HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-11-01 Bd Comm minutesAugust18,2016
Pagel
MINUTES
IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION
AUGUST 18, 2016 — 6:00 P.M.
AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING
FINAL
Members Present: Julie Bockenstedt, Minnetta Gardinier, Robert Libby, A. Jacob Odgaard
Members Absent: Chris Ogren
Staff Present: Michael Tharp, Eric Goers
Others Present: Matt Wolford, Melissa Underwood, John Yeomans, Philip Wolford
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council
action):
None.
DETERMINE QUORUM:
Odgaard called the meeting to order at 6:02 P.M..
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
5b(1)
Minutes of the July 21, 2016, meeting were reviewed first. Bockenstedt moved to accept the
minutes of the July 21, 2016, meeting as presented. Gardinier seconded the motion. The
motion carried 4-0, Ogren absent. Next the minutes of the August 5, 2016, meeting were
reviewed. Gardinier moved to accept the minutes of the August 5, 2016, meeting as
presented. Odgaard seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0, Ogren absent.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION:
None.
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION:
a. Farming Operations — Tharp gave Members some background on this
agreement. He noted that the agreement is with Farmers National Company, of
which John Yeomans is present, representing the farming operations. He added
that he is recommending they continue this agreement, and that Yeomans has
done a good job of finding tenants for the farming operations at the Airport.
Yeomans then addressed Members, giving the new Members some background
on what the farming operations have encompassed over the years, from
installing gates and fencing to keeping various areas around the Airport mowed
and cleaned up. Gardinier noted that recently when she was using the runway
she noticed how tall the weeds were getting. After a brief discussion, it was
noted that the area in question may typically be taken care of by the FBO.
August 18, 2016
Page 2
Yeomans, however, noted that he can add weed control to the farming
operation's contract if desired. Continuing, Yeomans noted that this is the time of
year when the farm operators try to renegotiate their contracts and that he did
receive a termination letter from the operator at the Airport. He stated that this
means the operator wants to renegotiate the rent he pays, possibly dropping it
from $266 to $250 for the farm land. Yeomans will let the Commission know how
the negotiations go. Gardinier asked what the impetus for lowering the rent
would be, and Yeomans responded that it is most likely commodity prices.
Yeomans continued to respond to Member questions regarding the farming
operations at the Airport. Tharp stated that he is recommending the Commission
approve the farm management agreement per their discussion. Members were
encouraged to let Tharp know of anything they would like the farm operator to
add to his list of maintenance type items.
i. Farm Management Agreement — Gardinier moved to continue the
farm management agreement with Farmers National Company.
Libby seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0, Ogren absent.
b. Airport Master Plan — Melissa Underwood spoke to Members about the status
of the Master Plan. She stated that the Airport layout plan is in the final air space
review. She hopes to hear back from the FAA in a few weeks on this. At that
point, the conditional approval letter will need to be signed by the Chair.
C. FAA/[DOT Projects: AECOM — David Hughes
i. FYI Apron Expansion — Tharp noted that Hughes was unable to attend
this evening. In regards to the apron expansion, he noted they are
awaiting some clean-up items here. The goal is to have this completed
by the next meeting.
ii. FYI Obstruction Mitigation — Tharp stated that this is still dependent
on the Master Plan completion. Gardinier asked why Hughes has not
been at the last several meetings. Tharp responded that he has to travel
from Des Moines and that if there are no significant updates, it isn't
necessary to travel to Iowa City. He added that he can ask Hughes to
attend the next meeting, if Members would like him to do this.
d. FY2017 Iowa DOT Grants —Tharp stated that he does not yet have the grants
but that the Transportation Commission did meet August 12th and approved the
aviation program for FY17. The Airport's projects include a bathroom facility for
the north T -hangars and the taxilane extension on the south side.
I. Consider a resolution authorizing Chair to accept grant offers from
the Iowa Department of Transportation Office of Aviation —
Bockenstedt moved to approve Resolution #A16-21, authorizing the
Chair to accept grant offers from the Iowa Department of
Transportation Office of Aviation. Gardinier seconded the motion.
