Loading...
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.