HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-11-04 Bd Comm minutes3b(1)
MINUTES
AD HOC SENIOR SERVICES COMMITTEE
OCTOBER 15, 2014 — 3:30 P.M.
HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
FINAL
Members Present: Mercedes Bern -Klug (3:37 P.M.), Rick Dobyns, Jane Dohrmann, Jay
Honohan, Hiram Rick Webber, Joe Younker (Chair)
Members Absent: Ellen Cannon
Staff Present: Michelle Buhman, Geoff Fruin, Marian Karr
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council
action):
None.
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Younker called the meeting to order at 3:35 P.M.
CONSIDER MOTION ADOPTING CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR AMENDED:
a. Minutes of the Meeting on 10/01/14
b. Memo to Asst. City Mgr.: Follow -up from the October 1, 2014, Meeting
Dobyns moved to adopt the Consent Calendar as presented. Honohan seconded the
motion. The motion carried 5 -0, Cannon and Bern -Klug absent.
DISCUSSION OF FINAL REPORT STRUCTURE AND DRAFTING PROCESS:
Younker stated that his goal at today's meeting was to finalize their discussion on a. and b.
below and to then finalize the summary of the Senior Center Evaluation that will appear in their
written report to Council.
a. Initial Sections (pgs 19 -21)
Beginning on page 19, Younker stated that he would entertain a motion to adopt
the reformatted version of the initial sections as it appears. Dohrmann moved
to adopt the reformatted version of the initial section as it appears on page
19. Dobyns seconded the motion. The discussion began with Honohan noting
that he is opposed to this, and stated that he would like to make some motions
regarding this section. Honohan moved that `as summarized below' be
deleted and that they restore the entire two charges from the resolution, as
in the subcommittee's draft of 9/28114. Webber seconded the motion.
Younker noted that the reason behind summarizing the charges was for brevity.
He added that the entire resolution can be included as an appendix to the report.
Honohan stated that the reason he is proposing they put them back in is that
there are some items they discussed, particularly in regards to diversity, which
are eliminated if this summary is used. Younker reminded Members that this is
the initial section they are discussing right now, part of the introduction. He
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 2
added that he would not have an issue with making this change. The motion to
amend carried 6 -0, Cannon absent.
Continuing on page 19, Honohan spoke to the paragraph beginning with 'Public
comment.' Honohan moved that they delete `non - profit' from this section.
Dobyns seconded the motion. Honohan noted that they have looked at profit
and non - profit earlier and clarified that this should read as 'local agencies
providing services to seniors.' Karr asked for clarification on which handout is
being referred to. Younker noted that to be consistent in their discussions they
would use Honohan's late handout entitled "Motions for meeting October 15...."
The motion to amend carried 6 -0, Cannon absent.
Returning to the initial motion under this section, Members agreed that they
would adopt the initial sections as amended by Honohan's motions. The
original motion as amended carried 6 -0, Cannon absent.
b. Acceptance of reformatted Charge 1: Senior Center Evaluation (pgs 22 -26)
Younker then moved to the proposed changes beginning on page 22. He stated
that he would entertain a motion to accept the reformatted Charge 1 summary,
which begins on page 22 of the Committee packet. Dohrmann moved to
accept the reformatted Charge 1 summary, beginning on page 22 of the
Committee packet. Dobyns seconded the motion.
Bern -Klug began the discussion, asking if the changes were mostly editing or if
the substance of the material was changed. Younker stated that the intent was
to reformat what had already been prepared to make it fit into the template better.
He stated that he did edit the summary to some degree for brevity, noting that the
entire evaluation and resolution will be part of the appendix that will accompany
the report. Honohan stated that he has some proposed changes and stated his
memo referred to the page numbers of the crossed out / redlined version and
would be referring to them for the remaining amendments. On page 24 —
beginning with the sentence that says 'A copy of the full evaluation is attached to
this report.' Honohan moved that they delete the word `issues' and replace
it with `items.' He stated he does this because the term 'issues' is a combative
term, and 'items' is a better alternative here.
Continuing on page 24, Honohan stated that he would move to bring back
the word `primary,' before `central' on the first bullet under `Areas of
Excellence.' He believes the Senior Center is the primary central resource for
quality programs and services that promote optimal aging. Younker stated that
he believes they had this discussion previously, and that this change was made
to track the language that comes out of the written evaluation. Honohan stated
that they deleted primary and left only central, and that he is saying both need to
be included. Younker stated that what they are discussing is what was already
approved by the Committee in the original written report.
Continuing with his proposed amendments, Honohan noted that on the first
bullet point on page 24, where it says `accordingly,' he would move to put
in the words `The Committee agrees with the accreditation report of the
National Institute on Aging that the Center accomplishes its Vision
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 3
Mission.' Moving to the second bullet, Honohan stated that he would move to
restore the deleted lines, and would add `The Committee agrees with the...,'
delete `accordingly' and `the' and replace it with `that.' Bern -Klug asked if
there is any way they could not focus on this right now, as she has not had time
to read the late handout. Younker stated that no one has had the time as they
just received it. He added that what he would like to do is to get through Charge
1 today. Honohan apologized for not getting the handout to Members sooner.
Bern -Klug stated that she thought that perhaps they could focus on what was in
the packet and give everyone a chance to read this late handout before they
continue with the discussion. Younker stated that he believes they can get
through Honohan's proposals fairly quickly.
Moving on to page 25, Honohan stated that he would move to restore the
charge as written in the subcommittee's draft of September 28, 2014. Under
the third bullet, Honohan moved to add 'SHIPP, and Honoring Your Wishes,'
as well as `The Center staff is responsible for coordinating these programs,
organizing registration, appointments, in addition to organizing
volunteers.' Continuing on page 25, Honohan moved to restore the charge
as set out in the subcommittee's report of September 28, 2014. Honohan
moved to restore the bullet points regarding members and staff as set out
in the subcommittee's report of September 28, 2014. Honohan moved to
add to the bullet on `staff the following: However the Center does serve
seniors who have disabilities and limited cognitive impairment.' Honohan
moved to delete the last two bullet points on page 25. Honohan would add
to the bullet beginning with `Ethnic' the following: The pool of seniors who
are black, Hispanic, and Asian is small.' Honohan noted that on this one he
simply got confused and thus deleted it. Honohan moved that also on C he
would delete `issues' and replace it with `matters.' On page 26, Honohan
moved to delete the word `should,' and replace it with `is,' on the first bullet
point, as he believes the staff is already doing this. Bern -Klug stated that
perhaps they should take `should' out and say that the staff 'is continuing.'
Honohan agreed with this change.
Younker reiterated that the changes that were made were basically in the name
of brevity for the introduction portion of the report, and that the entire evaluation
will be passed on to Council for their review. He added that he does not have
any particular resistance to any of Honohan's motions regarding page 24. He
stated he would entertain a motion to amend the pending motion to include Jay's
suggested revisions under his heading 'page 24.' Honohan moved to amend
the pending motion with his suggested revisions under the heading `page
24.' Dobyns seconded the motion. Members then began to discuss
Honohan's proposals, with Dobyns stating that he thinks some of this is word
play and that he would not vote to use the word 'primary' here for all the same
reasons he initially deliberated. Honohan further clarified his motion to delete the
word 'accordingly' and add his proposed sentence here. Some confusion was
noted over the word being `according' on the other version. The motion for
adopting amendments on page 24 carried 5 -1; Dobyns in the negative and
Cannon absent.
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 4
Younker asked for a friendly amendment to the pending motion to include
Honohan's page 25 suggested revisions. After some discussion and clarification,
it was decided that the next motion would be for Honohan's amendments to
pages 25 and 26. Honohan moved to adopt said amendments for pages 25
and 26. Webber seconded the motion. Honohan reiterated the changes he is
proposing here and why, giving Members further background on his reasoning.
Dobyns asked the Chair if they could vote on these one by one, as it is getting
confusing. Dohrmann agreed that it probably would be easier on this page to do
them one by one.
Younker stated that they would then move to the first motion on page 25. Karr
reminded Members that what they have on the floor is pages 25 and 26.
Honohan agreed to withdraw his motion, and Shaw agreed to withdraw his
second. Moving forward to 4a, Honohan moved that the third bullet, top of
page 4, to add `SHIPP, Honoring Your Wishes,' and his proposed sentence
as stated. Dohrmann seconded the motion. The motion carried 6 -0,
Cannon absent.
Honohan next moved to restore the charge as set out in the
subcommittee's report of September 28, 2014. Webber seconded the
motion. Younker briefly explained, again, why he deleted the full text of the
charge in this section. Honohan stated that he believes they need to keep
reminding the Council of what the Committee was told to do. The motion failed
3 -3; Dobyns, Dohrmann, and Younker in the negative and Cannon absent.
Honohan moved to restore the bullets on `staff and `membership' that have
been proposed to be deleted. Continuing, Honohan noted that he believes it is
important that the Council be reminded of the size of the membership at the
Center and also the staff. Bern -Klug seconded the motion. The motion
carried 4 -2; Dobyns and Younker in the negative and Cannon absent.
Honohan moved to add to the bullet on `staff the language, `However the
Center does serve seniors who have disabilities and limited cognitive
impairment.' Dobyns seconded the motion. Honohan further explained why
he believes this needs to be in here. The motion carried 5 -1; Dobyns in the
negative and Cannon absent.
Honohan moved to add to the bullet beginning with `Ethnic,' the words,
`The pool of seniors who are black, Hispanic, and Asian is small.' Younker
stated that by calling out these three ethnicities they seem to be limiting the
discussion of diversity to particular groups. Shaw stated that they could say all
diverse groups outside of what is the base population of the Midwest is small in
Iowa City and Chicago and elsewhere. Dohrmann stated that they need to be
very careful with this. Several members agreed that use of the word 'small'
suggests inconsequential. Bern -Klug and Honohan withdrew the motion.
Honohan moved to delete the last two bullet points on page 25. He briefly
explained why he now believes this is no longer necessary. Bern -Klug
seconded the motion. The motion carried 6 -0; Cannon absent.
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 5
On page 25, Honohan moved to delete the word `issues' and replace with
`matters' on Item C. Webber seconded the motion. The motion carried 6 -0;
Cannon absent.
Moving to page 26, Honohan moved to amend the first bullet by deleting the
word `should' and replace with the word `is.' He noted that the Center is
currently doing this so the `should' is really incorrect. Dohrmann suggested 'is
being' and others suggested 'is continuing.' Members agreed that `is
continuing' works, and Honohan agreed to this amendment to his motion.
Dobyns seconded the motion. After a brief discussion, Members realized that
the 'should' being replaced with 'is' was correct to begin with and Honohan
original motion stands. The motion carried 6 -0; Cannon absent.
Going back to the original motion to adopt the reformatted Charge 1 as
amended, Younker took a roll call. The motion as amended carried 5 -1;
Dobyns in the negative and Cannon absent.
C. Charge 2: Physical and Financial Resources
Younker noted that part of their charge here is to assess and make
recommendations on how Council should use current financial and physical
resources. As part of this, the Committee gathered information from various
agencies, both profit and non - profit, to assess the services being offered in the
community. Younker noted that they have approved in the template the first
three sections, beginning on page 27, dealing with understanding City financials.
This was done through things like the presentation from the City Finance
Director. In their review, Younker noted that they have attempted to determine
the needs of the senior population in Iowa City. Discussions were then held by
the Committee to review their findings.
1) Understanding of City Financials (pg 27) — Dobyns moved to adopt
the Charge 2 background information as it begins on page 27 of the packet,
through page 29. Honohan seconded the motion. Discussion began with
Honohan stating that he believes this section is too long and too much
information is included. He stated that he believes they should continue the
bullet style format through this part of the report, as well. Honohan spoke to what
he believes needs to be in this portion of the report. He added that he believes
the Committee needs to review this section and come up with a much shorter
version. Bern -Klug stated that she is not sure that they have enough information
to say what the needs of the senior population really are. She believes the
Council needs to do an official survey to determine this information. She
believes the Committee needs to discuss this further, first of all, but that the
Council really needs to do a professional survey to ascertain this information.
Younker stated that he agrees that the information they have received is really
not enough to make this analysis, but that their recommendation could be that a
more formal analysis is needed. Younker added that he does believe Council
needs to know what information the Committee received from various agencies,
as well as public comment, regarding this issue.
Bern -Klug continued to share her concerns with this section, noting that the
vision is optimal aging, and the way this is written makes it sound like the Center
doesn't welcome or serve people that aren't healthy and active, and then
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 6
therefore the other agencies help those who aren't healthy and active. She
stated that this is not how she understands things to be. Referring to the first
sentence on page 29, "The target population of the Center is active, healthy
seniors, to those who need help to maintain or improve function in their day -to-
day lives." Bern -Klug stated that this is not true. Dohrmann asked if they
shouldn't go through this page by page, as she has concerns about the length of
this section, as well as specific parts. Younker stated that he was hopeful to
avoid a line -by -line edit here. He stated that he would like to get a sense from
the Committee as a whole as to where they are with the document.
Younker noted that Honohan believes it to be too long. Bern -Klug stated she has
concerns about the general findings and needs section and added that she
believes they need a separate section that gives their recommendations, instead
of mixing the two in this section. Younker asked Bern -Klug if they should remove
the third section — general findings and needs of the senior population, and deal
with instead as recommendations. He asked if Bern -Klug would then be
comfortable with the first two sections. Bern -Klug stated that yes she would, but
that she is uncomfortable with the last paragraph on page 27 as well. She
pointed out the specific part dealing with property tax reform putting significant
pressures on the General Fund. She stated that this paragraph, while it may be
true, is not what she believes the Council asked them to focus on. She pointed
out that the charge talks about 'current resources.' This paragraph is speaking to
potential future cutbacks. Dobyns noted that this report from this Commission is
going to assist future Councils in developing future budgets. Therefore, the
future is what needs to be discussed, according to Dobyns. Bern -Klug
responded that she believes they need to be clear on their charge, and that the
charge is 'what is the current situation,' that it would make sense to pay some
attention to this paragraph. However, she believes the Committee has
dominated their meetings with the framing that the charge of this Committee is to
figure out how the City should deal with the upcoming cutbacks. She believes
that this is not their charge, and she asked for a clarification of their charge.
Younker read from the resolution establishing the Commission Charge B " ... that
the Committee is to make recommendations to the City Council on how Iowa City
should use current financial and physical resources to meet the needs of Iowa
City seniors." He stated that the charge goes on to provide that "...these
recommendations should consider the City's use of existing resources, mission,
and programming required to more effectively serve the growing senior
population in the community, in accordance with the inclusive and sustainable
values expressed in the strategic plan." Bern -Klug pointed out again that it states
'current' here. Discussion continued, with Younker providing more clarification of
what Charge B entails. Bern -Klug asked again what the City's budget is, the
amount, and that she asked this at a previous meeting as well. She stated that if
you look at the overall budget amount, the Senior Center portion is less than 1 %
of the overall budget. Karr and Fruin provided some background information on
the budget amounts. Fruin stated that the General Fund has total revenues of
$48 million.
Younker brought the discussion back to what they need to look at first. He stated
that if by agreeing to take up section 3 and the recommendation section, he
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 7
asked if there was consensus to at least agree on the background section as set
forth in sections 1 and 2. Dobyns called the question at this point. Honohan
noted that you have to have a vote on the call of the question when the Chair
does not declare it. Younker deferred to Karr at this point, and she noted that
this is not typically how they handle it. If a Member calls a question it ends it.
Bern -Klug stated that she does not believe they are done discussing this issue.
Dobyns suggested a second on the question. Dohrmann asked for some
clarification on what it is they are voting on, and it was noted that the call is to
end the discussion at this point and vote on the discussion. Dobyns stated that
he believes they should try to move this along. No second was given.
Honohan stated that with the concerns they have heard this evening, he believes
pages 27, 28, and 29 needs to be rethought. He volunteered to work on this,
stating that he would make sure that the Chair and Vice -Chair received his work
prior to Committee distribution. He wants to try to address his and Bern - Klug's
concerns, yet still capture what he believes this section is calling for. Younker
stated that he appreciates this, but he first wanted to review with Bern -Klug her
concerns. He suggested they deal with section 3 through recommendations, and
asked Bern -Klug if sections 1 and 2 are okay as written. She responded that in
#1 she wants to see the total General Funds budget listed so that it shows what
the Senior Center's portion of this is, which is 1 % of the General Fund. Bern -
Klug added that she wants to go back through this and make sure it is dealing
with what their process was. She stated that also okay on section 2 is where
they talk about which agencies they collected the most information from.
However, she does not believe they have come to an understanding of what the
needs of the senior population are. Younker then stated that he would entertain
a motion to accept sections 1 and 2. Karr stated that there is already a motion
on the floor to accept pages 27 through 29. Dobyns withdrew this original
motion. Honohan withdrew his second.
2) Overview of Process to Determine Needs of the Senior Population
(pg 28) — Dohrmann moved to accept sections 1 and 2, with the amendment
to add General Fund information and Senior Center information, per Bern -
Klug's recommendations. Webber seconded the motion. Honohan stated
that he believes they need to see these changes in writing before they vote them
in. The discussion turned to the last paragraph in section 1 and it being retained
in the report. Bern -Klug reiterated her concern with this paragraph, stating that
she believes it is not about the process of what the Committee did to arrive at
their recommendations. The motion carried 4 -2; Bern -Klug and Honohan in
the negative and Cannon absent.
3) General Finds of Needs of the Senior Population (pgs 28 -29) —
Younker then moved to discussion on part 3. He stated that he would entertain a
motion to approve this section. Dobyns moved to approve section 3 as
written. Dohrmann seconded the motion. Bern -Klug stated that she thought
they already discussed this section. Dohrmann stated that she agrees with Bern -
Klug, that they need to rework this section. Younker stated that he understands
Bern - Klug's point and that some of these issues can be addressed through
recommendations. However, he believes they need to have some conclusion
that tells Council what they learned from the investigation they did conduct.