The motion carried 4-0, Ogren absent.
e. Jet Air Hangar — Hangar N Proposal -
i. Hangar M — Tharp noted that the next few items all deal with the
culmination of the conversation on Jet Air building a new 100 X 100
facility. He briefly ran through these issues, noting that basically the
Airport will agree to buy hangar M, which is the building Jet Air built in
2012. The cost would be $250,000. The Airport would then rent the
August 18, 2016
Page 3
facility to Jet Air. For the first 10 years it would be $500/month, and after
that the rent would go back to $1,200/month. This would be a 30 -year
lease, according to Tharp. Jet Air would in turn lease ground for a new
100 X 100 facility. Tharp further explained the changes that would be
made to the FBO agreement, which include more options for Jet Air. He
then responded to Member questions regarding these various resolutions
and agreements with Jet Air.
1. Consider a resolution approving a purchase agreement with
Jet Air for Hangar M — Gardinier moved to approve Resolution
#A16-22, approving a purchase agreement with Jet Air for
Hangar M. Libby seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-
0, Ogren absent.
2. Motion to enable Chair to terminate land rental agreement
with Jet Air for Hangar M — Gardinier moved to enable the
Chair to terminate land rental agreement with Jet Air for
Hangar M. Bockenstedt seconded the motion. The motion
carried 4-0, Ogren absent.
3. Public hearing — 30 -year rental agreement for Hangar M —
Odgaard opened the public hearing at 6:54pm, No Comments
Received. Odgaard Closed the Public hearing at 6:55pm.
4. Consider a resolution approving rental agreement for Hangar
M — Bockenstedt moved to approve Resolution #A16-23,
approving rental agreement for Hangar M. Libby seconded
the motion. The motion carried 4-0, Ogren absent.
ii. Hangar N — Tharp then explained the Hangar N project, which will be the
new 100 X 100 facility. The rental rate will be at 20 -cents a square foot,
according to Tharp, which comes to $2,000/year.
1. Public hearing — 30 -year ground lease for Hangar N — Odgaard
open the public hearing at 7:01 pm. No comments received
Odgaard closed the public hearing at 7:02pm.
2. Consider a resolution approving 30 -year ground lease for
Hangar N - Libby moved to approve Resolution #A16-24,
approving 30 -year ground lease for Hangar N. Odgaard
seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0, Ogren absent.
iii. FBO Agreement — Tharp noted that this agreement has four additional
options added to it.
1. Public Hearing — FBO Agreement Amendment — Odgaard
opened the public hearing at 7:07pm. No comments received.
Odgaard closed the public hearing at 7:08pm. Members asked
questions of Tharp and Goers concerning this amended
agreement.
2. Consider a resolution approving an amendment to the FBO
agreement — Gardinier moved to approve Resolution #A16-25,
approving an amendment to the FBO agreement.
Bockenstedt seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0,
Ogren absent.
Airport "Operations"
i. Strategic Plan Implementation — Tharp stated that he is looking for
some direction from the Commission on this. With the Master Plan
process going through the FAA, he noted that there are so far no
August 18, 2016
Page a
substantial changes to the plan —just a few minor revisions. Tharp asked
the Commission how they would like to handle the process for the next
five-year strategic plan. He noted that the individual he is interested in
using, Regenia Bailey, was recommended by Jeff Davidson, the former
City of Iowa City employee who helped facilitate the current plan. Tharp
stated that he can invite Bailey to next month's meeting, so that Members
can have a conversation with her regarding this plan. Gardinier
suggested they also look at who other airports have used in creating their
strategic plans. Tharp asked if Members would want to put together a
subcommittee that could create an RFP to send out to some firms and
see what kind of feedback they get. After some discussion, Members
agreed to do an RFP process. Tharp will check with Marion and Storm
Lake to see who they used in their recent strategic plan processes, as
well as let Bailey know what the Commission's plan is. Gardinier and
Libby volunteered for the subcommittee.
1. Strategic Plan Process —
ii. Budget — Tharp stated that he does not have much to share here unless
someone has specific questions. He noted that the next fiscal year
budget process will begin soon, with the draft budget coming to them in
the next month or so. November is typically when he and the Chair will
meet with the City Manager's office to walk through the draft budget.
