HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-10-23 CorrespondenceCITY OF IOWA CITY "-
°���� MEMORANDUM -
Date: October 1, 2012
To: City Clerk
From: Kent Ralston; Acting Traffic Engineering Planner 02-
Re: Item for October 23, 2012 City Council meeting; Install STOP signs for eastbound
traffic at the intersections of Ireland Drive / Killarney Road / Kearney Lane & Dublin
Drive; prohibit on- street parking on the west side of Dublin Drive approximately 30-
50' north and south of Ireland Drive, Killarney Road and Kearney Lane.
As directed by Title 9, Chapter 1, Section 3B of the City Code, this is to advise the City Council
of the following action:
Action:
Pursuant to Section 9 -1 -3A (5,10); Install STOP signs for eastbound traffic at the intersections
of Ireland Drive / Killarney Road / Kearney Lane & Dublin Drive; prohibit on- street parking on the
west side of Dublin Drive approximately 30' -50' north and south of Ireland Drive, Killarney Road
and Kearney Lane.
Comment:
This action is being taken to properly assign right -of -way at said intersections and to provide
adequate sight distance for turning traffic. Staff has identified an increase in on- street parking
in this neighborhood during school hours.
Rn k
fO
CD
I-
r
CITY OF IOWA CITY
�.:m,���� 3f(2)
��� M E �J RA N D
Date: October 1, 2012
To: City Clerk
From: Kent Ralston; Acting Traffic Engineering Planner leig-
Re: Item for October 23, 2012 City Council meeting; Install NO PARKING, STOPPING,
STANDING ANY TIME signs on the west side of S. Madison Street adjacent to the
University of Iowa Wellness Center.
As directed by Title 9, Chapter 1, Section 313 of the City Code, this is to advise the City Council
of the following action:
Action:
Pursuant to Section 9 -1 -3A (10) Install NO PARKING, STOPPING, STANDING ANY TIME
signs on the west side of S. Madison Street adjacent to the University of Iowa Wellness Center.
Comment:
This action is being taken at the request of the University of Iowa. University officials have
noted that vehicles dropping off passengers in the travel lane have created an unsafe situation
due to the congestion near the Burlington Street / Madison Street intersection.
N
CIO
`
CD
,.® CITY OF IOWA CITY 3f(3)
MEMORAND )
� [M
Date: October 2, 2012
To: City Clerk
From: Kent Ralston; Acting Traffic Engineering Planner 6OZ—
Re: Item for October 23, 2012 City Council meeting; Installation of 2 parking meters in
the 800 block of S. Clinton Street.
As directed by Title 9, Chapter 1, Section 3B of the City Code, this is to advise the City Council
of the following action:
Action:
Pursuant to Section 9 -1 -3A (17); Install (2) 2 -hour term parking meters in the 800 block of S.
Clinton Street. Meter identification will be CL800S and CI-802S.
Comment:
This action is being taken at the request of the Transportation Services Department. The
additional meters will be installed in conjunction with the curb and gutter upgrades in the 800
block of S. Clinton Street.
r i
co
a
i
cr i
-t6a®4
All
CITY OF IOWA CITY 3f(a��-
MEMORANDUM --
Date: October 4, 2012
To: City Clerk
From: Kent Ralston; Acting Traffic Engineering Planner AC.
Re: Item for October 23, 2012 City Council meeting; Install NO U -TURN signs on
Emerald Street adjacent to Horn Elementary School
As directed by Title 9, Chapter 1, Section 3B of the City Code, this is to advise the City Council
of the following action:
Action:
Pursuant to Section 9 -1 -3A (9); Install NO U -TURN signs on Emerald Street between Benton
Street and the north property line of Horn Elementary School.
Comment:
This action is being taken at the request of the Principal of Horn Elementary School as motorists
are creating a hazard for school children when performing U -Turns on said street. Staff concurs
with this request to decrease congestion and provide a safe environment for school children.
This action will prohibit U -Turns on the section of Emerald Street adjacent to Horn Elementary
School between Benton Street and the north property line of the school.
0
ca
I
�. ®�t CITY OF IOWA CITY 3f5
MEMORANDUM
Date: October 4, 2012
To: City Clerk
From: Kent Ralston; Acting Traffic Engineering Planner
Re: Item for October 23, 2012 City Council meeting; Establish a 20mph school speed
zone on Emerald Street adjacent to Horn Elementary School
As directed by Title 9, Chapter 1, Section 3B of the City Code, this is to advise the City Council
of the following action:
Action:
Pursuant to Section 9 -1 -3A (1); Establish a 20mph school speed zone on Emerald Street
adjacent to Horn Elementary School. The school speed zone will be in effect from 8AM -5PM
Monday- Friday and extend from Benton Street to the north property line of Horn Elementary
School.
Comment:
This action is being taken at the request of the Principal of Horn Elementary School and the
University Heights Police Chief. Staff has received notice of speeding vehicles from the
University Heights Police Department and concurs with the request to ensure the safety of
school children.
ry
C=
rsc "*.may
Ems/
�:n
•
e�
u�
r
CITY OF IOWA CITY 3f(6
��w M, qu � ffik
)
IN MEMORANDUM
Date: October 8, 2012
To: City Clerk
From: Kent Ralston; Acting Traffic Engineering Planner 66-
Re: Item for October 23, 2012 City Council meeting; Prohibit parking on the south side of
Amber Lane between 7AM -5PM Monday- Friday.
As directed by Title 9, Chapter 1, Section 3B of the City Code, this is to advise the City Council
of the following action:
Action:
Pursuant to Section 9 -1 -3A (10); Prohibit parking between 26 and 38 Amber Lane (on the south
side of the street) between 7AM -5PM Monday- Friday.
Comment:
This action is being taken to accommodate school buses that are experiencing difficulty
navigating this portion of Amber Lane due to the existing on- street parking designation.
:.3
CD
r
='==
co
Marian Karr 3f(7)
From:
Chris O'Brien
Sent:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 1:55 PM
To:
Marian Karr
Subject:
FW: complaint about city transit with regards to zip cars
Marian,
This was the response to Bobbie Ney.
Chris
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: Chris O'Brien
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 8:46 AM
To: 'b.ney @mchsi.com'
Cc: Adam Bentley
Subject: RE: complaint about city transit with regards to zip cars
Bobbie,
The third Zipcar was added only temporarily during the Homecoming Parade and was moved back to Iowa Avenue after
10:00 pm. The original two Zipcars were placed in this location due to the proximity to the two hotels and residences in
the area. We wanted to place the vehicles in high pedestrian areas for visibility reasons in the early stages of the
program. These spaces will be evaluated periodically with consideration given to relocating them to a parking facility in
the future.
Thank you
Chris O'Brien
Director of Transportation Services
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: b.ney @mchsi.com [mailto:b.ney @mchsi.com]
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 11:46 AM
To: Council
Subject: complaint about city transit with regards to zip cars
I am not happy with the parking places across from the library that have been designated for the zip cars. I know that in
the past the public has tried to get more parking for the public library and the only ones available are 5 or 6 places in
front of the library. Consequently, the parking right across from the library are what people use. Zip cars originally had
2 of those prime spots and have now taken a third one. Why can't the zip cars be in a ramp or Iowa Ave. or near the
post office. What about seniors who want close access to the library. Bobbie Ney
Marian Karr
From: Mary Kathryn Wallace <mkatawall @yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 10:53 PM
To: Council
Subject: TAFT SPEEDWAY LEVEE
To Members of the City Council of Iowa City,
3f(8)
I'm Mary Kathryn Wallace and I live at 45 Colywn Court in Idyllwild with my husband of 51
years, Douglas Wallace. You, as representatives of the population of Iowa City, are now in an
important position to alleviate a mistake made by earlier members of the City Council. We who
purchased homes in Idyllwild did so because of the reassurance of "everyone" in the buying
process that this was a safe investment and because we were told "You don't need and can't buy
flood insurance." We believed. How wrong we were!
The 2008 flood devastated many lives and definitely interrupted the lives of many others
because we believed what we were told.
My question to you is "Why would you choose anything else ?" other than to vote to protect
the 92 homes in Idyllwild? We are here because a decision of an earlier City Council to
grant development in Idyllwild.
FACTS
After the 2008 Flood, we, in Idyllwild, voted 100% for a buy out but none of the 92
families were eligible.
We are dependent on the wisdom of the current members of the City Council to protect
us. (In contrast to the consequences of the earlier decision by other
members of the City Council.)
Currently, there is funding to protect the families in Idyllwild. What will you choose to do
with the monies?
— If the City won't protect us now, is it not a repeat of the earlier poor decision by Council
members to allow construction in Idyllwild?
When another flood occurs, and we haven't been protected, what is your responsibility?
My assessment is that protest to the Taft Speedway levee protection plan has a lot to do
with aesthetics. Yet, if it is built, in less that 10 years, people will
accept the protection wall as normal.
My assessment is that many people are not open to the aesthetics of a protection wall
which can be landscaped with plants and art.
My question to you is "Lyou do not protect us under the current circumstances with the
available money, and the next flood occurs what is your
responsibility ?" Do we have the right to sue the City for negligence?
