HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-02-21 TranscriptionPage 1
ITEM 2. STATE OF THE CITY.
Hayek: Before I proceed, I ... I want to, uh, alert the public to some ... a couple ... to several
changes in the...in the agenda for tonight. We held a work session that started
about two hours ago, um, and as a result of the work session, uh ... uh, staff and
the City Council, uh, concur that items 7c and 7d in Planning Zoning, uh, should
be, um, withdrawn from the agenda, uh, which means that those two items will be
sent through the normal legislative process, um ... and come back to the Council.
Uh, and they will not be action ... items that we take any action on, uh, this
evening. 7b will remain on the agenda. Uh, that has to do with occupancy in the
4- and 5- bedroom, uh, issue, um, that many of you, I know, are here about. We
will take that up, uh, at...at to ... in tonight's City Council meeting. Uh, also, item,
uh, 7f and 7g, um ... this regards the ... the Jefferson Street project, uh, the
applicant has withdrawn, um, those applications. So we will not be taking any
action on 7f or 7g tonight either. And I say this because if you're here tonight and
you wanted to address us on those issues, uh, we're not ... they're not before us
this evening. So ... thanks ... thanks for that. Item #2 is the annual State of the City
address and I'll read it at this time. (reads statement) (applause) All right! I got
through that tongue twister! (laughter)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 2
ITEM 3. PROCLAMATION.
a) Sertoma Freedom Week — February 12, 2012
Hayek: (reads proclamation)
Karr: Here representing the Sertoma Club is Ted Halm. (applause)
Halm: I'd just like to thank the Council and Mayor Hayek for their continued support of
our Sertoma Freedom Week. Thank you!
Hayek: Thanks. By the way, the top ... I went to the thing last week and the topic for the
8th graders was, uh, should the, uh, presidential electoral college system be
ditched in favor of more direct voting and ... that's a heavy topic, and those 8th
graders, they did a great job, so...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 3
ITEM 4. OUTSTANDING STUDENT CITIZENSHIP AWARDS — Hoover
Elementary
Hayek: Would the students from Hoover Elementary come forward, please! Hi, guys,
I'm Matt Hayek, the Mayor of Iowa City, and this is your City Council and we're
really honored to have you here tonight! This is especially great for me because
all ... because we get to see all the, uh, Iowa City schools through the course of the
year, but my daughter is going to be starting kindergarten at Hoover in a few
months, so I'm really excited to see you guys! So, uh, the way this works is, uh,
and I know you brought your little pieces of paper here, uh, we want to hear just a
little bit from you about, uh, about what you do at Hoover, and then I've got an
award that I'm going to read to you that comes from the City Council. So, if I can
just hand you the ... the microphone and you can start!
Samuelson: Um, hi, my name is Irene and I would just like to thank all of the wonderful
teachers and terrific students at Hoover Elementary, as well as City Council, for
sponsoring this award. I am quite honored to get this award. It makes me happy
that the teachers think I am a good model of citizenship. I always try to be a
helpful and inquisitive student. I try to stay to myself, and I don't do things
simply cause everyone else is doing them. Uh, it's important to be a good citizen
because, uh, it doesn't just make other people feel good, it also makes, um, you
feel good, and I'll try to live up to this word and continue to work on being a good
citizen. Thank you. (applause)
Eider: Hi, my name is Baylee and I'm a 6th grader at Hoover Elementary. The ways that
I demonstrate good citizenship are respecting others regardless of their differences
from me. I show honesty to anyone around me. I show responsibility by getting
my homework done on time, and I'm caring to my peers. I show courage because
I help other kids who are in need of guidance and direction when they may be
singled out because of their special needs. Thank you. (applause)
Hayek: Those are very nice pieces and uh, well written and well delivered. It's not easy
to get up in front of a big crowd and read into a microphone. Um, you know, it's
great to see, uh, leaders from our elementaries, and that's one of the reasons we...
we bring, uh, leaders from our elementaries to the City Council, to recognize you
and to thank your parents and your teachers and the other people who help you,
uh, succeed at...at Hoover, and we suspect they've had a lot to do with ... with
your success. So we appreciate their roles in your lives. Uh, but the lessons you
learn as young people, um, are going to carry with you, uh, throughout junior high
and high school, and ... and into adulthood, and lot of the people up here
who ... who are on the City Council or who are on staff here did things like ... like
the things that you're doing, uh, at...at Hoover, to ... to teach others and to lead by
example and to become involved and to ... and to help your classmates, and I think
the rest of your .... your classmates at Hoover and ... and students around the
School District, uh, you know, will see the example you lead. So we're very
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 4
proud of you and ... and we're excited that you're here. Uh, we have an award that
we're going to hand out to you, and... and we have one for each of you, and it
reads as follows. It's called a Citizenship Award. For her outstanding qualities of
leadership within Hoover Elementary, as well as the community, and for her sense
of responsibility and helpfulness to others, we recognize you as an Outstanding
Student Citizen. Your community is proud of you. Presented by the Iowa City
City Council, February, 2012. (mumbled) Congratulations! (applause) Go
home and do your homework!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 5
ITEM 5. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS
PRESENTED OR AMENDED.
Hayek: Okay, before we proceed, uh, I've been, uh, asked to remind the crowd to try to
not block the doorway. We've got fire ingress /egress concerns so if you can
please find a place elsewhere in the room, that'll help us out. Thank you.
Champion: Move adoption.
Throgmorton: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Champion, seconded by Throgmorton. Discussion?
Throgmorton: Yeah, Matt, I wonder if we can pull Item 5e(4).
Hayek: Uh... sure, just a second.
Throgmorton: I just want to educate myself about what's involved there. It's a ... the resolution
having to do with, uh, disaster area revenue bond.
Hayek: We could pull it or if you want to just get your question answered (mumbled)
discussion on this point. We could maybe get that answered...
Throgmorton: Well, mainly I know nothing about disaster area revenue bonds. I don't know
why a substantial amount of money is being, uh ... uh, processed in a way that
would be directed toward a particular, um, project, or private projects, so I'm sure
it's all totally above -board and everything, but I just don't understand how it
works and why.
Hayek: Should we get that question answered right now or should we vote on...
Dilkes: Sure. I mean, it's up to you.
Hayek: I mean, it's six of one, half dozen of the other really, I mean...
Dilkes: It's a mechanism that, um, the State allows and ... and, I know about it, as much
about it as you do, um, but ... cause our bond counsel has reviewed this. But it's a
mechanism that allows for the City to be issuer of the ... of the bonds, and
therefore have ... have a lower interest rate for the ... the project, um, or a piece of
funding for the project.
Throgmorton: I guess what I don't understand, Eleanor, is what are the boundaries of the disaster
area? So, in other words, who's eligible, uh, for these kinds of revenue bonds or I
don't know if revenue bonds is the right word to use.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 6
Markus: I would suggest that we get you that information and follow that up, um, later and
give you the exact details of that.
Throgmorton: Cause we might see something like this again in the future. I'd just like to know
what we're approving.
Hayek: Well, and we've... we've...
Dilkes: ...we've done this several times, I mean, at least once if not twice actually before,
urn ... but we can certainly give you a memo that gives you more detail.
Hayek: Are you comfortable voting on this with that included?
Throgmorton: Uh, since you've ... acted on similar, um, proposals before, I'd ... I'd be
comfortable doing that. I just want to make sure I understand what we're doing,
at... at some point here.
Hayek: Okay. So, staff could follow up with, uh, with Jim on that. Further discussion?
Roll call, please. Item passes 7 -0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 7
ITEM 6. COMMUNITY COMMENT (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA).
Hayek: Uh, this is the opportunity at each City Council meeting to address the City
Council on items that are not on tonight's agenda. It's important to remember
that! Uh, and so if there's something you want to bring to our attention, um,
please come to the podium and sign in and give us your name verbally, and
because there's a lot on tonight's agenda and we anticipate a lot of public input,
uh, I'm going to ask that everybody during community comment, and then when
we get to the other agenda items, limit their comments to three minutes, so that
we can all, uh, hear ... hear what people have to say this evening. With that, we'll
go ahead and proceed.
Opplinger: My name's Bob Opplinger. I'm the Education and Advocacy Coordinator for the,
uh, Bicyclists of Iowa City and I wanted to take a few minutes. I actually
budgeted four minutes so I'll try and squeeze it down here. Uh, to expand on the
letter we sent to you folks, uh, late last week regarding the idea of having Iowa
City become a platinum level, uh, bike - friendly community. The first point I'd
like to make is that the bike - friendly community initiative is ... is a project
sponsored by the League of American Bicyclists, which is a national advocacy
group. Um, it started about ten years ago and it's been very successful over
almost 200 communities have received the designation in the last ten years, um, if
you'd like to read more about it, you could go to their web site,
www.bikelea ug e.org and uh, click at the bottom of the page. There's an icon that
takes you to the bike - friendly community idea. Uh, one thing that's on the, uh,
web site is a list of the, uh, communities that are bike - friendly, and there are two
things that stand out to me about the list. Uh, number one is the number of
college towns that are on the list. So half of the comm .... Big Ten universities are
in a bike - friendly community. The second point, uh, thing about the cities that are
on the list and I think this speaks to the validity of the idea of a bike - friendly
community is the number of large cities that are on the list. So Chicago for
example, New York City, Philadelphia, Washington D.C., Minneapolis -St. Paul
are all on the list. Um, Minneapolis recently was elevated to the gold level.
We're a bronze level as you may know, uh, bike - friendly community. So these
communities see this as a valuable idea. Um, the third point, and I think this
should resonate with this group, is the evaluations are free. So you submit your
application and they go through the process and they send you a three or five -page
report and you use it for ... as you will. Um, fourth, I'd like to ... I'd like you to
recognize the idea that this is truly a community effort. Two of the areas for
evaluation, two of the five areas for evaluation, are education and encouragement.
And so the Bicyclists of Iowa City and the other groups in the Think Bicycling
Group would clearly have to be involved in the process for us to move to the
platinum level, um, bike - friendly community. One of the things that the bike club
has been doing for the last several years is hosting, uh, bike rodeos, which are
skill and education events for grade school kids. Last year we had ten of `em, ten
schools participating. About ... over 500 kids. Already this year we have a dozen
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 8
schools lined up to do bike rodeos and we expect to get a few more, uh ... the last
point I'll make, and, uh, is this, is that ... if the Council is truly interested in the
idea of an environmentally - friendly community, and if they buy into the idea of
the Blue Zone, which has been marketed a lot over the last few years, then they
should be buying into the idea of a platinum level bike - friendly community.
These were all very similar ideas, and in my mind they're synonymous. Um,
they're going to require some rethinking of policy, and, uh, allocation of
resources, and I know that's an issue as we talk ... as you mentioned in your State
of the City, uh, but we think it's a ... a discussion that should be engaged and I
think, uh, our group would be very interested in participating in that. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you, Bob.
Townsend: Uh, good evening. My name is Orville Townsend. I'm here this evening because
I'd like to share concerns I have with you related to, uh, an article in the Press -
Citizen, dated Saturday, January 28. In that article, uh, in any case, that Miss
Royceann Porter, you know, had filed charges against the Police Department and
it also indicates that the high - ranking individual in the, uh, City government had
indicated that he questioned whether or not she should continue as a member of
the Police Review Board, Citizens Review Board. Uh ... although I respect the
individual's right to express his freedom of speech, I am highly concerned that in
doing so, he greatly compromised Miss Porter's right to due process. I think a
more appropriate way to handle that would have been to allow her to perform her
duties, hoping that if she were not able to show objectivity in matters related to
police, that members of the comm .... of the committee would approach her, or the
worst scenario, that the chair of that committee would come before you, the City
Council, and express concerns because of actions she had taken that were felt that
she could not be objective. At that point though we would have facts to support
that. I mean, that ... that, she was not given ... she hasn't been given due process. I
would also add that the charges against her were dropped. Now, she did not join
the Police Citizen Review Board after the fact. She was already a member of that
board. And I think we need to be honest about it. We don't control what's going
to happen in our lives from day to day, especially if we have children. But... we
or our community, community that is growing, we are a diverse community. And
I feel that we need to be sure that we don't make statements or initiate actions that
will send a wrong message. Now you may say that citizens, uh, nobody's going
to think it's a big deal, but perception can be just as damaging as reality. I would
hope that you as a Council, because the individual indicated that, you know, he
...he couldn't do anything about her being on that board, that ... whether or not she
would be allowed to continue. It's the City Council's decision. So I hope that
you will respect her right to due process. She's a citizen. She was put in a very,
very awkward situation that she had no control over, but my concern is that we
have City officials saying that someone should be discontinued for a board
because they can't be objective. That's just like saying that, uh, as a citizen if I do
something or file something against a office in the City, that I can't be objective,
but that's not true. I think we are all, we are all entitled to due process, and in this
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 9
case I think basically that didn't happen. I also want to bring this to your
attention because if a high- ranking City official is ... is doing this, Lord knows
what staff with less experience is doing. So maybe we should consider some type
of training, because as ... we've got a lot of minorities in the community, uh, there
are a lot of attitudes toward the Police Department that, you know, they aren't that
favorable. I'm not saying that that's right, but like I'm saying ... we not only need
to be putting the spotlight on reality, we must also realize that perception can be
just as damaging, and we don't want to send a wrong message. So ... if Mrs.
Porter's case comes to you, I hope you will respect her right to due process and
give her a chance. I'd like to thank you for allowing me to speak to you, and God
bless you.
Hayek: Thank you, Mr. Townsend.
Hurley: Good evening. I'm Brian Hurley. I'm a la ... life-long Iowa City resident. This is
my first City Council meeting, so it's quite an experience.
Hayek: Welcome!
