HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-04-21 Info PacketCITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET
CITY OF IOWA CITY April 21, 2011
vi".icgov.org
MISCELLANEOUS
IP1 Council Meetings and Work Session Agenda
IP2 Response from the City Manager to James White: Application process for levee project
IP3 Response from the City Manager to Joel Wilcox: Taft Speedway Levee Project
IP4 News Release from Laurie Haman, Iowa City /Coralville Area CVB: 2012 U.S. Olympic Trials
— Wrestling
IP5 Quarterly Investment Report January 1, 2011 to March 31, 2011
IP6 Letter from Lee Grassley, Mediacom, to the City Clerk: Digital channel changes
IP7 Email from Russell Lombard, U.S. Route 6 Tourist Association: Stay on Route 6
IP8 Newsletter: Grant Wood Neighborhood Association — April 2011
IP9 Approved Minutes: Economic Development Committee: February 15, 2011
DRAFT MINUTES
IP10 Human Rights Commission: April 12, 2011
IP11 Housing and Community Development Commission: March 10, 2011
IP12 Housing and Community Development Commission: March 17, 2011
IP13 Planning and Zoning Commission: April 7, 2011
IP14 Police Citizens Review Board: April 12, 2011
I
ti ®lo
a City ouncil Meeting Schedule and
Y
CITY OF IOWA CITY Work Session Agendas IP1
www.icgov.org
TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE
Emma J. Harvat Hall
♦ MONDAY, MAY 2
5:30p Regular Work Session
Emma J. Harvat Hall
♦ TUESDAY, MAY 3
7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting
Emma J. Harvat Hall
♦ MONDAY, MAY 16
5:30p Regular Work Session
Emma J. Harvat Hall
♦ TUESDAY, MAY 17
7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting
♦ WEDNESDAY, MAY 18
Coralville
4:00p Joint Meeting
Emma J. Harvat Hall
♦ MONDAY, MAY 30
Memorial Day — City Offices Closed
Emma J. Harvat Hall
♦ MONDAY, JUNE 6
5:30p Regular Work Session
Emma J. Harvat Hall
♦ TUESDAY, JUNE 7
7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting
Emma J. Harvat Hall
♦ MONDAY, JUNE 20
5:30p Regular Work Session
Emma J. Harvat Hall
♦ TUESDAY, JUNE 21
7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting
Emma J. Harvat Hall
♦ TUESDAY, JULY 5
5:30p Special Work Session
7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting
Emma J. Harvat Hall
♦ MONDAY, JULY 18
5:30p Regular Work Session
Emma J. Harvat Hall
♦ TUESDAY, JULY 19
7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting
�` iii I� City Council Meeting Schedule and
CITY OF IOWA CITY Work Session Agendas April 19, 2011
www.icgov.org
Emma J. Harvat Hall
♦ MONDAY, AUGUST 1
5:30p Regular Work Session
Emma J. Harvat Hall
♦ TUESDAY, AUGUST 2
7:OOp Regular Formal Council Meeting
Emma J. Harvat Hall
♦ MONDAY, AUGUST 15
5:30p Regular Work Session
Emma J. Harvat Hall
♦ TUESDAY, AUGUST 16
7:OOP Regular Formal Council Meeting
CITY OF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
OFFICE OF THE
CITY MANAGER
Thomas M. Markus
City Manager
tom- markus @iowa - city.org
Dale E. Helling
Assistant City Manager
dale- helling @iowa- city.org
Kathryn Johansen
Administrative Assistant
to the City Manager
kathryn- johansen @iowa -city. org
410 E. Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
Phone: (319) 356 -5010
Fax: (319) 356 -5009
M IP2
April 20, 2011
James J. White
121 Taft Speedway
Iowa City, IA 52245
Re: Application process for levee project
Dear Mr. White,
Thanks for your correspondence sent March 23, 2011 and included in the
City Council packet.
Staff has talked to the State Project Officer regarding which HUD rules and
regulations were not followed in the process. His response was that there
were no rules and regulations not followed in the application process or
since the award was accepted. The study is designed to review the levee
application submitted so that the issues to which the residents along Taft
Speedway have brought can be reviewed again and public input can be
gathered regarding the levee and other possible alternatives to protecting
the neighborhood. We have designed the study so that it can be extensive
and thorough.
Regarding the discussion of the levee and timing of buy -out options, staff
has created a response to Mr. Wilcox that answers his questions and
explains how the decision to pursue and accept the Taft Speedway No
Name Levee evolved. Please see staff response to Mr. Wilcox's letter
included in the April 21, 2011 City Council Information Packet.
Sincerely,
G.,.,.. _
Thomas M. Markus
City Manager
w /mgr /letters /HUD- 4 -20 -11
Dr�S;��,��y
C�
Mariam mall
JJWHITE <jjwhite499 @yahoo.com>
From: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 9:50 AM
Sent: Council
To: Response to E -Mail sent to the IC Council from Mary Gantz
Subject:
Dear Iowa City Council Members:
The following is in response to an e-mail recently sent to the City Council.
In the March 22, 2011 Agenda "correspondence" the e-mail was identified as:
7. Taft Speedway: Bruce and Mary Gantz, Janet Lessner. (Though Janet's name is not on the e-
mail.):
First, the Council KNOWS that
d follow Speedway
s not just ask ng the City to' do- over" the
Levee to be done over, not "re-
examined", because it fade t
application process; it is asking the City to do it right this time and to follow the rules and regulations of HUD! our
Second, the Council knows that we, the members of Taft Speedway, were not told of the levee when offer
"buy -out" options. I have sent you commun �aaftergmost of usuhad relbu It ourdhomes and moved back ins Joelw
project' one for you to consider almost a year
Wilcox has sent off a lengthy letter to council also asking you and City Staff to stop misleading the local press
and citizenry into thinking just the opposite as well.
Third, we too are concerned about our property values, health welfare and "homes." But we take care of those
matters ourselves. Why is it incumbent
From the v very start of discussionstof mitigation the developer,
projects, Matt Hayek of Iowa City to have to
development and residents of y
raised the question of spending City money never been allowed to be built in he first place.). 1 am sure Mr. Hayek
1992 fiasco and why Idyllwild should have
and others are concerned about future requests that will come from "other developers" to protect their property,
their investments, and therefore the City's tax base, etc etc.
Fourth, there are more voices than nine who implore the City of Iowa City and its City Staff to follow HUD rules
and regulations.
James J. White
121 Taft Speedway St.
Iowa City, Iowa 52245
319- 321 -1643
1?
CITY OF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
OFFICE OF THE
CITY MANAGER
Thomas M. Markus
City Manager
tom- markus @iowa- city.org
Dale E. Helling
Assistant City Manager
dale- helling @iowa- city.org
Kathryn Johansen
Administrative Assistant
to the City Manager
kathryn-johansen@iowa-city.org
410 E. Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
Phone: (319) 356 -5010
Fax: (319) 356 -5009
M
April 20, 2011
Joel Wilcox
119 Taft Speedway
Iowa City, IA 52245
Dear Mr. Wilcox,
Re: Response to your letter sent to City Council on March 22, 2011
regarding the Taft Speedway Levee Project
The three items for which you wanted a response were:
1) There was no specific warning of the Taft Speedway /No Name
Levee, or of a levee, or of any specific plan at the time the
HMGP buyout program was announced in November 2008.
In the fall of 2008 the City Council was developing plans to mitigate losses
from future flood events. There was a three - pronged approach: encourage
buy -outs, improve public infrastructure damaged by the flood, and protect
portions of the Parkview Terrace and Idyllwild neighborhoods that were not
eligible for the FEMA buy -out program.
In the October 2, 2008 memo to City Council, staff reported on page 6 they
had been conducting preliminary engineering analysis on broader flood
hazard protection strategies such as levees and flood walls to protect
these two neighborhoods. These larger protective measures were
discussed at the October 6, 2008 City Council meeting.
In the November 13, 2008 memo to City Council, staff stated, under
Strategy 3 "Buy -Out Eligible Homes — Provide Some Flood Mitigation for
Neighborhood," that one flood mitigation strategy was to "Implement some
level of flood mitigation for Idyllwild, Parkview Church, and Foster Road
through a combination of earthen levees, elevated roads, fixed floodwalls
and /or demountable floodwalls." The Council then discussed this strategy
and other strategies at the November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session.
On November 20, 2008 homeowners that were eligible for the buyout
program were sent letters offering them a buyout and referencing the
discussion that occurred at the November 17, 2008 City Council Work
Session. The letter sent to homeowners used the wording, as described by
you, as "possibly elevating streets, capping storm sewers, and using
temporary or permanent flood barriers." The City's intent was not to force
homeowners into the voluntary buyout program but to let them know that,
if funding options became available, city staff would pursue funding for
larger protective measures for the neighborhoods and to let them know they could be part of the
buy -out program and say no right up until the date of closing of their home.
The City Council also wanted to see what methods might be available to protect neighborhoods
and thus enlisted Stanley Consultants to do a study to see what might be possible. In January
2009, a public meeting was held at the Water Treatment Facility to discuss options to protect
the Parkview Terrace and Idyllwild neighborhoods. This was the first time a levee constructed
by elevating Taft Speedway and No Name Road was discussed with the public. It was
discussed in the context of several different options to protect the Idyllwild neighborhood and
with the qualifier that funding would need to be located.
Specific funding opportunities for a possible Taft Speedway No Name Levee were not
discussed until March 2009. In a March 19, 2009 memo to City Council, staff outlined there
might be a possibility of funding to construct levees in Parkview Terrace and Idyllwild
neighborhoods through the Governor's State Bonding Program. This possibility was discussed
as part of a larger flood recovery funding opportunities discussion during the City Council Work
Session on March 23, 2009.
At the July 2009 City Council work session, the City Council decided to submit applications to
see if levees could be funded for 3 areas of the City: the Taft Speedway No Name Levee, the
Baculis Thatcher Levee, and the South Gilbert Street Levee. The Taft Speedway No Name
Levee was pursued only after the City attempted to purchase the Idyllwild properties and
determined that a portion of Taft Speedway would need to be elevated as part of the Dubuque
Street project.
In August 2009, homeowners along Taft Speedway were sent a letter telling them the City was
pursuing funds to construct a levee and ensuring they knew a buy -out was still an option. As
you state, it is a very difficult decision to pursue a buy -out after your home has been rebuilt.
However, many people in the CDBG buy -out did sell after fully repairing their homes in order to
remove themselves from future flooding.
In the first paragraph of your letter the assumption was made that David Purdy made the
statement to KCRG News that "Owners were warned of that possibility [of a levee] when the city
was first offered buyouts for the flood damaged homes." As the KCRG reporter indicated to you
in an email on March 28, 2011, after your letter was sent to City Council, David Purdy did not
make that statement, but rather it was a paraphrase of an earlier City Council meeting
discussion.
In the second paragraph, you reference the December 2, 2010 memo to Council which states
that "At the time they were offered buyout funds they were notified that the City Council had
directed staff to pursue funds for the Taft Speedway No Name Road Levee." This sentence was
in reference to the fact that buy -out options were offered up until fall 2010 for the HMGP Buyout
Program and later for the CDBG Buyout Program. You are correct that there was not a definite
plan to pursue funds in November 2008, only a general knowledge that the city was pursuing
options to protect the neighborhoods, which might include levees. In August 2009, residents
along Taft Speedway were sent a letter stating the city was pursuing funding for the Taft
Speedway No Name Levee.
However, the Taft Speedway No Name Levee funding was not pursued and accepted because
the homeowners along Taft Speedway rejected the buy -out. It was pursued because it was the
best option to protect the Idyllwild neighborhood after weighing the advantages and
disadvantages of several different options.
2) The first public announcement that a levee might be explored as a flood barrier
was in January 2009; the Stanley presentation indicated nothing about a levee
with a road on it.
See above discussion regarding the levee. One option to protect the Idyllwild neighborhood
discussed at the Stanley presentation on January 29, 2009 was to "Elevate Taft Speedway and
No Name Road above the 500 year floodplain." This indicates that a levee with these 2 streets
on top would be built. Of course, if Taft Speedway and No Name Road were not on top of the
levee, then residents along these streets could not access their homes and a secondary access
to the peninsula area would not be created. There was a question at the meeting concerning if
the road was elevated whether it would be chip sealed or paved.
3) There was no opportunity for public discussion, as promised in the November 20,
2008 letter, of the Taft Speedway /No Name Levee prior to application for it or
through the time that the City Council accepted the funds for it on December 7,
2010.
There was discussion of various flood protection methods at the January 2009 meeting with
Stanley. On July 20, 2009 a notice was published in the newspaper indicating the City was
intending to submit an application for CDBG funds to build a levee along Taft Speedway and No
Name Road before the application was submitted at the end of July. Correspondence from
residents along Taft Speedway was included in the CDBG application.
In a letter dated November 6, 2009 the State indicated that the city did not receive funding for
the three levees for which it submitted CDBG applications. It was not until almost a year later in
late October 2010 that the city learned that the application had met the guidelines of the CDBG
Disaster Recovery Program and was awarded funds for the three levee applications. Once the
award was announced, staff met with, talked to on the phone, and exchanged many emails with
residents to try to answer questions regarding the program and process.
At the December 7, 2010 City Council meeting, Council provided the public with an opportunity
to provide input on the three CDBG grant applications and 11 people spoke at the Council
meeting on the Taft Speedway No Name Levee grant application. It was after these residents
provided their input that the City Council discussed and opted to accept the award.
I hope this letter has answered your questions and has provided the context in which the
decision to pursue and accept the Taft Speedway Levee funding was made.
Sincerel ,
homes M. Markus
City Manager
w /mgMetters/01cox- 4 -20 -11
3
e-4,. a0-
Joel F. Wilcox, Ph.D.
119 Taft Speedway St.
Iowa City, Iowa 52245
March 22, 2011
Council Members
410 E. Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
Dear Iowa City Council:
F /LED
10; I MAR 28 AH 11: 43
CITY CLERK
to %j1 CITY.10'!
I am writing to call your attention to a recent statement on the intervention by HUD in the Taft
Speedway levee project at the request of Senator Grassley. In the KCRG -News web report on February
25, 2011, the reporter states that "Owners were warned of that possibility [of a levee] when the city first
offered federal buyouts for the flood- damaged homes." I assume the source of this information was
David Purdy, since he is the city official referenced elsewhere in the article.
I had exchanged email with Mr. Purdy in the days just before the December 7 council meeting at which
funds for the Taft Speedway project were accepted. The cover memo relating to all three levee projects
from Jeff Davidson and David Purdy, dated December 2, states on p. 2:
"There are nine homeowners remaining between Taft Speedway and the Iowa River who would
be located on the riverside of the levee. All of these homeowners were offered buyout funds
but declined. At the time they were offered buyout funds they were apprised that the City
Council had directed staff to pursue funds for the Taft Speedway No Name Road Levee."
I asked Mr. Purdy for the communication that supported this assertion and he sent me a copy of a letter
that had been mailed to me and other property owners living in homes on both sides of the river, dated
November 20, 2008. This letter announced the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) property
acquisition project. I assume that this is the specific language to which Mr. Purdy, by report in the KCRG-
News article, and Davidson and Purdy, in the council cover memo, refer in the November 20 letter:
"The City Council, at its November 17`h work session, discussed several possible alternatives for
reducing the impact of future floods. Along with the submission of this HMGP application, they
discussed such things as possibly elevating streets, capping storm sewers, and using temporary
or permanent flood barriers. The development of any plan will include many opportunities for
public input. While the process is just starting, it should be noted that several of these measures,
if part of the final plan, may have an impact on properties eligible for acquisition if the
homeowners decide to remain in their home."
I will not belabor the fact that of the "many opportunities for public input" envisioned in this letter,
there was only one to which I was invited in January 2009, and none when there was any actual prospect
of money in hand. What concerns me is the notion that this letter is considered the point of reference
for the specific Taft Speedway /No Name Levee. There are a variety of options to which the letter refers,
as you can read, a number of which might be completely acceptable me and others who live on Taft
Speedway St., assuming they are what we think they might be. There is nothing there even to suggest a
levee necessarily, as demountable walls or flood walls are flood barriers, and elevating streets was much
discussed with respect to Foster Road.
The December 2 statement is literally false, as there was no Taft Speedway /No Name Levee even on the
drawing boards, as far as we know, at the time. Even the City Council did not know about it until the July
27, 2009 work session, according to Mr. Davidson's comments at that session. My concern is in how this
matter is to be represented by the City going forward. The KCRG article's paraphrase is sufficiently like
the Dec. 2 memo statement that I think a reasonable person would assume it represents the City
Council's and city staff's notion of actual facts.