Idyllwild is my home. I'm here because of a decision made by an earlier City Council and
incorrect information provided to my husband and I at the time of purchase. I'm willing to
do my part. For the betterment and future of a strong Iowa City, are you willing to do yours?
My husband and I are participating members of Iowa City; we have chosen to retire here.
We vote and contribute. We ask for your soft heart, understanding
and wisdom. We invite you to speak with us before you make a decision. Our home is open
to you. You are affecting the present and the future.
I wrote this after the 2008 flood and discover it is still true. For me, the 2008 Flood still has
a strong impact. Let us take action to do our best to protect the families and citizens living in
Idyllwild.
2008 FLOOD of IOWA RIVER
Water. Giver and Taker of Life.
Around us and within us. Lifelong connection.
Soothing, gentle rain and raging river expanding relentlessly.
When will your rising stop?
In your own time.
Too late for families, homes, businesses, ordinary life.
You rise and fall to your own rhythm leaving destruction in your wake.
Leaving in your aftermath loss, sorrow, pain and also a new beginning.
Dark, dirty water of chaos, what have you seeded?
Weariness and also strength to continue.
Bonding of friendship and support.
Enlarged community caring more deeply because each was baptized by you.
River, you are a demanding teacher.
I was a reluctant student but am no longer.
I accept, even embrace, lessons you have taught.
I know with greater depth, like the depth of you at your widest and highest,
Surrender, Patience, Perseverance, Hope, Gratitude.
River, you are peaceful again, ever flowing, giving.
Yet I await the return of your powerful Self. I remember you with respect.
You are entirely new. Water of June that changed my life has come and gone.
New water flows.
Raindrop... Snowflake... Blizzard... Torrential storm... Accumulation.
Water, Giver and Taker of Life, I want us to live together in Peace.
Mary Kathryn Wallace
October 14, 2008
With her husband, Doug, evacuated on June 12, 2008,
from 45 Colwyn Court; Iowa City, IA.
Wishing you great wisdom in your vote,
Mary Kathryn Wallace
Marian Karr
From:
Drew Dillman <drewdillman @gmail.com>
Sent:
Thursday, October 04, 2012 2:43 PM
To:
Council
Subject:
Idyllwild/Taft Speedway flood mitigation
Dear Council Members,
I am writing to oppose spending large amounts of taxpayer money to perpetuate citizens living in a flood plain.
If individual citizens desire to use the flood plain, they should be allowed to bear the risk themselves and not be
allowed to shift costs to taxpayers who have chosen to avoid these risks.
I am aware that the City is able to shift some of the costs of construction to other taxpayers using a state or
federal grant. This is, in and of itself, not good . Besides the fact that wasting other people's money is to be
condemned, there is the practical consideration that even if the construction costs can be shifted to someone
else, long term maintenance costs will fall to the City.
The poet, Robert Frost stated, "Something there is that doesn't love a wall, That wants it down."
I have learned from living with two past floods that levees do little good in the type of floods we experience
unless they are accompanied by continuous pumping on the "protected" side of the wall. People are mistakenly
reassured by the presence of a wall and make bad economic decisions about building or maintaining structures
on the "protected" side of the wall. During the 2008 flood, because of bad experience I had in the '93 flood, I
asked that my house be left on the outside of the temporary levees that were made along Normandy Drive until
the neighbors pointed out that building the levee in a straight line to "protect" their homes required my home be
included. As in'93, the levees did more harm than good, in spite of the great effort and expense expended on
them.
Additionally, consideration must be given to the fact that while this construction is designed to possibly help
some residents on the flood plain, it will almost certainly harm other long term residents of the flood plain.
For these reasons, I ask that you simply leave the flood plain to nature except for mitigating man-made
impediments to natural river flow like increasing flow channels beneath the Park Street Bridge and lowering the
chain link fences around the baseball fields during flood times when the fences become clogged with debris and
slow river flow.
Sincerely,
Drew B. Dillman, M.D., M.P.H.
Marian Karr
From:
MECrawford @aol.com
Sent:
Tuesday, October 09, 2012 2:16 PM
To:
Council
Cc:
CLINESALLY @cs.com; TMChait @aol.com; layton.olson @byetm.com; Kurtkimmel @aol.com;
jholland @icialaw.com
Subject:
Idyllwild Flood Mitigation
Members of the City Council and Staff
City of Iowa City
410 E. Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
REFERENCE: IDYLLWILD FLOOD MITIGATION
Dear City Council and Staff:
You recently received a letter from Sally Cline, President of the Idyllwild Condominiums Owners'
Association. As a homeowner in Idyllwild and a former Association Board member I wanted to
reiterate and support what Sally has communicated.
Idyllwild homeowners were never offered a buyout following the flood of 2008. It is a matter of record
that the City specifically told us that we did not meet requirements for a FEMA buyout, even though
all of our homes were severely damaged and required rebuilding. In our case, we had 42 inches of
water in our home.
Following the 2008 flood, I chaired a buyout committee for Idyllwild homeowners. Much of that
committee's work is detailed in Sally Cline's letter dated September 24. At that time we met with City
staff and provided information on each of our homes in Idyllwild including names and addresses. We
also provided information on the damages to each of our 92 homes. This was information compiled
by having contractors examine and provide rebuild estimates for each home. So again, with advice
from City staff, Idyllwild made every effort to obtain a FEMA buyout. In the end, it was the City that
told us that none of our 92 homes would receive a buyout.
Although we were not allowed a buyout for any of our 92 homes, it is my understanding that the City
has, to date, spent approximately $21 million on 93 residential buyouts, relocation costs, and home
construction. I received this information from what has been written in local media and from City
staff. If the City can spend $21 million in federal dollars related to home buyouts for 93 homes, then
hopefully the Council will recognize the need to spend considerably less in federal dollars to provide
protection to the 92 homes in Idyllwild.
Finally, the point should again be made that Idyllwild was legally approved by the City Council in
1992. Following the 2008 flood the City encouraged Idyllwild to rebuild. In fact, the City administered
federal funds provided through the State that helped many of our homeowners to rebuild. In my
opinion the City clearly has a moral responsibility to protect Idyllwild from future floods, if not a legal
responsibility.
Sincerely,
Michael Crawford
54 Pentire Circle
Iowa City, Iowa 52245
319- 512 -5510
Marian Karr
From: Layton Olson <layton.olson @gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 11:52 AM
To: Council
Subject: Flood Mitigation - Idyllwild
Members of the City Council and Staff
City of Iowa City
410 E. Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
REFERENCE: IDYLLWILD FLOOD MITIGATION
Dear City Council and Staff:
As a board member of the Idyllwild Condominium Owners Association, I clearly understand the
different perspectives that have led to widely divergent views regarding the issue of flood
mitigation, and specifically those surrounding the Taft Floodwall proposals. When deliberating
the validity of any opinion or recommendation, more information always trumps less. To that
end, and from the vantage point of an Idyllwild condominium owner, I would like to add these
inputs to the debate:
1. The HDR Engineering study shows that there is no hydraulic encumbrance upon our
neighbors on Taft Speedway or in Parkview Terrace as a result of a proposed floodwall,
even to the height of a 500 year flood level plus 3 feet.
2. 83% of the cost of the Taft Floodwall (at 500 year plus 3 feet) is covered by a HUD
Community Development Block Grant of $8 million plus the funds of $3 million currently
budgeted for the raising of Foster Road, which would no longer be needed. Other less
expensive flood protection options could be completely paid for by the HUD grant.
3. Idyllwild has 92 homes that were solely owner occupied prior to the flood. By
necessity, and with City support, a temporary rental policy was established in 2008 in
order to make redevelopment possible. It expires in 2016, and includes the provision that
once a home is sold, it is ineligible for future rental.
4. Under the best of circumstances, Idyllwild cannot build a sandbag wall high enough,
wide enough, or expansive enough to protect the 23 buildings in the development from a
500 year flood. When the flood waters overcame us in 2008, we had put 350,000 sandbags
in place, yet were still 150,000 bags short when we simply ran out of time.
5. The construction and size of Idyllwild buildings precludes raising them (such as on
stilts, etc) to be out of flood's way.
6. Idyllwild homeowners were NOT offered the buyout option made available by FEMA to
many owners of individual properties that were flooded in 2008.
7. Idyllwild was built with City Staff and Council approval a foot or more above the flood
plain. The landscape has changed over time to put some areas in the flood plain, an event
not under the control of the Idyllwild residents.
8. There are walls built in Iowa City for many reasons and many of them are interesting
and attractive. With the technology available, and the creativity of architectural design,
1
there is no reason to believe that a flood wall that makes use of a brick or stone facade
could not be an appealing backdrop to new landscaping.
9. The DNR reports that the flood of 2008 is not an isolated, one -time event, and is
expected to occur with increasing frequency. Further, according to a study by the Natural
Resources Defense Council and the Rocky Mountain Climate Organization, heavy rainfall is
falling more often in the Midwest and severe flooding has doubled in the last half- century.
Failing to plan for the next flood is planning to fail.
10. Yes. Idyllwild is currently insured with flood insurance. However, in 2008, Parkview
Church had flood insurance, yet it paid only $500,000 out of the $900,000 of damage that
was incurred. Insurance does not mean there is no expense to the victim. Additionally,
flood insurance does not cover the stress and anxiety from such a disaster.