December is when the city-wide budget gets put together and is given to
the City Council to start their review. Bockenstedt then asked some
questions regarding the budget, to which Tharp replied. Gardinier asked
about budgeting for window blinds on the first floor, similar to what they
installed in the conference room upstairs.
iii. Management — None.
g. FBO / Flight Training Reports — Matt Wolford shared the monthly maintenance
reports with Members. Quite a bit of landscaping was done prior to the
congressional meeting that was held at the Airport, as well as the purchase of
several folding tables for the event. Mowing and storm clean-up have been
constants this season. Wolford also noted replacement of ceiling tiles in the
main floor lobby area. Members briefly spoke to the overgrown bushes out by
the airplane on Riverside Drive. Philip Wolford talked to parking issues, noting
that today for example, they were unable to find parking after returning from
lunch. Speaking to Jet Air's business, Matt Wolford stated they have been pretty
busy lately. He noted that today they had a meeting with a company that will be
hangaring and maintaining their Citation VII at the Airport. Jet Air also has had
some personnel changes.
h. Commission Members' Reports — Libby stated that there was a meeting
regarding the disaster drill, but unfortunately he missed it. The date has been set
for May of 2017, after graduations.
L Staff Report — Tharp reminded Members that Sertoma is August 28th. He noted
that he will be busy getting prepared for that. Then August 29th through the 31St
he will be attending the FAA Conference in Kansas City.
SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR:
August 18, 2016
Page 5
The next regular meeting of the Airport Commission will be held on Thursday. September 15.
2016. at 6:00 P.M. in the Airport Terminal Building.
ADJOURN:
Bockenstedt moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:03 P.M. Odgaard seconded the motion.
The motion carried 4-0, Ogren absent.
CHAIRPERSON DATE
August 18, 2016
Page 6
Airport Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2016
Key:
X = Present
X/E = Present for Part of Meeting
0 = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = Not a Member at this time
TERM
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
N
N
=
A
N
`
w
00
10
NAME
EXP.
-'
N
m
Z
N
-�
w
M
w
N
m
m
m
rn
rn
m
m
rn
m
rn
rn
Minnetta
03/01/19
X
X
X
X
X
X
0/
X
X
X
Gardinier
E
Jose
03/01/16
X
0/E
X
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Assouline
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
Chris Ogren
03/01/18
X
X
X
X
X
0/
X
X
X
0/
E
E
A.Jacob
03/01/18
X
X
X
X
X
0/
X
X
X
X
Odgaard
E
Julie
03/01/17
X
X
X
X
0/
X
X
X
0/
X
Bockenstedt
E
E
Robert Libby
03/21/20
N
NM
NM
N
X
X
X
X
0/
X
M
M
E
Key:
X = Present
X/E = Present for Part of Meeting
0 = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = Not a Member at this time
.-f"iA6
5b(2)
MINUTES
APPROVED
CITY COUNCIL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
JULY 12, 2016
EMMA HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL, 12:00 P.M.
Members Present:
Rockne Cole, Susan Mims, Jim Throgmorton
Staff Present:
Geoff Fruin, Wendy Ford, Eleanor Dilkes
Others Present:
Rebecca Neades (Iowa City Area Chamber of Commerce); Karen
Garritson (National Development Council); Tom Banta (Iowa City Area
Development Group); Michelle Kenyon (Program Director, Field to
Family);
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
None.
CALL MEETING TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Mims at 12:02 P.M
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Minutes of the June 14, 2016, Economic Development meeting were reviewed
Throgmorton moved to approve the minutes as presented.
Cole seconded the motion.
The motion carried 3-0.
CONSIDER REQUEST FROM FIELD TO FAMILY FOR FUNDING:
Ford addressed the Members regarding the request from Field to Family for two pieces of
funding. One is for $5,000 for the upcoming Field to Family Festival in September, and the
other is for $20,000 for next fiscal year. Ford noted that Field to Family is an organization that
focuses promoting local food production, connecting local food producers with local food
consumers, helping educate the community about healthy foods, and also bringing that
education to as many sections of the community as possible. Staff believes that the mission of
Field to Family is a good one.
Ford noted that staff first looked at sources for this funding. One possibility would be the Local
Foods Initiatives funding, which is the new $25,000 fund that Council allocated for such
programs. However, after review, Ford noted that Field to Family had already received $5,000
for an upcoming community dinner downtown. They are working with the Downtown District,
the County, and local restaurants to produce this dinner.
The Local Foods Initiatives funding requirements are that they are to be used in connection with
the County's efforts in local foods initiatives. Because the Field to Family Festival was not
working with the County and because Field to Family is the beneficiary of the funds raised at the
EDC July 12, 2016
downtown community dinner, staff did not believe that these funds to be an appropriate source
funding for this specific request.