I must ask that City staff stop drawing a connection between buyout offers and tacit or implied
agreement to the Taft Speedway /No Name Levee. I would also ask the Council explicitly to acknowledge
that there is no such connection and that there was no opportunity given for public discussion of the
specific Taft Speedway /No Name Levee proposal.
It would be accurate to say that Taft Speedway homeowners were told that the City would consider a
variety of options for flood mitigation at the time that the HMGP project was announced, but it is not
correct to state that any proposal was made for any option at that time, or that it was a levee, or that
any promised public discussion of any proposal or application was ever initiated by the City concerning
any specific proposal for funds. It is not right to leap from a host of non - specific options to a specific
scheme. The fact that "many opportunities for public input" is mentioned in the November 18 letter
announcing the HMGP implies that what might have been expected to follow for homeowners who
chose to stay in their homes is some participation in the process of determination as to what
methodologies might be acceptable among the broad range of property owners, or at least to know
what was being actively considered, but what resulted was a fully- formed proposal for a levee with a
road that would become the major route to the Peninsula in a flood year. Such a conception cannot be
pulled in whole or part from the November 20 letter.
There was one additional letter that came to us in August 2009, from Dale Helling, to let us know that
the City was pursuing a road levee and that the buyout was still available to us. But this was almost a
year after the HGMP project was announced, after which many thousands of dollars and r$gny hours had
been spent rebuilding. No one intends to take a buyout who rebuilds, and we allilt. Otis point
appears to be acknowledged by Mr. Hayek in the transcription of the July 27, 200werk J#sion (6:
"A couple have elevated so you know they're not going to go for that i.e., a bu n� j' N
Co
.t-
I hope that you will see that it is in the best interests of the City not to make any public statements to the
effect that Taft Speedway homeowners were apprised of the Taft Speedway /No Name Levee in any way
whatsoever at the time that we were offered buyouts. Such statements are at best confused and at
worst dishonest and put the City in a bad light.
I have to add that statements such as the one cited in the December 2 memo and even the KCRG
statement create prejudice against me and my neighbors and suggest that we might have been expected
to have forfeited any hopes and aspirations for the future of our property because we had decided
against the offer of a buyout, and are, in objecting to the Taft Speedway /No Name Levee project,
somehow like persons reneging on a prior agreement. Consider this: we have no objection to Idyllwild's
protecting themselves from future flood damage if they will use their own property to do so. If they did
so, who would care one way or another when or if anyone on Taft Speedway had been offered a buyout
or not? But because the City would make incursions into our property and make inaccessible the road
by which we connect to the rest of town in order to protect our Idyllwild neighbors, it apparently
becomes necessary, however disconnected and illogical, to find ways to make it as though we actually
deserve this kind of treatment. No matter what the scale, this is what a more powerful and wealthier
majority always does when they prepare themselves to do an injustice to the weaker, poorer, and fewer.
This I fear is the heart of the matter.
But my hope is that it is simply a confusion about what happened when, as honest mistakes can always
occur. I do not hold the named individuals above at fault, who have always treated me with courtesy
and professionalism, because I perceive the confusion to be broader than they. But as confusion begets
confusion, as this may be a case in point, and real damage does occur as a result, I look for my position
on this either to be publicly acknowledged as correct by the Council or refuted with respect to the facts,
events, and documentary evidence that took place between November 2008 and July 2009, namely:
There was no specific warning of the Taft Speedway /No Name Levee, or of a levee, or of
any specific plan at the time that the HGMP buyout program was announced in November 2008
The first public announcement that a levee might be explored as a flood barrier occurred
as part of a presentation of expert opinion from a study by the Stanley Consultants in January
2009, and included other options, such as demountable walls and Hesco barriers; the Stanley
presentation indicated nothing about a levee with a road on it.
There was no opportunity for public discussion, as promised in the November 20, 2008
letter, of the Taft Speedway /No Name Levee prior to application for it or through the time that
the City Council accepted funds for it on December 7, 2010
N
0
0
"—f c 3
W
�R
W
Thank you for reading such a long and tedious letter! I do look forward to a response.
Sincerely,
Joel F. Wilcox
119 Taft Speedway St.
CC: Gregg Hennigan, KCRG -News
Joseph Bohlke, IDED
Amanda B. Plunkett, HUD
_
ti
o
O
-'z=, h
3
CO
C'
"t:
Z
W
M
UJaQwrestling
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
To: News /Sports
From: Laurie Haman, Vice President, Iowa City /Coralville Area CVB
319.337.6592 or laurie @iowacitycoralville.org
Contacts: Gary Abbott, Director of Communications, USA Wrestling
719.598.8181 or GAbbott0)USAWrestling.orq
Rick Klatt, Associate Director of External Affairs, University of Iowa
319.335.9431 or rick -klatt @hawkeyesports.com
Josh Schamberger, President, Iowa City /Coralville Area CVB
319.337.6592 or Joshua @iowacitycoralville.or�
Number of Pages including this sheet:
Official website launched for 2012 U.S. Olympic Trials — Wrestling
Fans can now access majority of details pertaining to the 2012 event which takes place at
legendary Carver Hawkeye Arena in Iowa City, IA.
IOWA CITY, Iowa — The official worldwide website for the 2012 USA Wrestling Olympic Trials
launched earlier this morning. The website www.iowacitvtolondon.com, contains information
for both athletes and spectators. The event will be held at Carver - Hawkeye Arena on the
campus of the University of Iowa from April 21 -22, 2012.
In late January, Iowa City (IA) was awarded the bid to host the sports most signature
competition beating out bids from Columbus, Ohio, Council Bluffs, Iowa, Greensboro, N.C.,
Hampton, Va., Oklahoma City, Okla. and Pontiac, Mich. Since that time a local organizing
committee comprised of representatives from University of Iowa Athletics and the Iowa
City /Coralville Area Convention & Visitors Bureau have been working alongside the United
States Olympic Committee (USOC) and USA Wrestling (USAW) to shore up details surrounding
the event. They have been joined in those efforts by some of the sports greatest local figures
including legendary collegiate and Olympic wrestlers Dan Gable, Tom Brands, Terry Brands, and
Lincoln Mcllravy.
The event will feature competition in the three Olympic styles of the sport — men's freestyle,
Greco -Roman and women's freestyle. The competition will determine the U.S. athletes who will
qualify to represent the United States at the 2012 Olympic Games in London, England.
"It was important for our team to hit this first goal." said Iowa City /Coralville Area CVB President
and local organizing committee member Josh Schamberger. "Tomorrow begins the one -year
countdown. Our community is fired up and anxious to welcome our nation's best."
The goal of April 20, 2011 for the website launch coincides with when the majority of area hotel
inventory will open up. "Most hotels work on a 365 -day calendar. We have some of the best
properties in the country here in Iowa City, Coralville, Cedar Rapids ... but don't wait, things will
move quickly there." He added all- session tickets for the event will go on sale beginning at
9:OOAM (CST) on Monday, June 6, 2011.
Further details on the 2012 U.S. Olympic Trials can be found today at
www.iowacitytolondon.com.
2
M IP5
CITY OF IOWA CITY
QUARTERLY
INVESTMENT REPORT
January 1, 2011
to
March 31, 2011
Finance Department
Prepared by:
Brian Cover
Senior Accountant
OVERVIEW
The City of Iowa City's investment objectives are safety, liquidity and yield.
The primary objective of the City of Iowa City's investment activities is the
preservation of capital and the protection of investment principal. The
City's investment portfolio remains sufficiently liquid to enable the City to
meet operating requirements that cash management procedures
anticipate.
In investing public funds, the City's cash management portfolio is designed
with the objective of regularly exceeding the average return on the six
month U.S. Treasury Bill. The Treasury Bill is considered a benchmark for
riskless investment transactions and therefore comprises a minimum
standard for the portfolio's rate of return. The rolling average return on the
six -month U.S. Treasury Bill for the prior 365 days was .19% at 3/31/11.
The investment program seeks to achieve returns above this threshold,
consistent with risk limitations and prudent investment principles. The rate
of return on the City's entire portfolio for the quarter was 0.65% which is 46
basis points higher than the threshold. (See exhibit A)
Investments purchased by the City of Iowa City for the third quarter of this
fiscal year had an average return of .41 %. Rates on new investment
purchases in our operating cash portfolio for the third quarter were
approximately 21 basis points lower than investments purchased at this
time last year. Municipalities in Iowa are still having trouble finding
financial institutions willing to accept public funds.
The federal funds rate is the interest rate at which banks lend to each
other. The Federal Open Market Committee will maintain the target range
for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent and continues to anticipate
that economic conditions, including low rates of resource utilization,
subdued inflation trends, and stable inflation expectations, are likely to
warrant exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate for an extended
period. (See exhibit B)
The quarterly investment report lists investments by fund, by institution, by
maturity date, and investments purchased and redeemed.
New official state interest rates setting the minimum that may be paid by
Iowa depositories on public funds in the 180 to 364 day range during this
quarter were 0.05% in January, 0.05% in February, and 0.05% in March
2011.
Q
F-
m
2
X
w
ca
a�
a�
O
01
S
ol'"/�
r
W
O
60'(:X a
S
S°'4�
60,
W
O
S
Pol
0 0 0 0
aje�j Isaaaju l
CITY OF IOWA CITY
INVESTMENTS ON HAND
DETAIL LISTING BY MATURITY DATE
3/31/2011
INSTITUTION
INVESTMENT
PURCHASE
MATURITY
INVESTMENT
INTEREST
NAME
TYPE
DATE
DATE
AMOUNT
RATE
IOWA PUBLIC AGENCY INVEST TRUST
IPAIT
13- Jun -02
N/A
$ 3,000,000.00
VARIABLE
IOWA PUBLIC AGENCY INVEST TRUST
IPAIT
12- May -09
N/A
$ 4,000,000.00
VARIABLE
IOWA PUBLIC AGENCY INVEST TRUST
IPAIT
28- Oct -09
N/A
$ 15,000,000.00
VARIABLE
IPAIT 2005 GO
IPAIT
14- Dec -09
N/A
$ 424,818.43
VARIABLE
IPAIT 2006A GO
IPAIT
17- Apr -09
N/A
$ 1,060,988.51
VARIABLE
IPAIT 2007 GO
IPAIT
11- Dec -09
N/A
$ 912,529.23
VARIABLE
IPAIT 2008 GO
IPAIT
15- Jul -09
N/A
$ 2,242,279.70
VARIABLE
IPAIT 2009 D GO
IPAIT
12- Jun -09
N/A
$ 213,030.50
VARIABLE
IPAIT 2009 C GO
IPAIT
12- Jun -09
N/A
$ 2,840,699.78
VARIABLE
IPAIT 2010 B GO
IPAIT
12- Aug -10
N/A
$ 3,574,147.22
VARIABLE
IPAIT - WATER
CD
28- Feb -08
27- Feb -12
$ 450,000.00
4.100
IPAIT - WATER
CD
28- Feb -08
27- Feb -12
$ 2,234,789.00
4.100
AMERICAN BANK & TRUST
CD
12- Dec -08
12- Dec -13
$ 6,197,315.00
3.750
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
12- Dec -08
12- Dec -13
$ 2,000,000.00
4.180
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
26- Mar -10
22- Apr -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.550
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
26- Mar -10
08- Apr -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.530
HILLS BANK
MONEY MARKET
30- Mar -10
N/A
$ 9,290,781.67
1.040
WELLS FARGO
CD
13- Apr -10
01- Apr -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.300
WELLS FARGO
CD
13- Apr -10
08- Apr -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.300
BANK OF THE WEST
CD
14- Apr -10
01- Apr -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.350
BANK OF THE WEST
CD
14- Apr -10
08 -Apr -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.350
FREEDOM SECURITY
CD
16- Apr -10
16- Apr -11
$ 1,000,000.00
0.350
WELLS FARGO
SAVINGS
20- Apr -10
N/A
$ 10,000,000.00
VARIABLE
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
13- May -10
01- Jun -11
$ 4,500,000.00
0.600
LIBERTY BANK
CD
13- May -10
01- Jul -11
$ 2,000,000.00
1.050
WELLS FARGO
CD
13- May -10
20- May -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.650
WELLS FARGO
CD
13- May -10
10- Jun -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.650
WELLS FARGO
CD
13- May -10
06- May -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.650
WELLS FARGO
CD
13- May -10
03- Jun -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.650
UICCU
CD
28- Jun -10
26- Jun -15
$ 846,700.00
2.510
UICCU
CD
28- Jun -10
26- Jun -15
$ 300,000.00
2.510
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
10- Aug -10
01- Jun -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.600
FREEDOM SECURITY
CD
10- Aug -10
01- Jul -11
$ 1,000,000.00
1.010
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
24- Aug -10
05- Aug -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.420
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
24- Aug -10
12- Aug -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.510
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
24- Aug -10
19- Aug -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.530
LIBERTY BANK
CD
8- Oct -10
23- Sep -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.380
LIBERTY BANK
CD
8- Oct -10
16- Sep -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.380
CEDAR RAPIDS BANK & TRUST
CD
8- Oct -10
30- Sep -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.820
CEDAR RAPIDS BANK & TRUST
CD
8- Oct -10
01- Jun -11
$ 1,000,000.00
0.380
LIBERTY BANK
CD
8- Oct -10
01- Jul -11
$ 1,000,000.00
0.360
WELLS FARGO
CD
22- Oct -10
07- Oct -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.300
WELLS FARGO
CD
22- Oct -10
14- Oct -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.300
WELLS FARGO
CD
22- Oct -10
21- Oct -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.350
WELLS FARGO
CD
22- Oct -10
01- Jun -11
$ 5,000,000.00
0.300
WELLS FARGO
CD
22- Oct -10
01- Jul -11
$ 1,500,000.00
0.300
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
19- Nov -10
18- Nov -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.760
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
19- Nov -10
10- Nov -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.710
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
19- Nov -10
04- Nov -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.660
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
19- Nov -10
28- Oct -11
$ 2,000,000.00
0.620
WELLS FARGO
CD
14- Jan -11
01- Jul -11
$ 1,000,000.00
0.300
IPAIT
CD
14- Jan -11
13- Jan -12
$ 2,000,000.00
0.850
LIBERTY BANK
CD
10- Feb -11
10- Feb -12
$ 2,000,000.00
0.300
WELLS FARGO
CD
10- Feb -11
03- Feb -12
$ 2,000,000.00
0.300
WELLS FARGO
CD
10- Feb -11
27- Jan -12
$ 2,000,000.00
0.300