11. If the grant money of $8 million is not used in our community, it will be redistributed
for use somewhere else, not given back to taxpayers. We should use the funds that City
staff (under the direction of the City Council) worked so hard to get.
12. The Taft Floodwall will protect those residing in the Peninsula, living along Foster
Road, the Parkview Church, and Idyllwild's 92 families and real estate that was valued at
close to $30 million at the time of the 2008 flood.
At this moment, the City Council has the opportunity and the funding to protect the residents and
homes north of the river without raising the flood levels of our neighbors to the south. A basic
function of government is to protect the safety, welfare and health of its citizens. The Council
would be remiss to do nothing and let the flood waters flow unabated the next time around.
Please support the Taft Floodwall (500 year plus 3 feet) to protect Parkview Church, Foster Road
and its residents and the 92 families and homes in the Idyllwild development. We all pay our
share of taxes for these services, and deserve this protection.
Layton A. Olson
18 Idyllwild Ct.
Iowa City, IA 52245
319 - 688 -9767
2
Marian Karr
From: wtaylorlaw @aol.com
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 8:27 AM
To: Council
Subject: Comments on draft engineering report on Taft Speedway levee
Attachments: Taft_Speedway_Comments.pdf
Please bring the attached comments to the attention of the Council members before their work session next week. Thank
you.
Wallace L. Taylor
Attorney at Law
118 3rd Ave. S.E., Suite 326
Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52401
319 -2428; ( Fax) 319- 366 -3886
e -mail: wtaylorlaw(&-aol.com
WALLACE L. TAYLOR
ATTORNEY AT LAW
118 31° AVE. s.E., SUITE 326
Phone 319 -346 -2438 CEDAR RAPIDS, IOWA 32401 Fax 3 19-366 -3946
October 9, 2012
Mr. John Engel Mr. Jason Reichart
Project Manager Special Projects Engineer
HDR Engineering, Inc. City of Iowa City
6404 Indian Hills Dr. 410 E. Washington St.
Omaha, ATE 68114 Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Dear Mr. Engel and Mr. Reichart:
The following comments are submitted on behalf of the
residents on Taft Speedway Street in Iowa City, regarding
the Draft Taft Speedway Flood Mitigation Study Alternatives
Report. We believe the Draft Report contains serious flaws
and does net accomplish the purpose directed by HUD in
response to the concerns of the Taft Speedway and Parkview
Terrace residents.
As stated on page 4 of the Draft Report, the residents in
the Taft Speedway and Parkview Terrace neighborhoods
requested further study of the viability of flood
mitigation and the impacts it would have on their
neighborhoods. The US Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) Disaster Recovery Office required the
City of Iowa City to address the concerns of the Taft
Speedway and Parkview Terrace residents and provide
additional information regarding the effects flood
mitigation would have on them prior to the receipt of CDBG
funding. It must be emphasized that the concerns of the
Taft Speedway and Parkview Terrace residents were that any
type of levee or floodwall would force floodwater to
inundate those areas even more significantly than under
current conditions. The Draft Report does not address those
concerns at all.
In fact, the initial alternatives that were screened
contained four alternatives that might very well reduce the
risk of flooding without increasing the danger to the Taft
Speedway and Parkview Terrace neighborhoods. But those four
alternatives were rejected and abandoned with absolutely no
analysis or discussion. Those alternatives were;
e Removal or modification to Burlington Street Dam to
improve conveyance of Iowa River flood flows and lower peak
river stages in the Taft Speedway area.
• Increase conveyance of Iowa River by
clearing /excavating channel improvements and /or removing
bridge obstructions to lower peak river stages in the Taft
Speedway area during flood events.
e Increase flood storage of the Coralville Reservoir
through dredging, physical modifications, or changes to
operating rules to provide adequate storage for the 500 -
year event.
• Structural improvements to buildings to dry- proof;
site grading /improvements to facilitate flood fighting
closures. Structures would be raised to above 500 -year
WSEL.
We believe those four alternatives should have been given
more consideration and that the reasons for rejection are
not justified. It was important to analyze these
alternatives because they are the only ones that would
reduce flooding and still protect the Taft Speedway and
Parkview Terrace neighborhoods. The only alternatives
seriously considered in the Draft Report involved a levee,
a floodwall, or a combination of the two, all of which
would leave the Taft Speedway and Parkview Terrace
neighborhoods on the wrong side of the levee /floodwall and
increase the impact of flooding on those neighborhoods.
The Draft Report failed to discuss these four alternatives.
e The removal or modification of the Burlington Street
Dam, according to the Draft Report, could be used to
increase discharge during flood events, yet provide
elevated water surfaces to serve the University of Iowa's
water plant intake during low flows. The Draft Report then
says that legal and political issues affect this
alternative, but there is no discussion of what these
issues are or how they might be overcome. The Draft Report
then says that this alternative was not carried forward
because it does not achieve the project objectives. But
there is never any discussion of what the project
objectives are. The statement is then made that preliminary
modeling shows little or no impact to water elevations from
this alternative. But that preliminary modeling is never
discussed or explained, and there was apparently no effort
to conduct more complete modeling or any other analysis to
justify rejection of this alternative. Nor is there any
mention of the cost of this alternative.
• Improving conveyance of the Iowa River is
technically feasible, according to the Draft Report. The
Draft Report then states that environmental impacts, land
acquisition, and transportation system impacts are
potentially significant issues. But there is no discussion
or analysis of these impacts so the public does not know,
nor for that matter, would the City Council know, whether
this alternative was properly rejected. Finally, the Draft
Report states that this alternative was not carried forward
because the impacts far outweigh the benefits, with
absolutely no analysis or discussion of how this conclusion
was made.
• Increasing flood storage at the Coralville Reservoir
is also summarily rejected. The Draft Report contends that
this alternative would require a lengthy NEPA process and
property acquisition. But again, there is no discussion or
analysis of this alternative so the public and the City
Council can evaluate it. The Draft Report concludes that
the Reservoir could be managed to increase storage and
prevent too much discharge, but the Draft Report concludes
that the benefits are not substantial and would cause
frequent low level flooding downstream. However, none of
these statements are substantiated by any discussion or
analysis in the Report. Moreover, it does not make sense
that holding back the water to reduce flooding downstream
would case frequent flooding downstream. That is a
contradictory statement.
• The Draft Report claims that flood proofing
structures to the 500 year event level is likely not
technically feasible, with no discussion or analysis to
determine if that hypothesis is correct. The Draft Report
does acknowledge that raising the structures may be
feasible. In fact, that is exactly what many Taft Speedway
residents did after the 1993 flood and they withstood the
2008 flood with minimal impact. The Report then states that
even though flood proofing may prevent property damage,
evacuation would be required during a flood event. But
evacuation for a few days is a minor inconvenience in
return for not devastating the Taft Speedway and Parkview
Terrace residents.
In summary, the Draft Report is clearly a biased and
improperly narrow presentation of flood mitigation for Taft
Speedway and Parkview Terrace. In fact, other than the
initial statement as to the fact that the Parkview Terrace
residents wanted an evaluation, Parkview Terrace is never
mentioned or considered in the report. The only
alternatives seriously considered involve a levee and /or a
floodwall, exactly the narrow focus that raised concerns
and caused HUD to demand a further review. This Draft
Report needs to be rejected and further analysis conducted
of the alternatives that were summarily rejected.
Very truly yours,
Wallace L. Taylor
LATE HANDOUTS
Information submitted between distribution of packet on Thursday and 3:00 p.m.
Tuesday.
CONSENT CALENDAR ADDITIONS:
Correspondence:
3f(8) Lynn Sidwell, James White: Taft Floodwall (levee)/Idyllwild Buyout
Marian Karr
From:
Lynn Sidwell <lynn74213 @yahoo.com>
Sent:
Monday, October 22, 2012 8:41 AM
To:
Council
Subject:
Fw:
To the I.C. Council,
I sent this letter back in August. Now, the vote is actually coming up . Please remember when its time to vote
that many many people in I.0 oppose the building of a flood wall /levee. Too much money has already been
spent just on researching the idea, let alone what the actual cost would be. To do nothing is actually a choice
also. Allow every person who lives by the river to make their own decision as to how they want to be
protected. They either get insurance or they dont. Please dont allow a vocal minority ( with money) to dictate
your decision. Be fair to everyone .
Thank you.
Lynn Sidwell
- -- On Sat, 8/4/12, Lynn Sidwell <4ynn74213(a yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Lynn Sidwell <ll=74213(a,yahoo.com>
Subject:
To: council&iowa- city.org
Date: Saturday, August 4, 2012, 3:48 PM
To the I.0 Council:
I read with interest the article in the Saturday Press Citizen ( August 4th 2012) about the controversy over the proposec
flood wall and /or levee along the Iowa River. One plan would protect the residents of the Idyllwild condominiums from
future flooding , while forcing those living along Taft Speedway to be pennned in with the river in the event of another
flood. Another scenerio is to raise Taft Speedway, and yet another is to do nothing... knowing that all residents in this
area now know what can happen when the Iowa river floods more than its 500 year projection ( 2xs and counting).