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 8
Bern -Klug asked if they can wait until they finish their process to see what it is
they do come up with. Younker suggested that he and Dohrmann prepare some
draft language for discussion at the next meeting. Honohan stated that they
need something to look at, that he agrees with Bern -Klug on this issue.
Dohrmann addressed the first sentence in this section, noting that the intent is
that it is a continuum. Dobyns withdrew his motion at this point.
4) Discussion of Proposed Charge 2 recommendations
*Chair Younker and Vice -Chair Dohrmann (pgs 30 -31)
Younker noted that he and Dohrmann worked on this portion of the draft, coming
up with 11 proposed recommendations for discussion. Bern -Klug then has a
proposal of five or six additional ones. Younker stated that he would like to
discuss each of these recommendations at this point, have a motion and a
second, and then a vote on each. He noted that seconding the motion does not
mean you agree or disagree with the recommendation, but that it allows the
Committee to discuss the issue at hand. They need to do this in order to move
forward with completing their report to Council.
# 1 - The City's General Fund funds the majority (approximately 70 -75 %)
of the Center's budget. City Staff expects that property tax reform will put
significant pressure on the General Fund in the coming years. In light of
this expectation, the Center should take steps to become more self -
sufficient. Specifically, the Center should engage in a dialogue with City
Staff to identify revenue sources to replace the expected decrease in
funds available from the General Fund. The dialogue should include a
discussion of reasonable and appropriate goals for identifying and
utilizing revenue sources.
Honohan moved to recommend this to Council. Dohrmann seconded the
motion. Discussion began with Honohan noting that the Center is an entity and
cannot speak for itself. Looking at the wording where it says the City staff shall
engage in a dialogue with the Center staff, Honohan stated that they always do
this. Fruin agreed that this does happen during the budget process. Bern -Klug
asked if they didn't vote this down at the last meeting. Younker stated that his
understanding around the discussion regarding the term `cost recovery' was that
Dohrmann had talked about reframing the issue in terms of identifying revenue
sources. Dohrmann stated that she thought there were several concerns about
the term 'cost recovery' in their past discussions and that yes, she had suggested
reframing it in a different way.
Honohan stated that he does not like the word 'self- sufficient.' He added that the
Senior Center will never be self- sufficient, that it is like other departments within
the City that will never become self- sufficient. Honohan stated that what he
would support on #1 are the first two sentences, along with the last sentence.
Bern -Klug asked if they are suggesting the Senior Center engage in a budget
process that would be different from the other City departments. Fruin stated
that if their financial projections come true, every department will be going
through a similar process. Bern -Klug reiterated that she wants to make sure the
process isn't one that singles out the Senior Center. Dohrmann stated that the
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 9
intent behind this is to be proactive and look at other revenue sources for the
Center. Younker stated that a concern he has is if this Committee's
recommendations don't address budget concerns, and don't address and identify
additional revenue sources, that down the road the Center could be at a
disadvantage in future budget cycles. He added that departments that do have
these discussions upfront and make plans will be in a better position having
already planned for such cutbacks. Honohan stated that he agrees with Younker
in the context that they need to explore ways for the Center to increase their
revenue in order to make up for any upcoming shortfalls; however, he does not
like the language in this paragraph. He added that every draft that he has
submitted has had language like this, as did the subcommittee's report. Younker
noted that those were in response to Charge 1, and that now they are talking
about Charge 2, Recommendations for the Allocation and Use of Resources. He
then reviewed the two sentences that Honohan is taking issue with.
Fruin asked if he could make a suggestion at this point. He stated that in his
memo to the Committee, he noted that in the existing budget document that
Council has approved, there are performance measures. One of these for the
Center is a cost - recovery goal, which is stated as 25 %, and to increase this
percent. Continuing, Fruin noted that what has not been done to date is to
articulate what this increase should be. He suggested that the recommendation
may be for staff to continue to look at the cost - recovery goal that they have set
and to more clearly articulate what that end goal is, as well as the road map on
how to reach this goal. Bern -Klug spoke to the last sentence, where it addresses
`appropriate goals,' adding that to her it insinuates that the current goal is
inappropriate. Fruin clarified what this statement might be alluding to, adding
that in three years they would like to see 30 %, in five years this might change,
and that once the goals are articulated, there needs to be a plan on how the
Center would meet those goals. For example, increase fundraising, increase
membership fees, or increase rental opportunities, etc. Younker spoke to this, as
well, noting that the goal was to create a more formal approach to addressing the
issue. Bern -Klug added that another thing they do not know about this supposed
cutback is how the City plans to handle it. She stated that it is not a given that
the Center would be touched at all at this point. Younker stated that what this
recommendation would do, basically, is recommend that the staff and the Center
engage in a dialogue to deal with the expected decrease in revenue and to come
up with reasonable and appropriate goals. He added that he would leave it to the
discretion of the Center staff and City staff to determine what those reasonable
and appropriate goals would be. Fruin stated that one thing the Committee could
consider is to direct the process to take place, and also stipulate that such effort
should not result in a reduction of services offered by the Senior Center. If this is
a major concern for Members, Fruin stated that adding this wording should
alleviate their concerns. Discussion continued with Members voicing their
concerns over this section. Bern -Klug noted that even if they do not put this in
their recommendations, the City staff is still going to meet with Center staff to
review their budget and make whatever goals they see fit. Fruin added that to
have this process formalized it helps to set the wheels in motion in a very public
way to plan accordingly and to be prepared for those unplanned cuts down the
road. Younker stated that he has a concern with not including this as it may look
to Council like the Committee never even considered it. Bern -Klug stated that
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 10
they could also recommend that the Council find other ways to make up any
funding shortfalls, instead of asking the Senior Center to take a cut.
Honohan stated that he would like to suggest that after the portion 'after the
coming years,' to add `The Committee recommends that the Senior Center
Commission and staff, and the City staff, continue to work on goals to identify
and utilize revenue sources,' and to then delete the rest of this paragraph. Karr
read the now amended recommendation. Honohan moved to make a friendly
amendment to his original motion, as discussed. Dohrmann agreed that
her second would stand on this motion. The motion carried as amended 5-
1; Dobyns in the negative and Cannon absent.
Younker stated that he is overly optimistic that they can take the next three items
in one chunk.
# 2 - In connection with Recommendation No. 1, the Center
should consider implementing a sliding, income -based scale
regarding membership dues and activity fees.
# 3 - In connection with Recommendation No. 1, the Center
should consider formalizing its scholarship program.
# 4 - In connection with Recommendation No. 1, the Center
should assess opportunities to generate revenue through the
rental of meeting /gathering space.
He explained that the idea is to give three recommendations that might help the
Center achieve the goal in the first recommendation. These three
recommendations deal with implementing a sliding, income -based scale
regarding membership dues and activity fees; to consider formalizing the
Center's scholarship program; and to assess opportunities to generate revenue
through the rental of meeting and /or gathering space at the Center. Younker
noted that these are not specific in any nature, but merely recommendations to
consider as part of the process that the Committee is recommending in #1.
Honohan noted that he does not want to vote on these as one item. Honohan
moved #2 in order to begin discussion. Webber seconded the motion.
Honohan stated that he is opposed to implementing a sliding, income -based
scale regarding membership dues and activity fees, and believes this would be
very complicated. He also is against compelling people to report how much they
earn or do not earn. He stated that they have many people at the Center with
low incomes who do not like to be classified as such, and therefore he is against
#2 as it is written. Younker stated that he is aware of the Recreation Department
having such a sliding scale, income -based system, but that he doesn't have the
specifics on it. Fruin stated that there are discounts for programs, more so than
a scholarship, based on income levels. Dobyns asked Fruin if there are any
enterprise programs within the City that use cost - recovery methods and utilize a
sliding scale feature. Fruit stated that there are none he is aware of, but that they
do have scholarship programs. Bern -Klug stated that she believes the way the
amended motion that just passed was reworded puts the responsibility on
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 11
generating ideas to the people who understand the options the best, that being
the Steering Committee, the Center staff, and the City. She thinks that this
Committee does not need to offer examples of this. Therefore, Bern -Klug does
not believe they need # 2, # 3, or # 4. Dohrmann asked for some clarification of
someone needing help covering an activity fee, for example. She asked if they
would have to have a personal discussion, versus just going online like they
would for a regular registration.
Younker asked Honohan at this point if the evaluation of the Center doesn't
mention adjusting membership dues, and Honohan stated that it does. Honohan
noted that at least one Commissioner has discussed with him about having
meetings with not only the Commission but also Center participants as a whole.
Honohan noted that they did this previously, the first time they initiated a
participant fee. They held public meetings at that time, where participants were
given the opportunity to voice their opinions. The vast majority did approve
enacting fees, and at one time there was even an offer that those over 85 years
of age did not have to pay a fee. Honohan shared that three participants stood
up and said they could pay the fee just like everyone else. Dohrmann stated that
she is fine with taking out # 3 and # 4 based upon what Bern -Klug stated.
Considering #2, Younker stated that he would like to go ahead and take a vote.
Motion failed 1 -5; Younker in the positive and Cannon absent.
Younker then stated that he would entertain a motion for #3. Honohan moved
to recommend #3, recommending a formalization of the Center's
scholarship program. Dohrmann seconded the motion. Discussion began
with Honohan stating that they already have a formal policy for scholarships. He
added that he sees no need for this recommendation. Younker asked Senior
Center staff member Buhman to give them some information on the current
program. Buhman stated that in the program guide there are basic guidelines,
income - based. For instance, if someone is on the City discount for water, they
are automatically put on the Center's scholarship fund. This reduces the
membership to $10 regardless of the residential area that the person lives in.
Buhman noted that participants also get a 25% discount on programs that are
paid to independent contractors. This 25% is the amount the Senior Center
would normally take in, leaving the contractor their normal 75 %. Also, any fees
that are paid to the Center for materials, Buhman noted these would be waived if
someone is on the scholarship program. She added that the person would need
to come to the Senior Center initially to let staff know they are on this program.
They are not asked for formal documentation, according to Buhman, that the
participant is taken at their word. Bern -Klug stated that to her it sounds like there
is a formal process in place already. She asked how they would word this
recommendation to reflect what the intention is of having the process of getting a
scholarship revisited. She asked what is really behind this recommendation.
Dohrmann stated that it would be to expand on the formal program, such as if
someone wanted to be able to register online. Buhman stated that if someone
asks to be put on the scholarship fund, they are. They have formal guidelines
that they follow, but participants are not forced to provide any documentation.
Staff considers it hard enough for a person to come and ask for this help, so they
don't force the person to prove their need. Bern -Klug asked if a recommendation
for the Steering Committee to reconsider how people apply for the scholarship
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 12
program isn't needed, one that would minimize stigma or something to that
effect. Younker asked how the scholarship program at the Center differs from
other City programs that offer discounts. Fruin responded that there is a utility
bill discount program, a Transit discount program, a SEATS discount, and then a
Parks and Rec discount program. He stated that all of these require some sort of
documentation. Parks and Rec uses the school free and reduced lunch
guidelines, for example; whereas Transit and Water both use federal guidelines.
He added that the Senior Center's process is more informal than what the other
departments use.
Ina Lowenberg from the audience asked what the concern here is, if they are
worried about fraud. She asked if it isn't enough of a shame for many people just
the act of having to come and request the scholarship. She believes they should
not require documentation on top of that. Kathy Mitchell from the audience also
weighed in. She stated that some of the individuals who come in for scholarships
are homeless, and they come in to the Center to stay safe. She reiterated that
this is why many of these individuals are coming in for scholarships, that it is not
just individuals having some financial difficulties. Mitchell stated that she wants
the Committee to understand that these individuals have nothing, yet they can
come to the Center and be treated just like everyone else is. She added that this
is a very unique situation.
Younker asked Buhman if scholarship recipients have ever expressed concern
about the process used at the Center. Buhman responded that there has been a
concern with the conversation being done at the front desk as this is an open
space. The information being discussed is private and should not have to be
spoken of in this atmosphere. She noted that the receptionist and front desk staff
has been given permission to allow the scholarship process take place if Linda,
the Director, is not available. Once someone is put into the scholarship fund,
according to Buhman, there is a code in the database that automatically flags this
person as being on scholarship, thus eliminating that conversation again.
Honohan asked Buhman if she knows how many people, approximately, are on
the scholarship program. Buhman stated that it used to be at 10% some years
back. Honohan stated that the last time he checked it was at 11 %. Younker
then suggested that they go ahead and vote on the pending motion for #3. The
motion to adopt # 3 failed 0 -6; Cannon absent.
Younker stated that he would now entertain a motion to approve
recommendation # 4. Honohan moved to approved recommendation # 4 in
order to begin discussion. Dohrmann seconded the motion. The discussion
began with Honohan stating that since he has been on the Senior Center
Commission, they have always had the opportunity to rent space at the Center.
He added that rentals are negligible in his opinion. He asked Fruin and Buhman
if they agreed. Younker asked Honohan how the Center has explored generating
revenue through rentals, and Honohan stated that they have submitted to the
Legal department a proposal to allow alcohol, limited, in the assembly room and
other meeting rooms. He added that he has not heard back from Legal on this.
Honohan stated that he does not anticipate that this would raise a lot of revenue.
Their proposal is to limit it to 501(c)3 corporations so that they can get an idea of
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 13
how it would operate. Younker asked if allowing rentals to other entities has
been explored, and Honohan replied that they want to start out slowly to see how
things work out. Younker then called a vote on approving recommendation #4.
The motion carried 4 -1; Honohan in the negative, and Bern -Klug and
Cannon absent.
Younker then called for a motion to approve recommendation #5.
# 5 - The Committee understands that the City is in the process of
assessing how it prioritizes the distribution of certain federal, state, and
local funds among various social service agencies. Through that the
process, the City should identify the needs of seniors — especially needs
relating to issues concerning food and supportive services that allow
people to remain safely in their homes for as long as possible (e.g.,
Pathways Adult Day Health Center & Elder Services) — as being in the
highest prioritization category.
Honohan moved to approved recommendation #5. Webber seconded the
motion. Bern -Klug stated that she believes they should be talking specifically
about the needs of older adults without the means to pay for these services. She
added that she is assuming that that is where the money goes. The Aid to
Agency money, for example, Bern -Klug asked if this is justified based on
covering the expenses for those who cannot afford the services, or if it has
nothing to do with the low- income population that these agencies serve. Fruin
responded that it is indeed targeted to low- income. Bern -Klug stated that that
should be in this recommendation then. Dohrmann noted that the City uses the
United Way application process for those funds. She also stated that the intent
behind this recommendation was to address the hierarchy of needs, food and
shelter, while allowing people to stay in their homes for as long as possible, with
supportive services, and that this be placed in a high prioritization category rather
than a medium, where it stands currently. Honohan asked if they shouldn't add
`low- income seniors' to this paragraph. In line 3, Honohan suggested it read
`...the needs of low income seniors — especially...' and others agreed. Honohan
moved to make a friendly amendment to add `low income' prior to seniors
on line 3. Webber agreed to amend this with his original second. Bern -Klug
stated that her concern with this is if they are saying they want seniors in the
highest priority level, it is going to knock somebody else off the higher priority.
She stated that some of the highest priority level are based on age, but some are
based on need, so older adults fit into this as well. She thinks they need to be
reminded of who is already in the priority, and is there a limited number of groups
that can be in the higher priority. Fruin stated that the new process will not look
like the process they are currently using. He further explained where HUD, the
federal agency that governs these dollars, is moving with their philosophy. They
believe if you don't spread it out so thin, you can have a larger impact in
whatever the top need or needs are. Fruin stated that of the half dozen or so
high priorities currently existing, he would expect this to drop down, and he
agreed that if seniors were given a higher priority, something else would have to
be bumped down. Bern -Klug continued the conversation, noting that one of the
high priorities is housing, which would mean regardless of age. Fruin noted that
2014 was the end for their five -year plan, and they are currently working on the
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 14
new five -year plan for 2015 and beyond. He added that this has not been
presented yet to the Council for their review. Younker gave some clarity to this
issue, noting that it is referring to low- income seniors. He then called for a vote.
The motion to adopt # 5 as amended carried 6 -0; Cannon absent.
Younker then called for a motion to approve recommendation #6.
# 6 - Maintain the current location of the Center.
Honohan moved to approve recommendation #6. Bern -Klug seconded the
motion. Discussion began with Dobyns stating that he will be voting no on this
as he believes the rule of unintended consequences plays out. He believes the
programs of the Senior Center are excellent, as are the professional staff there.
He believes these need to be the primary goals going forward. He does not
believe they should wed the Senior Center staff and Commission to this decision.
Bern -Klug stated that she believes they can recommend the Center stay in its
current location, that this does not mean the Council has to accept it. Younker
then called for a vote. The motion carried 5 -1; Dobyns in the negative and
Cannon absent.
Moving to recommendation # 7.
# 7 - The Senior Center Commission and Center Staff, in coordination
with the City, should seek increased funding from Johnson County. This
process should include seeking opportunities to share programs for
seniors in other nearby communities as justification for increased funding
at the County level.
Honohan moved to approve recommendation V. Webber seconded the
motion. Discussion began with Honohan stating that he likes the motion, but
that he does not think they will get the Board of Supervisors to raise their
contribution to the Center. He added that they are now down to $59,000.
Dobyns asked Honohan if he thinks the Center should not seek changes to work
with other jurisdictions within the County on this issue. Honohan responded that
he has attended meetings, both with the City Council and the Board of
Supervisors, and also to North Liberty's Council, trying to secure more funding, to
no avail.