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
11- Mar -11
09- Mar -12
$ 2,000,000.00
0.520
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
11- Mar -11
24- Feb -12
$ 2,000,000.00
0.370
CITY OF IOWA CITY
INVESTMENTS ON HAND
DETAIL LISTING BY MATURITY DATE
3/31/2011
INSTITUTION INVESTMENT
PURCHASE
MATURITY
INVESTMENT
INTEREST
NAME TYPE
DATE
DATE
AMOUNT
RATE
MIDWESTONE BANK CD
11- Mar -11
02- Mar -12
$ 2,000,000.00
0.450
WELLS FARGO CD
16- Mar -11
03- Jan -12
$ 1,200,000.00
0.300
WELLS FARGO CD
16- Mar -11
01- Dec -11
$ 1,345,000.00
0.300
TOTAL $ 147,133,079.04
CITY OF IOWA CITY
INVESTMENT ACTIVITY
FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 2011
INVESTMENTS ON HAND AT 12/31/10 $ 156,220,734.70
REDEMPTIONS 1/01/11 TO 3131/11
UICCU
INVESTMENT
PURCHASE MATURITY
INVESTMENT
INTEREST
INSTITUTION
TYPE
DATE
DATE
AMOUNT
RATE
0.375
UICCU
CD
PURCHASES 1/01/11 TO 3131/11
21- Jan -11
$ (2,000,000.00)
0.375
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
WELLS FARGO
CD
14- Jan -11
01- Jul -11
$ 1,000,000.00
0.300
IPAIT
CD
14- Jan -11
13- Jan -12
$ 2,OOO,D00.00
0.850
LIBERTY BANK
CD
10- Feb -11
10 -Feb 12
$ 2,000,000.00
0.300
WELLS FARGO
CD
10- Feb-11
03- Feb-12
$ 2,000,000.00
0.300
WELLS FARGO
CD
10 -Feb -11
27- Jan -12
$ 2,000,000.00
0.300
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
11- Mar -11
09- Mar -12
$ 2,000,000.00
0.520
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
11- Mar -11
24- Feb-12
$ 2,000,000.00
0.370
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
11- Mar -11
02- Mar -12
$ 2,000,000.00
0.450
WELLS FARGO
CD
16- Mar -11
03- Jan -12
$ 1,200,000.00
0.300
WELLS FARGO
CD
16- Mar -11
01- Dec-11
$ 1,345,000.00
0.300
TOTAL PURCHASES
$ (7,239.62)
VAR
IPAIT 2009 C GO BOND (PARTIAL REDEMPTION)
$ 17,545,000.00
REDEMPTIONS 1/01/11 TO 3131/11
UICCU
CD
26- Jan -10
03- Jan -11
$ (2,000,000.00)
0.375
UICCU
CD
26- Jan -10
07- Jan -11
$ (2,000,000.00)
0.375
UICCU
CD
26- Jan -10
21- Jan -11
$ (2,000,000.00)
0.375
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
09- Mar -10
11- Feb-11
$ (2,000,000.00)
0.390
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
09- Mar -10
25- Feb-11
$ (2,000,000.00)
0.430
IPAIT (PARTIAL REDEMPTION)
IPAIT
12- May -09
10- Mar -11
$ (4,000,000.00)
VAR
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
09- Mar -10
11- Mar -11
$ (2,000,000,00)
0.485
WELLS FARGO
CD
13- Apr -10
18- Mar -11
$ (2,000,000.00)
0.300
BANK OF THE WEST
CD
14- Apr -10
18- Mar -11
$ (2,000,000.00)
0.280
WELLS FARGO
CD
13- Apr -10
22- Mar -11
$ (2,000,000.00)
0.300
MIDWESTONE BANK
CD
26- Mar -10
25- Mar -11
$ (2,000,000.00)
0.510
BANK OF THE WEST
CD
14- Apr -10
25- Mar -11
$ (2,000,000.00)
0.280
IPAIT 2005 GO BOND (PARTIAL REDEMPTION)
IPAIT
$ (57,466.16)
VAR
IPAIT 2008 GO BOND (PARTIAL REDEMPTION)
IPAIT
$ (7,239.62)
VAR
IPAIT 2009 C GO BOND (PARTIAL REDEMPTION)
IPAIT
$ (277,717.87)
VAR
IPAIT 2010 B GO BOND (PARTIAL REDEMPTION)
IPAIT
$ (96,557.56)
VAR
IPAIT 2005 GO BOND (PARTIAL REDEMPTION)
IPAIT
$ (17,849.76)
VAR
IPAIT 2007 GO BOND (PARTIAL REDEMPTION)
IPAIT
$ (675.00)
VAR
IPAIT 2008 GO BOND (PARTIAL REDEMPTION)
IPAIT
$ (22,667.45)
VAR
IPAIT 2010 B GO BOND (PARTIAL REDEMPTION)
IPAIT
$ (11,561.39)
VAR
IPAIT 2008 GO BOND (PARTIAL REDEMPTION)
IPAIT
$ (117,939.91)
VAR
IPAIT 2005 GO BOND (PARTIAL REDEMPTION)
IPAIT
$ (3,957.36)
VAR
IPAIT 2010 B GO BOND (PARTIAL REDEMPTION)
IPAIT
$ (19,023.58)
VAR
TOTAL REDEMPTIONS
$ (26,632,655.66)
INVESTMENTS ON HAND AT 3/31/11
$ 147,133,079.04
CITY OF IOWA CITY
INVESTMENTS ON HAND
SUMMARY BY FUND
FUND
TYPE
ALL OPERATING FUNDS
GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND FUND
EMPLOYEE BENEFIT RESERVE FUND
BOND RESERVE FUND
TOTAL
CITY OF IOWA CITY
INVESTMENTS ON HAND
LISTING BY INSTITUTION
3131/11 3/31/10
INVESTMENT INVESTMENT
AMOUNT AMOUNT
$113,559,275.04 $108,557,987.22
$ 13,845,000.00 $ 11,560,000.00
$ 19,728,804.00 $ 22,156,608.00
$147,133,079.04 $142,274,595.22
TOTAL $147,133,079.04 $142,274,595.22
3131/11
3/31/10
INSTITUTION
INVESTMENT
INVESTMENT
DEPOSITORY
NAME
AMOUNT
AMOUNT
LIMIT
TWO RIVERS BANK (AMERICAN BANK & TRUST)
$
6,197,315.00
$
8,197,315.00
$
10,000,000.00
BANK OF THE WEST
$
4,000,000.00
$
20,000,000.00
$
75,000,000.00
CEDAR RAPIDS BANK & TRUST
$
3,000,000.00
$
-
$
20,000,000.00
FARMERS & MERCHANTS SAVINGS BANK
$
-
$
2,000,000.00
$
15,000,000.00
FIRST AMERICAN BANK
$
-
$
-
$
35,000,000.00
FREEDOM SECURITY BANK
$
2,000,000.00
$
4,274,504.00
$
15,000,000.00
HILLS BANK & TRUST
$
9,290,781.67
$
9,290,781.67
$
25,000,000.00
IOWA PUBLIC AGENCY INVESTMENT TRUST
$
37,953,282.37
$
46,951,994.55
N/A
LIBERTY BANK
$
9,000,000.00
$
9,000,000.00
$
25,000,000.00
MIDWESTONE BANK
$
32,500,000.00
$
29,000,000.00
$
35,000,000.00
U OF I COMM CREDIT UNION
$
1,146,700.00
$
8,000,000.00
$
50,000,000.00
US BANK
$
-
$
-
$
65,000,000.00
US TREASURY NOTES AND AGENCIES
$
-
$
-
N/A
WELLS FARGO BANK
$
42,045,000.00
$
5,560,000.00
$
50,000,000.00
WEST BANK
$
-
$
-
$
35,000,000.00
TOTAL $147,133,079.04 $142,274,595.22
Mediacom
April 12, 2011
Ms. Marian Karr
City of Iowa City
410 E. Washington St.
Iowa City, Iowa 52240 -1826
Dear Ms. Karr,
FILED
2011 APR 18 AM 1e= 17
CiiW ' f CLERK
10VVA CITY,10V %
L i�
This letter is to inform you that on or about May 15, 2011 Fox Reality on digital plus channel
222 will be dropped. At that same time National Geographic Wild (Nat Geo Wild) will be
added on channel 222.
This change will not affect the pricing on any Mediacom digital packages.
If there are any questions please contact me at 319- 268 -5033 or e -mail
Igrassley cr mediacomcc.com .
Sincerely,
O, t i ova wt
Lee Grassley
Sr. Manager, Government Relations
Mediacom Communications Corporation
6300 Council St. NE • Cedar Rapids, IA 52402 •
319- 395 -7801 • Fax 319 - 393 -7017
IP7
Marian Karr
From: dwdarby @aol.com
Sent: Friday, April 15, 2011 7:25 PM
To: rex @rexrb.com; RussUSRoute6 @aol.com; Council
Cc: tom- marakus @iowa - city.org; flyind @netwtc.net; SecurityFinancial @hotmail.com;
mmheitzmann @care2.com; fmhann @aol.com; donan1 @comcast.net
Subject: Re: "Stay of Route 6 - U.S. Route 6 Travel Guide - Historic U.S. 6 Hwy. Signs
Would love to. Let's see if we can't schedule something.
Dave Darby
Executive Director
Iowa US Route 6 Tourist Association
www.route6tour.com
Follow us on facebook:
http: / /www.facebook.com / #! /pages /US- Route -6- lowa /l 07074632682057
Visit my Online Photo Gallery at:
http : / /public.fotki.com /DWDarby/
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: Rex Brandstatter <rex @rexrb.com>
To: RussUSRoute6 <RussUSRoute6 @aol.com >; council < council @iowa- city.org>
Cc: tom - marakus <tom- marakus @iowa- city.org >; dwdarby <dwdarby @aol.com >; flyind <flyind @netwtc.net >;
SecurityFinancial <SecurityFinancial @hotmail.com >; mmheitzmann <mmheitzmann @care2.com >; fmhann
<fmhann @aol.com >; donan1 <donan1 @comcast.net>
Sent: Fri, Apr 15, 2011 12:39 pm
Subject: RE: "Stay of Route 6 - U.S. Route 6 Travel Guide - Historic U.S. 6 Hwy. Signs
Hi,
The CVB was not aware of this project when I called. They are a dynamic, hard hitting organization, and I have informed
them of the project and the visit.
THEY reserved the room at the Vetro Hotel, (at their expense) on June 5.. 1 highly suggest that you visit the Coralville City
too. Hwy 6 actually is better know 'thru Coralville' rather than Iowa City.
We look forward to having you let us know if you would like to appear at a Council Meeting, (2nd and 4'h Tuesdays at 7pm)
AND/ OR a weekly luncheon for the Chamber members, in Coralville.
We would love to have you do so!
Rex Brandstatter
Coralville Historian
From: RussUSRoute60)aol.com [ma i Ito: RussUSRoute6 @ aol.com]
Sent: Friday, April 15, 2011 12:26 PM
To: counciKbiowa- city.org
Cc: tom- marakus(&iowa- city.ora; dwdarby(&aol.com; fyind@netwtc.net; rex(arexrb.com; SecurityFinancial(dhotmail.com;
mmheitzmann0)care2.com; fmhann @aol.com; donanl comcast.net
Subject: "Stay of Route 6 - U.S. Route 6 Travel Guide - Historic U.S. 6 Hwy. Signs
This correspondence will become a public record.
************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
FROM:
Russell J. Lombard, President & CEO
U.S. Route 6 Tourist Association
Matt Hayek, Mayor and
Members of the City Council
City of Iowa City - Official Website
Dear Mayor Hayek and Council Members:
Follow along and enjoy!
Starting May 20, 2011 Malerie Yolen -Cohen (Travel Writer) will be driving all 3,652 miles of the Grand
Old Highway (U.S. 6) from Provincetown, Massachusetts to Long Beach, California. She is writing a
Route 6 Travel Guide and will be looking for all those special places to visit, stay and eat when
traveling the 6.
Learn more about Malerie by visiting her blog. You'll love this >> "Stay on Route 6"
(NOTE: For your information we found that the Iowa City / Coralville Area Convention and Visitors
Bureau, IA does not provide direct emails to its executives or staff / departments. Thus, we are not
able to send or forward emails with CC:s, links or pictures to the C &VB. Also, they have not returned
our phone calls.)
Your contact person in Iowa would be David W. Darby, Executive Director of the
Iowa - U.S. Route 6 Tourist Association . Mr. Darby would look forward to addressing the City
and telling you about our Mission. David is currently working on a documentary movie about Iowa's
historic U.S. Route 6. Filming started last month at the Wilton Candy Kitchen . Before filming in Iowa
City David would first like to meet with you or a member of the City Council regarding the old
alignment that passes through Iowa City.
This is part of our Cultural Preservation and Economic Development Program.
(10-11
Item of Interest:
We now have Historic U.S. 6 Route street and highway signs that could be installed along the pre -
1956 alignment. Interested? The most recent signs were installed in the City of Lancaster, CA about
a month ago. I believe the old alignment goes through the middle of Iowa City.
The U.S. Route 6 Tourist Association provides the signs. The signs have the diamond reflective
surface.
Other EXAMPLES:
MA- New- Signage -in- Provincetown -pdf
and in California >> California U.S. Route 6 Tourist Association .
We are all volunteers, either retired or keeping our day jobs. Senior High School and College Student
Interns play a major role in our development.
The U.S. Route 6 Tourist Association is a Not - for - profit IRS 501 (c) (3) "Public Charity ".
We have had a link to your web site on ours since September 2004.
Iowa - U.S. Route 6 Tourist Assn. Directory Page
6
Feel free to contact Mr. Darby should you have any questions or would like to learn more about the
U.S. Route 6 Tourist Association.
I would appreciate if you would share this information with others.
Look forward to hearing from you.
Best Regards.
Russ L
Russell J. Lombard, President & CEO
U.S. Route 6 Tourist Association
RussUSRoute6(oaol.com
"Working to Preserve Our American Heritage"
CC:
Tom Markus, City Manager - City of Iowa City, IA
David W. Darby, Executive Director - Iowa - U.S. Route 6 Tourist Association
Kimberly K. Sloan, Director of Communications - Iowa - U.S. Route 6 Tourist Association
Rex Brandstatter, Chair - Broadband Telecommunications Commission - Coralville, IA
Bernic A. Maxfield, Chair of the Board - U.S. Route 6 Tourist Association
Michele M. Heitzmann, Vice Chair - Program Development / Route 6 Productions
Fred M. Hann, Executive Director - California U.S. Route 6 Tourist Association
Don M. Doucette, Executive Director - Massachusetts U.S. Route 6 Tourist Association
�a�ir �iwum�r lam iaa +Nreoianres -,� ��mmmr iar apt -r: IP8
fi
11G, ntw,
iN r
Io
!Yi
oc'- lion-
Am
,r zoli
�,CttY� �t.'h"� M1114i ttl N `,.,ttilll rdil °�Iw` �' ""' u�iGl Ulli ^� ?. t&➢iit��B—mTi'- _ .. .- :�`�iu miirui ,�� � -_ .. &H2�u�%Ili�m ..
Neighbors Tom Fox
My wife, Tiffani, our two boys and I moved into the Grant Wood and Weth-
erby area in April 2oo8. We were relocated for my job to Muscatine, but after
looking around eastern Iowa we decided Iowa City was the best place to live.
Once we started looking for houses and found a great place on Wetherby
Drive next to Wetherby Park, we knew this was the place. This was the main
reason for us ending up in this great neighborhood along with its proximity to
Highway 6 and ease of commuting to Muscatine.
Now that we have lived here for three years, we are so pleased that we de-
cided to live in this neighborhood. With the addition of the splash pad to
Wetherby Park, wonderful trail system, and playground, I sometimes think we
live at the park. Along with enjoying the park we really enjoy walking on the
Sycamore Greenway Trail with our dog and watching all the wildlife.
With spring upon us, there will be even more activities for us to enjoy as a
family around the neighborhood. One that just started and was simply out-
standing was the Grant Wood Market Place at Grant Wood Elementary. Ev-
eryone in the area should try to go support this wonderful event. Along with
this, we always attend the car shows at Sycamore Mall on Fridays, as our two
boys are just fascinated by old cars, race cars and show cars. And most impor-
tantly we will be spending a lot of time outside talking and interacting with are
neighbors.
My family and I are so excited and pleased to be a part of this neighborhood.
If you're out and about and see us out playing in the yard or at the parks, say hi.
Grant Wood Market Place:
A Treasure for Our
Neighborhood
If you haven't had a chance to visit the Grant
Wood Market Place, you'll have one more oppor-
tunity on Saturday, April 23, from 2 to 5 p.m. The
Market Place was established on a trial basis to see if
vendors and customers found the location suitable
for possibly establishing a year -round or off - season
farmers' market in Iowa City.
So far, informal comments have been very positive but all vendors will be
surveyed in May to see if they wish to continue the market. In the meantime,
take advantage of this wonderful asset and come visit on Saturday, April 23.
All kinds of goodies from homemade candy, donuts, pastries, salsa, guaca-
mole, cheese, plants, meats, eggs, fruit pies and jams and jellies, handmade
blankets, photo cards, jewelry, pottery, and glass birdfeeders. There are won-
derful gifts for Mother's Day and Father's Day.
For more information, contact Marcia Bollinger at marcia- bollinger @iowa -
city.org or 356-5237•
Neighborhood Art Project
Plans are moving forward for our Neighborhood Art project. Jill Harper, an art
teacher at City High School, has volunteered to work with our neighborhood.
Preliminary discussions have suggested a location at the entrance to the South
Sycamore Greenway Trail. Steve Rackis, a neighborhood resident, has vol-
unteered to coordinate the project so we can move ahead and get started this
summer. If you suggestions about the project, please contact Steve directly at
Steven- rackis @iowa - city.org or 887 -6o65.
Grant Wood
Neighborhood
Association
Grant WoodNeighborhood.org
Co- Chairs
Cindy Roberts
cindy- roberts @uiowa.edu
open position
Secretary
Tracy Middleton
tmmiddleton_ww @yahoo.com
Treasurer
Tom Fox
tfoxo3 @gmail.com
Event Coordinators
open positions
Newsletter Editor
Nick Bergus
nbergus @gmail.com
Website Editor
Diana Lei- Butters
chi - lei @uiowa.edu
Community Garden
Coordinator
Alicia Trimble
aliciamtrimble @yahoo.com
Communication
Coordinator
Cindy Roberts
cindy- roberts @uiowa.edu
Iowa City Neighborhood
Services Coordinator
Marcia Bollinger
marcia-bollinger@iowa-city.org
Care to fill an opening?
Contact Cindy Roberts at
cindy-roberts@uiowa.edu.
Between Newsletters
For information and
announcement between
issues of the almost - monthly
newsletter, visit our website
at grantwood neighborhood.
org.
