of keeping the neighborhood as a
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#6b Page 34
single family neighborhood where possible and creating affordable
housing elsewhere. The hardest kind of housing those people in the
Summit St. coop told me for them to find is affordable housing- not of a
four bedroom multi plex but a duplex where they can afford to live in a
regular house like environment. And that is what our neighborhood
offers. I just want to encourage you to think about going beyond what
Planning and Zoning did. I think there is political safety in doing that
given the testimony that people have submitted to you. And more
importantly, I think it is the right thing to do to maintain what is an
important downtown neighborhood. Thank you for the opportunity.
Lehman: Thank you.
Pfab: Why don't we just take a break-
Lehman: Do we want to continue the public hearing?
O'Donnell: Let's continue it.
Karr: Excuse me- we have a motion on the floor to do that. Moved by Pfab,
seconded by Kanner, to continue to 10/17.
Pfab: Do we want to continue it yet this evening after the break?
Lehman: I think we have probably spent enough time on it tonight. All in favor of
continuing the public hearing?
All: Aye.
Lehman: Opposed? The motion carries. It will be continued on the 16th and we are
going to take- the 17th- and we going to take a 1 O-minute recess.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#7 Page 35
ITEM NO. 7. PUBLIC HEARING ON A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE
FY2001 OPERATING BUDGET.
Lehman: I am going to read the comment and then I am going to ask Kevin to give
us a brief overview. Some of this seems a lot more complicated than it
really is. (Reads comment). The public hearing is open. Keyin?
O'Malley: Mr. Mayor, I recommend approval or favorable action on this amendment.
The majority of this amendment is for our Capital Improvement programs.
Several years ago the state used to allow us to have a continuing
appropriation which allowed us to budget construction programs over
many years. Since that has lost favor, or whatever happened with the
state, we now are required to have legal authority to continue these
construction projects. And so now we start doing budget amendments
twice a year. The second reason why I would like to see some favorable
action on this budget amendment is because we are getting ready for the
fiscal 20002 budget. And this will help us identify what our true fund
balances are so we can make some assessments at that time. Did that clear
up any of the-
Lehman: Kevin, what you are really saying is the budget amendments are putting
into the fiscal years the amounts that are actually incurred in those years
and in other words if we approve something for FY01, don't do it and we
end up extending it into the following year. So it is just putting it in the
proper spot?
O'Malley: That is correct. It is a timing issue.
Lehman: It changes- it does not change the spending, it just puts it in the proper
fiscal year?
O'Malley: Right. If you noticed on our publication, we are not raising any taxes. We
are just carrying forward the authority of unspent funds from the previous
year.
Lehman: Are there questions for Kevin before he sits down and we vote? Thank
you. Is there any council discussion?
Wilbum: We are not voting on it.
Lehman: Oh, we are not. Well, then I guess we just close the public hearing.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#8 Page 36
ITEM NO. 8. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST AN EXTENSION OF
THE LISTING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY AND LEPIC-KROEGER REALTORS OF IOWA CITY,
IOWA FOR THE COMMERCIAL UNITS REMAINING TO BE
SOLD AT TOWER PLACE AND PARKING.
Vanderhoef: So moved.
Wilburn: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by Wilburn. Discussion?
Pfab: As soon as I get my mouth empty a little bit- I do not wish to continue this
for several reasons. When this listing was taken I feel that the city had a
right to have the people give us a written appraisal of how they arrived at
the price of those units. That was never done or required and I don't know
why it wasn't. I believe that the citizens should have the same- the
citizens of Iowa City should have the same rights and privileges that any
other owner would have and they would do this for any other owner.
Also, there was an additional half of a percent increase for advertising
because of the fact that this was a difficult piece of property to sell. I
believe that the city should have the tear sheets and the billing for that
extra funds and that was not asked for and it was not provided by the real
estate firm.
Kanner: Irvin, can you explain what tear sheets are?
Pfab: In other words, the real estate firm came to the city and said we can't sell
this at the regular commission rate. We want an additional half a percent
because we want to do marketing- a real wide area marketing of this
property. Okay? So they are saying well, we want to increase it by about
15 or 20% of the cost of selling. Is the city going to get their moneys
worth? I think we have a right and an obligation to the citizens if we are
going to pay more money to get the results. The tear sheets are that the
ads- this is what they advertised where it was and bills to show that they
paid. I would be happy to continue this for another time until we work
this out but as of now I don't think the city got a fair shake.
