HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-11-21 Transcription#2 Page 1
ITEM NO. 2. OUTSTANDING STUDENT CITIZEN AWARDS- Hoover
Elementary.
Lehman: If Aaron, Elizabeth, Courtney and Sam would come forward please.
We've got a little segregation here- guys and gals. I am going to ask each
of you to state your name and then read why you were nominated.
Richenbacher: My name is Courtney Richenbacher and I think a star citizen is a person
who shows responsibility, respect, courage, caring and honesty. We are
here to represent Herbert Hoover Elementary School and its students. I
think every one in Hoover could have been chosen because Herbert
Hoover Elementary has good students and I am thankful to be here.
Mahaffa: My name is Elizabeth Mahaffa and thank you very much for giving me
this citizenship award. Good citizenship is doing what is best, not always
what you want. I would also like to thank my morn and dad, my family,
my teacher and my community for helping me become a good citizen.
Siegfried: My name is Sam Siegfried and I am here on behalf of all of Hoover
School. I want to thank City Council for presenting me with the good
citizen award. I want to thank Mr. (can't hear), my teacher, and my
parents for raising me into a good citizen. I think a good citizen is a
person who has all of the qualities of a Hoover star: responsibility, respect,
honesty, caring and being courageous. I also think that you have to be an
independent motivated learner. I think it also helps when you like school.
Again, thank you for giving me this award.
Ellis: My name is Aaron Ellis. A good citizen is someone how is responsible
and has enough courage to help somebody with a problem. A good citizen
gets their homework done on time and sometimes does extra. A good
citizen respects all kinds of people and volunteers to help at school
activities, community service and world projects. Examples of these
activities are Philippines project and visiting Oaknoll Retirement Home. I
will be a good citizen and be very responsible when I grow up. I would
like to be a writer and work for a publisher. I would like to thank my
grandma for helping raise me. She taught me how to be nice to other
people. I would like to thank my morn and my brother for their love. I
would like to thank Mrs. (can't hear), my principal, and all of my lower
grade teachers and Mrs. Johnson. I want to thank the City Council for this
award.
Lehman: Before I read this, you folks are thanking us and we really thank you
because you've earned these awards. And a lot of times we earn things
that people don't even recognize. And so you are just being recognized
for something that you have already earned. I am sure that your parents
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#2 Page 2
are proud of you. I know your grandma is proud of you. And so are the
rest of your grandmas- and especially grandpas, because I know how they
feel. Let me read to you what the award says: (reads award). Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#3 Page 3
ITEM NO. 3. MAYOR'S PROCLAMATIONS.
a. World AIDS Day- December 1, 2000.
Lehman: (Reads proclamation).
Karr: Here to accept is Andy Weigel, Department of Public Health.
Weigel: I just wanted to just announce that I am accepting this proclamation on
behalf of the Healthy and Positive Interventions- or also known as the
Happy Committee. And if anybody is interested volunteering for that
committee they can call me, Andy Weigel, at the Health Department or
Joseph Dobbert at ICare. Also I have some brochures just of a list of
activities and some AIDS ribbons to hand out to all of you here. Thank
you.
Lehman: Thank you.
Kanner: Can you tell us the symbolism of the AIDS ribbons?
Weigel: It is kind of just to remember the people that have suffered or have died
from HIV and also as a kind of symbol of hope to work for a day without
AIDS- a cure for AIDS.
b. University of Iowa Natural Ties Awareness Day- December 4, 2000.
Lehman: (Reads proclamation).
Karr: Here to accept is Eric Harlan, from the University of Iowa.
Harlan: I would like to thank the Mayor and the City of Iowa City for this. This
will greatly help us create awareness not only at the University of Iowa
but also here throughout the city. Like the Mayor has said, our mission is
to break down the barrier between people with and without disabilities.
We do this by fostering friendships between college students and people
with disabilities in the community. Thank you again.
Lehman: Thank you.
c. A Day of Recognition for the Iowa City Host Noon Lions Club
Lehman: (Reads proclamation).
Karr: Here to accept is Judy Terry.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#3 Page 4
Lehman: Is it okay if a Kiwanian gives this to a Lion?
Terry: Oh, yes. On behalf of the Iowa City Host Noon Lion's Club, thank you
very much Mayor Lehman and City Council.
d. Homeless Children's Trust Holiday Celebration
Karr: Here to accept is Mary Larew.
Larew: Thank you for your proclamation. The Homeless Children's Trust is an
offshoot from HACAP~ Hawkeye Area Community Action Programs.
And we have sponsored this program for nine years here in Johnson
County. This year we are having 49 families with a total of 133 children
at our party. So anyone who is willing or able to help volunteer or make
donations, we would be glad to have you. Thank you so much.
Lehman: Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#4 Page 5
ITEM NO. 4. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS
PRESENTED OR AMENDED.
Vanderhoef: So moved.
Wilbum: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by Wilburn. Discussion? Item d(1),
setting a public hearing for the Highway 6 corridor improvements, the date
of that is the 19th of December. And item d(2), the public hearing on
acquisition of property for First Avenue is on January 9, 2001.
Discussion?
Kanner: Yeah, I would like to make note in our permits renewals that we have
three liquor licensees here up for renewal- the Ground Round had 0 visits
by police officers year to date October, we had India Caf6 which is not
listed, and we had the Sanctuary which also had 0 visits. And again, the
average for arrests per visit in the city for all licensees is .99 arrests per
visit. Thank you.
Lehman: Other discussion? Roll call. Motion cantles.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#5 Page 6
ITEM NO. 5. PUBLIC DISCUSSION (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA).
[UNTIL 8PM].
Lehman: This is a time reserved on the agenda for persons who would like to
address the council on items that do not otherwise appear on the agenda.
If you would like to address the council please sign in, give your address
and limit your comments to five minutes or less.
Elliott: I didn't come here to say that, but wouldn't it be nice if those of us could
grow up to be as nice as those four young people who stood up here
tonight? It is something we should strive for. I wanted to say and take
just a couple of minutes to point out that if you hadn't noticed, we did
have an election recently. They are still counting in Florida. People
opposed to completing First Avenue successfully petitioned to have the
referendum put on the ballot. It was there and in the general election more
than 27,000 Iowa City residents voted 57% to 44% in favor of completing
First Avenue. The people have decided and both the First Avenue and
Captain Irish Parkway portion of Scott Boulevard is to be completed. It
was a very active campaign and I think legitimate issues were raised on
both sides. What I am here tonight (to do) is to ask and hope that those of
us from both sides of this controversial issue can come together now and
work for the best interests of all of Iowa City. Those people who opposed
completing First Avenue raised- I think they were very sincere and raised
some very legitimate concerns and I think we all need to work to assure
that some of their concerns which included keeping trucks off of First
Avenue- working toward optimum safety for all pedestrians along First
Avenue. Maintaining the integrity and the beauty of Hickory Hill Park-
those are all very real and very important concerns that were raised by
those opposed to completing First Avenue. We agree with those concerns.
I hope now that we can come together, work for the best interests of all of
Iowa City and I hope that the city moves forward with great haste in
completing this street which far too long has been a vice of issue. Thanks
a lot.
Kanner: Sir, I didn't get your name. I am sorry.
Elliott: My name is Bob Elliott. I am sorry.
Lehman: Thank you Bob.
Carol de Prosse: Good evening, my name is Carol de Prosse and I would like to say
I appreciate the conciliatory remarks of the previous speaker. I think that
once a decision is made people have to find ways to find the common
ground within the decision that has been made. And although I wish it
had been otherwise, we do have to accept the will of the voters. So, thank
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#5 Page 7
yOU. I am here as a member tonight of Citizens for Alternatives to the
New Jail. And I would like to mention that in the vote that took place on
November 7 that 73% of Iowa City voters said no to a new jail. 66% of
county voters said no to a new jail. And I would like to please ask the city
council tonight to consider the issues that we raised in our campaign about
the role that the Iowa City police play in the overcrowding situation of the
new jail. I think that the arguments that we made- many of them met with
a great deal of receptivity and I think that was reflected in the vote of Iowa
City voters. So, I think we have a problem at our jail. We have a problem
of overcrowding. We have a problem of safety for the deputies that work
there and for the inmates in the jail. I think those are legitimate concerns
of the Sheriff of the county. And they are not to be discounted. And so in
this time when we are looking for some space to address some of the
reasons for the overcrowding and ways to reasonably address the
overcrowding in financially responsible ways and ways that meet with a
majority of the greater county community, I hope that the City Council
wouldn't- I hope you won't put yourselves in a position where you don't
even want to perhaps listen to, as a majority of the council, some of the
arguments that we made about the Iowa City Police Department. Whether
you agreed with them or not on their face is, to me, not the point. It is that
we made them, we made them vocally, and we didn't hide behind
anything when we made those. And they are out there and I think as
representatives of the citizens of the city of Iowa City- I hope that you
would consider those arguments that we were making and specifically
with regard to the way it appears, in our opinion, the way the police do
target and arrest some many of the young people in our community. And
how that does contribute to the overcrowding at the jail. So I am here
tonight on behalf of our group to please ask the city council to as quickly
as possible- I know you are busy- I had an email from one of you today
that told me you met last night from 6:00 to 9:00 at night, so I know you
are very busy. But to find some time in your informal meeting to schedule
a discussion with those of us from Citizens for Alternatives to a New Jail,
your Chief of Police, your City Manager, the Sheriff, and the County
Attorney most particularly because he is the one who can best inform you
about what the police are required to arrest for and what they are not
required to arrest for. And how if we could have some slacking off for a
while of some of the activities of the Iowa City Police Department until
the council has either decided that they like what the city's police does or
they don't like what the city police does, and gives them some direction-
that we could find a little bit of space at the jail for people who are being
far too pressed for the numbers of people that they have and the situation
that exists there. Because it is going to exist for a while. And even if the
county moves to shipping out or transporting out prisoners, which I hope
they don't do, that is a lot of money- and that is all of our money. And
that is taxpayer's dollars, and so one of the things we always focus on was
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#5 Page 8
the most fiscally responsible way of addressing the problems that exist at
the jail and how we meet out and deal with justice in our community. So I
guess what I am asking for and what we are requesting is a informal
meeting set up by the council as quickly as you could do it that would
involve the people I mentioned before and allow us to have an open
discussion about our agreements and our disagreements and ways that we
might address this issue of the jail problem which I believe is a very real
one. Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you.
Kanner: Carol? Your group met last night, did you have another meeting date
planned for your group?
De Prosse: No.
Kanner: So you are waiting to hear maybe from City Council and the supervisors?
De Prosse: What we are looking at is addressing various aspects of the jail problem
and looking at is from a judicial- the impact that the judicial system could
have on the jail overcrowding and the impact the decisions of the County
Attorney could have, impacts of policing and arrests rates could have on
the jail. So I think we are looking now rather than to have more vast
community meetings that we are looking to break down into more kind of
focused groups or study groups on particular aspects of elements in the
community that impact the jail population.
Kanner: And one other question. I heard before your meeting took place that there
were some County Supervisors that were going to be at the meeting- as
reported in the paper- were there any county officials at the meeting last
night?
De Prosse: Carol Thompson was there, supervisor Mike Lehman was there and
supervisor Terrance Nugel was there. The director of MECCA was there-
an agency very interested in the whole jail question. And Joe Bolkcom, a
state senator, Mary Masher, a state representative was there. And
numerous citizens including people who had come in- a man who had
come in from Hills and Swisher and I think North Liberty. It was a good
meeting. I know you all were busy and I appreciate that but- I don't know
if there is anybody in the city that you can designate- if we have more
meetings and we invite you- we will always invite you because we want
your participation. I mean, you are vital to solving this problem that
exists. Perhaps there is some city staff member that you could designate
to come and at least listen and report back to you. I would ask you to
consider that as well.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#5 Page 9
Kanner: Thank you.
De Prosse: Thanks.
Lehman: Thanks Carol.