If you want to be added to
the GWNA news e -mail list,
send your name and e -mail
address to Cindy Roberts,
cindy-roberts@uiowa.edu.
Mission
The GWNA exists to
improve the overall quality
of life in the Grant Wood
neighborhood.
The association achieves
its mission by building
relationships by bring
its families together
through social events
as well as educational
opportunities, enhancing
safety and security, making
improvements, and using our
public parks and facilities to
promote volunteer activism.
V
Family Fun, Fitness
and Safety Day
The annual Family Fun, Fitness & Safety Day
will be held April 30, from i to 3 p.m. at Grant
Wood Elementary. This year's activities include
a bike rodeo, a bird and nature walk, a fire truck,
an ambulance, an emergency relief vehicle,
drug safety information and a "Take -Back Day"
pharmaceutical drop -off, bike helmet sales, and
more. More information is available on the Grant
Wood Neighborhood Association's website at
grantwo odneighborhood.org
Board Additions
We welcome two new volunteers to the association
board: Tom Fox as treasurer and Tracy Middleton
as secretary. Many thanks to Tom and Tracy for
coming forward!
No April Meeting
There is no Grant Wood Neighborhood Associa-
tion meeting scheduled for April. We are consid-
ering moving to having two to three association
meetings each year. Generally, attendance at our
monthly meetings has been minimal, which is why
we're considering alternatives. Let us know what
you think.
Friday Night Roller Skating
We offer free, fun, family entertainment: roller
skating at Grant Wood Elementary Gym! The first
hour, from 7 to 8 p.m. is for families and slower
skating, the second hour from 8 to 9 p.m. is for
more experienced, speedy skaters. Skating is free,
but a dollar or an ID is required as deposit to bor-
row a pair of skates. We have skates available in
sizes for young children through adults, but no one
under io years old will be admitted without a parent
or responsible adult.
•suaie AglaylaA�, pue pooh IuujE) aql ul sittapisai Ile of etas uaaq seg iallaIsmau sly_.
sauyapin[) Ia1la1smaN pooylogyApN panoaddu ayl iaaui Isnw slallaIsmau y�noylp 7uamoa aqi >o Aplunb ayl loj 31gisuodsai lou sl mq la3ialsmau ayl
srew pue smud Ali emollo Auk ayl jo saamlaS p0oylogy5laN jo aay}p a41.'uojiupossu pooyloggNpu moA Aq paanpold sl lallalsmau poo9logg9pu moA
SS' 'ON 31w13d
PMOI'Allo BMOI
QIvd
af�e1SOd SCI
plepuels pallosald
ObZZS VI /Q!3 EMOl
anuany e1U10J!jL3 rizZ
uo1je1Dossy p001P0Cl1V13N poO/A lue'D
M 1P9
MINUTES APPROVED
CITY COUNCIL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
FEBRUARY 15, 2011
LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, 8:00 A.M.
Members Present:
Regenia Bailey, Susan Mims
Members Absent:
Matt Hayek
Staff Present:
Wendy Ford, Jeff Davidson
Others Present:
Gigi Wood
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
Mims moved to recommend to City Council the Administrative Authority for
Disbursement of Economic Development Opportunity Funds, as discussed.
Bailey seconded the motion.
Motion carried 2 -0. Hayek absent.
CALL MEETING TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Bailey at 8:03 A.M.
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 21, 2010,
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING:
Mims moved to accept the December 21, 2010, meeting minutes as presented.
Bailey seconded the motion.
Motion carried 2 -0. Hayek absent.
CONSIDER A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADMINISTRATIVE
AUTHORITY FOR DISBURSEMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
OPPORTUNITY FUNDS:
Ford spoke to Members regarding this recommendation. She noted that granting
administrative authority to the City Manager to disburse funds from the economic
development opportunity fund would aid the City in being responsive to the business
community. Ford said the following stipulations would apply if the Council approves the
authority. One, there would be a $50,000 limit, which is in keeping with the current
consultant agreement limits set for the City Manager. Two, the use of the funds would
be directly in compliance with the Economic Development policies and strategies of the
City; and three, any the use of the funds would be reported at the next scheduled
meeting of the Economic Development Committee, and again in the annual report.
Mims stated that she believes this makes sense, and Bailey agreed that it would allow
staff be more responsive to the business community. Davidson noted that Members can
add to this recommendation, or pare it back, if they desire. Members agreed that they
would support this recommendation to Council.
Economic Development Committee Meeting
February 15, 2011
Mims moved to recommend to City Council the Administrative Authority for
Disbursement of Economic Development Opportunity Funds, as discussed.
Bailey seconded the motion.
Motion carried 2 -0. Hayek absent.
STAFF TIME:
Ford noted an article about Iowa City economic development efforts that was recently
published in the Sunday Gazette's Business 380. She also brought reviewing the
strategic policies and plans, and note that sometime in 2011, members would have that
on their agenda. Typically, the committee reviews, revises and recommends an updated
Strategies and Policies document to Council these about every two years, the last time
being January of 2009.
Davidson shared that there was a good turnout for the Riverfront Crossings presentation
recently. This led to some brief discussion about the interest in this area and the
University's plans for the School of Music, as well as other projects that will be moving
ahead in this area. Davidson also stated that they have begun the preliminary work on
the new parking facility project. He shared some of the details of this, adding that
around July 1 st they should be ready for Council's approval of the preliminary design.
Davidson shared that the interest in Towncrest has been growing. Ford agreed, stating
that five or six businesses have contacted the City with great interest. Ford added one
more point, stating that there is a presentation in town on Wednesday called, "The
Hidden Economies of College Towns," that should be interesting. The presentation is at
5:00 PM Wednesday at the Old Capitol Center.
COMMITTEE TIME:
None.
ADJOURNMENT:
Mims moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:20 A.M.
Bailey seconded the motion.
Motion carried 2 -0.
Economic Development Committee Meeting
February 15, 2011
Council Economic Development Committee
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2011
Key:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
N
NAME
TERM
EXP.
Regenia Bailey
01/02/11
X
Matt Hayek
01/02/11
—
b-/E-Susan Mims
01/02/11
F X
Key:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
MINUTES 1P10
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION PRELIMINARY
April 12, 2011
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
Members Present: Orville Townsend Sr., Dianne Day, Diane Finnerty, Harry Olmstead, Martha Lubaroff.
Members Absent: Wangui Gathua, David B. Brown, Howard Cowen, Connie Goeb.
Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers, Sue Dulek (Assistant City Attorney).
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): No.
CALL TO ORDER
Day called the meeting to order at 18:22.
PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None.
CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE March 15, 2011 MEETING:
Olmstead, moved to approve.
Townsend seconded.
The motion passed 5 -0.
ABUSED POSTVILLE RAID
The University of Iowa Center for Human Rights is planning on showing this film in the fall. Bowers will touch
base with the Center to inquire about possible co- sponsorship.
SANCTUARY CITY
Finnerty/ Yes, I can share and we might at some point want to kind of re -title that subcommittee
because it, the sanctuary city policy is what initiated it, but I think as a subcommittee, as a group
we've gone a bit beyond that. Part of the question is what kinds of things, what are the current
experiences of people who identify as immigrants, documented and undocumented, and then what
are the kind of multiple ways the City could be more of a welcoming inclusive community. One of
which may be a sanctuary city type recommendation, but may not as well. And so there are four
members of our group here today so we're well represented, and so its Harry, Dianne, Orville and
myself, and so Martha this is really kind of just some newness to you and also to the other
Commissioners in the minutes, that what the documents you have, the first is a cover letter that we
would propose to a company, a survey that I believe as it stands right now is written in English, but
we would recommend I believe to have it translated into Spanish. So at least there are two
languages represented. As a subcommittee what we want to do is take the City Council's charge and
determine what if anything could be put into place to welcome and create greater inclusion. So the
way we felt as a subcommittee would be to start with documenting and gathering some of the stories
both what people love about living in Iowa City, but also if there have been any challenges. I think the
other portion of that is we really see our, kind of our scope as looking at City services. So the
experiences of being in the City, but then also any particular stories regarding the services that the
City of Iowa City offers. So you'll see various City services, housing, law enforcement, parks and rec,
the Human Rights division. So we went through and just identified key City services with public
interaction. So I'll just share a little bit more and then ask anybody in the subcommittee. So what our
goal is and what we propose to do is to work with the community's sanctuary city committee that has
a lot of immigrant rights activists or advocates, and the faith community particularly to ask their
assistance in gathering some stories. Some other key people in town that we know work particularly
with folks who would identify as immigrants and undocumented. So people at different either health
clinics or some of the social service agencies. Some of the places that we have some contacts
already with folks doing that work. So put this out, ask people who are working with immigrants and
Human Rights Commission
April 12, 2011
Page 2 of 11
or who identify as immigrants to help gather some of these stories. Bring them on back and then
through this we would look and the subcommittee would review this and then make
recommendations for proposals, that again may include something like a sanctuary city but may not
as well. Then the other thing is just an educational piece that we're recommending is if part of the
issue is where can people particularly who don't have documentation feel safe and participating in
our community, and or which services they can access. We're recommending that the City create
this type of an information sheet, your last document. This has just got the City contact information,
but then also very clearly identifies what type of identification is needed to access those services. So
one based on what Carla had said last time about the participation in City Council meetings for
example. We drafted in that kind of in a transparent way, here's what it would take to be able to
participate. Documentation is not needed, but kind of as ah informed consent thing. Please know if
you're going to step up to the microphone here's what you'll be facing. So we would like to see all the
different City services identify what type of documentation they require, and hopefully it's the same as
what they request versus something serving as a proxy that they request, it's not really required by
law. That's our package of recommendations and I'd ask anybody else on the subcommittee let me
know and put on the record what I've forgotten to include.
Townsend/ I think basically I'd just like to say I really enjoy working on this committee. I mean it's like
a waterfall of ideas when they get together. It was really fantastic. When we first started off you
know we initially said that we would try to get feedback from individuals by having local pastors and
service organizations arrange meetings so we could meet with them, and then we thought we mauled
that over and kinda decided that maybe that would be a little uncomfortable. So we came up with a
plan B that you know we would just basically have the local pastors and organizations to get the
information to them and try to you know get them to submit it back, and felt we would get much more
feedback doing this, so that was what we finally agreed upon. We also felt that we should encourage
them to share this is not a witch hunt. This is in order to make things better so we felt it was very
important that we encourage them to share positive as well as the negative you know.
Day/ I think I presented these ...the survey and the City services to the sanctuary city meeting, and
ah they were all very pleased with it. They've also started doing ah; we did have a couple of people
there from the immigrant mainly Hispanic community, and discussed the survey and the services.
Essentially it was pretty much that, I mean I emphasized that for this to be valid it needed to be
spread out, and that that was resting on the faith community and other people working with
immigrants to do this. In talking to a couple of the Latinos that were there, it was also agreed upon
that there could be occasions where they would have some of their friends in with some of the, not
the commission but the committee where they might feel comfortable doing that, so that was another
alternative. Another alternative that I think is going to be utilized possibly is to ah they're going to
provide some of the copies of these to some of the Latino business owners in the community, that
they would have a lot of stories to tell. So I think that my goal hopefully in agreement with you is that I
impress upon the sanctuary city and the people that were there that it was a dissemination and that
they had a big responsibility, and to um passing it along to people. So they felt because if this was
transmitted in normal ways nobody would fill it out. That was their consensus that if we had it on the
website nobody would do it, but if somebody was with them and printed it. Another comment is they
are having a 'Know Your Rights Meeting' at the end of May that they're working on with one or two
people I think from Des Moines. So it's going to be basically a Latino meeting, probably mainly in
Spanish, but it is going to be know your rights kind of thing. We talked basically about, oh it's the
same night, oh that's been moved back. It was going to be the same night as the Abused yeah, that
possibly we could if we were interested have the survey there, and it would just be dispersing it.
Human Rights Commission
April 12, 2011
Page 3 of 11
Whether or not somebody wanted to translate and fill it out then, but that would be a place to at least
introduce the survey to again get a broader scope.
Finnerty/ It might be nice too the May 28th is that date for that the 'Know Your Rights' I think it will be
know your rights if there is an immigration custom enforcement raid workplace, and kind of what ICE
is doing now too is going door to door and picking people up on outstanding warrants so they can get
into that secure community system. So there's some door to door apprehensions and there's also
workplace raids, so I'm going to guess it will focus specifically on that about what are your rights in
the case of being apprehended by ICE, but it might be nice too if we could have as a goal to have the
City services document done by May 28th and we can distribute it there.
Day\ Is that a possibility?
Bowers\ Yes you mean the, yes that's not a problem at all.
Finnerty\ There are some other kind of know your rights that they may have around. Know your rights
that if a police officer pulls you over, you know some more City related know your rights stuff that um I
certainly wouldn't be opposed to us kind of having a table there and distributing this. To have a
presence of the Commission at that 'Know Your Rights'. I think it'd be a nice outreach.
Bowers\ Where is it being held at?
Finnerty\ Well they weren't sure yet. Is it possible to have it in both English and Spanish or is that
asking more then?
Bowers\ Well I don't know of anybody on the staff that would be able to translate it. I would have to
look around the City for that.
Day\ Or if you had it then we could find somebody to translate it if that works.
Bowers\ The problem would be me trying to find somebody, but with an entire City staff that may not
be that difficult.
Finnerty\ And if so Stefanie is there any budget for it? I can certainly find a translator. Would we
have any access to budget to pay for it?
Bowers\ Yes. Then I think I misunderstood you. I thought you meant a motion on the website, but
you mean on the...
Finnerty \Harry do you have anything you want to add as a member of the subcommittee?
Olmstead\ No, everything has been said.
Day \I think one other thing is the last time when I talked to you guys is the sanctuary city group was
going to do some interviewing or story gathering, and once they saw the questionnaire and what we
planned to do they pretty much said so...
Human Rights Commission
April 12, 2011
Page 4 of 11
Bowers\ I'm going to interrupt you. There are just a few things. One the cover letter I think if the
Commission signs off on it I think and Sue you can correct me, but I almost think the entire
Commission should sign it or just should say the Iowa City Human Rights Commission versus just
having the four members of the subcommittee. Then it should also be noted on the survey in the
cover letter and I know this has been discussed in emails, but Sue reminded me that you know we
can't keep these anonymous, so people need to, you know that needs to be big on the cover letter
and the survey. It needs to be understood so that people understand that when it's submitted it
becomes a public record and so if they submit it through an email that's stefaniebowers@ ...
Day\ Absolutely. I don't think my guess is that we will not get many through email.
Bowers\ But if we do we still have it ...
Finnerty\ I'll make that so that the, if I submit it using my personal email, my personal email
becomes part of public record.
Bowers\ Right.
Day\ We may need to make a note on that.
Finnerty\ Okay I'll make a note.
Dulek\ I think on your cover letter itself because I may tell a story that's pretty unique and I would read
that and go that's Diane's story. So I think that people just need to know that once they submit it to
the City it does become public. You don't have to sign it, but sometimes there's enough identification
in the story.
Finnerty\ So the two issues are the language that I've responded, the survey language, my story is
public even if I don't have any identification on it?
Dulek\ Correct.
Finnerty\ But the fact that my email address is attached to that survey is also public. Isn't that right?
Somebody could request that?
Dulek\ Yes.
Townsend\ It's kind of confusing because our committee and then we've got the sanctuary city
committee, so unless someone has a better idea I would suggest that our committee you know be
named ah the let me see, embracing diversity committee, embracing diversity committee...
Day\ I think a different name would be good.
Townsend\ Since I was going through my stuff you know today, I noticed that it just all mingles
together.
Human Rights Commission
April 12, 2011
Page 5of11
Finnerty\ The only friendly request I'd make is that I think this particular thing is specific to immigrants
and I think diversity is much broader. So if there anyway we can have the word immigrant I think
there, or maybe call it the immigrant stories project or.
Townsend\ Yeah why don't we do that.
Townsend\ Something besides sanctuary city.
Finnerty\ I agree with you on that.
Olmstead\ We've also talked about possibly changing the name to a safe cities, maybe just the safe
cities committee.
Townsend\ But there's already a safe city set of information out there.
Day\ That's more of an ordinance again. I mean you know I know what you're saying, but that again
think would be tied to an ordinance, which we don't know if we're going to get. Like immigrant story.
Townsend\ Yeah that's what we're focusing on right now.
Day\ It might serve as a more open, it could lead to, and does that make sense to you?
Olmstead\ I'm putting the cart before the horse?
LubarofR Could you call it something like an inclusive committee?
Day\ I think you're right though, I think we need to have immigration in it because it's basically geared
toward immigration.
Bowers\ And you're just referring to how you, the sub -group identifies correct?
Day\ Right.