Ford noted the Local Foods Initiatives fund was the source of $5,000 that was used in
conjunction with the County on a program called 'double up bucks,' a program that helps people
on the SNAP program double their buying power for food at the Farmers Market.
The second source of possible funding considered was the Economic Development Opportunity
fund, replenished each year with $100,000. This fund has been used more for specific, jobs -
related incentives and she gave examples of past funding requests. Because the request did
not fit the requirements of the local foods initiative fund or the purpose of the Economic
Development Opportunity fund, staff could not recommend approving the request.
Ford noted that although staff is not recommending this funding request, Michelle Kenyon is
here to speak with Members, to help explain the nature of Field to Family and their offerings to
the community. She added that staff believes this to be the start of a conversation — between
Field to Family, the City, and the County — and that going forward they would like to see what
type of funding can be awarded. Members then asked some questions of Ford, asking if there
was a particular program in the past where this type of funding would have come from. Fruin
stated that historically they probably would have looked at the community event funding for
something like this.
Michelle Kenyon then addressed Members. She noted that the request was meant to start a
conversation and she thanked everyone for the opportunity to speak today. She gave Members
some history of Field to Family, noting that they are very much a grassroots organization.
Kenyon spoke about their collaboration with the County, noting the opportunities this has
afforded them, such as grant writing and bringing other partners into the picture. Mims asked if
any effort has been made to reach out to other municipalities within Johnson County. Kenyon
stated that in 2017 they will be doing this, but that they have been working primarily in Iowa City
so far. Mims stated that she encourages Field to Family to reach out to these other
communities within the County to help with needed funding.
Throgmorton then spoke to the request for $20,000 for the upcoming fiscal year. He stated that
he is intrigued by what Field to Family is doing, and he spoke to having such festivals as this
being held along the riverfront. He believes this could connect initiatives like water quality and
the local food economy to better educate people in the community. Cole stated that he is a
huge fan of this and he agrees that this needs to be the start of a conversation. He would like to
see a fund set up with clear guidelines so that requests such as this could be considered in the
future. Mims agreed with Cole, stating that they are getting more and more requests from non-
profits and that they need to find a way to do seed funding, as suggested, to help these
organizations get started so they can grow to be independent.
STAFF REPORT.
Ford stated that they have been working on getting the policy focus group meetings set up. The
first focus group meeting was held two weeks ago, with Mims present, according to Ford. She
noted that they did receive a lot of feedback from this meeting. The second focus group meets
tomorrow, with Throgmorton schedule to attend. Ford then shared the survey questions that are
being sent out for each focus group to answer.
Ford then noted that the next EDC meeting will be August 5, 2016.
EDC July 12, 2016
COMMITTEE TIME:
None.
OTHER BUSINESS:
None.
ADJOURNMENT:
Cole moved to adjourn the meeting at 12:35 P.M.
Throgmorton seconded the motion.
Motion carried 3-0.
EDC July 12, 2016
Council Economic Development Committee
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2016
Key:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
TERM
N
9
N
NAME
EXP.
Rockne Cole
01/02/18
X
X
X
X
X
Susan Mims
01/02/18
X
X
X
X
X
01/02/18
X
X
X
X
X
gmorton
F
Key:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
r
r �CITY OF IOWA CITY 5
MEMORANDUM -
Date: October 19, 2016
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Kris Ackerson, Community Development Planner
Re: Recommendations from Housing and Community Development Commission
At their September 15th meeting, the Housing and Community Development Commission
approved the August 18, 2016 meeting with the following recommendation to the City Council:
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval to allow Charm Homes to reduce the number of
units from eight to four and use some of the money for rehab to make accessibility improvements.
By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommended the following modifications of the Affordable Housing
Action Plan presented to City Council on June 21, 2016:
Priority Recommendations:
4. Provide staff funding direction heading into the FY18 budget process
• HCDC recommends $1,000,000 annually through a regular line item in the budget funded with
property taxes or other revenue streams
5. Develop an annual process for distributing dollars from the City's newly created Affordable Housing
Fund
• HCDC recommends 50% to the Johnson County Housing Trust Fund, with a focus on multi -family
projects
25% held in reserve for land banking
• Maximum of 5% for emergent situations determined by the City Council (if funds not used by end
of the fiscal year, the funds reserved for land banking)
• 20% directed through HCDC for LIHTC support or supplemental aid through the CDBG / HOME
housing application processes
12. Create a committee of staff, developers and other interested stakeholders to determine the viability
and potential parameters of a tax abatement program that would support affordable housing
• Create an education program to promote the benefits of subsidized housing projects to
landlords/developers
October 19, 2016
Page 2
13. Exempt the Riverfront Crossings, Downtown and University Impact Areas from the Affordable
Housing Location model and consider modifications to reduce size of restricted areas and/or account
for neighborhood densities
• Consider adoption of a new neighborhood based (not address based) Affordable Housing
Location Model to allow and encourage city -assisted development in more locations throughout
the City, including redevelopment of existing affordable housing
Remaining Recommended Actions:
1. Continue to fund existing local programs including GRIP and UniverCity as well as review the set-
aside for housing rehabilitation as set in the Consolidated Plan.