Dobyns suggested the possibility for a lack of collaboration is why these
jurisdictions don't work with the Senior Center currently. Honohan stated that he
disagrees with this. He reiterated that they do this every year at budget time,
waiting to see what type of a grant the County is going to give them. Bern -Klug
stated that she believes recommendation # 7 already fits under the revised
recommendation # 1, that the Steering Committee is already looking at revenue
sources, of which this would be a part of. Younker stated that it seems to him
they are related, but also separate issues. What # 7 is meant to address is a
perceived lack of contributions from other jurisdictions who have residents who
take advantage of the Senior Center. Younker stated that they could always use
recommendation # 1 along, but that he believes they fulfill their charge in a better
way if they go beyond this and identify other issues that they would like Council
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 15
to consider. Bern -Klug stated that she would prefer the second sentence be
deleted on this recommendation. Honohan stated that he would accept this
amendment to his motion. Webber agreed to his second. The motion to
accept # 7 carried as amended 5 -1; Dobyns in the negative and Cannon
absent.
# 8 - City Staff and Center Staff should assess opportunities to share
space, funding strategies, and other resources with relevant community
social service agencies to increase efficiencies and leverage various
funding opportunities. Council should consider commissioning a
feasibility study to assist with this process.
Honohan moved to approve recommendation #8 in order to begin the
discussion. Younker seconded the motion. Discussion began with Bern -Klug
stating that this is already happening and has been for a long time. Honohan
stated that currently the Center provides space for several entities, such as the
VNA, SHIPP, Elder Services' dining program, at no charge. He continued, noting
that there really is not a lot of space in the Center that is available. He
questioned if a feasibility study would be worth doing. He stated that he does not
like the last sentence in this recommendation, because of that. Dohrmann spoke
briefly to in some way validating that these things are already being done.
Honohan stated that he would accept a friendly amendment to this original
motion, to delete the last sentence. Younker agreed to his second. Bern -
Klug asked to hear how # 8 would now read, and Younker read the text aloud.
Dohrmann explained the idea of leveraging funding opportunities and how they
would acknowledge these in -kind acts. Bern -Klug suggested they add `continue
to' in the first line between should and assess. Honohan stated that he would
accept this as a friendly amendment as well. Younker reiterated his
second. The motion to accept # 8 carried as amended 5 -1; Dobyns in the
negative and Cannon absent.
Younker stated that he would entertain a motion to approve recommendation #9.
# 9 The Center should take steps to increase the accessibility of its
building. Steps to consider include, but are not limited to: a) a general
ADA audit; b) requesting a public bus stop be added in front the ADA
accessible entrance on Washington Street; c) and increase signage in the
Tower Place parking ramp to assist visitors in locating the Center's
skyway.
Honohan moved to approve recommendation #9. Webber seconded the
motion. Discussion began with Younker noting that they did receive comments
about accessibility issues concerning the Center, as well as signage issues in the
ramp. Dohrmann noted that they received many requests for a bus stop in front
of the ADA - accessible entrance of the Center. Honohan stated that they need to
recognize with this building that they are limited as to what they can do. He gave
Members some history on how they have gotten to where they are with the ADA
accessibility and the hurdles they have faced. Dobyns added that these are
several reasons why vacating this building should remain an option. Bern -Klug
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 16
called the question at this point. The motion to accept # 9 carried 6 -0;
Cannon absent.
# 10 - The Committee recognizes that the Center has taken steps to
address issues related to diversity (e.g., forming a working committee to
focus attention on diversity issues exclusively). The Center Staff,
however, should adopt a more formal strategy to increase diversity,
especially with regard to race, ethnicity, and income.
Honohan moved to approve recommendation #10. Dohrmann seconded
the motion. The discussion began with Younker stating that the survey the
Center performed did show some room for improvement regarding diversity of
the Center. He noted that Honohan had stated earlier that the staff and the
Commission have been working on these issues. The point of this
recommendation is to formalize that process and that strategy, according to
Younker. Honohan suggested an amendment to this recommendation, to include
the Senior Center Commission and the Steering Committee, in front of 'The
Center staff.' Bern -Klug stated that another things she wants to clarify is when
you compare the demographic characteristics of those who completed the
membership survey to the demographic characteristics of Iowa City, they are
similar in every respect, including ethnicity and race, and income. They differ in
education level. Bern -Klug stated that the people who filled out the survey
appear to have a higher education level than the surrounding Iowa City older
adults, but that in terms of racial and ethnic diversity and income, they are right in
step. She thinks there is an underrepresentation in Iowa City of these ethnic
groups. Honohan accepted a friendly amendment to add `the Senior Center
Commission and the Steering Committee. Bern -Klug asked if they wanted to
include sexual orientation in the list after ethnicity and income. Dohrmann
suggested using `other types of diversity' as the wording, adding that she's fine
with the 'sexual orientation,' but was trying to find something more inclusive.
Bern -Klug suggested they then end the sentence after `increase diversity.'
Honohan accepted a friendly amendment here. Dohrmann reiterated her
second. The motion to accept # 10 as amended carried 6 -0; Cannon
absent.
# 11 - Transportation- related issues — especially in light of the reduced
funding to SEATS — are problematic for certain segments of the senior
population. The City should assess the transportation- related issues in
more detail. Council should consider — as replacement revenues are
identified pursuant to Recommendation No. 1 — transitioning some
amount of funding from the Center to better meet transportation needs of
this population.
Honohan moved to approve recommendation #11 so as to open it for
discussion. Younker seconded the motion. Honohan began the discussion
by stating that he has a question regarding this recommendation and whether it
is under their province to assess these transportation issues. He added that
because of the County's drop in contributions, SEATS has been reduced for Iowa
City. He stated that he is all for supporting the SEATS program and wants
Council to do everything they can to support it. Honohan stated that he would
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 17
stop this recommendation after'... in more detail.' Bern -Klug stated that this
appears to say the Senior Center funding is going to be moved to a different
group. She does not see why SEATS and the Center need to be joined.
Honohan noted that he is not supporting that portion, that he wants to end the
recommendation at the word `detail.' Honohan accepted a friendly
amendment to his original motion. Younker reiterated his second. The
motion to accept # 11 as amended carried 4 -1; Dobyns in the negative, and
Dohrmann and Cannon absent.
[Moving to Ad Hoc Member Bern -Klug (pgs 32 -33)]
Younker then moved to page 32 of the packet, where Bern - Klug's suggested
recommendations begin.
# 1 — The Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee recommends that the City
Council issue a public "Vote of Strong Confidence" about the important
and excellent role the Senior Center staff, volunteers, members, and
participants have been and continue to play in promoting optimal aging in
the Iowa City community.
Honohan moved to accept recommendation # 1. Bern -Klug seconded the
motion. Discussion began by Honohan stating that he likes the idea behind this
recommendation, but that he is unsure if they should be telling the City Council
what to do. He suggested a general show of support, something stating that the
Senior Services Committee makes a strong recommendation that the Senior
Center be supported, or something along those lines. Younker stated that it
seems to him the evaluation already reflects the Committee's position that the
Center staff, its volunteers, and its members are all doing a good job with optimal
aging in Iowa City. Bern -Klug asked if the Council ever issues such declarations
of support and that that was her point in this recommendation. The motion
failed 0 -6; Cannon absent.
# 2 — The Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee recommend that agencies
and organizations that serve older adults should be encouraged to apply
for AID TO AGENCY funds for their specific programs that address
current areas of high priority as decided by the City Council, including in
particular programs serving older adults that address: substance abuse
emotional health services, employment training, housing services for
persons experiencing homelessness, and transportation.
Honohan then moved to accept recommendation # 2. Webber seconded
the motion. Discussion began with Bern -Klug stating that the last sentence
does show the high priority issues currently. She added that she is thinking they
could be doing more to tell agencies that serve older adults that they can apply
for these high priorities, even if the agency serves other populations. Honohan
stated that he does not have any problems with # 2 as written. The motion
carried 4 -2; Dobyns and Younker in the negative, and Cannon absent.
Honohan asked Younker at this point how they are going to format the two sets
of recommendations that they have been reviewing today. Younker stated that
section # 4 is for Recommendations and he hopes to put all of the
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 18
recommendations approved tonight together on one page, and then they can
further discuss issues of each one.
Younker then asked for a motion to approve recommendation # 3.
# 3 — The Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee wishes to communicate to
the City Council that a highly disproportionate amount of meeting time
and attention has been devoted to discussions about what has been
frames for the committee as "the impending cost cuts to be experienced
by agencies serving older adults," (which is not listed as part of the
charge for this committee) rather than a discussion about how the City
could be improving services to older adults, as stated in the rationale for
the desire for an Ad Hoc committee.
Honohan moved to accept recommendation # 3 so that discussion could
begin. Webber seconded the motion. Bern -Klug stated that she believes the
process has been dominated by the impending cost cuts, and that when she
reads the charges given to them by the Council, it was not to talk about how to
deal with impending cost cuts. To include part of this in their call, she can
understand, but to make it such a focus, Bern -Klug does not agree. Younker
gave his opinion, stating that he believes Charge # 2 requires them to review the
financial resources, and that this includes the condition of the budget. Younker
added that it is important to keep in mind that their report can include
recommendations that were discussed but not passed. The motion failed 0 -5;
Bern -Klug abstaining and Cannon absent.
# 4 — The Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee recommends that if the City
is interested in the quality of services provided to older adults funded, in
part, by the city, that a professional survey be undertaken to find out from
the people receiving the services, the extent to which the agency is
providing satisfactory services
Honohan then moved recommendation # 4, noting that he wants to amend
it. Bern -Klug seconded the motion. Honohan stated that he would like to
amend this recommendation by removing '...if the City is interested...' through to
`older adults,' and then instead of `the people' he would replace this with
`seniors.' Bern -Klug asked if they are interested in all agencies or just those
receiving City funding, and is it all older adult or just low- income older adults.
Karr noted that they removed `older adults' and added `seniors.' Dobyns asked if
a professional survey was done previously, and Fruin responded that the Center
did indeed request an outside agency perform a more comprehensive survey.
Bern -Klug stated that she is going back to what she understood the Council
wanted them to do, which is recommend how to improve services to seniors.
One way is # 4 and the other is # 5, according to Bern -Klug, where # 5 talks
about what the gaps are in service and # 4 talks about how do older adults who
are receiving funds from the agencies, other than the Senior Center, how are
they rating those services that the City is paying for. Dohrmann asked if there is
a compliance factor to the Aid to Agency funding, and Fruin responded that he
does not believe there is a satisfaction component to this, that often times as the
grantor of these funds, the City does not know who is served by those funds.
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 19
Dobyns stated that he would be supportive if he could recommend an
amendment to the amendment already offered, that a professional survey be
undertaken to find out from elders or people needing the services. He thinks
limiting it to those currently receiving service is a biased sample. Bern -Klug
noted that this is why recommendations 4 and 5 are separate, because 4 is to
get a sense of the funds that the City is already paying to agencies for seniors,
and then 5 is to find out what would older adults in the community like to see that
is currently not available. Dobyns stated that he would then withdraw his
amendment. He stated that he would, however, be voting 'no' on # 4 as surveys
are expensive and he believes that one survey needs to be done, and # 5, he
believes, should have primacy here. Bern -Klug stated that she would be okay
with this. Honohan then withdrew his original motion for recommendation
of # 4.
# 5 — The Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee recommends that if the City
is interested in learning about gaps in services in the Iowa City area for
low- income older adults, that the City commission a professional survey
to collect unbiased, representative information, on which to base
subsequent recommendations.
Dobyns moved to accept recommendation # 5. Webber seconded the
motion. Discussion began with Honohan noting that he is for this motion, but
that he dislikes the phrase `if the City is interested.' Bern -Klug and Dobyns
agreed to this friendly amendment. Bern -Klug and Honohan continued to
discuss where they are on this recommendation, with Bern -Klug stating that she
believes a better use of the study finances would be on low- income people to find
out what services they are having trouble accessing. Honohan noted that he
believes all seniors are an important part of this. Fruin added that it would be
difficult to target a survey for just low- income respondents. Bern -Klug noted that
she is not concerned with needs that the market will handle. She believes they
need to focus on those having access problems because they cannot afford the
market rate. Dobyns asked Fruin if there were some federal language that they
could follow in this, something that could encourage inclusion of groups not
typically participating. Dohrmann stated that what she is hearing is the
Committee is recommending that the City commission a professional survey to
collect unbiased representative information to learn more about gaps in services
for elders or seniors, on which to base subsequent recommendations. Dobyns
stated that unbiased definitely catches his concern. Dohrmann stated that she
believes the `gaps in services' to be very important here. Younker then read the
amended recommendation to make sure they have everything covered. Bern -
Klug stated that by saying `unbiased,' this covers representative and then they
could ask to oversample low- income. It was noted that a professional survey
would undoubtedly handle these concerns. Younker asked Karr to read back the
motion at this point: "The Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee recommends that
the City commission a professional survey to collect unbiased, representative
information regarding gaps in services and barriers to access for seniors on
which to base subsequent recommendations. " Bern -Klug stated she wanted to
clarify one issue first — is the Council's main intent to help older adults stay in
their homes — as this would affect how the sample is done. Fruin stated that the
Council has not discussed this distinction. Younker explained how these types of
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 20
surveys are typically handled, trying to help Bern -Klug understand what can be
expected. Younker suggested they move forward at this point and vote on
recommendation # 5 as amended. Once they look at all of their
recommendations as a whole, they can further clarify or focus on a particular
group they can address it at that time. Dobyns and Webber both agreed to the
friendly amendments here. The motion to accept # 5 as amended carried 6-
0; Cannon absent.
Moving to page 33 of the packet, recommendation # 4 was addressed.
# 4 — The Ad Hoc committee recommends that the City Council refrain
from appointment of City Council members to Ad Hoc committees in the
future. It is difficult for non - City - council Ad Hoc committee members to
assess the extent to which a member of the city council is speaking on
behalf of the city council and when speaking on behalf of her or himself
during the Ad Hoc committee meetings. This confusion can have the
effect of making one committee member's voice more important than the
other members.
Bern -Klug moved to accept recommendation # 4 on page 33. Webber
seconded the motion. Discussion began with Younker stating that he believes
this recommendation is outside the scope of their charge. He stated his opinion
on this, noting that Council made the decision to appoint a Council Member to
this ad hoc committee. Honohan stated that he cannot support this
recommendation either. He noted that the Council is the governing body and
they make the decisions. Bern -Klug noted that this is not personal, but that she
has found it confusing to know when some comments are the Councilor's
personal opinions and when they represent the Council. She stated that she
believes this is an important issue, one that will come up with other ad hoc
committees. She believes that it is not clear what hat the Councilor is wearing
when comments are made, and thus she finds this very confusing. Dobyns
stated that as was discussed in Council, there are many times that Councilors
have been members of other ad hoc groups. The motion failed 1 -5; Bern -Klug
in the positive and Cannon absent.
d. Charge 3: Identify Obstacles
Moving on to the third charge, Younker noted that to some extent this is the other
side of the recommendation coin. He stated that he believes there is some
overlap in things they would like to see either the Council or the Senior Center
engage in, and obstacles to services. He suggested that he and the Vice -Chair
work on the wording for this section, similar to what has already been done and
approved, so that they have something to look at. He encouraged Members to
also identify proposed obstacles for discussion at the October 22 meeting. Bern -
Klug asked for a clarification of obstacles to what. Younker read Charge 3 for the
Members' review.
TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE:
Younker noted that they only have three regular meetings left at this point to complete their
report to Council prior to December 1. In preparation for the October 22 meeting, Younker
stated he would pull together what was approved at this meeting so that everything can be
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 21
viewed together. He encouraged Members to submit written recommendations that they would
like to offer for discussion at the next meeting. Karr outlined possible deadlines for packet
materials, and Members agreed noon Monday for submittal, with the packet going out Monday
evening. Bern -Klug asked for some clarification on what they will be discussing at the October
22nd meeting. Younker stated that additional recommendations regarding Charge # 2, followed
by obstacles to be included in their discussion of Charge # 3, with the idea being that by the end
of the meeting they will have a report all put together, and ready to receive public comments on
November 12. Younker stated that if everyone feels this is too tight of a timeframe they can add
additional meetings. He gave Members several options, noting that they could do several things
in order to meet their deadline. Dobyns stated that he will be unable to make most of the
October 22 meeting and recommended that the Committee proceed without him. Younker
stated that he will be in trial beginning November 4 so that will create conflicts for him. Karr
asked if they would like to add a few tentative dates, just in case. Younker suggested they
pencil in a morning meeting Saturday, October 25. Dobyns noted that he would have hospital
rounds but that should not delay the Committee from meeting. Honohan suggested
Wednesday, October 29, and Younker stated that he is not available the 29th. After some
discussion, a tentative meeting was scheduled for 8:00 A.M. on Saturday, October 25, and 3:00
P.M. on Friday, November 14 in Harvat Hall.
October 22
October 25, 8:00 AM (Saturday)
November 12, 3:30 PM (Wednesday)
November 14, 3:00 PM (Friday)
November 24. 3:30 PM (Monday)
Special meetings if needed
PUBLIC DISCUSSION (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA):
Kathy Mitchell stated that she just had a few comments in conjunction with the formal
recommendations from Younker and Dohrmann. On # 9, she stated that there are two other
accessible entrances — one on the far north side where there is a ramp coming in off the alley.
Another one is the bridge from the parking which is fully accessible and has an elevator.
