The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2012-04-03 Bd Comm minutesAirport Commission 4b(1) February 16, 2012 Page 1 MINUTES FINAL IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION February 16, 2012 — 6:00 P.M. AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING Members Present: Jose Assouline, Minnetta Gardinier, Howard Horan, Rick Mascari Staff Present: Sue Dulek, Michael Tharp, Kumi Morris Others Present: Jeff Edberg, Matt Wolford, Darrell Smith, Harrel Timmons RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): None CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Gardinier called the meeting to order at 6:04P.M. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES: Minutes of the January 19, 2012, meeting were reviewed. Mascari moved to approve the minutes as submitted; seconded by Horan. Motion carried 4 -0. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION /ACTION: a. Airport Commerce Park — Jeff Edberg spoke to Members, noting that there has been some interest in lots. The Deery Bros. transaction, according to Edberg, is progressing, with hopefully an April closing date. He then responded to Members' questions regarding this sale, noting that everything is on track, albeit slower. Gardinier asked if there was anything they could do to help this process along, such as with the FAA. Edberg stated that he would be sure to pass that along. b. Airport Farming Operations — i. Consider a resolution approving amendment to agreement with Merschman Seeds — Tharp noted that this is a resolution to extend the access -way agreement with Merschman Seeds. Dulek stated that she has a sketch of this area, in case Members would like to see it. She noted that it is partially City property and partially Airport property that is being discussed. Horan moved to approve Resolution #Al2 -03, seconded by Gardinier. Motion carried 3- 0; Mascari absent. c. Care Ambulance — i. Consider a resolution approving Commercial Business Agreement with Care Ambulance — Tharp stated that this would be the new agreement with Care Ambulance. He briefly explained how it has changed since upgrades were made to this hangar. Tharp responded to Members' questions and concerns about this Airport Commission February 16, 2012 Page 2 amount. He further explained how the agreement was reached. Mascari suggested they raise this amount to $150, but others did not agree with this. Horan moved to approve Resolution #Al2 -04; seconded by Assouline. Motion carried 4 -0. d. Terminal Building Brick Repair — i. Consider a resolution accepting bids and awarding contract — Tharp noted that both Darrell Smith of VJ Engineering and Kumi Morris with the City are present to answer any questions. He stated that bids were opened last Thursday, with nine being received. Bids ranged from $55,000 to $158,000 for the base bid. Tharp stated that the recommendation is for TNT Tuckpointing, with a base bid of $70,000, with an additional $23,000 in alternates. Horan moved to approve Resolution #Al2 -05; seconded by Mascari. Motion carried 4 -0. Kumi Morris spoke briefly to Members, explaining why the local company had a higher bid and was therefore not considered. ii. Consider a resolution amending Consultant Agreement with VJ Engineering — Tharp briefly explained what this amendment contains. This will cover the additional changes made to the project, approximately a 10% add -on. Mascari moved to approve Resolution #Al2 -06; seconded by Horan. Motion carried 4 -0. e. FAA/IDOT Projects: AECOM I. Obstruction Mitigation — Tharp stated that Hughes is unable to attend this evening, but that he did send an update. There was nothing new to report on the obstruction mitigation issue. ii. 7/25 Parallel Taxiway — Tharp stated that there was a kick -off meeting recently on this project. Various aspects of the project were discussed at this meeting, according to Tharp, and Hughes is gathering further information for the next meeting. The issue of LED lights was briefly discussed. Tharp also brought Members up to date on the Ruppert land purchase. f. Airport Operations: — i. Strategic Plan Implementation — Tharp noted that he will be starting a summary soon on this, where he will show where we are with various aspects of the plan. He hopes to have this ready in the next month or so. ii. Budget — Tharp stated that things are looking good for the annual budget. He added that he would like to do something with the stairway, such as painting, but that he is having trouble getting people to look at it due to the nature of the job. So far he has had one estimate, which came in at $1,500 to $2,000, mainly due to the need for scaffolding. Members briefly discussed the issue, with Dulek suggesting a possible contact for this work. After a brief discussion, Members agreed that Tharp should look into this issue further. iii. Management - 1. Airport Operations Specialist Position - a. Evaluation — Gardinier noted that she has not yet done Tharp's evaluation, nor has she received comments from any of the Members. She hopes to get this done in the next month. Mascari stated that he will contact her with comments. g. South Aviation Development Area — Horan addressed Members on this issue. He stated that he wanted to get some rough sketches to them, in order to get the conversation going on this issue. He gave Members some background on the area under discussion, noting that the Commission can decide what they would like to do with this area, similar to how they are handling the north commercial area. Mascari stated Airport Commission February 16, 2012 Page 3 that he believes they should learn from their mistakes, more specifically having the infrastructure put in by the City and then having to repay them for it. He believes they should consider going with a developer, who would then put in the infrastructure. Members agreed that they would like to make this an agenda item to further discuss the process they need to follow. Gardinier suggested they involve the Economic Development Coordinator in this. Assouline noted that often there are students helping out in this department who can help with this type of planning, as well. h. FBO /Flight Training Reports — i. Jet Air / Care Ambulance — Tharp noted that there has been mainly basic maintenance going on, with some snow removal over the past month. Several Members noted that there have been a lot of birds on the field lately. Timmons noted that it's mainly geese, and that they have been staying in the area due to the warmer winters. Gardinier asked if Jet Air could take a look at hangar 13 for a loose lock on the door. ii. Iowa Flight Training — Timmons noted that IFT is still training here in Iowa City, but that they have pulled out of both Galesburg and Burlington. Wolford added that they have a place in Cedar Rapids, as well. Timmons continued, stating that Jet Air is trying to improve their customer service and image, and that he is developing some new policies for his employees. He shared what he has in mind in order to achieve this. Gardinier then noted that she has some ideas on office space as well, and she shared what she has been contemplating. Members continued to debate this issue, with Dulek noting what Jet Air's lease agreement stipulates as part of their space. I. Subcommittee Report - i. For February — Budget (Chair, Secretary, Tharp) — Tharp noted that they have been through the budget process with the Council and that March 6 is when the budget will be approved by the Council. He noted that everything went well and the Council seemed receptive on the specialist position going to full -time. ii. For March — Community Liaison (Assouline, open, Tharp) j. Commission Members' Reports — Mascari shared with Members some information that he obtained on AOPA's recommendation on how to deal with specific airport issues, such as noise, compliance, economic impact, standards, to name a few. He also noted that in 2005 he requested a larger hangar, and that finally one has opened up. He stated that he just wanted to get that on the record and that it was not due to his being on the Commission. Gardinier asked that Mascari add AOPA to an upcoming agenda so that he can further share this information. He asked that Tharp make copies of the information and that this be put on the April agenda. Horan suggested they add painting the fuel storage tanks to their queue of jobs to do as the tanks are rusting and need to be cleaned up. k. Staff Reports — Tharp reminded Members that the "Day on the Hill" is this coming Tuesday from 11:30 to 1:00 in Des Moines. He asked that others let him know if they are interested in joining him. Gardinier stated that she is unable to attend. Gardinier then shared that the engine she ordered for her plane is to be shipped February 23. Tharp stated that the DOT recently sent out their call letter for the next round of grant applications. They are capping the vertical infrastructure at $150,000 this year, which Tharp noted was unexpected. Applications are due the first part of May, so discussions will need to begin soon. Tharp also noted that a four -year FAA bill was passed recently, giving them funding for that timeframe. A 90/10 grant split, however, was also instituted. Airport Commission February 16, 2012 Page 4 Noting that Assouline's term ends in March, Tharp added that Crane's slot is still being advertised for, as well. Deadline for both positions is February 29, 2012, at 5:00 P.M. SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR: The next regular meeting will be Thursday, March 15, 2012, at 6:00 P.M. at the Airport Terminal building. ADJOURN: The meeting adjourned at 7:26 P.M. Gardinier made the motion to adjourn the meeting; seconded by Assouline. Motion carried 4 -0. CHAIRPERSON DATE Airport Commission February 16, 2012 Page 5 Airport Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD 2012 Key: X = Present X/E = Present for Part of Meeting O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = Not a Member at this time TERM o 0 � N NAME EXP. N N 03/01/13 X X Rick Mascari 03/01/14 X X Howard Horan Minnetta 03101/15 X X Gardinier Jose 03/02/12 O/E X Assouline Key: X = Present X/E = Present for Part of Meeting O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = Not a Member at this time MINUTES HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION February 21, 2012 Lobby Conference Room htPFIN 4b(2) Members Present: Orville Townsend Sr., Diane Finnerty, Harry Olmstead, Shams Ghoneim, Howard Cowen, Kim Hanrahan, Henri Harper. Members Excused: Connie Goeb, David.B. Brown. Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers. Others Present: Charlie Eastham, Karla Stoltzfus - Detweiler. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None. CALL TO ORDER Chair Olmstead called the meeting to order at 18:05. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 20 2011 MEETING: Townsend moved to approve the minutes. Ghoneim seconded. The motion passed 5 -0. (Cowen and Hanrahan not present for vote) Olmstead- Shams Ghoneim to tell a little bit about herself. Ghoneim - I am retired from The University of Iowa. I was a staff member for 33 years. I'm also graduate school. I chaired and co- chaired the Council at The University of Iowa for several years. I also was a president and a current member of that . I am currently on my sixth year with Iowa, and I am very honored to be here with you today Olmstead- We're glad to have you, and Henry I don't believe you introduced yourself. Would you like to do that at this time? Harper- Sure. Henry Harper and I was born and raised in East St. Louis. Went school at Oklahoma. I own a lawn care business and created my own funding to make sure they pursue their dreams and goals. I moved to Iowa, moved to Washington, Iowa in 1997 and moved to Iowa City in 1999. 1 worked for the Iowa City School District at City High School for ten years. I currently work for Mayor's Youth Empowerment Program, and I am the Fas Trac Executive Director, and I'm happy to be here. Olmstead- We're glad to have you. So to get to know us a little bit better, Diane do you want to start and introduce yourself? Finnerty- So I'm Diane Finnerty and I've been on the Commission about a year. I've been in town since 1989, so I've been here for a few years. Moved here to . I work now at the University, but I was for the community, so I wasn't one of those students that hung on and did things like that. So I have a strong background in non - profit services: health care, sexual violence, domestic violence. I've done that work for a long time. I've been at the University for several years started out doing _ work for what's now called the Office of Equal Opportunity Diversity. Now I'm just a pretty eight to five P) bureaucrat in a lot of ways policy work with faculty. So work like this is important because it keeps my heart so I'm glad to be here as well. Townsend — I was born and raised in East St. Louis Illinois. I came to The University of Iowa in 1962 on a football scholarship. I graduated and went back and got my Master's Degree in _ counseling, and by that time shortly after that Administration for 42 and a half years. I've been retired and this will be my third year of retirement. I'm married to my lovely wife Billie, who is also my best friend. We have four kids and several grandkids. This is the start of my second term on the Council and I'm looking forward to another productive year. Cowen- Hi I'm Howard Cowan. I've been at the university for 30 years as Director of the _ Special Needs program involved with agencies of United Way for a number of years and other organizations _ Human Rights Council at the University. Olmstead- I'm Harry Olmsted and I'm new to the community. I've been here two years and I've been on the Commission two years, so this will be my last year going off in January or December. I serve on several boards in the community. I also Trans - Council, Advisory Council for the county, and I serve on the Access Board of Directors. I have a we live together on the far south east side of town. Hi Kim, would you like to introduce yourself. Hanrahan - My name is Kim Harahan. This is my second month as a Commission member so I still have a lot of learn. Olmstead- Want to tell us where you work? Hanrahan- Sure, am I introducing myself to you? Olmstead- Yes all of us. Hanrahan- I'm a social worker in town. I work at United Action for Youth, and every Tuesday I facilitate a support group for teens who are parenting. So that's why I'm late. You just never know what's gonna happen. I've lived in Iowa City my whole life and worked on social justice issues for a really long time. So it feels good to be here. Olmstead- Okay approval of the minutes from the following meeting of January 17`h. Stefanie can you explain to me why we have such detailed minutes. They're more detailed than we've ever had. Bowers- Well one I think it's probably better as a public commission to have notes that are close or accurate to what actually occurred at a meeting, similar to the City Council. If you ever look at their minutes they're pretty detailed, but two we have a transcriptionist at the office, and so it's also easier for me to have her do the minutes versus having to do them myself. All I have to do is go back and match the names with the comments, which is easy. She doesn't recognize voices yet, but eventually she probably will. Olmstead- Do we have a motion to approve the minutes? 