2. Adopt an Inclusionary Zoning code amendment for the Riverfront Crossings District (Done)
3. Adopt code amendments that enable the FUSE Housing First use in the community (Done)
6. Hold the $1,900,000 million in housing authority funds for an opportunity to leverage significant
private investment and/or to develop/acquire low income replacement housing
7. Consider an annexation policy that provides for affordable housing contributions
8. Consider use of TIF on a case by case basis to support residential development and/or annexation
through the provision of public infrastructure and capture the required LMI set-aside for use
throughout the community (Ex: McCollister and Foster Road)
9. Pursue regulatory changes to City Code:
• Waive parking requirements for affordable and non -affordable units in RFC and downtown
• Review possible changes to the multi -family design standards for all units in an effort to reduce
cost and expedite approvals
• Eliminate minimum size requirements for PUDs
• Increase allowable bedrooms from 3 to 4 outside the University Impact Area (keep occupancy at
3 unrelated)
• Permit more building types by right as opposed to requiring a PUD process (density, multiplex
units, cottage clusters, etc.)
10. Pursue a form -based code for the Alexander Elementary neighborhood and the downtown core
11. Strategically seek LIHTC projects through an RFP process overseen by the HCDC (ties to use of the
Affordable Housing Fund)
14. Tenant Displacement
October 19, 2016
Page 3
• Council notification of major site plans when 12 or more households will be displaced and there is
no accompanying rezoning Such applications would require a transition plan to better inform
residents and the general public (requires a comprehensive plan amendment)
• Mailings to current residents could be required upon application and a good neighbor meeting
would be encouraged
• Develop a displacement policy, including defining displacement (not to include non -renewal of
lease) and "emergent situation"
15. Rent abatement for emergency orders when vacation of property is not necessary (use simpler
language for ease of understanding)
• Increase education about housing code violations and how to report
Additional Recommendations:
16. Increase Neighborhood Services involvement in the early stages of residential development
Suggest having a Neighborhood Services representative located in the City Manager's office
17. Consider opportunities to collect rent data beyond the rental permitting process
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 - Done
MINUTES FINAL
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
AUGUST 18, 2016 — 6:30 PM
DALE HELLING CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Peter Byler, Syndy Conger, Christine Harms, Harry Olmstead, Dorothy
Persson, Emily Seiple, Paula Vaughan
MEMBERS ABSENT: Bob Lamkins, John McKinstry
STAFF PRESENT: Kris Ackerson, Tracy Hightshoe
OTHERS PRESENT: Tracey Achenbach, Maryann Dennis, Vanessa Fixmer-Oraiz
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval to allow Charm Homes to reduce the number of
units from eight to four and use some of the money for rehab to make accessibility improvements.
By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommended the following modifications of the Affordable Housing
Action Plan presented to City Council on June 21, 2016:
Priority Recommendations
4. Provide staff funding direction heading into the FY18 budget process
• HCDC recommends $1,000,000 annually through a regular line item in the budget funded with
property taxes or other revenue streams
5. Develop an annual process for distributing dollars from the City's newly created Affordable Housing
Fund
• HCDC recommends 50% to the Johnson County Housing Trust Fund, with a focus on multi -family
projects
• 25% held in reserve for land banking
• Maximum of 5% for emergent situations determined by the City Council (if funds not used by end
of the fiscal year, the funds reserved for land banking)
• 20% directed through HCDC for LIHTC support or supplemental aid through the CDBG / HOME
housing application processes
12. Create a committee of staff, developers and other interested stakeholders to determine the viability and
potential parameters of a tax abatement program that would support affordable housing
• Create an education program to promote the benefits of subsidized housing projects to
landlords/developers
13. Exempt the Riverfront Crossings, Downtown and University Impact Areas from the Affordable Housing
Location model and consider modifications to reduce size of restricted areas and/or account for
neighborhood densities
Housing and Community Development Commission
August 18, 2016
Page 2 of 14
• Consider adoption of a new neighborhood based (not address based) Affordable Housing Location
Model to allow and encourage city -assisted development in more locations throughout the City,
including redevelopment of existing affordable housing
Remaining Recommended Actions:
1. Continue to fund existing local programs including GRIP and UniverCity as well as review the set-
aside for housing rehabilitation as set in the Consolidated Plan.