Regarding # 10, she stated that this one came about because they thought there was a gap in
the Senior Center regarding low- income individuals and persons of color. She stated that at the
time they presented the importance of doing a survey, and they would have had an outside
person conduct this survey, which would have looked at those gaps, and even extended it
further to see where the gaps are in senior services. She added that it was denied on February
18th. She told the Ad Hoc Committee that they are doing a commendable job, that it isn't easy
to do this.
Mary Gravitt shared an audio of the October 7 City Council's formal meeting, highlighting Anna
Buss speaking to the Council regarding City owned housing. Gravitt stated that her question is
where is the rent money going on that City -owned property (noted in Anna Buss' presentation) if
not being used to keep the property up. Gravitt then spoke to the handout she distributed
regarding retiring to a college town. She stated that what is so important about the Senior
Center is that it is a magnet, that people are coming to Iowa City to retire. She pointed out the
highlights of college towns and how Iowa City measures up in an array of categories. Gravitt
spoke to the `battle' for the senior population's dollar. Younker then stopped Gravitt due to the
five - minute timeframe. With nobody else wishing to speak, he allowed her to continue. Gravitt
then addressed `class war,' noting that most old people are poor because of the circumstance
they live in, and most old people are female. She stated that the Senior Center will never be
self- sufficient because it provides a service. The Senior Center building is a magnet that is
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 22
centrally located, so that when the upper -crust move in to Moen's tower they don't feel below
themselves because they are going into a fine - looking building — an antique. Gravitt stated that
the Rec Center is for young people and families, and that it has nothing to do with what goes on
at the Senior Center. Gravitt then noted that sexual diversity is something that also needs to be
discussed here. She reiterated that the Senior Center is unique, the building is unique, and that
the charge was that the Center wasn't diverse enough. Gravitt ended by saying that this has
nothing to do with the budget — it's the building. Karr asked for a motion to accept
correspondence. Honohan moved to accept correspondence. Dobyns seconded the
motion. The motion carried 6 -0; Cannon absent.
ADJOURNMENT:
Honohan moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:15 P.M., seconded by Dohrmann. The
motion carried 6 -0, Cannon absent.
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
October 15, 2014
Page 23
Ad Hoc Senior Services Committee
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2014
Key.
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
- -- = Not a Member at this time
TERM
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
cn
Cn
o)
a)
-4
ti
•i
co
m
co
0
0
0
NAME
EXP.
O
Cn
w
O
w
N
w
O
y
N
j
W
0
—L
0o
O
w
N
:
O
-'
—h
0
N
N
A
�
Ah
Ah
A,
4
Ah
Ab
A.
Ah
Ah
-p
4
12/1/14
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Joe
Younker
Jay
12/1/14
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Honohan
Mercedes
12/1/14
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Bern -Klug
Hiram
12/1/14
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Richard
Webber
Ellen
12/1/14
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/
O/
O/
Cannon
E
E
E
Jane
12/1/14
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/
X
X
Dohrmann
E
Rick
12/1/14
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Dobyns
Key.
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
- -- = Not a Member at this time
I i'- �
Charter Review Commission 3=
October 14, 2014
Page 1
MINUTES FINAL
CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION
OCTOBER 14, 2014 — 7:30 A.M.
HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
Members Present: Steve Atkins, Andy Chappell, Karrie Craig, Karen Kubby, Mark Schantz,
Melvin Shaw (7:38), Anna Moyers Stone (7:42), Adam Sullivan
Members Absent: Dee Vanderhoef
Staff Present: Dennis Bockenstedt, Eleanor Dilkes, Marian Karr
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council
action):
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Chappell called the meeting to order at 7:31 A.M.
PRESENTATION ON LOCAL OPTION SALES TAX & THE CITY BUDGET:
The meeting began with a power point presentation by Dennis Bockenstedt, the City's Finance
Director, on the local option sales tax (LOST) referendum and the City budget. He explained
that a committee was formed following the budget process last year to review the feasibility of a
local option sales tax and then to make a recommendation on whether or not the City should
pursue this. The committee also looked at the City's current services and existing resources,
while reviewing what the best uses would be for a local option sales tax; and suggested ballot
language for such a referendum to the City Council.
The discussion continued, with Bockenstedt fielding questions about how the City can go about
securing additional revenue. He noted that the thing about a sales tax is it generates a lot of
revenue, yet has a lesser impact than some of the other options. Karr noted that if Members
have any further questions they can contact Bockenstedt directly
CONSIDER MOTION ADOPTING CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR AMENDED:
a. Minutes of the Meetings on 09/30114 — Chappell noted that the only thing he saw
in the minutes was a reference to the meeting being in the 'evening,' when in fact it
was 7:30 in the morning.
Kubby moved to accept the Consent Calendar as amended. Sullivan seconded the
motion. Motion carried 8 -0, Vanderhoef absent.
REPORTS FROM MEMBERS AND STAFF:
a. League of Women Voters Forum — Chappell noted that the forum will be held
on Wednesday, November 19, at 7:00 P.M. The League has asked that some of
the Members be present at the forum. This forum is intended to inform the
attendees about what the Charter is in general and also to have some level of
Charter Review Commission
October 14, 2014
Page 2
discussion regarding whatever topics come to the fore. Chappell stated that they
need to decide who is going to attend, adding that they won't want more than
four in attendance due to meeting laws, etc. Schantz, Atkins, and Kubby
volunteered to attend. Kubby stated that Chappell should attend, as well, since
he is the Chair of the Charter Review Commission. Atkins asked why they
couldn't all attend and call it a regular meeting. Chappell stated that if there is a
strong desire they could do this but it would be considered a Charter Review
meeting. Sullivan stated that he is inclined to keep it a minority of the
Commission. Chappell stated that he will talk to the League further to see what
their feelings are on this and they can revisit the issue at the next meeting.
REVIEW CHARTER:
a. Term limits — Chappell began the discussion with the term limit issue. He noted
that they did have some discussion about this when they discussed the mayoral position
and whether there should be some term limitation there. He asked what Members'
thoughts are on this issue. Kubby spoke to her feelings about these limits, noting that
she is somewhat open to this. Atkins noted that he has never been a fan. Schantz
stated that he does not feel strongly against it, but that it seems like a solution in search
of a problem. Others weighed in, agreeing that term limits typically come into play when
people are unhappy with who is currently in office. Kubby noted that Vanderhoef had
brought up the issue of a directly - elected mayor and the need for term limits in that
scenario. At this time there does not appear to be any interest on the part of the
Commission to suggest changes here. Chappell noted that if Vanderhoef would like to
address this further upon her return, they can do so at that time.
b. Compensation of council members — The issue of compensation for council
members was discussed next. Chappell noted that the Charter does not set the specific
amounts, the council itself does. Kubby noted that she believes there should be
something in the Charter so that councils can be relieved of this burden. She added that
the compensation should match what is expected — meetings, community events — in
terms of the time spent on council events. Shaw stated that he has a note in regards to
a conversation that took place back in May that made reference to raising the
compensation to 25% above the median income. He stated that he believes it came
about as they discussed how they could get more citizens involved. Shaw asked what,
on average, is the amount the council members receive. Chappell recalled that it is
$5,000 per council member, with the mayor receiving $7,000. Sullivan stated that one of
his concerns is that the compensation keeps out those in the community who cannot
afford to leave their job for an afternoon function or meeting. He believes it would bean
undue burden for a low -wage worker. Craig asked if Sullivan believes a higher
compensation would actually allow a low -wage worker to leave their job. The
conversation continued, with Members weighing in on the issue. Shaw noted that
serving on the City Council is not for the faint of heart. He added that those who have
the mental and financial wherewithal are going to be the ones who serve. He does
believe, however, that the compensation and /or financial reimbursements should be
raised, in order to help ease the burden of the time spent on council duties.
Atkins agreed that the amount should be raised. He noted that if it were part of the
Charter, it would be revisited basically every 10 years when the Charter is reviewed.
Schantz stated that he is in favor of doing something, that he believes having it be part
of the Charter, however, may be a bit tricky. He stated that one way to do this is to
come up with a number they believe is right. Another way is to have an external
Charter Review Commission
October 14, 2014
Page 3
committee of community members who would deal with this issue. A third way would be
to set the floor in the Charter with the current process, understanding that it might lag
behind in a 10 -year period. Atkins stated that he really doesn't believe it to be that big of
a deal. He added that in all of his years with the City, he never had anyone in the
community complain about the council's compensation amounts. Members continued to
discuss the compensation issue, with Kubby again stating that she believes it takes the
burden off the council if they put this in the Charter. Chappell stated that he isn't sure he
would support raising the compensation amount as he is unsure what it should be. He
added that he might be, if he were convinced that raising it to some reasonable amount
would encourage otherwise underrepresented residents to run for council. Chappell
asked if there was an interest in creating a subcommittee for this, who could review the
issue and then come back to the Commission as a whole with a recommendation.
Shaw asked what a city comparable to Iowa City does with their council and mayor
compensation. Chappell asked what cities are used in the collective bargaining. Karr
noted that they use cities like Ames, Des Moines, Davenport, and Council Bluffs. She
added that staff can gather this information for the Commission to help them in their
review. Chappell stated that this would be helpful. He also asked if staff can find out
how the council members in these other cities are classified — are they part -time, for
example. After a brief discussion, Members agreed that they would like to revisit this as
a group at a future meeting. The conversation continued on what other governmental
entities do with salaries and classification of employees /councilors. It was noted that the
School Board Members do not receive any compensation.
C. Use of word "citizen" — Chappell noted that Dilkes had brought up some issues
when they talked about `citizen' versus `resident' early on in their conversations. Dilkes
stated that she had looked at definitions of `citizen' and she remembers coming across
several that spoke about 'in the context of a city,' that you don't have citizenship of a city
— you are a resident of a city. She stated that they certainly could define `citizen' as
`resident' in the Charter and then keep it as citizen. Craig stated that she would prefer
this, that she does not like the word 'citizen' in the Charter. She believes if they do not
remove the word `citizen' from the Charter that they should then define it clearly as being
a resident. Schantz stated that he typically uses the word 'resident.' Atkins stated that
he uses 'citizen' as he likes the word citizenship. Dilkes stated that one thing that might
help them in doing a definition of `citizen' as being a resident is they can then continue
with a citizenship quality. Karr asked if Members would like for her to do a search and
find in the Charter document that will highlight `citizen,' as this will help give them some
context to what they are considering.
Kubby spoke briefly to adding a definition of 'corporation,' which would disengage
corporations from being people in the City's Charter, and in the compensation section
say that people and corporations have this limit. She believes this will clean up the issue
for many in the community. Sullivan stated that he understands why it sounds bad in
this day and age, but that corporations are legal people, as are political parties and
associations, committees, and other legal entities. He believes this could cause
problems. Dilkes stated that one issue she sees with this is whether or not you would
want a corporation to be a person is dependent on what you are talking about. Chappell
asked Karr to also do a search and highlight for the word 'person.' He added that this
can help them in further discussions regarding 'corporations' and those issues
surrounding it.
d. Preamble and definitions —
Charter Review Commission
October 14, 2014
Page 4
e. Commission discussion of other sections (if time allows) —
PUBLIC COMMENT:
None.
TENTATIVE THREE -MONTH MEETING SCHEDULE (7:45 AM unless specified):
October 28 — Chappell asked if everyone wanted to add a make -up meeting in place of
the Veteran's Day holiday meeting that was cancelled. Shaw asked if they could change the
start time a bit. After some discussion, Members agreed that 7:45 A.M. would work, with
meetings going to 9:00 A.M. In place of the November 11 meeting, Members agreed that
Monday, November 10, at 7:45 A.M. works as a make -up meeting. Schantz noted that he will
be unable to attend the October 28 meeting.
November 10
November 25
December 9
December 23
(Commission work completed no later than April 1, 2015)
ADJOURNMENT:
Sullivan moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:00 A.M., seconded by Shaw. Motion carried
8 -0, Vanderhoef absent.
Charter Review Commission
October 14, 2014
Page 5
Charter Review Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2014
Key.,
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
- -- = Not a Member at this time
TERM
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
j
A
C7�
Cn
CA
M
V
W
W
CO
CO
CO
o
0
NAME
EXP.
O
o
w
N
-4
o
N
N
M
m
w
o
co
Ah
46
A.
4/1/15
X
X
O/
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Steve
E
Atkins
Andy
4/1/15
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Chappell
Karrie
4/1/15
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Craig
Karen
4/1/15
O
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Kubby
Mark
4/1/15
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/
X
X
X
O/
X
O/
Schantz
E
E
E
Melvin
4/1/15
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Shaw
Anna
4/1/15
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/
X
X
X
X
X
Moyers
E
Stone
Adam
4/1/15
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Sullivan
Dee
4/1/15
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/
Vanderhoef
E
Key.,
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
- -- = Not a Member at this time
—ff -- �
3b(3)
Minutes APPROVED
Human Rights Commission
September 16, 2014 — 6 PM
Helling Conference Room
Members Present: Harry Olmstead, Shams Ghoneim, Orville Townsend, Kim Hanrahan,
Joe Coulter.
Members Excused: Paul Retish, Stella Hart, Andrea Cohen, Ali Ahmed.
Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers.
Others Present: Dennis Bockenstedt, Jeremy Endsley, Sally Scott, Donovan Bosold.
Recommendations to Council: No.
Call to Order:
Olmstead called the meeting to order at 18:00.
Consideration of the Minutes from the August 19, 2014 Meeting:
Motion: Moved by Townsend, seconded by Ghoneim. Motion passed 5 -0.
Meeting Business:
Presentation on Local Option Sales Tax & the City Budget
Finance Director Dennis Bockenstedt presented on the Local Option Sales Tax (LOST) and the City
budget. Bockenstedt discussed the essential factors that have been identified, components directly
impacting City revenue and impact from property tax reforms.
Presentation & Possible Collaboration Request from Johnson County Affordable Home Coalition
Sally Scott and Jeremy Endsley spoke on recent initiatives of the Johnson County Affordable Homes
Coalition. Yes In My Back Yard (YIMBY) is an outreach program to the community that
stresses the value of affordable housing and how important it is to a community. Scott
encouraged Commissioners to register and attend the upcoming Affordable Housing in a Tight
Market Seminar being held on October 2nd.
Proposed Date Change for December 2014 Meeting Date from the 16th to the 15th
Date will be changed from December 16, 2014 to December 15, 2014 to respect the starting of Hanukah
at sundown on the 16th.
Motion: Moved by Coulter, seconded by Ghoneim. Motion passed 5 -0.
Sponsorship Request from Social Justice through Secular Government
Donovan Bosold reported to the Commission that the event would be taking place on Wednesday,
September 17th. The program will feature a presentation by Sean Faircloth and will discuss the pursuit of
social justice through secular government. The Commission agreed to contribute $50 toward the
operational costs of this program.
Motion: Moved by Townsend, seconded by Coulter. Motion passed 5 -0.
Possible Proclamations for the Rest of Year
The Commission agreed to submit proclamations to the Mayor for Hispanic Heritage Month, National
Disability Employment Awareness Month and National American Indian Month.
Breakfast 2014
Olmstead, Retish, and Harahan will serve on the subcommittee to select 2014 honorees. Ghoneim will do
the opening at the Breakfast, Olmstead will introduce the keynote, Cohen will present the awards, and
Hart will wrap it up with the closing.
Upcoming Programs:
Human Rights Opportunity Fair
The event location has been moved to the T. Anne Cleary Walkway on the University of Iowa Campus.
Olmstead, Cohen, and Townsend will represent the Commission at this event.
Goal Setting Session for FY 15
The session will be held on Thursday, October 2nd at the Eastside Recycling Environmental Education
Center. It should run from 5 -8pm.
Defending Migrants ' Rights
Ghoneim and Olmstead will meet with a group of Russian visitors through the CIVIC program on
October 6th.
Reports:
Building Blocks to Employment Job Fair
The job fair is scheduled for Thursday, October 30th from 4 -6 pm at the Eastdale Plaza.
Building Communities Subcommittee
Townsend would like to see a policy that requires City staff when requesting policy changes to the
Council to be required to include a statement as to how that particular policy change could potentially
affect individuals in the community, particularly minority persons.
University of Iowa Center for Human Rights Board
Ghoneim reported that she recently served on a panel that discussed changing the term ISIS to QSIS
(Qaeda Separatists Of Iraq And Syria) in an attempt to educate the world about the difference between
real Islam and terrorism.
Commission
Coulter noted the recently released Equity Report. Coulter urges all Commissioners to read the report and
take a look at the issues and how the Commission can support or address the issues.
Adjournment: 20:05.
Next Regular Meeting — October 21, 2014 at 6:00 pm.
2
Human Rights Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2013/2014
(Meeting Date)
NAME
TERM
EXP.
9/17/
13
101151
13
11/19/
13
12/17/
13
1/21/
14
2/18/
14
3/18/
14
4/29/
14
5/20/
14
6/17/
14
7/15/
14
8/19/
14
9/16/
14
Ali Ahmed
1/1/17
-
-
-
-
X
X
O/E
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
Orville
Townsend, Sr.
1/1/17
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
Paul Retish
1/1/17
-
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
Kim
Hanrahan
111115
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
Shams
Ghoneim
111115
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Stella Hart
111115
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
X
X
X
O/E
Jewell Amos
111115
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
R
R
R
R
R
R
Joe D. Coulter
1/1/16
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
Harry
Olmstead
1/1/16
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Andrea Cohen
1/1/16
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
KEY: X
= Present
O
= Absent
O/E
= Absent/Excused
NM
= No meeting
- --
= No longer a member
R
= Resignation
4
3b(4)
NNN��
Work Session (Goal Setting) Minutes APPROVED
Human Rights Commission
October 2, 2014 — 5 PM
Eastside Recycling Environmental Education Center
Members Present: Harry Olmstead, Shams Ghoneim, Orville Townsend, Kim Hanrahan,
Paul Retish, Stella Hart, Andrea Cohen, Ali Ahmed.