Benz: Good evening, my name is Lori Benz. I am the city appointee to the
Senior Center Commission and I am here this evening to give you just a
brief report on the progress of the Senior Center toward the skywalk
fundraising, as well as a few other activities that are under way. The
skywalk project is approaching $80,000 at this point. We received a
$3,000 private donation during the past week as well as $1300 from the
Wal-Mart folks, and $200 from Younkers. And we are continuing to
receive gifts for that particular project. We are going to be meeting, the
staff and commission members, are going to be meeting next month with
different groups that use the Senior Center- different service organizations
that meet there to discuss parking needs. And then those
recommendations will come back to the commission. And finally they
will be presented to the City Council early next year. We also want you to
know that we are tentatively planning to submit or to reapply for CDBG
funding. Again, to look at funds for that particular project. So we want
you to be aware. The Senior Center is also in the third phase an
accreditation process. This has been a very in depth review of different
components of the Senior Center's function. We are currently involved in
reviewing governess issues, fiscal management and facility issues. This
uses not only staff and commission members, but we have been able to
draw from the business community, the senior citizen community and the
University community to serve on these committees. And it has been a
very exciting and rewarding process that we hope will allow us to achieve
national accreditation for the Senior Center. We also want you to know
that we are very excited about the possibility of developing a web page on
the City's website. That eventually will be maintained by volunteers that
we will recruit. So, we appreciate the opportunity to update you and
welcome your questions and comments anytime. Thank you.
Lehman: You are having a little reception I think at the Senior Center from 2:00-
4:00 on December what?
Benz: The reception?
Kanner: Johnson County Task Force on Aging is hosting a building wide
reception- which is a good idea.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#5 Page 10
Benz: Yes. It is actually, I believe, December 11th, 2:00-4:00. You are fight, it
is the Task Force on Aging. So, feel free to come.
Kanner: Loft, I had a question for you. It was reported in the minutes a couple of
months ago from the Senior Center Commission that we get in our packets
that the director was going to have to take off a few days in the future and
other people would be covering- and I was wondering how is that working
out?
Benz: It is working out very well. Actually, the coordinator is functioning as
usual- the Senior Center is proceeding as usual. There really hasn't been
any change. Things are going very well for everyone involved.
Kanner: Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you Loft.
Dieterie: I am Caroline Dieterie. I would like to add some comments about the
election and the situation with the Citizens for Alternatives and the
meetings that have taken place in the last few days as well. The first thing
I would like to say is that we are going to maintain our website, which is
www.nojail.org. And we hope to put on there suggestions and ideas that
people come up with and summaries of meetings that have taken place-
the points that were mentioned. And also to have a way then that you can
click on "contact us" and write notes with questions and comments of your
own. To try to keep the dialog going. And another thing is that I did
attend the meeting with the students that was at the Fieldhouse the other
day. And I thought that it was quite a good meeting. I have told you
before that I work with students and I have a lot of faith in the students. I
think that basically they came up with some very good ideas and they
acted very responsibly in what they had to say about it. And one of the
most important things that they pointed out was that binge drinking- that is
over drinking or getting drunk- and underage drinking are two issues that
are not really congruent. They are not the same. Some people who are of
age and drink legally obviously get dnmk. And some people who are
underage and who drink anyway do not get drunk and act quite
responsibly. I was sitting at a table with a fair number of students and we
did go around the table and ask how old everybody was. And it turned out
that there was really a majority of them that were underage people and
they freely admitted that they drank. But they also said that they
attempted to drink responsibly. And this same group noted, sadly, that the
University has gradually lessened the numbers of opportunities at the
Union. It used to be that the Union was a real place for students to hang
out and have some recreational opportunities and that has gone down.
And I think that the city needs to work with the University and really try
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#5 Page 11
to put a little pressure on the University to try to help solve the problem.
It isn't something that the council necessarily has to feel that it has to do
all by itself. Some other ideas that came out of that besides having the
University do a little bit more in terms of providing alternatives- there
were some questions and some other comments. For one thing, people
wonder why intoxicated students are taken to jail now by public safety or
picked up in the dorms and taken there. This is certainly contributing to
jail crowding. And in the past this was not done. I don't know whether
this is a new policy under the more recently appointed head of public
safety or not. But I think that the council could certainly talk to him and
point out that in the past the University was responsible for its students
and did their disciplining and their taking care of them in house and did
not depend on the jail to do that. And I also think that the University
could do more about working with the Stepping Up. To be less of a
prohibition oriented organization and more of a practically oriented one.
Where they really emphasis drinking responsibly rather than not drinking
at all. And I think when you work with the downtown bar owners, some
of the ideas that came out were finding a better way to provide
transportation home afterward. This would keep people from wanting to
loiter outside downtown after the bars closed and would also prevent
drunk driving, sexual assault, vandalism, and criminal mischief. And this
would also help in terms of cutting down on urinating in the street- if you
had port-a-potties down there. I know that in the history of council
elections downtown restrooms have been an issue over and over
repeatedly. And we have never gotten them down there. And I think that
if that can help our situation that is not an expensive alternative to look at.
The other thing is you could work with the bars to have designated drivers
so that anyone who needed a ride could get a ride from a designated
driver. And maybe they could in a sense pay these people by giving them
some other kind of reward- if not money they could give them all the flee
non-alcoholic drinks they wanted. Or they could give them a ticket for
getting their car a free oil change. I mean, I am sure that if you use some
imagination you can come up with things. Maybe better than those. And
then the other thing is to follow up a little bit on remarks earlier made by
Carol, I took the trouble of getting a precinct map and getting the results
from the auditor' s website of the library vote, the jail vote, and the sales
tax vote. And I thought those were very interesting and I am going to give
you copies of those. And here is the tabulated results. And please pay
particular attention to the- I gave you one here that had- I didn't get
around and didn't have enough time to put highlights on here but if you go
down on the jail vote and you look at the places that had better than 80%
no vote-
Karr: Can you come back to the microphone.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#5 Page 12
Lehman: You need to go back to the mic. And we need to wind it up too, Caroline.
Dieterie: Okay, if you look at the jail votes that are "no's", you will see that the
places that had better than 80% "no" were in fact the areas that are shown
here in the middle of town that are colored yellow on your map. And I
think that that should be noted when you look at the "no's" for the library
and the "no's" for the sales tax. I don't think that these people were
voting "no" just because they didn't want to pay any money. I think they
had other issues there. And I think if you think about that, you know, you
will realize what some of them might be. For one thing, when we were
working on the jail thing we found that the majority of the arrests for non-
violent offences were in those very same areas that are colored yellow.
So, I think there are a lot of issues here and I hope that you will work with
us on trying to come to some resolution. Thanks.
Kanner: When you say the sales tax do you mean the property tax?
Dieterie: No, when we had a sales tax vote and it was voted down. And I know- I
worked on that campaign and I found that an easy way to get a "no" vote
was to let people know that it wasn't just for the library and the
community center, it was to hire more police. People don't want that. At
least a large number of them don't. And when you look at these results
that backs that up.
Karr: Can I have a motion to accept correspondence?
Vanderhoef: So moved.
Wilburn: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by Wilburn. All in favor? Motion
carries. Any other public discussion? The next item is item 6, but I need
to say that the council by commenting or not commenting on public
discussion does not necessarily agree or disagree with what the public
says. But we certainly invite their opinions.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#6b Page 13
ITEM NO. 6b. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AN APPROVED
OPDH-12 PLAN TO ALLOW A 40-UNIT ASSISTED LIVING
BUILDING ON 2.87 ACRES LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF SCOTT BOULEVARD AND AMERICAN LEGION
ROAD. (REZ00-00020) (Second Consideration).
Lehman: This is second consideration and the applicant, in view of the fact that
there was no controversy involved in the application, is requesting
expedited consideration.
Wilburn: I move- this one first right? I move that the rule requiring that ordinances
must be considered and voted on for passage at two council meetings prior
to the meeting at which it is to be finally passed, be suspended. That the
second consideration and vote be waived. And that the ordinance be voted
on for final passage at this time.
Vanderhoef: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Wilburn, seconded by Vanderhoef, for expedited consideration.
Discussion?
Pfab: I have a question. Why is there a need to expedite this?
Lehman: My understanding is they would like to expedite this so they can start
construction. But I also understand that the reason that they are asking for
this is because there has been no objection and no controversy involved in
it and they see no reason why it couldn't move forward.
Pfab: What will they do different if they don't have to wait?
Lehman: Well, one of the things they might do is they could do something between
now and the 20th of December, the next time we meet. Because this would
be the second and third reading. So it would save them three weeks. I
think that is what they are looking at.
Kanner: I asked our Planning and Community Development Assistant Director if
there was any extenuating circumstances beyond what we got in our letter
in the packets and there was no extenuating circumstances. I think what
this does is it leads us down a slippery slope which is bad where someone
else says "why don't we expedite the process and go from three votes to
two?" I think it is a good thing that we have that we have to do three
votes. And unless there is some sort of emergency I see no reason that we
should quicken up this process. I think it is good even though there isn't
anything controversial. I think it is a bad road to go down. So I will be
voting "no" on this.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#6b Page 14
Wilbum: This is a modification of a plan that has already been approved, correct?
Lehman: Right, this is pretty much-
Wilburn: So I will be supporting this since the idea of the plan itself at that
interception has been out there. So that is why I will support it.
Lehman: Other discussion?
Pfab: Okay, if that is the case why is it necessary- why get into the process of
requiring three readings?
Lehman: I think that is state law Irvin. I don't think we have any choice.
Pfab: So there must- something must have triggered the need to do that. There
must have been some fairly serious changes.
Vanderhoef: There were not serious changes other than the use within the building.
And in my estimation requests at this time of year and the weather setting
at this point in time, three weeks could make a lot of difference on what
they might get done.
Kanner: Wasn't this the project- there was some question about the storage for the
wastewater pond and how that interacts with the community?
Lehman: There was no one who appeared to speak to that.
Kanner: Right, it seems like it was- there was resolve in a favorable position but I
am just saying that there was some controversy to this and right now there
is (can't hear).
Davidson: The issue was the fencing of the storm water area and that will be done.
Kanner: And so I think since it is resolved that is a good thing. And we should go
through the three step process and let people be aware of these kinds of
things that are happening and the more that we get out to people the better.
Especially if there is a state law that says stick to that three- I think that is
a good thing.
Lehman: The law obviously provides for situations where it might be better not to
have to go through it three times. One of the things that I think councils
get criticized for, and many times I think with some validity, is the
inability to move in an expeditious fashion. Now here is an application
that has no one objecting to it. It has a minor modification than from what
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#6b Page 15
was originally brought up. We had no objections at the public hearing.
The first consideration was unanimous. No we have somebody who
would like to start working three weeks earlier and we are saying no- or, I
don't know if we are or not.
O'Donnell: No, we are going to say yes.
Dilkes: I think it is important to note that you don't have another meeting for a
month- you cancelled one of your December meetings.
Lehman: I know that.
Dilkes: So I think that is a factor here too.
O'Donnell: If there was any controversy at all- this went through Planning and Zoning
7/0, it was approved by staff. I will support this given the opportunity-
Pfab: Is there one other hearing or one other reading?
Lehman: We have already read it once. We have had a public hearing. We have
discussed this probably- since the time it got to Planning and Zoning it has
probably been six or eight weeks.
Pfab: I have no objection.
Lehman: Roll call.
Dilkes: Pfab.
Pfab: What's the question?
Lehman: We're voting for expediated consideration.
Pfab: I would vote yes.
Dilkes: (Roll call continues)
Lehman: Motion carries.
Wilburn: Move that the ordinance be finally adopted at this time.
Vanderhoef: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Wilbum, seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion? Roll call. Just
a question Steven, do you oppose this project?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#6b Page 16
Kanner: Ernie, fight now I would rather not talk about the vote and if you want to
talk later we can.
Lehman: I don't mind it is just that it seemed to be an Alzheimer's project that
seemed to be a very good project and you just voted against it. But then it
passed anyway. Item c: (begins to read 6c)
Kanner: Ernie, I will tell you why. I think the process was bad that when we do
this and speed things up like that. And I think that-
Lehman: You didn't vote on the process, you voted on the motion.
Kanner: And so I felt the process was an important one to follow through on and
that that is why I felt to vote "no" on the final vote. And I think that was
important enough to support that process to do that Ernie.
Lehman: Steven, I respect your concern with the process and voting against
expediting, and I think you made that point rather clear. I don't
understand why you voted against a project that is obviously a good
project. Again-
Champion: (can't hear).