3 Finnerty - On conversation I would, one thing I would say about it is I'm so glad it relieves you of some work. That I think anything that can happen in that vein I'm very supportive of. it feels odd to have verbatim. I'm more use to like you know the decisions that are made and some of the key points. This will probably chill my conversation actually. I'm all about transparency, but I also think there's _ if we do a lot of deliberations and I'm a believer in dialogue, and that I can say something and you can say something and it can affect how I then view a change in these meetings. So I really value our dialogue, and so that's, it will be a bit odder for me to have it verbatim. So I just want to say that out loud. There's always been a recording that anybody can. Bowers- Right, so it's always a possibility that somebody calls and asks for it, and so personally I think it's better to have Deb transcribe them than to have somebody else transcribe them and try to figure out who said what. Townsend- I move that the minutes be accepted as presented. Olmstead- Do I hear a second? Ghoneim- I'll second. Olmstead- All those in favor? Aye Olmstead- Opposed? Public comments. Is there anybody here speaking from the public? Finnerty -This would be public comments of items not on the agenda right? Is that right, so as we're talking about the agenda items though the public can talk? Bowers-Correct Olmstead- Okay old business, 2012 Night of a Thousand Dinners. Bowers- Yes there's an email, at the last meeting you had asked me to follow up to get more information. There's an email from James Olson that's dated February 7th. It looks like the first correspondence was pretty much right after the last meeting on the 18th, but he gives the speaker, who is Elizabeth Heinemann, who is a University professor and author of a recent book on the history of violence against women in zones of war. It says this is a major human rights theme and we are pleased to provide a forum for her to share her work with the community. So and at the last meeting you had asked specifically how the event benefitted the community and or how it educated on human rights. So that was Mr. Olson answering that question. Cowen- What was the request again for how much did ? Bowers- The original request I think was for $50 minimum. Olmstead- Any other discussion? Do I hear a motion? Ghoneim- I'll make a motion. I'll make a motion to accept I guess. Bowers- Okay, so just to clarify, to donate for the amount of $50, okay. 4 Olmstead- Second? Cowen- I'll second. Olmstead- All those in favor say aye. Aye Olmstead- Opposed? The ayes have it. Cultural Diversity Day March 31, 2012, Saturday. Bowers- That again is an event that we talked about at the last meeting. The Commission usually participates in that. Of course participation is gonna be based on whether or not there are Commissioners to volunteer on that day to sit at the table. Cowen- Did we have any volunteers at the last meeting? Bowers- I don't think it was specific. Olmstead - Where is it held? Bowers - University Fieldhouse. Hanrahan- Is it from noon to five or do we know? Ghoneim- Noon to five, yes. Bowers- Usually I think there were either two shifts or three shifts because really usually that last hour it kinda drops off I think as far as. Hanrahan- Later in the afternoon? Bowers- Correct. Hanrahan -1 would be willing to do a shift. Townsend- Yeah I'll do a shift. Olmstead- I can do a shift also. Bowers- At noon and I would say 11:30, whoever is on that first shift to get the table set up. Hanrahan- Will materials be there then? Bowers- Correct. Whoever is on the first shift I will get a box to you with all the things you need. Ghoneim- I can also make a shift, so is that four? So it'd be a nice one hour. Bowers- We can probably do two and two probably I think will be best, and that way there's somebody there for kind of coverage. At the next meeting, unless people feel comfortable selecting their time slots today or we could wait until the March meeting, which is on the 20th which is a little closer in time to the 31St to select actual times or shifts. Olmstead- We have some arm twisting to do so why don't we wait till the next meeting. 5 Bowers- Okay. Olmstead- Okay Bowers- Correct. Olmstead- Youth Awards update, May 9, 2012 Wednesday. Bowers- I think this is on there because of the adult award. I really don't have much to add. Olmstead- In your packet you received the recommendations for the Youth Ally Awards. The committee came up with, for those that don't have them with you I'll read it. Iowa City Human Right Commission Youth Ally Award, nomination form 2012. The City of Iowa City Human Rights Commission Youth Award recognizes an adult who through their work entrusts and has empowered youth in the Iowa City area, and has contributed to their development in human rights in the Iowa City community or abroad. The City of Iowa City Human Rights Commission Youth Ally Award is an award where youth in the community nominate an adult for special recognition. The award recognizes an adult who _ their work in _ area, youth and empowered youth in the Iowa City area. Nominations can be sent standard mail to .... It has the fax number and for additional information please visit the website. Nominations will be accepted through April 20, 2012. Here are the instructions. Please type or write very clearly the name of the nominee, the address of the nominee, the phone number of the nominee, job title and description of nominee, email address, name of nominator, address of nominator, phone number of nominator, email address, name of the group or organization. Nomination details -a brief nomination includes the following; one, the number of years the nominee has worked with youth in the Iowa City area. Two, qualities that sets her or him apart. Three, impact on you, your peers, youth group and the Iowa City community. Number four- How has he or she gone above and beyond. Please do not include letters of support or resumes. Instead submit on complete nomination. Describe in detail using as many pages as necessary the nominees to work with youth in the Iowa City area. The adult selected by the Human Rights Commission to receive recognition will receive a certificate of appreciation presented at the annual Youth Awards ceremony. Bowers- Before you go on, Dr. Cowen can you hold yours up so everybody can see. So they know what it looks like. That's what it looks like in the packet. At the top it says Iowa City Human Rights Commission and then it says Youth Ally Award nomination form 2012. Olmstead- Now how this will differ from the breakfast? The person that receives the award will not speak, but just be recognized just along with all the other youth. Finnerty- So this is a youth who needs to be doing the nominating right? So the nominator needs to be a youth. Olmstead- Right. Finnerty- Was there any discussion about whether to include or age or age range or a verification of I'm under 18 or anything like that in the nominator section? Or will the committee be Ghoneim- Somewhere was it in the discussion or in the minutes last time? Bowers- There was yes. I: Olmstead- So we want to put the age of the nominator? Finnerty- That's what I don't know. What's the appropriate way to get to it, do I have to attest that I'm under the age of 18? Bowers- You could ask because I mean if somebody is home schooled they usually put a home school. So you could ask what school they attend, and that would be a way of, without having to ask age. Just a suggestion, I mean you can certainly ask age. Hanrahan- It's also not clear though in any of the narrative that it is supposed to be from a youth. Finnerty- It was something cause I was looking for that. Ghoneim- No it said award where youth in the community nominate them adult with special recognition. Olmstead- We could bold type that. Harper- I also think we need to identify youth instead of just saying what school they attend. There also will be kids probably nominate people that are not attending school, be it still Finnerty- Do you have some suggestions like, age doesn't seem Harper- Well we can put that in there, but how do we Hanrahan- Are youth considered under 21 because we could just say isn't award where youth and then in parentheses put under age 21. Olmstead- Or we could say I certify that I'm under the age of 21. Townsend- Can a nomination be made by a youth, grade school through high school or? Finnerty- So K through twelve or K through 21, so what's Harper- It should be K though 21 because a lot of kids , going to school, now on track. They probably have stories to tell how they got back on track, and probably in school here in Iowa or Kirkwood. So that person that made that change in their life should be recognized for that. Sometimes they don't get recognized people pay a lot of attention to _ back on track. Finnerty- I think United Nations says youth goes up to 25. Finnerty — So — would we be drawing attention to maybe that one sentence instead of the City 'of Iowa City Human Rights Commission Youth Ally, maybe youth nominate special adults for this. You know something Harper- Have them put their birthday on there someplace. We might not know exactly if they're telling the truth, but at least we have something to cover ourselves like this is the birthday they gave us, so this is what we are going by. 7 Olmstead- Well two changes that I'd indicate here is school attending, and then I attest that I am under the age of 21 years of age. Hanrahan- I think your point was well taken that they may not be in school. Olmstead- Well like home schooling? Bowers- Or a dropout. Olmstead- So we don't want to put school attending? Bowers- I mean everybody has an age. Henry brought up a good point, not everybody would have a school. So I mean age is something that everyone should have. Olmstead- We need to take action on this this evening seeing that we want to get this out. So do I hear a motion to accept this with the change that's the indicated that they _ that they're under the age of 21? Bowers -1 think just from a staff perspective maybe just asking birthday is better, without having people certified. Olmstead- Okay date of birth? Bowes -Yes or just birthday. Finnerty- Could we in the beginning say something like since this is a youth nomination. You know somehow why are we asking for birthday? Maybe since this is a youth nomination award, please specify your birthday. Up on the top I think it's 21, under 21, or something so that I know why I'm putting down my birthday. Bowers- Sure. Ghoneim — Don't you think that asking for a birthday is sort of invasion of privacy? Bowers —.I guess not in the sense of what we're doing no, but I could see, but I'm staff so it's up to the Commission. Ghoneim- I was just asking a general question. Some people may have some discomfort with saying their birthday. Harper- We'll just ask for the year. Hanrahan- Yeah just the year they're born maybe. Finnerty- Which one is better their age and put down I'm 17 or they were born in Harper- I think as far as the Commission can actually give this to a youth award. I think in some ways to cover ourselves, we say okay they gave the year of birth and that's what we went by on the form. So if they come later and say well, this person is really older than that. Well all we know is the information that was given, the fact that they gave the year of birth and that's what Townsend- I think in situations where you want to deal with age, if you just ask them for the age it gets kinda shabby or shady, but I think in the criteria, if we're saying in the criteria. We're saying that you have to be under a certain age to participate, then I think it would be appropriate to ask for the year, at least the year that they were born. Olmstead- So are in agreement to ask for a birth year? (no comment) Okay do I hear a motion to approve this with the change? Townsend- Before you do that I have a question. How important is it? You know I mean you know sometimes you can just get too picky, and blow things out of proportion. You know if we laid a criteria out indicating what the age expectations are. You know is it necessary because a person you know, the worst scenario is that somebody would lie. What harm is it gonna do? Bowers- Well and I guess maybe thinking this out if somebody writes a narrative as to why Stefanie Bowers has been a wonderful influence on my life and deserves this award. I would think the narrative would give indications of the relationship and with the person they're nominating, which to me would then indicate whether or not this particular person would qualify as a youth. Does that make sense? I mean there may be ways to get that information without being explicit, but. Finnerty- I would recommend that we really emphasize that this is a youth award, youth nominated award. And so even if that's in the narrative and then at the bottom, instead of asking birth date or anything, just a check box of I am a youth or something. I am under the age of 20. 1 don't want to ask so that it sounds like are you gonna get carded or not. I qualify as youth according to this or something. For me it's about the politics of we could discern, but I think it's also saying this is a youth nominated award. I really want to emphasize that to youth. This is somebody you're choosing. Olmstead- Well we'll move that information to the top. Finnerty- So we're from birth date to birth year to nothing, to under 21 to Olmstead- Okay so can we defer that to staff to make up whatever they can? Bowers- When you mean, I don't know what you mean by deferring to staff. As far as the age and how it's written? Olmstead- Yeah how it's written into the... Bowers- Well I don't know if it's clear though what the Commission wants to do though. I mean are they asking to put the year, certify or go with the criteria. I think there are three different things up here. Townsend- You know in the criteria if you say in order to be eligible to nominate someone you must, and then lay out the criteria that we want. What more do we need to do? Cowen- Why are we asking for their phone number and email address? Bowers- Because we need to contact them if they win and if we have questions, but also they're invited to the awards. 09 Cowen- So why can't we ask them at that time, just you know. We could just say if we're gonna contact them just say... Bowers- Well we would only contact them if their person was selected, but then it would be too late. If they say oh you know what I'm 35, what am I supposed to say? Cowen- We have an alternative, I mean well obviously they can say I didn't read the award where youth in the community, and you can put that around that in parentheses, under age 21 and that's the end of it. Just assume that they are or contact them and then go from there. Hanrahan- You could also put in this list of requests for demographic information you could put your birth or something too. Ghoneim- Just right after youth in parentheses under 21. Finnerty- Well we can try it out this year and see what happens. It's new and... Olmstead- Do I hear a motion to approve this? Bowers- So with the 21 going in the criteria for the award? Cowen- Yeah under age 21. Bowers- Okay under age 21. Hanrahan- I'll make a motion. Olmstead- Okay motion made, seconded? Harry- It's been seconded and all those in favor say aye. All- Aye Olmstead- All those opposed? Okay. Update reports. Cowen- I'm sorry, how are we going to distribute this? Who, where, when? Bowers- I'm open to this as the first year for the kids, so I'm looking for suggestions too. In the past it's always been the, you know the support, teachers, communities, groups and organizations. So this is a little different. Ghoneim- So you don't think it could go to schools and having like on boards? Bowers- It certainly can yes. Ghoneim- CRC is one organization that communities. They can also and make announcements during. Hanrahan- I also work at United Action for Youth so our youth center, our outreach workers can just start distributing. Olmstead- churches 10 Bowers- I don't know if it's a complete list. We have a list of churches. Ghoneim- And a synagogue and the mosque. Townsend- How do we distribute the information for the _- award, student awards that we give every year? Bowers- Primarily through religious organizations, school organizations, whether that's home school, private and public school. Townsend- Can we just use the system we've been using, but just you know point out that this year we have a youth award and fuse it with that. Hanrahan- I think if we just stick to that traditional list that we're gonna miss out on some people who are doing really effective work in the community that aren't involved in churches or schools. Harper- Actually we'd miss out on a lot of those kids - need it the most. current system update could be a good idea to connect with some of the programs that _ exist like some of the churches, and also some of the outreach people working on the street. Bowers- It goes there; it goes to the neighborhood centers and to Parkview. It doesn't go specifically to Harper- But my issue in the past those some of the kids are not even sure what it is, and I think in some ways. I know it's not _ our job to do it, but I think for those kids can be more involved in this process I think. The educated people they work with know more about, about what it's really about. We give them the forms and stuff, but some of them what it's really about. I'm not _ opposition but. Bowers- Who? I don't know if you're referring to the kids or the nominators. Harper- I'm talking about the kids, especially since the kids are going to be doing most of the nominations for this particular award. A lot of kids out there really could benefit from this for the most part. We need to get to them how they get this information, and that they understand what this award really is about. Those kids I believe have a lot of stories to tell about the people that have helped them stay on track and to go forward. They're intimidated by this process to tell you the truth. So in some way that we work with some of the outreach people for sure. Bowers- And that Commissioners can help too. Okay I just want to make clear because a lot of you have contacts to the community and those come in helpful when you're trying to promote an event. If you have venues that you think are appropriate, then I would certainly. Olmstead- Can we afford to put this in the paper? Bowers- Yes we usually do. We do advertise. The problem is that I mean you're either gonna have to advertise them together or separate. if you advertise them together it could be that one gets lost in the advertisement because people may not see the distinction that oh there's an adult award this year, but yes we can certainly advertise. This year is going to be about learning, but sometimes when you advertise two things together, one may be overlooked. 