Excused Members: Joe Coulter.
Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers.
Others Present: Jeff Schott.
Call to Order:
Olmstead called the meeting to order at 17:03.
Session:
A goal setting session was held at the Eastside Recycling Environmental Education Center. The
following Commission members were in attendance and participated at this meeting: Harry
Olmstead (Chair), Andrea Cohen (Vice- Chair), Shams Ghoneim, Paul Retish, Stella Hart, Ali
Ahmed, Orville Townsend, Sr., and Kim Hanrahan. Also in attendance and participating in the
session was Human Rights Coordinator Stefanie Bowers.
The following were identified as recent accomplishments of the Human Rights Commission:
• Participation and co- sponsorship of diverse local community events, workshops,
and initiatives either through monetary contributions, actual participation or
spreading the word about upcoming events and programs.
• Activities of the Commission's Immigration and Education subcommittees.
• Concerns /discussions of Iowa City Community School District's actions and
implementation of the diversity policy.
• Participating in programs and activities with other organizations, including the
University of Iowa Center for Human Rights, the Center for Worker Justice, and the
Council for International Visitors to Iowa City.
• Outreach and assistance to the University of Iowa Chinese Students Association.
• Job fair.
• Youth Awards.
• Human Rights Awards Breakfast.
• Disproportionate Minority Contact Conference.
• Americans with Disabilities educational programs.
• Submission of monthly proclamations to the Mayor.
• Recommendation to Council to support the adoption & implementation of the
Municipal Identification Card.
• Recommendation to Council regarding future budgeting for the SEATS program.
• Annual report.
The following were identified as key purposes of the Human Rights Commission as identified by
the Commission:
• Educate and raise awareness on human rights and recourse if and when rights are
violated.
• Provide services to persons who feel they have been treated unfairly in a protected
area and based on a protected characteristic.
• Cooperate as appropriate with other agencies /organizations both public and
private with similar /related objectives. For example through programming and
other activities.
• Advocate for social justice.
• Make recommendations to the City Council as needed.
The following were identified as new priority projects, programs, and initiatives identified by the
Commission for the upcoming 24 - 36 month period (listed in priority order):
1. Develop listening posts for outreach to target communities.
2. Enhance presence with quarterly presentations to City Council on Commission events,
programs and initiatives.
3. (Tie) Affordable /universal /accessible housing — educational programs.
(Tie) Hold meetings with various community groups.
Ghoneim left meeting at 20:05
It is recommended that staff prepare an action plan for the Commission to accomplish the
planning goals. The action plan should define the steps the Commission will need to take to
accomplish each goal, identify which Commissioner is responsible for implementation, and
establish a timeline for accomplishment. The action plan should then be presented to the entire
Commission for review and approval. It is also recommended that staff review with the
Commission the status of implementing the goals on a quarterly basis.
Adjournment: 20:42
Next Regular Meeting — October 21, 2014 at 6:00 pm.
2
Human Rights Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2013/2014
(Meeting Date)
NAME
TERM
EXP.
11/19/
13
12/17/
13
1/21/
14
2/18/
14
3/18/
14
4/29/
14
5/20/
14
6/17/
14
7/15/
14
8/19/
14
9/16/
14
10/2/
14
Ali Ahmed
1/1/17
-
-
X
X
O/E
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
Orville
Townsend, Sr.
1/1/17
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
Paul Retish
1/1/17
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
Kim
Hanrahan
111115
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
Shams
Ghoneim
111115
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Stella Hart
111115
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
X
X
X
O/E
X
Jewell Amos
111115
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
Joe D. Coulter
1/1/16
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
Harry
Olmstead
1/1/16
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Andrea Cohen
1/1/16
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
- -- = No longer a member
R = Resignation
3b(5)
IOWA CITY
Iw
PUBLIC LIBRARY
123 S. Linn St. • Iowa City, IA 52240
wae.�n S... Gig . 319 - 356 5200 • — 319 - 3565494 • kpi -9
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Minutes of the Regular Meeting FINAL APPROVED
September 25, 2014
Members Present: Tom Dean, Janet Freeman, David Hamilton, Thomas Martin, Linzee McCray,
Robin Paetzold (on the phone), Jay Semel.
Members Absent: Diane Baker, Meredith Rich - Chappell.
Staff Present: Terri Byers, Maeve Clark, Susan Craig, Kara Logsden, Anne Mangano, Patty McCarthy,
Elyse Miller, Brent Palmer, Vickie Pasicznyuk.
Guests Present: Rev. Doyle Landry, Dennis Bockenstedt, City Finance Director.
Call Meeting to Order. Vice - President Dean called the meeting to order at 5:02 p.m.
Public Discussion. Rev. Landry would like an item to be placed on the 10/16/14 Library Board of
Trustees agenda. He would like other City partners to be present at a ten minute presentation to
discuss targeting materials to schools where students may not have access. He referred to summer
reading program materials he had sent from the Chicago Public Library. The program in Meeting
Room A in October he previously talked about is postponed because of Saturday conflicts.
Approval of Minutes.
The minutes of the August 28, 2014 Regular Meeting of Library Board of Trustees were reviewed.
A motion to approve the minutes was made by McCray and seconded by Freeman. Motion carried
7/0.
Vice - President Dean moved the first item under New Business ahead of Unfinished Business on the
agenda to accommodate the Finance Director's presentation.
New Business.
City Budget /Local Option Sales Tax. Dennis Bockenstedt, City Finance Director, was invited to
provide information on the financial position of the City and the proposed local option sales tax
ballot measure. Bockenstedt gave a presentation about the 1% local option sales tax referendum.
Paetzold asked about Ames' diversified revenue streams. Iowa City's hotel /motel tax revenues are
the lowest in the group. A utility franchise tax can be instituted by City Council and does not require
a vote. Semel asked how the City plans to educate voters on this very complicated topic.
Bockenstedt said these formulas are tricky to understand. The Committee's recommendation to City
Council is to pursue the 1% local option sales tax to be used for street improvements, property tax
relief and affordable housing opportunities.
FY16 Budget. City reports have been delayed because of MUNIS and the change to accrual based
accounting so a draft operating budget is not available. Capital Improvement Project (CIP) requests
are ready. There are two: A FY16 request for funding to upgrade the control system for our
automated HVAC system. The operating system is no longer supported. The consultants we hired to
help evaluate our system identified this as the first thing to do. It is possible the HVAC project will
be paid out of the operating funds but Bockenstedt suggested it be included as a CIP project just in
case.
For FY17 CIP the request is partial funding for a bookmobile. This request is part of the new
strategic plan. Hamilton asked about the bookmobile he sees around town. Craig talked about the
Antelope Lending Library. Paetzold asked how Craig determined the $100,000 cost included in the
CIP. Craig said she did research and believes this amount is affordable for the City and this amount
will show a commitment to this project. It represents less than half the total estimated cost; the
remainder will come from fundraising. It is basically a placeholder for FY17. Semel asked why we
would do this. Craig recommends the City knows a big project like this is coming so they can plan,
too. It helps with fundraising if we can say the City has made a commitment to the bookmobile.
Craig believes we need this kind of lead time to help raise the money we need for the project. It is in
the strategic to spend FY16 planning the specifics. A motion to approve the CIP projects was made
by Freeman, and seconded by Semel. Motion carried 7/0.
Unfinished Business.
New Strategic Plan. Edits have been made to the draft presented in August and staff have proposed
FY16 objectives. Library staff see two major things in our strategic plan: the bookmobile and the
website. Semel asked "what if by January 2015 the Board thinks it is not such a good idea to go
forward with the bookmobile? Is it embarrassing if we change our minds ?" Craig said this happens
sometimes and the money gets reallocated to a different project or rejected but it does not reflect
on the department. Craig thanked McCray and Dean for their wordsmithing help. This strategic plan
starts next fiscal year. A motion to approve the FY16Strategic Plan was made by Martin and
seconded by Paetzold. Motion carried 7/0.
Staff Reports.
Director's Report. Craig presented a slideshow with a still image from each security camera in the
Library so Board members could see what the cameras see. Paetzold asked how long the images are
retained. Craig said it is based on computer storage. The cameras only record if there is activity so
storage time varies. The cameras that view the self- checkout stations are kept longer, on advice of
the County Attorney. Semel asked if we have a document that explains the proven benefit of
security cameras. Semel also asked Craig if people regularly call her at home to complain. She said it
does not happen often. Thirteen people responded to the social media post by calling here; none of
them from Johnson County.
ICPL has been approved as a Department of Transportation (DOT) driver's license site. The old
"typewriter room" has been designated the space to house the kiosk, and is expected sometime in
November. Paetzold asked about the Wedge. Craig said the Wedge has asked to terminate their
lease on October 30, 2014. Steve Harding, the Wedge owner, has been a very good tenant. Harding
requested a longer term lease than the City was willing to agree to.
Departmental Reports.
Adult Services. No comments.
Community & Access Services. Martin asked about the cost of lost items. Logsden said ICPL is not
out of norms for library losses.
2
Development Office. McCarthy said the Book Gala has been set for Sunday, 11/9/14 at Prairie Lights,
from 6:30 to 8:00 pm. Martin asked about Better World Books; McCarthy said they are located in
Indianapolis.
Miscellaneous. No comments.
Spotlight on the Collection. No comments.
President's Report. Paetzold encouraged Board members to attend meetings for which they are
registered. Paetzold said she attended the Town Meeting in Coralville, together with a number of
Library staff.
Announcements from Members. Hamilton asked how long Rev. Doyle has been coming to
meetings. Hamilton suggested diversifying the Board may be something to consider in the future
Semel asked this to be a future agenda item. Craig suggested January as a good time to do so.
Martin said Michael Scott has been named the new State Librarian. He begins his duties on
11/17/14. Craig thanked Martin for serving on the Hiring Committee.
Committee Reports.
Foundation Members. Semel announced there will be two fundraising events; one family oriented,
another aimed at larger donors. Semel stated the Foundation reached a landmark net worth of
more than $2,000,000 at FY2014 year end.
Communications. None.
Financial Reports. These reports have been delayed. They will be distributed as they become
available.
Disbursements.
The MasterCard expenditures for August, 2014 were reviewed. A motion to approve the
disbursements for August 2014 was made by Martin and seconded by Semel. Motion carried 7/0.
Set Agenda Order for October Meeting.
Budget.
Friends Foundation.
LOST endorsement.
Board directed Craig to communicate with Landry that the October agenda is full and to get a
better description of the topic he wants to address with the Board as it may be better to start with
staff.
Adjournment. Reminder the October Board meeting is a week early: 10/16/14. A motion to adjourn
the meeting was made by Hamilton and seconded by McCray. Motion carried 7/0. Vice - President
Dean closed the meeting at 7:05 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Elyse Miller
Board or Commission: ICPL Board of Trustees
ATTENDANCE RECORD
12 Month
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent /Excused
NM = No meeting
Meeting Date
Name
Term Ex iration.
11/21113
12/18/13
1/23/14
2/27/14
3/27/14
4/24/14
3/22114
6/26114
,7/24/14',
8/28/14
9/25/14
10/16/14
Diane Baker
6/30/19
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
Thomas Dean
6/30/15
X
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
Mark Edwards
6/30/15
O
O
Resigned
Janet Freeman
6/30/19
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
David Hamilton
6/30/15
Not on Board
X
X
X
X
X
X
Tom Martin
6/30/17
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
Linzee Kull
McCra
6/30/15
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Robin Paetzold
6/30/17
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
Meredith
Rich-Chappell
6/30/17
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
Semel, Jay
6/30/19
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent /Excused
NM = No meeting
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: October 17, 2014
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Bob Miklo, Planning & Zoning Commission
Re: Recommendations from Planning & Zoning Commission
I I W-
3�� sal
At their October 16, 2014 meeting the Planning & Zoning Commission approved the October 2
minutes with the following recommendation to the City Council:
The Commission voted 3 -2 to recommend denial of an application submitted by Iowa
City Co- Housing for a rezoning of 9.65 acres of land located at Miller Avenue and
Benton Street from Medium Density Single - Family (RS -8) zone and Neighborhood
Public (P -1) zone to Planned Development Overlay /Medium Density Single- Family
(OPD -8) zone for 7.68 acres and Neighborhood Public (P -1) zone for 1.97 acres, and a
preliminary plat of Prairie Hill, a 2 -lot residential subdivision with 32 dwelling units.
(R EZ 13- 00010 /SUB 13- 00008)
Additional action (check one
No further action needed
Board or Commission is requesting Council direction
_X_ Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 2, 2014 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
APPROVED
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Eastham Eastham, Ann Freerks, Paula Swygard,
Phoebe Martin, Jodie Theobald
MEMBERS ABSENT: John Thomas
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Sara Hektoen, Mike Moran, Kent Ralston
OTHERS PRESENT: Del Holland, Brian Boelk, Barb Bailey, Anna Buss, Annie Tucker,
Alicia Herschelm, Dan Kahn, Mary Jo Daly, Ann Stromquist, Andrew
Gutman, Mary Knudson, Ruth Baker, John Shaw, Tracey
Achenbach, JP Claussen, Michael Pacha, Martha Stevenson
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
The Commission voted 3 -2 to recommend denial of an application submitted by Iowa City
Co- Housing for a rezoning of 9.65 acres of land located at Miller Avenue and Benton Street
from Medium Density Single - Family (RS -8) zone and Neighborhood Public (P -1) zone to
Planned Development Overlay /Medium Density Single - Family (OPD -8) zone for 7.68 acres
and Neighborhood Public (P -1) zone for 1.97 acres, and a preliminary plat of Prairie Hill, a 2-
lot residential subdivision with 32 dwelling units. (REZ13- 00010/SUB13- 00008)
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There were none.
REZONING /DEVELOPMENT ITEM:
REZ13- 00010 /S U B13 -00008
Discussion of an application submitted by Iowa City Co- Housing for a rezoning of 9.65 acres of
land located at Miller Avenue and Benton Street from Medium Density Single- Family (RS -8) zone
and Neighborhood Public (P -1) zone to Planned Development Overlay /Medium Density Single -
Family (OPD -8) zone for 7.68 acres and Neighborhood Public (P -1) zone for 1.97 acres, and a
preliminary plat of Prairie Hill, a 2 -lot residential subdivision with 32 dwelling units.
Carolyn Dyer recused herself due to a conflict of interest as she is on the Co- Housing committee.
Hektoen referred to the Commission bylaws which require the Commission to state any ex parte
communications. There were none.
Miklo stated that at the last meeting the Commission asked staff to follow up on a few
issues /questions. Included in today's meeting agenda packet is a memo from Kent Ralston,
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 2, 2014 - Formal
Page 2 of 18
Transportation Planner, addressing the questions regarding Benton Street and the access to
Benton Street vs. Miller Avenue. Miklo stated that Ralston is here tonight if there are follow up
questions. The Commission also had asked about the extent of clearing that might occur on the
portion of the property that will be traded to allow street access to the development. Miklo showed
the plan where grading and clearing will occur for the proposed street. He stated that staff did ask
the City Forester to review the site and the forester toured the property with Miklo last Friday and
looked at the area where the proposed private street will occur. Miklo showed an image of the
area looking from Benton Street to the south approximately where the private street will be located.
The private street will be roughly located where there is currently a service drive to the park. He
determined that the majority of the trees in the area that will be cleared are elms, ash and walnut
trees. Both the ash and the walnut trees are susceptible to disease and regardless of whether this
project continues there will be issues with those trees in the future. He did identify one significant
oak tree which is in the Benton Street right of way but beyond where the driveway would be
located. The City Forester felt this oak tree could be protected during construction to assure no
root damage. There is another oak on the park property near the corner of the development where
the current plan does show some grading so it would likely be removed. The applicant has agreed
to work with the City Engineer and Forester to examine the grading plan to see if that oak could be
preserved. There is also hickory tree that would need to be removed that is in the path of the
proposed street, and some hackberry trees that may or may not need to be removed. The main
concern was the oak on Benton Street that the Forester was confident would be preserved.
At the last meeting there was also some concern about the loss of the wooded area of the park.
Miklo showed some photos of the remaining part of the park that would not be touched as part of
this development. As noted in the previous staff report, the staff is recommending approval with
conditions as outlined in the staff report.
Freerks asked whether, in some of the developed portion of the park, the woodland would be
maintained. Miklo said that the woodlands in a large portion of the park would be preserved and
showed photographs of the portion of the park that would not be disturbed.
Freerks asked Miklo to show on the photo the clearing that will happen to allow the roadway and a
portion of some of the units. Miklo showed the area where the roadway would be and stated that
the western part of the park would remain intact.
Eastham asked if there were any zoning ordinance or subdivision provisions that make it
impossible or difficult or bar an access to this development from Miller Street instead of Benton
Street.
Miklo replied that there is not a zoning regulation that would address that, zoning allows curb cuts
onto local streets which is what Miller Street is. Miklo said he doesn't believe there are any
regulations that would prevent access to Miller Street and the sensitive area ordinance would have
to be examined to see a plan showing where and how the grading for that access would occur
before he could give a yes or no answer.
Swygard asked Miklo to put the zoning map back up for viewing and asked the question whether a
trade of parkland for the area along Miller Avenue would result in the parkland being next to CC -2
zoning? Miklo confirmed the southern edge of the new parkland would be next to a CC -2 zone.
Swygard questioned one of the businesses located next to the proposed park area, it is a payday
advance business, Check -N -Go, and if it would then be within 1000 feet of the park? Miklo
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 2, 2014 - Formal
Page 3 of 18
confirmed it would and stated that it would make the cash checking /payday loan business non -
confirming as described in the ordinance which means the business couldn't expand or if it closed
it couldn't reopen in the current location.