2. Adopt an Inclusionary Zoning code amendment for the Riverfront Crossings District (Done)
3. Adopt code amendments that enable the FUSE Housing First use in the community (Done)
6. Hold the $1,900,000 million in housing authority funds for an opportunity to leverage significant private
investment and/or to develop/acquire low income replacement housing
7. Consider an annexation policy that provides for affordable housing contributions
8. Consider use of TIF on a case by case basis to support residential development and/or annexation
through the provision of public infrastructure and capture the required LMI set-aside for use throughout
the community (Ex: McCollister and Foster Road)
9. Pursue regulatory changes to City Code:
• Waive parking requirements for affordable and non -affordable units in RFC and downtown
• Review possible changes to the multi -family design standards for all units in an effort to reduce
cost and expedite approvals
• Eliminate minimum size requirements for PUDs
• Increase allowable bedrooms from 3 to 4 outside the University Impact Area (keep occupancy at 3
unrelated)
• Permit more building types by right as opposed to requiring a PUD process (density, multiplex
units, cottage clusters, etc.)
10. Pursue a form -based code for the Alexander Elementary neighborhood and the downtown core
11. Strategically seek LIHTC projects through an RFP process overseen by the HCDC (ties to use of the
Affordable Housing Fund)
14. Tenant Displacement
• Council notification of major site plans when 12 or more households will be displaced and there is
no accompanying rezoning Such applications would require a transition plan to better inform
residents and the general public (requires a comprehensive plan amendment)
• Mailings to current residents could be required upon application and a good neighbor meeting
would be encouraged
• Develop a displacement policy, including defining displacement (not to include non -renewal of
lease) and "emergent situation"
Housing and Community Development Commission
August 16, 2016
Page 3 of 14
15. Rent abatement for emergency orders when vacation of property is not necessary (use simpler
language for ease of understanding)
Increase education about housing code violations and how to report
Additional Recommendations:
16. Increase Neighborhood Services involvement in the early stages of residential development
• Suggest having a Neighborhood Services representative located in the City Manager's office
17. Consider opportunities to collect rent data beyond the rental permitting process
CALL TO ORDER:
Byler called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM.
APPROVAL OF JUNE 16, 2016 MINUTES:
Ackerson noted that the City Attorneys office reviewed the minutes and asked that staff clarify the draft
minutes that state the Housing Authority reviews Housing Choice Voucher leases. ICHA does not review all
leases. The landlord signs a HAP that reads as follows:
(2) The lease is in a standard form that is used in the locality by the owner and that is generally
used for other unassisted tenants in the premises.
(3) The lease is consistent with State and local Law.
The draft minutes also state that the City Attorney reviews leases °periodically." In the past, the City
Attorneys office would review a lease if requested by ICHA staff but that was perhaps one lease per year.
After the Iowa Supreme Court issued a major opinion this spring, legal staff began reviewing leases as they
come in.
The minutes also state that the "City has encouraged landlords to institute a Crime Free Lease Addendum
to protect other tenants from life safety or health safety concerns." It is not done citywide, but done on a
limited basis to address neighborhood/tenant concerns.
Persson moved to approve the minutes of June 16, 2016 with minor edits. Harms seconded the
motion. A vote was taken and motion passed 7-0.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
None.
Ackerson stated this was a project discussed at the last meeting, CHARM Homes, LLC said that they were
unable to find wheelchair accessible units so they would like to reduce the project from eight to four single
room occupancy units and use some of the funds for rehab to make accessibility improvements.
Housing and Community Development Commission
August 18, 2016
Page 4 of 14
Conger moved to approve FY16 Annual Action Plan Amendment #4 to allow Charm Homes to
reduce the number of units from eight to four and use some of the money for rehab to make
accessibility improvements. Seiple seconded the motion. A vote was taken and motion passed 7-0.