Hurley: Thank you! Um ... I wanted to, uh, direct you to an attachment that was sent on
February 14th. Think it's page, uh, 237 but um ... it was sent by Robert Sessions as
part of the Iowa City Climate Advocates, which I'm also here to represent, and
it's a group of citizens who are trying to get a, uh, people in the community
together and organized around climate change and uh, environmental
sustainability. So, um ... in the attachment, um, there was a letter that was sent
out, so I'd just like to kind of touch on a few of the comments on there. Um, we
basically have a group of individuals and um, businesses and groups within the
community that would like to promote long -term sustainability and prosperity in
Iowa City. And you mentioned a lot of things earlier, uh, this evening at the
beginning on steps we're already taking in the community, and those are great,
and we want to go and continue to push on those even further. So we believe that
the city ... the residents of Iowa City will be much better off in the future if we
plan intelligently and boldly to create an environment that fosters human and
natural health, social justice and true prosperity. We further believe that these
goals could be achieved best through full employment and sustainable economic
development, serious conservation, careful zoning, invigoration of
neighborhoods, promotion of local food production, and significant reductions of
the carbon footprint of our community. With this in mind, we strongly encourage
you to take the following three actions. One, ensure that the future versions of the
City budget, the three -year financial plan, and capital improvement
pro ... programs explicitly express how they will promote the long -term prosperity
and sustainability of the city and surrounding areas. Two, urge the MPO of
Johnson County to indicate, uh, explicitly how the long -range transportation plan
will contribute to the region's long -term prosperity and sustainability. And, three,
appoint a task ... a long -term prosperity task force, consisting of diverse
stakeholders and charge that ... that task force with devising a set of sustainability
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 10
indicators, a process for which the city can status those indicators, and can be
reported to the public annually ... to be used to help shape the City's budgets and
plans. And we have a list of groups and individuals that we've already had on
board to support this, and we'd like you to seriously consider our
recommendations. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you. Thanks for coming here tonight.
Adams: Hi, my name is, um, is Mary Adams, and um, I just want to read a statement. I'm
a part of Occupy Iowa City, but I'm not speaking for the group. I'm speaking
because of my own experience with the physical occupation that was set up at
College Green Park. Occupy Iowa City will officially end its occupation of
College Green Park as of February 29, 2012. Because Occupy Iowa City could
provide tents, food, and clothing to those who came to the park, many people
arrived who had no home to go to. Those without their own home have been
camping at the park throughout the winter, months with a few committed
Occupiers, and when the permit expires, they will have no place to go. Shelter
House, located in Iowa City, is Johnson County's only general use homeless
shelter, providing transitional shelter to men, women, and children, including the
disabled and the elderly. The Shelter has to turn away anyone who has been
drinking or using drugs. These people make up about 11 % of the homeless
population in Johnson County. The Shelter has a capacity for 70 people per night.
Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County reports the need for an additional 94 beds
for homeless individuals, and 147 additional beds for homeless families in
transitional housing. Half of the homeless staying at College Green Park are
veterans. Shelter House has 14 beds provided for veterans, but if these are full,
those veterans at the park will have no place to go. For many of these people,
Occupy Iowa City provided a safer alternative than living under the railroad
bridges and other out -of -the -way places on the edge of town. Some of these
people have tried to find a bed at the transitional shelter, but were turned away for
lack of beds. Some would not get in because they have intractable addiction and
are intoxicated. Each year, hundreds of men, women, and children experiencing
homelessness in Johnson County are denied access to shelter due to a lack of bed
capacity. In St. Paul, Minnesota, the St. Anthony Wet House offers respite for
those who are homeless and unable to stop drinking. St. Paul is an example for
other cities who are working to solve the problem of alcoholic homeless who
often cost the city or county more money than a wet shelter would. St. Anthony
reports that it's not uncommon for a homeless alcoholic to cost the public more
than $1 million during decades of drinking for multiple jail stays, emergency
room visits, rounds of alcoholism treatment, and other costs. Iowa City and
Johnson County have many great services for those in need. But those who are
turned away because of intoxication place an additional financial burden on the
city be default, because they will likely end up in a jail cell. Because Occupy
Iowa City set up their occupation, some of the homeless population have had a
tent, a toilet, food, and clothes to help them make it through the winter. Some
would benefit from a wet shelter because they are continually intoxicated, which
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 11
has led to extra problems for the Iowa City Police. Occupy Iowa City had no
authority to turn away anyone. As the physical occupation comes to an end, these
people will be back on the streets, looking for a safe place to sleep. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you for your comments.
Oguz Poroy: Good evening. My name is Oguz Poroy. I live at 36 Highland Drive. I want to
address the same issue that Mary just did, the homeless people that live in the
park. I stayed in the park for 40 nights, from about mid - December until the end
of January, and by the time I moved in most of the Occupiers had left. So most of
my interaction was with the homeless people that live there. And I observed a
great change in how these people behaved over that time. When they first came
to the park, they were almost like inhuman, you know, their faces were angry,
frozen. It was very difficult to communicate with them. They were
argumentative, and I'm ... I'm not an expert, so I didn't know what to do about it,
but over time ... this sense of security that they had from staying there, and the
limited resources like a tent, you know, sleeping bag, whatever, to us these are
nothing but to them, that was a significant resource to have. And also the sense of
community that they had, uh, interacting among each other, each other, as well as
interacting with us. I believe, uh, basically changed them and I ... I observed this
personally and, um ... it came to a point where, from it being difficult to even talk.
We exchanged life stories and I ... I got to know them, and it came to a point
where you couldn't take up a hammer and start doing something in the park
without one of them coming out of their tents and offering their help and it was,
uh, you know, one Sunday afternoon just watching them sitting around, smoking
cigarettes, exchanging stories and basically offering me socks and ... and, you
know, underwear and then whatever. It was a... quite... quite an impression. So
as the permit expires, uh, these people are going to be kicked out and it's going to
be impossible for them to lug around these blankets and sleeping bags and tents,
and what not that they have. To them this is ... it's been a mild winter anyway, but
um, this was the first winter that most of them had more than like a piece of
cardboard and a single blanket to sleep with. I came here tonight to ask you to
consider what will happen to these people, and to ask if it's not possible for you
to, uh, maybe allocate another space where they can be moved with their tents and
their belongings. There are plenty of us who are willing to come out and help
with that and I know there are some objections, but I think they can be (mumbled)
or require registration and you can ask people to sign liability waivers and do
other things to make that happen. As far as the objections, um, I don't think they
caused any problems to anybody really more than most of their damage that they
do is to themselves. Really, uh, there was a document that listed violations of the
original permit, uh, none of those things are true except for one. They kept using
the gazebo to dry their blankets and sleeping bags. We couldn't get them to stop
doing that, but uh, if these people are a problem they'll be a problem regardless of
where they are. I think there's some benefit ... I know there's benefit to them, but
I think also there is some benefit to the City from having these people in one
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 12
designated, uh, place. So I want to encourage you to consider, uh, allowing them
just a piece of land, piece of the planet where they (mumbled) live. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you ... for your comments. Is there anyone else who would like to address
the Council during community comment? Okay. We will move on to Item 7,
Planning and Zoning Matters.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 13
ITEM 7. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS.
b. CONSIDER A MOTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR
MARCH 20 ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 14,
ZONING, ARTICLE 91, GENERAL DEFINITIONS, CHANGING
THE DEFINITIONS OF "HOUSEHOLD" AS IT APPLIES IN THE
RM -44, PRM, RNS -20, RM -20, AND CO -1 ZONES.
Dobyns: Move for a public hearing.
Champion: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Dobyns, seconded by Champion. Um, as ... so we'll discussion at this
point. Um, as I indicated at the beginning of the meeting, uh, items 7c and 7d, uh,
were withdrawn during our work ... at the conclusion of our work session and will
not be before the Council tonight. Those will go through the normal legislative
process and come back to us in short order. 7b, the Council decided, which is
what I've just read, and which is now on the floor for discussion, is up for a vote
tonight. Um, because of the consider... considerable public interest on this issue,
uh, we're going to, uh, certainly invite, uh, public input on this before ... I think
before the Council has its discussion. So if...if you'd like to, uh, and ... and do we
need to have staff again on this, um, we heard from staff at the beginning, or at
the work session. I think we know where we are. Um, okay, so if you are from a
...the audience and you'd like to address us on 7b, we'll do the standard routine
where you, uh, sign in and give us your name, and we're again going to ask
people to limit comments to three minutes so we can get through, uh, the agenda
tonight.
Clark: Good evening, Council. My name is Sarah Clark. I live on Brown Street, and
I'm a member of the Northside Neighborhood Association, and actually my
comments ... uh, are relating to all three issues, but I think they're probably worth
hearing anyway, so ... (mumbled) so that's why I said it. Um, I ask...
Hayek: Sarah, I've got to interrupt you. Try to limit them to b because we ... I mean, the
other items really aren't on the agenda.
Clark: Okay! Well, it's a general...
Hayek: There's some general over (both talking)
Clark: ...it's some general. It's all good!
Hayek: Okay!
Clark: After... (several talking) ... after over 40 years of constant development in our
city's central neighborhoods, the residents of these neighborhoods deserve at
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 14
minimum a 60 -day breather which the public hearings will generate. This
Council has stated that neighborhood stabilization is one of its strategic goals.
What better way to signal to residents that you are serious about this goal than by
voting to set a public hearing. The city ... this city has reached a critical juncture
in the life of our city neighborhoods ... central neighborhoods. Do we continue
with the same zoning regulations that result in block after block of one housing
type, namely high- density apartments geared to short-term renters? Or do we
finally insist that the zoning be consistent with the goals of the City's own central
district plan. The central district plan's housing objectives include, one, a healthy
balance of rental and owner - occupied housing in the district's older
neighborhoods to promote long -term investment; two, affordable housing
opportunities; and three, preservation of historic homes and neighborhoods. The
time to achieve these objectives is running out. Parts of our core neighborhoods
have already been lost. Those that remain are either threatened or endangered.
When you think of a livable neighborhood or community, do you picture endless
rows of three -story high- density apartments or do you envision a neighborhood
appealing to all age groups because of its diverse, affordable housing? Do you
picture back and side yards covered in concrete in order to accommodate cars, or
do you see usable outdoor spaces and gardens that benefit everyone? Do you
picture a neighborhood where the few remaining children are bused to elementary
schools on the edge of town because their neighborhood school has been closed
due to low enrollment, or do you see a multi - generational neighborhood with
children whose school is a short walking distance away? The owners of high -
density student apartments have burdened the rest of our community with having
to take care of the consequences of those apartments. Our community can no
longer afford this burden. Please vote in favor of setting a public hearing. Thank
you very much.
Hayek: Thanks, Sarah. (applause)
Siders: Mayor, Council Members, my name is Glenn Siders. I'm with Southgate
Companies. I'm here this evening representing Southgate Companies. I'm also
here as the spokesperson for the Greater Iowa City Area Homebuilder's
Association. Uh, because I do represent a ... larger membership, if I would run
four minutes instead of three, I hope you extend a little bit of latitude. And I
promise you I will speak with no animosity towards your staff. Uh, it shouldn't
be a shock to, uh, have me say that in general our association is opposed to
moratoriums. Uh, we do however, uh, are however aware of the fact that it is part
of your existing ordinance. Uh, we need to either get that changed or just deal
with it. So I'm not here to speak on the moratorium per se. I am here to address
on how you're going about, uh, considering an ordinance before it's drafted. Any
project that any of our members have ever pursued or that I have ever seen the
City Council impose, uh, have gone forward in a method outlined by your staff.
It's outlined in the brochures that the City publishes, and it's outlined on your
web site. Um, that method is to first draft an ordinance. Uh, that goes through
staff review and comment. It then goes to the Planning and Zoning Commission
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 15
for their input, which involves public input. Uh, it then comes to the Council, and
at that point you set a public hearing. Uh, if you set a public hearing for Item 7b,
I think you're bypassing that pro ... that process, and you're bypassing an
opportunity for, uh, public input. On the City web site, uh, you outline a
rezoning process. That web site outline has a ... application form, um, has ... has a
few of the documents; application form, a cover letter, a document entitled "The
Zoning Process," and a document entitled "A Citizen's Guide to Rezoning
Process." The application is pretty straightforward; asks for legal descriptions,
uh, notification of property owners, people that live within 300 -feet of the
impacted area. I'm not necessarily sure that would imply to 7b. The cover letter,
the very first sentence of the cover letter, which is the second document you'll see
on your web site, states that it is the goal of the Planning and Community
Development department to provide adequate public notification for development
items. Then it goes on for another page and a half. Then following a couple
pages of fee structures and application dates you run across this document called
"The Zoning Process." And I'd like to just state a few... highlight a few things
that the zoning process informs you. It says the City Council makes land use and
zoning decisions for Iowa City, after receiving a recommendation from the
Planning and Zoning Commission. It says public input is important in the
process. So with any request for a rezoning, the public is notified by a number of
means. It says the Planning and Zoning Commission reviews applications and
staff evaluation recommendations for rezoning, hears opinion from both the
general public and property owners affected, and makes recommendations to the
Council. Under a little sub -title section that says City Council, it says before
making that decision, however, the Council reviews the recommendation from
Planning and Zoning, and finally under `how can I participate in that document,'
it says public input is important in order for the Planning and Zoning
Commission, and the City Council, to completely understand the issues related to
a rezoning request. Do you understand all of the issues? I question whether you
do, particularly when there is a phantom ordinance. Nothing has been drafted.
Nobody has reviewed it, and there's been no public input. For example, will this
impact townhouse development? Will this impact condominium development?
Will this impact remodeling projects? Will this generate non - conforming uses?
Those are to name a few. We strongly encourage you to forego setting the public
hearing at this time, and go through the customary process. Uh, that would be
setting your public after P &Z has sent you a recommendation. And having
listened to your work session, I jotted down a couple of comments made. One
question was asked, "What projects are out there ?" I'm not sure we know what
projects are out there. Our townhouse... if you have a four -unit, six -unit
townhouse, is that in this, um ... proposed ordinance? The 7b is the definition as I
understand it from what I have to read is the definition you're considering
changing the definition of `unrelated roomers.' That essentially in my opinion
impacts the number of bedrooms you might construct in a project. If you are
limited to three non - related people, I'm not sure why you would build a four- or
five - bedroom unit. So as ... I think similar to item c, that you had elected not to
deal with this evening. Also, you elected not to deal with item 7d which
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 16
potentially listening to staff would allow you, uh, possible bonuses which might
offset this roomer situation. It was also commented that you've done this before,
and it's kind of routine. You may have done it for the C zones, but you've never
done it in the R zones. I think that's different. It does impact what happens to
units that have four and five bedrooms, that have their rental permits, and they
already exist. Has that been thought of or discussed? With that, I would be happy
to answer any questions you might have or I'll just go sit down. (laughter) Thank
you.
Hayek: Thanks, Glenn!
