Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-06-25 Transcription June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 1 June 25, 2001 Special Work Session 6:37 PM Council: Lehman, Champion, O'Dormell, Vanderhoef, Wilburn, Pfab, Kanner Staff: Atkins, Helling, Karr, Holecek, Franklin, Fowler, Winkelhake, Davidson TAPES: 01-59 SIDE TWO; 01-63 BOTH SIDES; 01-64 SIDE ONE Plannin~ & Zoninl~ A. CHANGiNG THE ZONING CODE BY AMENDiNG THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT HOUSING OVERLAY, OPDH-8, PLAN FOR ARBOR HILL, AN 8.2 ACRE 17-UNIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, LOCATED NORTH OF WASHINGTON STREET ON ARBOR HILL CIRCLE. (REZ01-00006) Franklin/Okay your first item is a planned development, the Arbor Hill project, we continued the public heating from the last time after much discussion from the neighborhood, we have a conditional zoning agreement that has been agreed to by the developer' s and we expect to have that signed agreement by your public hearing tomorrow night. If for some reason the signatures don't get on it before the public hearing tomorrow night we'll have to continue this one more time. Lehman/And for the Council' s information I talked to Rick Fosse last week and he called me back today, I asked him if he would walk that site and look at it and his opinion is that the engineer's report is accurate that it's engineered the way it was presented to us 2 weeks ago that the situation in the back yards will not be any worse and probably a little bit better so he's comfortable with the recommendation. Franklin/I think we've got everything in the conditional zoning agreement that was at issue with the neighbors, I mean some of the things were laws that we already have in place like grading plan, erosion control. Lehman/Right. Kanner/Were laws in place like what? Franklin/Grading plan, erosion control, there were a couple of points that Jim McCarrigher made that were basically standard procedures. Lehman/The biggest change probably was the neighborhood association requirements that the water be taken, your fight, Franklin/Yea, the gutter stuff. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 2 Lehman/Most of the stuff that he asked for was going to be done anyway, some of it will require that. Franklin/Yea, right. B. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION BY DESIGNATING THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 307 EAST COLLEGE STREET (OLD CARNEGIE PUBLIC LIBRARY) AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF COLLEGE AND LINN STREETS AS AN IOWA CITY HISTORIC LANDMARK. (SECOND CONSIDERATION) Franklin/The second item then is second consideration on the designation of the Camegie Public Library as a landmark and we're asking for expedited consideration here so that would be a wave second and go to a pass and adopt tomorrow night so that we can get within the time limit of the moratorium. C. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE VACATING HEMINGWAY LANE WEST OF RUSSELL DRIVE. (SECOND CONSIDERATION) Franklin/Item C is second consideration on an ordinance to vacate Hemingway Lane, this is the street in the South Pointe. Item number 8 is conveyance of this and so again we're asking for expedited consideration since this is a fairly minor change. Lehman/And that we're asking for expedited on D? Franklin/No on C. Lehman/I'm sorry, right. Vanderhoef/There was something in the letter or something in the packet about the folks that live on Hemingway, Hummingbird Lane. Lehman/Hummingbird is a different. Franklin/Hummingbird Lane is a different project, this is Hemingway Lane, south side, Southpointe addition offof Sycamore. Hummingbird Lane is with the annexations with the east side. Vanderhoef/Okay got it. D. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION FROM GENERAL INDUSTRIAL (I-l) TO INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL (CI-1) FOR This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 3 APPROXIMATELY 12.09 ACRES LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 1. (REZ01-00002). (SECOND CONSIDERATION) Franklind Item D is second consideration on the rezoning of the Ruppert property near the airport. E. CONSIDER AN ORDiNANCE CHANGiNG THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF APPROXIMATELY 0.83 ACRES FROM PUBLIC (P) TO CENTRAL BUSINESS (CB-10) LOCATED SOUTH OF IOWA AVENUE BETWEEN LINN STREET AND GILBERT STREET. (REZ01-00005) Franklind E is second consideration on the rezoning of Tower Place from P to CB-10 because of the mix of uses. F. CONSIDER AN ORDiNANCE AMENDiNG TITLE 14, CHAPTER 6, ENTITLED "ZONiNG," ARTICLE E, ENTITLED "COMMERCIAL AND BUSiNESS ZONES," TO ALLOW MUNICIPALLY OWNED, MIXED-USE PARKiNG FACILITIES iN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS SLIPPORT ZONE (CB-5) AND THE CENTRAL BUSINESS ZONE (CB-10). (SECOND CONSIDERATION) Franklind Item F is second consideration on the code amendment allowing mixed use parking facilities in the CB-10. I don't know if it's important, do we have? Should we put those in the different order for the next time7 To have the ordinance amendment before the actual rezoning? Okay let's do that. G. CONSIDER AN ORDiNANCE AMENDiNG THE SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY PLAN FOR WALNUT RIDGE PARTS 8, 9, AND 10, AN APPROXIMATE 35.15 ACRE RESIDENTIAL SUBDWISION LOCATED ON KENNEDY PARKWAY. (REZ01-00003) (PASS AND ADOPT). Franklind Item G is pass and adopt on the sensitive areas plan for Walnut Ridge 8, 9, and 10. H. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AMENDED PRELIMINARY PLAT OF WALNUT RIDGE PARTS 9 AND 10, A 20.67-ACRE 12-LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT ON KENNEDY PARKWAY. (SUB01-00004). Franklind And Item H is the amended preliminary plat for Walnut Ridge parts 9 and 10 and which is why we had to do the change in the sensitive areas ordinance because the conservation easement in trees. I. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT OF WHITE BARN ESTATES, A 30.44 ACRE, 3-LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 4675 AMERICAN LEGION ROAD. This represents only a reasonably accurate lranscription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 4 Franklin/Item I is a resolution approving the preliminary and final plat of White Bam Estates, this is a 3-1ot subdivision on American Legion Road just east of Silvercrest, and it is within the County, it's basically a subdivision to settle an estate through some errors, there will be no development at this time, if it were to develop it would have to develop to city urban design standards and so we have specific language in the papers that development can not occur at this time, they are creating outlots basically. Vanderhoef/I have a question about this, it sounds as though the outlots are going to be owned by different people. Franklin/That is likely what will happen is that with the subdivision the estate will be divided among the heirs such that there's three properties and exactly who will own what I can't tell you. Lehman/Dee. Vanderhoef/Well my concern is not who owns it but if there are three different pieces there, I was looking at that one outlot and it doesn't have any access to a road without going through the properties so it looks like it could be landlocked unless there was cooperation between or amongst the owners. Franklin/Before subdivision can happen on any of this in terms of subdivision to allow development, it has to come back before us because there's a stipulation in this plat that no development can occur on those lots. Vanderhoef/Well that's with the county zoning though that they have to have so much set aside or the 40 acres or something and that would change whenever it came into the city. Franklin/Well I'm not exactly sure what your referring to but in the fringe agreement you have to, if your going to develop it in the county, you have to have I think it's 50 percent set aside for open space in this area and you have to build to city standards for streets, sewer and water even though you will cap them while your in the county. So nothing is going to be able to happen in terms of development on this site without it coming before us again. There is a 60 foot, I think it's 60 foot or 66 foot access easement from American Legion Road south to the Prybil property, which likely will be the access road for the development that occurs there in the future. Vanderhoef/The south outlot. Franklin/Right, right. And so that access easement is already in place. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 5 Vanderhoef/Okay, that is what I couldn't tell from my map that there was another access for that outlot. Okay thank you. Karmer/Outlot number 8. Vanderhoef/Yea. Karr/Okay and then we do have an addition at the request of planning & Zoning, 5J, that say motion setting a public hearing for July 10 on an ordinance. Franklin/We do. Karr/Yes, I'm sure it will come to you as soon as I finish. Amending the zoning code to allow dwellings on or below the ground floor of historic landmark buildings by special exception, and this is as a result of the Planning & Zoning meeting the other evening. Franklin/Okay. Karr/And this is recommended, we add it this time to allow consideration of the alternative uses for the library building as well as other historic sites in the CB-10, again this is just setting a public hearing but you'll get more information prior to that, but because of the construction season it's before us, the developer has requested expedited action. Franklin/Thank you Madan. Karr/Certainly Kadn. Kanner/Could you repeat what the public hearing is about again, to allow what below. Karr/This amendment will allow consideration of alternative uses for historic library building as well as other historic landmarks in the CB-10 zone by special exception. Kanner/And when is the hearing for? Karr/We're setting it for July 10. Franklin/Basically it's to allow some flexibility and what the land uses are at grade level in the CB-10. Champion/Oh right, right, okay. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 6 Karr/And you'll get more information on this tomorrow evening as far as the agenda item. Franklin/Will I be giving it to them? Karr/No it will just be an agenda item, and you'll be giving it to them in two weeks. Franklin/Oh okay thanks. Vanderhoef/Okay so this is J. Karr/5J, motion setting public hearing. Lehman/Which we will get tomorrow night. Karr/Correct, if it's okay with you to add at this time. Lehman/Yep. Vanderhoef/You bet. Lehman/Okay Review agenda items. Review A~enda Items Lehman/If we have questions on the agenda items particularly if we expect to receive answers tomorrow night it's kind of important that those questions be posed tonight. ITEM NO. 12. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND CITY CLERK TO ATTEST AN AGREEMENT WITH MIDAMERICAN SERVICES FOR THE FINANCING OF GREEN LED TRAFFIC SIGNAL EQUIPMENT. Atkins/Emie Jeff will be gone tomorrow night so if there's anything on the green lights. Lehman/On the green lights. Atkins/The green lights, LED' s. Lehman/Appears to be a good investment. Atkins/Okay. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 7 Kanner/Well you actually could, before tomorrow could I get a copy or anyone else that might want one of the agreement in our council packets, for mine it was unreadable. Karr/I can distribute that. Kanner/On the computer. Karr/I'll do that. Atkins/Marian said she'd get that for you. Karr/I've got the agreement. Atkins/Sony about that. ITEM IP#17 OF 6-21 INFO. PACKET Kanner/And I had a couple other issues Jeff about traffic calming. In the info. packet number 17. Jeff Davidson/Can you refresh my memory as to what 17 was? Kanner/The confirming last sessions new traffic calming procedures. Davidson/Right. Kanner/When a decision is made at a work session it might just be semantics but that gives the impression again that the decision is already made when I would like to, my understanding is it is clear that the decision won't be made until Tuesday at the formal council meeting two weeks hence. Is that the general understanding of folks? Lehman/I think that's a good point. Davidson/That was my understanding as well. Kanner/Okay. Pfab/Was that clear? It seems to me it wasn't too clear. Kanner/Well the way it read is it said when a decision is made at a work session regarding a traffic calming project a resolution will then be scheduled at the next formal city council meeting. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. Jane 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 8 Davidson/I think the way I took that Steven was that the decision at the work session is to put a resolution on the formal agenda. Champion/Right. Karmer/Okay. Lehman/But clarify them before I can understand why we would, I mean if a decision is made then it's over with. Kanner/Thank you. ITEM NO. 12. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST AN AGREEMENT WITH MIDAMERICAN SERVICES FOR THE FINANCING OF GREEN LED TRAFFIC SIGNAL EQUIPMENT. Vanderhoef/I was curious while your up there when you figured the savings on using the new lights does that include our staff time to install lights and all that stuff?. Davidson/Actually the staff time to install the lights was not a calculation in the cost savings, however I'll just tell you for your information we try and change out the incondescent bulbs annually and these are guaranteed for seven years and we think they'll last between 8 and 12 years and so obviously with respect to maintenance expense it's a big savings for us. Vanderhoef/That was what I was hoping you were going to say. Davidson/But them was no monetary calculation made in the cost savings. Vanderhoef/Well even it's a wash it's still a good program. Davidson/Well we're actually $5,000 to the good even while we're paying it off, and then we get the full $40,000 for at least two years after that and hopefully more. Lehman/But that's energy savings is the. Davidson/Electricity savings. Lehman/Which doesn't, your right it doesn't coant anything for the replacement which is significant as well. Okay, right. Vanderhoef/No it's a good program. Pfab/And also a better service because they're brighter. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 9 Davidson/That's right they are brighter. Kanner/Your saying it doesn't count the labor cost but it does count the parts, the actual physical parts. Lehman/No, no, no, I realize that but changing them every. Vanderhoef/Every year. Lehman/How often? Davidson/Every year approximately yea. Lehman/Every year, oh lord. Vanderhoef/And now not having to do that so we've got savings to our staff time. Davidson/Irvin did you have a question. Pfab/I'm looking in here but I couldn't tell if this had a extra straight ahead and left tum arrow at Dubuque and Jefferson, I was trying to count them. Davidson/It does not and I believe I sent a memorandum in your packet that Council should indicate if you wanted that researched further. Pfab/Okay, that was just my way of. Davidson/Sorry. ITEM IP#19 OF 6-21 INFO. PACKET Kanner/Yea, number 19 and that is about the Ridgewood speed bumps. Davidson/Yes. Kanner/It says the speed is 13-15 miles per hour, do you know what the figure was for last year in the number of vehicles? Davidson/No because I couldn't find anything from last year, I had thought we had recorded that but my guess is that because it was an alley we handled it just as a special situation and agreed to try them on a trial basis because the neighbor was in favor of them. I could find no records anywhere of a initial traffic study having been done Steven. Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 10 Lehman/Thank you Jeff. ITEM 3b(4). PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE - May 3 Kanner/On agenda item 3b(4) in the consent calendar from the Arts. Lehman/Advisory Committee. Kanner/Advisory Committee, what's the story on the Seiberling Portraits I hadn't heard about that as far as, I'm just curious. Who's paying? Where are they going7 Franklin/Ina Loewenberg who is a photographer had made an offer to the committee to display a couple of portraits of Nancy Seiberling that she has done and in doing that we viewed some of her other work and the committee thought that possibly a Faces of Iowa City exhibit might be a fun thing to do because Ina has done a number of portraits of different people at the University and in the City. What she indicated was that she may be willing to donate the two Nancy Seiberling portraits to the city. But the first step would be this exhibit called "Faces of Iowa City" possibly at the library and then we need to find a possible permanent home for the two Nancy Seiberling portraits. And we haven't had any discussion of money to date, these would presumably be a donation however the location of them, the installation of them, and the long term maintenance would have some cost associated with them but we're just not that far enough to bring a proposal to the City Council yet. Kanner/Okay sounds pretty interesting. ITEM 3C(15). RESOLUTION TO ISSUE CIGARETTE PERMITS. Kanner/On agenda item 3c(15) of the consent calendar about the cigarette permits. We had 15 or 75 renewals is what I counted, plus one new one, and did any of these places, the renewals get busted for selling to underage for the 75 that we know of?. Is this everyone in the city7 Karr/Yes, this is the time of year, it's an annual review, so all of them come due July 1 through June 30 so these are all of them. You'll notice also on your consent calendar is the new tobacco enforcement provisions, all of those are taken into account so we are currently in the works of you'll be seeing more of that activity on your agenda in the future regarding siting those individuals, going through the procedure allowing them opportunity to pay the fine, public heating process, etc. so they are being accounted for in that procedure, that' s through the County Attomey's office rather than our office. There are in the works right now I think well over 20 that are in different stages of being sited, again you'll all, you'll be getting those one at a time now that we've fined tuned the process. But this is the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 11 renewal of all of them, they will all be sanctioned through the state mandates of the fines. Does that answer your question Steven I'm not quite sure.'? Kanner/What I would, what would help me a bit is to get a list when we do the renewals of who has been sited just to have that available and see if, I don't think we're going to find much of a pattern of people doing over and over again but I would like to see ifthere's anyone that's done it more than once. Karr/You will be seeing that now through another means as well, it is an accelerated fine penalty, the first offense is $300, the second is $500, so you will be seeing that periodically through the year and know that will be an offense, you just want them at the same time of the year. Kanner/Yea, for me it would be helpful if we had it ideally at least a week before or in the packet before so when these 75 come up I can also see at the same time I know what your saying we'll get it throughout the year and I'll be aware of that but it's going to be hard for me to compile that. Karr/Do you want a cumulative total per year or ongoing as long as the establishment, see as long as the establishment doesn't change ownership the first offense doesn't start over, it would be an ongoing type of a? Kanner/Just what they have to date so when we. Karr/Within the current licensing year. Kanner/Yea so when these 70, so I would like ideally to find out of these 75 how many have been sited in the last year. Karr/Okay under the, okay under the present ownership, under the present ownership. Kanner/(can't hear). Yes, under the present ownership. Karr/Okay. Pfab/I believe there was one, wasn't there one siting that's coming up here in the? Karr/lt's on your consent calendar tonight. Lehman/It's on the consent calendar. Karr/A & J's on. Kanner/The first $300.00 that we're going to collect. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 12 Karr/And there' s eight more coming to very soon and another 13 in the works. Kanner/Would, so for tomorrow would that be too much work to get that list for tomorrow? Karr/I can certainly do the eight that are in the process, the rest, I don't know how much, I certainly can check with the County Attorney' s office, I'm not sure how they have their files and whether they can furnish that information or not. Lehman/These are all first offenses? Karr/Yes. Lehman/So they, I mean there will be a total of what? You have a total right now of?. Kanner/20 or 30 1 guess. Lehman/Yea but they're all first offenses, is that going to help you any, is that going to make any difference in the way you would view their renewals on one offense? I can understand two and three. Karmer/I don't know, probably not I'd just like to get a sense of who's doing it and have it in one place. Karr/Okay I'll see what I can pull together by tomorrow. Kanner/And the other thing is we're to assme that those that are crossed out are not reapplying for numerous reasons. Karr/That's correct, they are not renewing. Kanner/Some are still in existence and just have decided they don't want to sell cigarettes. Karr/That's correct. Kanner/So, okay, we had a number of those which we should apply I think. Karr/Now again I wanted to clarify you have also vending machine companies involved so a store may have sold privately under their own name have decided not to but a vending company may come in and apply for them so the fact that they're crossed off here doesn't mean that they're not selling under the vendor. Just to clarify. Kanner/Okay. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 13 ITEM NO. 19. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND THE IOWA CITY LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES AND THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY, AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES, LOCAL #183, AFL-CIO, TO BE EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2001 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2003. Kanner/And number 19 L, on the contract with the Library Board, it's a standard contract that for the most part that we've approved before but I must not have noticed this before, there' s a side letter that was from 4 or 5 years ago Dale about child care and that peaked my interest and I was wondering what happened with that, that, there would be an attempt to negotiate child care. Helling/No it. Kanner/Between 96 and 99. Helling/The, I think the agreement was primarily that both parties agreed that if we wanted to discuss that as a matter of a labor management committee meeting that it would be proper to discuss it even though it's a mandatory subject to bargaining, and we just agreed that if anytime during the contract year, and that agreement is still in place, that if either party wants to bring it up and talk about it, we'll do it. That doesn't necessarily mean we would reopen negotiations. Kanner/But as part of the management union counsel that gives you right to talk about it and see if it's something that might be brought up at future union negotiations. Helling/Yea, it's both parties saying look if you want to talk about we'll talk about it, we won't make a, we won't take a position that' s a mandatory subject of bargaining and we can't talk about it now so we, it may lay the ground work for future negotiations, who knows. Karmer/So no one has shown interest in talking about that? Helling/We did talk about it a little bit, but I, it's been a while, the last time I think it was on an agenda and we didn't get to it and we didn't reschedule another labor management meeting and so we haven't gotten back to it. Karmer/Seems like a good idea, I mean child care is a big issue and this is on site or elsewhere for workers I assume right, our workers, that's what we're talking about. Hellingd Until the discussion takes place and the issue is flamed I can't really say what it might be. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 14 Kanner/Okay. Well perhaps this is something in the future we can talk about as something we'd like to see, it seems like a good idea to me to bring up the issue and see if there's interest as a benefit for our workers. ITEM NO. 20. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND ACT INC., (FORMERLY THE AMERICAN COLLEGE TESTING PROGRAM, INC.) CONCERNING ACT INC. 'S MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS BY THE CITY OF IOWA CITY. Kanner/And then the final one for me is number 20 in the agenda the resolution for the amendment between the City and ACT. My question is when's the deadline for the exchange? Anybody know that, I did not see that date in there. Holecek/Actually the date has not been filled in Steven, I'm going to place the date as something that will be masonable, what we need to do is have a closing between ourselves and ACT, they have the deed prepared, I have the documentation prepared, so what I need is the Council' s approval of the resolution to make that exchange but I was going to set it out in the future, probably July 15 if you would. Kanner/For tomorrow' s resolution that we vote on you'd put July 15. Holecek/I was talking about the dates in the agreement itself. Kanner/The date for the deadline for the exchange, I did not see an exchange in the deadline. Holecek/Date in the proposed agreement. Kanner/Right and are you going to put that in before we vote on that tomorrow? Holecek/I can do that if that's required yes. Lehman/Why are you interested in the deadline? Kanner/Well why are we interested Ernie in any date, it seems to me you should have deadlines on these things and they shouldn't be open ended. Lehman/Well I'm assuming that this would probably be at the convenience of ACT and our staff as to far when this occurs. They need to start construction rather soon as I understand it. Holecek/We are on the property already moving dirt, yes, I'm sorry Steven maybe I should have explained this a bit better is that we've already begun to conduct This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 15 ourselves per the terms of this agreement. And so it will be something of a formality when we come together and actually do the document exchange, and it will finalize these particular terms but due to our exigency in needing to get on the property, we're already there, I'm already in possession of the temporary construction easements and the date is really not a material term but I can certainly fill it in, I'll make it July 30th so that we have plenty of time of convenience sake in scheduling of both ourselves and ACT. Kanner/Yea it just seems that we would want to forrealize, that sometimes people change their minds Emie and if you don't have it in writing your TOL. Lehman/Well this is a, and again I'm familiar with the situation so this probably isn't, that isn't a possibility in this situation but I understand what your saying. Kanner/People knew the Elks and it's happened so it's, I always, if we're going to do it, dot the I's. Lehman/Okay any other agenda items. ADDointments Lehman/Historic Preservation Commission. Vanderhoef/Lives on Brown Street. O'Dounell/Is it Jim Ponto? Vanderhoef/Yes it is. Lehman/I don't either, what's the last name? Vanderhoef/Ponto. O'Donnell/Ponto. Lehman/Ponto, is there a recommendation that he be accepted? O'Dounell/I certainly would nominate him. Pfab/Second him. Lehman/Okay do we have four that would? Kanner/Yea I called him, he's out of the country now for a week so now's the time to appoint him to like five or six things. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25,2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 16 Lehman/Okay, Public Art Advisory Corrkmittee. Pfab/I would suggest Chuck Felling. Vanderhoef/I think that would be good. Wilburn/Maybe I was a little confused daring this, is this for Emily Vermillion's spot? Isn't that an art, is that require a professional artist or not? Franklin/I think there was a, there was a misunderstanding, it is for Emily's position but the bylaws of the committee require that there be at least two art professionals on the committee, and right now, art or design professionals on the committee, right now there are three, so this appointment need not be an art professional. Lehman/Have either of these folks been active with the advisory committee? Franklin/Tom Moeller has made a proposal for a couple of sculptures that he wanted the group to do, he's now working with the Library Board on one of them. Chuck has been involved, neighborhood counsel, the committee went to the neighborhood counsel to talk about art in neighborhoods, and Chuck is on the neighborhood counsel. Pfab/Yea, now he's retired and he's got some time and he's involved in quite a few. Vanderhoef/Well both gentleman are retired. Lehman/They're both retired. Pfab/Yea, we were just talking about Chuck. Vanderhoef/No I can support Chuck. Lehman/Do we have four for Chuck? Okay. Mercy Hospital An~le Parking, (IP1 of 6/21 Info. Packet and 3g(7)) Lehman/Steve if you would like to, I think you addressed the (can't hear). Arkins/I was going to say it's pretty straight forward, I would hope that Mercy's proposal is pretty clear, they provide answers to the earlier letter and we gave you a copy of that. My memorandum, my most current one on the 21st, I don't have basic disagreement with it, it is the use of the public right of way, something we've always been very cautious about, my concem is one, if we can make certain This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 17 arrangements and they can be done legally. Whereby they are responsible for ticketing and towing from that emergency zone I think the staff could support it. Champion/I think that's essential, I don't think we should be involved in ticketing that, do they, can they do that (can't hear)? Atkins/I think it's. Holecek/May I speak to this issue somewhat? How I envision this agreement coming about is that due to the exclusive use, the nature of which we're going to give Memy the use of this property, you of course would need to make a finding that allowing the exclusive use of Mercy for this particular right of way is a benefit to the public because it's providing emergency services. It would be (can't hear) to Mercy then being like having a private parking lot and how we address that now is they monitor the cars that come in and out so for instance we would not have our personnel tagging license plates, doing things like that but when within their internal usage rules there's a violation they would call the police department to ticket and/or then tow the vehicle. Much under the same procedures we use when people are improperly parked on private property and that' s how we would envision the agreement being used. Mercy would also maintain the area of the parking lot, provide snow removal, and provide indemnification in defense of the city with regard to any towing that would occur. Champion/Right. Lehman/Well I would have no problem if we can reach those sort of terms to allowing that to occur, but I do think we do have to find, I mean have an agreement with those terms. Atkins/Oh I, as I understood from what Sarah had explained, I mean we are still involved but it's at their initiation. Lehman/Right. Pfab/Are there presedences being set, okay let' s suppose 100 years from now Mercy decides they aren't going to be there, is that, is there, do they own it? Lehman/No. Holecek/May I address that also? Typically in our temporary use of public right of way agreements or our license agreements if at any time the Council determines the public at large needs the use of this property and it should no longer be exclusively used by Mercy they upon 30 days notice are able to retain the property. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 18 Pfab/And it's still the city's property. Holecek/That's correct. O'Donnell/With adequate signage there I don't have a problem. Pfab/No, I don't see no problem, I was just curious if somebody else comes along and says well you did it to Mercy. Vanderhoeff Well to explain it as Sarah did as a public safety. Pfab/Yea, no, I think it's a great idea because it gives them a change to manage vehicles that come and go on a irregular time, an emergency pulls up and they've got a place to go and they clear it out and be ready for someone else. Kanner/I have some questions. Are there going to be any trees that will be removed? Atkins/Mercy folks, the audience. Kanner/I couldn't tell from the diagram and also green space, we've already had some removal of green space with the house that was tom down for parking lot and we continue to expand parking and so I have some concerns about that and the reason they request this space because they're expanding into the parking lot and that' s their decision to do that but I don't know if we should be sacrificing green space. We already have some concems from the neighbors about a medical office across the street that was allowed that they're going to put a parking lot in the front, not for Mercy, but I just have a general concem about the neighborhood, it is some residential right across the way and I think Merey's a good fit in there but I don't like the idea of taking more green space and trees away possibly so maybe you could answer that question, you like the person with the answers. Robert Carlson/I hope, no we are not removing. Karmer/What is your name please? Robert Carlson/I'm Robert Carlson from Rohrbach Carlson the architects for the project. We are not removing any trees, we are adding three new trees as part of this, we are taking out some bushes that were planted when we did the landscaping that we worked with the neighborhood on on the comer. This part of the landscaping we didn't put many bushes in because we had the idea that we would probably be expanding this way at that time which is why the bulk of the landscaping was done further to the west. Kanner/What's the green lawn space that' s being taken out, footage if any? I assume there' s going to be some green lawn space. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 19 Carlson/About 20 some feet, 20-25 feet of green, on space is going to be (can't hear). Kanner/Square feet. Carlson/No linear feet along the roadway. Kanner/So about 25 times 3 feet, maybe 75 square feet or so. Carlson/It's more like 12 feet from the curb to the sidewalk, curb to the sidewalk at that point. Kanner/So 12 times 75. Carlson, 12 times 25. It would be 270 square feet. Kanner/What was the 75 you just said? Carlson/No I didn't say. Kanner/Okay I'm sorry, oh I said, 3 times 25. Just me personally, it would help me personally ifI could see something that listed sort of what was there before and then what' s going to be taken away, it wasn't that clear in the map, it was, for our map it was somewhat slow. So personally I'm requesting if you could get something a little bigger to me, I assume we're going to be voting on this formally. Lehman/Well I think we first we have to get an agreement with Mercy. Holecek/Yes I think what we. Kanner/I guess my concern is that we're just not going to be doing it tonight so yes. Lehman/No but I think we are tonight going to tell staff whether or not to proceed with an agreement with Mercy if we have. Kanner/I understand that but we're not going to voting on it formally so I still have time to look that over. Lehman/Steven you have time but I believe if we the staff to proceed with this agreement, that's tantamount to telling them that we're going to approve the agreement. Karmer/Okay well I don't look at it that way, ifthat's the way your putting it then. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 20 Lehman/Why else would we tell them to pursue the agreement? Kanner/To see what it looks like and then to vote on it formally. Lehman/But we know what. Kanner/I figure when we vote on it formally that's when we make up our final decision. Lehman/But we've been told what we need to have in the agreement and I think I hear people saying that if we can get that in the agreement that we're willing to move forward which is why we're telling the staff to move forward. Do we have agreement to move forward with the agreement? Okay you've got it. Thank you. Wilburn/Just, I'm sorry one quick question, that's angled parking, isn't it basically where folks pull up in that anyway? Vanderhoeff The driveway. Wilburn/I'm a frequent user of the emergency room. O'Donnell/It's very needed there, I mean I think it's good. Lehman/Well and it's kind of a community purpose. Peninsula Financin~ A~reement (ITEM NO. 13. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST THE PENINSULA NEIGHBORHOOD FIRST ADDITION SHORT- TERM FINANCING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND TERRY L. STAMPER HOLDINGS, L.L.C. Atkins/As you all know and I just want to take about a moments for history, we have a plan and we have a developer for the Peninsula project, following lawsuits and other consturnations all of which your familiar with, I believe at least my reading of you all that your anxious to move this project along. In earlier discussions with the developer we had talked about a city role in participating at least initially with the financing. We dropped that of course, law suits and other issues followed thereafter, we've reached a point in the construction season where it's critical, assuming whatever your policy is with respect to this project that in order to move it along we have a proposed interim financing agreement for you. We believe it's consistent with our history in providing support for projects that the City Council feels is important to overall community goals. It is not unlike this financing agreement, is not unlike us let's say purchasing a capital project. When you read the terms and conditions of the agreement we collatorized the project, that is it's security is based upon the water lines, the sewer lines and the streets that will be constructed. We have two party checks prepared and with that in mind we're This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 21 presenting this oppommity to us to move the project along. We would suspect that the developer' s out now attempting to get his permanent, or get his construction financing now that we've cleared the lawsuit hurdle. I understand from a couple of you that you've had some complaints from other developers and other interests and I would point out to you that I do believe this is consistent with our history, for example, the Council made a decision to extend, pay for, purchase Court Street, the attempt is to open up a part of town for development. This instance we're saying to the developer that we will front end the money, two party checks, in order that you can get this project moving along. He still has an obligation to get his permanent financing in place, I can give you other examples, your recent policy decision on the use of CDBG for the housing project, the low income citizens that we chose to place in the Peninsula project, that's what lead to this, now, again I understand that some of our other interest in the development community see the city as a banker and are not happy about that. Well again folks it's policy that you have to make, if you wish to proceed with the project now then we would encourage you to go along with the agreement. If you want the developer to assume the full responsibility, remember this is a payback to us, we're not giving away anything then you have another option. Irvin you raised your hand. Pfab/I would see no problem with it at all, I would say let's move forward, I mean as long as our interests are protected which they are, he can't run away with the land. Atkins/Well you can't run away, that' s very well put, you can't mn away with the land and we do own, I mean