I read with disbelief, that the City Council would yet again protect the wealthy citizens of Idyllwild, while tossing the Taft
Speedway residents and those further upstream " under the bus" ( as the saying goes ... or would it be "under the water ")
The whole Idyllwild neighborhood should NEVER been built in the first place. For those residents to say that they were
told they didnt need to purchase flood insurance....) say, get real. If you have lived in Iowa City for many years, as I
have, or say... certain realtors who actually live there have ... you know that that area is extremely low and has always
been prone to flooding. So, what did they do when they couldnt get "buy outs "...they whined about it. Then, even though
they did not have flood insurance... they all have enough money to rebuild and they have. So, logically, if they have that
much money let them buy flood insurance as people on Taft Speedway have. And leave it at that.
I have found it ironic that such an expensive little community should be built next to one of the trailer parks where many
people dont have the advantages that the Idyllwild folks do.
Think before you vote to allow the "haves" ( ie those who pay higher property taxes) to dictate public policy and
disregard the "have nots ". You either buy flood insurance or you dont, but dont build a levee and /or a floodwall to protect
some and leave others to fend for themselves.
Lynn Sidwell
1602 Wilson Street
Iowa City Iowa
Marian Karr
From: JJWHITE <jjwhite499 @yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 10:48 AM
To: Council
Subject: Earthen Levee Structures
I would hope all council members would review the following:
James J. White
121 Taft Speedway St.
Iowa City, Iowa 52245
319- 321 -1643
hftp://en.m(ikir)edia.org /wiki/Dam failure
httg://video.search.yahoo.com/search/video: ylt=AOPDoKnIVoVQTBsAXzKJzbkF?p= Lake %20Delhi &fr -ush- mail &fr2 =piv-
ima e
http: / /www break.com/usercontent/2008/9/Lake-Delton-Busts-throu-q -levee-569032
hftr)://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KObVsSWXG-I&feature=related
http' / /wcfcourier com/ news /local /lost - lake - delhi- area - hit - with - flooding /article dd4874e2-fe63-56bb-aab4-
e46e52fd8695.html
October 4, 2012
Ms. Kenna Prottsman
655 S. Governor Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
Dear Ms. Prottsman,
10 -23 -12
i r 3f(9)
Ali ;
i
CITY OF IOWA CITY
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240 -1826
(3 19) 356 -5000
(319) 356 -5009 FAX
www.icgov.org
Thank you for writing to the City Council regarding urban chickens in Iowa City.
Currently, the issue is being addressed by the Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission and will move
forward to the City Council from there. We expect that the discussion and ordinance for urban chickens
will be scheduled later this year. While we do not know the outcome of that discussion, you can rest
assured that your thoughts and opinion is very important to the City Council.
We appreciate that you took the time to write to the City Council and encourage you to follow the City
Council meetings and agendas for further updates. You may subscribe online to receive the agenda and
materials at www.icgov.org or agenda copies are available at City Hall or the public library. In addition
all Council meetings are broadcast live and re- broadcasted on City Channel 4.
Sincerely,
(:f?.
Tom Markus
City Manager
City of Iowa City
r
S. G ����
T OVA
C.�
C)
C=
rl
S+
co(
Q n")e
u 0 el
s () 10
ck Vh
C
Ob p+ V --I -
%J U I
Y) C� �',
+
cCkU_ %'
wo() Ca
i
�--a v
c, t (lue cot
Se
C A SO CV.� *CjCen C--
6,tt- C
c) C
CA Yl
0 ryA
C- -�CJ y
L e * L +
r all. w na
e
A
0 -'u Y)
rn <: \/o r * ?
0C>
F)
c C�
O /C 1 1,
r) 0 +
r)
-T � o\r\
C(3
77
Prot rn i
62 S. Governor St
Iowa Qty, IA
Marian Karr 3f(10)
From: Eleanor M. Dilkes
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2012 3:37 PM
To: 'Rita Bettis'; Council
Cc: Matt Hayek; Rick Dobyns; Jim Throgmorton; Michelle Payne; Terry Dickens; Susan Mims;
connie- champion @iowa - city.org; Tom Markus; Marian Karr
Subject: RE: Initiative Action by Aleksey Gurtovoy and Martha Hampel
Dear Ms. Bettis,
Pursuant to Section 7.03(D) of the City Charter signatures on an initiative petition must be secured and the petition filed
within six months after the affidavit commencing the initiative is filed with the City Clerk. Your clients' affidavit was
accepted for filing by the City Clerk today so that 6 month period will start today. My review is a matter of courtesy so that
petitioners who choose to do so will have the benefit of my thinking before they begin to collect signatures. There is no
decision to be made by the Council at this juncture and nothing that prevents your clients from obtaining signatures. The
Clerk offered your clients the petition forms when they filed the affidavit earlier today but they did not wish to take them at
that time. Because Section 7.02(B) of the Charter requires the Clerk to issue the petition forms to the petitioners on the
same day the affidavit is accepted for filing, I have advised her to send the forms to them electronically today.
Please do not expect a response from Council members to your email. The next Council meeting is not until October 23
and I have advised Council members to be cautious about communicating by email, particularly when a majority of them
are included, due to open meetings concerns.
Please give me a call if you would like to discuss this matter further.
Eleanor M. Dilkes
City Attorney
City Hall
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
319- 356 -5030
319 - 356 -5008 Fax
eleanor- dilkesgiowa -ci , .org
Notice: Since e-mail messages sent between you and the City Attorney's Office and its employees are transmitted over the internet,
the City Attorney's Office cannot assure that such messages are secure. You should be careful in transmitting information to the City
Attorney's Office that you consider confidential. If you are uncomfortable with such risks, you may decide not to use e-mail to
communicate with the City Attorney's Office. Without written notification that you do not wish to communicate with the City
Attorney's Office via e-mail communication, the City Attorney's Office will assume you assent to such communication. This message
is covered by the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510 -2515, is intended only for the use of the person to
whom it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential and subject to the attorney - client privilege. It should not be
forwarded to anyone else without consultation with the originating attorney. If you received this message and are not the addressee,
you have received this message in error. Please notify the person sending the message and destroy your copy. Thank you.
From: Rita Bettis [mailto:rita.bettis @aclu - ia.org]
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2012 11:30 AM
To: Council; Eleanor M. Dilkes
Cc: Matt Hayek; Rick Dobyns; Jim Throgmorton; Michelle Payne; Terry Dickens; Susan Mims; Connie- champion @iowa -
city.org
Subject: Initiative Action by Aleksey Gurtovoy and Martha Hampel
Dear Council Members and Ms. Dilkes,
Attached please find a letter and included memorandum from the ACLU of Iowa on behalf of our clients, Iowa
City residents Aleksey Gurtovoy and Martha Hampel, in which we recommend that the Council recognize that
Mr. Gurtovoy and Ms. Hampel are today commencing an Initiative as established in the Iowa City Charter.
The affidavit commencing initiative proceedings and proposed city ordinance fled today by Mr. Gurtovoy and
Ms. Hampel with the Iowa City city clerk is included in the attachment.
As explained in our memorandum, we respectfully disagree with Ms. Dilkes's analysis contained in her August
21, 2012 and June 27, 2012 Memoranda to the City Council finding their proposal fell under the definition of a
referendum and was therefore time - barred. We are requesting that, as consistent with the city charter, Mr.
Gurtovoy and Ms. Hampel be permitted to proceed with the process of collecting sufficient signatures in the
next 6 months from today's date to secure consideration of their Initiative by the Council, and, if not adopted by
the Council at that time, to put the matter before the voters on the ballot for the November 2013 regular city
election.
Beyond this case, we believe this issue affects the rights of all Iowa City residents to have fair and equal access
the democratic processes established in the city charter.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thank you for your consideration,
Rita Bettis
Legislative Director and Staff Attorney
ACLU of Iowa
505 Fifth Avenue, Ste. 901
Des Moines, IA 50309 -2316
(515) 243 -3988 ext. 15 (office)
rita.bettis@aclu-ia.org
s.
T�MERIICAWCIVIL LIBERTIES UNION,
505 Fifth Avenue, Suite 901
Des Moines, Iowa 50309
www.aclu- ia.org
October 5, 2012
Council Members
Iowa City City Council
410 E Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
p..,. p r ,
Re: Submission of Affidavit to Commence Initiative, Proposed
Ordinance, and Memo on Behalf of Iowa City Residents Aleksey
Gurtovoy and Martha Hampel
Dear Council Members,
Enclosed please find an Affidavit to Commence Initiative and Proposed
Ordinance (the Initiative) filed by Iowa City residents and registered voters
Aleksey Gurtovoy and Martha Hampel on this date, October 5, 2012. We have
reviewed the Memoranda written by Iowa City City Attorney Eleanor M. Dilkes
and submitted to the City Council on June 27, 2012 and August 21, 2012, in
which she recommended that Mr. Gurtovoy's and Ms. Hampel's initiative be
barred for consideration as a referendum in disguise.
We are becoming involved because of the importance of this issue to the
access all Iowa City residents will have to the democratic processes protected by
the Charter. The City Attorney's position is one that encourages a content -
discriminatory basis for evaluating whether direct citizen action is time- barred or
not in a given case. Such an interpretation runs afoul of the City Charter and
well - established principles of statutory interpretation.