11 Hanrahan- It's a great suggestion, but a lot of our youth don't read the newspaper. For instance a lot of them ride the buses, so can we put up posters? Bowers- It's usually hung in the buses. Yes rec centers, libraries, any city facility is knowable of the awards. Finnerty- If the target is youth, I think the newspaper system may not be the youth target. Olmstead- Well that's not saying Ghoneim- Adults that would maybe just spread the word. Cowen- I think we have neighborhood centers you know. We've got our churches, synagogues. Why don't we just reach out to the community and ask them to help get the information out. Finnerty- Is there a sub - committee working on this? Olmstead- Yes. Finnerty- Could we just ask the sub - committee to _. Who is on it? Olmstead- I'm on, and _ is on, she's gone through the month of March. Bowers- Henri you're not on that sub - committee? Harper-Yeah. Olmstead- Oh I'm sorry Henry. Finnerty- come up with something because if we're gonna try it out this year it would be important to know what got done, so that next year we can do tweaking. So just kind of come up with a distribution plan about what you think is gonna work and get it down so that we can keep tweaking it. Harper- I think the whole issue is gonna be something that identifies resources _ and teach the process. advocate for the award in the future. I mean so we don't try to make it too big kids involved some kids in the community that actually can use a resource to educate their other friends and people how the process works. So from their aspect they can be a lot of help to us who can just identify some kids. Like the UAY or different programs or , have them sit them down and just teach them the process so they can teach other kids what the award is all about. We don't have to do so much work, they doing the work for us. Ghoneim- If its okay with the Commission I can, you know I'm on the editorial board and can ask the board if they would like to write _ view to explain the award and spread the word. Olmstead- I think we're here _ we can get could be beneficial. Finnerty- I'd like to recommend the youth award sub - committee create some kind of distribution plan and keep tweaking it every year. If it involves youth from . I mean I think that's a great idea for an editorial or whatever it is so that we just have it down so that we can keep working on it every year. I'd like to make that recommendation. 12 Hanrahan- Do we have guidelines on using social networking? Bowers- You want to set up a Facebook page or what specifically? No I'm asking not you specifically, but I'm asking what, because it depends on what you're, if you're talking Facebook or. Hanrahan- I don't know, just curious. Ghoneim- Sorry I was just gonna ask a question. The Cultural Diversity Day date is March 31St. When are we supposed to start advertising about this award? Bowers- It will be March 1�% so it will be available by March ft. Ghoneim- So will it be alright to have it on the table? Bowers- Yes. Olmstead- Get it on your calendars because we all need to be there. Bowes- For those of you on the sub - committee I guess when you guys meet let me know about what social media you may want to use. That way if it's very specific then we can go from there. Olmstead- Any other discussion on this award or the youth awards? Okay moving on, sub - committees, immigration. Well you have before you an email that I sent you that describes what the immigration sub - committee has come up with. What the immigration review committee would consist of, mission of purpose, _ meetings and Bowers- You might want to read it aloud or I can. Olmstead- Commission statement, given the well founded reluctance of many people in the immigrant community to come forward with concerns of rights, violations and or recommendations for community improvements. The immigration review committee will focus on reaching out and serving as a vehicle for the voices of immigrants living in Iowa City. The purpose, the IRC purpose is to be the voice for those immigrants in the Iowa City community whose voices may not be heard, and to convey their concerns to the Iowa City council and staff. Composition, the IRC will consist of five to seven members with one member being from the Iowa City Human Rights Commission, and that person has already Kim. Meetings, the IRC shall meet at least on a quarterly basis and report back to the Human Rights Commission. The work of members of the IRC will be voluntary. Bowers- Just from a staff perspective the only thing that I noticed was it doesn't give how long each person would serve, the five to seven members. Then it also doesn't give a duration for the committee, like I mean will it be on a yearly review or is it just, will the sub - committee always. Olmstead- Well according to city council, the way I read the city council work sessions, that we had two years to implement this, and I guess we'd have to go back to city council after that from what I suspect. Bowers- For a sub - committee for the Commission you wouldn't. The Commission can have a sub- committee without council approval. So I don't know if you want to put, I'm not saying you need to. That's not what I'm saying as staff. I'm just, it may be a good idea to put that in there, and if you don't want to put an end date for the sub - committee, you can put a date for it to be reviewed and for it to be 13 decided at that time whether or not it's still meeting the purpose or the reason why it was established. Personally I'm not sure I was a big fan of the name. I mean does the name really convey what you're doing? If I saw immigration review committee I don't think I would assume the purpose or the reason. Hanrahan- And is that what it was called I can't remember. Bowers- Is that what they called it yeah, I mean I'm not sure the name really fits. Ghoneim- How about the ad hoc committee on immigration since it is going to be a limited period of time I'm assuming? Hanrahan- I think immigration is the word that is most unsettling because that's the part. Do you guys think that or? Ghoneim- I think review is the immigrant voices or. Cowen- How can immigration be unsettling? Hanrahan- Well just because I thought if we are going to be a voice for undocumented and documented. Is that true? Finnerty- I think _ in the committee, the sub - committee when we talked about it. I see this is going to be a pretty living organism. I would be very remiss for too many dictates to come from group, to what the committee should be because I think it's going to be fluid. I think it's gonna be membership that comes and goes. Like I wouldn't say your term is three years. We can't make that commitment. I see it being pretty informal as a gathering voice of conversations. I also believe one of our intents was that the majority of the membership be identified as the self- identify as . I don't see that in here, but that sense of we don't want this just to be particularly or U.S. citizens talking about citizenship . But that we really saw this as a leadership development group as well, and leadership identification. So part of what I think of this is this is the bones that we could start with, but it's really the committee that will bring it to life. _ some provision of the committee shall set its own direction. The committee shall determine what's the best way to give voice to these issues to the Commission. Townsend- in our meeting I think we kind of indicated that our committee would you know set the structure, and that you know ... Finnerty- Loosely right? Townsend- Yeah loosely because a lot of decisions we didn't make because we feel that that should be done by process members. I think in all fairness we do need to come up with a term. If I volunteer what's my term gonna be at least. We should maybe give them that kind of information. Olmstead- Does two years sound appropriate? Olmstead- That's a good idea to stagger terms. Ghoneim- Yeah because some people may not be able to , maybe a year. So when I hear you say Diane, is that, you think the composition of this sub - committee or adhoc committee, is not only from the Commission, but could be also recruiting others ah immigrants or 14 Finnerty- Yeah I think this sub - committee this Commission is working on but I think this, whatever we call it is of the community, and we want to specify one person from here to be kind of ah but yeah. This is a community based group. I need to say I've never been a great fan of this recommendation anyway. I'm not clear how I see it working, but if it works I think it's gonna be an informal, vibrant, not a structured committee. I don't want there to be just one more committee on these issues. I think it's a sounding post is how I see it. Kind of ah you know something that's dynamic, and so it's hard for me to kinda ask for terms and ask for all these things because I'm not sure that's how the committee will work best to get the voices in. But that's why I'd love to identify some you know key people being identified to kind of keep working on this. One of the things we talked about is how is membership chosen? Like is there a call that goes out to the community or are the people hand chosen? You know those kinds of issues. I would hate for us to dictate who gets to be on it. I think there are challenges and it's important to get it started though. So what do we need to do to get it started so that it can start taking on a is the question I'm asking myself. Townsend- I'd like to go back we visited earlier; we were talking about the _ committee immigration. The word immigration seemed to kinda stand out, and I was just wondering you know is the committee going to be dealing with — issues that impact immigration population? Or are we going to be dealing with issues that impact everybody? I hate to see us shy away from a term because it may rub somebody the wrong way because when people get rubbed the wrong way the first thing I ask is, is there a reason for it. If there is a reason then I don't think we ought to back off of it. We've got a situation and I don't think we ought to dance around it. I mean immigration if that's what the focus is and that's what we need to deal with, then you know I don't think we should . I think or community needs to know what's going on. , but most importantly need to know that nothing is gonna change if they don't get involved. Ghoneim- so I'm trying to understand. What you were saying is under this Commission there is sub - committee that would be called x, y, or z, whatever we agree on. Is that it? Olmstead- Yes Ghoneim- Okay and that specific sub - committee will include members of this group, the Commission, as well as others. Olmstead- Right, one person from this group. Ghoneim- Only one. Olmstead- Right. Ghoneim- That okay, so the second question will come to mind. Usually the Commission if that can go to city council. Right because that's what happened before with the Sanctuary City issue? Bowers- Repeat that question. Ghoneim- The Human Rights Commission worked on issues you know population and sent it to as a recommendation to the city council to look into, correct? 15 Bowers- Correct. Ghoneim- So what I'm asking is would that sub - committee has the same pathway to city council? Bowers- They would have to come through the Commission or go directly to the city council themselves. Does that answer your question? Ghoneim- Yes either directly or _ this Commission. Is that right? Bowers- Right just as you know anybody can go to the city council and make suggestions. So anybody has the power to do that, but since they're a sub - committee of the Commission they, I think for purposes of this group, the idea is that they would come to talk to the big Commission and then the big Commission would determine whether or not. That is my understanding so I don't want to put words in any of the, looking at the folks on the sub - committee. Cowen- That would be my understanding since we're establishing the committee itself. Ghoneim- I think this is important too because you cannot work in a vacuum. You're already as a Commission; you already worked on this issue and had a specific recommendation. That's already gone to the city council. The city council pushed it back, depending on how you look at it. So I'm trying to figure out. I'm trying to figure out sort of, almost like a system. How to get back into the, so okay thank you. Finnerty- but I'd be very interested both Charlie and Carla here Sanctuary City have been working on this issue for some time. I'd be very interested to hear the _ of what wouldn't make this a useful group in the community. What shouldn't be in there? What should be? Just kind of thought. The question that Sham brings up is a good one. What would make people want to participate? All that and anything you'd like to offer our immigration Stoltzfus - Detweiler - Just to answer just this last question. What would make people want to participate? I think that this relationship with you guys. The people who have some sort of.personal connection to the members of the Human Rights Commission, and sense that this is a compassionate Commission, in a place where their needs will be heard I think. I think some of that is happening. I think there are some good ways of connecting this group. I mean there already are this Commission and some other groups. For instance the immigrant round table group that's been meeting would have lots of good connections to immigrant leaders in the community. Maybe, has this already been discussed several meetings. That group is a collaboration of people from various organizations who work with immigrants and immigrants themselves who would have, would be a great resource for inviting people to participate in this. I agree, a better name would be good, and maybe letting the group chose their own name would be . I think that the term limit idea, I think that a term of two years would be intimidating to a lot of immigrants that I know. I think it would be better to leave that open ended. I think it could be for a lot of established long time citizens a term limit is a comforting thing. I don't have to be stuck on this committee forever. I think there's someone whose life is not as stable to say, oh a year or two years. I don't think I can Finnerty- I think our intent is to try and make this as warm and welcoming and accepting as possible because we want to hear the real voices of people who are experiencing some of the things that about to address. Eastham- I just want to emphasize that I agree with Karla, that the connection of this committee to the Human Rights Commission and to the council is be willing to exert their time and energies to participate in One of the things, I mean I've heard people say is that they want both compassion And so that connection increases the _ I think. That they're participation Ghoneim- I don't know if Charlie wants to add to the list. The last meeting of CRC religious communities, is also definitely topic. So you have committees there that are working very hard on that issue, and hope to strengthen the Commission and its pathway to get that issue back on the calendar if you like. So I'm hoping somehow this committee will partner together. Stoltzfus - Detweiler - One other thing that in the Sanctuary City Committee we hashed out, and I know that your sub - committee has talked about this already, but one concern that we have is that the people who are invited to this sub - committee would have confidence that their role is not going to jeopardize their status in the community. And so we were searching for a way to make that very apparent, and I think that our suggestion of having the council make the commitment was the trouble with that. I don't know if it was legal or whatever, but. Bowers- The Commission can't guarantee the actions of another person I think was my concern when I read it. I mean they can't guarantee what somebody else would or would not do any more than I could. Eastham- I don't think that was Stoltzfus - Detweiler- We were