Holtkamp: My name is, uh, Mark Holtkamp and uh, I own one of the properties that was
discussed in the work session about one of the ones that's going to be under
construction potentially at the corner of Burlington and Governor Street. And on
that project, uh, to give you a little taste for what this ordinance would do, um...
that project would allow six townhouses, four- and three- bedroom, allowing for a
total of 23 bedrooms. Um, under the new proposals, without knowing what the
bonuses that they're going to suggest allowing additional one - bedrooms, I'd be
allowed to build 13 bedrooms there. To give you a feel, the difference from what
you did on the CB zones, when you got rid of the four- and five- bedrooms, it
really didn't affect the number of bedrooms you could build in a building because
the, uh, floor to air ration is what controls in those districts. Essentially you can
still build the same building and if you just want to build more three - bedrooms,
you're allowed to do that. In these residential zones, you're not allowed to build
any more units so you're losing bedrooms. So on this project I would lose ten
bedrooms, essentially like each bedroom is about $65,000. So on this project, it
wouldn't even make sense to do anything if the land was paid off free and clear.
Urn ... so in general I guess I'd like to say that just consider, you know, what
you're doing to property values also in the area. It's not like you did this before.
It's totally a new zoning and uh, just consider it before you rush into anything.
Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you for your comments.
Sponsler: I'm Clare Sponsler. I live at 413 N. Gilbert Street. I'm going to be very brief. I
simply want to ask you to support this motion for, uh, all of the reasons you've
heard a few minutes ago about the benefits that it would bring to Iowa City, its
ability to stabilize neighborhoods, uh, and its ability to make a positive change
that would improve the future growth of the city. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you for your comments.
Cook: Good evening, my name is Casey Cook. I live at #1 Oak Park Court in Iowa City.
I've been studying the economics of real estate in Iowa City, uh, since 1985 as an
appraiser, and for a six -year stint as a member of the Planning and Zoning
Commission. I believe the City would be making a mistake by effectively
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 17
downzoning properties at the edge of the central business district. I do not believe
the issue's been adequately vetted, and that we are seeking solutions that address
a purely political issue without a better understanding of their cost. My firm did a
survey of just over 6,000 apartments in the area last year. Rents have gone up a
little over 7% over the prior two years. Vacancies near the central business
district were under 2 %. A healthy market has vacancies of about 7 %. Here's the
upshot: you can expect continuing and significant increases in rents over the next
few years or until this imbalance is addressed. This isn't just about students. It's
about anybody who lives in rented housing. These are the most economically
vulnerable people in the community and they are getting clobbered! They don't
typically live near the central district, but as rents rise those inner -city residents
move further out and rents go up for everyone. Have we really studied how this
policy impacts affordable housing? Developers won't bear the burden of these
changes. The property owners will. It would be nice to think of the property
owners as `undeserving fat cats' feathering their litter box. This is not the case!
Property owners include the New Pioneer Co -Op, Community Mental Health, and
United Action for Youth. Developers should be treated no differently than non-
profits. Would you feel the same about these changes if $500,000 were wiped off
your balance sheet so that you could do your part to save a restaurant? Have we
studied the financial impact on the properties that will be affected? Do the
property owners fully appreciate the ramifications of this change? Have we asked
them? Taxes at every level of government are being assailed. The conversion
from apartments to cooperatives will impact hundreds of apartments in our city.
It will wipe out 40 to 50% of the taxes they pay. I'm not sure how much this will
reduce our city revenues, but it will be substantial. It will also hurt the County
and the schools. Commerc ... commercial property tax reform has just passed the
State House of Representatives and the Senate is working on their version.
Republicans, Democrats, and the Governor have all agreed to reduce commercial
taxes. The only issue is who benefits the most and how much will it cost. The
bill indicates that the State will " backfill" these lost taxes. I think this "backfill"
will be ripe political fruit to be cut and consumed when times get tough. The
rural areas and farms will not be the ones to make up the difference. It will be at
the expense of the cities. In light of these impending losses, where will the
revenue come from? Have we done any analysis in this regard? I would like to
know how much of the property in Iowa City is tax exempt, and how that has
changed over the past ten years. While churches, hospitals, community colleges,
and the University all play a critical role in our economy, there are burdens and
these need to be considered. When the University responds to the devastating
floods of 2008, they need property, and it's near the inner -city. What analysis has
been done on how the City will need to backfill revenues for the properties that
have left the tax rolls over the past five years? What are we projecting for the
next five to ten years in this regard? The upshot is that as City revenues are cut,
and ability to grow is curtailed, it is the human services and cultural events that
suffer first. For many of the people that signed the petition to save the Red
Avocado, these are things the City does that they value the most. So let's take a
deep breath and reconsider these zoning changes. Let's do some analysis on the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 18
true cost of our options, and I encourage you to refer these questions to the public
process and engage the Planning and Zoning Commission in this endeavor.
Thank you.
Throgmorton: Matt, could I ask, um, Casey a question for clarification...
Hayek: Well, you know we really ... we're just ... I think we open the door up if we do that.
That's my concern. Uh...
Cook: I'll be happy to chat with you later though if you want, Jim.
Throgmorton: Okay.
Hayek: I appreciate your interest in that, Jim. It's just ... we're not ... I don't know that
we're set up for that. Um ... so...
Throgmorton: I'll...
Hayek: I mean...
Throgmorton: ... when ... when do we interact with people and ... and try to, you know, really...
obtain insight into the real meaning of what they said. I'm (both talking)
Hayek: ...maybe we get through, at least get through the public's comments, urn ... and if
we've got questions, uh, during our discussion time.
Degraw: My name's Sheri Degraw and I'm actually reading a letter for Joan Jehle, who
wishes to conserve her speaking voice. Since 1993, I have lived in the 1...1...
1100 block of East Jefferson Street and year after year I have watched the
neighborhoods between Dodge and Evans Street decline. Much of that three -
block area has turned over from single- family homes to rental apartments and
duplexes, with a few apartment buildings also in the mix. I call this `student
sprawl' and it has come closer and closer to my single - family block of Jefferson
Street. I'm not anti - student nor anti - builder, but recently, yes it's true, I've
become more and more anti - developer. Long -time Iowa City residents resent
building student housing in our neighborhoods. Many of us like the central
business area just the way it is. Yes, I understand the need for more property tax
revenue to off-set the many University of Iowa buildings which do not pay
property taxes. I have lived in Iowa City for the past 62 years and I understand
the feeling within this community that developers always get their way. It is time
for the Planning Department, the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City
Council, and our City Manager to listen to Iowa City residents and approve the
proposed amendment to Title 14 zoning matters as listed in item 7b of tonight's
agenda. Further, I suggest that you, Mr. Mayor and Tom Rocklin of the
University of Iowa, join forces once again to learn what other college
communities have done to alleviate similar problems. I suggest you refer to the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 19
article, Coping With Colleges, How Communities Address the Problems of
Students Living Of Campus by Craig Raborne. Thank you for the opportunity to
address the City Council. Joan Jehle.
Hayek: Thank you, Sheri.
Cohn: Good evening! Uh, Yale Cohn, that's who I am! I'll keep it brief. I expected to
speak to some of the other issues, but um, I just would like, first of all commend
the Council for even considering these things and putting these, uh, matters on the
agenda. I've been critical of previous Councils that sometimes they didn't really
respond, uh, but that you have put these and now these, uh, I believe c and d on. I
went to a number of the good ideas, uh, seminars which are put on through the
Planning, uh, and Zoning department. I saw some of you, uh, Council Members
there, uh, so I think on some level that we're having this discussion now is
emblematic of something of a paradigm shift because these are issues which have
been, uh, ongoing for some time, but I hope, uh, not to be too terribly optimistic,
that there will be some real traction, uh, now in addressing these things. Um, as
one of the previous, uh, commenters mentioned, yes, this b, uh, would really
implicitly affect, um, multiple bedroom units and I think, uh, that's kind of the
point, um, given that we've seen, um, that these large, uh, primarily student
housing, if not exclusively student housing, do have deleterious affects on the
neighborhoods in a number of ways, uh, that the City then has to deal with. Um,
and I was always a firm believer in ... in the notion that if you're fixing the little
things, um, you're already starting to fix the big things. So if we can fix, uh, the
overconcentration of these, uh, units, and their location, uh, by zoning the ... the
phrase `University impact area' which I saw on some of the, uh, recent
documentation about this seems to be growing and growing and growing. Um,
certainly I'm not anti - development. People certainly have a right to, uh, invest
their money and build apartments and rent them, uh, but I think that certain areas
that are in fact as you talked about, neighborhood stabilizations what really are
`neighborhoods' uh made up of people who live, work, create, open businesses,
uh, they need to be protected from, uh, the development of the kind of places that
primarily, uh, you know, I'm glad the University's here and those kids need a
place to live, uh, but my argument's that perhaps, uh, you know, the choicest cuts
of real estate, uh, needn't be handed over to them. And by saying, you know, I
think we're clearly intellectually aware of this, and if...if you are. I know Jim
bikes a lot. I ... you wouldn't know it from looking at me, but I walk a fair
amount, so I've seen, um, where these places are, but I think the ... the most telling
picture of that, uh, I was at, uh, Mark Moen's penthouse, condo last summer for a
...a, event, uh, Summer of the Arts, people who had volunteered and that, they
had a little nice, you know, cocktail party for us, and from that vantage, which I
believe is the highest, maybe, spot in Iowa City up there on Plaza Towers, I've
lived here for ten years and you could look out from there and see, you know,
block after block after block after block where I think, you know, image is
important, uh, when you can really see that and conceptualize that in one picture,
um ... that's I think, you know, take a trip up there. I'm sure he'd love to see you
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 20
all, and uh, take a look out at the city from that high point, and I think you ... you
get more of a gut feeling for, uh, just this issue and the other ones folks are talking
about. So, thank you for your time!
Hayek: Thanks, Yale.
Buss: Hi, I'm Anna Buss. I live at 525 W. Benton Street, and I've had rental property
since 1973 and I'm a realtor. I've been a property manager, been a hairdresser in
Iowa City for a long time. One of the things, we've have a lot of different issues,
a lot of things have changed over the years. There's a lot of things to consider.
One of the things that while tearing down the houses over on Washington Street
have brought to focus, one of the things that should be remembered is, while all
older homes are older, it doesn't necessarily mean they fall into any sense of
historic value. Some of these older homes are unsafe, and something does need to
be done with them, whether it is to go in and actually evaluate them and
realistically, um, if you have purchased one of these homes and it is zoned for a
development, that should be allowed without having to go through all of this.
One of the other things that needs to be considered for just a minute let's take the
students out of the mix. That seems to be a hot issue with a lot of the people in
the downtown area. I rent to a lot of people who are not students. They are
working people. They are your next - door - neighbors. They are good people, but
the rent is high. Not just in my properties, but other people's. I try to keep a very
well- maintained older home. All of my homes are 1950 and before. I work well
with the City Housing Inspection department. They have never found any major
violations in my properties. The big violation seems to be smoke detector or a
hand -rail going downstairs. One of the common things that I find is that some of
these people need to live together and they need to have more than maybe what is
occupied, what is required by or allowed, by the zoning. They cannot afford the
rent in this town. They work at jobs that are sometimes temp services. They
might be temp services with Procter and Gamble, or they might be with Oral -B.
But, they might be a basic laborer, and those people cannot afford to live in this
town with the way things are going. So you need to have a balance here, and the
more that you ... the more it takes for people to develop and build, the more
difficult it is, the more it costs. Everything costs money. Time is money. And,
with this moratorium, the building season is only so long, and it causes problems
if you do that. That's been done before in Iowa City, and it didn't have a good
effect the last time it happened. There's a lot of us around who remember that.
So before you go talking moratorium, before you go talking re- evaluating
grandfathering, yes ... it seems that a lot of people downtown, they want to have
the money the students bring in but they don't want to have the students. And
you can't have it both ways. There are laws in place to deal with anybody,
whether they are students or not, who are causing problems, and those need to be
explored. Thank you for your time.
Throgmorton: Thanks, Anna.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 21
Hayek: Thank you, Anna.
Walker: Hi, I'm Jean Walker and I live at 335 Lucon Drive, and I just wanted to make a
quick comment that, um, neighborhoods and historic neighborhoods are impor
... should be important to the City, I mean, it's our heritage, and so anything that
can be done to help preserve these neighborhoods once, urn ... buildings get torn
down and large buildings, uh, get put in their place, it starts the deterioration of a
neighborhood and uh, in the neighborhood I live in, um, I've noticed ... I've lived
in it for almost 40 years and I've noticed over that time the destruction of, uh, the
neighborhood by the multiple cars that are parked in their driveways. It's now,
instead of looking down a street and seeing the historic houses, you see many cars
parked in the driveways. So anything that you can do to help preserve this City's
historic neighborhoods will be much appreciated. Thank you!
Hayek: Thank you for your comments.
McLaughlin: Good evening. Uh, my name's Mike McLaughlin. In your, uh, Information
Packet I included a letter and uh, several copies of the City Title 14 zoning code,
as well as a copy of the, uh, zoning pamphlet that's in the Planning and
Community Development, uh, department, on their, uh, countertop. Um, back in
2005, as my letter states, um ... we went through a process where the Title 14 code
was, uh, entirely overhauled and that process included, um, notification to the
public, couple notifications in the newspaper, um ... process through Planning and,
uh, Planning and Zoning Commission, which I think was, uh, possibly even more
than one. Might have been two or three meetings where the public could
comment and be involved. And, then it was, uh, passed on to the Council. Not
until at that point did I realize that, uh, rezoning was occurring, and therefore
that's why I included information in Court ... Council Information Packet, not only
a definition of rezoning, uh, but also copies that, uh, the code (mumbled)
proposed, uh, some of which were c and d, uh, that are not being ... that are not on
tonight's agenda, but also uh, item b the change in the definition of the word
`household,' a text change, uh, that falls under rezoning. Uh, I think right in the
first sentence of that rezoning definition. Um, primarily what I wanted to focus
on tonight is that, um ... there is a process, uh, that is due citizens, property
owners, um ... as well as neighborhood representatives in a rezoning process, and
uh, again that would follow public notification, um, to those zones that are, uh,
being considered — RM44, PRM, RNS20, RM20, and COI. Um, I think it's been
a history of the City to provide a letter of notification; that's not necessarily
required, uh, at the State level; however, some type of public notification is
required. And to my knowledge at this point that has not occurred, and as I'm
standing here speaking as well as other speakers have, um, brought this up, um,
you know, how did I find out. Well, I went and asked staff myself ... to see
exactly what they had in mind and uh, these items actually, proposed amend-
ments, didn't come out I think until later Friday. So time's kind of short, um, but
uh ... I get ... I would request the Council before voting upon item 7b as
amendment take your time and investigate... the rezoning that is occurring, what
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 22
you're required to do as a council in that rezoning process, uh ... based upon what
the City code requires, and um, in a letter also provided in your Information
Packet by, uh, Mike Pugh's an attorney here in town. He also, uh, laid out that,
you know, historically it's, uh, may or may not have been passed; however, you
know, we're looking at this item here tonight in that, um, you know, investigate
and react according to what the code requires, and uh, provide the citizens,
whether they're property owners, concerned neighbors, the due process, uh, part
of the due process also, uh, if, uh, rezoning item is brought forward to the
Council, uh, citizens or property owners are allowed to present a petition where
you can have, uh, at least 20% of the property owners within that zone being
rezoned, or uh, within 200 feet around that zone, if you have 20% or more of
those property owners, then uh, they could require Council to have a super
majority for ... before a rezoning process, uh, or before a rezoning amendment is
passed. Uh, that's one of the options there that protect property owners,
obviously. Uh, but also, uh, can represent or neighborhood ... concerned neighbor
...neighborhoods or neighbors. Uh, so again ... I guess I'm requesting that, uh,
this not be rushed through. That proper investigation occur to see what you need
to follow in a rezoning process, what due process is provided for the citizens, and
the uh ... the property owners, and uh ... and follow that. I don't understand that,
um, the need for a rush to go through this. Um ... couple other comments (both
talking)
Hayek: You're going to have to finish up pretty quickly.
