The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2001-11-27 Transcription#2 Page 1 ITEM NO. 2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS. Lehman/Item 2 our special presentation to outstanding student citizenship awards. If the three young folks from Regina would come forward please. You know your folks always tell you you save the best for last, we don't we do the best first. And it goes downhill from here. If you folks would like to state your name and why you were nominated. Stephen Grabowski/Hello, my name is Stephen Grabowski, I'm honored to receive this award, I'm a 6th grader at Regina, I'm the oldest of five kids, I feel I've been chosen for this award because I'm involved in my school and community. I had (can't hear) because I've worked hard on my school work, my favorite topic is history. I'm in advanced math and in band (can't hear). I feel my (can't hear) on student council shows me how government works so I can be involved. I'm also help with the teachers and other students in the classroom, I'm involved in sports like basketball, baseball and soccer. I feel that sports are important because I think skills like teamwork to use in many aspects of life. I've been in scouting since first grade. I am also involved in my religious community, I'm an acolyte and sometimes elector. I think you for this award. Shannon Bockenstedt/Hi, my name is Shannon Bockenstedt and I'm a sixth grader at Regina Elementary. I believe in helping serve our community as much as possible and to the best of my ability. I help teachers in the third grade class at religious ed. every Monday night to help younger kids leam about God and to be a positive role model. I also baby-sit for neighbors, friends, and even my sisters. I served on the student council at Longfellow and Regina for a total of five years, this involves many community projects. What I consider most important though is that I try as hard as I can to treat every person like I would want someone to treat me. I believe all of these qualities add up to make me a great citizen. Thank you for your time. Juliana Kleist-Mendez/Hello, my name is Juliana Kleist-Mendez, I'm 12 years old and in the sixth grade, (can't hear) for the outstanding student citizenship award because I'm a good role model, participate in community service with my girl scout troop and am always ready to take on new challenges. I would like to thank my parents for inspiring me to always do my best and to never give up. Thank you. Lehman/Well the Council is very proud to give these awards but actually the thing you have to be most proud of is that it's important enough for you folks to get these awards and that these awards are important to you. And I can tell you that it's very important to your parents and especially your grandparents, that's not funny, that's the truth. I will read what it says on one of these awards and then I'll pass them out. For outstanding qualities and leadership within Regina Elementary as well as the community and for a sense of responsibility and helpfulness to others This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #2 Page 2 we recognize these folks as Outstanding Student Citizens, your community is proud of you, presented by the Iowa City Council November 2001. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #3 Page 3 ITEM NO. 3. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF TItE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR AMENDED. Champion/Move adoption. O'Dormell/Second. Lehman/Moved by Champion, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion. Karmer/Yes just one thing, in our consent calendar we have an abstract of the City Council election I just want to congratulate Cormie and Mike and Emie for their win and thank the challengers John Robertson and Leah Cohen and Brandon Ross for the election. Pfab / I think they should get a nice round of applause. Champion/Thank you. Kanner/That's it. Lehman/Okay any other discussion. Roll call. All ayes. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #4 Page 4 ITEM NO. 4. PUBLIC DISCUSSION (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA). (UNTIL 8 PM) Lehman/Item 4 is public discussion, this is a time on the agenda reserved for public to address Council on items that do not otherwise appear on the agenda, if you wish to address Council please sign in, give your name and address and limit your comments to 5 minutes or less. Charity Rowley/My name is Charity Rowley and I am here to represent the Senior Center Commission, it's just such a wonderful idea to have these things to paste on (can't hear). I'm reporting on our last meeting a week ago, we're giving a final polish to the donation plaque for the skywalk to be sure that everyone' s name is on and spelled correctly. We're in the midst of finishing up our waterproofing and our tuck pointing. We have discovered that the stair mending on the front steps on Linn Street is much more extensive than we realized and that is going to be delayed until spring. And our pride is that we have received a report from the committee on that has been reviewing us for accreditation by the National Organization Senior Centers, we received 180 points out of the 135 required. Champion/Wow. Rowley/Let me read you a few of the comments. On Community, a list of community collaborations is extensive resulting in a wide variety of options, information referral is handled uniquely to an in-house television production component which is probably one of a kind. Champion/Wow. Rowley/Isn't that wonderful to hear? Their operation success is based on over 100 cooperative efforts with other agencies and organizations. Pride in historical facility is evident, atmosphere is comforting and professional and very well maintained. And at the end of the report on the strengths, the staff is dedicated and enthusiastic, yes they are, and they accomplish a great deal considering they are few. The program encompass a wide range of interests and involve many community resources, community involvement is extensive. We are very proud of this report, it will be going to the National Board after the first of the calendar year and we will then be receiving our creditation. Thank you. Champion/Congratulations. Lehman/Yea I have to tell you, I know the Council and I think the community is very, very proud of our Senior Center, it's really an asset to our community. Rowley/Thank you. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #4 Page 5 Lehman/Other public discussion. Item 5 is Planning & Zoning matters. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #5b Page 6 ITEM NO 5. PLANNING & ZONING MATTERS ITEM NO. 5(b). PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE TO VACATE WEST BENTON COURT NORTH OF BENTON STREET. (VAC01-00003) Lehman/Item B is relative a property that I have a personal involvement in so I will excuse myself and Mike if you would have the public hearing on Item B. O'Dormell/Public hearing is open. Bob Downer/Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, members of the Council I am Bob Downer, I am here this evening as attomey for Oaknoll Retirement Residents of which I have had the privilege of serving as either Director or an Advisory Director for the past 34 years. This is a facility that I feel is a great asset in our community and this particular request is brought up at this time because of plans that are in the process of being finalized at this time for Oaknoll to undergo a further expansion. In 1966 when the original part of the facility was built the health center which consisted of 32 beds at that time was unfortunately built of frame construction and a one story building. This has limited growth and good land use within the Oaknoll complex and a determination was made earlier this year because of some outmoded features in that health center to rather than to attempt to remodel it, it would be replaced with a steel and masonry structure and also there would be some 8 apartment units added as a part of this. This as presently planned would involve utilizing approximately the north 30 feet of Benton Court which is a dead end street of which Oaknoll owns the property on all three sides of it. There are parts of the present complex that are located on the east and the noah side of the parking lot that all of you heard more about than you probably cared to over the past several years together with three residences owned by Oaknoll are on the west side. There are not plans at this time to modify any other part of the property abutting this street except the northerly 30 feet which would be involved in this expansion. If there are any questions which anyone has I'd be happy to attempt to answer them. Champion/And so Bob what you're saying is by this is a dead end street that nobody else uses? Downer/That's right, that's right, it's all for the Oaknoll complex, residents and employees and the like. Champion/I just want to clarify that, thank you. Pfab/Bob I have a question, on the item there about utilities. Downer/Yes. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #5b Page 7 Pfab/Why are you opposed to taking any responsibility from that point? Downer/Well eventually these are going to probably have to be replaced because there are plans long ranged plans on the drawing board at this time to replace these residences on the west side with construction that' s comparable to the balance of the Oaknoll complex. Oaknoll didn't subdivide this property or install those utilities, this is going to be converted to tax paying real estate and I guess I don't feel that Oaknoll should assume the additional financial burden with respect to those utilities. But at such time as those are replaced and connection with the construction of this addition then presumably Oaknoll will have full responsibility with respect to those at that time. Pfab/Okay. Obviously where your heading in this as far as Oaknoll can buy this property from the City correct? Downer/Yes. Pfab/Okay it doesn't seem to make sense that you wouldn't take responsibility of the utilities when you purchase it, that's just my perspective. O'Donnell/You know we discussed this last evening and there were not four people interested in pursuing that line of question Irvin. Pfab/So I (can't hear) I just wanted to go on record. O'Donnell/Noted, noted. Any other questions? Kanner/Yea I just want to note it makes sense that you might want to consider bringing us a proposal even though four are not requiring it to purchase at this time the facilities the sewer and the water. Downer/We have a Board meeting tomorrow morning at 7:00 AM and I'll bring that before the Board, I don't have any authorization to do that at this time but I'll certainly present that tomorrow morning. O'Dormell/Very good. Downer/Thank you. O'Donnell/Thanks Bob. Would anybody else like to speak? Okay public hearing is closed. I assume Ernie's found somebody's grandchildren out there so if somebody would like to get him. (Lehman retums to room). Lehman/Well Mike if my grandchildren would have been out there I would not be in here. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #5b Page 8 O'Donnell/To clarify, I said somebody else's. Lehman/Oh well that's okay. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #5c Page 9 ITEM NO. 5(c). REZONE 1.38 ACRES FROM HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, RM-44, TO MEDIUM DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, RM-20 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1045-1075 W. BENTON STREET. (REZ01-00020) Lehman/This is a continuation of a public hearing from November 13, hearing is open. Judith Klink/My name is Judith Klink and I live at 1101 Harlocke Street and I filed a request for rezoning of the Cox property on Benton Street. I would like to say that I and the Harlocke-Weeber neighborhood are dropping our rezoning request. We are very pleased that West Cod?? Partners, the developers of the property were willing to redesign their site plan, we have had extensive discussions with them about our concerns for building placement and they have agreed to make changes which will be much more acceptable to the neighborhood than the original plan. We also have had other concerns about the development and we have discussed them and we have both signed an agreement statement, submitted it to the Council, the City Staff and the Planning & Zoning Commission. We are particularly pleased that they have pledged the spirit of cooperation in completing the project. We wish to thank the City Council, the City Staff, and the Planning & Zoning Commission for their willingness to hear the issues and their overall helpfulness. We also wish to thank the staff for drafting and the City Council for unanimously passing a moratorium on building in our area until the Southwest District Planning process is completed. We hope that there is ultimately a mutually agreeable conclusion about the development and zoning in our area. Any questions. Champion/Thank you. Vanderhoef/And thank you for your work (can't hear). Champion/A happy ending. Karr/Can we have a motion to accept correspondence? O'Donnell/So moved. Vanderhoef/Second. Lehman/Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Vanderhoef to accept correspondence. All in favor. All ayes. Public hearing is closed. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #5d Page 10 ITEM NO. 5(d) REZONE APPROXIMATELY 6.15 ACRES FROM INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL, CI-1 TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL, CC-2, LOCATED AT COMMERCE DRIVE AND LIBERTY DRIVE. (REZ01- 00015) (1) Public Hearing Lehman/This is a continuation of a public hearing from November 13th. Public hearing is open. Bob Downer/Mr. Mayor, members of the Council I am Bob Downer appearing here this evening for Streb Investment Partnership the owner of this property. I would like to commend the City Council for it's proactive approach to solving this problem and it appeared that considerable progress in this regard was made at the session last evening. And by reason of that we would request that the matter be referred to the Planning & Zoning Commission and the staff in connection with an attempt to develop an ordinance amendment that would meet the spirit of the conversation that took place at the meeting last evening. The general outlines of this proposal as it was discussed last night would be acceptable as far as the Streb's are concerned, they are interested in pursuing this and in addressing all of the concerns that were expressed at that meeting. And would further request that as far as this rezoning application is concerned that that be indefinitely postponed while this is in process with respect to the ordinance modification. At such time as that the ordinance change might be adopted it would then be their intention to formally withdraw the rezoning request. Lehman/Thank you sir. O'Donnell/Thank you. Lehman/Bob is referring to a combined meeting between the Planning & Zoning and the Council last night where we discussed this issue at some length and we did refer that to the Planning & Zoning Commission for their consideration as you have indicated Bob they'll work on it and get back to us. Anyone else wish to speak to this? Public hearing is closed, I would like a motion to defer indefinitely. Karr/Excuse me, could we accept correspondence before we close that? O'Donnell/Accept move to accept correspondence. Vanderhoef/Second. Lehman/Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Vanderhoef, all in favor. All ayes. Motion carried. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #5d Page 11 (2) Consider an Ordinance Motion to defer. Pfab/I move. O'Donnell/Second. Lehman/Moved by Pfab, seconded by O'Donnell to defer the ordinance indefinitely, all in favor. All ayes. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #5e Page 12 ITEM NO. 5(e). CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO REZONE FROM MEDIUM DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY (RS-8) TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION OVERLAY (RS-8/OHP) FOR PROPERTIES WITHIN THE LONGFELLOW NEIGHBORHOOD TO ESTABLISH THE LONGFELLOW HISTORIC DISTRICT. (REZ01-00019) (FIRST CONSIDERATION) Champion/Move first consideration. Vanderhoef/Second. Lehman/Moved by Champion, seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion. Champion/You know I'd just like to say that this all looks pretty routine, (can't hear) but this has taken a lot of work and effort on a lot of people's part and I think this Council has been very receptive in the past four years and I'm sure before that. I'm helping to maintain our neighborhoods, although it looks like a very easy vote this is a very important step in preserving the character of our Iowa City neighborhoods, (can't hear) incredibly important to maintain the city' s identity and make it a wonderful place to live. Vanderhoef/Well said. Lehman/Very well said, further discussion, I think you said it all Connie. Champion/Did I? I'm excited about it. Lehman/Roll call. All ayes. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #5f Page 13 ITEM NO. 5(8. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO RIgZONE FROM MEDIUM DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY (RS-8) TO CONSERVATION DISTRICT OVERLAY (RS-8/OCD) FOR PROPERTIES WITHIN THE LONGFELLOW NEIGHBORHOOD TO ESTABLISH THE CLARK STREET CONSERVATION DISTRICT. (REZ01-00019) (FIRST CONSIDERATION) Vanderhoef/Move first consideration. Pfab/Second. Lehman/Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by Pfab. Discussion. Frankly the discussion on the last item is certainly pertinent to this one as well. Roll call. All ayes. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #6 Page 14 ITEM NO. 6. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 5, "BUSINESS AND LICENSE REGULATIONS," CHAPTER 2, "VEHICLES FOR HIRE," OF THE CITY CODE CLARIFYING DEFINITION OF VEHICLES FOR HIRE, ADDING REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTIFIED STATE OF IOWA CRIMINAL HISTORY INFORMATION PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF ANY DRIVING BADGE, REMOVING THE REQUIREMENT FOR A DISTINCTIVE COLOR SCHEME FOR VEHICLES FOR HIRE, AND PROVIDING LANGUAGE REQUIRING A PERMIT FROM THE DIVISION OF ANIMAL CONTROL FOR OPERATING A HORSE DRAWN VEHICLE. (FIRST CONSIDERATION) Vanderhoef/Move first consideration. O'Donnell/Second. Lehman/Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by O'Dormell. Discussion. Kanner/I would like to state an amendment. Lehman/Okay. Kanner/I would state that upon denial by the Police Chief of the application they may appeal to the City Council. Lehman/Is there a second to the amendment? Pfab/I'll second it. Lehman/We have a motion and a second to amended by having an appeal process available to the Council for denial from the Police Chief. Discussion. Kanner/The reason I'm doing this is because it's a little bit vague about print what it means to be involved in conviction of crime, I think if the Chiefs going to have the final word we should be specific in what the time would be in both denial of license, since we don't have that I'd like it be appealable to the City Council. Lehman/Further discussion. Vanderhoef/I'm not sure what expertise I personally I would have with that that would be more than what the police chief might have, I'm not sure that this is the place it ought to come. Champion/I'm not going to support your amendment, I understand where your coming from but I really think it's the Police Chiefs deal somebody should not be driving This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #6 Page 15 on, hired vehicle, I guess I don't want to say that person should be driving so I'm not going to support your amendment but I do understand why your making it. Kanner/Well Connie it still allows us the ability to make the Police Chief recommendation and affirm that, I think once in a while there are extenuating circumstances that might warrant a look by us. We look at a lot of things that we're not necessarily experts on that we get from our different commissions but that's what we're elected for to make those final decisions. And I don't think it's quite fair to put the burden on the Police Chief, I think. Champion/Well I do. Kanner/I think he does his job and he makes his recommendations and somebody' s not satisfied with that they could appeal that to City Council. Lehman/Any further discussion? Dilkes/Yea I'd like to clarify as I noted last night, the Police Chief does establish standards that he uses in granting or denying these permits so it's not that he just does decides he likes them there are some standards (can't hear). Pfab/Are those standards public information? Dilkes/They are. Pfab/Okay. Lehman/Okay any other discussion, all in favor say Aye. Kanner/Aye. Lehman/Opposed same sign. The amendment is defeated 6-1, Kanner voting in the affirmative. Further discussion? Kanner/Then I'd like to amend it so that those standards are included in the ordinance, so it's clear to everyone what the standards are. Pfab/I'd second that. Lehman/Do we have a motion to include the, how do you want to word this? The standards used by the Police Chief. Pfab/If they' re public. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Cotmcil Meeting of November 27, 2001. #6 Page 16 Dilkes/One of the things you might consider doing is adopting by resolution those written standards that he uses rather than incorporating them into the ordinance. Lehman/Well the standards could change. Dilkes/They have changed over the years, they do sometimes, they're modified for certain reasons. Lehman/It would be easier to change by resolution because it could be changed more easily than putting it in the ordinance. Dilkes/(can't hear) interested in approving (can't hear). Lehman/I oppose the amendment by reasons just stated by the City Attomey. O'Donnell/I do too. Vanderhoef/That's where I was going too. Lehman/Any other discussion of the amendment? Kanner/I don't quite understand the difference between a resolution, (can't hear) a separate resolution as opposed to an amendment. Lehman/To an ordinance. Vanderhoef/To an ordinance. Dilkes/As a resolution as opposed to an ordinance, we often will have an ordinance that sets a general parameters and we'll adopt fees by resolution or those kinds of things. Wilburn/If there's a change in ordinance it's going to take three. Dilkes/No and then we don't have to do three readings. Wilburn/That's what I was getting at. Pfab/Okay if there's, how would you go about doing this? Lehman/You'd just have a resolution. Dilkes/You'd have a resolution adopting the standards to guide the Police Chief. Pfab/Is this part of this here? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. 446 Page 17 Dilkes/No it's not part of this ordinance. Karmer/Emie would you and others then be open to, if we take a straw poll to passing a resolution? Lehman/I don't have any problem with it I just don't see what the regulations and standards are available to public record to both the Council and to the public, so we adopt something that's public record. I mean I don't see what good that does. Kauner/I think it makes it more open and it makes us as govermnent more accountable, I think it's always good to have as much transparency as possible. Lehman/Well that's another discussion but the discussion now is on the amendment. All those in favor of the amendment of adding those guidelines to the ordinance say Kanner/Aye. Lehman/Opposed same sign. The amendment is defeated 6-1 Kanner voting in the affirmative. Is there any other discussion? The chair is unable to make a motion but if somebody. O'Donnell/I would move for first consideration. Dilkes/We have it already on the floor. O'Donnell/We do have it? Lehman/If somebody would like, somebody be happy with that motion but if somebody would like to amend it. Kanner/Yea the motion is on the floor. Lehman/If somebody would like to make an amendment removing the requirement that we get a permit from the Division of Animal Control for operating a horse drawn vehicle, I would certainly entertain that amendment. Pfab/I would have great difficulty entertain that, making that motion. Champion/I will offer an amendment. Lehman/Thank you Connie is there a second? O'Donnell/I will second that. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #6 Page 18 Champion/I will move that is not necessary from the Animal Control for operating a horse drawn vehicle. Lehman/Okay we have a motion and a second to amend it by removing a requirement that there be a permit from Animal control for operating a horse drawn vehicle. Discussion. Pfab/I would oppose the amendment because I don't think we would want any wild sick horses drawing vehicles downtown. O'Donnell/I haven't seen one in a long time. Pfab/I believe if we're going to have horses it's probably just a good idea if their just kind of healthy. Lehman/Irvin there have been horses pulling carriages although not in great numbers for years downtown without a permit from Animal Control, I have not seen a dead horse or a really sick horse and none of them have had permits. Pfab/Well let me ask you this, is this a totally new ordinance? Karr/The horse drawn vehicle section is only being amended to add the clause in additional permits from Animal Control. The treatment of animals, the health certificate, all of those things remain in effect and have been in affect for years, the only addition is the Animal Control. Champion/It just adds another step to the process and. Karr/That' s right. Champion/It doesn't seem necessary to me, if they meet all these other requirements and now they would have to meet another requirement, nobody will have time to bring a horse downtown Iowa City. Lehman/Is there any other discussion to the healthy horse amendment? Kanner/Well, Ernie there are horses that are in Iowa City, this is an oddity and I think that it's a good step to have this instead of permits from our folks know about animals under our police department. It makes sense to me to go through that and it's not that much of an additional burden. It's not like we have thousands of horses, I haven't seen those horses riding around. Champion/Well we have had horses. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #6 Page 19 O'Donnell/I think we probably should vote on this. Pfab/Just a moment I have a comment. I think it would be, if there was one of the horses was sick and it was not noted before it would probably ruin the reputation of the horses for a long time. Lehman/We have. Champion/We already have a requirement. O'Donnell/It has to go through the health certificate. Lehman/We certify their health anyway, it just doesn't have to have a permit. All those in favor of the horse amendment say Aye. Opposed. Kanner/Aye. Lehman/The motion carries 6-1 Kanner voting in the negative. Is there further discussion on the ordinance as amended? Roll call. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #7 Page 20 ITEM NO. 7. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 6 OF THE CITY CODE, ENTITLED "PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY" BY REPEALING CHAPTER 7, ENTITLED "SMOKING IN PUBLIC PLACES" AND ENACTING A NEW CHAPTER 7, ENTITLED "SMOKING IN FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS." (FIRST CONSIDERATION) Pfab/I move consideration. Vanderhoef/Second. Lehman/We have a motion from Mr. Pfab for first consideration and a second from Ms. Vanderhoefand before we start the discussion Eleanor I think there have been some, you gave us a handout tonight with some clarifications and whatever on it. Dilkes/Well you got a memo from me that talks about a couple changes to the language that I suggest you consider. You have a redline version of the current ordinance attached to that memo which shows the changes I'm proposing the section 6-7-5 just briefly, those changes are as follows, number one a business owner raised with me yesterday the issue of what, if an establishment wishes to make a change in their operation such that they will increase their alcohol sales and therefore qualify for their exemption, need they wait until an entire year since our exemption is based on an annual average. Must they wait an entire year in order to get the exemption from the smoking prohibitions. The language which I've added that you see there at the end of 6-7-5 would address that situation as well as the situation with brand new business. Also the issue was raised last night at the work session about cover charges and excluding those from the equation, the way that I have proposed dealing with that is instead of talking about a percentage of alcohol, percentage of all gross receipts I've changed the language to talk about percentage of gross receipt of food, beverage and alcoholic beverage and so you'd only be talking about the food and the alcohol which I think really is more consistent with the way the Council and the public have been discussing the issue in terms of 65 percent food and 35 percent alcohol or 50 percent food and 50 percent alcohol. I think you've been just talking about food and alcohol and not other things that other things that the business might sell whether it be cover charges, T-shirts, cigarettes, that kind of thing. That's the second change and the final change is just a clean up change, I added some additional language to clarify that we're talking only about on premises sale. And then I also noted the conversations I've had recently with the Attorney General' s office about the public place definition. Vanderhoef/I would move to amend section 6-7-5 with the redline additions put into it, I think that's what I was trying to say about entertainment and cover charges and so forth and I like the way Eleanor presented this and I would ask that this be adopted. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #7 Page 21 Pfab/I would second that. Lehman/Okay we have a motion and a second to amend including the provisions that have been added to section 6-7-5, discussion. All in favor the amendment. Opposed. That motion carried. Further discussion. Vanderhoef/Okay we had a discussion on the public place and felt that there would be a challenge and what Eleanor pointed out to me today what could happen is that our whole ordinance wouldn't get enacted until we got through perhaps the challenge on this piece which addresses the establishments with less than 50 (can't hear) for the prepare and serve food. I'm still in favor of doing that but I would rather do that as an amendment to the whole ordinance after we have the Supreme Court opinion on the percentage part that is being challenged in the Ames, and so I would offer an amendment to use the state code definition of public place at this time. Champion/I'll second that. Lehman/We have a motion to use the state definition of public place by Vanderhoefand seconded by Champion. Discussion. Kanner/Dee I'm sorry we're having a little problem with electricity over here and. Vanderhoef/So am I. Kanner/Could you just explain again the Supreme Court decision that your looking at in regards to this public place definition? Vanderhoef/Well there are things in the public place definition that must stay in the ordinance that Eleanor has said to us, what I had requested was that we define all restaurants and their including any place that serves and prepares food which we all seem to agree with but what we're getting information from the Attorney General at this point in time is that that will probably take a challenge or could well be something that could be changed by the state legislature for us so that the definition of public place would be consistent throughout the state and I would get our ordinance going and enacted right now and ask (can't hear) challenge that seems to be going to the Supreme Court that allows us to set percentage numbers for how we define restaurants thus far, then we would be able to keep that piece going and then add the amendment later and that could be challenged on it's own without interfering with our ordinance. Dilkes/Can I just clarify? I want to make sure that this is clear that (can't hear). But as I originally drafted the ordinance I used the public place definition as set forth in state code which has a lot of stuff in it but it only applies to restaurants with a seating facility over 50. It was my view that by using that public place definition This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #7 Page 22 you preserve your ability to rely on a favorable result in the Ames lawsuit if we get one, as well as directly on the Attorney General' s opinion, and the Council chose last time to make the amendment none the less accepting the risk and by saying that I don't mean that it may not be defensible, it very well may be. And then subsequently, subsequent to that I talked to the Attorney General' s office and they concurred with my view as expressed to you in that memo that it's best to keep it simple, keep that definition and go the next step sometime down the road. Pfab/Okay so my point of clarification, in other words move as the state says a public place now and we still reserve the right to change it as we had originally proposed after. Dilkes/You always have that (can't hear) you could change it a week from now. Lehman/And so this it would make it consistent with the state's definition of a public place. Further discussion on the amendment. Kanner/Is the, I'll go along with that, I would prefer the other way. Vanderhoef/So would I. Lehman/I think we all would. Kanner/Since compiled, this list we have about 220 food licensees that have service inside and those are definitely six under 50 and possibly another 15 so it's a small pementage so I don't think it's going to affect that many people, I think that' s something in favor of voting yes for it, that's one of the reasons I'll vote yes for it at this time. Pfab/As long as after the Supreme Court has made a decision that they do, has the Supreme Court accepted this? Dilkes/No this is, I think there's an anticipation that it will move up it's way to the Supreme Court, it's currently in District Court in Ames. Wilburn/I think it. Pfab/It might make it simpler as we go and if we still have the option that' s fine. Wilburn/I think it's worth it to consider the Attorney General' s expense than defending you know tobacco cases. Lehman/All in favor of the amendment say Aye. Amendment carries. Discussion of the ordinance as amended. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #7 Page 23 Vanderhoef/Okay as it is amended there isn't anything in this ordinance that shows any movement after this point in time for decreasing the amount gross sales of food to move us towards what the goal always would be in my mind to take us down to all places that prepare and serve food should be smoke free. So I will entertain an amendment to add to our ordinance of the 50/50 and in two years to drop that by another 15 percent. Lehman/So your putting in a clause, your amendment would be that it drop from 50 percent of gross sales to 35? Vanderhoef/Yes. Lehman/Is there a second to that amendment? Wilburn/I'I1 second that. Lehman/We have a motion and a second to reduce the 50 percent gross receipt for food to 35 percent at the end of three years. Discussion. Dilkes/I'm sorry I need some clarification. What's the number that your suggesting Dee? Vanderhoef/That anything over 35 percent in gross food. Dilkes/Okay remember how we word the ordinance, we're talking about an exemption based on alcohol sales. Vanderhoef/Okay so we've got to. Dilkes/And so right now it's at 50, okay, and we haven't gone back to 65 yet. Vanderhoef/No we have not. Karmer/I think your talking though ifI hear you fight going the other way, 65 percent or more alcohol sales within two years. Right now we're at 50 percent or more alcohol sales. Dilkes/Right. Kanner/And if I understand you correctly your saying within two years it will go to 65 percent, you have to have 65 percent or more. Vanderhoef/Pement of alcohol. Dilkes/Right. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Cotmcil Meeting of November 27, 2001. #7 Page 24 Kanner/Alcohol sales or more to be exempt. Wilbum/I would just like to ask since you passed out this proposed amendment that you were looking at Steven, when I seconded this motion I see also on this sheet your talking about. (END OF 106, SDE ONE) Wilburn/(can't hear) Red light, green light which I would not be interested in. Kanner/My goal is to get to zero smoking and I thought that red light, green light as I proposed it versus 50 percent would get us there quicker but I'm willing to drop that and go with the amendment, I see that moving us in the fight direction and so I would support the amendment, but the only amendment in that regards. Wilburn/And so in this reading and subsequent, the other subsequent two readings if we make it that far you will not bring up red light, green light for (can't hear). Kanner/Correct I will stay with this proposal, I see it moving us toward zero in a good fashion. Lehman/Other discussion? Pfab/Could you restate that motion or the amendment that your proposing Dee. Vanderhoef/Okay I'm proposing that in two years that it will go 65 percent alcohol sales to be considered a bar. Pfab/Does that change, cause any change in the first reading or anything else? Dilkes/We haven't read it first, we're still amending it, reading it for the first time. Pfab/I would, I'm somewhat perplexed because I think that's probably a little timid the way that I would like to see it go. Wilburn/I think it's consistent with what we've been talking about. Pfab/Okay I will, if that is the best we can do, that' s fine I'll support it because I, my goal is to get to zero I hope faster than that. Wilbum/And I think it's consistent with that goal. Champion/Well I'm not going to support it, I think you have to understand that you really cannot obligate future City Council' s to some goal that you have and if we do pass some kind of smoking ordinance whatever it's going to be, I think your This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #7 Page 25 going to have to evaluate it before you move forward and I don't have any objections to evaluating it and then moving forward. But I don't think you can obligate the future because it doesn't, well you can't obligate them so to me it's (can't hear) in there, because you can't obligate anybody. Vanderhoef/What in my mind Connie I agree that we can always change our ordinance at anytime and this would be similarly to what a stmset clause does it fomes to either address it or it automatically happens in two years. Champion/I think you will be forced to address it. Vanderhoef/That' s quite possible but at least it's putting the public on notice that we are moving towards zero in food establishments. Lehman/Well I guess it's time for me to say what I think. I don't think there's anybody sitting up here who isn't interested in seeing some limitation on smoking in public places, restaurants, bars, whatever, I don't think there' s anybody sitting here that would not like to eventually see smoking eliminated in public places just as it presently as in California. However, my, I have a very serious concern with an ordinance that starts out as drastic as this one does, four weeks ago tonight, I think it was, whatever, we arrived at a 65 percent number which I felt was a reasonable starting place. My concem even with the 50 is that if we have a significant number of businesses in this community who come before us 90 days or so after we pass this ordinance and show severe economic difficulty with this ordinance, my fear is that there will be a tremendous pressure on the part of the Council to rescind an ordinance and this in my opinion is probably worse than never having enacted it in the first place. I see a 65 percent as a reasonable number, I see no problem with reevaluating that after three years to see if that reduced to 50 or whatever, but I have a real problem starting out with something as drastic as this. We have a very unique situation in Iowa City unlike almost any city in the country, we have thousands of customers who are in a downtown area, unfortunately a fairly high percentage of those customers are smokers, an ordinance that prohibits smoking based on this 50 percent is going to make a significant number of the places downtown frankly out of bounds to a lot of those young folks who insist on lighting up and especially when they go with their friends. I don't, I have no problem with preventing smoking in restaurants but I do think this is one that I would much rather go with the 65 percent that gives the businesses and gives the downtown an opportunity to adjust to this, let us come back in three years, if we feel this is working, reduce that to 50 if at that time we feel that is reasonable but I am, I personally feel that the 50 percent is to high to start with and I certainly, I certainly applaud the goal of becoming smoke free, I don't agree with setting the percentage for, I have no problem with reevaluating at any given time and any Council can certainly do that, but I have a problem with the 50 percent and certainly I have a problem with adding another 15 percent on before we even find out how the 50 is going to work. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #7 Page 26 Dilkes/Ernie can I just? I just want to clarify to make sure we're all talking about the same percentage, when you say 65 percent, your talking about 65 percent food. Lehman/Right. Dilkes/So to be exempted the number would be 35 pement alcohol for exemption as opposed to the 50 that Dee is talking about sticking with and going to 65 percent alcohol to be exempted down the road. Lehman/I'm talking about the provision. Dilkes/I just want to make, we're talking, we're interchanging good percentages and alcohol percentages I want to make sure. Lehman/I'm talking about the original ordinance that we asked you to draft for us four weeks ago. Dilkes/Was 35 pement. Lehman/Right. Dilkes/Alcohol sales for exemption. Lehman/I feel that's a better place to start. Champion/And I'm glad you brought it up, I didn't realize we were going to have the discussion, I think the beauty of the 65 pement was that it had full Council support, it had a lot of support from the community and when it got dropped down to 50 at the last City Council or work session wherever it happened, it created a whole group of people angry about the possibility ordinance, and I think when you start something like this I think it's really important that you start out on a positive note in the community like people were very accepting of this. And some of the, one of the restaurants that was going to be affected by this even said you know what I'll try it for a year and so it's, it is a different situation here and I am concemed about this ordinance although I'm in favor of some type of ordinance, I cannot support the 50, I certainly would totally support the 65 and I think most of us would and I think it's a really healthy place to start and then we just move forward I have a feeling that your going to go to 65 and I don't think your going to go to 50, I think eventually your going to go to everybody, I think the leads going to be easier from 65 to everybody, than it is to going to be from 65 to 50 to 30 to 20, I don't know I really feel strongly about this. O'Donnell/I agree, I will not be supporting 50 percent and I think it's wrong to decrease by 15 percent before we really understand what the 50 percent is doing. Our This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #7 Page 27 discussion all the way along has been based on 65 percent or red light, green light and at 50 pement I will not be supporting this, I think we will be encouraging the restaurant bar to become a bar. Lehman/Well let's, we're discussing the amendment, and the amendment is at the end of two years is that what you said Dee? Vanderhoef/Yes. Lehman/And in two years the percentage would change from 50 to 65, all right is there further discussion on that? All those in favor of the amendment say Aye. Let's do it by hands, how many in favor of the amendment? How many opposed? The amendment passes 4-3 with Lehman, O'Donnell and Champion voting in the negative. Now we are looking at the ordinance as having been amended two or three times, discussion on the ordinance. Champion/I would like to amend the ordinance to back to the 65 percent food. O'Donnell/I will second that. Lehman/We have a motion to amend back to the original ordinance that we had. Kanner/Could you use the alcohol term, the percentage it was, you mean 35 percent. Dilkes/Yea if we could use the alcohol percentages, your talking 35 alcohol. Kanner/35 percent or more. Dilkes/Because that' s the way the ordinance is. Champion/Okay I'd like to amend the ordinance to 35 percent alcohol. Dilkes/To get an exemption. Champion/To get an exemption. Lehman/And you second that. O'Donnell/I will second that. Lehman/we have a motion and a second, discussion on the amendment. Pfab/I'm going to vote against the amendment and it kind of puzzles me how we I think unanimously believe that in the not too distant future it will be totally smoke free in restaurants and when we have a change to start getting there why do we want to This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #7 Page 28 step back? I think it's, I have no difficulty because I will oppose it but for the people who support it, I have difficulty understanding how you can get someplace by backing out. Lehman/Irvin we haven't done anything yet, anything we do is a step forward. Champion/And we haven't backed out, we started out with 65 percent, you fully supported it, you were willing to support 70. Pfab/Because I thought it was the other way around. Lehman/Okay, all right, is there further discussion on the amendment? Let's do this by show of hands as well, those in favor of the amendment please raise your hands. Pfab/Wait a minute, what are we voting on? Karr/This is the amendment to revert back to the 35 percent to get the exceptions of the amendment. Lehman/I don't mind taking public input but I really am going to limit public input to no more than, unless someone has something dramatically different to tell us that we haven't heard before and I don't see anybody that' s coming to the podium, probably tired of talking to us so. I do see someone, I will take public comment for no later than 10 minutes after 8:00, that is about 11 minutes, if you have something new and different please tell us. Jim. Jim Mondanaro/So is this a filibuster? My name is Jim Mondanaro, I have four restaurants in downto~vn Iowa City and one in Coralville. Three of which are non smoking, two which would be affected by the 65/35 also by the 50/50, the thing that concerns me about what we're doing here is that I believe in non smoking venues, I think it's the way to go, but the fact of the matter is it fails in the drinking combination food concept. We tried it in downtown Mondo's, and it didn't work, we made a major investment in that building when it burned down to come back and reestablish what had been a 10 year business in downtown Iowa City because we believed in downtown Iowa City. In that plan we had no projections whatsoever that were inclusive of us all of a sudden being confronted with issues that would come from the City Council to take away a part of our revenue making factor and that's the sell ofliquor. You know last week Mr. Kanner suggested that a compromise would be the red light, green light and it truly is a compromise but for some reason it's hard to get the people here to understand the compromise because this ordinance truly affects businesses. The people with CAFE don't have their signatures on the dotted line at banks, they just want non smoking and what they should really be asking for as far as I'm concemed is 100 percent non smoking but they'll take whatever they can get because they know at the beginning if they can get something that's better than This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #7 Page 29 nothing and the rest will come down the road. Well red light green light gives us that compromise, it lets us be able to take care of all the people at all the restaurants 100 pement of the time until 8:30 to 9:00 at night. And