Lehman: Other discussion?
Kanner: Are you making a movement to postpone it?
Pfab: I would move that if somebody would second it.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#8 Page 37
Lehman: We have a motion to defer.
Kanner: To what date?
Pfab: Until the next time so this can be worked out.
Lehman: To October 17. Is there a second?
Kanner: I will second.
Lehman: Moved by Pfab, seconded by Kanner, to delay this for two weeks.
Discussion?
Kanner: I want to clarify what we are looking for and what Irvin is asking for. Our
current commission is what- that we are paying?
Pfab: I believe it is 6%, is that correct? Steve?
Atkins: Yes.
Kanner: And they want 6.5%
Pfab: Right, they- it is not 6.5%. it is an additional half percent just for
extensive advertising and marketing. So it is not spilt with any other real
estate firm. It is just for that firm to do exclusive advertising for that. And
I think we should have a right to see if that is where they spent the money.
Atkins: It has the practical effect of being 6.5%.
Kanner: We would pay out 6.5% no matter who it is?
Atkins: Basically it would work that way.
Pfab: It is just that the 6.5% wouldn't be split with any other cooperating realtor.
Atkins: That is correct.
Pfab: They have an exclusive half percent that goes to them.
Kanner: And so you want to see the information of where the money is being
spent?
Pfab: Proof that it was spent for that.
Kanner: And we are not getting that information?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#8 Page 38
Pfab: Right. We have not gotten it. And I asked the realtor himself personally
and he said, why should I?
Lehman: I think there is a whole lot of difference between doing something on a
time and material basis where if they had come to us and said we would
like to promote this and we would like permission to expend city funds to
advertise this- and they would then turn in the bills and we would pay
those bills. And it might be a half percent, it might be a quarter percent, it
might a percent and a half. They agreed to promote it. They didn't say
they were going to spend a half percent on newspaper or brochures or
whatever. They wanted a half percent to promote it. If they spent 3%,
they are only going to get paid a half, which is what they asked for. I
don't think it is incumbent on them at all to show that they spent a half of
one percent. We agreed to give that to them for promotional reasons. And
I think had we wanted proof of their performance on that half percent, that
is something that should have occurred a year ago when it was listed in the
first place.
Pfab: I think we were derelict in our duties not to ask for that proof.
Lehman: Okay.
Pfab: I wasn't here so I think that that is an obligation that we have to the
citizens of Iowa City to see that they get their moneys worth.
Kanner: Ernie?
Lehman: Yes?
Kanner: What about the issue of appraisals that Irvin brought up (can't hear)?
Lehman: If I am not mistaken, generally speaking, and Irvin you have been in real
estate- you probably know more about this than I do- but if I have a piece
of property for sale and I believe in this case the city had a reasonable
method of determining the selling price- if we list a piece of property for x
number of dollars and tell the real estate agent that is what we want to sell
it for and he sells it for that, I don't know where we have any complaints
of any kind. It isn't his job to determine the value. It is to sell it for the
price that we would like to sell it for.
Dilkes: Joe, why don't you address how that would-
Fowler: They did do a market analysis. They looked at other properties that had
sold in the downtown and looked at the different prices per square foot.
And we had discussions about that. We looked at the payback and how
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#8 Page 39
you would price it as compared to a lease. Quite a bit went into
establishing the prices and there were several meetings prior to any prices
being established.
Lehman: But those prices were established cooperatively with the city and the real
estate firm?
Fowler: Yes.
Lehman: Thank you. Eleanor?
Dilkes: I think that the realtors really did something similar that they would do if
you listed your house with them which is to give you a market analysis
and a suggested listing price and then they work that out with the lister.
Realtors are not typically appraisers in the formal sense. But they do
usually use a market analysis approach.
Pfab: That brings up something that Eleanor you said to me when I objected to
not having an appraisal when there was an offer that came in on a piece of
property. You said we use the experts to set the price on that. Well, if
they did I think the city has a right to know what they arrived at and how
they arrived at it. Otherwise, they could pull a number out of the air and
that is fine. We have no proof and I think we owe it to the citizens of
Iowa City that that proof be provided.