Swygard also asked for confirmation that there would be no pedestrian route with this development
that would go to the south or west and Miklo confirmed that was correct. There would be the
possibility for a future pedestrian route along the southern property line because the grading would
be done as part of the storm water management, but the pedestrian route would not be installed as
part of this project. There is some steep terrain in this area that would need to be overcome in
able to put a trail.
Swygard stated that she asked because most of the shopping is located to the south. Miklo stated
the access from this development would be through the park and onto Miller Avenue to the new
trail on Highway 1.
Swygard questioned how wide the private street would be if the access were on Benton Street.
Miklo replied it would be 24 feet wide at the intersection of Benton Street, and the private drive
would be 20 feet wide.
Martin asked if a typical street is 25 feet wide and Miklo replied that a typical street in a new
subdivision would be 26 feet wide. However, he stated there are a lot of older streets in town that
are 25 feet wide and also have streets that are 28 and 31 feet wide.
Eastham asked for indication on what the benefit is to the City is to have the access to this
development on Benton Street rather than Miller Avenue. Miklo was unsure if he could answer
that, however the staff feel the benefit would be larger parkland opportunity for more usable
parkland as a result, and less grading on the critical and protective slopes.
Eastham asked if that was a benefit to the City or to the subdivision and Miklo replied it is a benefit
to the community to not have steep slopes disturbed and that the City does have an ordinance
regarding disturbing steep, critical and protected slopes.
Freerks invited the Transportation Planner, Kent Ralston, to come forward to answer some of the
Commission's questions.
Eastham asked Ralston about the memo he wrote to the Commission dated September 26
regarding the collision report. In the memo, Ralston detailed the number of collisions between
2008 and 2012 on Benton Street. Eastham questioned if there is any information on the number of
collisions in the same period of time for a neighborhood street, such as Miller Avenue.
Ralston stated it varies, and at this time does not have any specific statistics, but typically on a
local street on a midblock section you would likely have a lower collision history due to lack of
volume of traffic on a local street. Ralston stated the collisions on Benton Street are actually fairly
low for an arterial street, or at least in line with other arterial streets.
Eastham stated also in the memo, under the existing conditions section, that four or so of the
collisions mentioned in the report were snow or weather related collisions and in the memo it is
stated that from transportation planning perspective access onto Miller Avenue presents less
concern based on vehicle volume.
Ralston confirmed that from a purely transportation perspective it would be preferable to have the
driveway come onto a collector street such as Miller Avenue rather than Benton Street. But the
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 2, 2014 - Formal
Page 4 of 18
proposed Benton Street access does meet the current sight distance standards. However on
Miller Avenue there would be more traffic gaps and therefore easier to enter and leave the
development and fewer chances of collisions.
Freerks opened public discussion.
Del Holland, (1701 East Court Street), stated he was on the board of managers for the Iowa City
Co- Housing and plans to live in Prairie Hill. He stated at the meeting two weeks ago we heard the
concerns from some in the neighborhood and the Commission. There were two primary issues
discussed, traffic issues, including increased traffic on Benton Street, proposed access onto
Benton Street, and winter driving conditions there. The project engineer will address that later in
the meeting. The second concern was the proposed parkland swap. The Co- Housing Board
recognizes this is an emotional issue for many, especially for those who worked so hard to acquire
the park land, get it developed, and use it today. It was with this in mind, the Co- Housing group
originally proposed an easement to Benton Street along the far western park boundary to keep as
much of the current park land intact as possible. In addition, with the original request for access the
Co- Housing group offered to donate land for a park expansion to the south along Miller Avenue.
Because the originally proposed access point on Benton Street was not as desirable from a traffic
planning standpoint, as a more eastern access in the current proposal, Iowa City Co- Housing
accepted the City's suggestion to locate the drive at the site of the existing service access road
and to swap parkland for parkland.
As future residents of the neighborhood the Co- Housing group wants to preserve as much
undisturbed land as possible. We are striving to balance the need to disturb land associated with
development against the conservation and protection of green space and desirable vegetation.
As proposed, some of the western portion of the current park would be repurposed as a private
drive following the existing service access road. Holland presented a picture slide of the area
showed the private drive will be approximately 30 feet lower in elevation than the adjacent property
to the west and will not significantly affect the views from that property. The large trees will be
protected. No significant, desirable trees will be removed. Tree removal will be limited to the
invasive, disease - prone, undesirable species and the disturbed ground will be replanted with
desirable species of both trees and grasses.
The next slide showed the proposed land use in lot 3 and 4, the land to be traded to Iowa City Co-
Housing. This slide emphasized the public access conservation easement. The dotted line shows
the proposed boundary for the projected public access conservation easement. All the land north
and west of the dotted line would remain as it is and open for public use. This amounts to 59% of
current woodland. Another 23% of the land will be planted in trees and grasses. So only the
remaining 18% will be actually built upon. Not only will most of the woodland remain as is, but only
a small portion of lots 3 and 4 will be built upon. The current calculations show that the remaining
82 % will be "green" space. So, with the almost 2 acres of land along Miller Avenue that Iowa City
Co- Housing is proposing to trade, and the over 1 acre of the current parkland that Co- Housing is
proposing to conserve, the City and neighborhood will be gaining an acre and one quarter of
dedicated green space plus the green areas surrounding the buildings that Iowa City Co- Housing
proposes to build.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 2, 2014 - Formal
Page 5 of 18
Since there were issues raised concerning safety on Benton Street and a possible access from
Miller Avenue, the Co- Housing group has asked Brian Boelk of HBK Engineering to speak to these
points.
Brian Boelk, HBK Engineering (509 S. Gilbert Street) stated his firm has provided the civil site
engineering to the Co- Housing Prairie Hill Development and as part of those duties the board has
asked for an evaluation of not only the current proposed access off Benton Street but also take a
look at Miller Avenue and give an opinion and input. In regards to Benton Street what Boelk can
share is an echo of what Ralston has in his report. They always look at sight distance and it does
meet, in fact exceed by quite a distance, the required sight distances without removing the large
trees, specifically that large oak tree. So the sight distance is more than adequate with some low
clearing of some bushes and the grass maintained.
In addition, another question that was asked with regards to the access itself, they do widen out to
24 feet with 25 foot radius on both sides so it's wider at the intersection with Benton Street before it
narrows down to a 20 foot private street. They did run turning points with the turning software
including large vehicles such as fire trucks. And a fire truck can maneuver all throughout the
development and through Prairie Hill Lane. These plans have also been approved by the Fire
Department. One of the advantages of coming off Benton Street is you can get longer length in the
road and be able to make up the grades to develop on this site which means less grading and less
impact, such as tall retaining walls. They did run a number of different alignments with access off
Miller Avenue it is difficult at any point to get even to an 11 % grade on the access road to the
Prairie Hill development. It is quite steep and steeper than Benton hill and it would not be
recommended. To get to a better grade, say 8 -10% there would need to be severe cuts and
excavation and a lot of retaining walls. It also shows an impact into lots 3 & 4 and into the
neighboring properties in the west in terms of grading into those properties and significant retaining
walls to be built along the north line of the Co- Housing properties.
Boelk stated one of the concerns is always traffic on that hill in the winter conditions and the one
thing that Co- Housing has going for it is there really aren't that many cars that will be accessing
that site. They took count of the number of vehicles in the 16 adult families that make up the
current Co- Housing residents and there were 12 vehicles total. Of course there are more units but
even expanding it out to the 32 units it will not be considerable impact on traffic. The Co- Housing
values are a sustainable model, looking to walk and bike as alternatives to vehicles so there is no
adverse impact in terms of cars entering Benton Street from development or in terms of capacity
and as shown in Ralston's report, the current vehicle use of Benton Street is 11,000 daily vehicles
and the capacity is 15,000.
Boelk stated that if the access were on Miller Avenue the intersection of the private drive and Miller
Avenue creates quite a bit of a grade difference coming down at a 10 -11% grade right onto a
flatter, more gradual Miller Avenue. Wintery icy conditions will occur there. It may not impact as
much of the general public traffic as on Benton Street but there is that risk there as well in winter
conditions of sliding down that access road onto Miller Avenue. Boelk agreed that Benton Street is
a steep hill, but because of the low volume of traffic entering and exiting with this development and
the grade difference between the access and Benton Street it is seen as a viable access point
compared to Miller Avenue. Boelk pointed out that the Co- Housing group has looked at all options
at great length and are very conscious about the impact to the environment, the public and
particularly the surrounding neighborhoods.
Eastham asked if Boelk stated the grade currently to get from Miller Avenue up to the development
is 11 % or to get it to 11 % there would have to be additional grading. Boelk answered that there
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 2, 2014 - Formal
Page 6 of 18
would need to be significant grading just to get to 11 % and retaining walls that would have to be
built. It is not advised to go that steep, but to get to 8 %, which is feasible, it would take even more
grading into the sensitive areas and protected slopes.
Barb Bailey (2357 Willenbrock Circle) addressed the Commission stating she has been involved
with the Co- Housing project since the beginning. She is a lifelong resident of the Iowa City area,
and currently resides on the north end in the Peninsula Neighborhood. She is one of 11
households who own the Co- Housing land.
When we last met a couple of weeks ago, Iowa City Co- Housing came away with the sense that
there was support for the concept of Co- Housing- from both neighbors and commissioners. She
hopes to convince the Commission that the Miller- Orchard neighborhood is the place to build it.
The Co- Housing group looked at a lot of sites before we found this one. We knew when we saw it
that it was the best place we had found so far and it would be hard to find one better. We visit it
regularly, we've mowed paths to various building sites so we can stand and look out at the
panoramic views and think about living there. We have potluck picnics in the park. We take our
family and friends there as well as others who are interested in the project.
We knew it would not be an easy site to develop, we knew others had considered it and decided
against it. We knew there would be extra cost because of the difficult terrain. We thought and still
think that a development without the need for profit could work on that location.
If the Co- Housing group is required to access the community from Miller Avenue, the cost of the
private drive will increase by roughly 30 -40 %, hundreds of thousands of dollars. These costs of
course have to spread over the 32 dwellings that we are proposing.
We have to keep the costs of the homes in line with the market appraisals supported by the
neighborhood, this is a modest neighborhood. The cost of the common house and green building
practices contribute to making the upfront cost of these homes more than would be typical for
homes this size, in this neighborhood. If required to come up from Miller Avenue, additional
driveway costs will increase project costs, but not the market appraisals. If we have too much of a
gap between appraised values and project costs, it could jeopardize the project.
A private drive off of Miller Avenue would mean no park on that stretch of land. A different
development would likely mean more traffic than the Co- Housing group would produce. It may
mean a less desirable development on that land.
If the Co- Housing group were able to pursue development at this site, we may decide to sell the
land on Miller to help offset the additional expenses of the private drive.
In any case if access from Miller Avenue is required, the project as it is designed will not be
built. Since the design is an end product of many design parameters, a change in one requires
that others shift as well, a redesign would be necessary.
The Co- Housing group knows this is an unusual development proposal. As the developers and
future residents of Co- Housing, we are planning for our future residency in the Miller Orchard
neighborhood. As future residents, it is in our best interest to preserve and enhance the unique
features of the Benton Hill Park. As current land owners and future residents we care about what
happens there too. We use that park. We would like our needs to be considered too.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 2, 2014 - Formal
Page 7 of 18
There are a number of reasons why this development is a good thing for the Miller Orchard
neighborhood and for the City of Iowa City. One of the goals for the neighborhood is revitalization
and stabilization. One of the ways this is being accomplished is by increasing the number of owner
occupied homes. Through the University Partnership Program 10 rental homes have been
purchased, rehabbed and converted to owner occupied housing in Miller Orchard. Prairie Hill
would provide over 3 times that amount, 32 owner - occupied, high quality dwellings in the
University Impact Zone. Based on the August 2014 map prepared by the Neighborhood Services
Division of the City, the Miller Orchard neighborhood has 79 owner - occupied residences. Prairie
Hill would increase that number to 111, a 40% increase in owner occupied homes in the
neighborhood, changing the neighborhood from majority rental to majority owner occupied.
The co- housing model reinforces the stability of the owner - occupied homes. No investment
property owner would be willing to pay the premium of the common house. Co- Housing
communities experience little turnover and most have a waiting list of households that would like to
move in as the opportunity arises. The cooperative nature of the community is a hallmark of co-
housing that fosters an exchange of social supports, enhancing life for those who live there and
making it attractive to many. Iowa City Co- Housing currently has 11 member households with 3
more in the process of joining and several others who have expressed an intention to join. Our
ages range from 3 to 70.
Towards the goal of attracting stable households the expansion of parkland is a good thing for the
neighborhood. Providing a terrain suitable for activities requiring level land will expand the uses
and users and make the park and neighborhood a more attractive place for the neighborhoods
changing demographic, especially young families.
Iowa City Co- Housing provides a model of sustainable development, a concept that is rapidly
gaining in popularity as climate change brings home to more and more people how important it is
to lessen our impact on the earth we all share. The homes in the Prairie Hill Community will be
attractive, small, LEED certified homes, many of which will be solar powered. The community will
exist as a model for other development.
The Co- Housing project follows in the footsteps of over 200 existing and developing communities
to provide a structure for aging in place, supporting families, mentoring youth and engaging with
the larger community. We hope to be a meeting place for groups from the neighborhood and
larger community, where events of all kinds can be hosted.
Iowa City Co- Housing sees the development of the project as proposed, the swap of parkland and
access from Benton Street as a win - win -win for Co- Housing, for the City and for the neighborhood.
Anna Buss (525 West Benton Street) stated that most of the concerns were covered at the last
planning and zoning meeting so to just highlight, the City keeps saying it wants to revitalize our
area however she feels the area is already being revitalized. There has been lots of new
development in the area and the neighborhood welcomes it. The neighborhood likes the park just
the way it is. If you let one development have a piece of park the precedent has already been set.
Buss stated the driveway onto Benton Street is the main issue with most of the people who live in
that area, all the studies in the world, by all the professionals you can come up with, will never
trump the common sense factor. Iowa City has a history of not doing anything until someone gets
killed at an intersection. First Avenue was a perfect example. It happened a number of places on
First Avenue before a traffic signal was installed and a crossing bar at the railroad. Buss feels the
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 2, 2014 - Formal
Page 8 of 18
public safety on the Benton Street hill will be compromised with a driveway on that hill. The Co-
Housing group bought the property knowing that the access was to be on Miller Avenue and that
should be part of their construction plans. Issues on the Benton Street hill are the topography, the
grade of the hill, the 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. traffic, the blinding sun in the afternoon, and when you add
speeders and adverse weather conditions and because of the area it would be impossible to widen
Benton Street or add a turning lane, it just shows that Miller Avenue is the better and safer choice.
There is more development coming to the area which will bring a lot more traffic. Everybody
agrees on that all you have to do is drive around and you can see that there are for sale signs
down on Riverside Drive again more property is going to be coming into play. Buss feels that
perhaps the neighborhood went about this the wrong way and perhaps should have come together
and fought against the property development in general but didn't because many like the concept
of the co- housing, the big objection is the location of the driveway. If the concern is the 11 % grade
onto Miller Avenue, the 11 % grade on Miller Avenue will be way back and there will be plenty of
room to get stopped on an icy road and a lot more sight difference.
Buss also questioned how really affordable are these homes going to be? That will be a cost
factor as well. Buss questioned Miklo about the trees asking if there are currently sick trees over
there or just trees susceptible to the sickness. Miklo was unable to confirm the condition of the
trees at the present time. Buss shared concern about cutting down trees and the years it takes for
a new tree to replace it.
Regarding the sight distance coming out of the driveway, Buss questioned why the City is allowing
a 20 foot street when other streets need to be 24 -26 feet and feels there should be concern for fire
trucks trying to turn around on that street and that is a public safety issue.
Annie Tucker (1425 Oaklawn) is a member of the board of managers for Iowa City Co- Housing,
and has been involved since the beginning. Tucker stated she pays property taxes on the Prairie
Hill property as well as her current home. Tucker would like to discuss the issue of the Miller
Avenue access, stating the Co- Housing group always knew that Miller Avenue was an option but
before the land was purchased in April 2013 they spoke with the Iowa City staff about the
possibility of a Benton Street access. The original thought was to come in at the very western
uphill edge of the woods because the Co- Housing group values the woods too, but when they
spoke with City staff they addressed the safety of that entrance and they stated the driveway would
have to be down where the service road currently is located. That service road entrance is further
down the hill than the driveways that were proposed in the 1993 and 1997 development proposals.
The Co- Housing group believes that the currently proposed access on Benton Street provides the
best option environmentally. It works with the topography. Tucker stated as an eastside Iowa City
resident, she is aware of what happened on Dubuque Street with the cliffs and the rocks and
erosion so working with the topography is very important. The Co- Housing group is working with
the existing drive there. They would not be plowing through an existing woodland but going
through on the existing service drive. Also by accessing onto Benton Street it reduces the impact
on the sensitive slopes that are on Miller Avenue. It requires less concrete and retaining walls and
minimizes the tree removal. If Co- Housing were to keep that flat area of Miller Avenue they would
seriously consider coming up along the north edge and would have to balance what to do about
the trees and the slopes and there is a possibility of selling that land to another developer who
would have a lot more freedom to do what they wanted if they did RS -8 development.