then it lets those people that are in the liquor business, all people in the liquor business compete on a level playing field. It's not fair for me to have 75 percent of my business at Mickey's, and I'm going to tell you what my business is, and I'm not going to fudge the numbers. And 80 percent of Mondo's yet the 20-25 pement from 9:00 on I am not able to compete fairly with the other people that do not have the emphasis on food. If your going to pass an ordinance for the good of the public health as I said before go all the way through the door and make smoking, ban smoking in all establishments. But since we don't have the initiative or the guts to do that it's not fair for us to take a position that' s fair for others and unfair for some and red light, green light does that, it takes everybody into account, and that's I'll I ask you to do is to think about everybody that becomes affected by this because at 65 percent your probably only going to affect 8-9 restaurants, 50 percent you get a lot more and that' s when people become very excited because they thought they were going to affect their revenue seeking ability, but guess who it affects more than anybody? My restaurants, I guess somebody has to lay down and take it and so when you talk about do we all of a sudden look at a bar venue? Don't think I haven't thought about it, I'm a entrepreneur and I think about what' s best for me because when I sign on with a bank the bank is betting on me, they didn't bet on anybody coming in from the outside being the City Council telling me I had to change my game plan. It's easy for you to pass an ordinance but until you sit in the seat I sit in everyday with the economy the way it is today, with the uncertainty of downtown with a mall that is nonexistent. With taxes that continually increase and then you talk about taking away part of my revenue seeking ability then you can sit in that seat with me and feel the pain. Smoking, non smoking, it's going to be non smoking someday but you have to do an ordinance that's fair to all and not pick on a few by doing 65-35, it's the easy way out, it lets you walk away from an issue that's bigger than that. And CAFE should be up here promoting 100 percent or none if they're really behind non smoking and this issue of saying that you can't smoke and then go into an establishment set 8-10 hours later I don't agree with that, we all have been in restaurants or places where people smoke and then you go in the next day it's not a factor. The compromise at stake here for everybody is red light, green light and you need to think about that before you go any further, that's all I ask of you. Thank you. Lehman/Thank you Jim. Keith Dempster/Keith Dempster, The Mill Restaurant. There are those of us of course who also (can't hear) red light, green light because if you have after class, after work, 5:00 folks then you've lost that trade, now The Mill restaurant for 40 years in this town has met a payroll of 30 people or more, we've never been busted for anything, we've had a couple of minors caught with bad ID's over a period of 40 years and we have been like a 3 legged milk stool in our operation. We have This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #7 Page 30 food, we have a bar, and we have music and if you cut any one of those legs out of you, a couple of you used to be farmers know what it does to you. We cannot run live music in a no smoking environment because 40 percent of our customers won't come and neither will their friends. We have two large no smoking areas, it's smoking up from, there's smoking at the back bar and depending upon requirement non smoking in the stage room. We find that two weeks we ran non smoking in the stage room also and we found it cut our crown even interiorally. These are huge problems, when I find that my option is to hope that it's gradual so that some other remaining well known businesses in downtown Iowa City at least have some time to escape without complete bankruptcy or have the thing come through as it is now or in the more stringent version and put my house on the market. I live in a town where my water bill has gone from $65 dollars a month to $500 a month in five years, in the last three years, the tax burden on the building that I rent which I pay has gone up 40 percent, now you talk about the death of a 1,000 cuts, where everything that happens bleeds you. It's fine if Iowa City wins records, it wins records now as only surpassed by Des Moines for arrests, because we're all criminals right? This one coming along, I know I was silly to relax when it was 65-35 because well maybe we can run this for a few more years and maybe we'll find a couple more people that can go on a national stage, we've had a couple of them on national television that started out at The Mill in the last year. Or maybe we can live as a bar, not much, don't want to, but it's kind of catastrophic when you find your main opponem in business is not the couple of hundred other fellows in the same line of work one way or another, not even always the City Council but people who have absolutely no dogs in the race and have the absolute choice to never patronize our establishments downtown without having an option of going to some other kind of place. Mr. Kanner told me a couple of weeks ago that I was adaptive, oh well I'll survive, well no Steven that won't work. Lehman/Okay Woody, if you could, a couple of minutes. Daryl Woodson/Yea I'll be very very brief. Lehman/And then we're going to have to move on. Woodson/I'm just going to quote a couple of things, Daryl Woodson, Sanctuary Restaurant. And discuss that there is an economic impact from this, City of Mesa Arizona a Commission to study of the impact after they passed the smoke flee restaurant ordinance the conclusions I'll just say it appears overall a smoke flee ordinance in Mesa has resulted in sales losses for restaurants, the significance of those losses undoubtedly vary from business to business depending on the particular characteristics of the establishment. It's important to keep in mind that restaurants that depend heavily on happy hour and late night business are likely to experience the greatest losses. Restaurants that depend primarily on dining room business probably experienced below average losses. Our business at The This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #7 Page 31 Sanctuary depends heavily on the late night business, we will show significant losses at the 50/50 level. At a 35 percent 65 percent alcohol test we'd be out of business very quickly. In Califomia which has the most experience with smoke free, in the period after the smoke free restaurant law was passed in California which was a period of heavy growth in California, 32 percent, 31.9, 32 percent increased in the state's sales tax revenue during that period, huge growth, boom time out there, the number of sales tax permits for restaurants that do not serve alcohol during that period increased 12.7 percent, boom time, the number of sales tax permits that for restaurants that serve alcohol, decreased 3.3 percent. Not significant unless your one of the 1,039 restaurants that went out of business because of it. Lehman/Thank you Woody. Okay Council we have an ordinance, is there? Russ you've got two minutes and that' s it, nobody else, we've talked about this a long time but certainly go ahead. Russ Schmeiser/Thank you, my name is Russ Schmeiser, I'm affiliated with the Mondo's restaurants and Jim Mondanaro, I have an equity position in Mondo's downtown. What I'd like to say really just has to get back to the issue at hand and that's the public health issue, all of you have a reluctance t0 get involved in private enterprise and the way you get involved in it is through public safety or welfare. The question before you is really is there a public health issue here? If there's a public health issue and the documentation' s been presented to you and you all know in your own mind whether there's a public health issue to be addressed, then you need to ask how is that addressed? But if public health is what gives you the right, the right, maybe even the duty to be involved in the regulating of smoking in these public places then the public health issue exists regardless whether it's a restaurant or a bar. And if there is a public health issue that mandates the City Council to become involved and to regulate this then you have to go the whole way and regulate it everywhere. If it were contamination of the water supply, I don't think you'd be talking about well let' s regulate it in restaurants but not in bars, if you deem this to be a health issue and a contamination of the air supply, that same issue exists regardless of the percent of sales one way or the other. And I would strongly support if it's your determination that this is a public health issue that you meet your fiduciary responsibility and go the whole way on that decision and that is protecting the entire public if that is your determination. Thank you very much. Lehman/Thank you Russ. Okay Council we have an ordinance that. Vanderhoef/Connie' s amendment. Lehman/Oh we have Connie's amendment, the 65. Karr/Amend it back to 35 percent (can't hear). This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #7 Page 32 Lehman/The amendment would place it back as it was originally prepared by the City Staff. Those in favor, yes and Mike seconded. Those in favor of the amendment raise their right hand please, oppose, the amendment is defeated 4-3, Lehman, O'Donnell and Champion in the affirmative. We now have discussion on the amendment or on the ordinance as amended, any further discussion from Council? Champion/Well there are some other things I'd like to discuss, I don't know whether they'd be part of the ordinance or part of the solution to what' s probably going to pass tonight is I mean what are, what is our obligation to these businesses that are going to be affected? The four of you that are going to vote for this 50-50 ordinance, I mean, what can you do to assure these people, or what can you do to help them in their business is going to be affected? I mean we need to have included in this ordinance, what if they come to us in two months and say look my business is down 40 percent, or my business is down 50 percent, I mean don't you feel any obligation to what your doing to their livelihood? This is not just fun and games we're talking about, this is how people make a living, this is how they make their house payments, and they're scared to death and I don't know if they're right or wrong but I do worry about it and it bothers me that I don't hear that concem coming from this Council up here, it really concems me. Pfab/Could I address your issue? Champion/No, I mean yes, because I don't think you can, I don't think you want to. Pfab/No I do want to, and my concern is okay if in several months we find it's a tremendous disadvantage to some people maybe at that point we can go to 100 percent in all public places. That would be a level playing field. Kanner/I would second that, I think, but in addition I would say Connie in six months if we hear from people and they come to us and we look at our economic development money and say that it might be worthwhile subsidizing some of these people until we do get to a 100 pement, we look at different options and see what's out there. Champion/Well that's unrealistic Steven, now are you going to subsidize my clothing business when my sales drop because of the economy? I don't think so. Kanner/No, well if they're affected by something which I don't think they will be, I think actually it's going to increase business but if they do find that it's going to affect their business we talk about some options that might be available. Champion/What options? I mean can you come up with anything? I mean I hate to have people leave here tonight thinking about moving their restaurant somewhere else. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #7 Page 33 Kanner/Perhaps it's a loan or a grant, we give out, or it's equivalent of a tax abatement, we give that to other large companies, let' s support some of the smaller ones if that's the case. I don't think that's going to be the case and I think before two years is up instead of thinking about revoking what we have I think we're going to see that we might want to increase it, it's going to be very successful and I think we might want to get to 100 percent a lot sooner than two years. O'Dormell/Well I think the people that have spoken tonight are the ones that can tell us because they live that experience, we're affecting the well being of our businesses in Iowa City. I was prepared to go with the 65 or red light, green light, I will under no circumstance support the 50 percent. Wilburn/You know when we take votes here on ordinances and resolutions we, regardless of the issue we get input from staff, we hear from folks both pro and con, and so we've heard the arguments and we have to base our, use our less experience and judgment to take the best vote that we think we can in our judgment what is in the best interest of the public. And part of what I'm basing my decision and faith in is and I have received input on both sides, overwhelmingly in support of doing this, and overwhelmingly from some folks whether they're smokers or non smokers saying they understand and they will continue to patronize, in fact in some cases they will begin going to some other, some of the venues that they felt they have been able to go to so that's what I'm basing my judgment on, that these folks are true to their word. We have an ordinance group called CAFE, Clean Air For Everyone, but I've had input from folks who are not members of this on both smokers and non smokers who say they support this. That's what I'm basing my judgment on, I'm looking at it as more than just a special interest group, basing it on the many experiences that I have seen in favor of this and I'm ready to vote. O'Donnell/It's very easy for us to speculate with somebody else' s income. Wilburn/And I'm ready to vote. Lehman/Well I think, and I certainly think there' s concern and interest on the part of every person up here and I think that we all would like eventually having smoke free restaurants, the difference of opinion is how drastic do we start the issue? I guess, I mean I personally feel that the 50 percent is too drastic, I think any action that starts this movement is good and healthy and it's something we should do, I think the 50 percent is a mistake, I can't support the 50 percent, I absolutely support the concept of, I just think it's more drastic and obviously I think the folks who have communicated with Council and your right we've had enormous more communication on this issue than any issue we've ever had in the eight years I've been on the Council. There's been far more communication, overwhelming in support of some sort of ban, I think issue with the percentage, but that' s. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #7 Page 34 Wilburn/Sure. Lehman/I do not take issue with the concept and I don't want folks to say that I did not support regulating smoking in restaurants because that is absolutely not true, I just don't support the 50 percent. Vanderhoef/And I respect everybody's opinion up here and I think Ross hits it right on the head that your life experiences and the people that you talk to that want the clean air and for me when I suggested that we take it back to the 50-50 it was because over the course of two years we had talked 50-50 all that time and it had only been at one meeting that all it was it came up and there were numbers being tossed around and the 65 got landed on for no reason that I was aware of. I still think it's very defensible for 50-50, if you sell more food than alcohol then you are a restaurant and I think it's good public policy to look at the majority and I truly feel in voting for this ordinance I am speaking for the majority of the people in this town. Lehman/Well we're just batting our gums, let's do a roll call. Motion carries 4-3, Lehman, O'Donnell and Champion voting in the negative. Karr/Can we have a motion to accept correspondence? Vanderhoef/So moved. Wilburn/Second. Lehman/Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by Wilbum, all in favor. All ayes. Motion carried. I must say though and this is certainly, I mean I think we are all in the same mind when it comes to the smoking issue, but I really, really want to encourage the people of this community who wrote so many letters and sent so many e-mail's and made so many phone calls get out and support those folks, if they don't have smoking be there, be there with your friends because it's one thing to tell us how awful smoking is while you sit at home and eat a TV dinner or you go someplace else, if you don't support these folks I think you've done a tremendous disservice to the people of the community, and so I really, really encourage folks to show your support by patronizing those folks who will be required to go smoke free. Vanderhoef/Well said Emie, I second it. Lehman/Thank you. Okay Item number 8. Kanner/Ernie could we take a break and see if we could get electricity up here? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #7 Page 35 Lehman/Oh all right we're going to take an electric break folks, we're going to start at 8:30, that's 7 or 8 minutes. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #11 Page 36 ITEM NO. 11. CONSIDER A MOTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR DECEMBER 11 ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 1-9-3B OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES ESTABLISHING TIlE BOUNDARIES OF THE VOTING PRECINCTS. Karr/Mr. Mayor, the revised one. Lehman/I'm sorry. Karr/Consider a motion, setting a public heating, this is a revised one, you have something in front of you. Champion/Oh that' s right. Lehman/We need to set. Karr/We need to set a public hearing for December 11 on an ordinance amending the City Code 1-9-3B of a code of ordinances establishing the boundary of the voting districts, rather than give second consideration. Champion/So moved. Lehman/Right that's what I was starting to say because I had it written down here reset the public heating. Is there a motion to reset the public hearing for December. Champion/I motioned and Pfab seconded. Lehman/Moved by Champion and seconded by Pfab to reset the public hearing for December 10, all those in favor. All ayes. Karr/December 1 lth, would that be okay? Lehman/December 1 lth. Pfab/Do we amend that to? Champion/That' s what my motion said. Lehman/2001. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #14 Page 37 ITEM NO. 14. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING FEES FOR SERVICES AND ACTIVITIES OF THE IOWA CITY HOUSING AND INSPECTION SERVICES DEPARTMENT. Vanderhoef/Move to resolution. Lehman/Moved by Vanderhoef. Wilbum/Second. Lehman/Second by Wilbum. Discussion. Vanderhoef/I just think it's nice that we have our landlord' s all on board on this and they have the opportunity to have input and to come forward with a positive recommendation. Lehman/I think it's really important. Vanderhoef/I do too and I appreciate the work that those folks did. Lehman/Well I think that's, kudos to the staff working with those folks. Doug, no seriously I think that' s, obviously we try to cover 70 percent of our budget with fees and we've got a structure that is agreeable to those folks who are going to be paying the fees. Roll call. All ayes. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #15 Page 38 ITEM NO. 15. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST A CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A UNIVERSAL DESIGN SINGLE-FAMILY UNDER THE AFFORDABLE DREAM HOME OPPORTUNITIES PROGRAM (1812 B STREET). O'Donnell/So moved. Pfab/Second. Lehman/Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Pfab. Somewhere. Champion/We had them. O'Dormell/I can't find them either. Lehman/We received one bid, the bid was $157,000 the staff is recommending the awarding of the bid to Moore Construction Company. Karmer/What was the estimate on this? Vanderhoef/$157,000. Lehman/No, that's the. Vanderhoef/Oh the estimate was 152,000 or something like that, what was it Doug? O'Donnell/I just. Vanderhoef/It was close. Doug Boothroy/I don't recall exactly what the estimate was, I did the estimate but it was around $100 a square foot and this came in at about that same amount. Lehman/Okay, and your comfortable with the bid or you wouldn't be recommending approval. Boothroy/$100 a square foot is a very good bid for construction. O'Donnell/Good. Lehman/Discussion. Roll call. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #18 Page 39 ITEM NO. 18. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY LOCALLY KNOWN AS 656 S. GOVERNOR STREET, WHICH IS A PUBLIC NUISANCE, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ABATING THE NUISANCE. Champion/Move to consider the resolution. O'Donnell/Second. Lehman/Moved by Champion, seconded by O'Dormell. Discussion. John Wakefield/Greetings, my name is John Wakefield I'm the owner of that property, last year we put on entire new roof on the structure, we bought the vinyl siding for it which is all on site within the property, it's installed on one side and the back. I encountered some health difficulties which could have been fatal and I abandoned the property project for a while and I'm selling properties that I own in this area and the Realtor that I'm using gave me a call on the phone a few days ago and told me of this action and so I'm, we're going to close on one of those properties in roughly three weeks and I want to use the proof proceeds from that to put this property back up to snuff and then list it and have it sold as a normal property and so I'd like to have a little bit of time to delay, file a building permit in 60 days and comply with all the ordinances necessary to put this into (can't hear). Vanderhoef/Have you made any contact with our city staff prior to coming here tonight? Wakefield/None, I.iust drove into town. I did. Kanner/Is it true that your not the owner of record according to our record? Wakefield/We never registered that I was the purchaser more than 10 years ago but it's listed in friends name Dale and Jeanne Deines. Dilkes/It's my understanding that there may have been a deed that passed from them to you but never been recorded so if record the Deines are still title holders. Wakefield/Well. Dilkes/And we have been contacted by them today and by their attorney and so there' s an issue of ownership about this property. Wakefield/Well they signed the deed to me. Champion/Further until we find out whether this man is. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. # 18 Page 40 Dilkes/Well I don't know whether we can do anything about that title issue, that title issue complicates the dealings with the. Wilbum/What was your conversation with them today? Dilkes/Sue Dulek from my office took a call from them and they had just heard about it from seeing it in the paper as well and then we got a call from their attorney Bob Downer and just inquiring but not the question of particular action. Wilburn/Okay. Dilkes/I don't think that passing this resolution, it gives us the opportunity to proceed to basically, it requires. (END OF 01-106, SIDE TWO) Dilkes/(Can't hear). We can certainly do that. Wakefield/If the same result would be putting into the hands of the City rather than selling it. Lehman/No the same result would be abating nuisance. Wakefield/Oh well if that's your intent then I'm here to comply with that. Lehman/Comment section, this has been a nuisance for 10 years, there's been significant amounts of contact between the City, the Housing Inspection Department and the owners I understand over a 10 year period, this isn't something that come up today, now if we pass this my understanding is we can use this is necessary. If the nuisance can be abated without our acquire the property we will do that. Dilkes/This resolution allows to proceed and requires us to make an attempt to purchase it voluntarily, we have to do that under the condemnation statute before condemning but the problem like we discussed with you is just this has been an ongoing problem for years to the distress of our staff as well as the neighbors and I think Housing feels that it's something they want to pursue. Wakefield/Well the City hasn't been too helpful, I mean when you had your truck back in there and deposit a pile of waste from the city cleanup that was over 7 feet tall in the driveway so I couldn't get vehicles in there to work, that didn't seem like a fair thing and you did that when the storm occurred and I was here in town trying to work on it. Dilkes/I can't address, obviously I wasn't present at that time, I can't address that. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #18 Page 41 O'Donnell/This has been a 10 year problem. Wakefield/Well the house hasn't been a problem continuously for 10 years. Pfab/Eleanor does the City have just a burning desire to own that property by purchasing (can't hear)? Atkins/I'll answer that, this property is in deplorable, deplorable condition, and for 10 years, I think we have a responsibility to the neighbors and I would like the authorization to proceed, of course ifthere's a way of resolving it along the way we'll do that, but this house is deplorable. Pfab/But the goal of the City isn't just to get control of it, to get the problem solved. Atkins/We want abatement. Pfab/Yea, we want the problem. Dilkes/The purpose of the City is to abate the nuisance and because we have tried a number of other avenues to do that and have been unsuccessful we have come to this point. Wakefield/So that's why I'm asking for 60 days, I don't feel it's been 10 years. Dilkes/I don't think we can negotiate an arrangement here tonight. Wilburn/If passing this won't preclude this gentleman from trying to contact City staff then you can continue to work. Wakefield/But at that point, if I read your resolution that indicates that necessarily your still going to acquire the property from me rather than have me sell it on the open market to someone. Isn't that, i~ did I read that correctly? Dilkes/If Council would like us to keep him apprised of the development with respect to this property we will certainly do that. We always, even though we get authority in the resolution to condemn the property we always inform you before we proceed the condemnation, we would certainly do that here. Wakefield/Okay. Vanderhoef/And we've had that information regularly, this isn't the first that we've heard of it either, certainly our legal staff and housing inspection group have been keeping us informed of this so I'm ready to move forward with this. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #18 Page 42 Wakefield/Okay and if that pile of junk is still on the property could you guys make sure it disappears so I can get a vehicle in. Lehman/I think we can check on that. Wakefield/Thank you. Lehman/See how it got there, whatever, we can check that this is frankly it's enabling legislation that enables us to proceed if we need to do that. Other discussion. Roll call. All ayes. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #19 Page 43 ITEM NO. 19. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY LOCALLY KNOWN AS 707 WALNUT STREET, WHICH IS A PUBLIC NUISANCE, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ABATING THE NUISANCE. Vanderhoef/Move the resolution. Wilbum/Second. Lehman/Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by Wilbum. Discussion. Barbara Marland/I haven't seen any. Lehman/You need to give us your name first. Marland/Emie you know my name. Lehman/I certainly do but everybody else doesn't. Marland/It's so nice to see so many familiar faces that I've not seen for five years. Lehman/No seriously. Marland/Barbara Marland. And I purchased the property in 1976 and lived in it with my family until circumstances on the block forced me from my own safety to move away, I followed a number of other people who changed their location to another place in Iowa City. This wasn't the normal, I've got my Ph.D. and now I'm going elsewhere, this was a problem with one of the neighbors well known in the courts who proved to be not respectful of orders to not drive so I assumed he wouldn't be respectful of a restraining order. He was on my property quite a bit, he threatened to bum the house down specifically by putting a flaming match through the window. He has been known to boast shooting arrows into the development known as the Cliffs and he's inebriated so much of the time that's it's really difficult to feel that he would be able to be convicted where I could bring him to court. So I decided when an opportunity came to move in with some friends in January of 1993 that I would and in May of 1993 I broke my foot, was seen at the Orthopedic University Hospital, I received a call from Terry Goerdt to do some work on the property which I did despite the fact that at time Dodge Street was being repaired, there was no access in except by foot, and it was painful but I did it. I kept in good contact with the City and was working on the property as recently as Jtme 1996 and then throughout that summer when I was forced to stop first because the individual who had broken into the house and robbed it came back, a man HIV positive who traveled with burglary tools according to some of this other arrests and I just decided it was too damn dangerous and so for about a 4-day period I didn't go out. And then September 1, 1996 1 fell down a 20 step This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #19 Page 44 stairwell in my apartment building, the banister had been removed forcibly by one of the tenants in march of 1996 and had been unreplaced by the landlady and at that point I basically had to make a choice of abandoning the property for the sake of my body which I decided to do. I know it sounds melodramatic but I had the opportunity of course to go into the hospital and have surgery, I decided that at that time it would be safer considering that that tenant who tore out the banister was 6 feet away from the door to my apartment and liked to stand in his door all the time, a simple minded man deemed incompetent with a guardian, very complex situation. Every time I complained to the police about something he had done I received a lecture from them so basically here I was sick, and I took about two years off to heal, I damaged my sacral disks and I still have a problem standing, I spend a lot of time in bed. Meanwhile on that fall I lost a tooth, I lost another tooth when he tackled me as I was going down the stairs. I postponed getting my smile back to build up an account to remodel this house, the subject house. I would be happy to put those funds in an escrow account if you would like as a sign of great faith, I don't want to bore you with my body but at my age it is the most important thing. On April 23rd of this year I fell over a stump leaving the Eagles Country Market on North Dodge Street and once again I fell on the right side of my face and split the patella on my knee cap and when I received this notice at the end of July that the subject property was not registered and failed to conform with the housing codes, certainly can, what's the word? Sympathize with and agree to (can't hear) I wasn't able to get around, in fact it's only in the past several days I've been able to think about how much it's going to hurt when I sit on the edge of the bed and try to stand up in the morning. It's not been a really good time for me but I've not broken any bones that could not fuse by them self, or fuse inside a cast so I'm thankful to the Lord for that. As fas as conditions of the grounds go on the property, we have done our best, since the late 80's, since 1989 when my regular gardener left, I had a retainer paid to Jack Leatham my friend and neighbor hundreds, and hundreds, and hundreds and hundreds of dollars over the course of 1990 through 2001 and unfortunately for the past two summers for some reason Jack hasn't done anything, so in the summer of 1996 my Adam and his wife Filicia worked in the yard in June in the surrkmer of 98 he came down from Chicago and worked alone and in the summer of 1999 my daughter Barbara and her partner and Jack and Filicia, Jack is Adam, and Terry Goerdt came by and cheered them on, in the Summer of 2000 after I had agreed you know with Jack that he would continue working on the property, keep it mowed, keep the weeds down, keep the vines down, Barbara went over to the house four times, she lives in Berkeley, and pulled vines and this past June Barbara and her partner, a very busy San Francisco attorney who had cleared his slate to devote a week to working on the yard found that nothing had been done on the yard and decided that it was too far gone for them alone and my son Adam at this point had taken a job with Neiman Marcus and so he was far away in Dallas and had a house of his own to work on. Now I'm sorry that all this has caused such distress to the neighbors, frankly I'd be pissed myself, I mean I completely understand your attitude and I don't want to offer any resistance, I just This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #19 Page 45 want to explain how it came to this point. At the very beginning in 1993 it seemed like the logical thing to do one of the people that had been frightened by Lehman/Barbara have you talked to? Marland/Yea, real fast, one of the people that had been frightened by this man came out of work with the Chicago Coalition for the Homeless working with psychotic adult males and he as a tenant of the person that I was referred to constantly here as the nemesis of the neighborhood, he was accused by the individual of touching a branch and therefore the individual was going to kill him and so he moved. And at that point I decided okay here' s this man, Michael Lamash who' s now in graduate school here at the University and he did three or four years of Vista work in Iowa City, 1/3 my age, a guy, and trained in dealing with psychotic people found the individual too much for him, there was kind of a little voice that said perhaps you ought to think of getting the hell out of there too, I would be back them now except for the fact that I fell. Kanner/Barbara with all do respect I don't think this is getting us (can't hear). Marland/Okay well, getting to the. Kanner/(Can't hear) get to the point. Marland/Okay getting to the point, I have deferred dental implants and everything else I could you know consider elective to build up what I worked out to be about $28,000 to re-sheet the house and insulate it from the outside, reorient the porch to the Walnut Street Side and basically put in a row of Evergreen's on the Dodge Street side. I constantly receive offers to buy the house, it's almost a joke at this point but whenever the couple plans to have children or has children I tell them about the notrooxide that's released every time the bus that stops there and then starts again and then every car that was behind the bus comes to that comer (can't hear). Lehman/Barbara you say you have accumulated $28,000. Marland/No, no, much more than that Emie, I mean whatever you want, but basically the total that I set aside was $80,000. Lehman/Okay well my suggestion at least for Council is that we handle this in much the same fashion that we handled the other one. Marland/My only concern is the season, because it's getting too cold for outdoor contractors. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #19 Page 46 Lehman/Well I realize that, but I think that what we will be doing here, what we are being asked to do is to authorize the City to do what it is necessary to abate a nuisance, if that means they can work something out with you, and the property can be taken care of so be it. Kanner/Well. Lehman/What it does it authorizes the City to do what is necessary to abate a nuisance that apparently has been, it says in our staff report 14 years. Is that correct? Dilkes/Yea we need to be clear, what it authorizes us to do is attempt to acquire the property, to acquire it, to buy it, if we can't do so voluntarily condemn it. Lehman/Right. Dilkes/And the reason why we're, the staff is asking for that authorization is because attempts to abate the nuisance in all the other ways that we do that have failed and it's been very difficult as I understand from housing to communicate with Mrs. Marland and to do what' s necessary to do it in that fashion so we will certainly keep you updated if anything changes in that respect but we need to be clear about what this resolution does. Lehman/This is an authorization. Kanner/Yea and it directs the City Manager to begin the purchase of the (can't hear). I think if people don't want to do that they should ask for deferment but if not we should be clear to folks like Eleanor is saying that this is to purchase the property as you said we've seen a long history, we've seen pictures and we haven't gotten any response, it's not like we're putting people out on the street because it's been abandoned for quite some time and people get a fair, the owner could get a fair market price on this and I think that Council is, if there's a wish to defer it someone should make a motion otherwise I think I'm ready to vote and hopefully the rest of the Council is ready to vote. Dilkes/And just to remind you this is the house that we believe is structurally sound and can be saved. Lehman/Salvageable. Dilkes/But we need to move along. Lehman/Okay, any other discussion on the part of the Council? Roll call. All ayes. The motion is carried. Thank you Barbara. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #19 Page 47 Marland/I would like to understand what your procedure is going to be from here on out. I've not been that difficult to communicate with, I've been available by phone with Terry Goerdt for years and even with my leg in a cast and the skin oozing from abrasion have gone on down and worked on that property. Lehman/We'll be in contact with you I'm sure rather quickly. Champion/Absolutely. Dilkes/Right. Marland/Okay. Lehman/And I don't know how soon, I don't know how long the process takes but I would assume very soon. Dilkes/And your certainly free to contact my office. Marland/Could I come in and talk with you sometime? Dilkes/You certainly can. Lehman/Okay. Marland/All right I should also just in leaving like to add that I had no idea that I was in violation of not having registered a vacant house, I didn't have any idea that that was necessary, had I done it, had I known I surely would have done it. Thank you very much for your time, I'm sorry if I rambled. Lehman/Nope that' s all right. Marland/It's an incredible saga and I had no way of knowing that it would end this way when the joumey began. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #20 Page 48 ITEM NO. 20. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION RATIFYING SETTLEMENT OF PENDING LITIGATION. Lehman/Okay. I would like a motion from Council at this point to change Item number 25 on the agenda to Number 20, that is a resolution ratifying the settlement of pending litigation. Wilburn/So moved. Lehman/Moved by Wilburn. Pfab/Second. Lehman/Seconded by Pfab to change the order on the. Champion/We didn't vote on this last? Lehman/Yes we did. Champion/We did. Lehman/Yes, it was unanimous. Champion/I did. Lehman/Okay all those in favor of changing the agenda order say aye. All ayes. Opposed. Champion/I'm getting bad (can't hear). Lehman/And Item 20 is the resolution ratifying settlement of pending litigation which we discussed earlier this evening. Is there a motion to that affect? Lehman/Moved by almost everybody and seconded by most of us. Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion. Kanner/Could you explain this so folks know what we're doing? Lehman/I don't know that this is, I really do not believe that I, the explanation of this would be over with by midnight but it is in reference to a piece of property located at 426 Baird Street which has been a problem for some time from a repair standpoint, but this resolution authorizes the city to enter into an agreement with a person who is apparently able to renovate that property and will have responsibility for doing so. Is that? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #20 Page 49 O'Donnell/Very well. Vanderhoef/And the time schedule is. Lehman/By the first of May. Vanderhoef/Yes. O'Donnell/Good job Ernie. Lehman/Okay roll call. All ayes. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #21(f) Page 50 ITEM NO. 21(f). PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE. Lehman/Public Art Advisory Committee, we had two appointments to fill three year terms ending January 1, 2002, we appointed Barb Camillo and I think we have two other applications which we can certainly one of those two tonight if we choose. Champion/Well I'd like to nominate Emily Walsh. O'Donnell/I second that. Champion/I don't have my thing in front of me but I had her on my list to suggest last night and I. Lehman/Is that acceptable to the Council? Pfab/Fine. Vanderhoef/Yes. Kanner/Could you explain why we're reconsidering? Lehman/We had an error last night in the information that was presented to us, the applications were in fact complete, we didn't know that last night. Kanner/So all of them were complete? Lehman/That's correct, that's correct. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #22 Page 51 ITEM NO. 22. ANNOUNCEMENT OF VACANCIES. Previously Announced. B. Animal Care and Adoption Center Advisory Board - One vacancy to fill an unexpired term ending December 31, 2003 (Elizabeth Hospodarsky resigned) (0 males and 4 females currently serve.) Lehman/These applications must be received by 5:00 Wednesday December 5th and that is important. Vanderhoef/(can't hear). Lehman/Sorry, Housing and Community Development the deadline is November 21 for the application, Animal Care is Wednesday, December 5 and we do have a policy that if applications are received after the deadline they will not be considered for that appointment so it's important that the applications be submitted in a timely fashion. Champion/But it is already after November 21, oh I see we we'll get those in our next packet. Lehman/Right. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #23 Page 52 ITEM NO. 23. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION Lehman/lrvin. Pfab/Good night. Lehman/Good night, okay. Connie. Champion/Well I'd just, I'd like us to although I disagree with the vote tonight I certainly will support it since it is a City Council decision. I hope we can have some time in our work session to discuss some things that we haven't talked about like separate rooms, ventilation systems, how we're going to evaluate how this is working, so I'm wondering if it's okay with Council if we put this on a work session and discuss some of those options that might be available to people. Vanderhoef/I'd be happy to. Kanner/Say that again Connie. Champion/Well we talked about some other things when we were originally talking about the 50-50, we talked about some things that we didn't talk about when we went to 65 and that was things like separate ventilation systems and separate rooms, and people want to go to the expense to do that and we've talked about a few other things and maybe somebody else could come up with some other ideas that we could talk about. Pfab/I was under the impression that (can't hear). O'Donnell/No, no. Dilkes/Remember we still have two more readings. Champion/I know. O'Donnell/So we could bring those up. Chapion/We can bring them up at a, fight. Lehman/Okay some of those. Vanderhoef/Amendment. Lehman/Some of those things will come up as a natural reaction to the ordinance after it's in place as well. Anything else Mike7 This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #23 Page 53 O'Donnell/Nothing this evening, go Hawks. Lehman/Okay, Dee. Vanderhoef/Yes go Hawks, I second that. Wilburn/I just want to, I saw in the paper and know from personal experience that Iowa City lost Betty Simon, she died of cancer recently, former Psychologist and 28 year volunteer at the Crisis Center, Domestic Violence, Big Brother/Big Sister, just everywhere and if you knew Betty and she touched a lot of lives and she's going to be sorely missed. Kanner/A couple things I want to acknowledge our Muslim Citizens in Iowa City and around the world and wish them well in fast for Ramadan which just started and also let people know that UI Association of Muslims is hosting a Ramadan awareness week and people that are fasting part of the whole Ramadan month are invited to a public fast breaking party in (can't hear) on Friday, November 30 at the International Center at the UI. And also want to let people know that I attended the trial today of Southgate versus Iowa City and I think the city has a good case, the thing that I really was excited about, this is an everyday thing that happens, that there's a difference and in our society we go to trial to settle those differences in a non violent fashion and it was an exciting example of democracy to see that happen and I hope we continue to work to strengthen that, democratic institution. The decision should be coming from the judge in about a week or so we were told. And I do have a question for Eleanor, and I don't want perhaps an answer today although you might have one apparently you've talked with some folks. If the judge rules in the City' s favor and denies the rezoning how is that property, is that property subject to a moratorium that we voted on in that area? Dilkes/No. Kanner/Why is that? Dilkes/Those properties that have been subject to moratorium under our current ordinance which subjects them to a moratorium when a public heating is set on the rezoning and the rezoning has been accepted. I think also just from in terms of due process fairness issues this is a property that has been subjected to delays already so no it's been excluded from a moratorium, but. Lehman/Okay. I have one item, I would like, and I don't know whether this needs to come to a Council work session or it can go directly to Planning & Zoning but I would like permission from the Council to, the Sensitive Areas Ordinance has been, and I think it' s, staff has discussed this and I have spoken with the chairman of the Planning & Zoning Commission the Sensitive Areas Ordinance is not a rezoning ordinance, it's an administrative ordinance and I believe that there is This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #23 Page 54 going to be a recommendation that that ordinance be administratively applied rather than having to go through Planning & Zoning and Council. I would like that if Council concurs that that be sent to Planning & Zoning Commission and then sent back to us for some sort of action. Is that? VanderhoelY Yes. Pfab/I don't understand why a. Lehman/Well I don't think we can discuss it, we can discuss it. Pfab/Can we discuss it at a work session? Lehman/Well I think we're going to discuss it when it comes back to us as a recommendation from Planning & Zoning. Kanner/Well before we even send it there I think we need a work session to see if we even want to do that. Lehman/Well that's what I'm asking now, are there folks who wish to send it to Planning & Zoning Commission for their interpretation of it? Champion/I would. Pfab/I would like to have a further discussion at a work session. Dilkes/But I think you need to talk about it at a work session before you. Lehman/Would you schedule that for the next work session. Steve do you have anything? Atkins/Duke 41, Iowa 32. Champion/Oh. Vanderhoef/Where are we? Half time okay. Lehman/Eleanor. Dilkes/I can't match that so. O'Donnell/Go hawks. Kanner/Did you get an update on that? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001. #23 Page 55 Lehman/Well we don't know how Southwest Missouri did with the girls game either but that's probably over. Dilkes/No I don't know that either. Lehman/Marian. Do we have a motion to adjoum? Vanderhoef/So moved. O'Donnell/Second. Lehman/All in favor. All ayes. Motion carries, thank you. Adjourned 9:10 PM. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 27, 2001.