Lehman: Irvin, I think we determine the price though.
Pfab: No- according- the records will show-
Lehman: We are talking about this property at Iowa Avenue.
Pfab: Right.
Lehman: We determined the price in working with the realtor as to what we wanted
to ask for that.
Pfab: The records will show that Eleanor said that they determined the price
because of their real estate expertise.
Kanner: Who is "they", Irvin?
Pfab: The realtor.
Champion: I think that was out of context. I am going to make a motion to call for the
vote on this. This is a terrible discussion.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#8 Page 40
O'Donnell: And I will second it.
Lehman: Okay, we have a motion to call the question on the motion to defer. All in
favor of the question- I guess, is that a roll call? Calling the question?
Dilkes: No, it is a motion.
Lehman: All in favor, aye.
Pfab: To defer?
Lehman: This is calling the question to vote. All in favor of calling the question say
aye.
All except Kanner and Pfab: Aye.
Lehman: Opposed?
Kanner and Pfab: Aye.
Lehman: Okay, it is a 5-2 vote. Kanner and Pfab voting "no". The question is
called. All in favor of-
Pfab: I think there is a procedure. I think there was a motion on the floor to
defer this-
Dilkes: She is calling the question on the motion to defer.
Lehman: And we have passed it. Now we are voting on the motion (can't hear).
Champion: Now I am going to call the question.
Pfab: No, no. So then I vote for the deferment.
Lehman: We are voting now.
O'Donnell: We called the question, Irvin.
Lehman: All in favor of deferring this for two weeks signify by saying aye.
Kanner and Pfab: Aye.
Lehman: Opposed same sign.
Remaining: Aye.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#8 Page 41
Lehman: The motion is defeated 5-2, Kanner and Pfab voting no. (Can't hear).
That is correct. Now, we still are on the motion to authorize the extension
of this real estate agreement. This firm has sold two properties and is
apparently in discussions with prospects for the other four spaces. Further
discussion? Roll call. Motion carries 5-2, Kanner and Pfab voting no.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#9 Page 42
ITEM NO. 9. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING, AUTHORIZING,
AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY
CLERK TO ATTEST AN AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE
CITY OF IOWA CITY AND OLD CAPITOL MALL ASSOCIATES,
L.P. FOR A GROUND LEASE FOR THE WASHINGTON STREET
TRANSIT INTERCHANGE PROJECT.
Vanderhoef: Move adoption.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef.
O'Donnell: Second.
Lehman: Seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? For the public's information, this is
the space in the Old Capitol Town Center- is that the correct name?
Atkins: It is the official name, yes.
Lehman: Which will be constructed using I believe about 80% federal funds.
Atkins: It is no longer quite that.
Lehman: Well, whatever- but-
Atkins: It is about a $175,000 grant. Is that correct? It is $225,000 total and that
is item 10.
Lehman: That is the next item. But this will allow us to build a facility where our
transit drivers will have a place for restroom facilities, lunch facilities and
a place for us to sell tickets and passes.
Champion: Is this really going to happen now?
Lehman: Yes. If we pass the next item it might happen. Is there any further
discussion?
Atkins: Yeah, I want to clarify something just to make sure because this thing has
drug on. Joe, would you come to the microphone please? I just want to
make sure that we all understand this. The lease has been a long time
coming- we all know that. The next item is the interchange and is the flat
work- concrete, fixing the island, doing whatever. It is not the building.
That is a separate bid that Joe is working on as we speak. Is that correct
Joe?
Fowler: That is correct.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#9 Page 43
Arkins: So, it is in 2 pieces- really three. The lease, flat concrete work, then the
building.
Champion: It is still (can't hear) be going on?
Atkins: Yes. Just so you understand.
Lehman: All right. So the flat work- well, let's do number nine and then we will do
number ten.
Kanner: I have a question for you. If there is a change of ownership that wants to
break the lease, can you explain what happens or how iron clad it is?
Fowler: The lease continues on with the next owner.
Lehman: It goes with the property.
Fowler: It goes with the property.
Kanner: And after 40 years can either side deny renewal?
Dilkes: There is an option to renew- we have an option to renew.
Kanner: We have an option to renew-
Vanderhoef: For forty more.