McLaughlin: You bet! Just about done. Um ... with item 7b is that, uh, this isn't the first time
that the rezoning type of this has been brought forth, and it's ... more isolated and
it ... in looking at, you know, a particular zone or zones, um, I think it would be
beneficial is really kinda look over all at the whole, uh ... city map, the areas, and
have more of a broad view of how this could affect the, you know, the entirety of
the city. Uh, some of these zones are vast. I know there's RM44 on the west side
of the river. There certainly is some downtown. North Dubuque Street and other
areas, so there is a broader effect that these, you know, these amendments can
have and I think to take the time to consider those as well, uh, you'd be a little bit
better informed and have a little bit more insight on ... on how that, uh, how that
could affect, uh, not only just near downtown neighborhoods, but uh, broad areas
as well. So, um...
Hayek: You really...
McLaughlin: (both talking) Appreciate your, uh, time in listening to me and ... thank you.
Hayek: Thanks, Mike!
Wright: Good evening, I'm Mike Wright. I live at 225 N. Lucas Street, and I'd really like
to stop coming to the meetings (laughter) but I'm here to encourage you to please
set the public hearing tonight on item 7b. 7b does get at many neighborhood
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 23
concerns. Um, and in terms of some of the things I've heard tonight, passing the
public hearing does not mean there will be a lack of input. There'll be plenty of
opportunities for input coming up. We have opportunity this evening, in fact, but
my ... the big question is, how often are core neighborhoods and that's really what
this is boiling down to, going to be asked to fall on the sword of development of
rental properties? Stabilization of core neighborhoods is a goal of this Council,
and here's an opportunity to frankly put the money where your mouth is! High
density student apartments, and student apartments are really the issue here, are an
issue that do need to be addressed in Iowa City. Four to five students, unrelated
individuals, living in a unit in a large building do create an environment where
frankly havoc reigns. I know this from personal experience! The phrase
`unsupervised dorms' has come into play. I call them neighborhood `wreckers.'
This is a turning point opportunity for Iowa City this evening. I suspect we're
going to see a stampede of development that really none of us want, unless we put
the brakes on the type of inappropriate development that we're talking about this
evening. And you can have it both ways! We can have successful neighborhoods
that are a mix of student rentals and owner - occupiers, but there needs to be a
certain amount of balance. 7b will bring a certain amount of balance should that
be passed in the future. And again, there will be plenty of opportunities for input.
And I would to just close by saying that my neighborhood is absolutely not a
political issue, and I'm offended to hear it referred to that. It is home to myself
and a number of other people. Thank you.
Hayek: Thanks, Mike.
Brandt: Good evening, Council. My name is T. J. Brandt, and I'm here basically as a past
member of the Board of Appeals, uh, serving on that body for five years. Uh, this
is a hot button topic for the entire community and I guess the only thing I would
like to echo on is what Mike McLaughlin and Glenn Siders said is, do the
homework first, don't rush into it because no matter... you're not going to be able
to please everybody all the time. But, what you guys decide tonight could very
well impact, uh, the caseload for the Board of Appeals or the Board of
Adjustments, excuse me, not the Board of Appeals. The Board of Adjustment.
Because they are a quasi-judicial, uh, body, uh, the only ... after that process is
completed, then it goes on to the State. So, for the appeal process ... so ... as a
concerned citizen, and a taxpayer, please do your due diligence, take the time
necessary. If you've already delayed c and d, why not delay b and get the... get
the whole process done in one shot? That's all I ask is that you do your due
diligence and do what, uh, you have to do. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you, T. J.
Oliver: Hi, Matt. My name's Mike Oliver. I own Prestige Properties, um, our company
has ... over, uh, 40 rental units within an eight block area of downtown. I'm
concerned about the value of our investment in Iowa City, and to not be able to
redevelop those properties some point down the road. I think that, uh, the City
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 24
Council has not ... has underestimated the trends in housing. Our rentals have
professors, working families, doctors. I think the trend of people being the
owner - occupied is kind of going to be a diminishing term in our society. I think
that because the trend right now, what we're seeing, even in high- income people,
they want better quality rentals, higher standards in rentals, and if we can't tear
down some of this older housing stock, in non - historic neighborhoods, and build
that up to ... have that demand, those people are not going to live in Iowa City.
They're going to move out, away from Iowa City, and I think that, uh ... you're not
looking at this right, in the sense that more research needs to be done. I think the
scare of having, uh, five people in a bedroom or five bedrooms or multi -
generational housing. What we call multi - generational now is people want
housing that their kids can come back to, or they may have their parents living
there. It's ... it's a different ball game! And for the next 20 years, or 25 years, that
ball game is going to be affecting Iowa City. Just not the student population, but
the way we look at housing within ... close to downtown. I urge you to take a look
at all the ramifications of putting this on the table before you have all the
information. I think some research needs to be done. I think we need to go talk to
Denny Baldridge, and talk to him about the tax implimications. I did! I asked
him if he was going to reassess all my properties that are RM44 because the
values will be changed. Cause we cannot tear those units down and rebuild. I
thank you for your time. I think you need to consider this; little bit more research.
Thank you.
Hayek: Thanks, Mike. (whispering) Ma'am, before you start, I'm going to accept
comments until 8:40 and then we ... we need to shut it down so that we can, as a
Council, take up our discussion as well, because we've got a, at least one other
issue tonight that I suspect is going to take up some time. So, thank you.
Carlson: My name is Nancy Carlson. I live at 1002 E. Jefferson. In the 90s when our
neighborhood went through the rezoning from RM12 to RNS 12, I was one of the
people who went around the neighborhood to get signatures for the petition to
attempt to accom ... accomplish that goal. When I knocked on the door of Ed
Kanadell's house, I did so with a little bit of trepidation. Uh, the house looked
like it had been built in the late 40s or 50s, but next to it was one of the 70s
Mansford roof apartment houses. It was a small apartment house, surrounded
totally by concrete. The only green on that spot was the parking strip. I knocked
on the door and I explained why I was here. And asked him if he would be
willing to sign a petition. He said, `You betcha! When they built this thing next
door to me, there was nobody here to help me and look what I got stuck with. I
...what happened to me, I don't want to see happen to anybody else.' At that
same time there were a group of students living behind me and so as we were
going around the neigh... neighborhood, one of the kids came out one day and I
said, `Hey, you know, we're trying to get this rezoned from RM12 to RNS12.
Would you be willing to, you know, participate or would you be willing to sign a
petition ? / And he looked at me and he said, `Why would I want to get involved?
Next year I will not be here.' When the developers speak, their emphasis deals
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 25
only with their investment. Have you ever heard one of the owners who live in
the area bring that up? Their emphasis is on my neighborhood! What are you
doing to my neighborhood? Even though for most people their home is the
largest investment they will ever make in their lives. And if they all totaled up
their individual investments, it would far exceed the developer's investment.
They are concerned about the neighborhood, the community, not just themselves.
When I bought my house 31 years ago, I wanted a place where I could walk
downtown and not be totally dependent on my car. I came from a small town and
this area reminded me of that same small -town feel. There was a wide variety of
housing, from very small cottage to large Victorian, all mixed up together. It
appeared to be a very democratic area, where people of all income levels lived
next to one another. I had no concept of zoning and the effect that could ... that
could have on this wonderful area I had chosen to live in. What I have come to
realize is that because of the zoning changes that were introduced in the 60s, we
have been involved in a fight for 50 years, between people who look on ... at this
area as a prime investment area, and we people who live here, who want to
preserve the reason we moved here. I'm here and my neighborhood is here
because of the people before me who fought to save this neighborhood for me. I
am here now to carry on that tradition in hopes that we can pass on what we feel
is so wonderful about this area to the next generation. But without the City's
support, we are doomed to lose! We will lose ... what drew us to this area and
what we value, not because we haven't tried to preserve that and pass it on,
because ... but because without the City's supporting us in our fight, we are just
spitting in the wind. What is the legacy we are going to pass on to the next
generation? Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you for your comments. (light applause)
Schwalm: My name is Leslie Schwalm. I live at 819 E. Market Street, uh, and I've lived
there, uh, for 17 years. Um, I'm asking, uh, you to pass this motion. I'm asking
you to restrict the number of unrelated people, uh, who can live in our
neighborhoods. Um, we have been re ... coming again and again to the Zoning
Commission and we come to you again asking for your help in sustaining our
beautiful downtown Iowa City and our neighborhoods. Not just neighborhoods
for people who own their homes, but also neighborhoods, um, where people can
rent with affordable housing, but neighborhoods with people who respect each
other, who are long -term residents who have a deep commitment to
neighborhoods! Um, we have been fighting this fight for a long time. The ... the
laws aren't working. We call the police over and over again. We call the police.
The new buildings that have five- bedroom apartments, they're ruining our
neighborhood. The noise. The trash. The traffic. Um, the, uh, rentals that are
occupied by students that are consistently over - occupied. We can call the police;
we do call the police. We called the City, and it's an endless, endless struggle.
It's time for you to step up and help us with this project of sustaining our beautiful
neighborhoods in Iowa City. Again, what we have isn't working any more. We
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 26
need more from you, and I think this motion is an excellent move in that
direction. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you for your comments. Okay, we only have time for about one more
comment and ... (laughter) I think she was, yeah, she was ... (laughter)
NialleSylvan: (mumbled) My name is Nialle Sylvan. I live at 1722 Morningside Drive. Um...
I understand the concerns of those who want more time for input. It seems to me
that a public hearing is particularly called for, given the participation in the good
ideas workshops, given the amount of public interest in the 500 block of
Washington Street, given ... not by any fault of yours but a general public
perception that perhaps the City doesn't have the individual citizens' needs in
mind. This is a perfect opportunity for the City ... City to open a public hearing so
that people can speak their minds. Better that they should speak their minds
before you while there is still a question to be raised, then raise a petition after the
fact to try to stop something that can't be stopped. Um, I certainly see the
concern with wanting property to have investment value. I certainly want to see
development that is going to be helpful for businesses, individuals, developers,
and students. Um, I certainly think that affordability is an issue, and that
preservation of the historic neighborhoods would give opportunities to small
businesses, to extended families. I note that the, uh, item here states that ... the
maximum allowed in all the other zones in the city is already set at three for
unrelated persons. So we're not talking about a massive paradigm shift here. I
have heard people raise questions about the nature of the family these days.
Seems like that would be something you'd want to air at a public hearing. So I'm
in favor of a public hearing, and I'm also in favor of a public hearing so that you
can hear back from the students to some extent. While a lot of people demonize
the students, sometimes justly, I am quite sick of cleaning barf off the front steps
of my bookstore, um, there are students who are looking for affordable housing,
who don't want to mortgage their futures, who don't want to become the kind of
professionals that have to go to the east coast to get enough money to pay the
student debt that they had to take out to be able to afford a rental place in Iowa
City. To that end I'd like to read you something written from 225 N. Linn Street,
at the other end of the block from my bookstore. `Dear Mother, This is my first
evening here. The quadrangle was completely filled up with a long waiting list so
I had to walk all over town to locate a suitable place to live. I am very well
satisfied with this place but I will enclose the contracts for you to examine. They
appear rather complicated. So far my room is the only one taken in the building,
so I have plenty of privacy. It is convenient to the campus and to the downtown
section. I am delighted with the town. It is very much like Columbia, small and
friendly. I hope Dakin is getting along all right at Washington. I'm sure he
would like this university much better. It is by far the nicest campus I have seen.
Lovingly, Tom.' Also known as Tennessee Williams, date of the letter,
September 23rd, 1937. Let's keep his legacy in mind while we're thinking too!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 27
Hayek: Thank you for your comments. Okay, I ... I think at this ... we ... we simply have to,
uh, if we're going to get out of here at a reasonable hour tonight, uh, and the
public input and then at this point take up Council discussion on this issue.
Throgmorton: I'd like to begin by making an observation. Uh, which is connected to the
question I was going to ask. I think the point Casey Cook raised about the
vacancy rate being 2% is crucial. And I ... I don't know if Casey might want to
address this point, um, but um ... you know, prices in rents are a function of the
interaction of supply and demand. So if prices and rents are high, something's out
of whack, seems to me, so I'm ... I'm wondering if, uh, whether Casey or anyone
else in the room could, uh, enlighten us a little bit on the, uh, affect... possible
affects that, uh, the construction of the new 600 -unit dorm at the University would
have, and then whether um, you know, a second dorm, the construction of a
second dorm would have, uh, significant effect on the reduction of pressure to
build new larger apartments. That's where it's coming from! Seems to me, that
pressure.
Champion: Well I think...
Hayek: But hold on, before we do that ... you raise very good points, um, but it's
important to recall ... to ... to remember what is before us tonight and ... and
because what you're talking about goes to the merits of things that we could do or
the University could do to alleviate demands on housing. And what's before us
tonight is do we set a public hearing tonight. It's really a process question. Um,
and a lot of people have made comments about the merits of...of the zoning
proposals and... and that's okay, but it really doesn't go to what's before us
tonight, and ... and I'm afraid if we veer into some of these more policy, uh,
related issues, we ... we're going to stray from what's ... what we need to decide. I
mean, I ... I ... you raise excellent points, and I think ... I think we will have an
opportunity to look at that, and maybe Casey at...at a future point or ... or others
who are experts would give us input. I mean ... do you (several talking). We've
got to decide whether we're going to set a public hearing tonight on 7b. That is
the decision before us.