Lehman: That is alright.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#6d Page 17
ITEM NO. 6d. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE NON-
CONFORMING USE PROVISIONS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD
CONSERVATION RESIDENTIAL, RNC-12 ZONE, TO MAKE IT
CLEAR ANY EXISTING CONFORMING MULTI-FAMILY USE
WOULD CONTINUE TO BE CONFORMING UNDER THE RNC-
12 ZONE. (PASS AND ADOPT).
Vanderhoef: Move adoption.
Wilbum: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by Wilburn. Discussion?
Pfab: For just point of clarification, why, in just general terms, why are we
doing this? (Changed tapes)
Davidson: -clarify that if there is an existing multi-family unit which exceeds the
density that would be permitted, it is grandfathered in.
Pfab: And there are units like that that are specifically in need of-
Davidson: It has come up as an issue and this clarifies that those would be
grandfathered in.
Pfab: And there was no other objection- that is fine.
Lehman: Thank you very much Jeff. Roll call. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#6e Page 18
ITEM NO. 6e. CONSIDER A LETTER TO THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD
OF SUPERVISORS RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF A
liEZONING OF 125.43 ACRES LOCATED WITHIN FRINGE
AREA C EAST OF DANE ROAD AND WEST AND SOUTH OF
THE LAKERIDGE MOBILE HOME PARK FROM COUNTY A1
RURAL AND RS SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL TO COUNTY RMH
MANUFACTURED HOUSING RESIDENTIAL. (CZ0027).
Vanderhoef: Move adoption.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef.
Wilburn: Second.
Lehman: Seconded by Wilbum. Discussion?
Downer: Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council, I am Bob Downer
representing the developer in that application. As has been noted in the
explanation, this has been deferred several times. However, there has
been a considerable amount of progress that has occurred in connection
with defining and attempting to resolve issues. I would request that this be
deferred until the next meeting at which point I believe we will be ready to
proceed. There is a development agreement that I am in the process of
drafting. At this point I have been unable to complete it because of a fast
tract lawsuit where my attendance has been compelled by a court. That
has a way of getting my attention. And also because of some emergencies
that we have had staff-wise in our office- with emergency surgery and
things of that nature. So I haven't been able to get the agreement to the
point where it would come to the city for comment. But there have been 3
or 4 meetings with staff, identification of issues, substantial progress
toward a resolution. And it was agreed that the way to try to come to
some sort of closure on this was to get this agreement in shape. Which,
unfortunately, has not progressed as rapidly as I had hoped and intended.
And I am the one who has the ball on that. But I believe that this can be in
staff' s hands by early next week and ready to come before you the next
time. Otherwise I think it is a process of having to back up and start over.
And I don't think there is any gain from that at all.
Champion: What about if we deferred it to a meeting in January, Mr. Downer? So we
wouldn't have to read this again at our next meeting if it is not quite done
yet?
Downer: That would-
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#6e Page 19
Lehman: No, no. Bob, in fairness to the city staff- at our last meeting two weeks
ago we were- we deferred it with the understanding that we probably
wouldn't defer it again. And we hadn't heard from you during that period
of time and I understand from what you said, as why we didn't. I would
be willing to defer this to the 2 1 st of December.
Downer: That is fine.
Lehman: But, in the absence of an agreement that is acceptable to the city and to
you, I believe at that time we will act on this. I don't know how the rest of
the council feels.
O'Donnell: I agree.
Vanderhoef: I can go along with that.
Downer: That is fair enough.
Vanderhoef: So it is December what?
Lehman: Well, we need a-
Pfab: I move that we defer it until the next meeting.
Lehman: Moved by Pfab.
Vanderhoef: Second.
Lehman: Seconded by Vanderhoef. With- okay, all in favor? It is deferred to the
2 1 st of December.
Downer: Okay, thank you.
Lehman: We are frankly looking forward to this agreement, Robert. Have been for
some time.
Downer: It is in the works but it should be done here the first of the week.
Atkins: Ernie, isn't that date the 19th?
Lehman: The 19th? I am sorry. The 19th. I misspoke. The 19thofDecember.
Downer: Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#6f Page 20
ITEM NO. 6f. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE IOWA
CITY/JOHNSON COUNTY FRINGE AREA POLICY
AGREEMENT TO REVISE THE LAND USE MAP.
Champion: Move the resolution.
Lehman: Moved by Champion.
Vanderhoef: Second.
Lehman: Seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion? I guess, just as a way of a little
prelude- this is a resolution given to us from the County Board of
Supervisors amending or changing a previous resolution passed by our
Planning and Zoning Commission and this council, changing two
properties or three actually on the land use designation of the fringe area.
This- the proposal from the Board of Supervisors has been presented to
our Planning and Zoning Commission and they have recommended denial
on a vote of 7-0. Our Planning staff has also recommended denial. With
that, RJ.
Moore: Mr. Mayor, council. I am RJ Moore. I am the assistant Planning and
Zoning Administrator. With me tonight is Rick Dvorak, our Planning and
Zoning Administrator. We are here on behalf of the Johnson County
Board of Supervisors. You have received the memo I forwarded to you
and the council. We are basically in agreement on 99% of what the Fringe
Area Agreement has in it. The one point of disagreement at this point is
that area identified for future commercial uses at the Herbert Hoover and
1-80 interchange. We would like to redraw the lines there to include two
parcels that would be approximately 56 acres. And I believe you saw
those maps last night. There was a couple of points that came up last night
at your work session. One of them was how much land the county has
already zoned commercial available for commercial development. And
we showed you a map of the Tiffin interchange and the Oxford
interchange. The Oxford interchange is correct. The Tiffin interchange is
going to change dramatically. Tiffin has requested annexation and they
are moving down to annex everything down to the interstate. So that will
remove all that land there out of the county' s jurisdiction and
responsibility. So, one of the points that we have made throughout and
that you have noticed in the memo I forwarded to you was that two years
ago the Board of Supervisors adopted a new land use plan. This Board
that is in place today is not the Board that was in place 4 or 5 years ago
that did the original Eyman or Gateway rezonings at the Herbert Hoover
Interchange. They have been following our land use plan very well and
have been making great land use decisions. And we would hope are going
to continue doing so even with a new Board coming in place in January.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#6f Page21
The reason we would like to redraw the lines at the interchange is the past
development, the Gateway development, is we required that the developer
put in a shared wastewater system. That wastewater system has a capacity
of 82,000 gallons a day. We knew we was going to oversize it because we
figured there would be more development. We had 11.5 acres on the
south side of the road that was zoned 20 something years ago to CH. That
could- in the CH zoning that would permit some heavy- some pretty
intensive uses there. Mr. Eyman has agreed to allow future developments
to access his wastewater system. He has a shared well and he also- we
required that he do $300,000 worth of improvement to our road with the
decel, accel and turning lanes. So we felt that we had the infrastructure
there. That is one of the (can't hear) of our new land use plan- before you
allow development, have the infrastructure in place or have it required to
be built by the developer. So we are willing on behalf of the Board, is to
exchange the land that is east of Taft Avenue and would be northeast of
the Sharpless business that is there now. We really feel that that is an area
that is identified as agricultural area, and we would not like to see
development occur there other than agricultural uses. There is a big
difference in- a few years ago Karin Franklin, your Director of
Community Development and Planning, and I served on a Board to
discuss growth issues- and Karin came up with this and I felt it was really
a very accurate portrayal of development- there is differences in rural
development and urban development. In urban development your prime
goal is the efficient delivery of services. Rural development is not the
same. Rural planning is different. Our prime directive is the preservation
of agricultural and operations. In order for us to do that, our zoning
ordinance allows for commercial and industrial development. We must
have identified places where it is appropriate to site that type of
development in the county. We know that is a philosophical difference
with the city. However, we would like to continue to pursue and achieve
the goals of our land use plan- in particular, our Board of Supervisors.
And that is why this has become a point of contention with this Fringe
Area Agreement. I guess the one thing I would really like to point out to
you is if there is not a Fringe Area Agreement we are both going to be
losers. We do not know what our Board is going to vote on when they
have this December 14. Our P&Z recommended our revised map, not
yours, 5-0. Our Board listens just like you do to your P&Z. So, our point
is here- without a Fringe Area Agreement, we feel the city is a bigger loser
than us. We lose the fact that we don't achieve the goal in our land use
plan of creating Fringe Area Agreements with our municipalities.
However, you lose the fight that we give up in this proposed Fringe Area
Agreement about controlling our zoning. We, through this agreement,
agree to zone or not zone to what your future land use plan says. We have
also given up the fight in this proposed agreement that you can review the
developments of two acres or more. That is not in the state code. That is
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#6f Page 22
not anywhere. The only thing you can do per state code is approve and
deny plats and enforce your standards. Without this Fringe Area
Agreement you don't have anything other than that. So, what we are
saying is you are a net gainer here. We can be as well. We would like to
redraw the lines.
Pfab: I have a question for you, which my memory doesn't serve me real well
fight now. Is- I was under the impression that the land that you are
wanting to exchange from the noah side of Hoover road- I guess whatever
it is- is a lot less adaptable to good agriculture than the one that you want
to develop. That is my recollection. It looks to me like if I was going to
farm I would a lot rather own that piece of ground which you want to
develop rather than the one that is a lot closer to the interchange and
would make a lot more sense for a commercial development.
Moore: That land over there to the east and noaheast does not have the
infrastructure in place to develop it. Herbert Hoover, after it crosses the
interchange, is a seal coat road.
Pfab: Is a what?
Moore: A seal coat road. It is not a hard surfaced road.
Pfab: But you stated that you were exchanging less- land that was less
appropriate to agricultural use for land that was more appropriate.
Moore: Right, and those points are made on the ability to provide infrastructure:
wastewater, water, roads. The other thing is though, Irvin, you don't go
out into a rural area and site non ag uses. For us, that is a boundary.
Everything beyond to the east is our rural agricultural area. Our land use
plan says we should not be rezoning to anything but ag uses. And we
would like to draw the line there.
Pfab: But the line has been drawn two or three times before.
Moore: That is a past Board. I don't know how to, you know, your decisions-
Pfab: That is what makes it difficult for me.
Moore: But the Board members that are on the Board now did not vote for the
Iman application. There is a change-
Pfab: I am not saying you are right or wrong. I am not saying I am right or
wrong. I am just saying that is where I ran into difficulty. And then when
you- the statement that you made earlier that you indicated that the piece
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#6f Page 23
of ground that you want to use for commercial development is not as near
suitable agriculture as the other and I thought that was quite a bit- I had
great difficulty accepting that.
Moore: It gets back to those philosophies on planning as an urban versus rural
planning. And for us, we get a lot of people that come to us down by
Lone Tree and they have a piece of ground that only has a CSR of 30 and
they say, let me build a house on it because the CSR is not good and it is
not good for farming. But that is not the only input that we look at- the
only variable.
Pfab: You answered my question, that is fine. I just- it wouldn'tjive with what I
understood.
Lehman: RJ, I have got a couple of questions for you. What you be- you are asking
us to designate this property as commercial- is that correct?
Moore: Yes.
Lehman: Under the county zoning what uses would be permitted?
Moore: CP-2 is the permitted use. I prepared a list. I have handouts of what the
permitted uses are. These have revised recently-
Lehman: Wait and talk in the mic.
Karr: You may want to wait, yeah.
Moore: The county recently revised these. There used to be approximately ten of
those. And because the CP-2 district is our most restrictive and requires
site plan review, we brought approximately 15 other uses underneath the
CP-2 district. Again, we felt that it is a district where the county has more
ability to manage that growth and site the type of development we want
there.
Lehman: The plan that we passed and sent to the county, what, 5 or 6 weeks ago-
obviously there has been- we were asked at that time to change the 16.85
acres which we did not. Had that plan been approved by the County
Zoning Commission?
Moore: Yes.
Lehman: So what we approved last time was consistent with what the County
Planning and Zoning Commission approved that our Planning and Zoning
Commission approved- and now not only are you coming back and asking
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#6f Page 24
us to make the same change that was requested last time but we are adding
another 40 acres?
Moore: Right. And that wasn't based- that is one of the problems that we have
been dealing with. That the private property owners there had a desire that
part of it was the same as our staff had with the Board. And the two aren't
the same. Our staff did not raise this question to the Board after the
Donovans but before the Donovans approached you or the county on it.
And partially because we talked to the Board about the investment that
was made in infrastructure at that interchange. And how if you are going
to site commercial development, we don't want to see commercial
development on individual wastewater systems anymore.