Kanner: So it is up to us for 80 years, at about $1 a year?
Lehman: Is that long enough?
Fowler: 20 and 20 1 believe.
Lehman: It is 20 and 20.
Kanner: Oh, I thought it was 40.
Atkins: It is a 40-year lease. What is the terms of renewal?
Lehman: 20 years- 20 with a 20-year option.
Atkins: Right. 80 years is correct.
Dilkes: Yep.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#9 Page 44
Kanner: It is a 40 with 20 and 20 renewal?
Atkins: Yes.
Vanderhoef: And what do we have in the way of possible changes in the lease rent?
Lehman: The lease is in the packet. There is no change.
Atkins: One dollar.
Vanderhoef: That is what I wanted to make very clear.
Dilkes: It is nominal- nothing.
Lehman: Nailed down.
Vanderhoef: Nail it down.
Lehman: Okay, further discussion on the lease?
Dilkes: It is a forty year renewal. 40 and 40.
(several talking)
Lehman: Where did the 20 come from?
Vanderhoef: It is in the lease.
Lehman: All fight- all in-
Dilkes: I am looking.
Lehman; I think we are good. Can we have a roll call on this please? Motion
carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#10 Page 45
ITEM NO. 10. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK
TO ATTEST A CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE
WASHINGTON STREET TRANSIT INTERCHANGE PROJECT.
Lehman: The estimate on this project- this portion of it- was $210,000. The low bid
was from Streb Construction Company of $201,393.10. Parking and
Transit recommended the award to Streb Construction. Do we have a
motion to that effect?
O'Donnell: So moved.
Vanderhoef: Second.
Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Vanderhoef. Steve, I have only one
question on this.
Atkins: Yes.
Lehman: And I didn't look in my CIP listing- we obviously had hoped to do the
transit interchange- is this also in the CIP, the flat work?
Atkins: Yes. This is a part of the project. Remember, we split it deliberately.
Lehman: Right, but I thought I remembered the total project being in the
neighborhood of $200,0007
Atkins: The total project was three years ago.
Lehman: Right. But in the CIP do you know what we were showing in the CIP?
Atkins: I think about 250- (can't hear)
Fowler: Our project cost now is up to approximately- let's see, it is $210,000 for
this, $209,000 for this and the estimate for the building is $117,000.
Lehman: Okay, I mean, I just want to be clear what we are doing. Obviously this
involves- this is more than just the transit because of the work in the street
and the flat work.
Fowler: We are doing a lot more street and sidewalk work than we had originally
intended to do. And this bid also- excuse me- this bid also includes the
footings for the building.
Lehman: Okay.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#10 Page 46
Kanner: Joe, when we do get to the building of eventually will there be any federal
available for that?
Fowler: We had just the original grant- the $250,000- and that is all that we will
have. $200,000 and then we will have to match it. We don't get any more
money because of the increased costs.
Lehman; We also, I think, have been rather fortunate to get this- this money was
allocated like three years ago and I don't know how you managed to keep
it.
Fowler: They have been understanding as to the problems and difficulties.
Lehman: Okay. Other discussion? Roll call. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#11 Page 47
ITEM NO. 11. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK
TO ATTEST A CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE
NORTH AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT.
Lehman: The estimate on that was $1,527,550.00. We received what appears to be
about 7 bids. The low bid on it was $1,149,917.80. Public Works and
Engineering are recommending awarding that bid to the Streb
Construction Company who were the low bidder.
O'Donnell: So moved.
Champion: Second.
Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Champion. Discussion?
Dilkes: I have a comment before you vote. Something I just want to make you
aware of- the Streb Construction- the low bid- this Streb Construction bid
was file stamped in the city clerks office one minute after the deadline of
10:30. So at 10:31. The issue then became whether that was a material
defect that we could waive. We have the right to waive non-material
defects. Generally- although there was no specific case law in Iowa-
generally a material defect is seen as something that affects- gives the
bidder making the defect a competitive advantage. And it has been my
determination that there was no competitive advantage here. The bids had
not been opened yet- in fact Marian was just leaving her office when that
bid came in- with the bids to go upstairs and open them. It was not a
situation which sometimes occurs where the bidders are son of hanging
around to see who else is bidding at the last minute so they can stick theirs
in right at the last minute. So I don't think we have a material defect here.