Bowers\ So next time on the agenda if you chose a different name use that instead of calling it
sanctuary city? Okay.
Finnerty\ It looks like I took some liberties and I just put the immigration subcommittee actually. Sorry
about that, that wasn't a decision.
Townsend\ I have no objection to what it is, just that I need to something to on specifically.
Day\ We need a motion on that Stefanie?
Bowers\ I think if everybody on the subcommittee agrees and everybody is here right?
Bowers\ So as long as everybody agrees. I think I interrupted the motion.
Townsend\ So what did we decide on?
Human Rights Commission
April 12, 2011
Page 6 of 11
Finnerty\ Immigration subcommittee.
Lubaroff\ I'm going to make a motion that we accept this immigrant stories project as well as officially
change the name to Immigrant Subcommittee.
Finnerty\ I'd second that.
Day\ All in favor say aye.
Dulek\ The motion was as prepared and I would suggest that it was as amended just for that sort of
disclaimer.
Finnerty\ As amended with the subcommittee? Okay.
Bowers\ And also, with the additions of adding the full commission name and then the, that it
becomes a part of the public record.
Lubaroff\ Do I need to restate the motion or?
Dulek\ No that's fine.
Finnerty\ I'll make those changes and send around the redraft.
Bowers\ Just before we move on how soon, I mean is this considered a finished project once you do
the amendments?
Finnerty\ I think so and then if there's budget translation I can find someone to translate.
Bowers\ Okay that's not a problem.
Finnerty\ I was going to try to take a wack at the survey, but I'd have to, I'd take a wack and then I'd
have my friends who really know how to speak Spanish correct it. So if I didn't have to borrow those
favors that would be great. It would be done and ready for translation and I can find a Spanish
language interpreter.
Bowers\ Okay just communicate through email with me and we can get that arranged. Then as far as
getting it online I'll be working with ITS so, you know I'm not sure what their schedule is like it could
be May 1St before its available online and I'll also have document services put it on a different type of
letterhead. So it's on a letterhead I guess more so than just this.
Day\ I was just going to say so once we have the final copy of this and it's available online, then is
that where we need to develop the list either via email or regular mail or personal contact with
members of the community that we think would be involved, but we want to make sure they have the
letter and the survey to pass out. So we need to meet then by the 1St of May so that we have our
jobs. So we're all in agreement on that.
Human Rights Commission
April 12, 2011
Page 7 of 11
Bowers\ That's fine and there's a green, well it was green. The one I have is green. It's a Johnson
County services, it's a big thick booklet, and somebody should probably stop by and get that or I can
bring it to you because that would. You know there's an index and it would probably facilitate the list
a little better than just going around the group.
Finnerty\ I don't know if they're friendly amendments or brand new things, um given that it probably
won't be out till May 1St, I'd Vrobably recommend we have the dates, the stories collected by June 1St?
I think we kept that May 28t date because that was when the 'Know Your Rights' came up, but we
can move beyond that because we can gather stories there. So if June 1St? Then I think the other
piece that the subcommittee is interested in is asking the City, and I don't know if Stefanie if it would
be you to ask the directors or how it might work, to actually complete their section on here.
Bowers\ Yes.
Finnerty\ So if that could be part of the motion too that that was understood to be part of the proposal
Bowers\ Yes I have that down to have that completed and available, and then it will be translated also
correct?
Townsend\ I had a question. We had hoped that we could, you know when we make our written
recommendations to the City Council, that there would also be a Spanish version. How much time do
you need you know when you're trying to get things translated into Spanish? Is that going to be a
problem time wise?
Bowers\ You know if the person can turn it around say in a week, if that's possible. I don't think it
would be a problem at all. Even two weeks would probably be okay.
Finnerty\ Oh yeah. I think it'll depend on if we have a bulleted kind of report or if it's a lot of narrative
or what it might look like. So I'd recommend brevity on our parts and just kind of get the points out is
what I'd recommend, both for costs and also for time.
Day\ I have one more question. We are dealing mainly with Spanish, something we've not defined in
here and we've talked about it a little bit too. We have people of various languages and especially
Chinese, so and so can we. I guess I'm asking how to proceed on the language.
Bowers\ I think we had kind of discussed this too. I guess I would suggest adding something to the
letter. I mean if somebody called the office we have a language line that we could utilize. But to me
that's about the only way that I know of that we would actually be able to facilitate somebody taking
the survey.
Day\ So if we were to find someone say in social services or neighborhood centers or someplace that
there was a connection maybe we could hopefully utilize them to help translate if need be into
different languages. I don't know that they we, we'd have to pay them for it. I'm just asking that.
Bowers\ I mean when people come into the office and English is not a language either that they
speak or one they are comfortable speaking. There's a chart that we use that basically asks what
language do you speak, but it's in a lot of different languages. The person just has to point. So I
Human Rights Commission
April 12, 2011
Page 8 of 11
mean I guess to me if they can call the office we, the staff would have to do it over the phone through
a three -way conversation, but I mean we do that. I mean it's not a problem for us.
Finnerty\ And there is not a problem with identifying who they are or anything that way? They have
to give their name or anything?
Bowers\ To call the language line no. We would do that, no it would be my name, but again you know
if they said something as Sue said that was pretty unique, then...
Finnerty \Thank you, we'll see what comes up.
BUILDING BLOCKS TO EMPLOYMENT
Bowers reported that 9 employers had registered for the Job Fair.
FAIR HOUSING PROCLAMATION
Day accepted the proclamation on behalf of the Commission at the City Council meeting on April 5th.
DELVING INTO DIVERSITY
The next meeting date for this program is April 21st.
DIVERSITY DAY
Finnerty reported that it went well. She suggested that the Commission pass out brochures explaining what the
Commission does at the event next year.
SPEAKER'S BUREAU
Day would like to change the name of this program to Faces of Iowa City. The advertising for this program will
use the department email address.
YOUTH AWARDS
Bowers updated the Commission on the Youth Awards program.
FAIR HOUSING TRAINING
Olmstead will introduce the speaker and do the closing.
BULLYING PROGRAM
Olmstead updated Commissioners on this program.
REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS
Lubaroff mentioned the Iowa City Synagogue had a Mitzvah day which means 'good deed'. It included a blood
drive and also packing dry food to be sent overseas. A local African American church also participated. In
addition, Lubaroff is heading up an initiative with the Senior Center concerning Advance Care Planning.
Olmstead reported on the anti - discriminatory dolphin.
ADJOURNMENT
Lubaroff moved to adjourn.
Olmstead seconded.
The motion passed 5 -0 at 19:14
Human Rights Commission
April 12, 2011
Page 9 of 11
I,N
F
C
N
L
H
C
C
C
F
!C
Human Rights Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2011
meetin
uate
NAME
TER
M
EXP.
1/18
2/15
3/15
4/12
5/17
6/21
7/19
8/16
9/20
10/18
11/15
12/20
ianne Day
1/1/12
X
X
X
X
►angui
athua
1/1/12
O/E
O/E
O/E
O/E
artha
ubaroff
111/12
O/E
O/E
X
X
_
oward
owen
1/1/13
X
X
X
O/E
onstance
oeb
1/1113
X
X
X
O/E
arry
ftstead
3 -1 -2010)
1/1/13
O/E
X
X
X
►rville
ownsend,
r.
1/1/14
X
X
X
X
►lane
innerty
111/14
X
X
X
FO/
iavid B.
brown
1/1/14
X
X
X
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting /No Quorum
R = Resigned
- =Not a Member
L LIP11
i
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MARCH 10, 2011 — 6:30 PM
CITY HALL, EMMA HARVAT HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Chappell, Cheryl Clamon, Scott Dragoo, Charlie Drum,
Jarrod Gatlin, Holly Jane Hart, Michael McKay, Rebecca
McMurray, Rachel Zimmermann Smith
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Steve Long, Tracy Hightshoe, David Purdy
OTHERS PRESENT: Deborah Lyon (Successful Living); Karen Fox (Compeer), Jim
Swaim (UAY), Joan Vanden Berg (Iowa City Schools), Phoebe
Trepp (Shelter House), Ron Berg (MECCA); Scott Hansen (Big
Brothers /Big Sisters); Bill Reagan (Arc of Southeast Iowa); Roger
Lusala, Roberta Eide, Katie Lammers, Kim Darm (Mayor's Youth
Empowerment Program); Laura Dowd (Local Foods Connection);
Sue Freeman (NCJC); Dion Williams (Systems Unlimited), Becci
Reedus, Beth Ritter Ruback (Crisis Center); Roger Goedken,
Joshua Woolums (Progressive Education); Sandy Pickup (Free
Medical Clinic); Mark Patton (Habitat for Humanity); Karen Kubby
(Emma Goldman Clinic); Stephen Trefz (CMHC)
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL:
None.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Michael McKay at 6:30 p.m.
APPROVAL OF THE FEBRUARY 17, 2011 MINUTES:
A typographical error was pointed out by one of the Commissioners.
Chappell moved to approve the minutes as amended.
Zimmermann Smith seconded.
The minutes were approved on an 8 -0 vote (McMurray not present at time of vote).
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MARCH 10, 2011
PAGE 2 of 8
STAFF /COMMISSION COMMENT:
McKay said that Commissioners should keep in mind that the money available to Public
Services is ten times greater than the usual allotment; something that is not likely to happen
again in the foreseeable future.
McKay noted that funding projects under one category in this funding cycle could have
implications for eligibility for future funding cycles. Hightshoe gave specific scenarios to clarify
the applicability of that statement.
DISCUSSION REGARDING FY12 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)
AND HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM (HOME) REQUESTS:
• Review Project Rankings
• Discuss Average Allocation Worksheet
McKay explained that tonight's meeting would be a chance for Commissioners to discuss their
initial rankings of projects and the rationale for those rankings. The following week's meeting
would be when the Commission finalized recommendations.
Hart asked staff if there had been clear indication from staff as to how much of the
Commission's allocation was to be for housing. Hightshoe said that there had been some
direction given on the allocation worksheet. $762,000 must be for HOME eligible housing
activities.
HOUSING:
McKay noted that there seemed to be consensus among Commissioners that Dolphin
International LLC should not be funded. The Commission indicated an agreement to set that
application aside and move forward.
McKay noted that Hart had been the only member to allocate money to the Shelter House rental
project. Hart said that she liked the project but suspected there was not adequate support to
fund it.
Hightshoe said that typically if there is a wide range in allocations for a certain project this
meeting would serve as an opportunity for Commissioners to explain their rationale and give
reasons for what they liked or disliked about a project. She said that specific funding
recommendations will not be made until the next meeting.
McKay noted a wide range in the allocations given to MYEP's rental housing project. Gatlin said
that he had heavily funded MYEP in recent funding cycles, and while he felt this was a good
project, he also felt that other projects in the application pool could be more beneficial for the
community. Dragoo said that he had been hoping to support other MYEP applications instead of
this one. Zimmermann Smith said that she had fully funded it because it specifically targeted a
vulnerable population. She said she did not recall allocating anything to MYEP in the special
funding round. Drum said he too was drawn to the population the MYEP project was targeting.
McKay said that his focus had been on the accessible housing aspects of the project.
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MARCH 10, 2011
PAGE 3 of 8
McKay noted a wide -range of funding recommendations on the Successful Living rental
rehabilitation project. Zimmermann Smith said that she had funded the project because of the
vulnerable population it serves.
McKay asked Systems Unlimited if they had any reserves that would fund this type of project. A
Systems representative explained that a new regulation had severely limited their ability to
maintain reserves. He explained that the market value for the properties is much greater than
the actual rents charged.
Drum suggested moving to the other end of the scale toward the projects everyone agreed on
for the most part.
PUBLIC FACILITIES:
Zimmermann Smith noted that it looked as though most people had funded the Grant Wood
project. McMurray apologized for not getting her allocation worksheet in in time to be included in
the chart. She said that she did not do a bunch of smaller allocations, as her intent was to give
larger chunks of money out. She said she had funded seven Public Facilities projects. Dragoo
said that he had not had that particular strategy, but had not withheld funding for a particular
reason. Chappell said that this was his highest ranked project and he had made all of his
funding recommendations based primarily on their rankings. Gatlin said that his strategy had
been to fully fund the top three rankings for Public Facilities and Public Services. McMurray
asked why the school district was not paying for the cable at Grant Wood Elementary.
Hightshoe said they are paying for a portion of it. Chappell explained that there are specific
funds targeted toward a school that has some challenges.
McKay noted that the MYEP had quite a range for its property acquisition /facility rehabilitation
project and probably warranted some discussion. Chappell said that his intention was to allocate
money to MYEP for one project. McKay said that his intention was to fund the completion of the
facility rehabilitation and get the computer lab up and running. He said that he did have some
trouble supporting the acquisition of the neighboring property. Chappell noted that the cost for
the two projects McKay had just discussed was actually the reverse of what had been stated.
Hart said one of the things that seemed most critical to her were the infrastructure problems.
Gatlin said that he had fully funded the facility rehabilitation at the Crisis Center as one of his
three funded Public Facilities projects. McKay said that he had thought this project was a high
need, but that he had had some difficulty getting behind improved parking as it had not seemed
as critical to him as some of the other needs. Chappell said that he understood the parking to be
a fairly serious issue and so he had partially funded it. Drum said that there are so many
agencies in that small area that it would be good to get some resolution to the parking problem.
McKay said he had not entirely understood the arrangements that were being made. Drum said
that there were a lot of contingencies involved concerning what adjacent property owners would
be willing to accommodate or agree to. He said that nonetheless he did hope to get some
resolution to the problem. Dragoo said that his mind could be changed in regard to this
application. Hart said she felt the same way.
McKay noted that Dragoo had allocated the highest amount for the Arc project. Dragoo said that
he had passed that application over in the last funding round and he felt like this was a project
he could support. McKay said that his allocation was based on the sprinkler system as an
important safety issue, and the lower -level improvements would allow the agency to use that
level for programming. Drum said he felt the same way, but that he also had wanted to support
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MARCH 10, 2011
PAGE 4 of 8
the kitchen remodel. He said the agency would get a lot out of the improvements they have
planned. The playground, he believed was something the Commission could wait on.
McKay said he had recommended full funding for the Community Mental Health Center (CMHC)
because it is important for the agency to have full handicap accessibility. He said he did have
some questions as to whether or not it is worth it to put another $170,000 into a structure of that
age and condition. McKay asked if there was anything that could be done on this project with
partial funding. He asked if just improving the ramp itself would be of help. A representative of
the agency said that improving the ramp would be helpful in that it would solve the problem of
the crumbling steps; however, it would not solve the accessibility problems that an elevator
would solve. He said that the ramp is virtually impassable because it was not built to current
standards. Chappell asked if CMHC had a plan in place for how they would do the entire
elevator project if they received only partial funding, and the reply was that there was not a plan
at this time. Hart commented that she saw this as an either /or project, and Dragoo agreed.
Drum said that he believed that the number of people affected by this project had been an
influential factor in his allocation amount.
McKay invited comments on the MECCA project. Drum and Chappell noted that they had fully
funded the project.
McKay said that his thinking on the Old Brick project was that the front door was not as much of
a concern to him as the accessibility issues that arose from the problems with the side doors.
Drum said that he agreed with McKay about the accessibility issues, but noted that the front
doors posed safety risks to those who work in the building. Chappell said that this had been one
of his lowest ranked projects so he had not recommended funding. McKay said that he felt
much the same way about the front doors as he did about the Crisis Center parking lot: he is not
saying they are not important nor do not need to be done, just that there are more pressing and
critical needs. Drum said that he really, really advocates for Commission members to go on the
facilities tours to see the projects and to meet the people who work on behalf of the community.
He said the tours are very educational and very worthwhile.
Zimmermann Smith said she had partially funded PATV in order to fund their retaining wall.
McKay said that to his recollection the retaining wall had not been presented as a safety issue.
PUBLIC SERVICES:
Zimmermann Smith said she had fully funded the Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County
(NCJC) as she really liked the project and the community partnerships involved. Dragoo and
Chappell said that they had funded them elsewhere. Clamon said she had come close to full
funding for the same reasons offered by Zimmermann Smith; she said she thought that this was
a really good community project. Zimmermann Smith noted that there were two different
neighborhood centers requesting funding.
Zimmermann Smith said that she had fully funded the Crisis Center because of the critical
nature of their services. Dragoo said they had scored highly on his ranking sheet. McKay noted
that if $11,000 was funding 50% of a salary, then that was a modest request.