asking the Commissioners to make a pledge, not to jeopardize the status of any immigrants who would . If there would be a way that that could be stated clearly and simply. I think that would be an important measure to idea and make this a more inviting opportunity. Finnerty- I think that through the other Commissioners there was a _ about I as an individual or something will not jeopardize the group. That there's a statement that one option would be for all Commissioners at least to make a personal pledge. I think it was called Bowers- Okay that's not how I read it. Stoltzfus- Detwe i le r - I can read the statement that we submitted. We were suggesting that the city council members make this commitment. City council members of Iowa City agree to take no action as a body or as private, independent individuals that would put at risk any unauthorized immigrant assisting the immigrant Bowers- And that's what I'm referring to, that's asking another city body, and I don't think the Commission can do that. Well you're asking them to guarantee the, I guess the way I'm reading it is that you want them to ask the city council. I mean I think it can go up, I guess the way I read it is that you're asking the Human Rights Commission to guarantee that the city council won't. 17 Bowers- But you're asking the Human Rights Commission to do that. Stoltzfus - Detweiler - To ask the council to make a commitment to protect people who are serving on this committee. So obviously our statement wasn't clear. It would need to be worded. Finnerty- It might be an interesting tactic to ask each individual to sign a pledge. Each individual Commissioner, each individual councilor and some won't and that's interesting in itself about the individual. But I also — it's not just individuals it's also as a body. interesting to I personally make a commitment. that might be Eastham- I agree with you Diane, the Sanctuary City Committee purpose in having this request is to try to increase the comfort level the have to _ every decision, in every decision that they make. That judgment is doing this thing, am I jeopardize , and one of the things that we're suggesting is that we as individuals, and asking the council as individuals, to say that I'm not going to jeopardize. I personally by my actions, I'm not going to jeopardize Finnerty – They come to city council meetings now that the cameras are running. You know those kinds of things that I think the committee itself would have to have internal safety things in place. So I may unintentionally do something like say hey would you please come to the city council and then I'm well meaning, but then the cameras are running and starts doing some checks or something. Where can we make commitments and where can't we and how do we do Hanrahan- And I also think including more of your family members cause I think often times that's really Finnerty- So instead of us coming up with that, are there ways that we can get the process going? These are all deep and powerful issues right about how do you, how do people who are unauthorized safely participate in community period. What other ways and that's one of the outcomes? Eastham- To me this Commission establishes this committee, one of the things that I if I were on that committee, which I won't be. I would suggest that you immediately is pay attention to the projects. information that those efforts develop to these discussions. Finnerty- So there's a survey right now called the Immigrant Voices I think survey that's going out. It's a training to train people, particular leaders Stoltzfus - Detweiler- Well its buried in infancy stages, another potential project. Olmstead- I don't want to forget on the top of the handout Connie has written a memo asking us to consider the purpose or She also give the immigrants themselves enough support and encouragement to come forward and speak for themselves. I'm supporting have the IRC act as an interpreter and go between early on in the process. The goal of creating _ of a safe haven for the immigrants to speak for themselves , board, commissions and get involved. I'm just forwarding these remarks to you, but I would love to have something like this to discuss included if there is a majority in favor. Ghoneim – We said we're not going to call it the IRC. Is that correct? 18 Olmstead- The notes that I have is sub - committee on immigration rights. The _ of review I've suggested March of 2014. 1 think it's been discussed about making service and I don't know if we need to the service at this point in there. Bowers- Well you might want to put it not to exceed two. My thing is just that, I mean let's look fifteen years down the line. Do you want the same person who will never get off and give somebody a voice? So I mean if you don't want to say somebody has to serve for two years, then maybe you should say no longer than and give an amount of years because you're not gonna want somebody. I mean because that issue will eventually arise. I mean if this continues beyond two years, you're gonna have somebody who you know. Olmstead — Then we'll add a note that the majority of the Commission be immigrants. Any other discussion? Do I hear a motion to approve what we've read tonight and for the record? Finnerty — The other part is that this is, I would say if not all then mostly open for discussion by the committee itself to do some self- defining. Olmstead — Right. Harry — Okay you want that in there? Bowers — I think the Commission needs to vote on establishing a sub - committee. I think there's been a lot of talk and there just needs to be a vote for the record that every Commissioner has exercised their right to start a sub - committee, and then get into the... Olmstead — Do I hear a motion? Ghoneim — I make a motion that we establish a sub - committee on immigration. Olmstead —Second? Cowen — Second. Olmstead —All those in favor say aye. Aye Olmstead — Opposed? Okay do we need a motion to make Kim the representative of HRC? Bowers -1 don't think so. Olmstead — Okay. Kim has agreed to do that. She's also agreed to co -chair the immigrant sub- committee. Diane I sent you a memo out, has a busy schedule. I've talked to her after she sent the memo to me, and her schedule is just really busy at this time of the year and she's just quite stressed out with stuff. So she had to resign from that, but Kim has agreed to co- chair, and Karla I've talked to and asked if she would consider co- chairing with Kim and she was gonna give me a decision sometime. Finnerty— How about now? 19 Stoltzfus - Detweiler —Well actually I'm prepared to tell you that as I was reflecting on my life in the next two months in particular, which you were asking about are quite full would be beyond that, I would be open to it. But I don't think I can say yes to this in the next two months, at least . So I would be happy to provide some other _ if possible. I'm not sure who you've asked already. I mean I would encourage going, you said you know you're hoping to at some point have an immigrant as a chairperson, and I'm not sure who's already talked to. I mentioned several times Gloria is a leader who would be some one that I would ask to be a co- chairperson. She's a mover and I think she would be a great person to work with. Olmstead — Do you have contact numbers for these people? How about if I call you tomorrow and get that information from you. Stoltzfus - Detweiler — And also round table group there would be, I'm sure if we asked there would be many offers of names of people I'm happy to let immigrants take the lead from the start instead of having to transition Hanrahan — I just want to clarify one thing about my immigration statement because that may have seemed a little odd to folks. I know that sometimes even those in the population, in the community would prefer something like new citizens, or something that's a little less charged and has a little less history with it. So that's kind of where I was going. I've been working with this population for a number of years, and I want everyone to feel confident and comfortable that I'm familiar, and that I understand what they're experiencing. Olmstead — Anything else on immigration? Stefanie do we have to deal with what we dealt with today with the mission statement and stuff, or is that all wrong with that? Bowers — I would suggest that it gets tinkered and presented at the next meeting for people, unless somebody can go through it. I mean do you feel comfortable with all the changes? Olmstead — I do. Bowers — Well if you want to make the motion then that's fine. It's up to you. I mean I don't know what, it's up to you. You could resubmit it for next month. I don't think it will hold up anything, but its whatever you want to do. Hanrahan — Without it being approved as a sub - committee? Finnerty — Well we've got a, yeah we're doing the thing, it's more the details, is this the bones we Olmstead — Okay we can defer to next month. Moving on juvenile justice. [Townsend no longer present] Finnerty — What I will say is I've been out of the group for about a month with this and so I'm getting back in. I know , but I am not the best person so go ahead. 20 Harper — Well Orville has been coordinating the meetings that we've identified three or four individuals that work in youth services in Iowa City. identify some founding members that program together, and right now they're trying to get the date together for the program. Bowers — May 2nd. Harper — Right now we're in the process of putting the juvenile justice individuals that we identify; discuss the structure of what it would look like. So we've been able to get the date together, exactly when that will be. So Orville is coordinating that. I'm not sure what he's come up with so far, but everybody Finnerty — So there's going to an event on May 2 ,d? . Bowers — That will be the first event. On held on May 2nd at 7:00 pm at the Iowa City Public Library in meeting room A, and as Henri said the sub - committee for the juvenile justice, you guys haven't set another meeting date is my understanding also. Harper— Right. Olmstead — Any other discussion? Okay University of Iowa Center of Human Rights Executive Board meeting. I attended that. There's gonna be an art exhibit at the Senior Center on April 27th on human rights. The human rights has 60 students involved right at this point, and they're working toward future online programs for that. and that's been announced. I don't recall who that is at this point. That's about it. internships of $7500 available will be, I'm on that sub- committee to make decisions of the applications will go out this month for that. Then there's the essay prize that a sub - committee was formed for, and the applications for that will be going out this month also. Bowers — Could you just tell everyone why you're giving the report for the new members? Olmstead — Because we have a member from the HRC to the executive board for the university commission. Okay Commission members, anybody have anything for the good of the order tonight that they want to announce? No. Staff Report? Finnerty — I do have a question. Is this the place, I was interested in the packet to see if the letter and so it's interesting even though, was there something done with that as a Commission? Bowers — The reason it's in the packet is because the Commission was cc'd. If you look at the top of the letter it says Human Rights Commission, so anytime somebody sent something that has the Human Rights Commission cc'd then it gets put in the packet. So that's why it's in there, but outside of that there's nothing that has been done. Finnerty — Is there any recommendation more or less to, so it wasn't on a past agenda. Bowers — It's correspondence. Ghoneim- So we were not asked to speak on her behalf or address her issues of concerns? 21 Bowers- No, you were just cc'd as were a few other city commissions. I know the city council and some others. Finnerty —And has there been any action? Did the council respond or or? Bowers —1 don't know is the best answer I can say. Finnerty — I think it is interesting raising questions about the _ of the police citizen review board in this instance, and I don't know much more about how it works. I think I want to propose that the Commission ask one of the members of the police citizen review board to come here and just get their response. council from someone give their response to the issues raised. Bowers — I think that's not on the agenda, so I think that's something that can go on the agenda for March. You're asking the Commission to make a decision based upon something that's not on the agenda. Can we just save it till March and then it can actually be an agenda item, and then the Commission can discuss it and put it on the agenda. Bowers - Well because it's not the agenda and you're asking them to make a decision, and it could lead to a discussion, and I think a decision and a discussion would be a violation of the open meetings because it wasn't made known to the public that this was going to be discussed. So that's why I'm asking for it to be deferred and put on the agenda for March and then we shouldn't have any problems. Olmstead —Okay staff. Bowers — I just have some suggestions for the future that I think may help the meetings run more efficiently. I thought in the future putting page numbers on the packets may help folks so when we're referring to something there is a page number to reference. Olmstead — I would also suggest that maybe when time limits, approximately how much time we spend on each item, so that if we go over we can ask for more time. I know some boards go with that type of method. Bowers — I think we can put that on the agenda too. So we'll put the police citizens, do you just want to do the police citizens review board? Do you want it vague like that or do you want it more specific Diane? Finnerty — I'd like to propose it as a discussion or just a proposal to get a and they would . Does that need to be decided right now about what's the best ? Bowers — At least as far as topic, so that, it doesn't have to be that specific. Diane — Just put police citizen review board commission, maybe just commission response or commission discussion or something. Hanrahan — Who all sees this agenda? Is this public, cause it would be nice if somebody saw the agenda then they could come and speak to that. Bowers — I don't know what you are asking. we can talk after the meeting. I'm not sure what you're asking so I don't want to say yes or no because I'm not sure I understood that. We'll put protocol for 22 meetings how the sub - committees report and if there's a more efficient way to have them report. Whether that's time limits or maybe submitting reports ahead of time, but we can put that on the agenda too. Olmstead — Anything else from staff? Bowers — No. Olmstead — Our next regular meeting is for March 20th at 6:00 here. Do I have a motion for adjournment? Hanrahan — Motion to adjourn. Harry — Second? Cowen- Second. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Hanrahan moved to adjourn. Commissioner Cowen seconded. The motion passed 6 -0 at 19:16. (Townsend not present) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Human Rights Commission meeting of February 21, 2012. Civdg htstfe bd raftmi nutes. doc m N _ O � N � O E W O W V W N �U Z o �Q N Z = W O I- Ea d c� D 07 _ O d ►-Z M co T N T O N T t0 T O T co T CD T N co ti T \ ti CD LO Lo Lo ti et 0 N M N x x LU O x x x x x ti T x x x x o x o x o a: m m m It et IRT w W) LO W x W T \ T T T \ T T T \ T T T \ T T ` T T \ T T T \ T T \ = T \ T ! U) c d E W O O 3 o �+ N c o', z ccc V E o m c_ 30 O O m <L = R N = N = L T > C E l0 tj U 2 °D 0 0 0 2 Y ( E � cc = C V w to Z O v Z x C II W a==NED a) W O 'N d Q Z d d Q II II � I, j II 11 W II Y x O O Z w 4b(3) PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVED FEBRUARY 27, 2012 — 5:15 PM — INFORMAL HELLING CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Stewart Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks, Paula Swygard, John Thomas, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Karen Howard, Sarah Greenwood Hektoen OTHERS PRESENT: None RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: None. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:15 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None Zoning Code Item 1. Discussion of amendments to Title 14, Zoning, Article 9A, General Definitions, changing the definition of "household" as it applies in the RM-44, PRM, RNS -20, RM -20, and CO -1 zones, so that the maximum number of unrelated persons allowed to reside within a dwelling unit is three, which would make the definition the same as currently applies in all other zones in the city. 2. Discussion of amendments to Title 14, Zoning, to establish three as the maximum number of bedrooms allowed within a multi - family dwelling unit in the multi - family zones and in commercial zones that allow multi - family dwelling units and establish new residential density formulas in multi - family zones and in commercial zones that allow multi - family dwelling units. 