Champion: Well I'm going to vote to set the public hearing. Um ... I've been fighting for my
neighborhood and neighborhoods been fighting for their neighborhoods since I
moved to Iowa City. And some things have been not very well chosen along the
way, but I think that voting for 7b is a long way toward telling neighborhoods I, at
least my vote, wants to help you preserve your neighborhoods. I'm not against
development. I'm not against rental property. I have rental property all...
surrounding my house, but this business of unsupervised dorms, five- bedroom
units is really ruining our neighborhoods. It isn't the students themselves that are
ruining the neighborhoods. It's the mass of them in a congregated area that
somehow makes them act funny, my own kids included (laughter). Uh, so I am
going to vote for this ... to set this public hearing. Not because I'm against
development, but because I'm for neighborhoods.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 28
Payne: Well, Connie, I agree with most of what you said. I do totally believe in what we
have in the strategic plan with neighborhood stabilization, but I'm a firm believer
in the process and I think we should follow the process, and that process is for it
to go to Planning and Zoning first before it comes here, and to go through the
normal process. Um, that being said, that means that the moratorium wouldn't
start today. It would start, could start, 30 days from today. So that would just
push it further into the construction season before the mator ... moratorium's over,
but I think that is the process that we have established. So I ... I would vote to ... to
not set the public hearing tonight.
Throgmorton: Could I ask a procedural question, having to do with, uh, Planning and Zoning
Commission? Could we, um ... direct the Planning Com ... Planning and Zoning
Commission to move this to ... the highest level in their agenda, to move it up to
the first thing they consider in their next meeting or their meeting immediately
after that? You know, can we give them that kind of instruction? Or do they
exercise discretion...
Hayek: Well I... seems to me it already is. I mean, if... if this is passed and they believe
they can get back to us (both talking) by March 201H
Throgmorton: Well, I didn't mean it that way I guess. I meant, if we do not...
Hayek: Oh!
Throgmorton: ... chose to, uh, set a public hearing, could we instruct them to act on it, uh, you
know...
Markus: You could certainly ask `em that question, and I would guess that they would, uh,
comply.
Dilkes: I ... I think you could ask, and I think they would comply. I agree.
Dickens: I have to follow with Michelle. I ... I think the process is in place. Uh, it's a
matter of fairness. The speed of the process just kind of scares me. I think we do
need to look at everything, get everybody's input not ... just suddenly set this and
put a moratorium in place. We're talking possibly 30 days, not 60 days here that
we could get this done. Uh, I'm willing to look at rezoning these places into a
lower zoning if that's what... everybody decides, but I ... I just don't like the way
the matter, how fast it's moving, and I still haven't gotten all the answers that I
need to ... to make a ... educated decision on this process.
Mims: Well, I'm still where I was at the work session earlier tonight. Um, and my... my
comments there were ... I understand and I appreciate the process, uh, and that... it
definitely concerns me on anything like this to ... to waiver from that process. As
Michelle said, the other thing that I think is almost the flip side of this is if there's
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 29
going to be, um, a moratorium at some point, which I think there will be, um,
really is it better to do it now or is it better to do it later, in terms as we get into
the construction season. There certainly is the possibility, um, in doing it now
that there will be a few properties who possibly would have gotten in under the
wire, um, who may not at this point. Uh, I ... I think the over - building of these
four- and five-unit ... four- and five- bedroom units in the neighborhoods, um, has
been allowed to happen by previous councils for so long that, um, it really
warrants, um ... getting on this as quickly as we can and uh, I appreciate the fact
that the others, uh, both by staff and I think Council might have, even if...even if
staff hadn't I think Council might have, uh, wanted to delay the other two,
because they're so significantly different, and I think need an awful lot more
input, uh, we still have a lot of opportunity for input on this, but I am going to
support putting the, um, setting the public hearing at this time.
Throgmorton: Before I say anything, I want to ask you a question. Uh, will there be ... is it likely
that there would be a takings claim directed toward us if we set a public hearing,
uh, with regard to item b tonight?
Dilkes: Is it likely there'll be a claim? I can't answer that question.
Throgmorton: Right, it is...
Dilkes: Am I comfortable that you have a legal right to set the public hearing tonight, and
put a ... put, give yourselves 60 days to think about, um ... kind of put things on a,
on a hold while you consider this, I ... yes, I'm comfortable with that, and I think I
could defend a takings claim.
Throgmorton: But we wouldn't be running a risk anyhow if a ... having someone make that claim
toward us, right?
Dilkes: You could be. Right.
Throgmorton: Yeah.
Dobyns: (mumbled) a question. The Planning and Zoning meeting is on March 1st. Our
next Council meeting is the subsequent Tuesday on March 6th. Would it be
possible for Planning and Zoning to deliberate on this matter and then bring it to
the March 61h meeting, um, rather than the March 20tnq
Dilkes: Well...
Dobyns: Is there enough public warning for (both talking)
Davidson: Rick, it's our intention to have it on the March 1St P &Z agenda.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 30
Dobyns: Oh, but could we, is there ... any sort of thing keeping us from putting it on the
March 6th
Dilkes: I think... correct me if I'm wrong, Jeff, but it's my understanding that P &Z
typically, um, that their normal process is to consider it at two ... two meetings. I
mean, Michelle, you were at ... you were on P &Z, is that... accurate? Not that they
would have to, but ... but that is the normal process.
Davidson: That's correct.
Dobyns: How unusual would that be?
Davidson: Well, as has been alluded to earlier, you can make the request and I think they
will pay attention to that request, but ultimately I assume it's up to the
commission, right, Eleanor?
Dilkes: Right.
Payne: And they still ... they do have two meetings before the March, our March 20th
meeting, so...
Dilkes: Right. I think that has probably been what has been discussed, is letting them
have those two shots at it and then it would come to you on the 20th, but whether
they could eliminate one of those meetings that they typically do, I think yes, they
could.
Davidson: That... Eleanor's correct. That was initially our schedule, but again, I would think
the City Council making the request would have some weight with P &Z.
Champion: And they'll be accused of the same thing we're being accused of here (several
talking) tonight. Rushing things, so we ... all we're doing is really setting a public
hearing on...
Dilkes: I think that's exactly right.
Mims: Yeah, I think so (several talking) encourage P &Z to take the two meetings
because 1...
Dobyns: Cause my sense of the tenor of the meeting, if we're going to go through the
regular process, we go through the regular process and let them deliberate because
of the complexity that's been mentioned. And I think I agree with Michelle and
Terry, I think that the process is what's important here. I think my opinion on this
matter is not relevant today as a Council Member, uh, cause I do not want to
prejudice the Planning and Zoning Committee in what will be some very
important, difficult deliberations on their part. So I would vote no for the 7b.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 31
Hayek: I'm going to, uh, as I indicated in the ... at the work session several hours ago.
Um, I'm uh ... I'm comfortable setting the public hearing on ... on 7b. We're going
to take our hits, uh, as it relates to the merits, uh, as it relates to the... suggestion
that ... that these proposals are ... are (mumbled) real defined. We're going to take
our hits as to the process, uh, being ... being followed and, um, as I said just a few
minutes ago, the merits are not before us. Um, and ... and we will take those up
and there'll be a battle over that I'm sure. Um, I did consider and do consider 7c
and 7d to be, uh, insufficiently developed. Um, such that, uh, I'm not comfortable
proceeding with ... with those, uh, as public hearings, and that was, you know, we
discussed that earlier and staff concurred with that. Uh, but I don't feel the same
way about, uh, 7b. Um, and as to the process, you know, we're talking... doing it
this way is ... is rare, but not unprecedented, um, it...it causes a 60 -day breather, a
maximum of 60 days, which would occur at any point, um, whether we did it this
way or through the normal legislative process and frankly if...if this gets back to
the Council by March 20th, it's, you know, you cut that time in half for us to reach
the merits on ... on this proposal. Um, you know, Council has over ... a number of
months expressed this very concern to staff, um... and I, you know, that's why
we're ... we're seeing these ... these proposals, um, and I would also add that...
that, you know, it's my belief that ... that we don't have, um, projects as, uh, as
significantly or... or immediately impacted by, um, by 7b as we, uh, did under 7c
and d. Um, and ... and so I think the concerns about fairness are ... are
distinguishable as it relates to this one. So ... um, I'll support it.
Throgmorton: Sounds like it's 3 to 3 to me. Right now. Cause I didn't express my ... my view,
right? Am I counting correctly?
Hayek: I ... I think that's, your math is good!
Throgmorton: I thought I was. Okay!
Champion: ... swing vote.
Throgmorton: Yeah, yeah! Well, I ... you might notice me squirming up here a little bit and it's
because, um, I don't see any demons in this room. That's the main thing. I see
good people who are trying to do what they think is right with regard to, uh, a
developing, uh, our city. And... and I, you know, because I live in the northside
and because I've talked to virtually everybody in this room who lives on the
northside, I absolutely understand what's at stake in terms of, as Mike put it so
well thinking about this, not being about politics but it ... but it being about, uh, the
quality of our... our homes, the quality of our neighborhood, the quality of where
we live. So, I totally get it, and I think the message needs to be... go out loudly
and clearly to, um, people who own property and want to redevelop it that it needs
to be done very well, in a manner that will sustain our community, sustain our
neighborhoods, and ... and not just convert them into housing for large numbers of
people in a way that, uh, doesn't really benefit the ... the larger neighborhood and
the city. So that message needs to go out pretty strongly. Uh, I also believe very
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 32
strongly in process and ... and fairness. Uh, when I taught Urban Planning over at
the University, I talked about this over and over again. I think it's tremendously
important to get everyone, uh, a... a reasonable right to contribute their ideas and
contribute their insights, like ... like Casey did, like ... uh, like Glenn did, like Clare
did, and so the ... that we can have a ... a richer understanding of what's at stake,
and I think we've heard tonight, we've gotten pretty good insight into what's at
stake! You know, this really matters for the people who live in this area. But
also, for people who are looking for a place to live, even if they're students. Even
if they're whoever! So ... I, you know, I drew a little sketch up here and I had two
lines going down. They were pretty close together and I drew a line right in the
middle. That's where I feel I sit right now. Uh, so um ... I ... I want to say a couple
things before I tell you how I'm going to vote. Um ... um ... I think the staff needs
to articulate as clearly as possible ... it can possibly do, in ... in positive language
how this proposed amendment, and then the subsequent ones, uh, will advance the
purposes of the Comprehensive Plan and the central district plan. It's not about
keeping certain kinds of renters out. It's ... it's about, um, providing a ... a diverse,
a ... a range of housing choices for a diverse population, for a diverse mix of...of
renters and owners. We have to find a way to do that, uh, that ... that will really,
uh, really help us all. And, uh, for ... for, um, developers who have commented,
uh, Glenn and others, um, and Mike, uh ... I ... I want you to contribute your ideas
about how this can be done, perhaps even more effectively than what the City has
already, the City staff has already recommended. So, all of which is, uh, getting
around to saying I'm going to support the, uh, the um ... mor, not moratorium but
the moving ahead on, uh (several talking) on the, uh, on b. Um ... I ... it's a
difficult choice for me but that's what I'm going to do.
Dilkes: Mr. Mayor, before you vote, because I know people may leave after that. I just
wanted to bring, um, your attention to the memo I did on how the protest in my
opinion will work with respect to, um, this item.
Hayek: Okay. Further discussion... on the motion? Okay, all those in favor say aye.
Opposed say nay. Motion passes 4 to 3, Council Members Payne, uh, Dobyns,
and Dickens in the negative.
Karr: Motion to accept correspondence.
Mims: So moved.
Payne: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Mims, seconded by Payne. Discussion? All those in favor say aye.
Opposed say nay. Motion carries 7 -0. We're going to take a recess until 9:10 and
then we'll start the formal meeting. (BREAK)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 33
ITEM 7. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS.
h. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE REZONING 4.3 ACRES OF LAND
LOCATED AT 1920 PRAIRIE DU CHIEN ROAD FROM LOW
DENSITY SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS -5) ZONE TO
RURAL RESIDENTIAL (RRI) ZONE (REZll- 00019) (PASS AND
ADOPT)
Payne: 7h is the one I need to recuse myself from.
Hayek: Okay. (reads item)
Mims: Move adoption.
Dickens: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Mims, seconded by Dickens. Discussion? Roll call, please.
Dilkes: You want to do ex parte just real quick.
Hayek: Oh, yeah! (mumbled)
Throgmorton: None.
Champion: None.
Hayek: Any ex parte communications since the last reading of this?
Mims: No.
Hayek: Okay. Thanks, Eleanor. Item passes 7 -0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 34
ITEM 10. AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF LAND EAST OF STURGIS
CORNER DRIVE AND WEST OF THE IOWA RIVER TO RAVI
LODGING, INC.
a. PUBLIC HEARING
Hayek: This is a public hearing. (bangs gavel) Public hearing is open. Public hearing is
closed. (bangs gavel)
b. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION
Champion: Move the resolution.
Dickens: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Champion, seconded by Dickens. Discussion?
Mims: I just had a question. Nowhere in any of the materials we've seen has there been
a price indicated. Just...
Davidson: I'm sorry... Susan?
Mims: Sorry! Um, nowhere in any of the materials that we've been presented with, that I
recall, have we seen a price (mumbled) appraised value.
Davidson: And I apologize for not knowing that price. It was based on an appraisal of the
property.
Dilkes: Yeah, I ... did we not include the price when we set the public hearing? I
think... (several talking)
Hayek: I'm not sure you did.
Mims: I don't recall ever having seen it... and that's why I was kind of curious, cause it
seemed odd.
Dilkes: Okay. We can certainly get you that number.
Mims: Okay. Thank you.
Hayek: Further discussion? Roll call, please. Item passes 7 -0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 35
ITEM 15. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 10 OF THE CITY
CODE, ENTITLED "USE OF PUBLIC WAYS AND PROPERTY,"
CHAPTER 3, ENTITLED, "COMMERCIAL USE OF SIDEWALKS,"
SECTION 3, ENTITLED "USE FOR SIDEWALK CAFES," TO ALLOW
PLANTERS IN LIEU OF FENCING. (FIRST CONSIDERATION)
Mims: Move first consideration.
Dickens: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Mims, seconded by Dickens. Discussion?