McMurray said that she had fully funded the request for tables and chairs made by Big
Brothers /Big Sisters. Drum said that this was the second step in funding the new building:
equipping it. However, he said that he would rather make a bigger funding impact in a different
area and so he had not fully funded the request. Gatlin said that he had not funded the tables
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MARCH 10, 2011
PAGE 5 of 8
and chairs because the Commission had funded the building itself. McKay said that he partially
funded it because while the tables and chairs are necessary, he felt the money could have a
bigger impact elsewhere.
Chappell said that the Shelter House ranked in his top five, though he is a little concerned about
the shelter's ability to cover operating costs at the new facility in the future. He said that he had
recommended 50% funding. Hart asked if there were general concerns about the shelter's
viability. Chappell said there were not; he said that his comments simply stemmed from the
perception he had based on their request for operating costs. He said that Shelter House had
commented about the astronomical increase in energy costs at the new shelter, and Chappell
said that those kinds of cost increases should have been easily anticipated given the
dramatically increased size of the facility. He said that he hopes that Shelter House has plans in
place for the increased costs of running and maintaining the much larger facility. He noted that
he had no concerns about the organization as a whole. McKay noted that a Shelter House
representative was present for questions if the Commission had any. Hart asked Shelter House
to respond to the concerns that had been brought up. Shelter House very briefly laid out their
plans for maintaining the new facility and creating new income streams. McKay said he had not
allocated anything for Shelter House operating costs. He said that he had had trouble funding it
all, and had been surprised at their surprise about the increased expenses. Drum said that
Shelter House had ranked fairly highly for him and he had partially funded them. Gatlin said that
he had not funded them because he was trying to limit his funding to three projects. McMurray
noted that several Commissioners had made comments suggesting they had limited funding to
one project per entity, and she wondered if anyone cared to comment on why that would be.
Chappell said that in general, if he recommended funding in one category, he tried not to
recommend funding in another category.
Gatlin said that he actually had Table to Table ranked fairly high. He said that he thought the
project was unique, so he had funded it fully. Clamon said she had not been able to afford to
fund the project fully, but did think it was a good program.
Dragoo said he had not funded UAY, but was willing to be persuaded. McKay said that he was
making assumptions that the equipment would increase the agency's efficiency. Clamon asked
if the equipment request was for four computers, and a UAY representative said that was
correct. McKay asked how much the six additional software licenses would cost UAY. The UAY
representative said that the licenses would cost approximately $1,200. He said that generally
UAY can get non - profit discounts from Microsoft, but they are not available for this particular
software.
Hart said that she thought that the small, one -time request from Successful Living was a
manageable funding request. Gatlin said that his concern with taking on a number of smaller
projects was the oversight burden that could pose. Hart said that smaller projects sometimes
require smaller oversight. McKay asked Successful Living if they had found a van suitable for
their purposes for $6,900, and Successful Living said that a standard eight - passenger van
would suffice. Zimmermann Smith said she liked this project because it was an economical way
to make big changes in the way they do things with a small amount of money.
Hart said she had partially funded DVIP because she believed that they were at a point where
their computers were near - obsolete.
McKay said that the Emma Goldman Clinic had been a difficult project for him to make a funding
decision on. Chappell said that it had been difficult for him as well. McKay asked if partial
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MARCH 10, 2011
PAGE 6 of 8
funding would work for this project. Karen Kubby said that the agency was going to have to
figure out how to fund the project one way or the other, so partial funding would work. She said
that there is a lot of time involved in the reporting requirements for this funding, so if the
Commission could only fund a couple of thousand dollars, then that much might be spent in staff
time overseeing the reporting requirements. She said that anything less than $5,000 might not
be worthwhile for the clinic. Chappell noted that this was a one -time project. McKay said that he
was open to reconsideration of that project as he had been looking at it as an all -or- nothing
proposition. Chappell said that he was too. Clamon and Drum said that they were glad to know
that partial funding was a possibility.
Clamon said that she felt that the Iowa City Free Medical Clinic request was one that would
make more money than it spends. She said her impression was that costs could ultimately be
reduced by the preventative measures that could be funded by this request. McKay said his
thinking was that these kinds of needs were going to increase. He said that the Free Medical
Clinic is essentially the place of last resort for the uninsured and under - insured facing these
issues.
McKay asked what Hart's thinking was on the Compeer application. She said that she had not
been certain if this was a one -time request or not. Chappell said this project had ranked
somewhere in the middle for him and so he had given it partial funding.
McKay noted that the allocations for the MYEP equipment request had been all over the map.
Chappell said he had not recommended funding because he had fully funded the MYEP rental
housing project. Dragoo said he believed there were several pieces to this project so he had
only recommended partial funding, though he was willing to consider other funding levels.
McKay asked MYEP if they had a line on a $20,000 wheelchair van. Roger Lusala of MYEP
said that they were looking at an unequipped van that would then have to be outfitted for
accessibility.
McKay asked if anyone cared to comment on their MECCA allocation. Drum said his funding
levels wound up being a function of his ranking sheet. He said that rather than fully funding a
few things that he wanted to, he would up partially funding a whole bunch of projects.
Chappell said that Local Food Connections ranked near the top on his ranking sheet. He said it
is a one year project, so they would not be coming back before the Commission next year to ask
for the same funding. Chappell said that the project is an interesting one and would benefit
multiple service agencies. McKay said he thought this was a very soft project and he had
difficulty getting behind it. Hart said that this is a project that will help Local Foods firmly
establish itself in the community.
Drum said that he had supported the Systems Unlimited request because they really need that
van to provide their services.
McKay noted that no Commissioners had allocated funding for the Sudanese American
Community Center project.
Chappell said that he had not wanted to discount the Progressive Education request based
solely on the fact that it was an agency the Commission had not seen before. He said he liked
the idea of partially funding it to see what they can do with a little seed money as a
private /public partnership. Zimmermann Smith said she agreed with Chappell, but she would
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MARCH 10, 2011
PAGE 7 of 8
have liked to have seen support from agencies they had worked with in the past. McKay said
that it appeared to him that their services overlapped with those offered by other local providers.
Hightshoe said that Kubby's comments about the reporting requirements were something to
keep in mind. Hightshoe said that if the Commission is going to fund something they need to
make sure the agency has the staff to support the federal requirements. She noted that
Congress has not yet passed its budget, so the allocation amounts are not yet set. Hightshoe
said that City Council would be voting on the allocation recommendations at their May 3 Council
meeting.
ADJOURNMENT:
Zimmermann Smith moved to adjourn.
Chappell seconded.
The motion was approved 9 -0.
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVEOPLMENT COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2011
NAME
TERM EXP.
1/6
2/17
3/10
CHAPPELL, ANDREW
9/1/2012
X
X
X
CLAMON, CHERYLL
9/1/2011
--
X
X
DRAGOO, SCOTT
9/1/2013
X
X
X
DRUM, CHARLIE
9/1/2013
X
X
X
GATLIN, JARROD
9/l/2012
X
X
X
HART, HOLLY JANE
9/112013
X
X
X
McKAY, MICHAEL
9/1/2011
X
X
X
McMURRAY, REBECCA
9/1/2011
X
X
X
ZIMMERMAN SMITH,
RACHEL
9/1/2012
X
X
X
Key:
X = Present
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No Meeting
-- -- = Not a Member
IP12
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MARCH 17, 2011 — 6:30 PM
IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY, MEETING ROOM A
MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Chappell, Cheryl Clamon, Charlie Drum, Jarrod Gatlin,
Holly Jane Hart, Michael McKay, Rebecca McMurray, Rachel
Zimmermann Smith
MEMBERS ABSENT: Scott Dragoo
STAFF PRESENT: Steve Long, Tracy Hightshoe, Doug Ongie
OTHERS PRESENT: Deborah Lyon (Successful Living); Phoebe Trepp (Shelter House),
Bill Reagan (Arc of Southeast Iowa); Roger Lusala, Roberta Eide,
Katie Lammers (Mayor's Youth Empowerment Program); Laura
Dowd (Local Foods Connection); Sue Freeman; Dion Williams
(Systems Unlimited), Becci Reedus, Beth Ritter Ruback (Crisis
Center); Roger Goedken, (Progressive Education); Sandy Pickup
(Free Medical Clinic); Karen Kubby (Emma Goldman Clinic);
Karen Fox (Compeer); Bob Anderlik (Table to Table); Brett
Gordon (Old Brick); Mahmoud Siddig (Sudanese American
Community Services, Inc.); Josh Goding (PATV); Brian Leving
(NCJC); Jim Swaim (UAY)
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL:
The Commission voted 8 -0 to make the following recommendations to City Council for
the FY12 CDBG /HOME funding:
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
FY12 CDBG /HOME BUDGET RECOMMENDATION
Public Facilities
ICCSD Grant Wood Elementary - Equipment $33,400
Neighborhood Centers of JC - Facility Rehab. $65,000
HCDC (3/17/11)
Recommendation
$40,000
$180,000
$33,900
$10,500
$99,800
$350,000
$52,000
$48,000
$0
$0
$814, 200
$33,400
$42,250
Requested
Housing
Amount
IV Habitat for Humanity - Owner -occ. Rehab
$40,000
IV Habitat for Humanity - Homeownership
$180,000
The Housing Fellowship - CHDO Operating
$40,000
The Housing Fellowship - Pre - Development
$10,500
Mayor's Youth - Rental Housing
$99,800
United Action for Youth - Rental Housing
$480,000
Successful Living - Rental Rehabilitation
$92,500
Systems Unlimited - Rental Rehabilitation
$70,000
Shelter House - Rental Housing
$275,000
Dolphin International LLC - Rental Rehab.
$640,000
Housing Total*
$1,927,800
Public Facilities
ICCSD Grant Wood Elementary - Equipment $33,400
Neighborhood Centers of JC - Facility Rehab. $65,000
HCDC (3/17/11)
Recommendation
$40,000
$180,000
$33,900
$10,500
$99,800
$350,000
$52,000
$48,000
$0
$0
$814, 200
$33,400
$42,250
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MARCH 17, 2011
PAGE 2 of 11
DVIP - Facility Rehabilitation
Mayor's Youth - Property Acq /Fac. Rehab.
Crisis Center of JC - Facility Rehab.
Arc of Southeast Iowa - Facility Rehabilitation
Community Mental Health Center - Access.
MECCA - Facility Rehabilitation
Old Brick Foundation - Facility Rehabilitation
Public Access Television - Facility Rehabilitation
Public Facilities Total
Public Services
Neighborhood Centers of JC - Operations
Crisis Center of Johnson County - Operations
Big Brothers Big Sisters of JC - Equipment
Shelter House - Operations
Table to Table - Operations
United Action for Youth - Equipment
Successful Living - Equipment
DVIP - Equipment
Emma Goldman Clinic - Equipment
Iowa City Free Medical Clinic - Operations
Compeer Program - Operations
Mayor's Youth Empowerment Program - Equipment
MECCA - Equipment
Local Foods Connection - Operations
Systems Unlimited - Equipment
Sudanese American Community Ctr - Oper.
Progressive Education - Operations
Public Services Total
TOTAL
* $87,800 HOME funds unallocated.
Italics - CDBG only eligible housing activities.
CALL TO ORDER:
$6,500
$148,702
$170,000
$210,922
$171,000
$16,293
$49,600
$27,350
$898,767
$32,321
$11,092
$11,640
$50,000
$20,000
$6,900
$6,000
$5,600
$50,000
$47,000
$10,750
$40,000
$6,690
$16,000
$44,650
$50,000
$21,750
$430,393
$3,256,960
$6,500
$27,365
$25,000
$67.400
$16,293
$15,500
$0
$233,708
[R1000
$11.092
$15,000
$7,000
$0
$6,000
$0
$25,000
1 5,000
0
EE
S 1.147.2
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Michael McKay at 6:30 p.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
STAFF /COMMISSION COMMENT:
McKay thanked the staff for the amazing amount of work they had put into the allocation
process. He also thanked the Commission for the work they had done.
McKay said that the Commission would reach a consensus this evening about the allocation
amounts and would be forwarding those recommendations to City Council. McKay said that staff
had directed the Commission to consider the items that are considered high priorities by CITY
STEPS prior to considering other projects. McKay asked Hightshoe to clarify the significance of
CDBG -only projects and how that affects the Commission's funding allocations. Hightshoe said
that the order in which the applications are reviewed is a procedural issue outlined in CITY
STEPS. Hightshoe said that high priorities are reviewed first; however, that does not mean that
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MARCH 17, 2011
PAGE 3 of 11
high priority projects must necessarily be funded or fully funded. After consideration of high
priority projects, if funding remains, the commission would then review medium priorities, etc.
Hightshoe said that there is approximately $1,235,000 available to allocate, $762,000 of which
must be allocated to HOME - eligible activities. Hightshoe said that the maximum allocation
amount for Public Services is $100,000; though she noted that it did not all have to be spent on
Public Services. Hightshoe noted that Congress has not passed the final budget yet; however,
the preliminary numbers show that HOME funds should stay about the same as last year
whereas CDBG could have a 10 % -15% cut. Hightshoe said that at the end of the meeting, the
Commission would have to decide how they wished to handle any potential cuts to their
allocation amounts and also decide who would be writing the justification memo.
Hightshoe noted that the format of the meeting would simply be that of a conversation amongst
the Commission members unless they had a specific question for an applicant that was present.
DISCUSSION REGARDING FY12 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)
AND HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM (HOME) REQUESTS:
• Discuss FY12 CDBG /HOME Applications
• Develop FY12 CDBG /HOME Budget Recommendations to Council
McKay recommended that the Commission consider Public Services allocations first. Chappell
said he would rather consider Housing applications first as it is the category that has a specific
spending requirement. Hightshoe said that $762,000 must be spent on Housing activities,
though it was possible to reserve some of those funds for next year's allocations. Chappell said
that decisions that are made with HOME funds will impact how much money is left over for
Public Services. He said that if the Commission chooses to spend more than $762,000 on
Housing, then the full $100,000 might not be available for Public Services. Zimmermann Smith
asked what happens to the other funding categories if the full $762,000 is not spent on housing.
Hightshoe said that there is only $473,000 available for CDBG - eligible activities such as Public
Facilities, Public Service and CDBG Housing - eligible activities. Hightshoe said that if all HOME
funds are not allocated to Housing, they cannot be applied to Public Facilities or Public
Services. Hart asked if there was anyone who had not been planning on allocating the full
$762,000 for Housing activities. Drum said it makes sense to start with the HOME funding
because it is the only category that can affect the others. The Commission indicated agreement
on this approach.
McKay asked the Commission to discuss Habitat for Humanity's $40,000 funding request.
McMurray said that she had basically fully- funded high priority projects. Hightshoe noted that
while the Habitat project is a high priority based on CITY STEPS, it is a CDBG -only project
because it is owner - occupied rehab. Chappell said he would recommend full funding for the
Habitat for Humanity project, The Housing Fellowship CHDO operating costs, and Mayor's
Youth Rental Housing project. Zimmermann Smith said she could agree with that. Gatlin noted
that the entire Commission had funded The Housing Fellowship's Pre - Development project.
Hart asked what the Commission thought about funding the Successful Living Rental Rehab
project. Zimmermann Smith said that she had actually changed her Public Services allocations
to do that because the project is needed and the organization provides a huge service to its
target population. Hart asked for clarification and Gatlin explained that anything that appeared in
italics on the staff chart was a CDBG only activity, so the money had to be pulled from Public
Services or Public Facilities.
Chappell asked if anyone wished to change their position on Shelter House Rental Housing or
Dolphin International. He said that he had supported Dolphin last year, but no progress had
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MARCH 17, 2011
PAGE 4 of 11
been made in the intervening year. He said he loves the Shelter House project but that it had
just been funded in the last round. McMurray said that the only thing that made her want to fund
Dolphin was the fact that there are a lot of potential units that are currently sitting vacant. McKay
said that his issue with that project is that they are not pledging a portion or any of their own
money. Hart said she was fine with the allocations being discussed but asked what the
Commission planned to do with Successful Living and Systems Unlimited. She asked if the plan
was to fund them with money from another category. Zimmermann Smith and McMurray said
that they had both done so. Chappell asked if it was correct that the only HOME - eligible projects
that had not been discussed so far were UAY Rental Housing and Habitat for Humanity Home
Ownership. McMurray said she had fully funded those two projects in order to use up the
remaining funds. Zimmermann Smith noted that all of the money did not have to be "used up ",
and that some could be left unallocated. She said that to be honest she had not seen any
Housing projects that had been particularly creative. She said that during the special allocation
cycle she had seen some exciting projects, but these particular applications were not as
innovative as she would have like to see. Saving some of the money for next year's allocation
cycle and seeing if more creative projects were brought forward is always an option,
Zimmermann Smith said. Clamon asked if it was correct that money beneath that $762,000
allocation threshold could be carried over for future funding cycles and Hightshoe said that it
was. McMurray asked how secure that money is, considering the current state of the federal
budget. Hightshoe said that it was secure; the City has two years to commit it. Gatlin asked if it
was correct that holding money back could put some potential projects behind the eight ball
since timing would then be an issue. Hightshoe said that was possible, though it depended on
the amount of money involved. Gatlin said that the present discussions were for something like
$500,000, so it was his recommendation that the allocation discussions continue. He
recommended looking at the average allocations and seeing where that put things. Further
discussions resulted in preliminary allocations that left approximately $87,800 in HOME funds
unallocated. Chappell said that he did not have a problem leaving this money unspent, but he
also did not have a problem allocating to UAY. He advised leaving the HOME discussions for
now and making the final decision after looking at CDBG projects. Hightshoe noted that the
UAY pro forma had relied on full funding to achieve cash flow; the project could struggle if it had
to acquire a lot of private debt. Zimmermann Smith said that this was one reason she had
funded it lower. She said she thought it might be a situation where it would be wise to start out
slow and see how things go. Hightshoe noted that a representative from UAY was present for
questions. Zimmermann Smith asked UAY what it would do with an allocation that was half of its
requested amount. Jim Swaim, UAY, said that they would buy fewer units. He said that if the
funding level was of a substantially a lesser amount than what was presently being discussed,
they probably would not go through with the project; however, if the funding was at the level
Commissioners were considering, than they could easily proceed with the project by doing one
or two fewer units.