3. Discussion of amendments to Title 14, Zoning, Article 5A, Off - Street Parking and Loading Standards, to increase the number of required parking spaces for multi- family dwelling units that contain three or more bedrooms when located within a designated University Impact Area (UTA). Miklo said these proposed amendments are on the agenda because some months ago City Council asked staff to look at the High Density Multi - Family Residential (RM -44) Zone. He said Council wanted to know if that zone could be eliminated. Miklo said that following the public Planning and Zoning Commission February 27, 2012 - Informal Page 2 of 9 input regarding the 500 block of Washington Street, Council asked staff to look beyond the RM- 44 and look at other zones close to downtown and campus. He said staff has completed most of the research concerning housing density. He said as part of that research, staff looked at what other college towns - Ames, IA, Madison, WI, Lincoln, NE, Lawrence, KS, East Lansing, MI, and others — have done to address similar issues. He said the question is how to provide high - density housing, which is generally marketed to students, and preserve the quality of life in neighborhoods. Miklo stated that the issues of concern dealt with high density buildings near or mixed in with single family neighborhoods and commercial areas as well as the quality of life for the student neighborhoods themselves and what can be done to improve development character. Miklo said that when preparing the Central District Plan, staff conducted a meeting about housing where both students and University representatives stated that some of the higher density areas were undesirable neighborhoods in terms of large parties, excessive noise, vandalism and spillover parking — problems that stemmed from non - supervised dormitory style housing. Miklo showed the Commission a slide displaying that police and nuisance calls often correlate with where there is high density housing. He said although these are issues similar to those in other college towns, perhaps they are magnified in Iowa City due to the fact that the percent of undergraduate students housed by the University in dorms that have University managers and residence assistants is 25 percent compared to other Big 10 Colleges where that percentage is generally much higher. Miklo said the supply of dorm rooms compared to student enrollment has dropped dramatically over the years, and the last time the University built a dorm was in 1968. He said that historically, the University is housing a fairly low percentage of the undergraduate students. He said the goal is to continue to house a fair share of University students and to do it in a way that causes fewer conflicts between students and the neighborhood and to create a better living environment for the students. Miklo said that a tool used in other college towns is the University Impact Area where consideration is given in the zoning regulations regarding parking and other requirements in those areas close to campus that are affected by the University properties. He said that staff has identified an appropriate impact area in Iowa City. He said some of these areas are in single family zones that aren't going to be developed with multi - family buildings but staff included them because there may be other programs that could be developed to help bolster those neighborhoods to deal with quality of life. Miklo said that another technique used by college towns is control on apartment density. He said that both the RM-44 and Planned High Density Multi- family (PRM) Zones allow up to 5 unrelated persons per unit while the Medium Density Multi - Family Residential (RM -20), the Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS -20) and Commercial Office (CO -1) Zones allow up to 4 unrelated persons. He said that this zoning creates a real incentive to build dorm -like apartments because income from 4 or 5 bedrooms is greater than that from a 1 or 2 bedroom. Miklo stated that since the mid -90s, approximately 75 percent of apartments being built near campus have been 4 and 5- bedrooms. Miklo said that one of the proposals Council set a public hearing on is to eliminate 4 and 5- bedroom apartments anywhere in the city. He stated that the thinking is that students can live in 1, 2, or 3- bedroom apartments but that other segments of the population generally aren't attracted to the 4 and 5- bedroom apartments. He explained that staff thinks eliminating 4 and 5- bedroom apartments will make it easier for the community to control some of the issues that Planning and Zoning Commission February 27, 2012 - Informal Page 3 of 9 result when you have that high of a density on lots that were originally platted for single family homes or small apartment buildings. Miklo explained that another technique college towns . use is Graduated Density, which bases the achievable density on the number of bedrooms per unit in lieu of just the number of units. He said what staff proposes is an actual bonus for 1- bedroom units in certain zones, leaving 2- bedrooms as the standard, and requiring more lot area for 3- bedrooms. He explained that Graduated Density means that on a particular piece of property, no matter how many bedrooms that are built in the apartment, you end up with the same number of occupants on the site. He said staff thinks this will encourage a broader mix of apartment sizes. Miklo said that the other proposed amendment before the Commission is increasing the number of parking spaces for 3- bedroom units only in the University Impact Area. Miklo said that another proposal staff is reviewing is to create zoning provisions, such as a special exception for a private dormitory that would allow higher densities than are allowed today but require standard dorm conditions, like on -site management, no cars, and a provision for recreational facilities. Howard reminded the Commission that these proposals address only multi - family uses in multi- family and commercial zones. She said that the first amendment is basically amending the definition of household in the Ordinance. She said that in the Ordinance residential uses fall into the categories of household living uses and group living uses. Howard said the group living uses are not part of this proposal. She said the way the City regulates how many unrelated people can live in one household living use is by a definition that says up to 1 household is allowed to live within 1 household living unit. Howard said that the Ordinance is set up to abide by language in the Federal Fair Housing Laws. She said the only change to the Code in this proposal is the number of unrelated persons that can live in a household unit in the RM-44, PRM, RM -20, RNS -20 and CO -1 Zones. She said all the other zones in the city already have this limit applied. She said that all college towns have some provision in their Ordinances to deal with unrelated persons per unit. Freerks asked if these changes applied only to new construction. Howard stated that there's a clause that grandfathers in all the units that currently have rental permits. She said Council set February 21 as the date for the public hearing, so any developer who had a building permit and who has made substantial progress by then would be grandfathered in. Howard explained that a reduction in the occupancy limits in zones has been done twice in the last 8 years. She said there is only 1 project on S. Johnson Street that has a building permit issued and that has not seen substantial progress on construction. She said there may be some impetus that it be allowed to go forward Eastham asked if the effect on individual applications request for a building permit is part of the Planning and Zoning Commission's scope of review. Howard said only because it might come up at a hearing. Eastham asked if there was any real action he as a Commissioner could take, one way or the other. Planning and Zoning Commission February 27, 2012 - Informal Page 4 of 9 Howard explained that if they want to allow that 1 project that has the building permit that's been issued to go forward they would need to strike "if substantial part of the permitted development activity has begun on or prior to February 215." from the Ordinance. Howard explained that a building permit means that an applicant has had construction drawings done and they have gone through the process of site plan review and been approved. She said that this particular building is not in an area that is within a mixed neighborhood. Greenwood - Hektoen suggested that the Commission consider striking the phrase "substantial progress." Howard explained that the reason this party will not be able to meet the substantial progress standard is because they have tenants in the existing building and want to wait until those leases have expired. Dyer asked if this building was in the area that students feel unsafe in. Howard affirmed this but said that staff felt the proposed building at 404 S Johnson was an improvement to the area. She said they would be tearing down a couple older buildings and replacing with a new building. Eastham asked about the report in the Press - Citizen that two other building would be affected by the moratorium. Howard explained that they haven't submitted construction plans for their buildings. She said what they submitted were preliminary concept plans, so they do not have the building drawings they would need to get a building permit. Howard explained that the second amendment concerned parking. She said that in both the CB- 5 and CB -10 Zones the requirement would change from 2 required to 3 required parking spaces for a 3- bedroom unit. Howard said this would not affect buildings built on or before December 31, 2008. Thomas asked if in the proposed amendment it was true that in the CB -5 Zone, units with more than 3 bedrooms would still have 3 parking spaces per dwelling unit. Howard explained that this is the case because there are a lot of grandfathered units that have more than 3 bedrooms due to the fact that the CB -5 Zone used to allow up to 5 unrelated persons. She reiterated that this amendment pertains only to parking, not to occupancy. Howard said that in the proposed amendment multi - family dwellings in the University Impact Area only would require the standard of 1 parking space per bedroom. Dyer asked if the Elder Apartments requirements refer to buildings or apartments within buildings. Howard explained that Elder Apartments have a specific definition in the Zoning Code that reserves them specifically for elder and disabled persons. Miklo said there might be a situation where there are apartments within a building that are Planning and Zoning Commission February 27, 2012 - Informal Page 5 of 9 reserved for elders while the remainder of the building is occupied by younger residents, but so far, there's never been mix developed in the same building. Howard explained staff is always calculating the parking for mixed use buildings depending on what use is in the building. Howard then talked about the amendment to reformulate the density standards. She said that currently it is based on the number of units per acre of land. She said those standard were set up in the 1970s when most of the demand was for 1 and 2- bedroom apartments. Howard said that over the years the actual population density in many zones has nearly doubled. She explained that the 2- bedroom unit in all zones remains the same. She said that for the RM -44 and PRM Zones the proposed amendment provides for a density bonus for 1- bedroom apartments. Howard explained that this would mean you could build just as many bedrooms if you built 1- bedrooms as you could if you built 2- bedroom apartments. Howard said this allows the developer to choose what type of market they are targeting. She said that currently, 1- bedroom apartments come at a premium price because there are so few of them, so staff is hoping that the market will respond to that demand with the equalization of this density standard. She said that the price of a 1- bedroom near downtown can potentially be rented for close to $1,000 while a 3- bedroom might be rented for $500 or $600 on a per apartment basis. Howard explained that several developers have expressed interest in these density changes. Eastham asked what the rationale was for choosing 500 feet rather than 1000 feet as the maximum density. Howard explained that it was based on giving incentives for building 1- bedrooms apartments and so there is no incentive in building more bedrooms per unit. Thomas stated 1- bedrooms will often be occupied by 2 people. Eastham stated that there are many couples who live together who aren't related. Howard said that would still be fine, as up to 3 unrelated persons are allowed per dwelling unit. She said that the occupancy has nothing to do with the density. Dyer asked if with the incentive of building 1- bedroom apartments the rents are likely to go down in price. Howard said that potentially they could as the market responds to this change. Thomas asked how staff arrived at 70 square feet as a minimum bedroom size. Howard explained that is the standard in the City Building Code. She said this is a typical standard used in other college towns to discourage builders from including rooms that will be used as bedrooms but are labeled as something else. Howard explained that currently there is no maximum number of bedrooms per multi - family dwelling unit. She said it was a concern of the Housing Department that if the occupancy standards are set up to have a maximum of 3 unrelated persons but yet have no limit on how many bedrooms are allowed in a unit, it would make it difficult to enforce the occupancy standards. She reiterated that this applies only in multi - family zones for multi - family uses. Planning and Zoning Commission February 27, 2012 - Informal Page 6 of 9 Thomas asked if anyone other than students live in the RM-44 or the PRM Zones. Miklo said there might be occasions where that is true, particularly in the buildings that were put up in the 1970s that have 1 and 2- bedroom apartments. Eastham asked if there was any data on the actual age of people living as a group in 4 and 5- bedroom units and the RM-44 and PRM Zones. Miklo said there is not. Howard said that in any town in Iowa that is not a college town, there wouldn't be the interest there is in building 4 and 5- bedroom apartments, which validates the assumption that the majority of occupants in the kind of units Eastham referred to are students. Eastham clarified that he wants to know what the demographics and characteristics of people who actually rent these units. Thomas said that if you compare the cost of an apartment in the impact zone versus Coralville or North Liberty you will pay $300 or $400 more for that 3- bedroom in the impact zone. Howard said it would be specious to think that there any singles, couples or families renting a 5- bedroom apartment in the downtown area of Iowa City for $2,500 per month. Dyer asked that if the number of people living in a unit is limited, will this be an impetus to buy up more houses for rental in neighborhoods farther out like Goosetown. Howard explained that most of the areas Dyer refers to are zoned single family so new multi- family would not be allowed. Eastham said it seemed that the market for student occupied housing might well expand beyond its present confines and start to include single family houses with multiple bedrooms that could be rented to unrelated students. Howard countered with the possibility that the market will be such that the prices will adjust so that if more 1- bedrooms are created that creates more opportunity for more household types to live in these neighborhoods which will potentially create more stabilizing effects as the rental prices come down. Dyer asked if a different kind of pressure might occur farther out if building multi - family units is limited. Howard said that the same argument was made when the City decreased the limit in the CB Zones yet most of the apartment buildings built in the last several years have been in the CB -5 Zone. She said that proximity to the University is the biggest factor. Miklo said that a priority in the Strategic Plan is neighborhood stabilization so Council wants to stabilize older neighborhoods and in addition to dealing with zoning, they are looking at other methods, like the UniverCity partnership, investing in parks and streets, amenities, and