Pfab: Is that enough capacity to develop the land that is presently zoned the way
they want it? There is quite a bit of undeveloped land that goes up along
the interstate isn't there? That is still not developed?
Moore: Mr. Eyman has 15 acres that is zoned and platted and undeveloped. And
there is 11.5 acres on the south side of the road.
Pfab: The south side of-?
Moore: Herbert Hoover.
Pfab: Herbert Hoover. But is that going to be used in that wastewater system?
Moore: We are hoping so. That is what we are going to encourage.
Pfab: If that is fully developed, is that capacity big enough for all of that?
Moore: Mr. Eyman says he has a capacity of 82,000 gallons a day and when he is
built out with his 45 acres, he will consume about 21,000 gallons a day.
Pfab: So you are saying-
Moore: (can't hear) capacity.
Lehman: Would that also encompass the 53 acres that you are showing surrounding
that 11.5 acres?
Moore: That wasn't included until this new agreement came. The original
agreement that you forwarded with a positive recommendation included
that.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#6f Page 25
Lehman: Right, but his water treatment facility would be adequate to service that 53
acres as well?
Moore: We hope so. We are not sure what uses he is proposing.
Lehman: I realize that. But you are saying that it is big enough to service the new
area, but the other area which we already approved you are not sure it is
big enough to service? You are telling us you want us to change the land
designation because he has excess capacity. I understand that.
Moore: Right.
Lehman: But now you are telling me you are not sure he has enough to do the 53.03
acres that we already approved?
Moore: That would depend on the use that came through. We think he can service
it all.
Lehman: That was my question.
Moore: We think it can service all of it that everything that is west of town-
Pfab: Could I ask a question here? Is this something that we could take a look at
and maybe bring it back at a next meeting? I have a lot of questions and I
don't want to-
Lehman: Irvin, I don't think there is a problem with that except I think we have
looked at it pretty thoroughly. (Can't hear).
Pfab: Okay, because there was a fair amount of new information here that
seemed to be different than what my understanding was. That is okay. It
is not a big thing to me, but it looks like we can- there is a lot of
information that is moving around here.
Vanderhoef: Okay. I have got a couple of three things on my mind here, too. Number
one, how much commercial land do you need? If I total it up and exclude
the 144 acres at the Tiffin, which is a problem in itself because you are
saying they are going to annex it. Well, I am saying this is in our growth
area and we are putting our sewer and water out- that we can also service
all of this additional land that you are wanting here. So, that is annexable
from our side of it. But anyway, just at the interchanges I have added up
that you have got 236 acres at the interchanges to go for future
development. That is twice the size of the Coral Ridge Mall property. I
mean, that is a huge amount of land. And then when I read your memo to
us about where you have sited commercial- you want it to go with your
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#6f Page26
villages, your small towns. And where they also have services available to
them. So I am saying I don't see that you had any need for these
additional acres. And then when I get your new permitted uses here and I
see things like furniture stores and carpeting stores and building supply
stores and computer supply stores- those are retail. That is creating, to me,
another entrance strip mall just like we have on Highway 6 and like we
have on Highway 1. And this is exactly what I don't want in this
residential area, is to keep sprawling and moving down the highway and
create another strip mall into Iowa City. That is not what we have
envisioned. We have protected our Dubuque Street entrance and have
made a lovely entrance to the city there. Years and years ago the Council
preceding me even, went on record that they want to keep the Hoover
Highway entrance into the city as a beautiful entrance and come in
through residential. The Iman property got developed even though the
city said we don't want it. And I understand that is a previous Board. But
I do not intend to expand this and end up with another strip mall that is
going to move right into the residential that in our planning we have said
this is all going to be residential. At most we will have some multifamily
out closer to the highway. And we need the infrastructure that you are
talking about you wanted on a hard surface road. We want it on our hard
surfaced road too. If we are going to put multi-family living out there and
make the usual kinds of progressions that we do from what you are doing
in commercial right at the interchange- do some transitioning with some
multiple family housing and then move into our single family dwellings. I
cannot expand this at all.
O'Donnel l: I want add something here. We are- it seems like you are really getting
jumped on tonight and that is not the purpose. We are talking (can't hear)
here and on the other side of the interstate bridge we have- and that is one
of those colors I cannot see-
Lehman: 53.89 acres.
O'Donnell: Thank you sir.
Lehman: You are welcome.
O'Donnell: We have 53.89 acres that we are willing to trade off for this 56 acres.
Champion: We-
O'Donnell: That has been (can't hear).
Champion: Okay, not "we".
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#6f Page 27
O'Donnell: And we are not talking about something that is not there. We have
development there right now. If we are concerned about sprawl, then let' s
let it spread beyond the interstate bridge and go out. This 16.85 acres here
could just as well be a hog lot. Now, that is, I think, much less desirable
within our 2-mile Fringe Area Agreement. So, I guess I would be in favor
of the amendment.
Moore: May I- Dee had some very good points, and thank you Mike. What we
would like to have and I think that the Board agrees with is once you put
an agreement in place, if you adhere to that agreement then you are
consistent. Once you start deviating from that- because we have heard
both from the city P&Z and from city staff- that well, you know, you can
come back after we do this agreement- let's put this agreement in place
and that person that owns that 16 acres can come back and say let' s rezone
it and maybe we will consider it. What we would like to do is say where
the lines are drawn this is where it is permitted. Outside of that is "no".
and stay consistent with that decision making. As I have said, this Board
and we hope our new Board will stay consistent with the land use
decisions. As far as sprawling, if you don't have a Fringe Area
Agreement you get a Board of Supervisors and they put junkyards all the
way into your corporate limits. Without a Fringe Area Agreement you do
not keep us from zoning the way we want to. It is the Fringe Area
Agreement that binds the county to adhere to this. And what I am saying
is this Board and hopefully the Board that takes place January 1 will
continue to adhere to your Fringe Area Agreement. One of the examples
is the Wolf application that was before you. We have refused to act on it
until we have heard from the city because that is what the Fringe Area
Agreement says. Without that Fringe Area Agreement Mr. Wolf comes to
the county and we can zone that 125 acres to RMH and you will have
another 400 manufacture homes sitting on the south side of Iowa City in
the county.
Champion: Mr. Moore, I feel like I am being threatened by you. That is the fourth or
fifth time that you have threatened to put something that you know that we
don't find desirable somewhere if we don't approve this Fringe Area
Agreement. That is not the way to get me to agree to anything. That is
ridiculous.
Moore: It is not a threat.
Champion: It is a threat when you put it the way that you have.
Moore: It is a fact of what happens without a Fringe Area Agreement.
Champion: That is not a discussion when you talk like that.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#6f Page 28
Wilburn: I think that with the conversations that we have had with the County
Supervisors have indicated is that they are supportive of the Fringe Area
Agreement and just the emphasis on hearing about the Fringe Area
Agreement and not just this portion of it. Because that was what we heard
before. It raises that- it creates that feeling that well, without a Fringe
Area Agreement, you know,- I mean, that is just my reaction to it.
Because like I said, in the conversations that we have had with the current
Supervisors first started by saying this is a good agreement. And so I am
just throwing that out. I was one- excuse me for interrupting- I was one-
when we did discuss this when we didn't approve the 16.85 acres that
came up outside of the county that came before- I was willing to go ahead
and have that 16.85 acres be commercial to kind of acknowledge and
recognize what is present to the north and to the east of there. But I didn't
initially have the concern about some type of strip mall developed until I
saw this map with the 40 acres south of the highway. And then again with
seeing what the uses are under the CP-2 zoning ordinance here. So, in my
mind, and you yourself pointed out, this existing county Supervisors
intends to comply with that. You know, I don't know what a future one is
going to do so with this additional information I guess that does raise a
concern with me now. So I would not support this.
Kanner: RJ, can you explain the thinking of the county representative to the
committee that worked on this Fringe Area Agreement to agreeing
originally to not having those be commercial? Did you follow what I was
saying on that?
Moore: Yeah, Rick was a member of that committee. Maybe he would be better
to respond to that.
Kanner: Okay, thanks.
Dvorak: I think Ann served on that committee with me. I am Rick Dvorak.
Correct me if I am wrong, but the meetings I attended a couple of
Supervisors didn't agree with what this was. We felt the document was so
important to the committee and to the county and to myself and to the city
that we at that time really didn't want to press the issue. We felt like the
city is giving us 300 and some acres and we will work with that. But then
after further review, and then it started working through staff and through
some of the other members and a couple of Supervisors, we looked at that
and felt like the land to the east really wasn't viable for development. We
felt the additional land to the west which was actually a little bit of a trade
off, we felt made much more planning sense. And again, Anne served on
that committee with me and- that is what happened at the meetings I
attended. We felt that we wanted this document so bad that we would
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#6f Page29
give up a little bit. The more we thought about it, we felt like no, a couple
of Supervisors, felt like no we feel this is a big enough issue we want to
discuss it with the city.
Lehman: I guess the only thing- (can't hear)- one of the things that does concern me
is the fact that it was approved by the County Planning and Zoning
Commission, the County staff, the City staff, the City Planning and
Zoning Commission, and the City Council- it appears to me that the
question now is not one so much of land use as it is political.
Dvorak: You would have to speak to the Supervisors. You know, we are just
representing their staff.
Lehman: I appreciate that. I am just saying, from my perspective.
Dvorak: From your perspective. Again-
Kanner: What did you say Emie? I didn't hear the last line.
Lehman: I think that this- because we had almost unanimity and agreement on this
the last one we passed- it was on the way to the Board of Supervisors and I
attended the meeting of the Board of Supervisors when they decided to
refer it back to us. I feel that this has become a political issue instead of a
land use issue because their Planning and Zoning commission, our
Planning and Zoning Commission, their staff, our staff, this Council, all
agreed on the previous one that was passed and now not only has it come
back to us with the 15 acres but there has been another 40 added to it.
And I feel this is a political decision and not a land use issue. That is my
own personal observation. Any other questions for county staff or do we
want to hear from our own Planning and Zoning folks?
Champion: That would be good.
Lehman: Ann?
Bovbjerg: I am Ann Bovbjerg. I am the Chair of the Planning and Zoning
Commission for Iowa City. You have all had the advantage of seeing our
minutes. Most other people haven't read them so I would like to underline
a few things that have happened in the meetings that we have passed- what
we had passed and what our thinking was. The map that you originally
passed of May 2000 had the squared off commercial area at the Herbert
Hoover 1-80 interchange. That was squared off by the committee as we
were meeting that spring- and two of you were on that- because we kind of
went from a blob to squared off and we used section lines and quarter
quarters so that it would follow the maps and the ownership the way it
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#6f Page 30
would make sense. And that square is what came through Planning and
Zoning. And we approved of that on August 18. At the August 18
meeting, there was brought up for the first time to our Planning and
Zoning that one new section to the west of the upper noah- new quarter
quarter- it had not been part of our packet but it was presented as a
property owner' s application. The map that was in front of us was what
we voted on and we approved of that. On November 2 when this came
back to us having gone and approved by you going to the county and
coming back, there was a proposal to add that section and the one to the
south of Herbert Hoover Highway. At the August 18 meeting the
applicant with that property had said just the noah section was interested
as you had mentioned. And now the south one came in. Our Planning and
Zoning could not go along with that for the same reasons that we stood by
the original agreement in August. And that was, that if there is going to be
commercial development around the interchange of those two roads, it
should be as contiguous to that interchange as possible. And it could be as
contiguous as possible. So that it didn't go running down any roads. We
were especially concerned of going westward down Herbert Hoover and
getting into a strip commercial development. We felt that even though
there was some development on the noah part of the quarter quarter
section, this did not dictate that there also be commercial development
right along the highway. It was not a necessity to that. So, on our
November 2 meeting, we reaffirmed that we preferred to go with the
original squaring off. We had some good discussions with the County
Planning people who presented their point very, very well. The question
of swapping one parcel for another came up. We did not discuss that
except to say that we felt that would be a promise that nobody could keep
in the future. That we could not promise that other Planning and Zoning
Commissions would agree or not agree. No Council could burden another
council. No Supervisor Board could burden another to say, oh we do want
this eventually. So we felt that the original map had been well thought out
for land use. And that was what we looked at. That this was a perfectly
good place for commercial and that commercial in the county was a very
valid use for them. And we felt that the contiguity and the focus on the
interchange of two well-traveled highways was the best place to put it.