The Commission agreed to move on and consider Public Facilities.
McKay noted that they seemed to be near - unanimous in their desire to fully -fund the Grant
Wood project. Zimmermann Smith suggested plugging in the average allocations for Systems
Unlimited and Successful Living in order to show that money as reserved for Housing projects.
McMurray suggested fully funding the top three Public Facilities projects, since they are all high
priorities under CITY STEPS. Gatlin suggested giving them 80% of their requests as a starting
point. Zimmermann Smith said that it made sense to put in the average allocation for DVIP and
NCJC. McMurray said she would like to see full funding for those projects. Chappell suggested
starting out by giving NCJC $42,250, which is the cost of funding their priority project. He noted
that that would not mean they could not return to the project and fully fund it, but it would give
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MARCH 17, 2011
PAGE 5 of 11
the Commission a starting point. Hart said that she would like to give at least partial funding for
some of the projects that did not rank as high but still addressed safety issues and facility
access, such as Old Brick, PATV and MECCA. McKay said that the high priorities had to be
considered first. Hart said she was suggesting plugging in the average allocations for the high
priority projects and then seeing what was left. The Commission reached consensus on a
preliminary allocation amount of $6,500 for DVIP.
McKay noted that there was quite a variation in the amounts allocated to the Crisis Center
Rehab. Chappell noted that the priority for the Crisis Center was the parking lot. A preliminary
figure of $25,000 was agreed upon for the Crisis Center. Hightshoe clarified that Community
Mental Health (CMH) could not get an elevator without full funding, but could work to improve
their handicap accessible ramp with a lesser funding amount. Zimmermann Smith said that it
did not seem to her that the ramp was that critical of a project for them. John Shaw, architect for
CMHC, confirmed that the ramp does not necessarily meet code at present, and is the only
means of getting someone in a wheelchair into the facility. Shaw said that in his opinion it would
be unfortunate to put money into the ramp but he did not want to speak for the director as to the
agency's priorities. He said that his impression was that something would have to be done with
the ramp if the elevator was not funded, as the ramp is absolutely crumbling. McKay asked what
the cost to improve the ramp would be. Shaw said he had not calculated that as the elevator
project included the demolition of the ramp. McKay said that he believes CMHC might be going
about this project backwards as a handicap accessible office could be rented for a number of
years for the $170,000 that CMHC was wanting to invest in this facility. Shaw noted that CMHC
would then have to fund staffing for the alternate location. McKay said that he understood that
but that this was a lot of money to put into this particular project. Consensus was reached that
because the elevator is an all or nothing project, no funding would be allocated. Hart noted her
objection to allocating no funding at all.
McKay noted that there was near - consensus on fully funding the MECCA Facility Rehab project.
A consensus was reached to fully fund MECCA preliminarily.
Gatlin suggested moving to the next high priority items, even if they are in Public Services, and
then coming back to finish out Public Facilities and Housing. The Commission indicated
consensus with this course of consideration.
McKay noted a wide range in allocations to the NCJC Operations project. Gatlin said that he
had fully funded this project as it had ranked as his highest priority. He noted that his strategy
had been to fully fund a few projects rather than allocating smaller amounts to many projects.
He said that his focus was on high impact allocations as typically Public Services only has
$10,000 available, and this funding cycle there is $100,000 available. Clamon said she did not
fully fund this because she ran out of money, but she came as close to fully funding it as she
could. Zimmermann Smith said she liked the job- training aspect of this project. McKay
suggested penciling in $15,000 for the project and coming back to it later. Chappell said that he
did not have a problem with that but he wanted to note that all of the positive aspects mentioned
about the NCJC project are also present in the Progressive Education project. He said the
question that was asked of Progressive Education was whether the services it was offering are
duplicative of those already available in the community. Chappell said that the same question
should also be asked of the NCJC project. Zimmermann Smith said that the application
materials submitted by NCJC show that they already have their community partners and
clientele lined up whereas Progressive Education had not shared the same kind of
documentation of support. She said she was certainly open to funding Progressive Education if
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MARCH 17, 2011
PAGE 6 of 11
that kind of support was demonstrated. Hart said that Progressive Education had been a little
short on details.
Zimmermann Smith asked the Crisis Center which they would choose if they had to pick
between funding for Operations or Facility Rehab. A Crisis Center representative said that this
was a difficult choice: for Facilities, the priority is the parking lot so the current $25,000 funding
level is adequate; Operations funding will assist with paying for an additional staff member hired
to handle recent funding and demand increases. Zimmermann Smith said she was comfortable
fully funding the operations expenses and leaving the Facilities allocation at $25,000. Drum said
that the Operations ranked highly for him because it was money used to raise more money.
Consensus was reached to fund the Crisis Center at $25,000 for Facilities and $11,092 for
Operations.
Chappell said that Big Brothers /Big Sisters ranked highest for him in terms of Public Services
projects. He said that what he liked about this was that it is easiest to make an impact with one-
time funding. Chappell said that none of the ongoing funding that the Commission had seen in
this funding cycle really had a concrete plan for how the need would be funded the following
year. He said that he wants to make an impact in Public Services with one -time projects in this
allocation cycle because there is a unique opportunity to fund. Gatlin said he has no problem
funding this equipment request, but he wants to make sure that the Commission fully -funds
wherever possible, as he believes that has a greater impact than partial funding. McKay said
that he funded at around $5,000 because he believed that the bulk of the equipment needs
could be picked up through other fundraising efforts. Chappell said that he agrees with Gatlin
about fully funding wherever possible; however, he also wanted to suggest that if full- funding
was not possible, then funding should be done in a way that allows the agency to fund its
priority projects. A consensus was reached to fund at $5,200 to cover the folding tables, carts
and chairs. Hightshoe noted that applicants are encouraged to list their projects in priority order
on their application.
Chappell noted that four Commissioners had recommended funding for Shelter House
Operations, and that those allocations amounts were between $22,000 and $25,000. He asked
if there was anyone who recommended $0 that would be willing to recommend something for
Shelter House. Chappell said that he had shared his concerns about this application at the last
meeting, and had indicated that he would be much less happy with this application next year if
strides had not been made to meet the expected expenses of the new facility. He said that since
this is the first year, he is comfortable funding at $25,000 or less. Hart said that she would be
interested in looking at projects further down the list before making this decision. She said that
while this project had ranked highly for her, she also realized that rankings are somewhat
arbitrary and that she, like Chappell, is partial to the one - time -ask rather than providing annual
assistance. She asked if it was possible to look at some of the equipment requests first and then
return to the operations requests. Drum said he had no problem with that. Zimmermann Smith
said that she had not allocated to Shelter House but did not have a problem funding them if the
Commission wished to do so. Clamon asked how that jived with Gatlin's full- funding strategy
and he replied that it is actually completely counter to his line of thinking. Clamon said that she
too had allocated zero, but that she could support bridge funding if there was an understanding
that coming back next year and asking for the same kind of money would not be viewed
favorably. Zimmermann Smith asked if there was consensus to preliminarily fund at $25,000,
and there was.
McKay suggested looking at the UAY Equipment request. Chappell recommended not funding
the UAY Equipment request as the Commission is funding their Housing request at $350,000.
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MARCH 17, 2011
PAGE 7of11
Swaim said that it would be fine to keep the Equipment request funded at zero as he had
recently learned that more federal equipment grants would be coming available in the next 18
months.
Chappell said that he was skeptical that Successful Living could fully fund a van for $6,000.
Hightshoe noted that the request is for $6,000, but the agency was contributing their own funds
to cover the shortfall. A consensus was reached to fully fund the request.
Hart said that she had funded the DVIP computers that were requested. Chappell noted that
there seemed to be a consensus not to fund the request at all. Hart asked how he had come to
the conclusion that there was a consensus to fund. Gatlin explained that six out of the nine
Commissioners had allocated zero funding to the request. Hart said she would like to suggest
that at least partial funding for the computers be granted to DVIP. McMurray asked how much
the computers were. Hart said she thought they were about $3,000. Several Commissioners
indicated a desire not to fund this project and Chappell said that he believed the consensus was
to not fund the project. Hart said she did not believe there was consensus not to fund, but that
they could come back to it later.
Hart said she had partially funded Compeer because her understanding was that this would give
them a jumpstart in being self- sufficient. Chappell noted that there were seven Commissioners
who allocated zero to this request. McKay suggested putting zero down for this project.
McMurray wondered why so many projects that were considered high priorities were being
allocated zero dollars. Chappell explained that the projects were high priorities in terms of being
reviewed first; they were not necessarily the most highly ranked projects. Chappell noted that
the rankings also factor into the funding amounts. Hart said that the rankings may factor in, but
she has never used those rankings as much more than a sorting mechanism and Chappell
cannot assume that everyone is putting the same weight on the rankings. Chappell said they
should probably be used or not used consistently.
Zimmermann Smith noted that the Emma Goldman Clinic and the Free Medical Clinic had been
allocated some level of funding by nearly everyone, so it might be useful to discuss those
applications next. Clamon said that she had not funded the Emma Goldman Clinic because she
had thought it was an all -or- nothing project. McKay said that it looked as though $25,000 was a
popular allocation amount for that request. Hart said she would fund both Emma Goldman and
Free Med, and would also fund Local Foods. She said that she realized Local Foods had not
received across the board funding but that it seemed like there were people who could be
persuaded to at least partially fund Local Foods. McMurray said she would like to see Local
Foods funded as it is a one year project. Drum asked if Local Foods was an educational project.
Chappell said that his understanding was that it was education and increased cooperation with
other non - profits. Drum said that when he compares that request against a van that will take
kids to activities, he has a hard time funding it. He said that he understood the value of the
project but when he compares it with concrete needs he just cannot support it in favor of some
of the other projects before the Commission. Chappell said that it may be more accurate to
compare the project with a replacement van rather than a primary means of transportation as
most of these agencies already have vans. Zimmermann Smith noted that Successful Living
does not have a van at present. Drum said that it was not vans in particular that he felt
outranked Local Foods; it was the concreteness of the van that he was trying to get across.
Zimmermann Smith said that she agreed with Drum; transportation and medical care outrank
the needs met by the Local Foods project in her opinion. McKay agreed. Hart said that she
would disagree because the program is not as nebulous as what Commissioners are making it
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MARCH 17, 2011
PAGE 8 of 11
out to be. She said the program has made a significant impact for people that do not have a lot
to spend on good food choices. Hart said she would like to see at least partial funding.
Gatlin said that if the Commission was now looking at two or three major projects in Public
Services they should keep in mind that there is only about $13,000 left to spend on Public
Services. McKay said that to his mind the Free Medical Clinic has to get some money.
McMurray noted that the Commission is funding their Health Fund, though Zimmermann Smith
explained that they were totally different programs. McMurray said that the Commission has
funded Free Med a great deal in the past. Gatlin noted that the Commission could review the
allocations that have already been set if they wanted to add to the remaining $13,000. Drum
said that the average allocation for Free Med was $17,000. Chappell said that Free Med was his
lowest ranked project and he had allocated $4,000 for diabetic monitoring equipment. McMurray
said she could agree with allocating $4,000 for equipment. Zimmermann Smith asked if it was
possible to do anything with just the equipment. Sandy Pickup of the Free Medical Clinic
explained that someone had to actually see the patient in order for the program to work. Pickup
explained that if $4,000 was allocated, it could not all be spent on equipment as there would be
staff involved in seeing the clients. Zimmermann Smith asked if Free Med's funding from other
sources was in any way contingent on what the Commission chose to allocate. Pickup said it
was not. McKay asked if the salary costs included in the request have anything to do with Free
Med's prescription drug program. Pickup said that the salary funding was to partially cover the
pharmacy assistant, the case manager and the physician. Zimmermann Smith said that she
would give Free Med $18,000 and remove the small Big Brothers /Big Sisters allocation.
McMurray said she would rather reduce the Shelter House allocation. Zimmermann Smith
suggested taking $10,000 from Shelter House and giving Free Med $20,000. Chappell said that
Table to Table had not yet been discussed, though five people had allocated $10,000 to it in
their allocation worksheets. McMurray said that Table to Table was a big priority, and thanked
Chappell for bringing it up. Chappell said that his recollection was that their project was a one
year project. Gatlin said that Table to Table was his second highest ranked project, but the
question ultimately becomes one of where the $10,000 comes from. Chappell said that despite
his admiration for the program, for him the money comes from Free Med because the project
ranked the lowest and it is the same type of request Free Med has to make every year. Gatlin
pointed out that just because a request is repeated from year to year does not mean it is not a
need. Hart said that even though it is a need, the concern is that some of these agencies are
unable to find alternate funding for these programs. Zimmermann Smith said that she had felt
about Table to Table the same way she had felt about Local Foods. She said that though it is a
good project, she did not fund it. Gatlin asked if it would be possible to go with the average
allocation for Table to Table. He said he had had Emma Goldman ranked as his third highest
project because it is a project that will help them increase revenues. Zimmermann Smith noted
that Emma Goldman would have to fundraise beyond anything the Commission allocated. There
was extensive discussion about taking a small amount of money that was currently allocated to
Emma Goldman and the Free Medical Clinic and allocating that to Table to Table. Ultimately,
consensus was reached to fund Table to Table at $7,000, Free Med at $15,000, and Emma
Goldman at $25,000.
The Commission agreed to return to discussions of Public Facilities. Hart said she was under
the impression that funding allocations under Public Services were still up for discussion for
things like DVIP. Zimmermann Smith asked if everyone was comfortable with the allocation
amounts currently set for Public Services and a majority of Commissioners indicated agreement
with the allocation amounts.
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MARCH 17, 2011
PAGE 9 of 11
Hightshoe said there was $110,065 left to spend on CDBG eligible activities. Hart asked if it was
the intention not to spend the other $87,800 in Housing. The consensus was to not allocate
these funds at this time.
Chappell recommended that the Commission cover the expenses of the sprinkler system for
Arc, and a number of Commissioners indicated agreement. Zimmermann Smith recommended
increasing the Mayor's Youth project to $99,800. Gatlin said that he would like to do one side
door for Old Brick, but not the front door. Hightshoe said that she did not think the front door
would actually be eligible as it only led to the banquet hall. A consensus was reached to fund
Old Brick at $15,500. Zimmermann Smith suggested giving the remaining balance to Mayor's
Youth. Hart asked if there could be any discussion about the PATV project as the back steps
and the retaining wall present safety issues. Chappell noted that six Commissioners had
allocated zero to PATV. He also noted that Mayor's Youth had had a lot of funding for their
ground -level rehab, and are getting close to $100,000 for rental new construction this funding
round. Chappell said that if there was desire to spend the rest of the money right now, the Crisis
Center and Arc had ranked highly for him and he would rather see the money go there than just
lumped into Mayor's Youth. Chappell asked if there were still staff concerns about the PATV
application. Hightshoe said there are. She said that because it would be very difficult for PATV
to verify that 51 % of the beneficiaries of their project are low -to- moderate income, they would
have to rely on that part of their project that benefitted Extend the Dream and Extend the Dream
would have to meet and document the low -to- moderate income national objective. A consensus
agreed not to fund PATV. Zimmermann Smith said she was okay with giving Arc more money.
McKay said he could go along with most of the balance going to Mayor's Youth. A consensus
was reached to increase Mayor's Youth and the Arc.