better code enforcement. Thomas asked how many multi- family units have been developed in the impact zone since 2008 Planning and Zoning Commission February 27, 2012 - Informal Page 7 of 9 when the Central District Plan was adopted. Miklo said that be hard to pinpoint to a date, but they could work from rental permits over time. Howard added that there haven't been any code changes since the Central District Plan was adopted. She said that while the Plan sets the policies, the implementation of that policy has to come through codification. Thomas asked how what's being proposed directly responds to the imbalance between rentals and owner occupied units, because what is being proposed refers to multi - family, which is typically rental. Eastham said he has the same question. Howard explained that what they are targeting is not what can be rented or owned but rather the type of units that are being built and whether or not they are conducive to a broader range of populations. Thomas said he thought the multi - family units that have been built in the central neighborhoods tend to be developed with a rental population in mind. Howard explained that the issue is not rental versus owner - occupied, but rather it about making sure there are opportunities for a variety of populations to live in the central part of the city. Eastham said that for him the imbalance has to do with whether or not there are adequate opportunities for people who aren't unrelated students to live in the central business area. He asked staff to summarize these changes that staff sees as incentives for developers to build more 1- bedroom and 2- bedroom dwelling units as opposed to 4 or 5. Howard explained that currently the density formulas are set up with no way of distinguishing between building a 5- bedroom apartment and a 1- bedroom apartment. She said you have to have the same amount of lot area. She said this creates a tremendous incentive for developers to build units that have as many bedrooms as they can fit on the lot. She noted that there is a market for that kind of building because in the graphs Miklo earlier showed the Commission there are many undergraduate students searching for housing. She said with a density formula like the current one, if the 4 and 5- bedroom units get overbuilt and the University population declines, who will then rent those kinds of apartments that have been built exclusively to appeal to students. She explained that staff decided that it's better to let the market decide what gets built rather than have the ordinances have such great incentives to build large units. Eastham asked why they aren't considering a Comprehensive Plan amendment in considering these changes. Howard said there are 3 pages of Comprehensive Plan support for these changes. Eastham asked how nonconforming uses would play out in the future with these changes. Howard said that in regard to grandfathered units, they still have the same multi - family uses, and the distinction between a conforming and a non - conforming use is that the actual use itself is different. Planning and Zoning Commission February 27, 2012 - Informal Page 8 of 9 Other There was none. ADJOURNMENT: Weitzel moved to adjourn. Swygard seconded. The meeting was adjourned on a 6-0 vote. Z O N _N O v O Z Z N 06 0 Z_ Z Z Q J IL O V w a W N v� Q N D Z W Q .r c N CL u X w Y E 7 O 7 vd O z C (D 00) E 0 �QZ Q n n n w 0 0 z �IIMMMMM 1 ■ 1 1 1 1 NXXX�XXX ■11 M ZXXXXXXX N v �m 0o 00 I--x W W J J .r c N CL u X w Y E 7 O 7 vd O z C (D 00) E 0 �QZ Q n n n w 0 0 z NXXX�XXX M ZXXXXXXX N 0o 00 I--x W W J J �QZ J =zi- =a2 0<w IL °� VQYUj�NJ 2�WaaN aWNW L LOO ~ Z0Wti.YH� .r c N CL u X w Y E 7 O 7 vd O z C (D 00) E 0 �QZ Q n n n w 0 0 z 4b(4) PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVED MARCH 1, 2012 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Stewart Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks, Elizabeth Koppes, Paula Swygard, John Thomas, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Karen Howard, Sarah Greenwood Hektoen OTHERS PRESENT: Pam Michaud, Claire Sponsler, Cecile Kuenzli, Karen Hopp, Jean Walker, Nancy Carlson, Mike Wright, Marianne Mason, Amy Butler, Mary Knudson, Mike McLaughlin, Casey Cook, Mike Pugh, Glenn Siders RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: None. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. ZONING CODE ITEMS 1. Discussion of an amendment to Title 14, Zoning, Article 9A, General Definitions, changing the definition of "household" as it applies in the RM-44, PRM, RNS -20, RM -20, and CO -1 zones, so that the maximum number of unrelated persons allowed to reside within a dwelling unit is three, which would make the definition the same as currently applies in all other zones in the city. 2. Discussion of amendments to Title 14, Zoning, to establish three as the maximum number of bedrooms allowed within a multi - family dwelling unit in the multi - family zones and in commercial zones that allow multi - family dwelling units and establish new residential density formulas in multi - family zones and in commercial zones that allow multi - family dwelling units. 3. Discussion of amendments to Title 14, Zoning, Article 5A, Off - Street Parking and Loading Standards, to increase the number of required parking spaces for multi - family dwelling units that contain three or more bedrooms when located within a designated University Impact Area (UTA). Planning and Zoning Commission March 1, 2012 - Formal Page 2 of 10 Miklo explained that some months ago City Council asked staff to examine the High Density Multi - Family Residential (RM -44) Zone to see if it could be eliminated. He said that subsequently Council asked staff to look at other zoning issues near the downtown and university campus. He said this is an opportunity to implement some of the neighborhood stabilization policies of the Comprehensive Plan, particularly the Southwest District and the Central Planning District, which have policies regarding density and multi - family or higher density development near the university and downtown. Miklo said research is complete concerning the issues of density as they apply to the RM-44 Zone and the other higher density zones, Medium Density Multi - Family Residential (RM -20), the Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS -20) and Commercial Office (CO -1). He said staff has looked at what other college towns have done to address the issues that were of concern to Council. He noted that the towns staff researched were Ames, IA, Madison, WI, Lincoln, NE, Lawrence, KS, East Lansing, MI, and others that had used zoning techniques to address how to provide high density housing generally marketed to the student population while preserving the quality of life in neighborhoods through zoning and other City policies. He said that staff also looked at how to provide quality environments for students, a concern that was raised at meetings for the Central District Plan, where many students and university officials identified a concern that some of the higher density neighborhoods were not desirable for the students in terms of large parties, excessive noise, vandalism and spillover parking — problems that stemmed from non - supervised dormitory style housing. Miklo showed a slide indicating that where police and nuisance calls are concentrated in higher density housing areas. Miklo said that only a small number, approximately 25 percent, of undergraduate students at the University of Iowa are housed in dormitories compared to much higher number in other Big 10 universities or the other State Universities in Iowa. He said that when the university built its last dorm in the late 1960s almost 40 percent of undergraduates were housed on campus. He said undergraduate enrollment has increased by over 60 percent while the university supply of dorm rooms had increased by less than 6 percent. Miklo said that Iowa City has 46 percent of its housing stock in multiple units while other Iowa cities with populations over 50,000, with the exception of Ames, have approximately 30 percent or less in multiple units. He said 53 percent of units are rental in Iowa City while in other comparable Iowa cities, the percentage is 30. He said this shows that Iowa City provides its fair share of housing for university students. Miklo said that one technique used by college towns is to create a university impact area where special zoning regulations are applied to address concerns created by higher density housing. He said staff proposed a "University Impact Area" based on the area in the Southwest District Plan and the Central Planning District that are heavily impacted by their close proximity to the university, as well as an area in Manville Heights that is zoned RNS -20 and contains several fraternity houses and apartment buildings. Miklo said the proposal would apply specifically to parking in the impact area, but staff believes there may be future proposals for other City policies that might deal with some of the issues that arise from being close to the university. Howard said the first proposal deals with changing the definition of household as it applies in certain zones, to reduce the maximum number of unrelated persons allowed to 3. She said that the RM -44, the PRM, the RM -20, the RNS -20 and the CO -1 Zones are the last zones that allow more than 3 unrelated persons in a household. She said that all other zones in the city currently have a maximum of 3 unrelated persons per household. The City modified this definition in 2005 and in 2008 to address the same types of issues in several other zones. Planning and Zoning Commission March 1, 2012 - Formal Page 3 of 10 Howard said the definition of household includes definitions of families and other populations that constitute a household but within that definition there is a limit on the number of unrelated persons who may reside within 1 dwelling unit. She said in the RNS -20, RM -20 and CO -1 the number of unrelated persons allowed per dwelling unit is 4. She said in the RM-44 and PRM Zones, which are the highest density multi - family zones, the number allowed is 5, which creates an incentive to build the dorm -like apartments containing 4 and 5- bedroom apartments. She noted that 4 and 5- bedroom units are generally neither attractive to nor affordable for any tenants other than university students, as the current rate for a 4 or 5- bedroom apartment near campus is about $2,500. Howard said limiting the number of unrelated persons to 3 per unit will eliminate the construction of more 4 and 5- bedroom apartments which will alleviate the negative effects such high densities have on the neighborhood as well as assure that a form of housing with a limited market is not overbuilt. Howard explained that the university has seen an increase in enrollment which may not continue at the same rate, meaning that the market may over - respond due to the incentives in the Code. She noted that around 75 percent of new apartments built since 1995 have been these large units. She noted that even if the definition of household is changed all of the existing 4- and 5- bedroom units will all be grandfathered and can continue to be rented to the number of occupants currently listed on the rental permit. She reiterated that all the zones in the city would have the same definition of a household if the proposal is adopted. Howard said the proposal regarding density is to establish 3 as the maximum number of bedrooms allowed within a multi - family dwelling in the multi - family zones and in commercial zones that allow multi - family dwelling units. She said the current density formulas that require the same amount of lot area per unit regardless of whether the unit is a 1 or 5- bedroom unit have created an incentive to build apartments with as many bedrooms as possible, given the market for student housing in the area. Howard noted that the demand for smaller units, particularly 1- bedroom apartments is not being met because of the skewed incentives created by the current density formulas in the Code. She said the intent of the graduated formulas is to correct these skewed standards so the market can more freely respond to the demand for different types and sizes of apartments. She said these new standards do not apply to single - family dwellings or duplexes or in single - family zones or in planned development zoned single - family. Howard remarked that the maximum number of bedrooms allowed in all the multi - family zones would be 3, matching the proposed maximum number of unrelated persons allowed per unit, if the definition of household is also changed as proposed. She said that in the Low Density Multi - Family (RM -12) Zone they are not proposing any changes in the density formulas. She said staff would not recommend a density bonus in the RM -20 and RNS -20 Zones for efficiencies and 1- bedrooms because these are older neighborhoods with historic character and structures, many of which may already contain 1- bedroom units. If a density bonus was included for 1- bedroom apartments, it might create an incentive to tear down older housing stock to take advantage of the increased density allowed, which may result in a considerable number of tear - downs. She said in the RM-44 and PRM Zones they are proposing to give a density bonus which would allow twice as many 1- bedrooms units as 2- bedrooms and fewer 3- bedroom units. She said that these new graduated density formulas would generally equalize the amount of lot area necessary for each bedroom on the property regardless of what size of unit was proposed. In other words, the density formula would be based on a per- bedroom basis rather than on a per unit basis. Howard noted that in the CO -1 and CC2 Zones, no change to the density formulas is proposed. These are commercial zoning designations used in many areas in the community, the primary purpose of which is to promote retail commercial and office development in areas outside the downtown areas. The current standard allows apartments above commercial uses at the same Planning and Zoning Commission March 1, 2012 - Formal Page 4 of 10 density as the RM -12 Zone. She said that in the CN -1 and MU Zones, which are intended for lower intensity commercial uses in close proximity to lower density residential areas, the current standard is 1 unit per 1800 square feet. She said staff is proposing that given that these areas are intended to be developed in a manner that is compatible with lower scale residential areas that the same density standard applies to these zones as do in the other lower scale commercial zones at 1 per 2725 square feet. Howard said that in the CB -2 Zone the standard is currently similar to the PRM Zone, and staff proposes to graduate the density formula the same as what is proposed in the PRM Zone. Howard noted that in the CB -5 and CB -10 Zones there are no maximum density standards, rather density is controlled by floor area ratio or building height. She said that in order to ensure that a variety of dwelling units sizes are built in the central business district to support a diverse housing population to support healthy business growth, that 3- bedroom units be limited to 30% of the total number of units on any given lot. Howard explained that the parking proposal would require 1 parking space per bedroom for any new multi - family use built within the University Impact Area but does not apply to single family or two- family dwellings (duplexes) nor does it apply to multi - family buildings outside the University Impact Area. Eastham asked if the crime distribution map shown earlier represented where citations were made or where people subject to those citations lived. Miklo said he believed it represented the location of the call. Eastham asked if staff had looked at any enrollment projections for the next several years that have been done by the university or by Kirkwood. Miklo said the university expects enrollment to remain similar in the next several years to what it has been but in the longer term level off and possibly decrease. Freerks opened the public hearing. Glenn Siders asked if the Commission was going to be taking any action tonight. Freerks said the intention was not to take any action tonight. Pam Michaud, 109 S. Johnson Street, says she supports the amendments because there are thousands of 3 -5 bedrooms close to downtown and that affect the safety and success of students. She also cited the demographic trend of more people staying single longer, an increase in the number of retirees and a large population of potential renters working for the city's largest employers who want quiet, smaller units close to downtown. She said she hopes that developers will address the increased market for 1 and 2- bedroom