And that was why we voted the way we did.
Lehman: Questions for Ann?
Champion: So, Ann, when you first got this map this 16 acres wasn't on here? I
thought it was on your original one.
Bovbjerg: The May 2000 map was the one that we were all using.
(Several talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#6f Page31
Bovbjerg: Right, two squares on each side of Taft.
Champion: Right.
Bovbjerg: Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you Ann. Other discussion? This is a motion- this doesn't take a
roll call?
Karr: This is a resolution. What is on the floor is a motion to adopt a resolution.
Lehman: If we choose to vote in the affirmative and agree with the recommendation
from the Board of Supervisors we need to indicate that now and defer this
vote until such time as we meet with the Planning and Zoning
Commission. If we concur with the Planning and Zoning Commission's
recommendation that this be denied, we can go ahead and move on it. So,
I suppose we should have some indication from the council folks to their
feelings before we take the vote.
Vanderhoef: I will be voting "no".
Kanner: I concur with our Planning and Zoning.
Lehman: I do as well.
Champion: I do, too.
Wilburn: Yeah.
Lehman: Roll call. The motion is denied 5-1, O'Donnell voting "no". 6-1, I am
sorry.
O'Donnell: There are 7 of us.
Lehman: There are 7. We are going to take five minutes. Thank you.
Karr: Could we have a motion to accept correspondence on this one?
O'Donnell: So moved.
Champion: So moved.
Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Champion. All in favor? Motion
carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#8 Page 32
ITEM NO. 8. PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORMS OF CONTRACT, AND
ESTIMATE OF COST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF IOWA
AVENUE STREETSCAPE PHASE II IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT, ESTABLISHING AMOUNT OF BID SECURITY TO
ACCOMPANY EACH BID, DIRECTING CITY CLERK TO
PUBLISH ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, AND FIXING TIME
AND PLACE FOR RECEIPT OF BIDS.
a. Public Hearing.
Vanderhoef: I must be excused. I have a conflict of interest on this. (Vanderhoef
leaves room).
Lehman: The public hearing is open. This is a $2.5 million project in cooperation
with the University of Iowa, who is contributing on this particular portion
of it $1.1 million. The public hearing is closed.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#9 Page 33
ITEM NO. 9. PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT, AND
ESTIMATE OF COST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A
SINGLE-FAMILY HOME UNDER THE AFFORDABLE DREAM
HOME OPPORTUNITIES PROGRAM (1605 DICKENSON LANE),
ESTABLISHING AMOUNT OF BID SECURITY TO
ACCOMPANY EACH BID, DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO
PUBLISH ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, AND FIXING TIME
AND PLACE FOR RECEIPT OF BIDS.
b. Consider a resolution approving.
Champion: Move the resolution.
Pfab: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Champion, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? Somebody
has to say something. This is a wonderful, wonderful project.
Atkins: You just did.
Lehman: It is. This is an opportunity for a family on 80% median income to buy a
home, own that home with the assistance of the city. This is something
that I am really, really high on for folks being able to own their own
homes. Now, we will see how many agree with me. Roll call. I am
sorry-
Kanner: I agree with you to a certain extent but I had a question maybe for Maggie
or Steve. I was wondering if we can get more bang for our buck and put
more people in homes if we look into putting more money into purchasing
used or already built homes. And maybe model it to a certain extent on
the home ownership program that we are going to be looking at our next
item on the agenda. And maybe also throw in things- there is the new
Section 8 provisions that allow people to use that to purchase homes and
maybe that could be thrown in to the mix. It just seems that the $122,000
is above the average price for a home in Iowa City. And I looked at
$93,000 for the tenant to home ownership program for that house. And to
me, that seems like we can put more people in homes with the same
amount of money.
Grosvenor: Where do I start? This particular ADHOP house is lot specific. We don't
have a choice because this was given to us by the Housing Commission.
So, we have to build a suitable on this particular lot. Now, if you are
asking if the ADHOP program could look at other homes, yes we could.
And we can do that with the future. But this particular one that you are
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#9 Page 34
voting on there is no choice. We can't- do you understand what I am
trying to say? It is 1605 Dickinson Lane, so it is specific to a lot.
Kanner: This is the one that the majority of Council voted on not to give to the
Greater Iowa Housing Fellowship? So we could have given it to them and
perhaps they had plans to make it affordable at a longer time period?
Grosvenor: There were two different lots- one lot went to Greater Iowa City and one
went to us.
Kanner: Right, and we could have given both of them was the question.
Grosvenor: Yes you could have.
Kanner: And the majority decided to keep it with just this one lot.
Grosvenor: Correct.
Kanner: So you are saying in the future though that we can look towards used
homes for this program of Dream Homes?
Grosvenor: We can explore that.
Kanner: And there are some nice homes that are used. And I think that is to be a
Dream Home too for people. And we can put more people in homes that
way.
Grosvenor: Right, and the other program you talked about with the Section 8 home
ownership- that is a whole different issue. And that will be many different
homes. That there could be the option of the tenants purchasing the homes
that they are living in. We will not choose those homes. Tenants will
choose those.
Kanner: But we could maybe throw that into the mix and put together a program
that says look, if you have Section 8 we have these homes that we have- it
could become affordable to you and we can put together the package like
we are doing for the tenants of home ownership with where we are
supplying part of the mortgage for that. And some other things that would
help people out.
Vanderhoef: Are you thinking Steven that because they are on such a (can't hear) that
they don't have to qualify for the regular bank loan as a primary loan like
we have in the tenant to ownership program?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#9 Page 35
Kanner: No, I am saying it is another tool that could be used that is out there now
since section 8 can be used for home ownership. It is a recent
development from HUD and from the federal government. I guess I am
using it more as an example of what can be done to stretch our money and
make it go further and get more people into home ownership. And do it
for a lower cost. That is the thing that I think we need to continue to
examine.
Vanderhoef: I understand that but I am not clear on what the program would be when
you just say the Section 8 program.
Kanner: Do you want to explain the new Section 8 provisions?
Grosvenor: It is a new provision. It was new in October and we don't have it
developed yet. But what we would be able to do is take the Section 8
housing assistance payments and it will work similar to a rent to own. So
if I am a Section 8 tenant and I am living in your house and the Housing
Authority is paying hat payments- you know, rental payments- what I can
do if you are agreeable as landlords is we can enter into a contractual
agreement and those hat payments can now go to pay the mortgage. And
there are requirements and that is another- that are attached to that- down
payment, working requirements and things.
Vanderhoef: And 80% and below?
Grosvenor: Yes.
O'Donnell: Affordable Dream Homes- they own the ground don't they?
Grosvenor: Yes, they do.
O'Donnell: And that is a big difference. I really support the project.
Lehman: Maggie, I had just one question. It would seem to me, wouldn't a lending
institution- I would think they might look more favorably on new
construction where there is no maintenance and no upkeep for a period of
time as opposed to an established home where there is maintenance. And
SO there are certain advantages to a new home where the new homeowner
does not have to look at maintenance.
Grosvenor: Basically maintenance-free, yes.
Vanderhoef: Are you planning to go ahead on this ADHOP home to use recycled
materials in some of the-?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#9 Page 36
Grosvenor: We are trying to keep the costs down a little bit and recycled materials are
extremely cost prohibitive. We are going to use the pop bottle carpet and
the recycled paint. So those two issues.
Vanderhoef: And that is all?
Grosvenor: That is all we are planning at this point.
Lehman: Okay, thank you Maggie. Other discussion?
Kanner: I am going to vote for it but I just hope that Council in the future will look
with our Housing Authority at some other options that might be around to
put more people into houses.
Lehman: Roll call. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#10 Page 37
ITEM NO. 10. CONVEYANCE OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME LOCATED AT
1905 GLEASON AVENUE TO THE TENANT.
a. Public Hearing
Lehman: This is a public hearing. The public hearing is open. This is a tenant who
has lived in the property since 1999 and has qualified for a loan from a
bank in conjunction with the Federal Home Loan Bank and some down
payment assistance from the City of Iowa City. The public hearing is
closed.
b. Consider a resolution approving.
Champion: Move the resolution.
Pfab: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Champion, seconded by Pfab. Discussion?
Vanderhoef: This, too, is a good program. And I fully support it. The money that the
city is putting into this house will be repaid. It is just in the form of
(changed tape sides)
Lehman: -motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#12 Page 38
ITEM NO. 12. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION DIRECTING SALE OF $13,000,000
WATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2000.
Lehman: We got the bids today. And the finance director is recommending US
Bank Corp., Piper Jaffrey with a bid of $5.5372%.
Pfab: I have a question.
Lehman: Yes?
Pfab: What is the length of those?
Karr: Can we put the motion on the floor first?
Lehman: Yes. Can we have a motion?
O'Donnell: So moved.
Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell.
Vanderhoef: Second.
Lehman: Seconded by Vanderhoef.
Atkins: That is 25 years.
Pfab: 25 year? Okay. I didn't see it anywhere as I went through it. Okay.
Lehman: Discussion? Roll call. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#14 Page 39
1TEM NO. 14. MOTION TO ACCEPT THE FORM OF CONTINUING
DISCLOSURE CERTIFICATE PERTAINING TO THE $13,000,000
WATER REVENUE BONDS.
Vanderhoef: So moved.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef.
Champion: Second.
Lehman: Seconded by Champion.
Pfab: I guess I have a question. What does that mean?
Atkins: That means the Securities and Exchange Commission says that we have to
do this.
Pfab: Okay, amen!
Lehman: Okay. All in favor? Opposed? Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#16 Page 40
ITEM NO. 16. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION REPEALING THE RESOLUTION
ESTABLISHING THE IOWA CITY SOLID WASTE ADVISORY
COMMISSION.
Champion: Move the resolution.
Vanderhoef: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Champion, seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion?
Rettig: My name is Janelle Rettig and I am the sole appointment to this
commission. The reason I get a letter from the Mayor saying that you
were dissolving the commission was a lack of applicants. I just wanted to
let you know that since the Gazette did a article- which I didn't call them,
they called me- you have had a number of applicants. So that reason has
now dissolved. Having said that, I think that this is an important goal- to
have citizen involvement in solid waste and recycling issues. Particularly
because recycling is a voluntary activity in this town except for disposal of
yard waste. And so thus I think citizens should be involved in deciding
that. And I also think there is a number of landfill issues that have come
up recently. And so if you decide to go ahead and dissolve this
commission I would really like to see you some how come up with a way
to involve citizens. And so there is a big "if' there. You've got to vote
down the commission and if you decide to do that, for whatever reasons
you come up with, I think you should do something to involve citizens.
And I propose too, which I handed out to you and I hope you all got a
copy of-
Lehman: We did.
Rettig: -and you will accept that as whatever you have to do to accept it. But my
two recommendations is: number one, that you appoint an ad hoc or blue
ribbon or task force I guess you might call it commission that would have
finite goals and a finite time line to accomplish. So you would assign
them goals and that commission or task force would have a number of
months to come back to you with some recommendations. And I think if
you do that you really should put out there what you are looking for in the
task force. Some diversity as far as people who are business owners or
apartment dwellers or apartment owners or people involved in the
recycling business. And that is my first proposal for you to consider. And
the second one is if you go ahead with your recommendation that you did
in your informal meeting a few weeks ago to turn this into a staff advisory
committee, then I am wondering if there are any options to open that to a
few community members? So you have a staff and community
committee. So those are the two options that I am proposing. And then
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#16 Page 41
just a final comment on why I think this task force didn't have more
applicants- I mean, clearly this is an environmental town and people are
concerned about recycling and environmental issues. There are a couple
of reasons. I think first perhaps the City' s current methods of advertising
commission openings is starting to fail. And I think that there are better
ways and new ways that you could add in- and I have written some of
those down and proposed them and would be happy to talk to whomever
about it in more detail. And then second of all, I think this commission
was misnamed. And the word "recycling" should have been in there
somewhere. And if- I am not as big ajunkie as I should be on your issues
but I had at least read your original proposal and I realized that it wasn't
just dealing with tipping fees at the landfill. And so I realized early on
that this was a commission that I would have an interest in. So whatever
you do I think you should change the name of it. And if you have any
questions about what I have given to you I would be happy to answer
them.