As explained in this memorandum, we respectfully disagree with the City
Attorney's findings and analysis. For the following reasons, and on behalf of Mr.
Gurtovoy and Ms. Hampel, we ask that the enclosed Affidavit to Commence
Initiative and Proposed Ordinance be accepted by this Council as an initiative.
Upon the acceptance of Mr. Gurtovoy's and Ms. Hampel's Affidavit to Commence
Initiative, they will have six months from the date of filing to secure sufficient
signatures for consideration by this Council. If the Initiative is not adopted by the
Council at that time, they are entitled to put the matter before the voters during
the 2013 regular city election.
20,12 OPT
505 Fifth Avenue, Suite 901
Des Moines, Iowa 50309
www.aclu- 1a.org
To: Iowa City City Council
Date: October 5, 2012
Re: Validity of Gurtovoy - Hampel Initiative under the City Charter
MEMORANDUM
SUMMARY
The Iowa City Charter expressly provides that initiatives are not invalid
because they repeal or amend existing measures, nor are more restrictive
requirements for filing initiatives permitted by the Charter. The interpretation and
course of action proposed by the Iowa City City Attorney regarding the Initiative
filed by Mr. Gurtovoy and Ms. Hampel in July 2012 is in conflict with well -
established principles of statutory interpretation and the plain language of the
Charter. In order to remain in compliance with the laws of Iowa City, the City
Council should recognize this initiative action filed by Mr. Gurtovoy and Ms.
Hampel October 5, 2012 as a valid initiative, not a referendum, so that Mr.
Gurtovoy and Ms. Hampel can begin the process of collecting the necessary
signatures.
DISCUSSION
1. The Iowa City Charter Expressly Allows for Initiatives that Repeal
Existing Measures.
The Iowa City Charter expressly permits initiative actions which repeal
existing ordinances in whole or in part, as well as initiative actions which amend
existing measures:
(2) Initiative. It is intended that (a) no initiative petition will be invalid
because it repeals an existing measure in whole or in part by virtue of
proposing a new measure and (b) an initiative petition may amend an
existing measure.
Iowa City Charter Section 7.01(C)(2). in the June 27, 2012 Memorandum
to the City Council, the City Attorney attempted to reconcile Section 7.01(C)(2) of
the City Charter provided above with her determination that an initiative including
a repeal on an existing ordinance is a referendum in disguise by presenting a
novel interpretation of the words "by virtue of in that Section:
505 Fifth Avenue, Suite 901
Des Moines, Iowa 50309
www.aclu- 1a.org
To: Iowa City City Council
Date: October 5, 2012
Re: Validity of Gurtovoy - Hampel Initiative under the City Charter
MEMORANDUM
SUMMARY
The Iowa City Charter expressly provides that initiatives are not invalid
because they repeal or amend existing measures, nor are more restrictive
requirements for filing initiatives permitted by the Charter. The interpretation and
course of action proposed by the Iowa City City Attorney regarding the Initiative
filed by Mr. Gurtovoy and Ms. Hampel in July 2012 is in conflict with well -
established principles of statutory interpretation and the plain language of the
Charter. In order to remain in compliance with the laws of Iowa City, the City
Council should recognize this initiative action filed by Mr. Gurtovoy and Ms.
Hampel October 5, 2012 as a valid initiative, not a referendum, so that Mr.
Gurtovoy and Ms. Hampel can begin the process of collecting the necessary
signatures.
DISCUSSION
1. The Iowa City Charter Expressly Allows for Initiatives that Repeal
Existing Measures.
The Iowa City Charter expressly permits initiative actions which repeal
existing ordinances in whole or in part, as well as initiative actions which amend
existing measures:
(2) Initiative. It is intended that (a) no initiative petition will be invalid
because it repeals an existing measure in whole or in part by virtue of
proposing a new measure and (b) an initiative petition may amend an
existing measure.
Iowa City Charter Section 7.01(C)(2). in the June 27, 2012 Memorandum
to the City Council, the City Attorney attempted to reconcile Section 7.01(C)(2) of
the City Charter provided above with her determination that an initiative including
a repeal on an existing ordinance is a referendum in disguise by presenting a
novel interpretation of the words "by virtue of in that Section:
F P order to reconcile this provision with the definitions and time
l!,lv_ p
requirements of Article VII of the Charter, the words "by virtue of
�C KIT _�ryt fapue significance. Often, a proposed measure will require the
112 5 Fep `A - f certain other portions of the code. In such cases, repeal is
,a;coincidence or by- product of the new proposal .... This
;• is : col hbidental repeal, or repeal al "by virtue of the proposed measure, l. s, 66h
different than a repeal as a result of a substitution that
renders the recently enacted ordinance completely meaningless.
We find this reading to be fairly convoluted, and in violation of well- defined
and established principles of statutory interpretation in Iowa. When words are
undefined in a statute, they are given their ordinary and common meaning. See,
e.g., Mason v. Schweizer Aircraft Corp., 653 N.W.2d 543, 548 (Iowa 2002). The
court will only depart from the ordinary meaning of statutory language when the
statute's literal terms are in conflict with its general purpose. See, e.g., State v.
Hopkins, 465 N.W.2d 894, 896 (Iowa 1997). Statutes are interpreted in their
context. See Griffin Pipe Prods. Co. v. Guarino, 663 N.W.2d 862, 865 (Iowa
2003). When no ambiguity exists, a statute's language is read and rationally
applied as written. See Iowa Comprehensive Petroleum Underground Storage
Tank Fund 8d. v. Shell Oil Co., 606 N.W.2d 376, 379 (Iowa 2000) and Larson
Mfg. Co. v. Thorson, 763 N.W.2d 842, 859 (Iowa 2009).
In this case, there is no ambiguity as to the plain and ordinary meaning of
"by virtue of." Rather, the plain and ordinary meaning of "by virtue of does not
lend itself to the City Attorney's interpretation that it excludes initiatives which
substitute new language for old and thereby render existing ordinances
meaningless, but that initiatives calling for "by- product" or "coincidence" repeals
would be permissible. Rather, the plain and ordinary meaning is as stated in the
Charter: that initiatives are not invalid because they call for a new measure that
would require the repeal or amendment of an existing one. When taken in
context, we find that Section 7.01(C)(2) appears to protect against the exact sort
of interpretation the City Attorney is offering in this case, rather than to support
the City Attorney's position: Section 7.01(13)(2) simply says initiatives cannot be
excluded by virtue of, or because of, their effect to repeal or amend existing
measures. Moreover, the City Attorney's suggested limitation would be
inconsistent with the Charter's directive that "[i]t is intended that this article confer
broad initiative and referendum powers upon the qualified electors of this city.
City Charter Section 7.01(C)(1).
The City Attorney finds that it would be irrational to allow a city ordinance
to be repealed by an initiative if the time for a referendum has expired. In fact, the
converse is true. The City Attorney's analysis, if adopted by the Council, would
significantly undermine the City Charter's grant to citizens of the power of
initiative, by necessarily making any initiative whose effects would include repeal
of a decision more than 60 days, but less than 2 years old subject to the same
deadlines as referenda.
The City Charter recognizes this circumstance, and reaches a conclusion
contrary to that of the City Attorney, by expressly providing that "...no initiative
petition will be invalid because it repeals an existing measure... by virtue of
proposing a new measure..." (Section 7.01(C)(2)(a)). Because Section 7.01(A)(3)
defines "measure" as "...all ordinances... of a legislative nature, however
designated, which (a) are of a permanent rather than temporary character and
(b) include a proposition enacting, amending, or repealing a new or existing law,
policy, or plan... ", any petition that creates a broader policy, and in so repeals an
existing policy, is an initiative.
2. The Initiative Enclosed Seeks to Enact an Ordinance that is Broader
in Scope than Mere Repeal of Existing Measures.
The initiative filed by Mr. Gurtovoy and Ms. Hampel seeks to accomplish
far more than a repeal of Iowa City's new traffic camera ordinance, Ordinance
No. 12 -4466, as the City Attorney has argued. In fact, it allows for traffic
cameras, so long as certain safeguards are met, such as requiring an officer to
be present on the scene, witness the infraction, and issue the citation; the image
captured by the traffic camera could still be used as evidence under their
proposed initiative. But more to the point, its goal is also much broader: it would,
for example, limit the ability of Iowa City police to use automatic license plate
readers in ways which would violate the terms of the proposed ordinance, and
would prohibit non - emergency warrantless use of drone technology in routine
traffic enforcement efforts.
Such a policy amounts to more than a mere repeal of the decision to
authorize red light cameras, and renders it quite clearly an "initiative." The City
Attorney's analysis incorrectly assumes that policy is only created when an
existing policy is modified. Here, she assumes the revised petition is a
referendum and not an initiative because, out of all activities that it would ban,
only one method of enforcement has thus far been authorized by the City.
However, policy is also created through forward- looking prohibitions.
Policymaking is seldom purely reactive: it identifies future problems and seeks to
prevent them from occurring or becoming worse. This is precisely what the
revised petition seeks to do: it identifies the problem of increased surveillance,
and seeks to prevent that problem from becoming increasingly severe by both
restricting currently authorized surveillance and preventing the use of certain new
surveillance tools.