Throgmorton: Yeah, I'd like to ... I don't know, process a question a little bit. Uh ... I, years ago
when we adopted the first, uh, sidewalk cafe's ordinance, um, my recollection is
that, uh, we encountered a difficulty having to do with a sightless person who was
going down the street and slammed into some stuff because he didn't know it was
coming up. And I'm wondering if any contacts have been made with, uh,
sightless people or others who might have certain disabilities that would be ...that
would affect them differently with regard to this ordinance?
Fosse: We ... we recalled the ... the same incident, uh, from when that went through the
first time and what has ... what this contemplates are planters that are down low
enough so that there'll be cane contact there. The problem that we had, uh, that
you just described had to do with a ... with a temporary, um, banner I'll call it, that
was about waist -high, so that you ... you really got past it with your cane before
you encountered it with your body. So this will not present the same difficulties.
Throgmorton: Good! I'm glad to hear that. I had sort of a more general point though which
really I think, Rick, you can't really address. It has to do with, uh, people who
have certain kinds of disabilities and how they might be differentially affected by
certain ordinances, and if we don't have those disabilities we might be
unconscious of how those ordinances might affect `em, uh, so I ... I don't know, I
try to keep myself, uh, aware of that, uh, affect and think about it ahead of time.
Payne: Is ... is what this is, instead of putting up planters and a fence, or ... you know,
wrought iron fence or whatever, somebody could put in just a row of huge
terracotta pots? Is that the idea here?
Dilkes: Well, there are requirements in ... in the ordinance, the minimum requirements,
and ... urn ... Rick, if you want to ... talk about those.
Fosse: You're doing fine, Eleanor! (laughter)
Dilkes: I was just going to read `em so...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 36
Fosse: Yeah, go ahead and do that, if you've got it handy. I don't!
Dilkes: Okay. Um, they have to be, the planters shall be either fastened to each other or
removed from the sidewalk or City Plaza at the end of the day's operation. Um,
shall be not less than 27 inches or more than 36 inches in height. Um, and shall
be either metal or have a metal frame, and in addition, they have to be,
um ... approved by the City Manager. Or designee.
Fosse: Does that help?
Payne: Yep! Perfect, thank you.
Fosse: Uh -huh.
Hayek: Further discussion on this item? Roll call, please. Item passes 7 -0. And I want to
just clarify for the record, I misspoke on item 7h, which was the rezoning on ... on,
uh, Prairie du Chien, uh, I said pass 7 -0, but really it passed 6 -0 with Council
Member Payne abstaining. I just want to get that into the record. I looked over to
you and saw, man, she just abstained a couple minutes ago and I didn't mention
that! Okay!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 37
ITEM 18. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING THAT GENERAL
PROPERTY TAXES LEVIED AND COLLECTED EACH YEAR ON ALL
PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE RIVERFRONT CROSSINGS
URBAN RENEWAL AREA, IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, COUNTY OF
JOHNSON, STATE OF IOWA, BY AND FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE
STATE OF IOWA, CITY OF IOWA CITY, COUNTY OF JOHNSON,
IOWA CITY COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT AND OTHER TAXING
DISTRICTS, BE PAID TO A SPECIAL FUND FOR PAYMENT OF
PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON LOANS, REBATES, GRANTS,
MONIES ADVANCED TO AND INDEBTEDNESS, INCLUDING BONDS
ISSUED OR TO BE ISSUED, INCURRED BY SAID CITY IN
CONNECTION WITH THE RIVERFRONT CROSSINGS URBAN
RENEWAL PLAN. (FIRST CONSIDERATION)
Mims: Move first consideration.
Dickens: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Mims, seconded by Dickens. Discussion?
Throgmorton: Yeah, I'd like to bring up a ... a suggestion. Bear with me for a second, so if
somebody else wants to say something, please do, but I'm trying to find my notes
to ... on that particular point.
Hayek: Any other discussion on this?
Mims: Well I just ... I think (coughing) for the public that this is adopting a TIF
ordinance, and when I read in the packet what you just read it...it read to me like
it was all the property taxes, and in fact it's just the incremental property taxes,
which obviously is in the ordinance but just to clarify that for somebody just
reading this description, it might not be clear.
Hayek: Good clarification. You ... is that, was that your point?
Throgmorton: No, no but I found my notes so...
Hayek: Okay. Proceed a pace!
Throgmorton: Lot of material here to go through (laughter) keep track of these things. Um, I'm
concerned, uh, well, no, I don't want to put it that way. Um, if I understand
correctly, there's no time limit on, uh, urban renewal TIF districts, and if that's
correct, I'd like us to consider, uh, setting a time limit on it. In other words, I ... I
wouldn't ... I think it'd be unwise to have an indefinite period associated with, uh,
this TIF district, so that it could just kind of go on forever, uh, that that's one of
the difficulties I think we've seen with our neighboring city.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 38
Champion: Well I think, I mean, your point is well taken, but this doesn't mean that every
TIF will have a bottomless line. It just means... because when we do a TIF, it'd
be for a specific project, in that area. And it will have a timeline or a money
(several talking)
Dilkes: Can I just clarify for a minute? First of all, um, there is a time limit on an urban
renewal, um, for an urban renewal, uh, area that's designated, based on economic
development. This one is, was done for slum and blight so there is no such time
limit, but also all we're doing here is enabling, um, the certification of debt.
We ... we have to certify debt before we can capture that incremental value, and
we typically do that on a project -by- project basis.
Throgmorton: Right, I've got that, but ... but I can restate this a little bit differently and then
maybe Jeff can address this, um, how would we know if the TIF district has
accomplished its objectives? Um, in other words, the ... the memo from Wendy
Ford lays out a series of objectives. How would we know that they're
accomplished and then if they get accomplished, wouldn't we want the district to
go away?
Davidson: I suppose if the Council reached a point at which you felt all of the property in the
district had achieved its goals, that, at least hypothetically, you at that point could
...could end the ... end the district. Um, the reason we're bringing this to you now
is because of the prospect, the possibility, it actually looks now like it's going to
be less likely than we thought it was going to be, of a TIF project for the hotel
project that's down there. It may actually go forward without it now, it appears,
uh, but ... but that was the, our reason for bringing it to you now, and as Eleanor's
pointed out, what the slum and blight designation there is not the, uh, 20 -year
limit that there is for economic development.
Dobyns: But, Jeff, isn't it the tradition of Iowa City in the past for previous TIF districts,
that um ... they've ended fairly quickly soon after (both talking)
Davidson: All of our projects, there have been nine or ten, and all of them have basically
ended once the project ended, then the project is closed out and the ... at that point
then all of the taxing entities receive the benefit of the ... the increased value.
Dobyns: So, Jim, my sense is that Iowa City has shown historically that we have abided by
that philosophy, so...
Throgmorton: Absolutely! I'm not objecting to using TIF as an instrument in this instance. Not
at all, and I understand what Connie and Jeff have said about how... recapture of,
uh, of property taxes would be associated with particular projects. I'm just
concerned about the district itself having an indefinite time period associated with
it. So that ... 30 years from now, a ... a council could keep providing TIF projects,
keep enabling TIF projects, in a district that's already stopped being a ... a blighted
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 39
area, you know, I mean that... so... so if we had some... some date in mind. I
don't know, like a ... a 15 -year period when the Council would be required to at
least reconsider. Uh, that's what I'm suggesting. I'm not ... not saying anything
else other than that.
Hayek: Well we ... go ahead.
Mims: Well I think, too also that the issue with an area like this, um, and in particular as
we start looking at that whole Riverfront Crossings' area, we've got a lot of space
down there that, it might be 15 to 20 to 30 years until that is all done, and so the
fact that, to me the fact that that whole area is designated is not an issue because
we have always done these as project - specific with an end date, I mean, in terms
of shutting those down, and so we're not keeping any of those incremental taxes
from the other taxing entities, once that project has met its goals. But, in starting
something like this, it is really ... I would say impossible to know how long it's
going t take to really redevelop that area, particularly, you know, in an economic
situation like we're in right now, um, things can really get slowed down for 5 or
10 years, and if you put an end date on, I don't know what the process would be
to start one back up again if you put an end date on it.
Davidson: I'm not sure of that either, Susan. I guess the one other piece of information I'd
give Council for your deliberation is that we did look property by property at this
district when we established the urban renewal area, and there are certainly,
there's a great variation, it's not ... there's a great variation in the status of
properties in this area. There are some, you know, the Village Inn was
reconstructed after the flood. The Dairy Queen was reconstructed after the
tornado. Those properties are not going to be need... in need of reinvestment for
several years, but in 15 years they may be in need of reinvestment, and that
becomes a reason for leaving it open, um ... as opposed to a project that will...
needs reinvestment right now.
Payne: So ... so theoretically then ... does that mean that somebody could partake today
and in 20 years, since the district is still there, and... they... become blighted
again, they could partake again?
Davidson: Well or ... or, you know, I would point out, uh, Michelle, that with the
Company we're in the process right now of negotiating a third TIF agreement
with that company. The second one is even still in ... in effect. Now those have
been not for slum and blight but for economic development, but the point is that
yes, if there's reason to keep reinvesting in a property and the Council wants to do
that, we do have the option of doing that.
Hayek: I mean, it seems to me that ... uh, that ... that future councils will need to decide
how far along has this area come and ... and, you know ... is, does it still need this
kind of ... of approach, and um ... and you know we've, we as a city have ... have
made some policy pronouncements on ... on ending TIFs and our concerns about
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 40
that because they turn into these ATM machines for ... for communities to ... to
take on other projects wholly unrelated to the diverted taxes and ... and those sites,
but I think the safeguard against that is our Economic Development policies,
which, uh, which provide for, uh, generally project -based and certainly, uh, much
shorter term, uh, projects with end dates and metrics and all ... all of those things.
So I'm comfortable with this, um, it's consistent with State law and it's also
consistent with, and very importantly, our ... our own policies.
Champion: I'm very comfortable with it.
Dickens: Does it need to have a case -by -case basis put in it, or not? Is that (several talking)
Champion: It'll always be a case -by -case (several talking)
Hayek: Cause each case would be a case -by -case basis (several talking). We're talking
about a district, uh, you have to designate as such.
Dilkes: I think this ordinance, I kind of view it as an enabling ordinance, for purposes of
deciding what incentives you want to use on a project -by- project basis.
Hayek: Okay. Further discussion? Roll call, please. Item passes 7 -0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 41
ITEM 19. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 9, "MOTOR
VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC," CHAPTER 1, "DEFINITIONS," AND
AMENDING TITLE 9, "MOTOR VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC," TO ADD A
NEW CHAPTER 11, "AUTOMATIC TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT," TO
ALLOW FOR RED LIGHT AUTOMATED TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT.
(PASS AND ADOPT)
Mims: Move adoption.
Dobyns: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Mims, seconded by Dobyns. Discussion? I assume there are members
of the audience who would like to address us, and so, uh, we're going to be
consistent with what we did earlier in the evening, uh, get in line, uh, sign in and
give us your name please and stick to the three- minute, uh, rule. Thank you.
Curtin: As you'll see later, my name's Shawn Curtin. I live on Muscatine Avenue. Um, I
came and spoke out against this red light proposal the last time it was up for a
reading. And uh, I'm happy to come out here and wait for two hours to do it
again cause this is something that is, uh, very important to me. I've, uh, brief
comments which I've prepared which will not go past the three- minute limit, uh, I
just want to do a little bit of an opener. Um, you know, I think on something like
this there's often the argument made that, uh, if it saves one life that it's worth it.
Um, but I know we could pass a law and... and have people not drive their
vehicles in inclement weather. We could pass a law and have people stay inside
their homes at night and this is just ... is not an argument that ... that holds a lot of
water in my book. Urn ... and, you know, I was sort of questioning whether I
wanted to bring this up, but I feel like it's necessary, uh, as we were out waiting
for the opportunity to speak about this, I was looking through a phone and I saw
that, uh, there was an article published where Sam Hargadine stated that he's
confident that this will pass, um, and you guys have stepped up to be leaders, um,
and you have that position of leadership because the people have put you in place.
So this is the appropriate forum to hash out this issue, and it's not done. The
conversation is still going on. It's going on right now. Thank you. Um, I guess
the comments that I have prepared is that we're a diverse group of people. I think
we have people from all political spectrums in this room, uh, you know, I'm
confident of it. But there's something that we all agree on. We all want safe
roads. Who wouldn't want safe roads? I don't oppose red light cameras because
I want dangerous roads. Uh, I'd like to tell you a little bit more about that. Um...
you know, I think this ... this is, uh, the wrong answer to the right question, this
red light proposal. Um, I guess what I wanted to say is that ... it does make sense
to support something that someone said will make us safer. Uh, but this will not
make us safer. This will make us less safe. I'm just speaking about the effects
that this would have on public safety, independent of all the other concerns that
people have in regards to privacy or this, that, the other, revenue, money going to
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 42
corporations that are not in America and ... and the appropriateness of this.
Speaking on this public safety issue what I would like to say is, uh, you know,
there are studies that have indicated that red light cameras, uh, may in fact, uh,
reduce side collisions by around, you know, 5 to 20 %, depending on what you
look at, uh, and then there are also these studies that say that we've all heard of
that these cameras do in fact increase rear end collisions, uh, so you know, we can
have one person bring up one study and that can be used for a purpose, or we can
have another person bring another study in and they can use that for that purpose.
What I would say is that if you look at ... if you look at, um, if you look at meta
analysis, which I've taken some time out to do, what they like to do is they get
around 10 studies from one side, 10 studies from the other side, depending on
what position those take. Um, and what they do is they have scientists sit down
and look at it, and there's an organization called, uh, Direct Science and they did
one of these meta analysis, and what they ... what they realized is that, you know,
rear end collisions, um ... were ... were increased. What happened is that side
collisions were decreased by 15 %, rear end collisions were increased by 40 %, and
total collisions were increased by 15 %. So, you know, we may not have these
side collisions. We will have other collisions, and I just want to know, you know,
how are we going to feel as a community if we do this and we don't thoroughly
think it out, and say there's a child in the safety seat in the back. Possibly
someone with a back injury. And we have this rear end collision. Uh, you know,
so we will see people hurt, if we do this tonight, and we cannot do this and just to
wrap up, you know what I would say is that ... you know, people sometimes say
that this might be revenue neutral, so it might seem like, you know, this is for
safety. This isn't going to cost us any money. Let's go ahead and do it. But,
what we know is that people will be hurt because of this, and it is not revenue
neutral. There ... other cities that have, um, that have so many outstanding tickets,
how many people are we going to divert from their other important, vital duties to
track down these people who need to pay these tickets, how many, you know, say
we get 10 piled up, if that would trigger something. Maybe someone would have
an arrest warrant put out. Maybe we're not going to deal with all these other
issues that we need to deal with. What we need to do is realize that these red light
cameras sometimes the reason that they reduce the side collisions is because when
there are cars coming in the other direction, it increases ... it stops that on- coming
traffic. It's not cause there ... it's not cause they know that someone's watching
them. It's because it changes the ... the dynamic of it. Let's increase our yellow
light by one second. No one will disagree on that. These other overreaching
issues of civil liberties that are ... is a legitimate concern, as well as rear end
collisions. Those are not going to be an issue. I want safer roads. Everyone else
does. Vote against this. Thank you!