Pfab: Do we want- is this- will that be subject to question by any of the other
bidders?
Dilkes: It might. I can't tell you.
Pfab: Is there- would it make sense to check with them beforehand?
Champion: No.
Dilkes: The best I can tell you Irvin- I can't speak to what is in the mind of the
other bidders. The best I can tell you is that it is my determination that it
is not a material defect and given that the next highest bid is $20,000
higher- I am comfortable with the awarding to Streb Construction.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#11 Page 48
Champion: I am too.
Lehman: Other discussion? Roll call. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
# 12 Page 49
ITEM NO. 12. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE TITLE 2,
ENTITLED "HUMAN RIGHTS," CHAPTER 3, ENTITLED
"DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICES," SECTION 2-3-2, ENTITLED PUBLIC
ACCOMODATIONS; EXCEPTIONS:"
Vanderhoef: Move adoption.
O'Donnell: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion?
Kanner: What changed with the handout?
Karr: Title only.
Dilkes: Just the title. The title didn't really make reference to the substance of the
ordinance and I added that.
Kanner: Okay. So are you ole timers going to make use of this?
(Laughter)
Lehman: Whenever possible.
Atkins: And if the whole bunch of us ole timers bounced on you.
Lehman: Right.
Pfab: We won't hold it against you if you
Champion: And you're lucky if you're going to be still around to be called a ole timer.
Kanner: I didn't mention any names.
Pfab: We won't hold it against you the fact that you're too young.
O'Donnell: Speak for yourself Irvin.
Lehman: Okay. Roll call. (Kanner - all ayes)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
# 13 Page 50
ITEM NO. 13. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE BUDGETED POSITIONS IN
THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE BY DECREASING THE
POSITION OF CITY ATTORNEY FROM 1 FTE TO .6 FTE AND
INCREASING THE POSITION OF ASSISTANT CITY
ATTORNEY FROM 2.5 FTE TO 3 FTE.
O'Donnell: So moved.
Champion: Second.
Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Champion. Discussion?
Kanner: I am asking for a call for postponement on this vote until our next meeting
October 17. I move to postpone the vote until October 17.
Lehman: Motion by Kanner to defer until the 17th Of October. Is there a second?
Pfab: I would second it.
Lehman: Seconded by Mr. Pfab. Discussion?
Kanner: Yeah, I want to say why. I think there is a lot of exciting possibilities in
this change. With change there is always possibility of good. And there is
possibility of bad. I became aware of this last- well actually Friday when I
got back from my trip to Dubuque. But others were perhaps made aware
of it on Thursday. This is a major change for us. For 15 years we have
had a full time city attorney. Before that, the City of Iowa City- like many
cities today in Iowa- had to contract a city attorney. And some of the staff
has had discussion for a couple of weeks on this issue. And I think we
should have at least that much time to discuss this and the ramifications.
We could also look at it as perhaps- can we save some money in this
change that has been proposed? And we can look at how will it work
exactly and get a written proposal so that we can examine it in that way.
There have been some explanations of how it is going to work and I
personally need to look at it for a couple of more weeks to see if there are
any questions in my mind and also in the city constituent minds about this
proposal- to have our city attorney go from full time to 60%. And I would
also like to ask the City Manager to look at how it works in other cities
that have part time city attorneys and/or something similar to what is
proposed with us. And also perhaps we need to look at the ever increasing
burden that we are placing on the city attorney's office and see if there is
ways that we can mitigate that. And see if we can save taxpayers dollars
in the short and the long term. So that is why I am asking that we
postpone it for two weeks to examine these questions more in depth
beyond what will take place tonight. I have no doubt we will have some
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#13 Page 51
good discussion tonight. But in my mind I would like to see some written
proposals and see if there are ways that we can save the taxpayers money
and receive satisfactory service.
Lehman: Other discussion on the motion to defer? All in favor of deferring this to
October 17 signify by saying "aye".
Kanner and Pfab: Aye.
Lehman: Opposed?
Remaining: Aye.
Lehman: The motion is defeated 5-2. Kanner and Pfab voting in the affirmative.
Now, discussion on the resolution.