The above cited Charter provision (Section 7.01(C)(2)(a)) supports this
analysis by explicitly providing that initiatives are still valid, (and therefore not
"referenda "), merely because they repeal an existing policy through proposals for
a new policy.
3. The Charter Prohibits the Council from Setting More Stringent
Requirements Affecting Initiatives Than Imposed by the Charter.
The Charter specifically prohibits the invention of new restrictions on the
use of initiative and referendum proceedings:
t
j~t 6
The council may not set, except by charter amendment, conditions or
requirements affecting initiative and referendum which are higher or more
stringent than those imposed by this charter.
Iowa City Charter Section 7.07. The plain meaning of the requirements of
an initiative are clear in the charter, as is the express prohibition on discounting a
petition because it requires repealing or amending an existing city ordinance, as
discussed above. The City Attorney's invention of a new requirement for valid
Initiatives, namely, that they may not require repeal of an existing ordinance by
virtue of supplanting it with broad policy, is thus highly suspect and
challengeable.
4. Conclusion
The City Attorney is incorrect in concluding that any petition that repeals
the City's decision to permit the use of red light cameras is necessarily a
referendum according to the plain and ordinary meaning of the Charter. Mr.
Gurtovoy's and Ms. Hampel's petition has a substantially broader scope to create
new policy regarding the use of technology to identify vehicles and their owners
or occupants, and would therefore be an initiative. Additional restrictions on the
use of initiatives by Iowa City residents is improper under the Charter, and unduly
burdens the democratic processes available to Iowa City residents protected by
the Charter. On behalf of Mr. Gurtovoy and Ms. Hampel, we respectfully ask this
body to accept the enclosed filings so that they may proceed with signature
collection as is their right as Iowa City residents. .--�
Respectfully,
Rita Bettis
Staff Attorney
ACLU of Iowa
(515) 243 -3988 ext. 15
rita.bettis@aclu-ia.org
aclu- ia.org
Randall Wilson
Legal Director
ACLU of Iowa
(515) 333 -2527
randall.wilson @aclu- ia.org
7'13
AFFIDAVIT TO COMMENCE INITIATIVE
STATE OF IOWA
COUNTY OF JOHNSON
The undersigned petitioners hereby propose to commence Initiative proceedings
pursuant to Article VII of the Charter of Iowa City.
1. Each of the undersigned is a voter who is registered to vote in Iowa City.
2. The undersigned will supervise the circulation of the Initiative petition and will be
responsible for filing it in proper form with the City Clerk of Iowa City.
3. The names, addresses, and phone numbers of the petitioners are as follows:
Aleksey Gurtovoy
Martha Hampel
4362 E. Court St.
915 Oakcrest #11
Iowa City, IA 52245
Iowa City, IA 52246
(319) 936 -0565
(319) 471 -7319
a, uq rtoygyO -meta- comm.com
4. All relevant notices relating to the initiative proposal shall be addressed as
follows:
Aleksey Gurtovoy
4362 E. Court St.
Iowa City, IA 52245
5. The ordinance proposed is attached hereto as an exhibit and by this referendum
made a part hereof.
Witness our 4nd is � da y of �� ¢� be , 2012.
- --
Alek u voy Martha Hampel
Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public, on this .S day of
2012, by Aleksey Gurtovoy and Martha Hampel, to me known to be the persons who
executed the foregoing Affidavit, and each of whom acknowledged that he /she executed
the same as his /her voluntary act and deed.
�;. C
, t Y Notary�Public
J
My commission expires
C-3
f •'a .1 h
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE ENACTING A NEW CHAPTER OF TITLE 9 Ch Y"
CODE OF IOWA CITY TO RESTRICT THE USE OF TRAFFIC ENFORCE- MENTr.: c,1
CAMERAS, DRONES, AND AUTOMATIC LICENSE -PLATE RECQ6t,�i�!t�I'
SYSTEMS.
WHEREAS we find the public safety benefits of police traffic surveillance
technology to be unproven and outweighed by the civil liberties and due process
rights of the citizens of Iowa City; and
WHEREAS independent studies have shown that traffic engineering and public
education efforts, such as driver feedback signs, yellow light timing, an all -red
clearance interval, and other less punitive means have much more significant
and lasting effectiveness In reducing traffic violations than traffic enforcement
cameras; and,
WHERAS the Iowa Department of Transportation has issued Guidelines
governing the use of automated traffic enforcement technology, approving its use
only after other engineering and enforcement solutions have been explored and
implemented, and limit their use to locations where there is a significant crash
history and where the placement of automatic traffic enforcement technology can
directly address the primary traffic safety issue; and
WHEREAS automated traffic citations disproportionately impact low income
residents who have registered their vehicles and function equivalently to a highly
regressive municipal taxation system; and
WHERAS Iowa City is home to a new set of students every year, and is visited
by thousands of parents and hundreds of thousands of sports fans; it's also
home to the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, a nationally renowned
hospital receiving more than half a million patient visits per year; the punitive
enforcement of minor, technical violations of traffic rules will damage the City, the
University, the hospital, and the businesses who are reliant on visitors, and a
large portion of students operate vehicles registered to a parent who unfairly will
be held liable for the traffic citation; and
WHEREAS laws prohibiting automatic traffic enforcement systems have passed
in over ten U.S. states given the growing concern over the civil liberties
implications of the systems and their unproven effects on traffic safety, especially
compared to less punitive traffic engineering and other enforcement solutions;
and
WHEREAS automatic license plate recognition technology is unregulated in
terms of data collection, storage, sharing, and poses significant risks to privacy
and core constitutional rights; and
WHEREAS domestic drones are unregulated in terms of data collection, storagg,Y
and sharing, and pose significant risks to privacy and core constitutional rights; 1. I F i.
and
WHEREAS drones should be deployed by law enforcement only with a warrant,
in an emergency, or when there are specific and articulable grounds to beliQte'
that the drone will collect evidence relating to a specific criminal act, and ndt `f& ! T . '
routine traffic surveillance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF IOWA CITY, IOWA:
SECTION I. AMENDMENT. A new chapter of Title 9, entitled "Limitations On The
Use of Traffic Surveillance Systems," is adopted as follows:
9. GENERAL: The city of Iowa City, including its various boards, agencies,
and departments, shall not:
A. Use any automatic traffic surveillance system or device, automatic
license plate recognition system or device, or domestic drone system
or device for the enforcement of a qualified traffic law violation, unless
a peace officer is present at the scene, witnesses the event, and
personally issues the ticket to the alleged violator at the time and
location of the violation; nor
B. Store, archive, transmit, share, publish, grant access to, sell, index,
cross - reference, or otherwise aggregate, distribute, analyze, or
process any data obtained through automatic traffic surveillance
system or device, automatic license plate recognition system or device,
or domestic drone system or device unless the data directly pertains to
a qualified traffic law violation or other criminal law violation for which a
ticket, citation, or arrest was issued or made by a peace officer who
was present at the scene.
2. DEFINITIONS: As used in this chapter:
A. "Qualified traffic law violation" means a violation of any of the following:
(1) any state or local law relating to compliance with a traffic control
signal or railroad crossing sign or signal; or (2) any state or local law
limiting the speed .of a motor vehicle.
B. "Ticket" means any traffic ticket, citation, summons, or other notice of
liability, whether civil, criminal, or administrative, issued in response to
an alleged qualified traffic law violation detected or recorded by a traffic
surveillance system or device.
C. "Automatic traffic surveillance system or device" means a device or
devices including but not limited to a camera system(s) that uses any
electronic, photographic, video, digital, or computer system to produce
any photograph, microphotograph, videotape, digital video, or any
other recorded image or digital record of a vehicle and /or its operator
and/or its occupants that can be used to establish identity or ownership
of a vehicle and /or identify its operator, owner, or occupants.
D. "Automatic license plate recognition system" means a computer -based
system(s) that captures an image of a license plate(s) and converts it
to a data file to be compared with databases or hot lists generated by
various law enforcement agencies, and which produces an alert when
there is a match between the collected license plate data and those
databases.
E. "Domestic drone ", "drone ", or "unmanned aerial vehicle" means an
aerial vehicle that does not carry a human operator that can fly
autonomously or be piloted remotely that is equipped with one or more
on -board cameras or other sensors for registering, observing, or
recording persons, objects, or events or for transmitting such
information as it is occurring or thereafter.