Hayek: Thank you for your comments.
Buss: Anna Buss, 525 W. Benton Street. Well, Texas has those wonderful safety
cameras, and while in Texas my car got one of those tickets. I was home three
weeks before I got the notification. Now I wasn't about to go back down to Texas
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 43
and fight it, but I had loaned my car to my mother's 90- year -old friend to go get
groceries. She got the ticket. Neither here nor there, but my question is, this is
before the legislature right now. If they decide that they're going to outlaw these,
please when you're entering into the contract with these people, allow yourself an
out, because there's a lot of discussion about this in Des Moines right now, and
there's a lot of people that really are not for it. I'll be interested to see what
happens. So, given that, just proceed with caution because I hate to see the City
in yet another lawsuit! So ... thank you.
Hayek: Thank you, Anna.
Eicher: Hi, I'm Charles Eicher and I'm a, uh, resident of Coralville, although I was born
and I work in Iowa City, and I'd first like to briefly say that I did come here also
to comment on item 18 but was not given the opportunity and I would just like to
briefly go off topic to say that, uh, I'm here representing myself but a member of
Occupy Iowa City, and we recently impaneled a, uh, TIF committee and we are
dealing with, uh, scrutinizing TIFs in the city and in fact that ... there was, are
hearings in Coralville regarding their 40% of the entire tax, property tax base
being under a TIF, and we would like to basically not get into it right now, but to
basically say that there is a law in the State Council, in the State House right now,
uh, regarding term limits on TIFs and the whole area is ... Johnson County's under
great scrutiny on TIFs right now, as it seems that Iowa City and Coralville (both
talking)
Hayek: (both talking)
Eicher: Okay, so anyway, let's move on to (both talking) perhaps another time, but I came
here to speak on the red light and I'd first like to say that the two common
arguments seem to be money and safety. The first argument is that, uh, well we
don't want to be seen as using this as a money- making opportunity and
unfortunately it will. There's no doubt about it. There will be more revenue
raised, and even if it wasn't the intention to make this a money- maker, the effect
is that it will. Uh, I'm also concerned about the safety issue in that I was recently,
uh, driven in front of by somebody who ran a red light and my car was destroyed.
It totaled and I lost, uh, hearing in my left ear as ... on account of the accident.
However, the Iowa City Police did arrive on the scene and investigated, and uh,
fault was assessed without any records or videos or photographs, and uh, basically
the issue is that safety is not really increased by red light cameras. Uh, basically
every city that has surveyed, uh, red light cameras usage after a year to two years
has resulted, has reported an increase in rear end accidents, caused by people
slamming on their brakes saying, `Oh no, I'm going t get a ticket!' Uh, this is, uh,
if my phone hadn't run out of batteries I would be reading an article from the
Kansas City Star reporting that after two years, they had a 18% increase in rear
end accidents, in those 17 intersections where they implemented red light
cameras, while overall throughout the city safe, uh, automobile accidents
decreased. So basically it's concentrating traffic accidents in the red light zones.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 44
However, what concerns me the most is, uh, something that I don't think
anybody's ever brought up in this argument, and this ... that is ... what, giving this,
would this proposal... basically outsources governmental and law enforcement
functions to a ... to a private corporation. This is corporatizing, uh, functions of
the city that are rightfully under legal and judicial, uh, oversight by the City
Council and the courts. Uh, I ... I, an example I would like to use is Chicago
recently outsourced its parking to, uh, a third party and basically got totally ripped
off, and suddenly there are parking, uh, parking meters every single place that one
can be placed in this town. You give somebody incentive to run with the ball,
they will run with it, and uh, it will basically not create revenue for the city. It
will cause inconvenience for the residents more than ... I've heard reports of, in
that case there are parking, uh, meters where there, maybe one person park every
week or month, so uh, well, in addition to the outsourcing issue which is, uh,
concerns me greatly, I think that, uh, outsourcing a law enforcement function that
really doesn't seem to be a problem since the ... what did we hear in the work
Council, four tickets in the last year? Uh, this doesn't seem to be a problem
crying for a solution, and I'm not sure what this is a solution to. What it does
appear to me though that this is a kind of a slap, uh, in the face of the Iowa City
Police Department, saying that a private corporation can enforce the law more
effectively than the Iowa City Police and law enforcement of the county and the,
etc., so it's my proposition that, uh, passing the red light ordinance would be a
terrible proposition. It would set a bad precedent for privatizing, uh, law
enforcement and governmental functions, and I deeply urge the City to resist and
vote down this proposition. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you for your comments.
Hampel: Good evening, Council. Uh, my name is Martha Hampel. I live at Oak Crest
Street. I would like to once again voice my opposition, uh, to the installation of
red light cameras in Iowa City. Based on speed and distance, the proposed red
light cameras have sensors which can predict whether a driver will run a red light,
and in turn, stop cross - traffic from getting a green light. Have we considered the
possibility that it is this feature of the cameras that has caused a decrease in
broadside collisions, and not the actual photo being taken? I am also curious how
long those who advise our City Council have known about this type of life- saving
technology and did not ... do, and did nothing to implement it. We also know that
extending yellow lights for even a second has proven in many studies to decrease
accidents at intersections. I am saddened that there is ... there is concrete and
proven ways to make Iowa City intersections safer, yet the Council is postponing
the implementation of such life- saving techniques in hopes they can couple them
with the ... these very controversial cameras in order to generate revenue from
Iowa City's hardest working residents. Because the Council has done as much
research as I have on the issue, I am sure they are familiar with the many studies
which show that while broadside collisions can be decreased by about 15% at
intersections where camera sensors stop cross - traffic. Rear end collisions are
increased by anywhere from 35% to 80% due to drivers' fear of the actual
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 45
camera. The Council's objective is to decrease the likelihood of broadside
collisions. This is appropriate and appreciated. However, the Council should be
concerned with decreasing and preventing both broadside and rear end collisions.
I would ask the Council Members to vote no on the proposed installation of red
light cameras in Iowa City, and implement any or all techniques proven to
increase safety at intersections. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you for your comments.
Garrett: Hi, uh, my name's Aaron Garrett and I'm not a citizen here, but do live in North
Liberty and uh, like to come around town from time to time. Um, so uh, I just, I
want to thank you first of all for... for the time to speak on this important issue
today. Urn ... as I said, my name's Aaron Garrett and I'm a, actually I'm a, I'm
not speaking for him tonight, but I'm a newly elected member of the Johnson
County Central Committee for Republicans and um, I'm also a registered nurse
with experience in cardiac telemetry, geriatrics, orthopedics, and most recently
some pediatric mental health. Um, you know, I was thinking about what I would
say today in regards to this, and uh, one of the first things that I thought of was
that I've never once, um, needed a camera looking over my shoulder to, uh,
administer life- saving intravenous medications, when caring for a patient. Um, or
in order to make sure that I was able to recognize life- threatening, um, situations
and ... and uh, to act correctly in those situations. Um, just as my ability to do
these things has ... has been vetted, I have, uh, also been able to consistently stop
at red lights my entire life without having to have a camera. Um ... the ... the
question I have, uh, I think we need to ask though is the insight, urn ... we need to
question the reasoning of government entities, which have habitually negated
their responsibility to look past the decisions they make and to recognize the
unintended consequences that those decisions will eventually manifest. I would
like to bring to your attention, um, if some of you aren't already aware, and I've
actually got the article here and a few copies for you if you'd like to look at it,
um, from the Des Moines Register, um, this is an article in print on September 30,
2011, which stated that aircrup ... Air Cover Integrated Solutions Corporation, out
of Redding, California, has received from the State of Iowa a $175,000 royalty
award. They have opened a facility in Cedar Rapids and they plan to work with
the University of Iowa's operator performance laboratory, and it ... and partner
with Iowa local law enforcement to test their products on, and uh, basically this
will no doubt result in agreements, um, sweetheart deals with these local law
enforcement entities, which are willing to take the next step, insert civilian
surveillance by local law enforcement in our area. (noise on mic) Now ... hello?
Um, this isn't happening ten years from now, five years from now, or even one
year from now. A recent article in the Corridor Business has cited that the
President of Air Cover, James Hill, states that, `By the time we reach April, there
will be products pushed out the door." So welcome to the next step into
electronic civilian surveillance. These are, if I haven't been clear to this point,
they manufacture unmanned, um, well I guess for lack of better terms they call
them unmanned drones and they are used for surveillance. Um, now increasingly
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 46
more in law enforcement and Texas, of course, is a leader in this. Um, and ... and
so basically they're going to be manufactured in Iowa cities. They will be tested
in Iowa streets. They have been subsidized by Iowa taxpayer money. Again, to
the tune of $175,000 to get `em to Cedar Rapids, which is a ... a pretty close
neighbor. And today we set a precedent. Is this what you want in your
neighborhoods? We've had a lot of talk about our neighborhoods here tonight.
I've sat and waited through all of it, and they're important to us. I'm a
homeowner, and I plan on having kids, and my neighborhood does mean a lot to
me, and that's why I'm here tonight. This isn't what I want in my neighborhood.
This isn't what I think we need to feel safe. Urn ... Thomas Jefferson advised that
those who would give up freedom for security will possess neither, and I think
that that is generally the case. I wouldn't question him (laughter). But um ... I
would just ask that you consider tonight what your vote with some foresight to see
past today to tomorrow, the precedent this is going to set for us, because
tomorrow's knocking on our door and April's going to be here pretty soon. So
we're going to have more decisions to make at this Council. Um, I also would
advise to you that every action will also have a reaction, and unfortunately we're
here today because a number of you have made the wrong decision so far.
Because we've had this discussion before. I would advise the Council the
following: do not cast your vote without solemn consideration of what you are
endorsing. As you can see there are a number of us in the room willing to take
the time out to move to action. Some of us in attendance aren't the kind of people
who are going to be content with casting a vote against the offending Council
Members. Some of us are the kind of people with the desire, the resources, the
organization, the donors, and the volunteers, and the ability to identify and
support or become an alternative. Thank you very much for your time and...
Hayek: Thank you.
Walters: Hello, my name's Ed Walters. I actually am a recent resident to Iowa City, um,
residing on, um, South First Avenue, near the, uh, Central, the City High School.
Um, interestingly the last two places that I've lived were Houston. Actually Katy,
Texas, which is annexed right next to Houston, and then before that, Washington,
D.C. I have first -hand, um, seen the traffic, uh, cameras in use. I've been witness
to actual accident that have happened at those intersections. I've been, I'm a
pretty confident person as a former, uh, as a West Point graduate and Army
officer, pretty confident in stressful situations, but I gotta be honest with you:
driving to work all the time, seeing these accidents and seeing people slam on the
brakes is unnerving. The other thing I'd like to say is, I really, my wife and I
really want to stay in Iowa City. It's got this great appeal of being, having all the
attributes of a great city but still having part of a small town, Mayberry type feel.
Okay? I don't think that we need these big -city cameras. I think the citizens of
this country and in this town, we have enough surveillance going on in our lives.
We go to the, you know, whether you're on business or pleasure, you gotta go to
the airports. Understand that we gotta go through security there. I support those
that said there are other alternatives here. Um, I realize that the Iowa Supreme
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 47
Court has said this is not an invasion of privacy, according to the law, and that,
um, it could not be overturned, but I ask you to consider what the voters here in
Iowa City want. We can set the tone that we want in this town. You know, one
of the other things is, um, companies like American Traffic Systems, which was
the company that did this in Houston, um, aggressively court the police chiefs.
It's the same sales pitch that they give every police chief, and I really respect the
police chief. Like I said, I've served in uniform and I know he's concerned about
the safety of citizens, but I am completely against this. I also hope that you are
listening to the citizens, the voters, and the Iowa City residents that are here
tonight, because it sounds to me like based on what, um, the police chief has
already said to the press that's been in our papers prior to this meeting that this is
basically a slam dunk. So that's not exactly what he said, but he said it looks like
we have the votes and it's going to pass. He said the vote, Hargadine said the
vote will likely play out the same way this evening, based on the outcome of a
City Council work session earlier tonight. He mentioned that there's been months
of studies with you all; however, you know, as somebody who's personally
experienced these cameras, as somebody who you can go and on the web and
look at case after case, it's not just Washington, D.C. that's had issues. It's not
just Houston that's had issues. It's all over the country. I would also like to say
that when I was in the Houston area, I actually voted, um, there was a voter
referendum put up so the ... the politicians passed this. There was a ... three
brothers that got involved, got a brea... great big groundswell movement; a voter
referendum was put on the ballot, and the ... the red light cameras were overturned.
But, what happened was because of the agreement that was put in with American
Traffic Systems, and American Traffic Systems, of course, was seeking court
injunctions and was suing for violation of the contract. So I really have to
question the motive of the vendors that you might do business to because at the
end of the day it's all about money to them. So I hope we are not too late. Um,
you know, it appeared that accident rates in Houston increased. The Houston,
um, city of Houston would not actually release the accident statistics at those
intersections, and you know what that probably tells us. There is enough
evidence, um, you know, that ... that it increased accidents. They just didn't want
to put that out. It is costing, or it has cost the city of Houston a lot of legal fees in
trying to, um, adhere to the will of the people that put it on referendum. I really
urge you, I know you've done a lot of work on this. I know you're concerned
about the safety of citizens. I don't think this is solution. I think there's a lot of
other people that don't, um, think this is the solution. Thank you very much for
your time. We really appreciate it.
Hayek: Thank you for your comments, Mr. Walters.