Champion: Thank you.
Vanderhoef: Thank you for coming. You and I have visited a few times and I like your
proposal. It is the way I like to approach these kinds of things in having
ad hoc committees and the combination of staff who has to implement any
policy that this council puts forward I think is a real positive kind of thing.
And I would encourage staff to ask a couple of people to join them so that
they can put in their perspectives from, like you say, whether it be the
apartment dwellers if that is the task that is before the group to be sure that
we have some property owners and some apartment dwellers. And work
with the staff to figure out what kind of a policy is enforceable and is
something that can be worked with in an expeditious kind of way. And
cost is always a big thing in the recycling issues. And clear at the tail end
of all of this I would like one of the tasks also to be in looking at how the
materials are being recycled and reused in our community.
Wilbum: We had some- at our work session we had some initial discussion about
how staff could- the fact that staff could reach out to some interested
groups or representatives of the community. And I thought I saw several
heads shaking that that would be something that we at the time could go
on with having an in house staff committee. But I think it is important
enough to, whether it is spell out or state publicly so that the public has
reassurance that we are interested in hearing input about it and defining or
making sure we know what it is we are going to be talking about with this
group. You yourself indicated confusion about just the name of the
commission itself so I think it can help send a positive message. I will be
voting to disband with the understanding that we are going to move
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#16 Page 42
towards your recommendation or some components of your
recommendations so that we have that addressed.
Rettig: Thank you.
Soglin: I am Becky Soglin. I am a Board member with the Environment
Advocates, and a recently retired Conservation Chair of the local Sierra
Club. And I am primarily just up here to suck in everything that Janelle
has said. If you didn't notice that the number of applicants doubled from
yesterday to today for the commission from 4 to 8, I was partly
responsible for that. I was eager to get on the commission and encouraged
some other people to do so. But I also recognized that Janelle's idea of
this ad hoc committee would probably be more effective. So I would
understand the vote today to disband the commission. And specifically I
would hope that if an ad hoc committee is created that somebody from the
Rental Property Association be asked specifically to serve on that
committee and also that someone from City Carton serve on it. The
majority of us who have our applications in, I believe we represent most of
the environmental groups and I understand that that wouldn't be sufficient
to cover all of the bases needed to come up with a good policy. And I also
do have some ideas on how the city could better reach out to inform us
when you want us to come serve on the commission. I do work in media
relations and I can also tell you a little bit about how in the environmental
community we do tend to get the word out. And there is lots of list serves
and ways that I think you could communicate information to us to get it
out much faster. Obviously in the day of the Internet we are doing things
a little bit differently. In fact, Environment Advocates did learn about this
in August and we did make an initial request for information. And for
some reason we didn't get more. We did see that it was called the Solid
Waste Commission and didn't know in fact that it did have a greater
recycling component to it. So, thanks very much.
Lehman: Thank you.
Walters: Hi, Jim Walters. I just had a question. It was unclear to me in the
newspaper reports and in trying to follow Council how many people
actually applied to serve on this commission. Do we have a number of
how many people actually applied?
Vanderhoef: Well, until today-
Karr: As today- we had four or five come in today- but up until today we only
had four people for six vacancies.
Lehman: Over what period of time?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#16 Page 43
Karr: We advertised at least two months- 60 days.
Walters: But before the deadline- there was a deadline at some point-
Karr: Before the deadline there was four for six.
Waiters: There were four and that was in addition to Janelie who was appointed?
Karr: No- it was a seven-member committee so I took Janelie off the top, which
we only advertised then six vacancies the other times.
Walters: I see. Okay, and then we had four?
Karr: That is correct.
Waiters: So you basically had five people that kind of had interest- had indicated
interest in serving? Five out of seven?
Karr: Correct.
Waiters: And then we got four more in?
Karr: Correct.
Walters: Okay, thank you.
Pfab: I am really opposed in general principles to dissolve this. I believe that
the need is there. I am uneasy about this ad hoc committee. We went
through this with the idea of getting it going and I think the fact that the
city probably didn't do a good job of getting the word out in the areas, you
know. That doesn't mean we were wrong but I think the city organization
shares some of the responsibility of not doing a good job of getting this
out to the public. By the way we named it and how we promoted it. I
think we should follow up with this. I have a feeling that it is going to be
moving on. I think that is a big mistake. I think we were on to something
there and I think we should continue on and say, okay let's regroup but
continue on as we were. Because I can't see- where does this ad hoc
committee go? And this had a good structure. It is similar to other
commissions that we have here at the city. Most of them seem to work
very well. And I think to go off in a tangent- what is to gain by it? we are
taking the citizens out and we are going to tell them this is what you are
going to do. And these citizens have volunteered their time to help
promote this and work- I think that is- I think we are going the wrong way.
And that is all I have. But I am going to vote against disbanding it.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#16 Page 44
Lehman: Other discussion?
Kanner: Yes. There were two objections that I heard in the work session to why
we shouldn't have this. One was we didn't have enough people applying.
Well, I think we have seen that there is 8 more people applying- that there
is interest. The word is out there. And the second was that perhaps this
would be better- some of these issues would be better taken care of at the
ECICOGS. But my understanding is that the proposal didn't just come
out of the blue but in part it came from ECICOGS, a recommendation that
there should be citizen commissions. And with the Supreme Court
decision that happened a number of years ago that limits control of flow
garbage, it is even more important. I think that we have a vast array of
citizens input into how we make our decisions on solid waste. Recently
we lowered the fees at our landfill because we were afraid more and more
private garbage haulers were taking it to Illinois where it is cheaper. And
so I think the question that Iowa City has to wrestle with is how are we
going to encourage recycling? How are we going to deal with having to
keep lowering the prices? Is that the direction that we want to go in? And
there is a lot of issues that I would like to have that input from citizens. I
would like to have environmentalists, I would like to have the business
community. And that is why I went to the Chamber of Commerce and
asked them if they would nominate one or two people. And before they
had a chance to get it going the work session- the majority of the council
decided to disband the Solid Waste Commission. Ernie, you asked me
before why was I voting against something- I would ask you the same
question. Originally you voted when it was a 3-3 tie to keep the
commission. And then you changed your vote to go- to make the majority
to go against it at our last meeting. So now that we have the applicants I
would ask you why not- let's take another couple of weeks to be able to
look over these applicants and let's go with the Solid Waste Commission.
I think it is a good thing and I think let's go for it.
Lehman: Let me respond to you Steven. I think that we have spent a certainly an
adequate amount of time, if not more than adequate time, looking for
applicants. Two weeks ago tonight we told the public that we were not
going to continue with the committee. We have received four applicants
today. Now, the message to the public four weeks ago was that
applications- that we weren't going to have a committee so that any
potential person who wanted to serve on that committee who heard that
probably would not have applied for a commission that we said last week
we were not going to- or two weeks ago- that we were not going to have.
So, the fact that we got four applicants for a commission that we said two
weeks ago we weren't going to appoint- that doesn't particularly impress
me because I think that it is possible to go out and get applications. You
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#16 Page 45
said that you talked to the Chamber of Commerce and they were fully
aware of this Board and Commission from the day that we set it up. And
had they been interested in having people appointed I think they would
have. And I think they should have. I mean, I really do. Now we have a
pool of people obviously interested in solid waste management recycling
and whatever. And I really believe that we can use the input of those
folks. I think that that input can be done just as effectively with a
committee- an ad hoc committee that can be appointed that will represent
landlords, tenants, business people and whatever. And I think it can be
appointed. But the response that we got to this was disappointing at best.
And so I really- I think it is important that we have citizen involvement. I
think we have the pool of people who would be involved and I think we
can accomplish that. So I still favor abolishing it.
Vanderhoef: And I have just a couple of things to say since I am your representative at
East Central Iowa Council of Government. When the solid waste plan for
the region- which is required by law- we don't have a solid waste plan just
for Iowa City. We have it for an entire East Central Iowa Council of
Government. When that plan came here I don't recall any discussion
when we had the public hearing on it. There wasn't any discussion. If
people were really interested in putting together a solid waste plan that
was where the input should come in. Secondly, when you say why would
people- what is there to get people started on this? There has been a state
mandate to decrease our solid waste materials and we have a goal. In
Iowa City is reaching that goal. The region is not reaching that goal. But
we have done a good job with our recycling plans and we are just in the
process of expanding it. And I think these folks who have to implement
the plan from our staff side, have to work in conjunction with people from
the community who see the problems in their "back yard". Whether it be
rentals or wherever it is. I think the combination is a much better way to
approach this recycling then it is for us to just put together a commission
that was not interested in our Solid Waste Plan at that time.
Pfab: I have a question. Dee, do I understand you to say we are accomplishing
our plan of reducing the solid waste? How are we doing that? We are
shipping it out to Illinois. Is that right?
Vanderhoef: No. We are not shipping ours out to Illinois. We are decreasing our
tonnage that goes into our landfill.
Pfab: Because it is going to Illinois. And I think we are dumping-
Vanderho ef: We have been dropping in the number of tonnage long before there was
any that was taken out. And certainly what we collect is not going out.
What some private haulers take out we cannot force them to dump at our
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#16 Page 46
landfill. So that is their choice of where they take it. Right now it is stuck
with the Rules Committee at the state DNR who will not enforce the
haulers to come in and be part of our plan. The law says they have to be
part of our plan- they are not being part of our plan. And therefore what
they are doing is by law illegal. However, the state has not enforced it at
this point. And that is where we are sitting fight now. Waiting for the
DNR to enforce the rules that say that all of tippers have to be part of the
plan. When they become part of the plan then they have to pay to the state
just like we do that percent of dollars that goes into the state for recycling
projects. But right now those people who are hauling outside of the state
are not paying their fair share into the recycling program.
Lehman: Before we go too far- we are not becoming the Solid Waste Advisory
Committee. This discussion is whether or not we want one.
Pfab: And that is the point I am making. Obviously the governmental agencies
are not doing a good job of getting more recycling done. We need more
citizen participation and this is where we would get it.
Lehman: The only comment I would have Irvin is that Iowa City was complying
with the state mandate long before anything went to Illinois. So we do
have significant participation by citizens.
Pfab: (Can't hear) to say we are reducing our solid waste that is going into and
being landfilled- is idle words because it is not really true.
Lehman: It is a fact Irvin.
Pfab: We are moving it from Iowa City out someplace else.
Champion: Irvin, that is not what Dee is saying.
Lehman: Long before we started hauling it out- we have got the numbers if you
want to see them- there was a significant reduction in tonnage that went
into the Iowa City land fill since 1990.
Champion: And I think Dee is also saying that what Iowa City is dumping into the
landfill is decreasing. Isn't that what you are saying Dee?
Vanderhoef: Yes.
Kanner: Dee, to address your issue, I think that is the problem- is private haulers
aren't being counted in a lot of these figures. And the decisions that we as
a city have to make could include solutions that cities across the country
are starting to take to overcome the Supreme Court decision. There are
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#16 Page 47
ways to look at it. For instance, if we had a commission they could look at
making multi-unit houses and commercial and industrial part of the
mandatory Iowa City Solid Waste system. Now, that is a big decision and
that is something that I would- if we go that direction, not saying that we
are going to or have to go that direction, that is something that I want input
from a wide array of people on a Solid Waste Commission. I think-
Vanderhoef: And that is where those folks should be coming to ECICOG and putting it
into the plan and helping us as we are working very hard right now to
work with Liz Christenson who is the new director of the DNR to enforce
the rule that is already on the state books.
Kanner: I think that we are in Iowa City and I want to have Iowa City and
surrounding people help us make that decision. Because they are the
people that are going to be most directly affected.
Vanderhoef: And they can at the regional level in the regional plan. That is where that
comes in.
Lehman: If you looked at the memorandum from the City Manger who indicated
who would be serving on this group of folks- obviously we have got some
of the most talented people who live right here in Iowa City who happen
to be working on our staff. And I have got a great deal of confidence in
those folks. Particularly if we work out some arrangement where they are
able to take advantage of some of the citizens who have an interest in
working with them.
Wilburn: One quick question.
Lehman: Yes?
Wilburn: The downtown streetscape plan, wasthataccomplished through use of a
taskforce?
Lehman: That was a committee that was appointed. That is correct, it was not a
commission.