it's very similar to the developer in this case building a capital project, I mean we built Foster Road in order to encourage this project to occur with the public's money and this case we're to be paid by. Again I understand some of the constumation it creates with the development community but I think if they look at the history and what we're attempting to do it isn't dramatically different. Vanderhoef/I think the concern out there is the word of loan. Atkins/Yep. Vanderhoef/And in the previous cases we have been "the developer of the capital improvement" and there have been tap on or fees as land was developed and so forth that paid for their fair share of the project. To call this a loan, I see we're purchasing the same thing, we're purchasing capital improvements to our land and that land will not be sold, shall we sold until everything is paid up. Atkins/Until you say it will be. And another circumstance is while we have used tap on, we have also built projects where we clearly at the public's expense built the project in anticipation of certain development occurring. This is an instance where the individual does have to pay bank rates so you understand our This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 22 investment rate is probably in the 4 ½ to 5 percent, this is a 9 percent, the developer did ask that it be extended from 120 to 180 days, you know personally I don't think that makes a whole lot of difference, but we were trying to make it consistent with what we believe to be our history had been, excuse me Connie. Champion/Well I just interrupted you but I'm from a big family. Has there been an exchange of money on this property at all? Atkins/Exchange of money no, just so understand we bought that land in 95' that particular parcel for $1.3 million dollars, we used our own reserves, we allowed that land to go through the development pla~'mg process and when the developer signed the agreement he must pay us back, so assuming you accept 180, at the end of 180 days the note is due as well as when we transfer the land $300,000.00 is due to us. As you know I've fussed around a couple of years with Council members saying we've got to get that reserve position repaid, if this project goes now it would seem to me we will be getting our reserve repaid sooner than if we are to wait until the next construction season. Vanderhoef/Question of taxes obviously that's one of the things that the sooner we sell it. Atkins/Yes. Vanderhoef/The sooner it goes onto the tax role and produced income for the general fund which is where we're, which I'm interested in keeping up anyway. There's two things on the money that come up for me, one is retroactive taxes to the time of the starting of the process, and the other thing is at a 9 percent loan and you just stated that we have 4 ½ to 5 percent is what we usually get when we use money' s from our enterprise funds, which leaves a 4 percent on top of it and I think that is genuinely dollars that should go into the general fund rather than into the enterprise funds just in the form of that it is, we've lost income off of our $1.3 million over these five or six years and that's one way of replenishing our general fund. Atkins/Well we've carried that $1.3 million on the books as an asset to us and with the agreement with the developer there was a payment schedule established, that is when he can buy up the land in phases and I believe there are four phases, each of which is in the $300,000 dollar range. O'Donnell/Steve is there any particular reason that this went from 120 to 180 days? Atkins/My reading is that the individual, that is T.L.S., Mr. Stareper is looking for financing outside of Iowa City, he had made an original agreement, informal to use local builders, local Realtors, and local banks. Our talking with some of the local banks they've indicated that while there was no question that he had the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 23 financial strength this is a very different project for them and I think there's going to be reluctance locally until success of the project is established. But I would remind you we knew this walking into this thing years ago that this was a different kind of a project and I'm assuming he wants the extra time Mike to cover his tail. Holecek/And I may have another perspective on that to Mike, I believe because of the harsh reality as the agreement is drafted, if he does not pay us back at the end of that time and close on that first addition, he forfeits all rights whatsoever under the development agreement as well as any rights in the improvements that have been put in the ground. So he spent at least a year of time here in the commtmity developing the, so he wants the two extra months. (END OF 01-59 SIDE TWO) O'Donnell/This agreement. Atkins/T.L.S. is a corporation yea. Lehman/It's the corporation. Atkins/But remember the important thing is that it's collatoralized with public improvements, it is a bank rate loan, and it would seem that as the Planning Director described it, Aliens came and picked this guy up and he disappears, what we own is water, sewer, streets and we own the land anyway, not unlike any other capital project. You know folks the lawsuit, and all the issues that entered into, this should have been done months ago, but there's, again there' s nothing you could have done about it, I could have or T.L.S. Lehman/Well I'm going to, I believe in this project, I think it's an important project, it's something that has I think for 3 years has said this is a priority, this is something that we believe is good for the community, it's something that obviously has some opponents within our own community that do not believe that this is a viable exercise. Because I really am convinced that it's worthwhile I'm going to support doing this, but I have and I do think that it's very important that Mr. Stareper understand he's a full year to arrange his financing. Atkins/No he's not Emie. Lehman/He knew a year ago that this was his project, did he not know that? Atkins/And I'm not here to defend the man, I'm here to tell you that as he was traditionally walking through the development process using what was his money, what he was going to have to borrow, when the lawsuit occurred it clouded the title. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 24 Lehman/I'm well aware of that. Atkins/He's unable to walk in, and that's why clearly folks this is a policy question, if you do not want the project to get jump kick started now, that's okay but understand the construction season will wane and we'll go into next year. Lehman/And that's why I'm going to support it but I will say this, that if I were Mr. Stamper I would have had my ducks in a row and the minute, no, no, I'm sorry but I believe this is good business that you have your financing arranged, and that you have a fall back position, I find it rather difficult to understand that at this stage of the game there isn't anything, I mean we haven't, he hasn't taken possession of the land, he doesn't have the money on the improvements. Now because we are taking no risk, in my opinion and he is taking a huge (can't hear) risk if you will. Atkins/Huge risk. Lehman/All of the effort, all of the planning, all of the engineering, everything he has invested in that project is gone in 180 days if he doesn't pay us and we choose to foreclose. O'Donnell/What's invested? Lehman/Pardon. O'Dormell/What's invested? Lehman/Oh the engineering alone, he's told us within the three months. Atkins/Yea, architecture, promotion, engineering. Lehman/About a half a million dollars in planning and engineering costs involved in putting this project together. Atkins/He bought a home here Mike. Lehman/He's got a lot to lose, we don't, philosophically I wish this weren't the case but because of the importance of the project the fact that we've got 19 lots sold, we've got 19 projects that should start hopefully this fall, I feel that we need to move forward with it. Atkins/That's the policy question for you all. Steve. Karmer/I have few questions and the first is some background. My figuring is that we're subsidizing this deal to the tune of close to a million dollars and that we're selling This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 25 the land at the cost from a few years ago plus we're giving, when we sell future land we're only charging about 6 percent interest is what I was told. Atkins/Now your losing me on that. This $690. Karmer/No ignore that. Atkins/Okay. Kanner/This is what we're subsidizing. Atkins/We bought the land. Kanner/What we lost, if we were to sold this land the difference my rough reckoning is that we would have made another $600,000 if we would have sold it at the appraised value. Atkins/I can't tell you that, (can't hear). Kanner/Plus we're going to sell bits at a later time and we're only charging, the rates that we're going to charge at are going up, I was told about 6 percent. Atkins/We're not selling lots, he will sell lots. Holecek/I think Steven's referring to the development agreement. Kanner/We're selling four different phases like you said and we're going to, my understanding when we voted on this a few months ago, a number of months ago was that each phase that we would sell we would charge more than the previous time. Atkins/Yes, there' s a schedule, it does increase right. Karmer/Increase right, and I was told it was 6 percent. Holecek/6 ½. Atkins/6 ½. Karmer/Which is below the market rate of like 9 percent so in a sense we're subsidizing that' s what I mean. Atkins/It's above our market rate. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 26 Kanner/No but it's below the market rate that they would have to pay, they're getting a break on the price so in a sense we're subsidizing close to a million dollars so that' s the background on my question, we're giving them a deal already, they're getting a great deal. Lehman/Except 6 percent is increase in property value, it has nothing to do with interest rate, isn't that, 6 ½ percent is the increase in the price of the property? Franklin/Yes it's roughly that but the subsidy your right, it is the subsidized project, it has been since the very beginning to get the things out of it that we wanted to have in it. Kanner/Right and my point is that it is subsidized, so that' s background that we're already giving them a very good deal, we're getting some things back and that' s why we're moving forward. So some of my questions are, did you take a survey of what the going rate would be for a loan of this type from like 5 banks or so? Atkins/We called some banks and that' s how we came up with 9 percent, that number moves Steve, but yea, that's how we got that number. It could be a little different today. (can't hear). Atkins/Yea we we're figuring in the high 8's and at the time we were putting it together it was 9. Kanner/I have to concur with Emie, for one I was reading the paper the quotes are not, the problems are not necessarily because of the Elks lawsuit because of the difference of this project compared to so called normal development. And it seems to me that that, it still exists later on and why wasn't it taken care of earlier is the key question. Atkins/What would be taken care of?. You lost me Steven on that, help me on that. Kanner/Lining up the financing, and because the difficulty in the project compared to normal development projects was there a year ago and it should have been taken care of at that time, and I don't buy the fact that the Elks lawsuit was the major reason why he's having difficulty now. Atkins/Well that's what we were told by the banks, that had a good bit to do with it. Kanner/Okay that's not what he's saying in the paper, maybe it's not coming out in the paper (can't hear). Atkins/Which is always possible. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 27 Kanner/Which is there a small possibility of that. Pfab/Very slim. Lehman/Remote. Kanner/And you mention reserves, one of the things you did talk about a few weeks ago is that our reserves are getting lower. Atkins/General funds, yes. Kanner/Concern, and this is another thing that will take out reserves, the one thing. Atkins/Can I answer that? Okay what we intend, is that it would be water, sewer and road use tax reserves, we would not go to the general fund to finance this project and those reserves remain healthy mostly because we have to have default agreements in any bonds associated with water and sewer projects and we have rather large reserves that we have to maintain for a long period of time, we are permitted to use them on a short term basis, so the $690,000, whatever the cost of the water project is that would be the reserve commitment, whatever the sewer, sewer, whatever road, road use tax, we're not going to the general fund. Kanner/But I would argue that one of the things that make us strong financially is that often times if we have a project that we feel is necessary throughout the year we have these funds available and I assume that the bond rater. Atkins/That's correct, yes. Kanner/Will look at that and say hey we have that and we don't have to go to the general fund. I have a bit of concern about that. Atkins/But please understand also, I'm not here to argue with you, okay. Kanner/I'm sort of addressing. Atkins/Okay. Kanner/To the Council. I have a concern about going to 180 days, in the agreement it does allow for renewal and I think 120 days is much more reasonable especially with the tum about our reserves in the bigger picture and the other help that we've given the project in the past. Atkins/And in principle your not wrong on that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 28 Kanner/So I would consider this for the 120 days the 180 days I have some bigger problems with that change all of a sudden, that' s quite a change. Pfab/If that was a problem is there a place halfway between we could meet? Kanner/Well I prefer 90 days so I would say. Pfab/Okay so (can't hear). All talking (Can't hear) Atkins/He's really cranking it down. Champion/I think three months is a really short time when your talking about heavy duty financing and construction time, it's really a minimum, I don't have any problems with 180 days. Atkins/120 originally, part of the thinking was July, August, September, October, those are the prime construction, he's not going to draw all of his money from us at once, just so you know we have two party checks, you know that was part of the thinking that that's the logical construction period under which this thing would be occurring. And the 180 days was at his request, I feel compelled to bring it to you, 120 was our original number. Champion/And I think if you look at 120 days with the construction period, the end of the construction period coming up on us quickly that he's going to have to really move fast to get (can't hear). Atkins/To get the road finished yea, he does have his proposals, part of the financing package was we required him to give us a proposal that he has to construct the road, we have a document that lays out what would, that's sort of how we came up with the numbers, we then reduced it by about 15 percent, figuring he's going to have to come up with his own cash. The project itself is estimated in the $800,000 plus dollars. Champion/The other thing that I think this is a difficult project, difficult because it's not within the norm of now, but I'm still very impressed with it, I think it will be successful, it's been successful in most of the country, now it's not been successful everywhere. Atkins/Well remember it's the kick off to close to 400 units of housing there anticipated to be built there. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 29 Champion/So I'm going to support it, I know I'll be criticized for it but I'm used to that and I think it's a very valid thing and I'm still really excited about it and I'm willing to go the 180 days. Lehman/There is another key component of this agreement to me, it says "T.L.S. shall provide the city with a letter from an independent public accountant selected by T.L.S. to the effect that the said accountant has reviewed financial statements which have been prepared in conformity with general accepted accounting principles, that the examination of such financial statements by such accountant has been undertaken in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, and that TLS is financially capable of fulfilling it's obligations under this agreement." This isn't just giving them a letter of credit. Atkins/Give Sarah a lot of credit, she wrote this and she wrote a very tight agreement. Lehman/No I mean it seems we have sufficiently protected the city's interest. Kanner/Your saying that when we sign, before we sign this we're going to have in our hands a letter, what page is this? Lehman/Page 3, Conditions Precedent, E, you first the read sentence, that pretty much says that if the financial statement. O'Dounell/What page Emie? Lehman/Page 3 of the agreement, Financial Statements from T.L.S. are not acceptable and he is not financially capable of fulfilling the obligations he doesn't get the money. Kanner/But I don't understand, how someone can say their financially capable if we're counting on them to Stamper to find something in the future, if this were to say you were to say you have to some collateral, we're not saying suppose to have collateral. Lehman/This, no, no, but I think this indicates the financial condition of T.L.S. and the financial condition in large part is totally is going to govem whether or not he is capable of getting financing. Atkins/Now please keep in mind this financing wanted purchases, the collateral that we base this on is what it buys, it buys street, it buys water, it buys sewer, nothing else. Lehman/But it does say here you have to be financially. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of Jane 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 30 Atkins/I understand that Ernie, I just want you to understand that the collateral on the thing is that worst case. Lehman/We own it. Atkins/Disappears you built Foster Road and paid for it, what's the worst case? You own it and you can tum around and sell it if you like that's up to you. Champion/My other just to clarify and I'm sure you've said it and I haven't had a chance to read all these things. Isn't it tree that the City will not be issuing checks directly to the developer? Atkins/No they are two party checks, they will be submit proper documentation, one will be submitted to him one will be submitted to the prospective contractor. Champion/So he can't really. Arkins/Sarah can explain better how it works but that's how I. Holecek/That' s correct. Atkins/He can't go out and cash it. Champion/He can't take a trip to Hawaii. Atkins/No. Holecek/That's right, any contractor or material supplier will submit the documentation and it will be issued jointly to T.L.S. and that supplier or contractor. Champion/And so there' s a lot of protection (can't hear). O'Donnell/But you know Ernie said something there that we had a year between the time we knew we were going to do this and the time it was done and I believe the financing should have been in place. I've supported the project all the way along but I'm having trouble with this financing. Pfab/I don't know whose in charge of this (can't hear). O'Donnell/Irvin I'm on such an ego trip you mice over. Atkins/You have a question Irvin. Pfab/I have a question, how does a person get a hold of Mr. Stamper? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 31 Atkins/I, Karin I know talks to him on a regular basis. Pfab/I was told to call (can't hear). Franklin/887-1000. Atkins/There you go. Pfab/Pardon. Atkins/887-1000. Franklin/887-1000. O'Donnell/What is that? Franklin/Local office. Atkins/Local number. Pfab/I called the city and because I know somebody that's interested in taking a look at financing this, somebody at the city said call Ohio and I called and left a number there. Atkins/Ohio. Pfab/Yes. Atkins/He's from Michigan. Pfab/I'm sorry Michigan. Atkins/Because he owns a home here. (All talking) Pfab/But I had a call from the person who is interested in taking a look at this because of the (can't hear) not normal type of construction. O'Donnell/But Irvin we're beyond that point. Atkins/Yea. Pfab/No, no, I'm just saying that was something I was (can't hear). This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 32 O'Donnell/Well I see there' s going to be four people here to support this. Vanderhoef/I certainly would like to look at the 120 days instead of the 180. Atkins/Folks it's your call. Lehman/No, I am, to me, don't set it up to fail. Champion/Right. Lehman/Don't set it up to fail, if it takes 180 days and if it's not reasonable to expect it in the 120 don't set it up to fail. Wilburn/If this weren't a multiple year planning process, if this were on request and we weren't going to see anything with all these additional protections and I wouldn't be comfortable going on beyond that but because it has been a multiple year planning process and worst case scenario we own the structure. Atkins/You own a street. Lehman/Well the other thing is he stands to lose big big time, if he's unable to repay this and take possession of that property and pay us for that property within 180 days and we chose to he is eliminated from that project. Wilburn/So I'm comfortable with giving that extra cushion, getting things going, moving forward, seeing this unique design and seeing the affordable housing stuff that we (can't hear). Pfab/I think 180 days is to get as much construction, go out and encourage him, stroking him and get as much construction as you can, go for the 180 days and if he decides he wants to walk broke go. Kanner/Well I think with 120 days what you get is that the corporation has to come back before us you get that and I think that's a good safeguard to have, we have in the agreement it can be renewed. Pfab/At our option. Arkins/At our option. Kanner/At oar option, and so I think 120 days is reasonable, four months is quite a stretch and if you can't find financing in four months there's something I think seriously wrong. This represents only a reasonably accurate h'anscription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 33 Pfab/I think it's reasonable and so there's nothing saying 120 days isn't masonable, there' s nothing saying 180 days isn't reasonable either, I think it's, but which do you want? Or 150 days. Atkins/Well I'm assuming this will be somewhat of a legislative debate tomorrow night, you'll have to land on a number and go just up and down. Lehman/Well obviously we have explored the situation, I think we understand it and we can debate it further tomorrow night when we vote. Atkins/Thank you. Lehman/Thank you, we are going to take a break for. O 'Donnell/Half hour. Lehman/No, back in 10 minutes to 8. PCRB Lehman/There is discussion of the PCRB, I think we have probably seen in the agenda for tomorrow night there is 13, there is could be the first reading of changes in the ordinance, I've asked that be put back on the work session tonight so that we can discuss it. It isn't. Vanderhoef/It's page. O'Donnell/13 Connie. Champion/9. Lehman/9. Champion/Oh page. O'Donnell/Item 13. Lehman/Item 13 is the Peninsula. Pfab/Item 9. Lehman/Item 9 on page 9. O'Dounell/That's what I said Item 9. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 34 Lehman/All right. Champion/Your having trouble counting today. Lehman/He's easy today. We have received tonight a memorandum from John Watson, chair of the PCRB with some comments on some of the things we talked about two weeks ago. We also have a memo from Steven Kanner as to changes he'd like to see, I think we need to go over this again. The time table as we're all aware baring any action on the part of the Council, the PCRB ceases to exist at the end of July so we need to do one of two things either make changes or make changes which we see fit and pass a new ordinance by the first of, actually we need to do it by. Karr/261h of July to be published by August 1. Lehman/261h of July in order to publish it or we need to extend the present agreement the way it is, now the route that we have at least started on is to make amendments or changes to this and attempt to pass a new ordinance prior to the 261h of July, so with that comments. Kanner/One other possibility to throw out them is that the important thing is that we get rid of the sunset clause, if we pass that then we have time to do other things so just keep that in mind that we don't necessarily have to rush them through if we don't feel comfortable. Lehman/No that's what I said, we have to, we can act and reinstate the one we have right now or we can make whatever changes we choose to make. But one or the other has to occur before it runs out because the sunset clause will terminate the PCRB as of the 1st of August baning any action on the part of the Council. Has everyone read the memorandum from? Vanderhoef/That's what I'm reading right now. Lehman/Well just take a minute and read it. First of the comments from John relative to staff time which we did at the last meeting indicate that we would eliminate the staff person. Kanner/And we got a memo from Marjan. Lehman/Right. Kanner/Stating that I believe she didn't feel that she could handle it unless we increased staff time with the clerk's office, or would put strain on it. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 35 Lehman/I think with the changes we had proposed two weeks ago the amount of staff time is still going to be sufficient that it was going to put a real strain on it, in fact I'm not so sure that the changes that we made would have reduced or will reduce the staff time significantly at all is that correct Madan? Karr/As it presently stands correct. Lehman/Right. WilburW Madan let me ask you when the staff time for this is not in hours, your office handles everything else, apparently correct? Karr/I'm sorry I don't know that by (can't hear). Wilbum/When the staff, I forget how many hours, is it 20 hours? Karr/The administrative assistant that they currently have, that's correct 20 hours. Wilburn/When that person is not on your office is handling. Karr/That's correct. Wilbum/Okay, and so I guess maybe another thing to toss in there though is if the PCRB is I suppose being prudent about staff usage for example, Dee and I had the conversation about having that person doing web searches if, I mean if the commissioners, or if the Review Board members could use their time, their personal time if they want to have some piece of information done on a web search that they encourage them to do that on their own which would save some time from you know paid staff's time doing that, and that's stuff that they could do. Vanderhoef/That can be done, just as I look at it and think about it, it would seem that the policy and procedure is where most of that is happening and I suspect that we as a Council as we receive the reports from complaints if we see something that we would like researched we as a Council could say to the Chief or whoever, it could be Steve, this is something we would like researched but to just consistently research policy and procedure for anything and everything that doesn't peak our own interests for our own situation and our city I would like to just take all policy and procedure out of purview of the board and leave that purview with the Council. Lehman/That's what we did last time, it says to allow the Board to review police policies, procedures and written policies only at the direction of City Council. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 36 Vanderhoef/So that in itself to take that out of there then decreases a lot of that search time. Wilburn/And your talking beyond information that they would look for while investigating some complaint correct? Vanderhoef/Right. Champion/Right. Vanderhoef/So we can make that direction if we see a need for that. Champion/Well I think John in his memo addresses I think what you brought up Ross that they might want to do some research when their reviewing a complaint, is that what you meant? Wilburn/Yea I think that's (can't hear). Champion/John has that addressed in paragraph four on page two, is that what you meant? Wilbum/Yes. Kanner/I have a question about staff time, those 20 hours that the staff, Sandy is that her name? Karr/That's correct. Kanner/That's 20 hours that she's over at the Senior Center? Karr/No not necessarily, no. Kanner/How many hours is she over at the Senior Center staffing the office? Karr/We have hours there typically all day Monday, all day Friday and half a day Thursday, now that would total 20 hours if she were there the full component, she often is not because of the number of meetings and to keep her within that 20 hour window, the 20 hour commitment of a week so if they would meet say 3 hours then she would be, take 3 hours off during that week. We have the availability again, we act as back up to her phone when she' s not there anyway and then also she has an answering device and then retums calls then within a period of time, so she has the flexibility where of a week of no meetings Steven she would spend potentially 20 hours in the office all day Monday, all day Friday and halfa day Thursday. If there were other connnitments whether they be meetings or getting This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 37 ready for forums things of that nature then she would be doing those, those 20 hours outside the office. Kanner/And let me ask continuing with this line of questioning. So let's assume she averages 15 hours in the office, let's say some figure, on those 15 hours is she always working on some PCRB project, if no one comes in there? Karr/Typically yes. Kanner/She's doing research. Karr/She' s doing research, she' s doing filing, she's, we've got a number of form letters that we've kept up to date, yes, returning phone calls. Kanner/Okay and, so you would not see any down time from when she's over there that would reduce the amount of hours that if it came that job position came to the City Clerk's office? Karr/I guess I don't know, I'm sorry Steven I don't know how to answer that, I don't understand the question. Kanner/I'm saying, I was assuming that there would be down time where's she just there and she's waiting for people to come in, there would be a certain amount of. Karr/We don't have a great deal of walk ins at the Senior Center. Kanner/Right. So that, I guess that was the original assumption of why we thought there would not be the need. Kant/We have weekly packets to prepare, and there is quite a bit of paper work and filing that occurs as well as the retrievals. Kanner/And so your saying that you would cover that work, in your office you would ideally like a half time person to cover that? Karr/I guess Steven what I'm saying is I'm waiting for Council to determine how they would like the Board to operate and do the duties and then I will be happy to report back to you on what is needed. But I didn't want it to go unnoted that with the changes you made that there's an assumption here that this affects the duties that that person has been doing because I don't believe is sufficiently reduced. Kanner/Thank you. Pfab/I would like to make a statement, I think we are at a time where we are now looking at a mistake that we made at the last meeting, that person is no longer available, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 38 she was well trained, she was very good at what she did, she is no longer interested in the position, that's what I'm told and so in essence there was a quite amount of time and effort put together to make this Board effective and she was a good part of it. I think there was a determination by some people on the Council to take and, I'm going to use the word "got it" got this thing and I think you have accomplished it. Now what you want to do I don't know, I don't know where to tell you where to go but I do believe that the citizens of Iowa City will look back and say there was mistakes made. Lehman/Well let's take, Steven's memo and just go one by one, let's get through this. His first one is the PCRB should be able to recommend to the police chief a level of discipline for police officers at fault in PCRB findings, is there interest in PCRB having any recommendation as far as disciplining a police officer? Vanderhoef/No. Kanner/I think that's part of the equation is we under, apparently under state codes you can not give out discipline unless your the police chief, but I think the other half of the equation in looking at cases where there might be wrong doing is to recommend what the consequences should be, it seems logical in my mind to have that. Ernie you don't think that's logical? Lehman/I don't think that, I think the chief has got to be the person who determines the level of discipline, he's obviously responsible to the City Manager who's obviously responsible to the Council, and I think at the level of discipline is not satisfactory at any one of those three levels it's probably going to be addressed. Kanner/Well I think the whole purpose of PCRB is to have another outside agency that's looking at this thing that's quasi independent and I think the assumption is that they would come up with a recommendation from being intimately involved with the case. Lehman/Well the question is "Is there interest in the PCRB being able to recommend a level of discipline for a police officer?" O'Donnell/No. Vanderhoef/No. Wilbum/No, fault for wrong doing I agree with but discipline is a personnel matter. Lehman/Okay expand the length of time that complaints can be filed by citizen from 90 days to six months. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 39 Vanderhoef/I think that gets into really cloudy time, there haven't been any circumstances that I'm aware of, there was one late filing, or maybe two late filings over the four years and I don't know that there were extenuating circumstances why that happened so I see no point in extending that out and then trying to get folks to remember what did or did happen at that occasion. I think it's clearer if they write it the sooner rather than later. Kanner/Dee I think that one of the reasons I proposed this is that for a lot of people it's an intimidating process and I think sometimes I think there's a language difficulty and I think heck if we can give six months to Terry Stamper we can give six months to file for this, give people that opportunity to do this. O'Donnell/You should note that all people weren't in favor of giving six months. Cham~oion/I don't think they're related. Lehman/I don't either. Vanderhoef/That's apples and oranges. Lehman/Is there interest in extending this from 90 days to six months? Pfab/I'd be happy to say go to 120 days. Wilburn/How does 90 compared to other appeals with the other departments? Atkins/We don't have any other Boards quite like this. Wilbum/Well not Board but for a for fines, speeding, you know those type of?. Atkins/Oh boy. Wilburn/I mean is it just too wide a range to? Kanner/What about the Board of Appeals, what's the time limit if someone has question about a ruling by staff on building code? Atkins/Building code or something I really don't know. HolecekJ It's defined as a reasonable time period under state law, state law by case law has been interpreted that 30 days is a reasonable time period. Pfab/How many days? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 40 Holecek/30 days but you know it depends upon the forum that your looking at as to what your time period for jurisdiction is. Typical appeals of a citation once there's been a trial for instance is 30 days. Lehman/I don't know that this has been a problem has it, the 90 days? Pfab/Apparently there was two, somebody mentioned two cases I don't know. Karr/I believe that the two instances we had and that's why the recommendation was to increase it to 90 days in the first amendment, I'm getting that concurrence so those two would have been addressed with the 90 day period that we have in place now. Lehman/So we did address that some time ago and changed it to 90 days. (All talking) Karr/We did extend it. O'Donnell/I think 90 days is fine. Champion/People don't remember (can't hear). Pfab/I think one of the problems that you may rim into are and there's a certain process of intimidation but I think there also are a very mixed cultural commtmity there might be some cultural differences that may be a problem but 90 days. Vanderhoef/We have this new interpreter. Pfab/120 days I'm, if, I guess if there was a case of there being a reason why it wasn't filed in 90 days does that mean it's dead period? Holecek/I believe and I may need to be corrected, of course John could do that, I believe there have been an incidence at least one that I can recollect there was some gray area as to the timing of the particular case so the Board in order to address even that situation went forward and did exercise jurisdiction and the investigation was done etc. Pfab/And with no prejudice to the people even though they were not? Champion/Of course not. Holecek/It was not dismissed on that basis. Pfab/Okay, all right, that' s what I mean in other words. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. Jtme 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 41 Lehman/Item 3, PCRB should track "use of force" by officer and issue some annual reports. The only problem I have with that is some officers are necessarily assigned duties that will require more use of force than other officers. Kanner/I don't think that, we do get a report of use of force right now, again similar to the cigarette request I think they have it compiled for months and months, I know it's hard for me and Emie then to make notation, if we see someone who's assigned to a particular area where there's more susceptible to have to use force that would be noted I would hope from our PCRB. But I think it's good to have that agency looking at it, at this issue and compiling those figures and see if there' s any pattern that might be discerned. Vanderhoef/And I think that's one of the things that our Police Chief can do internally since this is a here again a personnel kind of thing and I would encourage him to look at that but I don't think it's necessary. Champion/I'm sure he looks at it already. Vanderhoef/I do too. Wilbum/I don't have a. Champion/If he doesn't we probably need a new Police Chief, I mean seriously, these things that you have here I mean I agree it's good that somebody' s following those but that is really the role of the Police Chief is to follow, he probably knows what officers, I mean he would know if there's a police officer that he thinks is using excessive force, I mean I would hope he would know that. And I think your trying to get this group to be the Police Chief and I guess I disagree with that. Atkins/We do have an internal review process on all those just so you understand that. Wilburif Since we received those reports anyway I have no problem with as part of the PCRB's report to us anyway, we saw this as a comment, I mean I have no, but I don't see any independent thing real necessary I mean it's the same information we would receive so. Kanner/Well Ross I think that's the whole idea of PCRB is to have an independent body and to have someone that is outside of the Police Chief looking at these things and I think there's going to be by definition perhaps a little friction, you know Ernie says well they're getting along well but the perhaps is not necessarily to just get along with the PCRB and the Police Chief it's to independent body to take an independent look at these things and see if there are any patterns. And I think this is the body that's most appropriate to do that to put those figures together and be charged with looking at those things, it just makes more sense independent is the key word here and pretty good and a outside body. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Cotmcil meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 42 Wilburn/I guess I'm looking at the independence in terms of the investigation of complaints and not what I see as duplication of effort. Kanner/Well there's investigation of complaints by the Police Chief by definition, that's part of the job is there's duplication there. We have the PCRB reviewing the police chiefs investigation so there's duplication there, so there's, that's the way it's set up is to have duplication so I don't see it outside of the realm. Wilburn/I guess we disagree, I see it as not complete duplication is what I'm getting at and I just finished saying I, if they want to comment on a report that we saw this report you know I have no problem with that. Pfab/I would take two issues, two items that are not directly related here and tell you why I'm concerned. The latest one happened when I was listening to the news this morning and I'm not sure, I'm hoping to get a copy of the transcript but I don't know if I will by tomorrow or whenever but I do expect to get it. And that was there was a young man charged with a very aggregated case of rape and he sentenced to 25 years in prison and 10 years later it was found out that the person, that person did not commit that rape. Now he's going to the city and is saying now we all sit around this table and talk about the value of private property, what is the person's life that's put in prison for 10 years incorrectly, now this did not happen without some wrong, bad police work. Lehman/No, no, the courts did that. Pfab/No, no, no, no, the court, that is not true, without the police fome, a mistake in the police fome, that doesn't make police forces bad but it shows the potential was there. O'Dounell/Where was this? Champion/It happens all the time. Pfab/No, no, no, sure it happens all the time that' s my point. O'Donnell/Where was this? Pfab/And we say good police fomes and I think we have one of the best we can get but at the same time them's supposedly better police forces and that's the FBI, just look at the records that they're compelling right now. Champion/It's irrelevant to what we're talking about. Pfab/Oh it is not. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 43 Champion/It is. Pfab/Okay if you think it is that's your decision. Champion/I think it's irrelevant. Pfab/Okay I accept your position as that but I also accept the position of how you voted and I think that' s, I think the citizens of Iowa City got a raw deal. Wilburn/Let' s see if I can interrupt for a second, I think maybe duplication of effort is not the correct, not really what I meant, I think when I'm looking at this I'm looking at what I would want formally and some informal things just as a, if a, on another commission if they were to flag something for us to look at, would you consider this? That' s what I'm looking at more of the formal and informal, I guess I would include your number 3 and your number 4 the racial profiling as some informal commentary request suggestions to pursue from the PCRB as opposed to the formal investigation type of process on this. I don't know if that clarifies my position or not a little bit more but I just thought I'd throw it out there for. Vanderhoef/Well as I understand it the racial profiling kinds of information are now being collected routinely with the stops and the report of the officer so I think that's being addressed by the police department. Wilburn/And they're pursuing the investigation research or where did we end up with that (can't hear)? Atkins/We have, we're in the process of negotiating with some folks to do that analysis work, we have chosen to go outside of Iowa, we prefer not doing it locally, we just think somebody who really knows nothing about us we will give them the data, RJ's already working on that and I'm hoping we'll have a contract before to long. (RJ talking I believe, can't hear) Atkins/Okay before the end of this month and I think (can't hear) okay it was the University of Louisville that we found some folks that will do an analysis for us and we intend to bring that back to you. Wilburn/Okay. Vanderhoef/Then I think we have pretty much addressed number 4 and number 5 and that they aren't necessary and we can move onto number 6. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 44 Kanner/Well I just wanted to address Irvin's comments in the context of number 3 and 4 and that what I hear Irvin saying is that there are these things happening around the country and we have a police force at a high level that's doing good work and mistakes are made at certain times. We don't want it to be like those other cities and one of the ways to do that is to have a strong Police Citizens Review Board that's there, that' s keeping independent check that's working perhaps with the with the police chief but certainly working with our City Manager and the City Council to do something like racial profiling from an outside perspective. There's always, we all bring biases to the work we do and if you have a Police Chief initiating, being the only one that's initiating the study on racial profiling I think we might miss some things and that's why I think it's important to have the PCRB or some other body outside to be part of that. Champion/That's what we're doing. Vanderhoef/And that's what we're talking about, we're collecting the data and we're sending it outside to be reviewed by folks trained to look at statistics. Kanner/And we're having the hiring and the whole process go through the police chief and I'm saying I think it's worth our while to have the PCRB be the one that initiates that, that says this is what the questions we want to ask that we want to find out that we want this firm to look at. At the very least they should be part of it, equal parmers with the police chief in investigating this and in setting up the parameters of what the study is going to be and that' s why I think it's important to empower the PCRB with these kind of roles. Vanderhoef/I'm ready to move on. Lehman/Well I think number 6 is. Karr/I'm sorry could we go to number 5, I think we were talking about 3 and 4 and I just want to, just need to clarify. Lehman/Okay number 5 I think and I guess I would ask Sarah on this, I think that, I'm not sure, I don't think it's a good idea but I'm not sure it's even legal to make it a condition for employment that officers testify before the PCRB, is that, can you tell me that? HolecekJ Well there are certain things that we can make as conditions of employment, I think we would have some definite issues to resolve contractually. And I haven't necessarily looked into it in depth but I think it would be for a lack of a better phrase "fraught with peril". Lehman/In other words not a very good idea. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 45 (END OF 01-63 SIDE ONE) Holecek/You are, your making them submit to a body that does not have the disciplinarian authority, it is not able to hire and fire them so requiting them or ordering them to submit to the body seems problematic off the top of my head. Vanderhoeff I agree. Kanner/It seems that if some, especially if these are done confidentially and also part of the ordinance states that these can't be used for criminal cases testimony that's made here so I think there's quite a bit of protection, it would be something that would probably have to be proposed at negotiations at the next contract. I think it's something that's worthwhile to look at and to get over the problem that we're having with police officers being told by their union not to testify. Lehman/Is there any interest in incorporating number 57 Vanderhoef/No. Wilburn/No. O'Donnell/No. Lehman/Okay I think number 6, the amount of time that's going to be required by the PCRB is going to be, that's, time is going to tell what's going to happen there. There's one other suggestion that I would throw out, it's I do think, obviously the Council, the Council is a policy making portion of city government, we have administrators, we've got the Police Chief, we've got the City Manager, we've got all kinds of employees that abide by the ordinances that we pass but policy basically comes from this board, this group, the City Council, and I guess I would like to see us have the, that the Board, the PCRB may request that the Council conduct informal hearings and forums whatever which would be public in nature to review concerns that the PCRB may have. And I think there is merit in the Council holding those meetings and that Council is the board that not only would receive the information from the public but also has the power to do something about it if they find there's a difficulty so number, in the ordinance I think it's 8. Karr/Your looking at 8-8-8 (B) (7) that was noted in the City Attorney' s memo. Lehman/Yes well I don't know, it's 7 1 can see that. But I would like to see us that the Board may request that the Council hold general information hearings concerning police department practices, procedures or written policies and that such hearings will be public. But I do think that there' s a place and it's important that the public have an opportunity to speak but I believe that the Council is the group that needs This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 46 to hear those concems because they basically ultimately have the responsibility for addressing those concerns. Pfab/I would counter your proposal when those were held by the Police Citizens Review Board I don't think that any City Council person was not allowed to go. Lehman/I don't know what that has to do with. Vanderhoef/But it would be a formal meeting if we all went so we might as well have it at Council. Pfab/Okay. VanderhoelY Rather than in the other venue. I think we should be moving towards taking a responsibility seriously on those things and I think we could initiate it, I think the Police Chief could initiate it and certainly the public could initiate it. Lehman/Or the Board could ask us to do it, I don't have a problem with that. Vanderhoef/But we will, we will ultimately that is in a forum and as far as public input as with all of our commissions on the agenda each meeting there is a public time so that anyone who wishes to address at the PCRB certainly it's an open meeting and there is an opportunity for them to address at a timely fashion not having to "wait for a forum" and they certainly can do that at our meetings likewise since we have public time and they can come to us. Pfab/My point was the same as it was the last time, I've been on the City Council a year and a half and I believe I've made several clean hearted attempts to suggest that we have a chance to meet with the Police Chief and just discuss things and I don't think we did. Now if we continue in that vain then I think by not keeping a very strong Police Citizens Review Board is really a derelict of our duties, now if we change that' s fine but there needs to be a way of connecting the individual citizens and the police department, and the City Council some way together so communications keeps moving back and forth, how it's done I don't know. Champion/lrvin what change did we make that has irritated you so, tell me? Pfab/Basically we had a very effective Police Citizens Review Board. Champion/What change did we make? Pfab/Well we fired, basically told the person that they didn't have a job anymore, now we're trying to take any, what limited authority they have, we're trying to take that away from them. And we're saying, they have, they and the police department have made some very good strides in the last year. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 47 Champion/What authority did we take away form them? Pfab/Well we said, they're not allowed to go out and initiate a forum. Champion/We didn't say that. Pfab/Well that's how I read it. Vanderhoefs' That' s what we're. Champion/We didn't say that. Vanderhoef/That' s what we're talking about right now. Pfab/That's what's being said. Champion/Well you said we did it. Pfab/And we refuse to go ahead and say we'll extend it and not have a sunset clause on it, we're holding that hostage until we maneuver around, it looks like we basically just take the, what little authority and what little initiative that was allowed to the Police Citizens Review Board we're taking it away from them, and I think that's the worst thing and I want no part of it and I. Champion/I don't think (can't hear). Pfab/And that' s about as much as I can say. Champion/I don't think your were at the same meeting I was at last time. Pfab/Well I went back and read the transcript and that's what I saw, I didn't think it was quite that bad either but when I read the transcript I was pretty disappointed. Kanner/The change that we had proposed there was a response in. Lehman/John's. Kanner/John's memo number 2 that's the major change, probably one of the major changes that we had proposed about policy review and John gives reasons why he thinks it's appropriate to continue as the way it was before. I think one of the key points is that the board again does not set or alter policy, they just recommend, and we've taken even that away, that initiative and I think it behooves us to listen to that advice and put that back in. But from what I'm hearing Ernie your saying This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 48 you want to take away 8-8-8 (B) (7) for general information hearings is that what you? Lehman/No I'm saying that I believe that general information hearings, if they're going to be truly effective need to be held by the body that makes the decisions regarding policy, obviously anybody can speak at any of our board or commission meetings, they can appear or speak publicly if they want to. If we have an issue whether it be use of force, racial profiling whatever issue if there's an issue that needs to be addressed publicly I believe the best forum for that is a Council conducted forum at the request of the chief, the City Manager, the City Council or the PCRB. Kanner/Well I would put it different spin on it and say that we should be there but the board, the PCRB should run it and we should be off to the side listening to heart the meeting as it goes on, the interaction between the PCRB that' s calling the meeting, the general information meeting and the people that show up so if we need to add anything, I think we should add that this should, the Council should be invited and expected to be at these and when we would have simply call a formal meeting or informal meeting of the Council along with these information sessions. Lehman/That's what we're talking about so I mean, other comments. Vanderhoef/Well for me in response to that would be that since I'm the person who has the vote and this Council has in the majority can direct our City Manager that we want certain things to be done it would be behoove me to be able to sit where I can ask a question of someone who comes and complains or has a concem rather than me sit off to the side and let the PCRB conduct I would much rather do it as Eruie is suggesting that it be in front of Council at our behest and then I can get my questions answered and be sure that I'm clear what the whole issue is about so for me to sit at a forum, I have done this once and there's certainly had I been sitting at the front as a Councilor I might well have had questions for folks who spoke that evening, I didn't speak because I didn't think it was appropriate for me to speak that evening. Kanner/Actually I think you make a good point, I think there should be interaction among the bodies that are there, the Council Members, the Police Citizens Review Board and the other people I think that would be a healthy thing that in a sense figuratively and maybe literally we're sitting around the same table talking about these issues. And then Councilors since we're there if we want to pursue it or the PCRB if they want to pursue it we have different angles to pursue it and Council can certainly go further so I like the idea of that interaction among all the parties there I think that leads to a healthier discussion and we'll get some points of view from all parties that we might not have gotten there, a synergy that take place and that kind of collaboration. I think that's what the top cities are doing at the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 49 National League of Cities when I went to the conference last year I learned about how Washington DC was doing some of those kind of collaborations and a number of cities are doing that and I think that's a good route to go down. Champion/I'm really having some difficulty with this one, the more I stand, I think people need to have a forum that's different than with City Council, I think if all of us are there it's kind of a formal meeting, I think it's, I think we're different than the Police Citizens Review Board. I think the thing that bothers me about those open forums that the PCRB has although I support them, support their having them, is that they don't all the time stick to the agenda, and maybe that's fine, if people have something they want to say they ought to be able to say it, but I think the thing that bothers a lot of us about those forums, it becomes kind of a police bashing and that's not the purpose of the forum. If people have a specific complaint I think they ought to have somebody to talk to besides us, or just some idea. Vanderhoef/And that's why I. Champion/And that' s why I have problems with it but I don't want to take that away from them, I just wish them was some way that they could make sure that what's going on at those forums is productive and not just nonsense. I mean it's probably not nonsense to the people who are saying it so I'll take that word back. O'Donnell/Too late. Champion/Too late, it probably is but I think that's what bothers some of us about those forums but I do think it's important that people have somebody to talk to besides us in a formal setting and we're always in kind of a formal setting. Vanderhoef/But they have that opportunity in my eyes to do that at any commission meeting, we have neighborhoods that go to Parks and Rec., we have folks who come to P & Z meetings, and that forum is available at every single meeting of the PCRB so I think that' s where those opportunities are available. Champion/Oh sure it's available but then your going there as an individual to again kind of a formal setting and I think a lot of people would be very uncomfortable doing that. That is a formal setting, your going in. Vanderhoef/Yea. Champion/It's a formal setting and if somebody has a valid issue with a policy or I don't have any problems with them telling it to the PCRB, I'm not sure which way is the best way but, I don't know. Lehman/Any forum. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 50 Vanderhoef/When things become a big issue in our city there tends to be a group of folk who get together and recognize it and we see that when they go and say these are the things that I want for my neighborhood, these are the things I want for my park, these are the things I want for my police officers, that's the same no matter which commission they go to. But if it truly is rising to the level of concern in the larger community, I think they will go as their group and say each one of them will take their five minutes or whatever the commission allows and make their statements. Wilburn/I guess I share that experience from being on Parks and Rec. seeing well, I'm just thinking what groups came to us, whether it was problem you know, the dog parks, some of the stuff arotmd Hickory Hill, the trail nest people you know organizing came to Parks and Rec. with that. But even something that wasn't perceived as a "problem" the Shakespearian Theater came to Parks and Rec. and so I guess I have that same experience. Atkins/Ernie can I make a quick comment? Lehman/Yes. Atkins/You know since your debate is sort of who's best equipped, I don't mean that to sound negative to here these kinds of issues, John and I were just, if you read point 2, the forum does not appear to be so much the issue. Kanner/Wait which point? Atkins/Point 2 in John's memo Steve, is that they're proposing to review policies and we're into debate about public hearings, at least that' s what I'm hearing you say because we keep spinning back to, if you want a board or commission to conduct a hearing on a certain issue, your the City Council all you have to do is say so. Vanderhoef/That's right, that' s exactly the direction I'd like to go. Atkins/I mean and that goes for all boards and commissions, I mean all the boards and commissions are ultimately your employees, and will do your bidding as you instruct them to do. Go ahead Steven excuse me. Kanner/It seems that last meeting we divided up these two issues, the issue number 2 is different I think than what Emie brought up for 8-8-8 (B) (7) or at least he's attempting to make the difference and that's what the Council did at the last meeting, the majority said there is a difference, that one is initiating policy review and I agree with John' s perspective, the majority doesn't and so we separated, and then Eleanor said should we do that through all of the different places in the ordinance that talk about this issue and then it was brought up I think by Ross that This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 51 no there are some places that we want to keep the same. And then this 8-8-8 (B) (7) is one that we said we're going to keep the same. Now Emie is bringing back the new proposal, is that? That's my understanding. Atkins/I'm not sure, I'm trying to track the discussion to see sort of where your heading. Karr/Can I also make a clarification? Between the two memos you've got Eleanor's memo and you've got PCRB John Watson's memo, Item 2 on John's memo is very different than Item 2 of Eleanor's memo. Lehman/Right. Karr/And we're meshing them together and I think they're very clearly different issues. Lehman/I think we said in John's memo, Item 2 and number 2 in that to help us make informed decision regarding specific complaints and I think we said that we felt that was appropriate. Champion/Right. Lehman/But we did not feel it was appropriate to initiate reviews. Karr/Right but John in his second paragraph of Item 2 notes additional sections that he and PCRB would like to remain unchanged, and I think those are very different sections in the sections we're referring to here. John Watson/(can't hear). Lehman/John come on up yea. Atkins/And while John's walking up there, prior to the PCRB, a couple of you may recall when we started the whole accreditation process and standards and policies at that time RJ had proposed that we were actually thinking about having a citizens review to help us step through that process, that got set aside when we decided to go the PCRB route. Watson/Actually we declined the offer of the Chief because we were in the middle of our start up and we just didn't see time to review policies. When we talk about policies in my memo number 2, we're talking about very specific policies called general orders that govem very specific things, there's a journal order on vehicle pursuit, there's a general order on searches and seizures there's a general orders on arrests and so on like that, they're very specific general orders that give guidelines to officers on how to do specific things. We have been conducting a regular review of certain ones of those that we feel have come up or might come up that might come under the purview of our complaints. So that' s what I mean This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 52 to enhance our own understanding of policies, procedures, and practices which is part of our own education, we need to understand those general orders. And the Chief or one of the captains come and we ask questions and they explain it and we give them what if this, what if that, and it's within the context of the meeting. We also might do that because a question comes up in a complaint that we don't quite understand the general order and how it might apply to a situation. We ask the Chiefor a captain to come and answer our questions about that. The third thing we have heard complaints about specific things in our public forums and we hear them personally on the street and so on and sometimes we decide to review a specific general order in response to that citizen complaint, it's a general thing. And what we do if we feel there's a suggestion or a comment we make that to the Chief, we don't expect them to get back to us and report to us what he did about it, that's his business, we just make a suggestion on our own initiative. And I guess what we would like is to keep to not have to ask you permission to do that basically. Holecek/And if I can clarify there are two different issues being discussed here, one is as John has just gone through the oversight or review of specific general orders and policies and police procedures which the Council at the last meeting as my understanding and as drafted by Eleanor is saying that those shall be reviewed by the PCRB at the request of the City Council, City Manager or Police Chief and that' s the issue you were just discussing. The second issue is the holding of the informational meetings. Watson/And that' s a separate issue and please don't confuse the two, I mean of the two I think it's important that we not have to ask permission every time we want to look at a general order and ask the Chief come and answer questions. Champion/And I think what you just said clarified coming from me that's never been clarified because when you were talking about policy before I thought you were talking about this. Watson/We don't want to do all that work, there are only certain those policies that we have an interest that interface in a way with civilians that could result in complaints, there are general policies that address the administrative things too and we just don't need to be involved in that. Kanner/Do we get in the report to the Council do we get the report on those reviews and suggestions that you made to the Chief?. Watson/They are in the minutes. Kanner/It seems to me we should get them in the report in a regular report. Watson/We summarize them in our annual report. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 53 Kanner/You do, so it's okay. Do you have a listing of 1, 2, 3 we made these suggestions throughout the year? Watson/Right some of them might be suggestions in the context of a complaint, and others might be not but both and we summarize them in the annual report every year. Vanderhoef/So John help me clarify then how this relates to if your asking for general orders from the Chief, how does this relate to all of these Internet searches and so forth about policies and procedures and so forth? Watson/There aren't any Intemet searches that I know about policies and procedures, there are Interact searches about news articles and what other communities are doing, other police civilian review boards are doing. Vanderhoef/Well that's what I'm talking about. Watson/Yea and that you know it helps us understand our field, I mean we're people that are still learning here, this is new in Iowa, we're trying to learn all we can about our jobs and you know I don't know how much time that takes, there was a question of time but I mean if the staff doesn't do that we could probably do that ourselves if we can find somebody with the initiative to do it or get an intem, that' s what a lot of departments do. You know it's just part of our own education, we're trying to understand the straggles of other cities and how they're dealing with them and it's been helpful to us it's not probably a vital function but it's been important. We have new members coming in and it helps them get educated too. Vanderhoef/Well these, this is part of the reason that I question all of this continual review, I understand having to learn about certain procedures but it just seems to me that as there's turnover on the board true they will learn from other board members as they move along as we all do but how much of that needs to be done other than in real specific for a complaint that you have received. I guess weighing those two and the amount of time and how much carry over there is with that information. Watson/Well it has to be done periodically because we forget, we're human, our memories aren't (can't hear). Vanderhoef/Oh really. Watson/And for instance it was about six months when we actually sat down and handled a complaint and we had to go back through our whole complaint process to make sure that we remembered our steps that we need to take. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 54 O'Donnell/Your last complaint John was six months ago? Watson/No the last one that we reviewed I think, we've had, we just finished one, we just, you'll be getting it. O'Donnell/Is that the second or third this year? Watson/We're reviewing, this is number one for this year and we have one other one so far. O'Donnell/So for a total of two for the year. Watson/So far this year, calendar year. Kanner/John, was the procedure on how police enter a building now that was changed, was that done before the Police Citizens Review Board came into being or? Watson/Yea I'm pretty sure it was. Right RJ. Lehman/I think it was too. VanderhoefJ Yea. R J/Yea. Kanner/Did you review that at all? Watson/We have I think since then but it wasn't in context of a complaint. Kanner/And what did you find about that? Watson/Boy. Kanner/Basically that it was working well, that it was a good change? Watson/I don't remember, I mean, I honestly we probably did it in our first year and I. Vanderhoef/Maybe he doesn't know what it was before. Kanner/What? Watson/We probably did that in our first year, it's probably one we looked at, and it was, we didn't do it right away, it was kind of a, we knew it was a sensitive area and we, but we took a look at it and I think we felt what was there that we saw, we This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 55 didn't compare it to the old one, we don't know the old one but we thought it made some sense but we were just starting out at that time too so I'm not sure. Kanner/Well I guess my point is that it's good to have that them, that often times they'll confirm that it's a good change if change does happen or that perhaps some change is needed. And probably it's indicative that you don't remember, that it was probably, you probably felt it was a good change that was made and you said okay we've got that there, that's good and I think that's a good thing to have in place to have the Police Citizens Review to be able to initiate that kind of thing. O'Donnell/Do you have your own office in the Senior Center is that what I understand? Watson/We have an office up on the top floor of the Senior Center, yea. Kanner/They share with two other groups. Watson/No the one we have now is just ours. Kanner/Oh you moved into your own like a year ago or so? Watson/Something like that. Karr/No we share. Watson/We're still sharing? Karr/Yea we still share, it's a different type of sharing but you still share. Kanner/The insurance group and (can't hear). Karr/Well no that has been changed, we don't share with the same three no. Watson/I'm sorry I was, when I go to visit Sandy she' s the only one there so I'm not aware that. Karr/Right on that day that's true, on those days. Watson/She's the only one there. Karr/And we currently are relocated because of the pedestrian skywalk that's being put in, so we're located in the Mezannine. Kanner/Oh. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 56 Watson/You know on the public forums if I may take just a second on that, I think it's an important thing to do, if you will do that would be great but I'm not sure you will and I honestly don't understand what the concern is. Lehman/I think it's probably the manner in which they're conducted more than anything else, I think if they were conducted. Watson/It's an open forum. Lehrnan/I realize, but you see even you know we have public hearings and we have public discussion at Council meetings but we still have rules. Watson/Yea. Lehman/And I think anytime you have a public discussion you've got folks that, you need rules, we all need rules to live by. And if forums are used as an opportunity to bash the police, they probably lose a lot of their value. Watson/Yea. Lehman/And I think, but I do think that those sort of things could be controlled by the PCRB in fact I think had the forums been a more productive, a little different venue we probably wouldn't be talking about it. Kanner/Ernie what percentage of the people bash the police at the forums? Champion/It doesn't make any difference. Kanner/Yea it does Emie is saying they're basically used for that, I don't know, is that the case? I haven't been to one and I'd like to know what. Lehman/No but the thing is, well I think we've got a couple people here that have been to them and I think they pretty much confirmed that. Kanner/Bashing, let's say there's 10 people how many of those 10 bash the police? Watson/Let me just say I, the first one I would say there was some bashing, but I would say it was a milder bashing than what you got yourself that first year (can't hear). Lehman/Had to be. Watson/And if it's there it needs an outlet probably and why not let people speak. I mean I think the worst thing to do is try to stifle it. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 57 Lehman/But it also, it also is counter productive to give credibility to things that are not credible. Watson/Well I don't think the last one did that. Lehman/I didn't go. Watson/And I know (can't hear) there and she disagrees with that but there were other people that were there and the comments that I had including from the officer was he thought it was useful thing so. Lehman/Well you know police work is necessarily work that people who come into contact with police generally find less than pleasant, I mean your getting a ticket for this, your doing, so your basically dealing with the population that is not happy with the police because of their improper or perceived improper actions. Watson/Yea. Lehman/So you know it's, that' s a tough, that' s a tough group of folks to work with, I believe very sincerely, and I think everybody here believes it, anybody who has a legitimate complaint against the police needs avenue to have that complaint reviewed by someone non partisan, I will say that I believe you group of folks we couldn't have asked for a better group of folks who have been very objective in reviewing complaints. And l think that's very important, and lthink basically from my perspective and I can't speak for the rest of the Council, the biggest purpose of the Police Review Board is to protect the citizens who have legitimate complaints to hear those complaints, make recommendations, whether or not they concur with the Police Chief or not it doesn't make any difference, I think they're entitled to those reviews and I think that your board is the group that should hear those reviews. I think that it's easy to find folks who aren't happy with the police, we hear about them about every Council meeting, I mean we get folks who come down and tell us basically don't follow the state law, you know don't enforce the law, we don't like that. And I think that, I don't know if your hearing what I'm trying to say I really believe there is a function for the PCRB but I can tell you that I believe that without looking very hard you can find a lot of people who aren't happy with the police, and they can tell you every single policy the police have they don't happen to like. Most of which probably are pretty good by your own group I think you've determined that. So where do we find the middle ground where you can be effective in handling those complaints yet at the same time not so engrossed in looking for. I can understand reviewing general orders, I don't see. Watson/You know we've been in existence four years and we've had three forums, I don't think we're engrossed in that, I think it's just a service. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 58 Lehman/Oh no, no, I'm just saying forum, I mean you folks work hard, I mean you probably work about as hard as any commission we've ever had. I don't think we ever envisioned that you would be into the kind of work that your into doing and I don't, and obviously you feel it's worth your time or you wouldn't be doing it. I guess I sense on the part of the Council anyway that we don't really see that there probably is as much work there as your finding. Is that? Pfab/I know there's a lot of work goes on, believe me. Lehman/I'm not saying it's not work because I think it is. Pfab/I mean, it's work that the community benefits from, so does the City Council, so does the police force. Lehman/Well the question is what are we going to do with the PCRB? Go ahead. Champion/John on this number 4 that you have on your memo, now does that give you the review of policies that you wanted, is that what you mean by (can't hear) saying the following? Watson/Well this number 4 has to do with the difference to the Chiefs expertise and the reasons why that we have to give to disagree with the Chief. But there was an added paragraph there that Eleanor has in bold that just kind of sanctions our ability to comment even though we might not disagree with the chief formally on the allegation. There might be something about the, that complaint that we want to send a message and it allows us to send a message without disagreeing with the chief formally. And it was my understanding at your work session at your last meeting that you thought that was appropriate for us to do that not just about conduct but about police policy, procedure or practice. In other words if it wasn't the misconduct of the officer but there was something, a flaw in a policy that we felt we uncovered in the course of a complaint that we could comment on that to the chief and ask him to take a look at it, ask him to change it, you know and that was something that you thought was, I thought, you thought that was a good thing. O'Dounell/John would define policy to me. Watson/It's a general order, this is a policy, there' s a policy on vehicle pursuits for instance, and I use this an example, we hear about these high speed pursuits in places and somebody gets killed, a kid gets killed or something like that, that is not okay with Iowa City. The general order is very specific about high speed pursuits, they should not occur unless there's a very fight criteria are met. O'Donnell/Or potential danger too. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 59 Watson/Yea because they often cause more problems than other so the law allows that I think but the Chief and the department have said we're not going to go as far as the law has allowed us to so that's their policy. O'Donnell/But see the point is John there' s exceptions to that, now if a guy's going down Riverside Drive shooting a gun out the window, obviously we're going to encourage pursuit before he hurts somebody. Watson/Yea. O'Donnell/How many complaints has the PCRB had since it's existence? Do you know that figure right on the top of your head? Watson/Probably in the range of 40. O'Donnell/And did we have like 17 or 20 from one person? Watson/There were about 14 from one I think. O'Donnell/From one person, and we've had two this year, see I'm kind of going along with Emie, I mean we're talking about, it was my intention the PCRB was to listen to complaints of the citizens of Iowa City. Watson/Well what. O'Donnell/And I don't know that anybody's qualified to get in and recommend change about law and policy and procedure to the police department. Watson/Well the ordinance gave us that power, what we're saying is we'd like to keep that power, we're not saying we're perfect and we can't change it all we can do is recommend after intensive study make it a recommendation, and that's all, we're just asking to keep the power to make a recommendation that's all. Lehman/John in Eleanor' s this item 9 it says "and to allow the Board to comxnent on aspects of an incident with which it is concerned not withstanding it's affirmants of the police chief or City Manager report in accordance with the reasonable basis standard of review which I think is what we did say that we do expect you to be able to comment, you may agree, you may sustain the Chiefs report but this does say you will be allowed to comment on the aspects of the incidents with which are concerned. Isn't that what we said last week? Watson/I'm sorry I don't have what you're reading from? Vanderhoef/It's the agenda. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 60 Watson/Is this Eleanor's? Lehman/Yea it's Agenda Item Number 9 if you read the last portion of that I think that really says what your saying what we said two weeks ago. Kanner/Your referring to John' s number 4 that he was just talking about? Watson/(Can't hear). Atkins/Microphone John. Lehman/Microphone John please. Watson/(can't hear) It wasn't just misconduct it was also one of these general orders, a specific policy. For instance if there was a high speed vehicle and something happened and it wasn't one of the specific things that criteria that was mentioned in the ordinance, or in the general policy, we might recommend that that added, that the officer's allowed to pursuit in case of X. Lehman/Well wouldn't this cover (can't hear) allow the Board to comment on aspects of an incident with which it is concerned? Not withstanding it's affirmants of the Police Chief or Manager' s report, doesn't that do what your just saying you'd like to do? Watson/I think so and I think. Lehman/I mean I think that' s what we intended. Watson/Yea and I think Eleanor's paragraph the way it's written restricts it to misconduct. Kanner/Are you looking at 8-8-8 (7)? Lehman/I'm looking at page 9 on the Agenda, the comment section before the, that we're going to vote on tomorrow night. Holecek/Emie I would more specifically direct you to page 6 of Eleanor's memo and that is the bolded paragraph that is the actual language, the comment is not the actual language being proposed, the actual language be proposed is dealing with the allegations of misconduct. Watson/No I've got it here it is. Lehman/I don't think I've got it. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 61 O'Donnell/You know the whole thing is, I believe that this Council and the City is committed to listening to the complaints citizens feel they have and I think we've committed to about $160,000 and under a four year period and you know what that's a lot of money per complaint. Watson/You know what how much of the $160,000 was spent last year? O'Donnell/How much was it, was it $50,0007 Pfab/Probably quite a bit less than that I believe. O'Donnell/Well how much did we spend on two complaints? Watson/Our budget the first year, our budget the first year was less than $40,000, I'm not sure where the $160,000 comes from. O'Donnell/But since the inception, but John is part of that budget is something sitting on a computer on a daily basis searching for other policies and other states, that's part of the budget? Watson/There's a person that's half time and she's assigned, and her time is assigned to our budget, I honestly don't know how she spends her days, I'm not there but some of that time I'm sure is searching. And as I say in my memo I'm not convinced that anymore we need that half time, you know half time was adequate the first two years when the work load was a lot heavier so. Kanner/And I think one of the reasons we might want to consider John' s point number four about adding those words police department, policy, procedure or practice because it is more than just complaints, and it is, they do more than just handle those 40 complaints, from those folks, they look into those other issues and I think it is appropriate to add that in Section 8-8-7 (B) (2) page number 6 as Sarah was mentioning. O'Donnell/Well I disagree Steven. Wilbum/I think, John I think in our conversation I think you convinced me about ability to look at general orders, I'm not really interested in recommendations suggestions that go against what state law and I know that's not what your looking for but. Kanner/Who said anyone about state law except Emie? O'Donnell/Did you say that Emie? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 62 Lehman/Pardon. I said we get people coming to Council meetings asking Council or complaining about police officers enfoming state laws (can't hear). Kanner/And actually I've never heard anyone say that and. Wilburn/Well I have. O'Donnell/I have. Vanderhoef/I have. Kanner/For City Council change the that we should change the state law? Champion/I agree with you, I mean when you put that in perspective for me today I feel we need to do that. I don't know why I have so much trouble with all this. Watson/It's very difficult. Champion/It's very difficult and we kind of felt like we had to rush through it because of that sunset clause, I'm not interested in getting rid of PCRB but I also, and I don't want to kind of increase your powers, but I simply don't want to put you in a position where you can't function because I think you should be able to function, it's terrible to say but I think we need you, maybe Iowa City doesn't need you but you know what we might need you so I really and I feel like I'm (can't hear). Pfab/Connie. Watson/Anymore for me I'll sit down and let you guys go? Lehman/We may have but we'll ask you. Atkins/Thank you sir. Pfab/Connie that was why when I proposed earlier let's just say that either let's just solve the sunset thing and then go on and take our time and work our way through this but it's now a squeeze play trying to get out through the tube, we've got to have all of ducks in a row and before we'll open the gate and let it go and that's. O'Donnell/I'm not sure what any of that means Irvin. Pfab/Okay. O'Donnell/But we're here to talk about what we think their responsibility should be. Lehman/That's right and I don't know how much progress we're making. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 63 O'Donnell/We're making very little. Lehman/I agree. Vanderhoef/What I really would like to know is whether there are four people that are interested in having the forums come through the auspices of the City Council. Pfab/I for one am not. O'Donnell/I am interested in that, I have been to a forum and I really really think it was out of control. Pfab/Well you and I went to different fogs. O'Donnell/Together right. No, I'm saying I saw, you know there are some people, we have one person, I understood it was 17 complaints against the police, there are some people that are never going to like any part of law enforcement or law enforcement officers but they're necessary and anytime you force the law to pull over somebody for speeding. Lehman/They're mad. O'Donnell/They're certaining, what? Lehman/They're mad when you pull them over. O'Dormell/They're certainly going to be upset and you could have a complaint pile. I think the PCRB has shown we have a very very good police department in this town, we've got two complaints this year, we have 40 in 4 years approximately and we have, I'm not sure I thought it was 17 but 14 from one person. I mean I'm for, I really agree with Dee and Emie that these forums should be at the Council' s wish. Champion/Well I could give up the forum I guess but now I want, now I want. O'Donnell/It's late Connie. Champion/I know it is, I mean I was against the forums from the beginning and then I think, I don't know, I guess I'm really wishy washy on this one and I apologize because I keep changing my mind because I keep hearing something that I didn't really hear before. (END OF 01-63 SIDE TWO) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 64 Holecek/Conducting the general information hearings that the Board may request the City Council to hold those general information hearings. Champion/Yea that' s fine. Wilburn/Yes. Pfab/Could you state that again? Holecek/The way I have it is in 8-8-8 (B) (7) drafted as the Board may request that the City Council hold general information hearings conceming police department practices, procedures or written policies and such hearings will be public. Wilburn/And I agree that I think thinking they can make (can't hear). Pfab/But are you saying that' s the only way that they can hold it? They have to take it through the City Council to do it. Holecek/The Board may request that the Council do it, the Council will have of course the authority to do it at their own accord at any time. Pfab/Well what about the Police Citizens Review Board have it the authority to do it on their own? Holecek/That is what, that' s what we were discussing that the Board would no longer have the power to do the hearings on their own. Pfab/Well then I would be (can't hear) that. Wilbum/I think they can make a, take advantage of the public time at the meetings so. Lehman/We do have, you have that correct Sarah. Holecek/Okay. Kanner/So the majority, so there's switch of vote. Vanderhoef/There' s five. Kanner/From some people from our last time where we agreed. Champion/Well plus the PCRB (can't hear) not important. O'Dounell/There sure is a lot of discussion about majority recently and you know what majority or minority we're all sitting here trying to represent Iowa City it really This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 65 would be nice if we could come together on that and quit talking majority and minority because I'm not sure, I'm majority some times and the minority other times so I've filled both of those shoes. Wilburn/I think I would like to, the discussion about being able to look at general orders, I would support that. Champion/Me too. Vanderhoef/General orders in the limited versus the massive over the policy and procedure. Wilbum/I'm not sure I know what your. Holecek/I believe there are two issues. Lehman/Okay frame them. Holecek/One is giving the Board general authority to review police policies, procedures, and practices in general and the other one is raised by John is in the commentary associated with a specific complaint. Vanderhoef/And a specific complaint I agree with that just to review all of them, the other scenario I don't. Lehman/Are general orders? I mean that's public information I presume. Holecekd Yes I believe so. Lehman/It would be pretty hard to tell them they can't (can't hear). Vanderhoef/RJ said yes. Champion/Yea I'm with you Ross I support that. Lehman/Okay she' s framed a couple issues for us, do we want and John requested from us that, tell me what John said Sarah because you can say it better than I can about being able to comment on procedures or whatever relative to a specific complaint. Holecek/Right in review of the different standard the City Council suggested that the standard remain the same but the Board has the ability to comment, and I believe this was the paragraph I referred you to in Eleanor' s memo and John has suggested that with respect to the allegations of conduct that they may so comment on the officer's conduct with respect to a specific complaint. But he This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of Jtme 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 66 also suggested they have the ability to comment on a specific policy, procedure or practice in conjunction with that specific complaint. Lehman/Right and I think that's, I thought that' s what we said, or tried to say. Champion/Earlier. Lehman/Two weeks ago. Holecek/Okay. Atkins/Sarah question, does that mean they go through the process and settle the complaint, that is sustain not sustain and then as a separate statement comment on that? Lehman/I think the. Atkins/I mean the process is to settle a complaint, walk it through. Holecek/Let' s not use the term settle, it's too confusing for me, it's to confusing for me, the term settle is just way to confusing for me, resolve. Atkins/Resolve. Holecek/Review. Atkins/Resolve, they deal with the issue, bring it through to a point of confusion, send off their findings then as a separate statement of concern policy, procedure whatever they refer to it? Holecek/I believe that is what is being envisioned here. Atkins/Okay. Lehman/Steve I think it's kind of like there's a basketball game that's 98-99, we know who won. Atkins/All right. Lehman/The same team wins 99-12, there probably isn't much comment about a 99-12, but a 99-98 might deserve some comment. O'Donnell/It doesn't have anything to do with the camel head under the table either. I have no idea what you just said. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 67 Atkins/Well it's disappointing but I understood it. O'Donnell/You did, now I really feel bad. Lehman/What's your pleasure folks? Holecek/So we have two issues, the first one is the general authority to review police policies, procedures and practices. Pfab/Is that so stated on John's request? Vanderhoef/This is the broad one. Holecek/That's the broad one so to speak yes. Pfab/In Eleanor's or in John's? Holecek/I think John has addressed them both, it would be number 2 in John' s memo and number 4 is the second issue of John's memo. Atkins/You can safe to say this is substantially what they're doing now. Champion/Yes. Pfab/I think there might be one additional, is there one additional on number 4 or what? (Can't hear) Lehman/John would you come back up again please? Vanderhoef/The broad issue is the one where there's lots more search. Watson/No it's not search, it's not search it's taking a specific Iowa City general order and us reading it, it's usually two or three pages long. Vanderhoef/That's the narrow one. Watson/This is number 2, my number 2. Vanderhoef/Yea. Watson/But we do it for different reasons. Vanderhoef/But the broad one is where the search is I was trying to. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 68 All talking (Can't hear) Watson/No that has nothing to do with policy, the search is, the search, get rid of search, I mean we don't want to do search, you don't want to search with staff, we'll do it our self. The policy review is a review of a general order, a specific general order for instance on let's say searches of people, searches of a person, and it says it talks about the legality of it, gives a background, it's a very well written, very specific general order that says what the officer should do, why they should do it and some guidelines. We review those because it's those general orders that often impact a complaint or a complaint is in reference in the context to one of these general orders. Wilburn/That's a logistic of how you enforce the law. Watson/Yea we have to understand, one of the reasons we can disagree with the chief is because if the officer disobeyed a policy, okay, we have to understand the policy. Holecek/I'm sorry John go ahead. I want to bring it into black and white so you can see exactly what we're looking at. Page 3 of Eleanor's memo at the very top under N, after the last Council meeting I believe the amendment was suggested that at the request of the City Council, City Manager or Police Chief that the board would have the review authority as written in that paragraph 0. Lehman/That's right. Holecek/And what John is saying is that the Board wants to have that review authority without being requested to do so. Watson/And it's not terribly time consuming for staff, it does take the presence of the Chief or one of the captain's to be there, and they're there anyway, they come to every meeting but they have to prepare a little bit, review it themselves to be able to answer our questions and so on because it's a learning process for us, we need to understand those orders and what the officers are expected to do. So that's one, general information, education for ourselves. The second reason would be to help us understand a specific complaint, how that policy affects a specific complaint. Lehman/That I understand, got a complaint, I think you really have got to go to, anything that affects that complaint should be fair game in trying to assess what occurred. Vanderhoef/I think that's what we are all agreeing on that piece of it and so I think that one is not a question. Watson/In our most recent we reviewed two different general orders that were affected. Lehman/But they were relative to a complaint. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 69 Watson/This complaint yea. But we've had a regular review almost every meeting we've tried to do one general order a meeting just so we understand it, just to review it and it's not with the purpose of making recommendations it's mostly for the purpose of understanding it. And sometimes we make a suggestion, but it's just a suggestion we. Champion/Right. Kanner/Your proposing these three sections be put back in their original form. Watson/Exactly, that allows us to do that without asking your permission or waiting for you to direct us to do that. I mean we'll prepare you with a request because we feel we have to do that, we need to do that in order to be an effective board, we have to review policy and it's incidental whether we recommend a change or not, we need to do that as part of our complaint review and just as our, for our own education we need to do that. Champion/Right. Holecekd So at the last meeting these three sections were amended to say that there would only be review and comment upon the request of the City Manager, City Council, or Police Chief. Pfab/I think we, I would propose we take that off. O'Donnell/I agreed with it last time and I agree with it today. Lehman/Except as it relates to a complaint. Holecek/That' s the second issue, two issues. Watson/And number 4 I'm just trying to clarify it doesn't just pertain to misconduct but also we could comment on policy also which means a general order basically or a procedure or practice. Wilburn/And given that, given that you'll do your own web searches all along. Champion/Right. Wilburn/I would support that, I know your not (can't hear). Holecek/Do we have some agreement on the review of policy and procedure and practice either on request or? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 70 Lehman/Do we want review to be by request of the Chief?. Holecek/City Council. Lehman/City Manager or the Council or do we want that to be at the (can't hear) of the PCRB? O'Donnell/I thought we decided last time. Lehman/We did. Champion/We did. Lehman/We're asking, we're asking again if that, we still concur with what we said last, the last time we said it would be at the direction of the Council, the police chief or the City Manager except as it relates to a complaint, ifa complaint comes up automatically they address that. Champion/No. Vanderhoef/That's the way I want it. Champion/Again we have an interpretation of language here, (can't hear) okay when I read this before to review policy to me is to review it, to criticize it or to improve it, but what John I think is saying it's to under, it's to look at it, it doesn't mean they won't have a suggestion for improving but how does language, how you interpret this language, now he has totally said something different tonight than I read when I read it before. To review something to me means to, what it call it, like you go to a movie you rate it but what do you call it? Holecek/Critique. Lehman/Critique. Champion/Critique, now what he's saying to me tonight is to review policy, to understand it and I can see where they'd have to know how the police operate before they could ever make a decision on whether a complaint is valid or not. Now do you wait, do you get a complaint so that you can read all the policies before you can act on that complaint? I think it is part of the learning cycle the way he stated it tonight. Arn I right? O'Donnell/But we've had two complaints this year. Lehman/Or else you read. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 71 Champion/I don't care. O'Donnell/I do. Champion/If you have no complaints that would be wonderful. O'Donnell/Yea but I mean you could go through this whole policy and then six months later have to go through it again so I'm just, I had envisioned the PCRB as being a bunch of average citizens like us. Champion/They are. O'Donnell/Absolutely that would listen to a complaint of a citizen and make a recommendation, I mean when you get a complaint I think it's fine to go through and learn about so you can comment on it effectively but you know I, don't think we ever envisioned them, and it's not really their fault because they were formed and they kind of took on life as they grew and I just. Champion/I don't think so. Watson/(can't hear). Champion/(Can't hear) So I know. Holecek/Well if this helps, one the first issue about the three sections that they can review policy, procedure is kind of out of a factual context, that means just reviewing it. The other one is in the factual context of an actual complaint, which sometimes helps put flesh on actually what is happening. Champion/Right. Holecek/So if that helps make the distinction in your deliberation. Lehman/I believe the later of the two is critical from the complaint. Vanderhoef/Yea that one is fine. Lehman/Entitled to and should review the policies and whatever that are relative to that complaint because obviously the issue is the rage, beyond that I'm not sure that I (can't hear). Pfab/That's how I feel. Vanderhoef/I don't, I think there's lots of, I agree Emie I'll say that up front and I think it is because we have change over, we do forget, we review every time, if I was This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 72 going to be doing a complaint I'd be review them anyway just for my own edification and I think that's important and so I like the way it is written as we produced it last time. Wilbum/And because of a better understanding of what the general orders are I'm willing to go ahead and go beyond that and allow them to review them and not have to logistically, I think they'll end up asking us can they review quite a bit anyway so I'm willing to go ahead and give that to them after. Champion/(can't hear). Wilbum/Nope. Holecek/So in the general context we have four who think that they should, it should revert back to the way previously written that they don't have to be requested to review policies, practices and procedures. Lehman/Are there four people who want to do that? Vanderhoef/There's at least, okay. Holecek/Now on to the second issue and I think I can count from there but that in the context of a specific complaint commentary on policy, practice and procedure. (Can't hear) Holecek/Okay. Lehman/So that now if I read this correctly we have reversed what we said last week and we have added that public meetings will be at the request of the PCRB may request. Holecek/That the Council hold them. Lehman/Okay that's the two changes that we made after this hour of discussion. Is that correct? Holecek/Well actually three. Lehman/What's the third? Holecek/You've added that in the context of commentary even though they agree with the Chief's ultimate finding there may be commentary on a policy, practice or procedure. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 73 Pfab/I'm going to ask, are we saying that we are not going to give the Police Citizen's Review Board the right to go and hold a public fortun on their own initiative? Lehman/That' s correct. Kanner/Correct. Pfab/We are denying them that. Champion/Right. Kanner/And your saying point number 4 in John's memo we are accepting that? Holecekf That' s correct. Kanner/Okay. Lehman/Now is that, does everybody understand that? Holecek/And point number 3, I know we haven't discussed it specifically but it's a very simple clarifying language change, I agree with John's point. Lehman/Thank you. Champion/Oh right. HolecekJ So if you don't mind I'll take care of that. Thank you. Lehman/Can this be by tomorrow evening, incorporated into? Holecek/Yes. Lehman/Then we will be able to see the changes tomorrow night and if we chose we may act first time on it tomorrow night. Holecekf If you so choose do have me do so I shall do. Vanderhoef/There we go. Lehman/We do choose. Other comments, other comments on the PCRB, I think we've. O'Dounell/You know I think we all, we all want the citizens to have a voice in Iowa City but I think they need direction and you really have to go out and attend one of these forums to understand it was out of hand. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 74 Champion/They're gone. O'Dounell/And I know. Lehman/No, no, I think there's a very real possibility or probability that this Council will be conducting forums. O'Donnell/And I don't have a problem with that. Lehman/Set the rules. O'Donnell/That's the important thing Emie. Lehman/All right dandy. And we have come to council time. Council Time Champion/I have a couple things. You know I've had people mention it to me and I keep forgetting to mention, somebody had mentioned (can't hear) and that is about cafe's downtown. Atkins/Cafe's. Champion/And it's been on the pending list before and now it's not on there. Vanderhoef/Outdoor cafe's. Karr/Sidewalk cafe' s. Atkins/We have a sidewalk cafe ordinance and we have a number of them, can you give me a specific question? Champion/Well I thought when we. Wilburn/There's something in the ped mall where the restaurants were going to be able to allow in the middle there to have. Atkins/We went through, yea we went through a discussion such as that and we could not find a way to make it work, taking liquor across, back and forth. Lehman/Separation between the buildings. Atkins/Separation between the buildings, it just, couldn't make it work. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 75 Karr/And our current ordinance does not prohibit the uses, please don't misunderstand that is that there is a way to do it and that is that they remain contiguous. Atkins/But then the problem was when you have a contiguous to a building, we have for example we one merchant that has a restaurant next door to him and if you put it contiguous to the building that means when you walk around it you don't walk by his window, your further out into the lane. Cormie I when Marian and a nmnber we beat it to death. Karr/Yes Connie are you wondering why there isn't more of them or your wondering what particular part? We spent quite a bit of time at staff talking about this and I guess. Lehman/College Street. Champion/College Street. Karr/The plaza. Kanner/We were told we were going to, because we were talking about the alcohol ordinance that the memo came to us that we would discuss it later or wait some other direction so we're bringing it up now. Karr/Right and I think Steve' s summary is accurate, we as a staff did meet, did find out two major issues, one that is can exist, in the configuration that it is right now being adjacent to, just like they are on other streets, we were not going to treat the plaza any differently than we treated any other downtown. Champion/But what if they wanted to have, well it's not, for instance a restaurant to me that wouldn't have a plaza to put a restaurant on, they should be treated different as far as I'm concerned. But what happens if they don't serve alcohol then? Atkins/I, we didn't really talk about that, we assume that's part of the deal, that's such a high profit item for most of the restaurants they want to serve it. Karr/Many of our, there are very few restaurants downtown, very few and there can be and it's a provision, and they certainly could apply for it, we have provisions in place. Champion/And what makes it illegal to carry the glass of wine across the brick? Karr/State law that it be contiguous. Atkins/Contiguous. ~his represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 76 Karr/And the dram shop be covered, and we also have an open container ordinance. Champion/Why couldn't that, oh? Atkins/Contiguous to the building, attached to. Karr/So it's all in dram shop covered. Kanner/But we could look at this on a case by case basis where we say perhaps we'll let you have it in the middle of the ped mall if you agree not to serve alcohol, we'll say we'll look at it next to your building and we'll talk to your neighbors to see how they feel, I think it's good, this would be a thing to do case by case it seems to make sense to me. Karr/All of the establishments that we have talked to on the plaza the last time were not interested unless it was a full service menu. Atkins/Yea. Champion/Okay well, it's too late, the other thing is. Atkins/Oh it's not too late it's just, we just kept running into all sorts. Champion/No I mean it's too late (can't hear). Atkins/Oh tonight okay yea then it's too late. Karr/We are meeting as a committee and taking a look at a number of issues regarding that. Champion/Okay good, I will tell the people that, the other thing is and I hate to bring it up again is Dubuque Street parking. My favorite subject, you know two years ago we changed those meters (can't hear) changed them to an hour and then they allowed people to feed them all the time. Atkins/Yea. Champion/Well I've done a very, you probably think I don't work at all I just watch Dubuque Street but it is (can't hear) and the other day I was sitting outside and every car parked on Dubuque Street was an employee of a business and they just feed those meters all day long, every one. Atkins/All day long. I happened to be in a restaurant which happens to be in a parking ramp one day and walked out and I saw the employees and there was three employees sitting up there. I mean it was the car fTom here to there. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 77 Lehman/Call and complain, Champion/Call and complain to who its legal, they're not breaking the law. Lehman/No, no, they operate on a complaint basis, those are one hour meters and if you complain we will ticket the car. Champion/But Cotmcil, since I've been on the Council decided people could feed their meters. Atkins/Yes, informally you have, I mean it's virtually impossible to enforce instead your standing fight there, so we went. Champion/Right but to park there the whole day. Pfab/No it's not, chalk the tire, write the time on them. Vanderhoef/Chalk the tire. Champion/Well I know but if you did it for a couple weeks you would (can't hear) parking there. But you know if, I've had several customers say I just wish you just went back to half hour meters so I can run in and try on that skirt you know. Atkins/I'm hoping Tower Place will resolve some of that because your going to have one block away, your going to have loads of parking. Vanderhoef/But we're going to have the same thing down on Clinton, we're going to have the same thing on Clinton. Champion/Employees feeding the meters. Vanderhoef/Or the students. Champion/Well they can't get home that fast. Atkins/The one I have trouble with is we're managing that person's business, I mean tell your employees you don't park there. Champion/No but these are people who own those businesses. Atkins/I understand that and I don't understand, they do it, they take care of it, I don't, I guess I have trouble taking care of that problem for them you tell your employees don't park there. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 78 Champion/No the employer's are parking there and feeding the meters. Atkins/Well then I can't. Kanner/Well then I guess that's what they want (can't hear). Lehman/Steve I thought when we talked about that we indicated we would not enforce the one hour limit except by complaint and if somebody complains. Atkins/Generally Emie that's the rule, that's almost always complaint. Lehman/But if we have a problem, if Connie wants to complain we will chalk the tire, we will ticket the car. Atkins/How about if we put out a little notice up and down Dubuque Street we're going to be a little more aggressive in the next couple of weeks prepare yourself. O'Donnell/The first one that's going to get a ticket is Corntie. Champion/I have never parked in front of my store, never. Atkins/Unless I hear differently we'll put out a notice enforce it. (All talking). Kanner/The current ordinance says you can not feed the meter for more than one time. Atkins/Your not suppose to feed meters period. Vanderhoef/Period. It's a one hour meter. Atkins/It's been understood. Kanner/Is that in the ordinances? Atkins/I don't think it's in the ordinances, it's got to be somewhere Steven. Lehman/I think it's on the meter. Vanderhoef/And it's on the. Atkins/Yea I just don't, I don't know, I'll find out for you. Kanner/Yea I'd like to see that because I've never heard of that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Cotmcil meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 79 Vanderhoef/Well that's the way it is and the students feed them all the time. O'Donnell/I have one thing, Connie you brought it up, is it Church Street and Dubuque we need a turn arrow up there? Champion/Yes. O'Donnell/Another one, I made a mistake and was traveling First Avenue and Mall Drive, if you ever get on Mall Drive you'll never get off to go onto First Avenue, they need turn arrows. Champion/There are turn arrows. Atkins/There are turn arrows there. O'Dounell/But not going the other way, not going on First Avenue. Atkins/To turn left. Vanderhoef/You don't need on First Avenue. Lehman/Oh turning off of First Avenue onto Mall Drive. O'Dormell/You can spend three and a half days there. Lehman/There's not five, you don't have a turn lane. Atkins/Three and a half days. O'Dormell/I know but it would be nice to have turn arrow there because I waited and there were. Pfab/Mike I don't know what 3 ½ days mean. O'Donnell/Stick your head under the (can't hear) Irvin. Atkins/Let me check both of those for you. O'Donnell/I would because coming there you can really back up traffic there and there' s a tremendous amount of traffic. Atkins/I live in the neighborhood and I drive it all the time. (All talking) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 80 Vanderhoef/The problem though that goes with that is that if you go to the fight lane then your forced to turn at the school. O'Dormell/It's impossible. Champion/I never thought about that. Lehman/It's going to be really tough for her to pick this up on the tape we've got 15 conversations going at once. O'Donnell/Then I move we adjoum. Lehman/Well wait a minute, Steven has something. Kanner/Concem another form of transportation I was riding my bike on the River Trail and saw our new little park on Benton and it's a nice little (can't hear). Atkins/Ned Ashton Park. Karmer/Well two things, one I think it would be nice to have a bench there, actually them, it didn't seem to be any benches there, we have a few restaurants around there and it seems like a nice place to stop. Atkins/Good idea, we'll check it. Vanderhoef/Is there a bicycle rack? Kanner/No I don't thing so. Atkins/I think there are at the restaurants though, I know what your talking about. Vanderhoef/They are at the restaurants? Atkins/Yea I would think so, we'll check. Karmer/Yea you could put one up, or people bicyclists if your biking you can just clean your bike but I think people walking by there it would be nice to have something to sit down fight there and the other thing is we don't have a sign there saying that is Ned Ashton Park, not that I saw. Atkins/Oh those are easy enough, we'll take care of those. I'm assuming, usually on the signing, we didn't, we never did a formal dedication because using the commission likes to do that something like that at the time of the, I'll find out for you though. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 81 Vanderhoef/Before you go any further though, where's that chunk of the bridge that's part of that park? Kanner/It's in there. Atkins/It's in there. Kanner/lt's in the back of the rock. Vanderhoef/Is it in, I haven't walked it I've just driven past. Arkins/I thought it was there, that was part of the design Dee. Vanderhoef/Okay I'll go check it out completely. Arkins/Okay, but I'll check on sign, bench and bike racks. Lehman/Okay. Atkins/We'll find out for you. Kanner/And the other thing is the wetlands memo we were going to get in the packet this week. Atkins/Couldn't tell you where that was. Kanner/I was wondering what happened with that. Atkins/That's the one in response to the new Federal Supreme Court ruling? Kanner/Yea and Karin and Eleanor said we would get something in our packets. Holecek/And I apologize I meant to get it in this packet and I was remiss so it will be in the next packet. Kanner/Can we get it tomorrow night? Is it done? Holecek/No. Katmer/Okay. Holecek/No on both counts, how about because, yea. Kanner/But, okay the next one the packet, all right great. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 82 Karr/Could I save way to the next packet, you all got a memo regarding laptops and reprogramming. Lehman/Leave them here. Karr/And there will not, this is, every six months we go to Volume 2 on our computers so I'll need the laptops in so we can make that programming change. Because of that we're not anticipating any packets this Thursday, we will have it, if you'd like to leave your laptop after tomorrow night's meeting you certainly may, if not we're scheduling programming next Monday and Tuesday so we would have it ready and loaded for you with your packet on the 5th. Atkins/Next week will be a little crazy, Holiday right in the middle of an agenda packets, so bear with us if things are a little loosy goosey for a while there. Karr/We're going to start working. Champion/(Can't hear) computer the latest by Friday or? Karr/Friday of this week is great, that's fine, first thing Monday morning is acceptable, I just thought if some of you wish to leave it this time since there' s no packet that would be fine, if not Friday or Monday is great. Vanderhoef/If we leave it tomorrow night do we get it back before the weekend? Karr/No, there's no reason to leave it tomorrow night if you want it back for the weekend. Vanderhoef/Well they were going to do a couple things on mine anyway but I. Karr/There are a couple of issues that ITS is going to work with a number of yours on and if you just say I've got it, oh do you need it at the house to work on? Vanderhoef/Well I want to be able to get my e-mail's over the weekend. Karr/Okay then you might not want to bring it in. Lehman/Bring it in Monday. Karr/Bring it back Monday (All talking). Lehman/I have one thing Sarah, I noticed, I was gone all last week but when I came back I noticed that there is apparently some interest in the part of some of the folks in This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001. June 25, 2001 Special Work Session Page 83 the community for some sort of charter amendments and I'm not familiar with what they are but I would like us to at least track them, your office track them to see what can and can't be done, I'm sure there may be legal issues involved. Holecek/I imagine there are a number of legal issues that would be involved so we'll pay close attention to that and start researching as the issues come up. Vanderhoef/Thank you because that was on my list too. Lehman/Other items for Council. Karr/I'd just like to point out Item 10 on your agenda is the parking fees, and staff is requesting expedited action so that we could publish that by July 1st so that will require collapsing tomorrow evening and we will be sending it early so if there was any problems or anything with doing that I'd love to hear it before I send it over tomorrow. Okay. Lehman/Okay. Anything else? We're out of here guys. O'Donnell/Good night. Atkins/Good night all. Adjourned 9:45 PM This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of June 25, 2001.