Knight: Hi, my name is Roger Knight, and I ... was here for the first reading of this
ordinance, and one person supported it. I missed the second, uh, reading, and one
more person approved of this, talking to you guys. Tonight none! The city
doesn't want this because this is not the right angle to go. No person after person
after person has came up and gave you other options. Maybe planting some trees.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 48
Trees are beautiful. They don't run in front of cars from what I can tell. There
are other options to go. These cameras, you know, there's issues with security.
There's issues with the money. All the issues aside, it's causing more accidents.
We can right statistics and say whatever we want with statistics. The thing is is
this is not right for Iowa City. This is a city where ... its small town feel with kind
of big -town appeal. And, it was brought up that, well, maybe we need to look at
Cedar Rapids. For why these cameras might be good. Okay, well, we don't have
380 running through the center of Iowa City. Cedar Rapids is a whole ` nother
traffic area. You know, you got 380 through town. It's spread out. You got more
people. People don't care about other people. Cedar Rapids is not where I want
to live. I live in Iowa City because of how the ... the Iowa City Police Department
is so much better! They know what's going on. They get out there. We see their
sometimes ugly face ... no offense (laughter) out here to ... get ... we get out there.
We know their names. We see them. They're here for us. I love that feel, and
Cedar Rapids it's oh my gosh! What, you know how many tickets I'm going to
get to for just looking out weird. You know, I don't want that here. This is not
right for Iowa City. We have other options. I encourage and hope that you guys
would at least look at other options. Real, you know true heartedly, and maybe
vote it down tonight and go at this another way. Where then they can be brought
up that this is wrong because of this. That's my thoughts and hopefully you guys
actually think about it before you say yes or nay tonight. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you for your comments. (light applause) Is there anyone else who wants
to address us before I close this and take it up for Council, uh, discussion? Okay.
Thank you, uh, for... for all of the input. Uh, at this time we will close this for
Council discussion. Is there Council discussion?
Champion: I have nothing new to say. Except ... (laughter) when, I like the point he brought
up about the referendum. I mean, when you guys look at this contract, better
make sure there's an out because citizens in Iowa City can do a referendum too.
(people talking in audience) And ... has there ever been a lawsuit against a city for
using these cameras, for uh, a rear end collision?
Dilkes: Ever anywhere?
Champion: Well, you know (laughter)
Dilkes: I don't ... I don't know.
Champion: I mean, would the City be liable if.. .
Dilkes: I don't think so.
Champion: Okay. Anyway ... it makes criminals out of people who aren't criminals and it
also, the ticket goes to the car and not the person, and those kind of things just
really bother me. I know parking tickets go to the car and not the person too but
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 49
it's a little bit different. And he's right, they put parking meters everywhere in
Chicago now, even in alleys! (laughter) So I mean I think this technology is fine,
some of it is and some of it isn't, but I'm still going to vote no. I still don't like it,
and I probably will never like it.
Hayek: Further discussion?
Throgmorton: Yeah, I mean, I can't help myself so I'll say a few things. Partly in order to get it
on record because we had this discussion during the work session. But not
everybody, uh, may have heard the discussion, so ... uh, for those of you who
don't know we had this ... we asked the staff to, uh, respond to a series of
questions for us and they did quite a good job of it, and their responses, um,
are ... are going to help produce a better decision on our part regardless of what the
decision is. So I feel really good about that. And, uh, also we've got a ... some of
you who have, um, made your statements tonight don't know this, but we've
gotten all sorts of communications that appear in our written packet from people
who support having, uh, installing these red light cameras. So it's not as if, you
know, the people have spoken and they spoke tonight. There are all these other
people who've told something different, okay? Uh, that said, so the ... the ... I
directed a series of questions toward the staff and uh, they um ... let's see what I
wanted to say next, urn ... um ... I asked them about whether there was, uh, I asked
them to tell us how ... how, uh, how extensive the use of, uh, cameras are right
now for outdoor public spaces. And... and I, from the response I gather not very
extensive. They're used for lots of reasons indoors and so on, but not for outdoor
public spaces, uh, so I think this would be, um, a significant step toward further
monitoring of, uh, of uh, of public behavior in one way or another. That bothers
me. But ... I'll get back to that in a second. Um, I ... I ... I think there's also a
chance that if we do these at ten intersections, that there might be a strong
inclination to extend them to other intersections or to other possible uses. That
bothers me a little bit. Um, I understand that there are no legal concerns
associated with, uh, doing these, uh, installing these red light cameras, and I
appreciate Eleanor's help on that. Uh, I remain a little bit concerned about, uh,
perception of unfairness associated with ways, uh, fines would be levied and so
on, but there's nothing illegal about it. Uh ... and, uh, I also looked carefully at
how the staff, uh, stated it's um ... the purpose of, uh, of, uh, these red light
cameras and... in the most... in the most recent memo we got from `em, uh, they
indicate that the purpose would be to increase compliance with traffic laws at
intersections. And that full compliance would reduce collisions and associated
damage and injuries. Okay, so ... for me that ... that's what I'm riveting my
attention on. And when I do this, and I said this during the work session, uh, I
think there's a lot of variability in how these cameras might, uh, the effectiveness
that these cameras might have at specific intersections. There's concern about
red, uh, rear end collisions and so on, but one ... I'm going t toss some numbers
your way. When ... when I do some back -of -the- envelope calculations, and I
know there's error associated with it, I ... I figure that the, uh, it would cost the
people of the city through fines about $180,000 per year to achieve, to avoid 0.1
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 50
major injuries per year at the ten intersections that we have in mind. If I knew
that the public safety benefits would be substantial, I'd set aside all the other
concerns that have ... that I've mentioned. But I don't think these public safety
benefits warrant, um ... installing the cameras. So I ... I would vote no.
Hayek: Okay. Further discussion? I'm ... I'm going to, uh, continue with the vote I cast
in, uh, the prior two readings. I very much appreciate the input. This is one of
those issues, and they pop up from time to time, that bring out impassioned
arguments; cogent, uh, well reasoned, uh, arguments and uh, and that input is
important to us, and I ... I certainly listen to it, uh, but for the reasons I've stated in
earlier readings, uh, I'm comfortable giving this ... giving staff a chance to go out
and look ... look at a contract. Roll call, please. Item passes 4 -3, uh, Council
Members Throgmorton, Payne, and ... Champion in the negative.
Karr: Motion to accept correspondence.
Mims: So moved.
Dobyns: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Mims, seconded by Dobyns. Discussion? All those in favor say aye.
Opposed say nay. Motion carries 7 -0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 51
ITEM 23. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ALLOCATING HUMAN SERVICES AID
TO AGENCIES FUNDING FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30,
2013.
Mims: Move the resolution.
Payne: Second.
Hayek: Moved by, uh ... Mims, seconded by Payne. Discussion?
Throgmorton: Well we got these... letters or requests or whatever, so ... we need to think about
that.
Hayek: Yeah! So, as I understand it we were contacted by at least two entities.
Throgmorton: Yeah (both talking) ...kind of expected. They would have also.
Hayek: ...appeared to have missed the deadline, um ... and uh, so what do we do about it
now? (mumbled)
Champion: We've taken this out of our hands, which I think is kind of too bad. I think I
really liked it when the Council decided allocation of these funds, um ... but I think
they did a good job and (mumbled)
Hayek: Aren't you in favor of doing that...
Champion: No, I was not!
Hayek: You were not. Okay. (several talking)
Throgmorton: ... may have done a good job but still some agencies seem not to have known
about the process because of Linda Severson and ... and you know transformations
in human resources.
Hayek: Well ... I mean, you know, we can consider those late applications I suppose, I
mean, we're free to modify these HCDC recommendations, but given that the
recommendations max out what we've allocated budgetarily, we'd have to take
hide from, uh, other...
Champion: I'm not willing to do that.
Hayek: ...recommendations. So ... John, were you standing up there ... do you want to
(laughter) Is there anything we need to know?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 52
Yapp: No, just that the, uh ... what's called the joint application process, uh, where we,
uh, utilize the United Way funding application has been the same, uh, for what
I've been told is 19 years now. Uh, the one thing that has changed is that, uh,
Linda Severson used to, uh, make a reminder phone call to several of the agencies
reminding... reminding them to get their applications in. Uh, that's the one thing
that has changed, and then for the past three years I believe you've received
funding app... recommendations from the Housing and Community Development
Commission, uh, as you have tonight.
Hayek: Okay. Thanks, John. Well, there's a motion and a second that is on the floor, um,
unless someone wants to, uh, try to reallocate... we have a vote for us. I mean, I
think it's an unfortunate situation for those who ... who got left behind, but ... I
guess from my perspective we implement these recommendations and hope that
they, uh, apply in timely fashion next year.
Mims: Yeah, I mean, they've been applying for more than one year so it would seem like
they should have some idea of the dates.
Hayek: So...
Throgmorton: Well, you know ... I ... I don't like the idea of, um ... people losing out because of
some slippage, um, and ... and you know, what looks to us to be tiny amounts of
money for some of these agencies, I think, could be substantial. So...
Champion: You're right about that!
Throgmorton: Yeah, so and ... I ... I would want us to be, uh, oh, what's a good word?
Uh ... (mumbled) flexible I think that's the best word I can come up with.
Hayek: It seems to me ... looking at this, um, no one is recommended to get more funding
than they got last year.
Mims: Right.
Hayek: So there's not some project that all of a sudden is a favorite and has resulted
in ... in increase in funding over the last budget cycle. Um ... everybody gets at or
less than what they got, uh, last year, and the fact of the matter is, you know, the
budget is down on this by ... I can't even do the math. Uh ... $30,000 -some. So,
that's... that's the difference.
Throgmorton: (mumbled)
Champion: We used to kind of keep a contingency fund for that very reason, that things came
up during the year. But these agencies have been applying for these funds for
years and I'm not going to change the status of the recommendations because they
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 53
forgot to send in their application. I ... I just ... I think there's some responsibility
there, too.
Hayek: Further discussion? Roll call, please. Item passes 7 -0.
Karr: Motion to accept correspondence.
Mims: So moved.
Throgmorton: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Mims, seconded by Throgmorton. Discussion? All those in favor say
aye. Opposed say nay. Motion carries 7 -0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 54
ITEM 27. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION.
Hayek: We'll start down on your end, uh, Rick, if you have anything.
Dobyns: Nothing!
Payne: Nothing for me.
Dickens: Nothing.
Mims: I will. I know we're late but I'll try and make this quick. Um, I have three things
I would just like to mention and throw out in terms of our zoning discussion for
staff to consider, if Council is in agreement. Um, one of the conversations I've
had is ... how easy it is for people to, uh, get demolition permits, it sounds like,
and is there any way, um, is there any way we can look at making, in providing
incentives. I realize I'm talking money here, okay, but in terms of keeping some
of these houses in these neighborhoods, less incentive for people to tear them
down and put up big apartment buildings. Uh, so just something to consider. The
idea of, um, building across property lines. One of the ... one of the things in this
neighborhood stabilization that we see happening is developers are buying up two
or three adjacent properties and tearing down those two or three houses and then
putting up mega- structures. Um, I'm assuming it takes away the ... the, uh...
Markus: Setbacks.
Mims: Setbacks, thank you (laughter) you know from your interior lot lines which is
allowing potentially even more square footage going up on those two or three
adjacent properties. Are there ways that we could look at incorporating some
things in the zoning that would either give us additional review or oversight on
those or ... even do we want to look at restricting the ability to build across, um, lot
lines. Um, and the other thing related to the zoning, and really the ... is the issues
that we've been having, is there anything more that we haven't looked at, um, in
terms of trying to get landlords to, um ... be good landlords, if you will. I mean,
we've ... we've got the nuisance calls, we've got things like that. Is there anything
else that we can use for leverage in terms of getting them to use more judgment,
better judgment in terms of their, um, tenants and trying to keep good houses. I
don't know if any of those are possible. And then one last one, totally unrelated,
but I just happened to think about as we were, something was said about the trails
or something tonight. We had a meeting earlier this winter, and I remember Doug
Boothroy was here and the comment was made about our City code requiring
property owners to clear the entire width of the sidewalk, even if it's 8 -feet wide.
And I think a lot of us sat up here and said, `Whoa, wait a minute!' I would be
interested, again if Council is, in having staff look at ... changing that ordinance to
require, you know ... the width, or 4 to 5 -feet, whatever is less in terms of, and
obviously this has been a very mild winter. Hasn't been a big issue. So it might
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 55
be a good time to do, if we were so inclined, so it was in place for next winter. I
won't keep us any longer!
Champion: That's all right. That's some good ideas. I like the idea of the sidewalks. I like
the idea looking at how we build across state lines ... or city, state lines! (laughter
and several talking) That's going to be a giant house, from here to Illinois and
Ohio! And I ... I agree, we need to look at some ways. I don't know how you
enforce rules for landlords. Many of `em are (both talking) out of town and ... it
all depends on who's managing their property.
Mims: I don't know if there is, but ... I throw it out.
Hayek: Well let's take up the ... the last point first. I feel like this is a quiz show here!
(laughter) Uh, the ... the issue of...of snow removal, I mean, are there at least
three people who would like staff to at least look at that.
Champion: I'd like to look at it!
Hayek: Cause that's a stand -alone issue.
Mims: Yeah.
Hayek: Okay. If you could do that. And then the other issues, uh, I think are good ones,
um, do they already fall under the ... the neighborhood stabilization, I mean, are
we ... looking at those things?
Fruin: Yeah, those'll all be things that we look at.
Mims: Okay.
Hayek: All right, so let's flag those and come back to them.
Mims: Okay. Thank you!
Throgmorton: I thought the second one would be a function of property lines. So, and the
property lines change once you buy three pieces of property and consider them to
be one.
Hayek: Right.
Mims: Yeah, but ... I don't know how Iowa does it. Other places don't. They're still
legally separate pieces of property, aren't they?
Champion: They are (both talking)
Mims: ... separate legal descriptions.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.
Page 56
Champion: They do, because I can tell you for sure that I've tried to get `em combine my lot
with my house, since it's unbuildable, so zoning laws have affected my income
too. I no longer can sell that lot or build on it. And that's my argument to
developers is that you're, you know, you're cutting into my pocket, but so I've
tried to get `em to combine that, and they won't do it. It's a whole separate tax.
It's a whole separate description.
Dilkes: It probably could be combined, um, through a sub ... a resubdivision process.
Yeah (several talking)
Mims: Yeah, replat it.
Hayek: Well, let's ... let's look at that at the appropriate time. Connie?
Champion: I've said enough tonight! So have you!
Mims: Move to adjourn .... oh, I'm sorry! Gotta do staff!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of February 21, 2012.