Wilbum: Okay.
Lehman: And it worked.
Wilbum: So I am confident then (can't hear).
Lehman: Other discussion?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#16 Page 48
Kanner: Ernie, I think you can say that about any commission. Certainly we have a
very talented staff. And they are there to support the efforts of the city
goals in the Comprehensive Plan. And we wouldn't throw out city staff
and rely only on Solid Waste Commission. We would use both together.
But like other commissions, we would say we value this and they would
help to write up bylaws of how the commission would be run and then we
would approve that. So I think a commission of this sort is useful.
Pfab: I want to go on record that I think we are going in the wrong direction to
disband this. And that is what I want to go on public record as saying.
Because when I vote against it.
Lehman: Other discussion? Roll call. Motion passes 5-2, Kanner and Pfab voting
"no". Steve, I would really- I sense a tremendous interest on the part of
this council to have citizen folks involved so you will be working with
Brad and those folks-
Atkins: Yes, we will take care of that.
Lehman: -to come up with something because I think that is important to the
council.
Karr: Motion to accept correspondence?
O'Donnell: So moved.
Wilbum: Second.
Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Wilbum to accept correspondence.
All in favor? Opposed? Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#17 Page 49
ITEM NO. 17. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE BUDGETED
POSITIONS IN THE LIBRARY AND THE AFSCME AND
ADMINISTRATIVE PAY PLANS BY DELETING THE POSITION
OF MAINTENANCE WORKER lit- LIBRARY AND ADDING THE
POSITION OF LIBRARY BUILDING MANAGER.
Pfab: Move adoption.
Champion: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Pfab, seconded by Champion. Discussion?
Kanner: I am going to be voting against this at this time. I think that it would be
most appropriate to discuss it at our budget discussions and also examine
the management to employee ratio and those kinds of issues at that time.
Lehman: Other discussion? Roll call. Motion carries 6-1, Kanner voting "no".
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#18 Page 50
ITEM NO. 18. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING EXECUTION OF AN
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND
HOWARD R. GREEN COMPANY CONSULTING ENGINEERS
TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR
THE IOWA CITY SANITARY LANDFILL.
Lehman: This is relative to groundwater and surface monitoring and water quality
reports in accordance with state and federal regulations. This is for a
three-year period.
O'Donnell: So moved.
Champion: Second.
Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Champion. Discussion?
Kanner: I have a question.
Lehman: Yes?
Kanner: Do we have an engineer in the house?
Atkins: I have an engineer there for you, Dan Scott.
Kanner: I am sorry, what is your name?
Scott: My name is Dan.
Kanner: Dan, thanks for coming.
Scott: Sure.
Kanner: It talks about how after three years it is most likely that Iowa City
employees should be trained and be able to do this. Is this in fact what
you anticipate happening? That Iowa City should be able to do this in
house?
Scott: Yeah, both of the contracts that you have on the agenda tonight include
training for each of those three years. So, at any point after the first year it
could conceivably be possible that the city staff could take over all of the
work.
Lehman: Are you saying that these contracts would not necessarily go for three
years?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#18 Page 51
Scott: They don't have to. That is the way they are set up. But that is not
necessary.
Vanderhoef: So we can discontinue it after one year if we are ready to take over the
projects ourselves?
Scott: That is correct.
Vanderhoef: I have had- I truly have some concerns about a three year contract for
$172,000 for this one and the next one is close to $150,000. I can hire
another Dan to do that kind of a project and come out ahead.
Lehman: I think you just gave him a raise.
Atkins: One of the things I think you need to keep in mind when we enter into
these agreements is that we try to build flexibility in so that, just as Dan
pointed out, we can change over and assume responsibility. But we also,
remember, we have to demonstrate to the regulating agency that we have
the capacity to do this. And so thereby an annual contract, quite frankly, I
don't think would have been acceptable to the DNR. That we are going to
have to show and prove to them that we have the capacity to provide this
testing and all of the monitoring that goes with it for some reasonable
period of time. I don't know if there is a magic to three years but we
certainly felt that within that period of time we can fulfill our
responsibility to the regulatory agency, get our own staff up to speed, and
then make a decision in accordance with what we think is going to be the
most efficient for us.
Pfab: Emie, are these lump sum payments or are they defined as units used at
different costs?
Atkins: Generally what we do is we have like a monthly pay out. We are billed by
the consulting engineer.
Pfab: But the- we will expect no matter how we do it to pay $172,800?
Arkins: That is a maximum.
Pfab: It is a maximum?
Atkins: Right. Now, they can come back and ask us for amendments. That is not
a problem.
Pfab: Is there any- can it be done for any less if the staff gets up to speed?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#18 Page 52
Atkins: Yes. If we get up to speed we can trade certain things off. But remember,
the consultant is going to make investments also and is there a buy out
provision or anything in this contract? The answer is no.
Pfab: So it is basically going to cost us $172,000 period?
Atkins: Yes.
Pfab: So we might as well use them for three years?
Atkins: Yes.
Dilkes: As is typical of most of our consultant agreements, we have a seven day
termination provision which allows the city to terminate on seven days
notice and pay for the services up until that point.
Pfab: Okay, so it is-
Dilkes: There would be a mechanism.
Pfab: That was the point. It didn't indicate in this- that is why I asked the
question.
Lehman: Other discussion? Roll call.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
Page 53
IOWA GAME
Lehman: For all those faithful fans who have been watching the council meeting
instead of the Iowa game, Iowa beat Drake 72-70.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#19 Page 54
ITEM NO. 19. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING EXECUTION OF AN
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND
HOWARD R GREEN COMPANY CONSULTING SERVICES FOR
THE IOWA CITY SANITARY LANDFILL.
Lehman: This is relative to the gas collection system.
Vanderhoef: Move adoption.
O'Donnell: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by O'Donnell. I presume the discussion
relative to the last item is also true of this one?
Atkins: Yes sir.
Lehman: Is there any discussion? Roll call.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#21 Page 55
ITEM NO. 21. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF
IOWA CITY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEVISION TO
ADOPT HOUSING REHABILITATION PRIORITY AREAS FOR
OWNER-OCCUPIED PROPERTIES IN IOWA CITY.
Vanderhoef: Move adoption.
O'Donnell: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? These are
identifying areas in the community that have high concentrations of homes
containing lead-based paints. And that is what this resolution delineates.
Kanner: And there is other criteria?
Champion: Other criteria, yes.
Kam~er: Lower to moderate income with higher concentration.
Lehman: Yeah.
Champion: It is a little more complicated than just lead paint.
Lehman: It is but-
Champion: -get the lead out.
Lehman: We are going to try to get the lead out. That is right. Other discussion?
Roll call. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#22 Page 56
ITEM NO. 22. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF
IOWA CITY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION TO
ESTABLISH A REVOLVING LOAN FUND AND USE OF SET-
ASIDE FUNDING FOR THE IOWA CITY HOUSING
REHABILITATION PROGRAM.
O'Donnell: So moved.
Vanderhoef: So moved.
Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Vanderhoef. This sets up a $200,000
per year or 13% of the CDBG money that will be set aside into a revolving
fund for housing rehabilitation. I think it is a great program. Discussion?
Roll call.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#23 Page 57
ITEM NO. 23. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO CONVEY THE
ENGLERT THEATER PROPERTY TO ENGLERT CIVIC
THEATER, INC., AN IOWA NON-PROFIT CORPORATION, AND
SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR DECEMBER 19, 2000.
O'Donnell: So moved.
Pfab: Second.
Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Pfab. Discussion?
Kanner: I had a couple of things. I know we are going to perhaps go into this a
little more in depth at the public hearing. We were given the contract and
it says "remedies of the party, #11" on the contract and I didn't quite
follow that. I was wondering if you could explain some of this. Does it
say that the city gets the theater if the buyers don't pay when due? Do we
have the first lien on the theater? I didn't quite understand that.
Lehman: We have a mortgage but isn't this more appropriate to discuss at the public
hearing? In terms of the contract?
Dilkes: We can do it- it is really whatever you all want to do.
Lehman: I don't care.
Kanner: It was included in our packets.
Lehman: I realize that.
Dilkes: I can answer the question.
Lehman: Go ahead.
Dilkes: We are in the position of the lender when we do a real estate contract.
And we will have a first lien on the property. If they would default in
their payments we would have the right to what is called forfeit that
contract and take the property back. They would forfeit payments made
and we would have the fight to take the property back.
Kanner: So that is any of those $100,000 payments if they are not made?
Dilkes: We would have that remedy.
Kanner: Okay, thank you. And I had another item for discussion. I thought it
would be appropriate to bring it up now so that when we vote on it in
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#23 Page 58
finality we can just perhaps discuss it. since we are putting significant
money in I thought it might be appropriate that we ask for a number of
seats on the Board of Director that we would appoint whether it be
ourselves or some other person. We heard from the Englert group last
time that they seemed to be open to that idea. The exact amount of seats
we don't have to decide right now. But maybe by the time we vote on the
final contract we can consider that. I think it would be appropriate and I
think we would get a lot of interest from people in the city that might want
to apply for that if we did have a number of seats- if we didn't want to
have city council members be part of that.
Lehman: But you are talking about someone who would represent the City of Iowa
City?
Kanner: Represent the city's interest in there. Just like the community theater has a
certain amount of seats on the board, we would also be a partner of sorts.
That we would have some representation.
Champion: I don't know about that.
Lehman: Why don't we have- John Shaw is sitting out here. We don't- we are
going to have a meeting between now and then- why don't you discuss
that and on the 19th when we discuss this we can have some sort of
response.
O'Dounell: I can't imagine why they would want a council member on that.
Champion: Maybe they want all of us.
Atkins: -great expertise.
Lehman: All but one. All right.
Dilkes: I think that is something that you certainly can discuss in connection with
this but it wouldn't really be part of the real estate transaction.
Lehman: I know.
Dilkes: That would be something different.
Lehman: Other discussion? Roll call. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#25 Page 59
ITEM NO. 25 COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS
a. Board of Adjustment
Lehman: We had one appointment, no applicants.
b. Board of Appeals
Lehman: Last night we discussed this and agreed to appoint Charles Maas.
c. Housing and Community Development Commission
Lehman: One appointment. We agreed to appoint Gretchen Holt.
d. Human Rights Commission
Lehman: One appointment for an unexpired term. We agreed to appoint Emie Cox.
And three appointments for three year terms and we agreed on Lisa
Beckman, Paul Retish and Keri Neblett.
e. Parks and Recreation Commission
Lehman: Two appointments for four year terms and agreed on Matt Pacha and
Nancy Ostrognai.
f. Public Art Advisory Committee
Lehman: Had no applications.
g. Senior Center Commission
Lehman: We agreed to readvertise for more applications. Do I have a motion to
approve those appointments?
O'Donnell: So moved.
Champion: Second.
Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Champion.
Kanner: I have something to say. Some of the appointments and non-appointments
were not unanimous. And I- I don't know exactly how we proceed with
this. I guess an amendment would have to be made for alternatives to
what was proposed. So I would like to propose that one- the Senior
Center we had two applicants and originally at the work session before
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#25 Page 60
break it was decided to appoint those two applicants and then after the
break there was a vote- an informal vote- to not- I don't know if it was
informal or not- there was a majority that said they did not want to appoint
those. I think that- excuse me for mispronouncing this perhaps- Chevalir
Monsanto and Charles Thayer would be good appointments for the Senior
Center. I think we ought to appoint them and so I would like to move an
amendment that those two be appointed. And then I will have a separate
amendment for one other appointment that I would like to put in there. So
I will do that first for the Senior Center as an amendment.
Lehman: Is there a second to the amendment?
Pfab: I will second it.
Lehman: Moved by Kanner, seconded by Pfab. Discussion?
Kanner: We see that Charles Thayer in his application has been involved in the
Senior Center for many years. And I think both of these people would be
valuable voices to the commission and would represent the city well on
our Johnson County- Iowa City/Johnson County Senior Center.
Pfab: I would support Steven on this because for all we know we turn around
and there might not even be a Senior Center Commission the next time we
do this. That is being sarcastic but-
Champion: Yes it is.
Pfab: We have the people-
Champion: I call the question.
Letunan: All those in favor of calling the question-
Dilkes: We need a second on this.