SECTION II. REPEALER. All other ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict
with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION III. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision, or part of this Ordinance
shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not
affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision, or part
thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION IV. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final
passage, approval, and publication, as approved by law.
r-
Marian Karr 3f(11)
Ew
From: Melvin Kelly <kel lyresearch plan @yahoo. com>
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 11:06 AM
To: mland @texas - city - tx.org ; glenn.barham @wichitafallstx.gov ; mayor @cityofdelrio.com ;
mayor @elpasotexas.gov ; lee.lessingwell @austintexas.gov ; themayor @ci.pasadena.tx.us
; mayor @houstontx.gov ; mayorjuliancastro @sanantonio.gov ; mayor @ucitymo.org ;
LPagano @stptersma.nat ; mayor @gocolumbiamo.com ; gwinstead @ci.bloomington.mn.us
; citycouncil @cityofrichfield.org ; abiede @rochestermn.gov ; at @minneapolis.org ;
Council; jon.crews @cedarfalls.com ; mayorgulba @ci.davenport.ia.us ; mayor @kcmo.org
Subject: The West Nile Virus by Melvin Lorenzo Kelly
Attachments: Misquitos.doc
From: Melvin Lorenzo Kelly
2014 Olive Rd.
Augusta, Ga. 30906
706 - 796 -3044
Email: kellyresearchplan@yahoo.com
To: Hon. United States of America Mayors
Sub: Blood Transmittal Diseases
The West Nile Virus
Date: October 9, 2012
Cc: United States Elected Officials
(City, County, State and Federal)
United States Civic Leaders
The Center for Disease Control and Prevention
Dear Honorable US Mayors / Elected Officials,
Recently, I emailed you four letters pertaining to my proposed projects to help create
employment for American citizens in areas that are really needed to improve the lives of
less fortunate Americans.
1. 4 -Point Homeless to Home Ownership
2. Educational (The elimination of Abbott Districts and Drop -Out Factories)
3. Violence in Music
4. Shelter in the Time of a Storm (Hurricanes and Tornados)
Today I would like to share with you another proposed project that can create
employment to reduce and control the population of mosquitoes, because infected
mosquitoes carry a virus known as the West Nile Virus that kills human beings and many
other species of life.
As of September 25, 2012 according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention,
48 states across the United States of America have reported the West Nile Virus infection
in people, birds and mosquitoes. Overall the CDC reported a total of 3,545 people were
infected with the WNV, and 147 people died from the infection of this disease.
The 3,545 cases reported thus far in 2012 is the highest numbers of WNV disease
reported to the CDC since the last week in September 2003. Seventy percent the cases
have been reported from eight states, (Texas, Mississippi, South Dakota, Michigan,
California, Oklahoma and Illinois) and 38 percent of all cases have been reported from
Texas.
I truly believe my proposed project to kill, control, and reduce the population of
mosquitoes in commercial, business and residential areas across America is well needed
today.
The American Government spends millions of dollars every year to prevent the spread of
HIV /AIDS which is a blood transmittal disease, on intravenous heroin and speed addicts
along with a kit that contains; hypodermic needles, syringes, a tourniquet, alcohol wipes,
filters, and a cooker to liquefy the drugs. As well as a supply of Naloxne which is used to
rescues an addict that is about to overdose.
There is no known antidote for a person infected with the West Nile Virus.
I am totally aware of the fact that most elected officials in America believe in practicing
what is known as legislative courtesy, but I find it not to be disrespectful if you choose to
contact me regarding a situation that affects Americans, regardless of what legislative
district you represent.
For more in formation about my proposed project to eliminate and control the mosquito
population or any other project as mentioned above please feel free to contact me.
Let's build a better America,
Melvin Lorenzo Kelly
Marian Karr
From: Robert and Elizabeth Engel <reengel @oaknoll.com>
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 11:20 AM
To: Council
Subject: Traffic Cameras
This correspondence will become a public record.
TO: Members of the Iowa City Council
FROM: Robert E "Bob" Engel
DATE: October 12, 2012
RE: Traffic Cameras
3f(12)
I strongly support the use of traffic cameras, particularly at busy intersections. The incidents of "running red
lights" and other related intersection violations in Iowa City are rampant. Scarcely a day goes by that my wife
and I do not witness such violations. I realize that such use should be carefully restricted, but please, safety
first!
I AM A LONG -TIME MEMBER OF THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, but on this issue I strongly disagree
with the position the Iowa chapter of the Union has taken against the use of traffic cameras. Whether I am
driving my car or have loaned my car, a violation may be charged to me whether the driver can be identified
by the camera image or not. After all, if I loan my car to someone and there is an accident for which the driver
is responsible, my insurance company is not going to say "since you were not driving, your insurance does not
apply."
Robert E. Engel
1 Oaknoll Court, Apt. 473
Iowa City, IA 52246
Phone 319 - 887 -5239
reengel@oaknoll.com
Marian Karr 3f(13)
From: Bill Ackerman <ba_iowacity @yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 11:17 AM
To: Council
Subject: Parking issue to address
Mayor Hayek and Council Members:
I wish to call to your attention an issue that affects our neighborhood and I keep getting different
answers on how to deal with it thru the police.
From time to time I park my vehicle(s) on Lincoln Avenue which is the adjancent street to our home
and recently, in seemingly increasing numbers, motorcycles and moped type vehicles park there as
well, and often (usually) park so close to my vehicle that I cannot get it out. This just happened this
morning and the officer came over and did tow a bike that was fully in the tow zone. Right now, I
have a truck that I absolutely cannot get out if I had to. Something has to be done about this. It has
to be illegal to park so closely to someone that they cannot move out of their space, and it has been
told to me that only one vehicle can occupy one parking space.
What I am asking is that this motorcyle parking be eliminated .from Lincoln avenue, EXCEPT, and
here is the solution to the problem, is that a motorbike parking only area be designated, perhaps at the
end of the street where it would not affect anyone and it would not interfere with people getting their
cars out of their spaces.
This has become a nuisance level issue, but if I had to get my vehicle out to go somewhere, I cannot
do so without knocking over a bike or two, or moving the bikes elsewhere. If I had to get out the
things are now that is my option. It should also be noted that in all cases where a vehicle is that
tightly blocked in, that the vehicle, not the bike, was parked there first.
I need to add that the bikes are parked perpindicular to the curb and sometimes there are three or four
bikes clustered together in one parking spot. Furthermore, it makes is very dfficult for my neighbor's
driveway not to be partially obstructed by bikes that stick out in the street further than cars that are
parked legally.
My contention is that these bikes are illegally parked as they are perpindicular to the curb and
multiple vehicles occupy one space.
The result is the immovability of a legally parked vehicle in a space on the street that cannot get out.
It is a most difficult situation that needs a quick solution. I hope you can take a few minutes to view
the situation, most any morning, and I will have pictures on my cell phone shortly to illustrate my
complaint.
The police are not sure what they can do, but something needs to be done, and soon. I await your
response and would be glad to meet with you on Lincoln Avenue to discuss this further.
Thank you,
Bill Ackerman
814 Newton Road
Iowa City, Iowa 52246
319 - 338 -8449 or 430 -3737
Marian Darr
From:
Tom Markus
Sent:
Monday, October 15, 2012 3:38 PM
To:
Marian Karr
Subject:
FW: Parking issue to address
For the agenda in response to Mr. Ackerman.
From: Sam Hargadine
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 3:01 PM
To: 'ba_iowacity@yahoo.com'
Cc: Tom Markus
Subject: FW: Parking issue to address
Mr. Ackerman,
Your email to the City Council was forwarded to me. I've also been in contact with the Community Service Officer that
you spoke with this morning and drove by Lincoln Avenue over the lunch hour. There were about a half dozen scooters
and motorcycles parked there when I drove by and I photographed them so you don't need to send in more.
I agree with you regarding the proximity problem to parked cars. The dead end of the street probably would be the best
solution for parking scooters and I've notified the appropriate staff for exploring that option.
It is my understanding that there isn't an ordinance that regulates the perpendicular parking. There are not designated
parking spaces there so the number of vehicles parked within a given space isn't something we can enforce either. Your
issue regarding the proximity to legally parked cars is certainly noted and I would ask that you give the City staff a little
while to come up with a solution. Thank you for bringing this to our attention.
Regards,
Samud.E & Xwgadim
Chief of Police
Iowa City Police Department
410 E. Washington St.
Iowa City, IA 52240 -1826
i
Marian Karr 3f(14)
From: Brian Boelk
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 1:35 PM
To: 'steven- bullard @uiowa.edu'
Cc: Rick Fosse; Mike Moran; Ron Knoche; Adam Bentley; Geoff Fruin; Marian Karr; Tom Markus
Subject: RE: ralston creek
Attachments: Creek Maintenance Application.pdf
Mr. Bullard,
Thank you for inquiries with regards to Ralston Creek, 7th Avenue, and the alley behind 7th Avenue.
With regards to the maintenance and mowing of the alley behind 7th Avenue, you are certainly welcome to mow
this in order to help with aesthetics and drainage. I can look into the possible posting of No Dumping signs and
will investigate further into the long term maintenance and the drainage of this area off the south end of the
alley.
The creek maintenance in this area falls amongst the Iowa Interstate Railroad and the adjacent properties as the
creek is located on both the railroad property and adjoining private properties. With that being said, the City
does have a Creek Maintenance Program, funded by our stormwater utility, that can assist private property
owners with the stabilization of creek banks where erosion and maintenance is a concern. I have attached the
application form for this program which also provides additional information. If you would like to discuss this
program and option in more detail feel free to contact me and I would be happy to do so.
The obstructions within the creek that you describe can be handled through a neighborhood cleanup possibly. I
know there are some scheduled cleanups this fall in this region of Ralston Creek so some of this may already be
addressed or in the plan. Carol Sweeting, Public Information /Education Coordinator, heads up these efforts and
can help point you in the right direction in terms of this issue. Carol can be reached at carol- sweetine @iowa-
city.ore or 319 - 356 -5164.