Wilburn: I am comfortable going with this. I am also comfortable with the fact that
we are increasing the position of assistant to the city attorney from 2.5 fte
to 3 fte to make sure that the balance of work can be divided out and to
help make sure that we are- that the department is able to cover all of their
responsibilities. Also in other work situations where we have had to do
some type of restructuring with management type positions and making
sure that- I think the bottom line was making sure that the ability of the
office is able to function and I am comfortable with what is being
proposed.
O'Donnell: I am very comfortable with it. Eleanor has surrounded herself highly
qualified people. I believe that there is one person that will tell us if this
doesn't work and we are very fortunate to have somebody of Eleanor's
character to tell us that. And I know you will. So I support this
wholeheartedly.
Vanderhoef: I have been real pleased with the positive input by the staff that works in
this building that works closely with the attorney's office and find them
very supportive of this and are willing to make this work for the entire
city. So I am very comfortable.
O'Donnell: Very good.
Lehman: I would just like to second what you said Dee.
Champion: Me too.
Lehman: We have been told by- the council has three employees in the city, direct
employees: the City Manager, the City Clerk, and the City Attomey. And
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#13 Page 52
the other two of our city employees that work very closely with the city
attomey's office have given their unqualified support to this proposal. I
am sure there is no way she would have received that sort of support if
they did not fully feel that the office would be able to function well. This
is something that has been worked out- I think it is a real credit to Eleanor,
you and your staff, to get this sort of an endorsement. And I certainly can
support this.
Pfab: I have a question since we are not going to be able to postpone this- how
does the legal cost for Iowa City compare with other cities of similar size?
Lehman; I don't think that is relevant for this Irvin. We can look it up but this is-
Pfab; I am not saying that. I am just asking at this point that- I am going on
public record here as asking that maybe Steve could look into this or
someone else could look into this so we could get a report back on it.
Lehman: We could get that for you. I think that you will find that there are
probably- there are several that are more than we pay and there are of
course some that are less.
Pfab; I mean a percentage of- I am not saying a total cost, but a percentage of
city budgets in similar cities.
Champion: Over what period of time? Because some years (can't hear).
Lehman: That is the sort of thing that probably should be discussed at budget time
but it is not relevant to this discussion. Is there any other discussion? Roll
call. Motion carries 5-2, Kanner and Pfab voting no.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#14 Page 53
ITEM NO. 14. RESOLUTION OF UNCLASSIFIED SALARY COMPENSATION
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001 FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY AT 60%
TIME.
Vanderhoef: Move adoption.
O'Donnell: So moved.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? Roll ca- I
am sorry, do you- I mean, this basically if we passed the last one we
probably are incumbent to pass this one. But go ahead.
Kanner: Could you explain it again, Emie, what this is?
Lehman: This approves the reduction in the city attorney's time by 40% and a
corresponding reduction in salary of 40%. Reducing the salary from
$84,011.20 per year to $50,406.72 per year. The last resolution agrees
that the city attorney may become a 60% employee and this makes the
salary commensurate with what we just did. Roll call. Motion carries 6-1,
Pfab voting no.
Dilkes: I don't speak often but, thank you for that.
Lehman: Thank you Eleanor.
Champion: We hope it works for you Eleanor.
O'Donnell: I know it will.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#18 Page 54
ITEM NO. 18. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION.
Lehman: Irvin?
Pfab: Pass.
Lehman: Connie?
Champion: Nothing.
Lehman: Mike?
O'Donnell: Two quick things. I have been getting complaints about bicycles and
skateboards in the Pedestrian Mall. We discussed last night the idea of
new signage downtown and I hope we get that down there quickly.
Atkins: Can I answer that Mike?
O'Donnell: Sure.
Atkins: We are probably going to put up some of our current signing which isn't
the most attractive. We have contacted a couple of the other cities-
Boulder you mentioned and a few others- to try to see if we can get
something that looks a little better. And once we have that I assure you a
replacement will be put up.
O'Donnell: And it will be good looking?
Atkins: And it will- well, as good looking as a sign can get.
O'Donnell: Also, Hickory Hill Park- complaints on dogs running. And (can't hear)
brought up the question- I know Parks and Rec is looking at the possibility
of a dog park. And I am looking forward to some information on that.
That is all I have.
Lehman: Dee?