Lehman: I am sorry. We have called the question and we have a second. That is a
roll call- is it? No? All those in favor of calling the question say "aye".
Opposed? The question has been called. All in favor of the amendment
say "aye", opposed same sign. The amendment is defeated. We are back
to the original motion. Steven, you said you had another amendment?
Kanner: I had another amendment. We had a large amount of people that applied
for the Human Rights commission and I applaud those people for doing
that. One of the people that applied that the city council majority decided
not to appoint was Antrell Williams. And he describes himself as a
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#25 Page 61
"young black man". And I think it is very important to have that
perspective on the Human Rights Commission. And especially because I
have gone to a former (can't hear) that the Human Rights Commission put
on and I heard people in the community talk about specifically about
young black men going into stores and being followed simply because of
the color of their skin. At least that is the perception that people had. That
is just one reason I think it is important to have this perception and this
point of view on the Human Rights Commission. And so I would move
that Antrell Williams be appointed to the Human Rights Commission in
place of Ernie Cox.
Lehman: Is there a second to that amendment?
Pfab: I would second it for discussion.
Lehman: Discussion please.
Champion: The thing I want to discuss is the way you are going about doing this. I
can't remember your exact comments but you acted like we decided not
appoint this person for some reason- that is not really how we go through
these commissions. We really decided who to appoint, not who not to
appoint. I think there is a very negative connotation. You know, Steven,
when the majority of the council makes a decision you can't just always
find some other way to get into the back door to change them and that is
basically what you are doing. These decisions were made last night.
There is not going to be support for them. I think you are just grand
standing. That is what I think you are doing.
Lehman: Other discussion of the amendment? All those in favor of the amendment
say "aye". Opposed? The amendment is defeated 6-1. We are discussing
the original motion. All in favor say "aye". Opposed? Motion carries. I
would like to say on behalf of the Council- we have got extraordinarily
good folks who have applied for these appointments that were made
tonight. I don't think the failure to appoint anyone indicates that the
feeling on the part of any one of these Council people that they were not
qualified for that appointment. We try to pick who we think are best. It is
very difficult when we get the quality of folks that we have applying to
appoint everyone. And it is a shame when folks- when we have this many
folks that apply that everyone doesn't get appointed but the fact of the
matter is that there is only so many appointments that can be made. And I
think that we do our best to appoint the folks that we feel would do the
best job for this community- regardless of what one member of the
Council may think.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#26 Page 62
ITEM NO. 26. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION
Champion: I just want to say that for the first time in my life- this probably isn't good
to say- but I went to the landfill last week. I have never been to the
landfill before but my trash hauler (can't hear) is broken so I had to take
my trash to the landfill and take my cardboard to recycling. And that it is
so well organized and spotless. I know that just because it really looks
clean doesn't mean there isn't water contamination, rats and all of that.
But I don't know what I expected. I don't know if I expected just stuff
blowing around and crows and birds- it is incredible how clean it was and
how organized it was. I am just really impressed with the landfill right
now. I am going back again.
O'Donnell: I can't wait to go to the landfill. I am going to do it next weekend. Take a
lunch.
Champion: They close at noon on Saturday.
O'Donnell: Do they?
Pfab: I am glad there is no sarcasm here anymore.
O'Donnell: Iowa City just finished its leaf pickup and we got a wonderful comment in
the Iowa City Gazette. And I thought it was really nice to see a positive
thing in the paper. And that is a great service that we have here in the city.
And other than that I hope the election is soon over. And I wish
everybody a happy and safe Thanksgiving.
Vanderhoef: Just a couple of things. Just to add on to what you said Ernie about
(changed tapes) second choice. Secondly I think something that came up
tonight on how we advertise (can't hear) and I honestly don't know- are
we advertising them on our website?
Karr: Yes we do.
Vanderhoefi Okay, that and do we have anything there that describes what that
commission does?
Karr: Yes we do.
Vanderhoef: Someone asked me and I said I honestly don't know. So, that is one place
that if you are interested in upcoming commission openings you can
always check the website. And you can also read about all of the various
commissions and find out if there is something else you are interested in.
That is all.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#26 Page 63
Wilburn: Just a question to follow up on something that Dee had mentioned. In the
letter that goes out to people letting them know they were not selected for
a commission, are they made aware of what the other openings are at the
time?
Karr: We encourage them to apply for other boards and commissions. I don't-
Wilburn: Do we specifically let them know what openings there are?
Karr: No. We certainly could do that.
Wilburn: I would be interested in that.
Lehman: It would be very easy to do.
Karr: Okay.
Wilburn: I know it will change every time but I think we need to do it and get the
word out.
O'Donnell: Good idea.
Lehman: Steven?
Kanner: Two items. One I want to say thank you to the Citizens for Alternatives to
the New Jail. I think they are working on an issue that is very important
and I like the way that they are organizing. And I appreciate that kind of
input. And we need- we have a lot of that as evidenced by people
applying for commissions and being involved with commissions. There is
a lot of ways to get involved in city work and this is one of them. And I
applaud the Citizens for Alternatives to the New Jail. And hopefully the
City Council will take them up on their invitation that we heard earlier to
get involved in those discussions because I think we certainly play a major
role in that. And just to let people know, our City Manager did send a
letter to the County Supervisors asking that we do have a role in that. And
I applaud that. It might be from a different angle perhaps than from what I
am looking at but just to be at the table is a good thing. And the second
thing is we received a letter on November 6 from Bob Elliott who spoke
earlier- and there is one thing that concerned me especially in this time of
election and concern about the Florida vote. He is strongly encouraging
City Council to work toward a future that de-emphasizes the ability to do
referendum elections. And I am very much opposed to that. I think we
have a good system that City Council makes most of the decisions but if
there- our city charter gives the opportunity for our citizens to correct
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#26 Page 64
things that they feel are wrong or to try to change things through the
referendum system. And I think it is a very good one. And so I hope that
we don't try to lessen the ability for citizens to do a referendum in the
future as Bob Elliott might suggest.
Lehman: First of all I really do concur with Bob Elliott. Whether or not we want to
get into the hassle of a- that would require a city charter commission
meeting to change that which I am not sure is worth going through the
hassle.
Atkins: You understand every ten years Council has an obligation to appoint a
commission.
Lehman: And at that time that could be looked at.
Karr: Excuse me, there are three ways to amend the charter and that is one of
them. Council can amend the charter and citizens can petition a change.
There are three ways. We are mandated every ten years to convene a
Charter Review. That is not the only way to change.
Lehman: Council can change the charter as well.
Kanner: And it is within ten years- it could be sooner than ten years.
Karr: Absolutely, ten years is only related to the Charter Review convening. It
is not related to the-
Kanner: I am saying the Charter Review can be sooner than ten years according to
law?
Karr: Yes.
Lehman: Okay.
Kanner: And we had one about five years ago.
Dilkes: I think there are certainly some ways regardless of how you feel about the
initiative and referendum process that the charter could be clarified as to
what the intent is.
Lehman: Oh, and that would be very well- yeah, I think we have already found that
it would have been nice if we could have made a couple of changes and it
would be very nice to see those changes made so that in the future if we
ever have referendums they can be a little clearer to the voters.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#26 Page 65
Champion: Right.
Lehman: That is something- I suppose that goes on the pending list. I don't know
how much a job that is to do that. I don't know that it would be very
difficult.
Dilkes: I think you would want to have the commission- I mean, I think you
would want to have it looked at and discussed in a committee. I mean-
Lehman: I am talking about the rewording.
Dilkes: No. there are a lot of issues there in terms of what can be a subject matter
of initiative and referendum- that is not completely clear for instance.
There are a number of issues there.
Champion: We should think about doing that because the way it is written now- and I
have not read it- but when the ballot doesn't really say what people want I
think you are in trouble already.
Dilkes: That is really a different issue. That is a different issue.
Pfab: Seriously- is it because you couldn't- you can't stop something unless it is
already started? That is the way I understood you had described it. That
is why the no meant yes and the yes meant no. Because you said- you
can't say don't build- we couldn't say don't build First Avenue. You had
to wait until it was initiated and then you had to do it a way of stopping
something that was already started.
Lehman: It would be an affirmative question.
Dilkes: That is not what I said. What I said was that the charter provides for
initiatives and referendums with respect to plans and not execution of
plans. And that is where that (can't hear).
Pfab: I hear you. I don't understand.
Lehman: We do, I think, at some point Steve are probably going to have to at least
at a work session address the jall issues. Certainly there is a tremendous
conflict within the community between those folks who are genuinely
concerned about overindulgence in alcohol and drunkenness and coming
down on us like a ton of bricks to change ordinances. And then the other
group of folks who don't think that we should do anything about it.
Atkins: I would just caution you- remember it is a county service and they have
full authority and responsibility to execute whatever policies they feel are
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#26 Page 66
appropriate. The purpose of my letter was quite frankly to have someone
knowledgeable present information to the Board of Supervisors in a very
factual sort of way. I mean, I heard we arrested everybody to nobody to- I
mean, it was just all over the lot of misinformation. And the second point
that I would sort of caution you on is be careful about taking sides. I
mean, we have the Citizens for Alternatives but you also have other
citizens groups that feel very strongly the other way. And so I would just-
I don't like giving political advise to city councils but just be cautious
about how you choose to participate. The intent of my letter and I hope it
was clear in that letter that if you want us, please ask us.
Lehman: My concem is not so much the jail issue as it is with the police issue. And
I think that we have been- we have some people in the public accusing our
city police of making arrests that should not be made.
Atkins: But that is not a jail issue.
Lehman: I realize that but that is the issue that has been put before us tonight by a
couple of folks and I think that there is some- I do think at some point that
we need to respond to that.
Atkins: I also think that the purpose of sending the letter to the Board of
Supervisors is they are the authority that makes the decision of whether
this thing ever reaches the ballot or not. And in my capacity serving you, I
don't think I am in a position to chose up sides. That I will do as you
instruct me to do and I thought the best thing to do was go directly to the
board, offer our assistance, and wait to hear back from them.
Lehman: And that is where we are now.
Wilbum: (Can't hear) the point that there is one side of town that says police do too
much and we also frequently a letter in our packet- one or two packets ago
we got a letter saying there is not enough police or enforcement
downtown. So what- the issue of what police are doing I think would be a
good one for us to have.
Pfab: That brings up an interesting point. Is there a way that the council on a
fairly regular basis- however it is- that we could be brought up to speed by
the Police Chief what is going on and what are important things? You
know, just to keep us informed so that when we hear these things from out
in the public that we can say yes we can bring that up at a work session or
something like that?
Atkins: My first comment would be that your work sessions are already jam
packed now. Secondly, is it just the police? We have ten operating
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.
#26 Page 67
departments that probably would like- I mean, that is why we put out
annual reports and do the kind of things-. I mean, it is very much (can't
hear).
Pfab: Is an annual report- is that a little bit of a non interactive- an informal
session with the- and I am not saying good or bad- I just-
Atkins: I would rather if you all have some specific questions about a city
operating policy or procedure, specify it and we will prepare a report for
you and I will bring the department director in and certainly you may
question away. But I think we need to keep the focus reasonably narrow.
And again, I remind you, the jail is not our issue.
Pfab: This has nothing to do with the jail. This is just something that I had been
thinking about for the last couple of months and I just wondered is there a
way to do that? I don't know.
Atkins: The way is you tell me to do it and I bring them in.
Pfab: Okay. That is why I asked.
Champion: We can't really ask- I mean, I understand Steve's point because what
happens is somebody asks you a question or they hear a rumor or they
accuse the police of something and then your question to them is- is that
what happened?
Pfab: I think it is just a way to keep lines of communication opened. I don't
know. I am not aware of any specific issue that I want to ask them about
but it is just a matter of- I don't know.
Lehman: I have something that is really, really non-controversial. The day after
tomorrow is Thanksgiving Day. Now, that happens to be one of the nicest
holidays of the entire year. As much as we may argue and discuss things,
the fact of the matter is we are all really blessed in this community. We
are all very, very fortunate to live here and I would certainly encourage
each of us and our friends to enjoy your families and enjoy your children
and your grandchildren and you mothers and fathers. And for heaven' s
sakes for one day be thankful for what we really have here in this
community.
Pfab: (can't hear) non-controversial issue is the turkey.
Lehman: I am not going to comment on that.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of November 21, 2000.