Alicia Herschelm (710 Miller Avenue) stated she is a resident of the Miller Orchard neighborhood
and a big fan of co- housing and very excited about the idea of this project coming into the
neighborhood. However the main issue with the project is that this Co- Housing group has not
done their due diligence, they bought a specific piece of land to develop for this project knowing
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 2, 2014 - Formal
Page 9 of 18
that the access was supposed to be on Miller Avenue as shown in various traffic studies, the best
option. While Benton Street access would work it is not technically the best option, it goes by the
code however Miller Avenue is still the better access point for traffic and pedestrians. Herschelm
has attended some of the neighborhood meetings and feels it is great that the Co- Housing group
has included the neighborhood, and has said they want to be part of the neighborhood, but they
immediately want to change something that was done as a neighborhood group over several
years. It is most important that they work with what they have and bought with the plans that the
access would be on Miller Avenue. The Benton Street access has caused too many problems with
traffic and other issues. Herschelm stated again she is very excited to have the Co- Housing group
in the neighborhood; however they need to spend the money to make the access on Miller Avenue
work and not try to change the neighborhood to work for their project.
Dan Kahn (333 Lexington Avenue) has lived in Iowa City for over 26 years and is a property owner
in Prairie Hill. As a Miller Orchard neighborhood land owner he wanted to briefly address the
concerns about the proposed entrance onto Benton Street. Benton Street and other arterials on
the hills, such as Dubuque, Myrtle, and North Governor are perceived as problems largely due to
the volume of traffic they carry and the steepness of the hills. Specifically regarding the Prairie
Hills property the City Transportation Planner concluded there really isn't a problem, confirmed in
the studies. In the City Transportation Planner's memo it is stated "Access to Benton Street and
access as shown is acceptable and meets all the applicable access standards." The facts and
statistics on Benton Street that pertain to the Prairie Hill development seem to show that there is
more than enough sight distance to accommodate the slight increase in traffic due to the Prairie
Hill development. And additionally after hearing tonight's discussion, Kahn is not sure where it was
assumed from the beginning that this development was going to access onto Miller Avenue. It was
investigated along with a number of things about the development that were investigated however
it was never confirmed access would be on Miller Avenue. A wide variety of access points were
investigated and the statement that has been said that the development was purchased with Miller
Avenue being the access point is not true. Perhaps that should be investigated with members of
the community on where this information has been obtained.
Additionally there is the Benton Hill park issue, Kahn appreciates that many Miller Orchard
residents have worked hard for years to achieve this lovely neighborhood park. A very small
number of residents have communicated that they do not want any changes, not even the smallest
change made to this park. The Co- Housing group understands their request, but cannot agree
with it. First as you have already heard this evening a small percent of the parkland along a
current access road will actually be built upon and being done in the least disruptive way. Second
if the Commission accepts and agrees to this rigid upholding that nothing at all happens to this
park then they will force us, the land owning citizens who are trying to develop Prairie Hill, into a
very difficult spot. If our proposed entrance street is changed from Benton Street to Miller Avenue
it will require additional substantial land grading at a great expense, at least hundreds of thousands
of dollars The Co- Housing group does not have the resources of a large developer. They are
developing this land not for profit but for personal homes. The Co- Housing group is doing this
according to our values where we want to maximize environmental protection and unit affordability.
Loss of Benton Street access could price us out. Some mega developer could put some other type
development on that land and they would have plenty of resources and cash to grade the land if
they were forced away from Benton Street access, however real serious questions as whether we
would be able to do something like that and what might that mean. Prairie Hill is a pedestrian
focused development and if we can't develop it someone else will and they will likely bring
substantially more traffic to that area than we will. The Co- Housing group feels your best option to
manage traffic in this area is to back our project. Kahn stated he is confident the Commission will
use the best judgment on the facts when you decide the future of the land and future homes. He
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 2, 2014 - Formal
Page 10 of 18
believes the Commission will review the strong and persuasive evidence provided by City staff,
engineers, and the many citizens who favor the Prairie Hill development as proposed.
Mary Jo Daly (532 Meadow Street), understands there has been a lot of change in the area and
sometimes change can seem stressful even when it's change for the better. She remembers
bicycling up Benton Street hill in 1958 it seemed steep then. However that doesn't match the
negative environment impact that would happen if the Miller Avenue access area had to be graded.
As a member of Iowa City Co- Housing since May 2013 the land swap was already discussed and
the land purchase had been completed. When this takes place, the woodland will be so much
improved and it will no longer be like 25% poison ivy and primitive hobo encampments, it will be
beautiful and people will be so glad they got behind this project. Daly stated that as a long term
Iowa City resident and tax payer she will be living in one of the three affordable units and if the
Benton Street access does not go through and the Co- Housing group has to do the Miller Avenue
road she will not be able to afford her unit.
Ann Stromquist (316 Myrtle Ave) stated her family has lived there for 31 years and their three
children attended Roosevelt school. Stromquist wishes to speak to the Miller Orchard neighbors
as much as the Commission. Her family lives in the Melrose neighborhood, and is your neighbor,
so what happens in the Miller Orchard neighborhood affects the Melrose neighborhood. The Miller
Orchard neighborhood and Melrose neighborhood share some characteristics as they are in the
shadow of the University and on the fringes of downtown Iowa City, therefore the neighborhoods
are fragile. The stability that once characterized both the neighborhoods, owner occupied houses,
family occupied homes, a school the children could easily walk to, is threatened by encroaching
rental properties and the University (that once promised not to extend south of Melrose Avenue but
have done so in spite of that promise). Additionally the closing of Roosevelt school virtually
assured that the neighborhoods will not be attractive to families as they once were. The piece of
property in question will not sit vacant for long, something will be built on it, perhaps rental
property, student housing, a strip mall, and a parking lot. What better neighbors could Miller
Orchard and Melrose neighborhoods ask for than the Prairie Hill Co- Housing group, people who
care about the land and the environment, who are eager to manage the surrounding parkland, who
are community minded whose motivation is to conserve energy, who will love Benton Hill park as
much as we do, who chose this very land because it would be easy to walk and bike to downtown
Iowa City. Stromquist knows that everyone needs to weigh the pros and cons of this project and a
major factor in this consideration is the benefit to the neighborhood and to Iowa City. A group of
community minded, caring people, who are eager to invest in Miller Orchard neighborhood by
actually living there not just investing from afar, living there and contributing to the revitalization of
the neighborhood. So to the folks in the Miller Orchard neighborhood this is your opportunity to
choose your neighbors.
Andrew Gutman, (1120 East Burlington), just moved to Iowa City about a year ago. Gutman stated
he does not know the Co- Housing group very well but it's exciting that something like this is
coming into Iowa City. After hearing the discussion it seems like they have gone out of their way,
or at least jumped through the hoops, adjusting their plans from the original spot on Benton Street
that was proposed, and increasing the park size which is not something many developers would
do. On a larger scale, state and regional, it is very important that communities start looking at
these co- housing options for the grand scheme of things. To have that here in Iowa City is a pretty
strong statement about how we live in this world. Gutman understands the concerns about the
street issues by really that is hypothetical because the development meets the requirements that
the City has put forth. Paying attention to the big picture is important here and the smaller issues
will not end up being prominent or important down the road.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 2, 2014 - Formal
Page 11 of 18
Mary Knudson (725 West Benton Street) stated that half her property could be potentially
surrounded by this development so feels she has a lot of personal interest as well as just from a
neighborhood member interest. Knudson first wanted to state that we are all excited and in favor
of the Co- Housing group and what they can bring to the neighborhood, that is not the point.
Additionally Knudson doesn't feel the neighborhood is afraid of change, it is important to have good
neighbors, and these would be good neighbors, homeowners, but as stated at the previous
meeting, it is important to separate the Co- Housing plan from the two big issues of the park and
street access. First, the park; this neighborhood is a very vulnerable neighborhood and not just
because there is not a high percentage of owners but because the neighborhood has worked hard
with the fact that an arterial street runs through the neighborhood. Even with that obstacle, Miller
Orchard has been able to identify ourselves as a neighborhood and have fought for that.
Roosevelt School was taken away with a lot of fight to keep it, and the 30 year old fight for this park
that sits on a wooded area was a fight to achieve, and the topography and the view from the park
is important. Knudson pointed out that in the slides the development part and the service road to
the east of it was only shown. The sign, "walk in beauty ", really says a lot, it is a beautiful park and
a view the neighborhood really likes. The swap for the land is not an equal swap because the
topography and the neighborhood want to keep the current park environment and flat land is not
the type of park that was intended. Additionally the new park land will be near shopping which is
dangerous to children for playing there.
Knudson also addressed why Miller Avenue keeps being stated as the original access point for this
project. The piece of land is intended to have access to Miller Avenue and not to Benton Street, it
does not have an opening to Benton Street which is why the neighbors are perplexed how the
Benton Street access came about and how the park got thrown into the mix of it. Benton Street is
10 -12% grade, not 8 %. In a memo sent to the Commission from a traffic study done in the
neighborhood, 15% of the drivers drive 35 mph or faster down Benton Street. The development
talks about only 32 units and that they are not big drivers but one cannot compare what the traffic
for this development will be in comparison to what the traffic from an apartment building might. The
real question is the cost to the City, to the neighborhood of having additional drivers there and what
that means coming into a steep hill, a high traffic hill with 11,000 cars driving that hill each day.
Knudson stated she does look forward to having Co- Housing group as neighbors but has serious
concerns about the road access and the trade of the park.
Ruth Baker (515 West Benton Street) lives in the Miller Orchard neighborhood and wrote to the
Planning and Zoning Commission and included a number of documents that hopefully the
Commission has read. Baker particularly stated that the memo that Bill Buss had written a number
of years ago addresses the issue of meeting minimum standards of sight distance. In Mr. Buss'
memo there were many things that were not taken into account with regards to the safety of the
hill. Baker noted that she viewed online that Ralston had a meeting with the Commission
concerning arterial streets (it was a working session on September 18 regarding street planning).
In the document minutes from that work session, on page 2, it indicated that arterial streets are
longer blocks without entrances or limited entrances off arterial streets. Therefore Baker questions
why the City would allow the Prairie Hill driveway entrance so close to Greenwood and Miller
Avenue, which seems to not follow what Ralston stated is the planning of arterial streets City. Also
tonight, the photos showing the service road into the park are deceiving. The park path is not a
wide drive; it is a path, a walking path basically. When the City comes to do service in that park,
they pull off Benton to the edge of the park and then walk whatever equipment they need into the
park. They do not drive up into the park area. Baker asked the Commission to segment the issue
of co- housing and really look at safety.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 2, 2014 - Formal
Page 12 of 18
John Shaw (437 South Summit Street) was a very early contributor and member of Iowa City Co-
Housing, and the architect for Iowa City Co- Housing. Shaw is very vested in this project and
would like to talk about what this project offers to the City. Shaw is not here to say this
development is better or more beneficial than other developments in town there are lot of nice
neighborhoods and lots of great developments, however this development offers diversity to the
type of housing stock in Iowa City. It increases the overall worth of the entire community. No one
in this room will argue diversity is not a good thing. To his mind, to deny this application on the
strengths of the concerns raised here tonight is to completely ignore scope the incremental change
to this road is a 0.03 % increase if every one of those 32 cars pulls out onto that road every day.
What this project offers to the City, to balance the minuscule change that would happen to Benton
Street against the fact that it increases the owner - occupied housing in the Miller Orchard
neighborhood by 40% is short sided. If this Commission does deny this application it would be a
rare case of the Commission listening to the concerns of the few and disregarding the benefit to
the many. The traffic engineer stated this project exceeds the requirements for safe travel. The
amount of land for public use increases as a result of this project. This Commission has a history
of making decision on rationale criteria and that is what we use to determine the appropriateness
of what we bring to the Commission and City Council and staff that has recommended this project.
Tracey Achenbach (727 S. Rundell Street) is the executive director of the Housing Trust Fund of
Johnson County and resident of Iowa City. The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County is an
organization whose mission is to promote and support affordable housing and was glad to hear a
neighbor is concerned about the affordability of the housing. As informed at the last meeting, the
Housing Trust Fund awarded the Co- Housing group a loan so they could offer down payment
assistance to three of the purchasers in the development that meet the low to moderate income
criteria. While the assistance will go through the Co- Housing organization it will be passed on to
lower the purchase price of three of the dwellings that will benefit the low to moderate income
home purchasers. When considering the request for funds from the Co- Housing group, the
Housing Trust Fund board was really impressed with this group. They were making the affordable
units a priority and wanted to keep costs down so they could provide some affordable units. The
Housing Trust Fund doesn't often see that except from nonprofit providers in the community so the
board was really impressed and really wanted to be part of this project. Achenbach stated her
concern that the Co- Housing group has put a lot of time and energy to find the best site and have
already incurred a lot of costs in doing so and if this project is not approved as proposed or
requires significant project alterations such as changing the development access to Miller Avenue,
it will impact the cost of the project and perhaps impact whether they will be able to provide
affordable housing units.
Mike Moran, director of Parks and Recreation, addressed the Commission to state that the Parks
and Recreation Department has been working with the Co- Housing group for three to four months
and have looked at various configurations. The current configuration, the one being proposed, is a
benefit to the City. The parkland swap may be a benefit, not a loss of land, because of the way the
Co- Housing group would treat it. Moran offered to answer questions about trees and such.
Freerks asked Moran if these wild spaces, and what the community has said, is taken into
consideration since the swap will be for a different type of parkland.
Moran stated that park planning is done through the neighborhood process and understand this is
a new parcel of land and a different type of land. The neighborhood is the one that has buy in to
the issue, not the Parks and Recreation department.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 2, 2014 - Formal
Page 13 of 18
Eastham asked Moran if it made much difference if there were a swap of land or not. If the access
to the development was from Miller Avenue and there wasn't a parkland swap, would Parks and
Recreation support that?
Moran stated was not what was proposed to them, the Co- Housing group proposed that swap to
Parks and Recreation so they reacted to that proposal. If the Benton Street access isn't granted
and it goes down to Miller Avenue, Parks and Recreation won't be involved because they will still
retain the current park. Only if a developer or citizen wants to donate or sell any property to
become park land does the Park and Recreation Department act.
JP Claussen (2139 Davis Street) is a member of Iowa City Co- Housing and property owner in the
Miller Orchard neighborhood and would like to discuss the parkland with the Commission. Some
may be assuming there is more parkland than there is, the Co- Housing group actually owns quite a
bit of the woodland area. Some of the features up there that people would consider parkland like
the amphitheater and the barn is actually partially on the Co- Housing land. So when discussing
the view, there is no view from the park, the view is from the Co- Housing portion of the land. The
proposed land swap would return most of those features to parkland. This was mentioned very
briefly by Daly, but the only kind of residence up there now is a homeless camp. That is what is up
there, no one has talked about safety, kid's safety with homeless folks up there with a fire, drinking,
unmonitored and that is real feature of what is currently on that property. The Co- Housing group
wants to bring really good neighbors there. They are going to increase owner occupied housing by
40 %. It's an emotional issue for the Co- Housing group too and quite frankly if the access must be
on Miller Avenue it will totally degrade the environment there which is completely against the
values and additionally the Co- Housing group will be priced out of the property. So to state the
Commission needs to separate the idea of co- housing and the parkland swap and street access, it
cannot be separated. This is the opportunity and it's in the Commission's hands if Iowa City gets a
co- housing community
Michael Pacha (3117 River Street) is a member of Iowa City Co- Housing and a property owner in
the Miller Orchard neighborhood, native Iowan, has lived here for 55 years. This process is a bit
sobering where it should be exciting. The Co- Housing group has heard a lot about issues,
emotions and changes in the last two meetings. This is true in many parts of our lives that we
have to deal with. A lot that has been discussed is about the past and finding cures for the
present. But we are also here tonight to talk about the future and what it means for Iowa City.
Someone once wrote Change is Inevitable, and whether change is good or bad, it happens, Prairie
Hill is a good change. It's a community that will have shared values, shared interests, a place to
learn new things, and a place to grow among friends. The Co- Housing group believes this with all
our hearts.
Martha Stevenson (531 Olive Street) is a resident of the Melrose neighborhood, and considers
herself fairly new to Iowa City as she has only been part of the community for 23 years. There
have been many changes in those 23 years. The first thing she noticed when moving to Iowa City
was The University of Iowa, and it's growth. I will continue to grow. She also noticed the changes
in the City Council, and in Iowa City and it's going to continue to grow. There is a problem with
stagnation. When stagnation begins, communities die. It's happened in large communities like
Chicago as well as small communities, it's happened in downtown areas and in Iowa communities.
The downtown areas are stagnating and they are dying. People don't like change, but change is
inevitable. As the community continues to grow traffic continues to grow and Iowa City knows how
to deal with those issues. Benton Street has always had traffic issues and will continue to have
traffic issues, with the growth of Oakknoll, and those problems will be solved as they come up,
dealt with best as possible, and grow with the positive changes. The Miller Orchard area has
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 2, 2014 - Formal
Page 14 of 18
grown, it started out quite slowly but it has grown nicely and the park is beautiful. So Stevenson
hopes the decision that is made will profit everybody and be the best for the city.
Buss stated there had been a lot said about owner occupied properties and a tot of the people
have lived there a very long time and are well aware that the Miller, Benton, Hudson area was
pretty run down; stating that her banker can attest to the fact it is not as run down as it used to be.
Buss also has a lot of rentals in the neighborhood but prides herself in that her rentals look good
and in a lot better shape than some of the owner occupied homes used to look. Buss stated that
the thing with owner occupied is, things change, and in Iowa City they change rather quickly, so
her concern is yes, the Co- Housing group means well, but Benton Street hill is dangerous and that
won't change. What can be changed is to eliminate some of the traffic. While it has been stated
that this development will only be 36 or 38 cars, there is additional development that is coming in
on Riverside Drive and when the developments went in west of town the Benton Street traffic has
quadrupled. It's getting worse, not better, it doesn't matter if it's a game day or not, all you have to
do is drive up Benton Street. When the Co- Housing folks many years down the road move on and
people will have to sell their properties, what happens when they can't sell their property and it
becomes a rental property? And the houses they are proposing are beautiful, but they will be
costly. It's not affordable housing, in Iowa City truthfully affordable housing does not exist.