Vanderhoef: Last week I had the opportunity to attend the Iowa League of Cities annual
meeting in Dubuque. Several things came out of this. One-
congratulations to Steve Atkins. He was reelected to his second term of
two years on the Board of Directors of the league. Which I think is very
positive for Steve and for our city. Second, I had the opportunity to do
some touring of the city that has some unique topographical kinds of
things and to see what they are doing in economic development. I hope
that I brought back a couple of ideas for our own economic development
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#18 Page 55
committee. I would like to report that the legislative policy that I had
placed in your packet a couple of weeks ago was adopted unanimously by
the members of the league. And for people who would like a copy of that,
we can make those here at the city. And on October 12, here in council
chambers starting at 6:30 social hour, 7:00 meeting time, we will have
state legislatures in place here to talk to us about city issues. You may
want to review your draft of the legislative proposals and be ready to
query our legislatures about this.
Kanner: (can't hear)
Vanderhoef: Legislative day.
Kanner: Are the other cities participating in that in the area?
Vanderhoef: I have invited all of the cities in Johnson county and our Johnson County
supervisors certainly are very welcome to be here and be part of it. The
general public is invited to come. They all will have an opportunity to ask
questions and participate. There is a possibility that we will have another
county joining. I hope to find that out in the next day or two.
Karr: Cedar Rapids did call and they will be- not all of them- but a certain
portion of them will be. We anticipate roughly twelve attending from
there.
Vanderhoef: Okay, so Cedar Rapids and those south of Cedar Rapids- they had asked if
they might join us this year and I had indicated last week to them that this
would be very possible and could lead to some real interesting
conversations.
Champion: I think that is good. Where will we meet? In here?
Lehman: Right here. Ross?
Wilbum: I also attended the League of Cities conference and one thing that I get
that is impressed upon me is how in many ways other communities look to
some of the opportunities we have available here in Iowa City. For
example, one of the city staff- Iowa City staff members- was presenting on
the 24 hour city hall how having the web site and services available for
community members can make government more user friendly at work.
And a lot of people- I heard a lot of positive comments about-
Kanner: I too went to Dubuque for the League of Cities meeting. Irvin was also
there for all three days. And I appreciated the opportunity to be able to go
there. Dubuque is an interesting city. They have a couple of gambling
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.
#18 Page 56
facilities, which apparently are putting in large amounts of money into the
city coffers. We don't know what the costs are but their tax rate is one of
the lowest in the state. Somewhere around- I think their tax levy is 10.2 or
so. Ours is close to 14.
Lehman: Do they have a sales tax too?
Kanner: They have a sales tax and they issue no general obligation bonds for- they
haven't for a number of years. On the other hand, they have a Pedestrian
Mall that is not as alive as ours down there. They have some problems.
So it was interesting to see that. And also it was a good chance to network
with other people that I haven't gotten to talk to on a personal level.
People from North Liberty and Coralville and Cedar Rapids also. And I
appreciated that opportunity. And in one of my workshops I went to was
on trails. And they had someone from Nebraska, Omaha, talking about
their trail system and some other people from the Iowa Department of
Transportation. One thing that was interesting- this is just a preliminary
study about economic development of trails- there is going to be a large
book that is coming out from IDOT, the Department of Transportation,
talking about trails. And one example of economic development is there
was an estimate in one city that it brought in nine dollars per user per day.
So trails have a positive economic impact. Another point was that they
did a survey- this was around Omaha- of people living near the trail and
75% of the people around the trail within a few blocks thought their
property value went up after the trail went in. So it is a good way to look
at the impact of trails. And, again, I enjoy going to the conference.
Lehman: I just have- I think I bring this up every 8 weeks. That is as often as the
University DeGowan Blood Center sends me this little card that says I can
get free V8 and a cookie if I go over and donate a pint of blood. And I
would certainly encourage my fellow councilors and anyone from the
public. It is so easy to do and it means so much.
Atkins: Ernie, we have an employee blood drive in November.
Lehman: In November? Okay- council people sign up.
Atkins: Sign up and we will take your blood.
Kanner: And actually even non-employees are welcome to come I am sure.
Atkins: That is what I understood.
Kanner: Over at the Robert E Lee Rec Center.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of October 3, 2000.