Gatlin asked how much PATV had needed to complete their project. Hart said they had needed
just about the amount she had allocated. Gatlin asked if anyone saw a way to fund this project.
Zimmermann Smith said she was not comfortable funding it given the staff concerns. Hart said
the back steps were directly related to Extend the Dream's egress and they could act as
applicant. Hightshoe noted that there had been compliance issues in the recent past with
Extend the Dream. Chappell said that if Extend the Dream is able to remediate compliance
issues in the future they can apply for future funding. Gatlin suggested that zero might be the
most appropriate allocation amount and a number of Commissioners indicated agreement.
McKay invited a motion.
Zimmermann Smith moved to accept the discussed funding allocations as the
Commission's final recommendations to City Council.
Drum seconded.
The Commission voted 8 -0 to approve the motion (Dragoo absent).
Chappell suggested that if the Congressional allocation changes by 10% or less then staff
should adjust the numbers accordingly. If the changes are more than 10 %, then the
Commission should meet again.
Zimmermann Smith moved to have staff make adjustments to allocations if the
Congressional allocation to Iowa City changes by 10% or less; if the changes are by
more than 10 %, the Commission will reconvene to consider the allocations.
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MARCH 17, 2011
PAGE 10 of 11
Chappell seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 8 -0 (Dragoo absent.)
Hart and Clamon agreed to write the justification memo.
ADJOURNMENT:
Zimmermann Smith moved to adjourn.
Drum seconded.
The motion was approved 8 -0 (Dragoo absent).
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVEOPLMENT COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2011
NAME
TERM EXP.
116
2117
3110
3117
CHAPPELL, ANDREW
9/1/2012
X
X
X
X
CLAMON, CHERYLL
9/1/2011
--
X
X
X
DRAGOO, SCOTT
9/l/2013
X
X
X
-- --
DRUM, CHARLIE
9/112013
X
X
X
X
GATLIN, JARROD
9/1/2012
X
X
X
X
HART, HOLLY JANE
9/1/2013
X
X
X
X
McKAY, MICHAEL
9/1/2011
X
X
X
X
McMURRAY, REBECCA
9/1/2011
X
X
X
X
ZIMMERMAN SMITH,
RACHEL
9/1/2012
X
X
X
X
Key.
X = Present
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No Meeting
-- -- = Not a Member
PRELIMINARY
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
APRIL 7, 2011 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL
CITY HALL, EMMA HARVAT HALL
IP13
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Freerks, Josh Busard, Charlie Eastham, Elizabeth Koppes,
Michelle Payne, Wally Plahutnik, Tim Weitzel
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Karen Howard, Tabatha Ries - Miller, Sara Greenwood Hektoen
OTHERS PRESENT: Kirsten Frey, Matthew Lepic
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
DEVLOPMENT ITEM:
SUB10- 00014 /SUB10- 00015: Discussion of an application submitted by Craig
Haesemeyer for a preliminary and final plat of Mackinaw Village Part 3, a 13 -lot, 7.89 acre
residential subdivision located north of Foster Road on Mission Point Road and
Algonquin Road.
Eastham noted that he had a conflict with this item and would not be participating in its
consideration.
Ries - Miller stated that the property had been rezoned in 2004 to allow for cluster development
to protect environmentally sensitive areas. At that time, the preliminary plats for Parts 1, 2, and
3 were approved. In October of 2004, the final plats for Parts 1 and 2 were approved. In August
2004, the preliminary plat for Part 3 expired.
Reis - Miller explained that access is provided to the site by Foster Road, with future access
points routing off of Mission Point Road and Algonquin. In 2008, new subdivision regulations
Planning and Zoning Commission
April 7, 2011 - Formal
Page 2 of 5
were approved. These regulations require 60 -foot streets and five -foot sidewalks. When the
preliminary plat for this property was originally approved, code required only 50 -foot streets and
four -foot sidewalks. Staff recommends that most of the development retain the 50 -foot street
and four -foot sidewalk standards. The exception to this is the north side of Algonquin where it
acts as a collector street; staff recommends a 60 -foot street in that area.
In 2004, when the OPD5 preliminary plat was approved, staff recommended that front - facing
garages be allowed due to a gas -line easement in the rear. The PUD requires that staff approve
building design for those three lots.
The neighborhood open spaces requirement was fulfilled during the platting of Parts 1 and 2.
Freerks opened the public hearing. No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed.
Freerks invited a motion.
Busard moved to approve SUB10- 00014 /SUB10- 00015, application submitted by Craig
Haesemeyer for a preliminary and final plat of Mackinaw Village Part 3 with the
stipulations outlined in the staff report.
Koppes seconded.
Freerks said it is not unusual to find an application that has expired needs a little retro- fitting to
be brought up to code requirements. Freerks said she thought this would be a nice addition to
the area.
Payne said that she likes the way Algonquin was transitioned in this application.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6 -0 (Eastham abstaining).
REZONING ITEMS:
REZ11- 00006: Discussion of an application submitted by Iowa City Community School
District and North Dodge Partners, LC for a rezoning from a Research Development Park
(RPD) zone to Neighborhood Public (P1) zone for approximately 10.39 acres of property
located at 1725 N. Dodge Street.
Ries - Miller explained that this property was rezoned in 1988 for the Press Citizen. The school
district is in the process of purchasing the property and plans to use it for its central
administration offices, school board meeting place and a centralized food service operation.
Ries - Miller explained that the zoning code states that property owned by the school district,
county, city or state will be zoned P1. The current zoning allows or office, research, production
and assembly services. The school district's proposed uses are consistent with that zoning
designation; however, the P1 zone will allow for appropriate school - related uses. Because the
development abuts residential property the zoning code requires that the maximum building
height is consistent with the adjacent zone, which in this case is 35 feet. The code also requires
the setbacks and screening requirements to be consistent with the adjacent residential zone.
The Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as RPD, and if the P1 designation was approved,
the Comprehensive Plan would have to be amended to reflect the change in use. The Northeast
Planning and Zoning Commission
April 7, 2011 - Formal
Page 3 of 5
and the North District plans both address this area as a corridor and entryway to the city and
recommends maintaining and enhancing the area.
The original rezoning in 1988 had a conditional zoning agreement (CZA) and site development
standards; the purpose of which was to provide a high - quality aesthetic, enhancing the area's
natural features. At this time, the school district is not proposing any major exterior changes for
the site. Nevertheless, staff recommends that the rezoning be subject to a CZA that ensures
sensitivity to the natural and environmental features on the site, and would require general
compliance with the provisions outlined in the 1988 agreement. Specifically, staff recommends
requirements that would: 1) keep the development of the site retained to the current boundaries,
2) maintain the steep slopes; 3) maintain the northern buffer, and 4) require staff approval of
any future changes to the site.
Staff recommends approval of the rezoning subject to the conditional zoning agreement.
Freerks asked if the wording of the CZA would be more specific before it reached City Council,
and Ries - Miller said that it would. She said that the school district and the City were negotiating
the wording at present.
Eastham asked if the school district would be required by law to comply with the conditions the
City is imposing upon their zoning agreement. Greenwood Hektoen said that they would be.
Eastham asked if there was not required stormwater management for the site due to the
proximity of the Hickory Hill retention area. Howard explained that because this was not a
subdivision, stormwater management requirements would be unchanged from what had been
required at the time of the original rezoning.
Freerks opened the public hearing.
Kirsten Frey, 920 South Dubuque, spoke on behalf of the school district. She said that she was
present as the school district's attorney and was available to answer questions. She noted that
the district's repurposing of the building does not involve any large -scale construction or dirt
moving. The only construction under consideration is the building of a room specifically for the
purpose of holding school board meetings. Even that is being considered as a part of the
existing footprint of the building. She also noted that the food service facility would not really
involve cooking but more the transport of food out to schools. Frey said that she has received a
draft of a CZA and agrees with the broad strokes of the agreement, though the exact wording
still needs to be worked out. Frey said that she fully anticipates having a mutually agreeable
CZA to take to City Council. Freerks asked if there was intention to create additional parking
and Frey replied that there was not at this time. She said that the district would be amenable to
having future parking additions reviewed by staff as part of site plan review and the CZA.
Eastham noted that a number of school district meetings are held at night and asked if there
were plans to add additional lighting in the parking lots. Frey said there was no plan for that at
this time.
There were no additional comments and the public hearing was closed.
Weitzel motioned to approve REZ11- 00006, an application to rezone 10.39 acres of land
located at 1027 North Dodge from RDP to P1, subject to a Conditional Zoning Agreement
as approved by staff.
Planning and Zoning Commission
April 7, 2011 - Formal
Page 4 of 5
Payne seconded.
Koppes said that generally there is actual language for the Commission to review prior to voting
on an application. Greenwood Hektoen said that the general parameters of the CZA have been
set forth in this meeting. Koppes asked if the application would come back before the
Commission if there were changes beyond the scope of what was discussed at the meeting.
Greenwood Hektoen said that now would be the time for Commission input. Koppes said she
would prefer not to offer blanket approval and would rather see the language worked out. Payne
asked if Weitzel's motion had specifically addressed the four conditions discussed in the
meeting. Weitzel said that he had worded it to include staff approval, not specific requirements.
Koppes said that she just wished to ensure that the minutes reflected that the Commission had
four specific requirements it wanted to see in the CZA. Freerks suggested that Koppes spell .
those out for the record. Payne said that the specific requirements being discussed were: 1) that
the development occur within the current boundaries, 2) steep slopes would be maintained, 3)
the current buffer would be maintained, and 4) staff would approve any changes to the building
or site. Weitzel said that he believed that the building footprint was still being negotiated. Busard
said that he was comfortable with the City Council being left to approve the details of the plan,
and noted that he believed the school district would be a good steward of the land. Weitzel
noted that there was not a lot of room for the footprint to change because of the size of the
plateau. Eastham said that he shares Koppes' concerns about voting on a CZA without having
the specific language before the Commission. Eastham said that because the staff report
indicates that the existing CZA will basically be maintained, he is more comfortable with it than
he would otherwise be. Koppes said that she is not that concerned about this particular
application; it is the general practice of voting without the details being worked out that concerns
her. Payne said that the Commission probably would not do this in another case. Weitzel noted
that the Commission should also make note of the plan to include the existing CZA as outlined
in the staff report. Freerks said that the application is generally consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan. Eastham noted that there are a number of other properties that have
been zoned P1 that should result in Comprehensive Plan amendments. Ries - Miller said there
were a couple more such properties coming before the Commission soon.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7 -0.
REZ11- 00007: Discussion of an application submitted by Stanley and Douglas, LLC for a
rezoning to amend the Planned Development Overlay (OPD5) plan for Village Green Part
XX, Lot 50 (Wellington Condominiums) to allow the addition of 3 -car garages for
approximately 2.35 acres of property located at Village Road and Wintergreen Drive.
Howard said that this development was originally approved in December 2001 with two -car
garages. The OPD was amended in January 2005 to allow three -car garages on a couple of
dwelling units. This approval included a note that the third garage must be setback at least two
feet from the other garage stalls in order to provide facade articulation. Because those units sold
very well, the developer is requesting permission to amend the OPD to allow for three -car
garages. The OPD5 plan does allow for that kind of flexibility under certain conditions. Howard
said that given that the area is already developed and the design is consistent with surrounding
development, staff does not feel that allowing three -car garages will adversely affect the
neighborhood or contradict the intent of the zoning code and Comprehensive Plan. Howard
recommended that the two -foot setback for the third garage stall be retained. She noted that the
lots are fairly wide and the development has a great deal of green space built into it.
Planning and Zoning Commission
April 7, 2011 - Formal
Page 5 of 5
Busard asked how wide the garages are, and Howard recommended he address that questions
to the applicant.
Freerks opened the public hearing.
Matt Lepic, 825 St. Andrews Drive, identified himself as the applicant. He noted that the third
garage stall is a one -car standard width, 12 -feet. Koppes asked if the applicant had met with
any of the neighbors concerning this. Lepic said that he had not as he had not really been
through this process before. He said that he did speak with the homeowners' association and
they were in favor of the changes.
No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed.
Eastham moved to approve REZ11- 00007, a rezoning to amend the Planned Development
Overlay plan of Village Green part 20 to allow three -car garages on four new units.
Payne seconded.
Weitzel said that the area can absorb extra cars, the articulation helps retain the attractiveness
of the structures. Eastham noted that bicycles can also be stored in a third garage. Freerks said
that the articulation was important and she thought the third garage would be compatible with
the neighboring structures.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: February 28 and March 3, 2011:
Payne moved to approve the minutes.
Eastham seconded.
The motion carried 7 -0.
OTHER:
Freerks noted that Busard would be leaving the Commission, and Caroline Dyer would be
replacing him as Commissioner.
ADJOURNMENT:
Payne motioned to adjourn.
Koppes seconded.
The meeting was adjourned on a 7 -0 vote.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2011
FORMAL MEETING
INFORMAL MEETING
NAME
TERM
2/3
2/17
3/3
4/7
BUSARD, JOSHUA
05/11
X
X
NAME
EXPIRES
EASTHAM, CHARLIE
05/11
X
X
X
BUSARD,
05/11
X
X
X
X
FREERKS, ANN
05/13
X
X
X
JOSHUA
KOPPES, ELIZABETH
05/12
X
ix
X
PAYNE, MICHELLE
EASTHAM,
05/11
X
X
X
X
PLAHUTNIK, WALLY
05/15
X
X
X
CHARLIE
WEITZEL, TIM
05/13
X
X
X
FREERKS,
05/13
X
X
X
X
ANN
KOPPES,
05/12
X
X
X
X
ELIZABETH
PAYNE,
05/15
X
X
X
X
MICHELLE
PLAHUTNIK
05/15
X
X
X
X
, WALLY
WEITZEL,
05/13
X
X
X
X
TIM
INFORMAL MEETING
NAME
TERM
EXPIRES
1/20
1/31
2/28
BUSARD, JOSHUA
05/11
X
X
X
EASTHAM, CHARLIE
05/11
X
X
X
FREERKS, ANN
05/13
X
X
X
KOPPES, ELIZABETH
05/12
X
ix
X
PAYNE, MICHELLE
05/15
X
X
X
PLAHUTNIK, WALLY
05/15
X
X
X
WEITZEL, TIM
05/13
X
X
X
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting /No Quorum
- -- = Not a Member
DRAFT 1P14
POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD
MINUTES — April 12, 2011
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Donald King called the meeting to order at 5:30 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Melissa Jensen, Peter Jochimsen, Royceann Porter, Joe Treloar
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Staff Catherine Pugh and Kellie Tuttle
OTHERS PRESENT: Captain Wyss of the ICPD; Caroline Dieterle public
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
None
CONSENT
CALENDAR Motion by Jochimsen and seconded Porter by to adopt the consent calendar as
presented or amended.
• Minutes of the meeting on 02/09/11
• ICPD General Order 00 -04 (Body Armor)
• ICPD General Order 00 -07 (Police Cyclist)
• ICPD Bar Check Report (PAULA) — January, 2011
• ICPD Bar Check Report (PAULA) — February, 2011
King questioned the Acknowledgement of Risk in General Order 00 -04 (Body
Armor) as to whether the officer had a choice to wear body armor since the
directive in the procedure is "shall ". Wyss explained that all uniformed officers
"shall' or must wear body armor, non - uniformed sworn officers "should" but have
the option not to with the acknowledgement of risk.
Motion carried, 5/0.
OLD BUSINESS None.
NEW BUSINESS Adding interview process language to materials — King stated that the Board had
previously discussed adding language to the complaint form; further explaining
who may be a designated representative for the complainant. The Board briefly
discussed options and Jensen said she would draft the language and get it to
staff to include in the May meeting packet.
PUBLIC
DISCUSSION None.
April 12, 2011
Page 2
BOARD
INFORMATION
STAFF
INFORMATION
EXECUTIVE
SESSION
Treloar emphasized what a great opportunity he thought the Police Citizens
Academy was and encouraged Board members who haven't been through it to
attend.
None.
Not needed.
TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS (subject to change)
• May 10, 2011, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Rm
• June 14, 2011, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Rm
• July 12, 2011, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Rm
• August 9, 2011, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Rm
ADJOURNMENT Motion by Porter, seconded by Jensen to adjourn.
Motion carried, 5/0. Meeting adjourned at 5:51 P.M.
POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2011
(Meetiniz Date)
NAME
TERM
EXP.
1 /11
2/9
3/2
4/12
Melissa
Jensen
9/1/12
X
X
NM
X
Donald King
9/1/11
X
O/E
NM
X
Joseph
Treloar
9/1/13
X
X
NM
X
Peter
Jochimsen
9/1/13
X
X
NM
X
Royceann
Porter
9/1/12
O/E
X
NM
X
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
- -- = Not a Member