apartments. Michaud also said that dense housing destabilizes neighborhoods with noise, trash, and lack of light caused by multi -story buildings affecting neighboring gardens and yards. Claire Sponsler, 413 N. Gilbert Street, said she is speaking in favor of the 3 amendments because they represent a win -win situation in that they stabilize neighborhoods, they increase economic advantages for developers and property owners as they encourage a diverse variety of housing options that currently aren't being served by the market, and they help correct imbalances that couldn't be predicted decades ago when the original zoning occurred. She also said that the amendments respond to her first -hand knowledge of a demand that's not being met for adults, professionals and retirees who would like to live and rent in Iowa City and who Planning and Zoning Commission March 1, 2012 - Formal Page 5 of 10 can't find suitable housing because most of the options are geared toward undergraduate students. She also said these amendments represent a forward- looking plan for the future of Iowa City and the changes they'll bring about will be beneficial for a variety of people who live, work and invest in Iowa City. Freerks said that she will assume the public comments will apply to all amendments unless noted by the speaker. Cecil Kuenzli, 705 S. Summit Street, said she supports the amendments because she feels that they affect even the older neighborhoods. She said she was stunned by some of the information presented earlier, particularly the percentage of rental units in Iowa City relative to the total percentage of housing units and the percentage of university students who are housed off campus relative to other college communities. She said this suggests to her that things are out of control and that citizens are right and justified in being upset about the threat to their neighborhoods and in the changing appearance of the city. She said that it's time to exert influence to save what is left of our neighborhoods and that it's time to be bolder in our regulations. Kuenzli said that Iowa City ranks among the top 10 cities of its size due to the quality of its healthcare, culture, and the number of good neighborhoods. She said she fears that if nothing is done to change the current situation, we risk losing that kind of ranking. She urged the Commission to accept the staff's recommendations. Karen Hopp, 26 N. Governor, read from a publication of George Fox University, Newberg, Oregon, relating the many benefits of living on campus, including cost and safety. She stated that students who do not live on campus do not do as well in school. Jean Walker, 335 Lucon Drive, said that if you have the temptation to build large buildings with 5- bedroom units it's a temptation to tear down small, historic houses. She told the Commission that if these historic buildings are torn down they will not reappear. Walker said they need to preserve the city's historic stock. She also referred to an article in The Des Moines Register that said the more concentrated the buildings and population, the greater the concern is that the aquifer might run out in 20 years. Nancy Carlson, 1002 E. Jefferson, said that the premiere universities provide 85 -97 percent of their students with on- campus housing compared with the depressingly low percentage that the University of Iowa provides. She noted that in recent projects that have come before the Commission - 821 Jefferson, 911 Governor and the Linn - Bloomington -the number of bedrooms has been reduced but the overall density remains the same. She noted that the South Johnson and Van Buren area, because of its RM-44 zoning, is no longer a neighborhood but rather a student ghetto, with former permanent residents gone along with their houses, and an atmosphere that promotes neither safety nor success for the students. She supports the proposal that each bedroom must have a parking spot, but asked if that means that parking lots will supplant backyard green space and wants to know if there are landscaping techniques that can make these areas more palatable. She said changing the maximum number of unrelated persons to 3 is a positive step. She said reducing the number of bedrooms without changing the overall density of these areas is a good concept, but she is concerned with what the reality will look like. Mike Wright, 225 N. Lucas, asked the Commission to support all three of the proposals. He said the proposals are neither anti - rental or anti -poor or anti - student but rather anti high - density primarily in neighborhoods that were never designed to support such extreme density. He said that the current high - density zones are neighborhood wreckers, working against the City Planning and Zoning Commission March 1, 2012 - Formal Page 6 of 10 Council's goal of neighborhood stabilization, with the proof being in the South Johnson and South Van Buren areas. He said he lives about a block from a new building with 5- bedroom units, and this unsupervised dorm is a nightmare for the neighborhood. He said that in January he personally swept 8 pounds of glass out of Lucas Street in front of these units. Wright said there is also a demonstrated shortage of smaller units, especially in the core neighborhoods. He said that smaller units are more attractive and possibly more affordable for students and non- students alike. Wright said he doesn't like the idea of dedicating more space for cars, but knows that there is already a problem in the core neighborhoods with overflow parking during the day. He urges the Commission to give serious consideration to the proposals, which he thinks are friendly to the community and should benefit everyone. Lorianna Mason, 640 S. Lucas, said she is grateful for the UniverCity program that has enabled six property owners in a row on her street. She said she is completely in support of the three amendments. She said she would like to see a more diverse population on her street as only one demographic tends to destroy a community feeling. She said she doesn't necessarily favor destroying backyards to solve the parking problem, but that it is a better option than what occurs now, which is parking on the grass right -of -way next to the street. Amy Butler, 326 Melrose Court, said she's the Chair of a search committee at the university and she said that type of housing is currently not being built and that makes it difficult to recruit quality candidates. She said the candidates they are interested in want a place where they can walk to work and downtown. She said it would be great to have more housing options for young professionals, the kind of people the University wants to attract. Mary Knutsen, 725 W. Benton Street, said she supports the ordinances and agrees with everything that has been said so far supporting the proposals. She said she wants to reduce the density in older neighborhoods close to downtown, including the one she lives in, that are trying to become more stable. Mike McLaughlin, Coralville, said it's clear that there needs to be some planning regarding the concerns that have been brought up tonight. He said he thought there was merit in the idea of eliminating some on- street parking so that people who are using the streets as parking lots wouldn't be able to do so anymore. He said this might encourage people to use the parking ramps, leave their cars at home, which would help support public transit, and make the area more bicycle - friendly. He said the parking proposal would help with future development but doesn't do anything to help the current situation. McLaughlin said decreasing on- street parking would make it so there wouldn't be such a discouragement to developing smaller units where the ratio of bedrooms to parking spaces must be one -to -one. Casey Cook, 1 Oak Park Court, said he agrees that the University isn't carrying its fair share of student housing. He said he agrees that there's a significant demand for one - bedroom units. He said that a study done by his office, Cook Appraisals, found that housing within a mile of the Pentacrest was at 1.6 percent vacancy, with no distinction on the number of bedrooms. He said if you have pressure on the inner zones with rents continually increasing substantially, then people move further and further out, but the students stay because they can pay more. He said if you take the number of units in the city and multiple it by the difference between what the current vacancy factors are and what a balanced vacancy factor is that's going to tell you just how big the imbalance is. Cook said we are at a crisis point with this issue and he doesn't think that issue has been a critical part of the planning process so far. He said it needs to be. He said he thinks many of the decisions that are made happen in an economic vacuum and the economic consequences aren't fully explored or understood. Cook said he wouldn't be surprised Planning and Zoning Commission March 1, 2012 - Formal Page 7 of 10 if some of the property values in areas affected by the proposals aren't diminished by 20 to 30 percent. He said he thinks it would be valuable to do specific case studies to help understand what the immediate impact of these proposals will be on property owners and see what how they impact their balance sheet and the ability to finance their operations. He suggested that these case studies be done on the New Pioneer Co -op site, the United Action for Youth site and the Community Mental Health site. Cook said he did a case study on the three buildings that were demolished on Washington Street recently, 2 of which were residences and 1 of which was commercial. He said they were paying total taxes of about $21,000. He said that the property that will replace those buildings will be paying property taxes around $150,000, which will be annual revenue for the City, the school board and the county. Cook said he has no problem going with the 3 bedroom units and sees what the neighbors' concerns are, but he doesn't like the change in the land to unit ratios, which he thinks are very destructive of property values. He said he has a problem with the change in the parking requirements also, not just because it takes away landscaping, but students shouldn't be encouraged to have as many cars as they do. Cook said he is concerned with the language in proposal 2, which states ... "and establish new residential density formulas in multi - family zones and in commercial zones that allow multi - family dwelling units." He said he thinks that is a blank check to make much more radical changes than what is being contemplated at this meeting. Mike Pugh, 4743 Dryden Court, said over the past several months there has been concern voiced about a desire to stabilize and preserve the character of the existing residential neighborhoods. He said these worthwhile goals need to be supported by the community as a whole. He told the Commission that they need to take a wide -angle view of the community. He said there is a natural tension that exists between stabilizing some of the older neighborhoods and a sound planning policy of encouraging density of developments near downtown and the university. Pugh said sustainable development encourages density and diversity. He said that growth downtown needs to be promoted. He said that for denser developments you need to choose a site that has access to transportation, employment, education, services existing infrastructure. He said that compact projects prevent sprawl by reducing the amount of land used. Pugh said he sees no compelling reason to limit the percentage increase on the CB -5 and CB -10 Zones to 3 bedroom apartments. He said all 3 proposals represent a downzoning and will put pressure on the outlier neighborhoods because with the proposed square foot requirements fewer bedrooms can be built. He said these proposals also increase the cost of housing in Iowa City. He said that parking spaces decrease the building footprints, which tend to drive up costs. He said the per square foot cost of constructing a 1- bedroom apartment is higher than a 3- bedroom apartment. He said Iowa City is unique among college towns mentioned by Miklo and Howard because the university campus is intermingled with the central business district. He said if the goal of the University Impact Area is to stabilize the older neighborhoods, there is an inherent competing interest with wanting to promote denser development downtown. He asked the Commission to look closely at the size of the University Impact Area and ask what is really trying to be achieved. Pugh said there's a major difference between the residential zones and the CB -2, CB -5 and CB -10 Zones. He encourages the Commission not to take a blanket approach but to understand what the interests are of the community and refer to the Comprehensive Plan as they are contemplating the proposals. Mark McCallum, 932 E. College, asked the Commission to take a second look at what was done several years ago in down - zoning downtown to 3 bedrooms and addressing some of the concerns that other speakers tonight have had in the sense that these downtown areas are where our growth should be, and it would relieve pressures on the residential neighborhoods farther out. Planning and Zoning Commission March 1, 2012 - Formal Page 8 of 10 Glenn Siders, 1180 S. Jones Boulevard, North Liberty, said he represents the Iowa City Homebuilders Association. He said he wants to reinforce what Cook and Pugh had said. He said that most of the discussion has been focused on the downtown area and big box apartments but that many of the Association's builders build 4 and 6 unit townhouse complexes that are considered multi - family dwellings. He said these proposals impact them. He said a concern is that with 3- bedroom units being very popular to build as townhouse units, the parking requirement of providing 3 stalls may be difficult. Howard explained that if they are located in a single family zone or a planned development that is zoned single family, the standards would not apply. She said the increased parking standards would not apply in the areas outside the University Impact Area. Siders asked if it would comply if you want to do townhouse construction in a multi - family zone. Miklo indicated that the townhouse developments that Siders referred to are outside of the University Impact Area, so the proposed parking requirement does not apply to them. Siders asked the Commission to consider changing the proposed effective date of February 21, 2012, in the Definition of Household amendment to the date the ordinance is enacted. He said he's uncomfortable having an effective date weeks before the ordinance takes effect. Carlson handed a 2011 Apartment Survey done by Cook Appraisals to staff so the Commission can look at the figures. Walker stated that she takes exception to someone building these large structures who aren't planning to live there themselves, leaving the residents of the neighborhood to live with the consequences. Freerks closed the public hearing. Freerks asked for a motion. Eastham moved to defer discussion of the three amendments to the March 16, 2012, meeting of the Commission. Dyer seconded. Freerks stated that the Commission has a lot of information to look over and they don't want to make a decision tonight. She thanked everyone for coming to this meeting. Eastham asked what measures were actually taken by the comparable communities that staff looked especially in regard to number of bedrooms. Howard said staff would provide that information to the Commission. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7 -0. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: February 13 and February 16, 2012: Koppes moved to approve the minutes with corrections Planning and Zoning Commission March 1, 2012 - Formal Page 9 of 10 Weitzel seconded. The motion carried 7 -0. OTHER: Miklo said that a Planning and Zoning for Local Officials workshop will be held in Cedar Rapids on March 29th. He said that the City will pay for Commission members' registration and travel expenses and encouraged the newest members to attend. ADJOURNMENT: Koppes moved to adjourn. Weitzel seconded. The meeting was adjourned on a 7-0 vote. z O N 20 O u VLLJ ZwN Z z N Np ad z OW z� za z a J CL E 7 O 7 00 N O 3 z U p� C N y O ) O Qz Q n n n u w xOoz i� W Y i ti N C4 N M z:xxxxxxx N mw0tOMNOLnM Wa.in000Ln0Ln 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W w J =Q2 J E 7 O 7 00 N O 3 z U p� C N y O ) O Qz Q n n n u w xOoz i� W Y ti N C4 N M z:xxxxxxx N mw0tOMNOLnM Wa.in000Ln0Ln 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W w J =Q2 J J =z 0Vama0- V= W Q a W Ludl M W -W W W aO2FN- a O- Z O W LL I-- � E 7 O 7 00 N O 3 z U p� C N y O ) O Qz Q n n n u w xOoz i� W Y FINAL /APPROVED POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD 4b(5) — M j INUTES – February 22, 2012 CALL TO ORDER: Chair Donald King called the meeting to order at 5:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Melissa Jensen, Peter Jochimsen, Royceann Porter, Joseph Treloar MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Staff Kellie Tuttle and Catherine Pugh STAFF ABSENT: None OTHERS PRESENT: Captains Rick Wyss and Jim Steffen, Officer David Schwindt of the ICPD; Caroline Dieterle, Charles Eastham, Marianne Dennis, Henry Harper, Annie Tucker, Tara Bannow, Dean Abel, and Marian Coleman Public. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL Accept PCRB Report on Complaint #11 -02 CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by Jochimsen and seconded by Jensen to adopt the consent calendar as presented or amended. • Minutes of the meeting on 01/10/12 ICPD Use of Force Report – September 2011 • ICPD Use of Force Report – October 2011 • ICPD Department Memo #12 -04 (September- October 2011 Use of Force Review) Motion carried, 5/0. OLD BUSINESS Community Forum – Tuttle informed the Board that the City Council was meeting on the same night as the forum and asked if they wished to change the date. The Board directed staff to check the availability at the Library for Wednesday, May 2nd Tuttle also looked into childcare and had found that other Boards and Commissions had not offered childcare in the past. Also that the City Attorney's office had said there was nothing prohibiting the Board from offering childcare but until they had some type of proposal from the Board they couldn't confirm if it was possible. Tuttle asked the Board to think about whether this was a role the Board thought they wanted to serve and be responsible for. Also if an outside organization wanted to offer childcare on their own, that was also acceptable. Annie Tucker commented that a committee working with the Human Rights Commission had shown a video at the library and the Library had provided space and the committee had gotten the consent from the children's room staff to use the room for Child Supervision. Graduate and University students volunteered to staff the supervision, and no background checks were done. King asked for a motion to provide childcare service for the Community Forum, which failed due to no motion. PCRB February 22, 2012 Page 2 Tuttle had a draft agenda and notice and asked the Board if they were interested in collecting questions or comments before the forum as they had done the previous year. The Board agreed to ask for those again. Tuttle stated that the forum would be publicized the same as it had been in the past. NEW BUSINESS Correspondence distributed at 1/10/12 meeting from Royceann Porter— King suggested forming a sub - committee to respond to the letters from Porter and Tucker, and submit a draft to the Board at the next meeting. Pugh stated the following: 1. There really isn't a procedure for a review of a complaint once the public report to the Council has been issued. 2. When the complaint first came to the Board, one of the Board members commented that this is not going to be easy because no matter how the complaint was looked at, if the Board attempted to give more deference to Royceann they would be accused of mishandling the complaint and since it was a Board member there was a natural feeling that the Board members wanted to give as much deference to Royceann as possible, but they're charged with a duty and that is to review the Chief's finding's. 3. The Board's review is limited and you can recommend the Chief's reversal only if his finding is not supported by substantial evidence, if it is arbitrary, unreasonable or capricious, or contrary to public policy or laws. Pugh said she witnessed the internal questioning and thinks everyone has a different perception of how that went. She stated that Royceann is a valuable member of the Board and probably the best thing for the Board to do is to put the situation behind them, it was unfortunate and difficult, and as Counsel she felt the Board discharged their duties in the best way possible under the ordinance and under the law. Pugh stated the Board needed to make a decision. Whether to have a sub- committee prepare a response for the Board to review or if her comments were a sufficient response to Royceann's letter. After Board discussion, it was agreed that Legal Counsel Pugh's comments would be sufficient response to Royceann Porter's letter. Correspondence distributed at 1/10/12 meeting from Annie Tucker— King stated that the letter from Tucker refers to the court case against Porter, Board name change, and the review process of citizen complaints. King reviewed previous Board discussions on the overall review of the ordinance, by -laws and standard operating procedures. PUBLIC PCRB February 22, 2012 Page 3 DISCUSSION Several members of the public (Dean Abel, Marian Coleman, Marianne Dennis, Caroline Dieterle, Charles Eastham, Henry Harper, Annie Tucker) appeared and spoke regarding the following: 1. Changing the name of the Board. 2. Complaint process. 3. Investigative procedure. 4. Limited review and authority of the Board. 5. Public perception. 6. Use of subpoena power. Porter stated she wrote the letter (See discussion under "New Business ") to address how she felt she was treated by fellow Board Members; was "ok" with the outcome; and planned to continue on the Board. King stated that there were a lot of things talked about that will lead to discussion at the community forum where the Board can take the opportunity to educate the public and discuss changes. BOARD INFORMATION None. STAFF INFORMATION None. EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by Treloar and seconded by Jochimsen to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section 21.5(1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22 -7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. Motion carried, 5/0. Open session adjourned at 6:54 P.M. (BREAK) PCRB February 22, 2012 Page 4 (Porter left executive session due to a conflict of interest — 7:00 P.M.) (Porter returned to executive session — 7:03 P.M.) REGULAR SESSION Returned to open session at 7:08 P.M. Motion by Treloar, seconded by Jensen to forward the Public Report as amended for PCRB Complaint #11 -02 to City Council. Motion carried, 4/0, Porter abstaining. Motion by Treloar, seconded by Porter to set the level of review for PCRB Complaint #11 -03 to 8- 8- 7(13)(1)(a), on the record with no additional investigation. Motion carried, 5/0. Motion by King, seconded by Treloar to request a 45 -day extension for PCRB Complaint #11 -03, due to timelines and scheduling. Motion carried, 5/0. TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS (subject to change) • March 21, 2012, 5:30 PM. Helling Conference Rm • April 10, 2012, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Room • April 17, 2012, 7:00 PM, Iowa City Public Library — (Rescheduled to May) • May 8, 2012, 7:00 PM, Helling Conference Rm • May 9, 2012, 7:00 PM, Iowa City Public Library — Community Forum ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by Treloar, seconded by King. Motion carried, 5/0. Meeting adjourned at 7:11 P.M. CD y eD CD a J e� FQ d ro O r H Hn tz� y � N NrrJ�O N C n t� o� 0 CI OQ CD in N w w cn N J e� FQ d ro O r H Hn tz� y � N NrrJ�O N C n t� o� 0 POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 -1826 (319) 356 -5041 From: Police Citizen's Review Board Re: Investigation of PCRB Complaint #11 -02 This is the Report of the Police Citizens Review Board's (the "Board ") review of the investigation of Complaint PCRB #11 -02 (the "Complaint "). BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Section 8 -8 -713 (2), the Board's job is to review the Police Chief's Report ( "Report ") of his investigation of a complaint. The City Code requires the Board to apply a "reasonable basis" standard of review to the Report and to "give deference" to the Report "because of the Police Chief's professional expertise ", Section 8 -8 -7 B (2). While the City Code directs the Board to make "Findings of Fact ", it also requires that the Board recommend that the Police Chief reverse or modify his findings only if these findings are "unsupported by substantial evidence', are "unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious" or are "contrary to a Police Department policy or practice, or any Federal, State or local law ", Section 8 -8 -7 B (2) a, b, c. BOARD'S PROCEDURE The Complaint was initiated by the Complainant on September 28, 2011. As required by Section 8 -8 -5 (B) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigation. The Chief's Report was filed with the City Clerk on December 21, 2011 The Board met to consider the Chief s Report on January 12, 2012 and February 22, 2012. At the January 12th meeting the Board voted to review the Chief's Report in accordance with Section 8 -8 -7 (B) (1) (a), "on the record with no additional investigation ". February 23, 2012 K r� 1 To: City Council Complainant W -- City Manager Sam Hargadine, Chief of Police r Officer(s) involved in complaint From: Police Citizen's Review Board Re: Investigation of PCRB Complaint #11 -02 This is the Report of the Police Citizens Review Board's (the "Board ") review of the investigation of Complaint PCRB #11 -02 (the "Complaint "). BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Section 8 -8 -713 (2), the Board's job is to review the Police Chief's Report ( "Report ") of his investigation of a complaint. The City Code requires the Board to apply a "reasonable basis" standard of review to the Report and to "give deference" to the Report "because of the Police Chief's professional expertise ", Section 8 -8 -7 B (2). While the City Code directs the Board to make "Findings of Fact ", it also requires that the Board recommend that the Police Chief reverse or modify his findings only if these findings are "unsupported by substantial evidence', are "unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious" or are "contrary to a Police Department policy or practice, or any Federal, State or local law ", Section 8 -8 -7 B (2) a, b, c. BOARD'S PROCEDURE The Complaint was initiated by the Complainant on September 28, 2011. As required by Section 8 -8 -5 (B) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigation. The Chief's Report was filed with the City Clerk on December 21, 2011 The Board met to consider the Chief s Report on January 12, 2012 and February 22, 2012. At the January 12th meeting the Board voted to review the Chief's Report in accordance with Section 8 -8 -7 (B) (1) (a), "on the record with no additional investigation ". FINDINGS OF FACT On September 23, 2011 at 1532 hrs, the Joint Emergency Communications Center (JECC) received a call from a female caller advising a resident at her home had assaulted a female. The Iowa City Police Department responded and investigated a call for service at 1313 Davenport. When officers arrived, they found three females outside and a male subject (the Complainant) sitting on the front steps. The Caller stated she had rented a room to the Complainant and there had been problems since. When the caller asked a female friend to assist with retrieving a cable box from the Complainants room, the Caller stated the Complainant grabbed her friend by the neck and arm, and pushed the friend. Officer 071022 observed bruising on the friend's right arm. After interviewing all parties involved, Officers decided the Complainant would be charged and released with Simple Assault. ALLEGATION #1 Complainant stated that he was threatened with arrest by Officers. Complainant alleged that during the course of the investigation Officer 850406 told him that "he was going to arrest him if he didn't shut up. "Although Officer 850406 did not have his body mic activated or video recorder on while he was on this call, and there is some disagreement as to what the conversation was, there is no indication of misconduct on the part of the Officer. After the officers conferred, the Complainant was charged with Simple Assault although an in custody arrest would have been lawful and consistent with Department Policy. During the interview, the Complainant acknowledged when the Officer asked the Complainant to step outside, the Complainant initially told the Officer he wasn't going outside because he would be arrested. f" 3 NOT SUSTAINED ALLEGATION #2 Complainant stated that he was intimidated by the Officers The report of the interview with the Complainant reflected that Complainant said that he officers were not threatening to him. The Complainant said that he was not intimidated by the officers themselves, just by the fear that that his social security check would betaken if he was arrested. Although it does appear that this was an incident that the Complainant found to be quite stressful, there is no evidence to support his allegations that the officers intentionally contributed to this. NOT SUSTAINED 4b(6) Approved Minutes February 2012 MINUTES SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION FEBRUARY 16, 2012 ROOM 208, IOWA CITY /JOHNSON COUNTY SENIOR CENTER Members Present: Jay Honohan, Rose Hanson, Chuck Felling, Michael Lensing, Mark Holbrook, Sarah Maiers Members Absent: Daniel Benton Staff Present: Linda Kopping, Kristin Kromray, Michelle Buhman Others Present: None RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 4:00 PM. Honohan chaired the meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM January 19, 2011 MEETING: Motion: To accept the minutes from the January 19, 2011 meeting. Motion carried on a vote of 5/0. Lensing /Felling. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. COMMISSION ASSIGNMENTS: Honohan will attend a City Council meeting and a Johnson County Board of Supervisors meeting. STEERING COUNCIL REPORT: Felling reported that the Center Ambassadors went to a local labor group's annual meeting to share information about the Center. The group also discussed how to best survey Johnson County seniors. Approved Minutes February 2012 GRANT REPORT TO JOHNSON COUNTY: Kopping reported that for the grant report to Johnson County she focused on the Senior Center's outreach programs. Kopping highlighted that there are many different outreach programs that are housed in the Senior Center including, Elder Services nutrition program, SHIIP, AARP tax aide program, Visiting Nursing Association, legal counseling, personal counseling, reiki therapy, and chair massage. In addition the Senior Center is partners with various outreach groups such as Johnson County Livable Communities and its subcommittees and the community wide Honoring Your Wishes initiative. Kopping also included information on the outcome based surveys that the Senior Center has done. FRIENDS OF THE CENTER UPDATE: Honohan reported that at the end of January the Friends of the Center Endowment fund currently holds approximately $444,000. The charitable giving account balance is $36,000. OPERATIONAL OVERVIEW: Kopping reported that the membership budget meetings were well attended and she had compiled the information and ideas raised in the meetings. This summary is attached to these minutes. The commission discussed some of the ideas generated. . Buhman talked about a new program that she is investigating. It is called 'Senior Center without walls'. It is a phone in program where a person would call in and a facilitator would lead discussions about various topics. She is working to put together a survey to see if area seniors would be interested in this service. She has met with IT to discuss how this might work and to talk about how much this would cost so she can generate a budget. Hanson inquired about the water damage the kitchen staff created. Kopping reported that all expenses related to the event will be submitted to Elder Services. Kopping reported that she, Craig Buhman, the director and the nutrition director of Elder Services are meeting to discuss a maintenance plan for the kitchen. Kopping reported that it is time, per the Senior Center's goals, to do a community wide survey to assess how the community perceives the Senior Center, if the communities needs are being met and if additional services are needed. Approved Minutes February 2012 COMMISSION DISCUSSION: None. ADJOURNMENT: Motion: To Adjourn. Motion carried on a vote of 5/0. Maiers /Lensing. to N N V-- 3 O O N N O O N O LL O_ a O N N E, V v L d r V C N c4 0 C N cc N Q � O N N r LO co 0 O N CD co r co O T- iz co col ti r LO O r cC) M CD LU X X X X X X N O W X X X I X X N N = N N et v ch M N r r r r r r X W E N N N N N N N N H C1 Y c � c O O C O O cc C L �_ N O C O J c0 m LL 2 _ = 2 O N v N N E E �C U O (a c0 c0 t U) Z 0 U y .a X C E _ W N C C C N y y O E ca N -0 .0 O O d Q Q Z Z I I 11 II it W II XOOz I N Y