The flood plain distinctions /mapping have been revised since the addition of the Scott Park stormwater
management basin.
Please let me know if you have further questions or would like to meet to discuss further, and thank you for your
thoughts.
Thanks,
Brian A. Boelk, P.E., CPESC
Sr. Civil Engineer
City of Iowa City
Office: 319 - 356 -5437
Cell: 319 - 400 -1056
brian - boelk @iowa- citv.ore
From: Bullard, Steven A [mailto:steven- bullard @uiowa.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 11:18 AM
To: Council
Subject: ralston creek
Gentlepeople,
I have a few questions perhaps you could help me with.
I live at 927 7th Ave. and there is an alley which dead ends into ralston creek behind us. The area at the end has become
a dumping ground and no longer drains or gets mowed \maintained. Who would be responsible for the area? I would be
glad to mow it if I could. Any info would be appreciated in how to deal with the situation.
Who would be responsible for the creek maintenance itself? It serves as a storm drainage area does it not? There are
several obstructions along the stretch from seventh down to the prairie walkway which during storms reduce flow volume
drastically by forming dam areas.
Have the flood plain distinctions been revised since the input of the Scott park retention area? I am just wondering as we
have lived here since 1990 and the creek has been out of it's banks a several times but was never to a level in line with
the current map. I appreciate your help with this and also your time.
Sincerely,
Steve Bullard
CITY OF IOWA CITY
CREEK MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE APPLICATION
Name:
Address:
Home Phone: Daytime Phone: Email:
Can the City access your property for evaluation of this application?
Description of proposed work (please attach a sketch):
Yes No
Anticipated Schedule:
Request for financial assistance:
free disposal of debris removed from creek
Item Cost Estimate
I have read and understand the conditions listed on the reverse side of this application.
Property Owner's Signature Date
Name and address if different from above
IOWA CITY'S
CREEK MAINTENANCE
PROGRAM
BACKGROUND
This program has been developed to provide financial assistance for property owners to
perform creek maintenance. The program is intended to help cover the costs of
materials such as rip rap (stone) or plant materials used to stabilize a creek bank,
and /or to provide free disposal of debris removed from the creek. The goals of the
program are to reduce erosion and limit flooding by facilitating proper creek
maintenance. Projects may range from debris removal to erosion control and bank
stabilization. The program has a limited amount of funds. Comprehensive projects
spanning more than one property are often most effective and will be given a higher
priority.
INSTRUCTIONS
1. Fill out the application and include a sketch of the proposed work and attach
estimates or quotes you may have.
2. Make sure that the application is signed by the property owner(s).
CONDITIONS
1. The property owner is responsible for the payment of all expenses associated
with the work. Upon submittal of paid receipts, the City will reimburse the
property owner within 30 days for costs approved by this application.
2. Implementation of an approved project is the sole responsibility of the property
owner. The City is not liable for personal injury or property damage resulting
from said work.
3. Projects approved for funding carry no implied warrantee by the City.
Implementation and maintenance are the responsibility of the property owner.
4. The property owner is responsible for any local, state or federal permits that may
be required. In most cases if any permit is required, it will be a local permit that
can be obtained from the Housing and Inspection Services Department (356-
5120).
5. Free disposal of debris removed from a creek has the following requirements:
• Place the debris at the curb between the sidewalk and the street.
• Place all wood in a separate pile from other debris (such as shopping
carts and tires).
• Call 3 days in advance to arrange for pick up (356- 5140).
6. Involve your neighbors. If your neighbors are not a part of the project, at least
keep them informed and seek their input before doing the work. Drainage issues
have been known to cause years of ill will between neighbors.
7. The IRS does not consider this taxable income; however, a W -9 tax form will
need to be completed and returned to the City prior to receiving the
reimbursement check.
Marian Karr 3f(15)
From: Melvin Kelly <kel lyresearch plan @yahoo. com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 9:02 PM
To: mland @texas - city - tx.org ; mayor @cityofdelrio.com ; mayor @elpasotexas.gov ;
themayor @ci.pasadena.tx.us ; mayor @houstontx.gov ; mayorjuliancastro @sanantonio.gov
; mayor @ucitymo.org ; mayor @gocolumbiamo.com ; gwinstead @ci.bloomington.mn.us ;
citycouncil @cityofrichfield.org ; abiede @rochestermn.gov ; Council;
jon.crews @cedarfalls.com ; mayorgulba @ci.davenport.ia.us ; mayor @kcmo.org
Subject: Employment, Homelessness and Education by Melvin Lorenzo Kelly
Attachments: Homelessness, Employment, Education.doc
From: Melvin Lorenzo Kelly
2014 Olive Rd.
Augusta, Ga. 30906
706 - 796 -3044
Email: kellyresearchplan(d�yahoo.com
To: United States Mayors / Elected Officials
Sub: Homelessness, Employment and Education
Date: October 17, 2012
Cc: US Senators
US Representatives
US Civic Leaders
US Clergy
Dear Hon. Elected Official,
Recently I emailed you a letter describing to you what my proposed homelessness and
educational projects will do if implemented, and approximately how much it will cost to
complete the final stages of its research process.
I believe my homelessness and education projects will be the greatest research and
development projects created in America since the Manhattan Project. In 1939 many
scientist and physicist got together and began to create what is known as nuclear bombs.
In 1945 the United States dropped two Atomic Bombs in Japan, one in Hiroshima and the
other in Nagasaki which caused a lot of destruction.
My proposed projects will have the same force behind them as an Atomic bomb, but
instead of destroying life they will create a new way of life for the homeless, the
unemployed and the less educated. America needs a new explosion of opportunity for
less fortunate Americans during this time of recession to keep from going into a Great
Depression.
Life do not have to be complicated and everyone deserves the right to have a roof over
their head and some money in there pocket, the only thing worst than a dead dog is a
broke man that cannot provide for his family. The only two things that man will always
do in this world is have sex and die, but what happens in between that depends on what is
available and his ambition to survive.
The American people depend on the people they elected into governmental office to
make life better for them; with the respect and the understanding that the office they were
elected into, does not belong to them, but to the people and they are public servants.
The following material describes the intended goals of my proposed projects.
Four Point Homeless to Homeownership Proiect
Objective:
The final stages of this proposed project entail hiring 16 professionals, architects
contractors, etc for a period of 8 weeks to complete the final research process.
Goals:
1. Eliminate Homelessness
2. Create Employment
3. Create Employment Training
4. Re -build torn down Urban Neighborhoods
5. Reduce Recidivism
6. Create constructive human activity for impoverish Americans to reduce crime.
Total needed to finish homelessness research process.... $191,118.00
Education Proiect
Objective:
The final stages of this proposed project entail hiring 16 professionals, computer
engineers, school teachers, etc for a period of 8 weeks to complete the final research
process.
Goals:
1. To help eliminate Drop -Out Factories
2. To help eliminate Abbott Districts
3. To elevate obtaining a basic education as a top priority within Urban America
4. To introduce a new way of obtaining a basic education in America
5. Create Employment
Total needed to finish educational research process...... $141,000.00
Overall total for both projects
$332,118.00
The growth of America has always been based on new inventions and ideals. Most of the
appliances and machinery we used today have only been created within the last 200
years, before then for thousands of years mankind survived without electricity, the light
bulb, televisions, airplanes and telephones. Today we have more to work with, but less is
being created to help the less fortunate Americans citizens.
In the Bible in the book of John 12:8 Jesus Christ said that "there will always be poor
people in the world" being poor is not a crime, it is an opportunity for those who are
financially blessed to give.
Let's build a better America
Melvin Lorenzo Kelly
Marian Karr 3f(16)
From:
Matthew J. Hayek <mhayek @hhbmlaw.com>
Sent:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 1:59 PM
To:
daniel - benton @uiowa.edu
Cc:
Marian Karr; Tom Markus
Subject:
senior center
Mr. Benton,
Thanks for your email re the senior center commission. We very much appreciate your service to the community and to
the city. Safe travels next year!
Matt Hayek
Matthew J. Hayek
Hayek, Brown, Moreland & Smith, L.L.P.
120 East Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa 52240 -3924
319.337.9606 telephone
319.338.7376 facsimile
Email: mhayek @hhbmlaw.com
Website: www.hhbmlaw.com
Marian Karr
From: Matt Hayek
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 1:48 PM
To: 'Matthew J. Hayek' (mhayek @hhbmlaw.com)
Cc: Marian Karr; Tom Markus
Subject: FW: Senior Center Commission term
From: Benton, Daniel J [mailto:daniel- benton @uiowa.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 1:17 PM
To: Matt Hayek
Cc: Linda Kopping; Jay Honohan
Subject: Senior Center Commission term
Dear Mayor Hayek,
I am writing to inform you that I will not ask to renew my Senior Center Commission appointment after it expires at the
end of this year. My travel plans next year indicate that I would miss too many meetings to maintain a regular presence
on the commission.
I believe the Senior Center is in very good hands with its current staff and commission leadership. Thank you for the
opportunity to serve.
Sincerely,
Daniel Benton
729 N. Linn Street
Iowa City, IA 52245
e -mail: daniel- benton @uiowa.edu
Cell: 319 - 321 -4148