Tucker stated that John Yapp from the City staff stated this location, this proposed access onto
Benton Street, was studied for traffic and access flows, stated the sight distance, for when you can
see a car coming down the hill until it got the location where the access road will be, it was nine
seconds. Nine seconds is plenty of time to decide to pull out onto the road and be in traffic without
causing issues. Additionally Yapp stated the length from the top of the hill you can see down to
this point is longer than most city blocks. The other piece is about the park, the Co- Housing group
is putting in a conservation easement so it will never be developed. When looking in the park you
are in the woods so there will still be woods and wild space for people to be in. Additionally there
will be a 50 foot buffer of green space and the area will still be isolated. Miklo showed the overall
site plan and Tucker pointed out the boundary of the southern part of the developed part of the
park on down into the development land is just woodsy. It is reminiscent of Hickory Hill and that
will also be part of the flat land. So there is an additional space of wild trees that will be
undisturbed.
Pacha stated everyone has discussed the danger of Benton Street but no one discussed Miller
Avenue and driving on Miller Avenue. You can park on one side of Miller Avenue which makes it
difficult for two cars to get down that street at the same time so it's not as safe as everyone thinks it
is.
Shaw would like to return to the scope of discussion which is that we are talking about 0.3 of 1 %
increase of the 11,000 cars that go down Benton Street every day if all 32 cars come out. If
everyone comes out of the development twice a day, then it's 0.6 of 1% increase to the traffic onto
Benton Street. The Commission should not choose to deny this application based on that minimal
change.
Stevenson stated that she lives on Myrtle Street and turns east bound onto Myrtle to get to
Riverside every day. She must patiently wait for traffic; there are no lights at that intersection. It
can be dangerous, but even during rush hour time it's only ever been at most 3 minutes before she
is able make her turn. Traffic is traffic and it's going to continue, everyone just needs to be patient.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 2, 2014 - Formal
Page 15 of 18
Daly stated she drives like an old lady and prefer to take three rights rather than one left and will
still get where she needs to go. Daly questioned the difference of coming out at our proposed
driveway on Benton Street and turning right or accessing from Miller Avenue, and then turn right
onto Benton Street from Miller Avenue. The difference is the degradation to the environment.
Everyone here understand the definition of a red herring, a red herring is when the hounds really
have the scent and they are on the trail and are focused on what it's all supposed to be focused on
until someone drags a red herring across the trail and distracts them, such as Benton Street.
Knutson said she does not believe anyone from the Miler Orchard neighborhood minds change.
And as a neighborhood that has experienced lots of change, it has adjusted to change, and they
wrote a neighborhood plan with change. However Knutson still wants to address Benton Street, it
is an arterial road 10 -12% grade. It's not so much the co- housing people coming out; it's the fact
that there are over 11,000 cars going up and down. And it's not the fact that there may only be 32
cars coming out, there is all those 11,000 cars not expecting to have to stop in the middle of the hill
with the blinding sun in their eye and crashing back into somebody. It is a danger; it is not a red
herring. On Miller Avenue the traffic is significantly less than Benton Street. It is true this
neighborhood has a lot of problems with their streets, which is why traffic studies have been done,
but Miller Avenue is still a much safer option than Benton Street.
Claussen just wanted to answer Buss' point about the rentals, the Co- Housing group has created a
policy regarding rentals which states anyone who buys in the community can be away from their
home one year or less otherwise has to be owner occupied.
Eastham has a question referring to Ralston's memo regarding collisions on Benton Street near
the entrance to Roosevelt Elementary School and if Ralston can speak of collisions over the
course of Benton Street elsewhere.
Ralston does not have the data, the information this data is collected from is the police reports and
it can vary depending on how the police office fills out the report. As far as he can ascertain there
were 5 collisions roughly between the middle 2/3 of the hill and tried to focus on the area where the
proposed driveway would be and the Roosevelt school entrance.
Freerks asked Ralston to clarify in his memo where he stated that the average daily traffic on
Benton Street had decreased lately. Ralston replied it was true and it's a trend, these were 2010
DOT counts, it actually decreased by 500 from 11,500 to 11,000 between 2006 and 2010. This is
a trend seen metro area wide. A lot of the traffic on arterial streets is dropping. A national trend as
well.
Martin questioned the reason for this downward trend. Ralston replied that locally he believes
bicycle, pedestrian, public transportation use has increased.
Freerks closed public discussion.
Theobald moved to approve the application submitted by Iowa City Co- Housing for a
rezoning of 9.65 acres of land located at Miller Avenue and Benton Street from Medium
Density Single - Family (RS -8) zone and Neighborhood Public (P -1) zone to Planned
Development Overlay /Medium Density Single - Family (OPD -8) zone for 7.68 acres and
Neighborhood Public (P -1) zone for 1.97 acres, and a preliminary plat of Prairie Hill, a 2 -lot
residential subdivision with 32 dwelling units subject to: 1. approval of the landscaping plan
by the City Forester; 2. City Engineer approval of a storm water management plan and 3. the
applicant installing the offsite improvements to trail and lighting at Benton Hill Park.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 2, 2014 - Formal
Page 16 of 18
Martin seconded the motion.
Freerks stated she tries to keep an open mind up until the end of all discussion, she went over to
Benton Street prior to the meeting tonight and she knows the history, she knows people on both
sides of the issue. Freerks stated she is not so concerned about the traffic from the 32 additional
cars onto Benton Street they will hit Benton Street most likely even if they come from Miller
Avenue. Also this is not apples to apples with the proposals from 1993 and 1996 as the spacing of
the driveway was very different. When looking at the property, there could be other developments
in there, there are some that would like to see more student housing. This proposed community is
a benefit for the neighborhood and for the City of Iowa City. Freerks concern was about the park
portion and still has some reservations, but sees tonight that a large percentage of the park will be
left permanently undisturbed. Freerks does believe what will be replanted there and replaced there
and that it will be conservation areas in the big picture that along with the additional park land will
make for a better area. Freerks would not like to see the disruption and grading of the slope area
that would have to be disturbed to have access onto Miller Avenue.
Martin stated after looking back at her notes and wondered what the cost benefit analyses is
between the environment portion vs. the traffic portion and feel like she has to support the whole
thing because in the big scheme of things this will be a positive impact on the community as a
whole.
Freerks stated the 40% increase in owner occupied, to have that happen on its own without
additional tax payer dollars is a huge plus.
Swygard stated she could not support this proposal because she does drive Benton Street
regularly and while the sight distance meets the requirement staff says there are concerns with the
hill that remain. Among those concerns are the grade of the hill, just because you can see doesn't
mean you will actually be able to stop. From her personal experience (along with neighbors) have
attested the sun is a huge concern. She doesn't think the 32 cars will make a difference, however
the stopping and turning mid -hill can be dangerous. Another concern is this park swap would
make an existing business nonconforming. As far as the neighborhood goes they are very used to
change there and made great accomplishments, the university programs have helped stabilize
housing and while there will be this percentage increase in owner occupied housing, it will be in a
particular area of the neighborhood and it will not necessarily impact the majority of the
neighborhood that spreads at the bottom of the hill. Swygard appreciates the efforts and the Co-
Housing concerns with the environment but cannot trade that for the safety on Benton hill.
Freerks asked Hektoen what was the vote needed for this to pass and Hektoen replied 4 positive
votes are needed to pass.
Eastham asked for clarification about the nonconforming issue. Miklo stated there was a check
cashing /payday advance business in the area and it will become nonconforming if it's within a
distance from a park. That means it could not expand and if they were to close, they could not
reopen in the same location. He said depending on your perspective that may be a positive thing
regarding the health of the neighborhood. He said such businesses are regulated due to negative
effects on an area.
Theobald stated she was very excited about this project. As a long time west side resident, her
children went to Roosevelt school. Her concerns are the access onto Benton Street, and what it
did to that park the neighborhood worked so hard to get, it was saddening. Theobald feels like
there could be some other solution, where everybody was happy. There may be extra expense
involved, however there could be ways explored to help with that. The conditions on Benton Street
just are not safe, in any weather, bikes come down the hill very fast and the bike lane ends. The park is
Benton Hill Park, it's not lower "Miller Park ", and it is so much a part of that neighborhood. Saddened
that can't support it but think there could be a better solution.
Eastham has major concerns regarding the access onto Benton Street, and it has nothing to do with the
increased vehicles from the development, it's the increased likelihood of collisions with existing traffic.
He does believe the co- housing is great idea and would be very good for the Iowa City area and
suspect it can still be done. The Co- housing board members have expressed some concern about the
finances being there if additional grading is necessary to get access to Miller Avenue. Putting the
increased likelihood of collision risk on Benton Street is a legitimate concern. He suspects the Co-
Housing group can reassess and hopefully will find that Miller Avenue is the best thing for this
community. From the beginning the transportation planner and the City staff preferred access point
was Miller Avenue and that is a professional opinion that the Commission cannot dismiss. Looking at
the collision report it shows it is significant enough that access on Miller Avenue needs to be clearly
ruled out based on money or environmental issues before access should be granted on Benton Street.
While this access does meet the sight distance standards, sight distance does not mean no collisions.
Would like for the applicants to take the access issues into consideration and draw up another set of
plans.
Freerks stated it is not just about the cost of drawing up new plans; there would be cost of moving dirt
and putting retaining walls up. She is afraid that if this community does not get approval for access
onto Benton Street, the development will not happen and a future development of student housing will
happen. Freerks feels common sense is being disregarded as they are talking about access east of the
park or from Miller Avenue just a short distance away. Traffic will still be coming out onto Benton
Street.
Swygard stated a difference is to come out on Miller Avenue, that is an established access point, which
the 11,000 cars that travel Benton Street expect.
Eastham stated that the collision rate on Miller Avenue would be different and some cars will go to
Highway 1 and not to Benton Street.
A vote was taken and the motion was denied 2 -3 (Eastham, Swygard, Theobald voting no)
Hektoen stated the applicant can proceed to Council for consideration. Because it involves rezoning, if
the council feels they will vote different than the Commission recommendation, the Commission will be
invited to meet with Council to discuss the rationale. You are making a recommendation to them;
however they are free to vote however they choose.
Consideration of meeting minutes: September 18, 2014
Eastham moves to approve the meeting minutes with corrections, Martin seconded and the motion
carried 5 -0.
PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION:
Miklo reminded the Commission of the south district workshop Monday, October 6. The Commission is
welcome to attend, sit at a table, but do not try to steer the conversation in one way or the other. It
would be good for the Commission to attend to observe what the discussion is and to be a source of
information of what planning and zoning is all about.
ADJOURNMENT:
Martin moved to adjourn
Eastham seconded
Meeting was adjourned.
z
O
�o
� OC
20
00
v w
?0
z z N
Oa
N
06 z
LU
z
H
za
z
a
J
a
O
z
w
w
J
O
LL
oXXXXXX0
m
Go
Z
x
x
X
X
X
x
X
0)
�
XXXXxx�
x
x
x
x
x
x
NXXxxxXx
�XXXXx,X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
n
;xxxxxxx
c0
0
W
I--
LO
W
LO
n
O0to0000
VZXXOxXxx
w
W
(-XXXXXXX
Z
w
co
J
M
o OZ
�,xxxxxxx
0L)<CL
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
U
x
w
z
UQ
m
Q
W
xxxxxx0
O�
Mxxxx
LL.
2U)
-XX
0
N
X
X
x
x
x
X
X
N
N
x
x
x
x
x
x
X
U)
�w
r-0WLO
X0000000
w
W
J
w
J
W
�XZ
0
a�=
V
Q=
O
ao
VQYZamQ
=
LU
w
awti2NF
-P
O
z
w
w
0
z
v-xxXXXXX
m
CD
NxXXXXXX
N
N
X
x
x
x
x
x
x
�xxxoxxx
T-
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
U)
w
c0
0
W
I--
LO
W
LO
mn.
V- X0000000
O0to0000
W
w
W
Z
w
co
J
M
o OZ
0L)<CL
0
w
11
do
cn
U
x
w
z
UQ
m
Q
W
�Pw�
O�
ZaW
LL.
2U)
c
xE�' N
N
_ � U)
U)
cowo
N O
aQ¢Z�
u ii n n n
xOO i
w
Y
r_
3b(7)
IOWA CITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION APPROVED _
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 22,2014--5:30 P.M.
CITY CABLE TV OFFICE, 10 S. LINN ST. -TOWER PLACE PARKING FACILITY
MEMBERS PRESENT: Laura Bergus, Nicholas Kilburg, Matt Butler, Bram Elias
MEMBERS ABSENT: Alexa Homewood
STAFF PRESENT: Mike Brau
OTHERS PRESENT: Josh Goding, Bond Drager, Emily Light
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION
Light said that Senior Center Television will be having an open house October 28 and will be showing
a number of works by SCTV volunteers. Brau said Mediacom responded to the letter from the city
requesting Mediacom provide some form of compensation for the disruption caused by their plan to
move the library channel and go to digital transmission only for the digital tier. Mediacom declined
citing a desire that all Mediacom communities be treated the same. The city will be contacting
Mediacom to determine how they might collaborate with Mediacom to publicize where those who
need a digital to analog converter can get them. A meeting was held with representatives of the access
channels to discuss ways to inform the public of the library channel number change and how all the
access channels could use the public outreach effort to also promote their channels. A list of ideas was
developed. Coleman and City Communications Director Shannon McMahon will develop messaging
language. PATV will produce a PSA. The library will be working on separate efforts to inform
viewers of the channel number change. The city will develop a website to help consumers obtain and
install converter boxes. Brau said he recently received feedback from PATV for the local access
survey and will be incorporating the changes. The survey will then be tested. It is expected the survey
will be initiated next month.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Bergus moved and Elias seconded a motion to approve the amended August 28, 2014 minutes. The
motion passed unanimously.
ANNOUNCEMENTS OF COMMISSIONERS
None.
SHORT PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
CONSUMER ISSUES
There was no consumer issues report.
MEDIACOM REPORT
There was no report.
LOCAL ACCESS CHANNEL REPORTS
Light said that Senior Center Television will be having an open house October 28 and will be showing
a number of works by SCTV volunteers. SCTV volunteers will be meeting with City Channel 4 staff
to discuss some of those projects. A SCTV volunteer is participating in the climate change march
across the United States and will be making a video on the topic. A program consisting of a number of
interviews called "Images of Aging" is now being played back.
MEDIACOM INTERNET PROPOSAL
Brau said Mediacom responded to the letter from the city requesting Mediacom provide some form of
compensation for the disruption caused by their plan to move the library channel and go to digital
transmission only for the digital tier. Mediacom declined citing a desire that all Mediacom
communities be treated the same. The city will be contacting Mediacom to determine how they might
collaborate with Mediacom to publicize where those who need a digital to analog converter can get
them. A meeting was held with representatives of the access channels to discuss ways to inform the
public of the library channel number change and how all the access channels could use the public
outreach effort to also promote their channels. A list of ideas was developed. Coleman and City
Communications Director Shannon McMahon will develop messaging language. PATV will produce
a PSA. The library will be working on separate efforts to inform viewers of the channel number
change. The city will develop a website to help consumers obtain and install converter boxes.
LOCAL ACCESS CHANNEL SURVEY
Brau said he recently received feedback from PATV for the local access survey and will be
incorporating the changes. The survey will then be tested. It is expected the survey will be initiated
next month.
ADJOURNMENT
Butler moved and Elias seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously. Adjournment
was at 5:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
V�? �
Michael Brau
Cable TV Administrative Aide
TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
12 MONTH ATTENDANCE RECORD
(X) = Present
(0) = Absent
(O /C) = Absent/Called (Excused
Elias
Ber us
Kilburg
Butler
Homewood
9/23/13
x
X
X
X
o/c
10/28/13
X
X
X
X
X
12/30/13
O/C
X
O/C
X
X
1/27/14
X
X
X
X
X
2/24/14
X
X
X
0
0
3/24/14
X
X
X
X
X
6/2/14
0
X
X
X
X
6/23/14
0
X
X
X
X
7/28/14
0
x
x
x
0/c
8/25/14
X
X
X
X
X
9/22/14
X
X
X
X
o/c
10/27/14
X
X
o/c
o/c
x
(X) = Present
(0) = Absent
(O /C) = Absent/Called (Excused
d'�"
,�,,, --r. -4 CITY OF IOWA CITY 3d(1)
P .,M,�,
MEMORANDUM
Date: October 28, 2014
To: Tom Markus, City Manager
From: Karen Jennings, Human Resources Administrator
Re: Blue Zones License agreement
Introduction:
The City's Employee Wellness Committee has recently been notified that both City Hall and the
Senior Center have been awarded the Blue Zones Worksite designation.
History/Background:
The City's Employee Wellness Committee has been working toward the goal of earning the Blue
Zones Worksite designation since early 2013. Earlier this month, application for the designation
was submitted on behalf of both City Hall and the Senior Center. The Wellness Committee has
been notified that both applications were successful and that final Blue Zones Worksite
designation is dependent upon a signed license agreement regarding the City's use of the Blue
Zones trademark. Upon review of the license agreement, the City Attorney's Office has
recommended a City Council resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign agreements on
behalf of the City related to Blue Zones.
Recommendation:
I recommend that City Council adopt the resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign off on
the Blue Zones License agreement and other potential agreements of this nature to further the
City's overall employee wellness goals including potential pursuit of the Blue Zones Worksite
designation of other City worksites.