DISCUSS AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGIES FOR THE CITY:
Byler noted this was brought up at the last meeting but was deferred until City staff had an opportunity to
make their presentation at the work session. The presentation was included in the Commission's packet.
Byler suggests beginning discussion by reviewing the summary of recommended actions in the
presentation.
Persson questioned the statement regarding expanding workforce housing and does that assume that
throughout this presentation that affordable and workforce housing are the same thing. Hightshoe stated
they are not the same, affordable by definition is below 80% income level and workforce housing goes up
to 110%. Persson feels that needs to be clarified.
Hightshoe noted that Council is asking the Commission not only to review the 15 recommendations and
decide which ones they recommend, but also to prioritize their recommendations because staff will not be
able to proceed on all immediately.
1. Continue to fund existing local programs including GRIP and UniverCity. Byler asked if GRIP is
funded out of CDBG funds. Hightshoe said it was a separate budget item. GRIP is for homeowners under
110% and the funds must be repaid to the City.
Byler noted that some on the Commission have expressed an interest in reviewing the policy of setting
aside $300,000 each year for owner -occupied rehab. So perhaps as a footnote that the Council review the
amount of CDBG that is set aside. Hightshoe noted that each year the Commission reviews the priorities of
CITY STEPS and makes recommendations to Council. So that recommendation can be made at that time.
Seiple asked if UniverCity takes a similar amount of staff time, knowing that was an issue with the
Homeowner Rehabilitation program. Hightshoe noted all programs take staff time. Sometimes UniverCity
is easier to implement because staff does not have to coordinate work with homeowner schedules.
UniverCity homes are vacant until the work is completed and ready to be sold.
2. Adopt an Inclusionary Zoning code amendment for the Rivenront Crossings District. Persson
asked where that was in the process, thinking that was done. Byler said that was approved by Council so it
is done.
Vaughan asked about long-term strategy because there were other phrases used in this document talking
about urban renewal districts — are there any plans for inclusionary zoning elsehwere. Hightshoe said they
are using the Riverfront Crossings District to see how it will work. Riverfront Crossings will have more
density than anywhere else in town so right now it's only envisioned for Riverfront Crossings.
3. Adopt code amendments that enable the FUSE Housing First use in the community. Byler believes
this is also already complete. Hightshoe confirmed it is complete.
4. Provide staff funding direction heading into the FY 18 budget process
• Staff recommends aiming for $500,000 to $1,000,000 depending on budget conditions
Recommended revenue sources include district -wide TIF in the urban core and property tax
Byler asked how to divide up the money on an annual basis, and if the money is not spent does it
accumulate, or is it reset. Hightshoe stated she believes once the money is provided it stays in the fund
Housing and Community Development Commission
August 18, 2016
Page 5 of 14
until it is spent on affordable housing. Byler then feels that $1,000,000 a year, which is around 1% or a
little less of the City's budget, is probably an appropriate number to recommend. He also suggests striking
the part of the sentence that states, "depending on budget conditions." Byler also suggests this is added to
the budget as a line item rather than from an engineered source such as a TIF.
Persson agreed noting that whenever there is a line item it shows strong intent.
Seiple stated that the 20% of the higher amount ($1,000,000) is $200,000 which is actually less than either
of the LIHTC project requests this year.
Byler asked if everyone was in favor of recommending the $1,000,000 and striking "depending on budget
conditions" and recommending that it is a regular line funded through property taxes. The commissioners
were in agreement.
5. Develop an annual process for distributing dollars from the City's newly created Affordable
Housing Fund
Staff recommends 50% to the Johnson County Housing Trust Fund
• 30% held in reserve for land banking or emergent situations determined by the City Council
20% directed to HCDC for LIHTC support or supplemental aid through the CDBG / HOME
application processes
Olmstead asked whether the Rose Oaks $250 payments were coming out of this fund as well. Byler
confirmed it is the first fund expenditure.
Persson noted that policies and procedures should be developed for distribution of these funds so people
know what to expect. Byler agreed, noting there are several details within this recommendation that people
could have a variety of opinions about. For the 50% that is allocated to the Johnson County Housing Trust
Fund, would their board decide on the allocations or would there be stipulations such as must be spent in
Iowa City. Tracey Achenbach (Johnson County Housing Trust Fund) stated a few of the board have met
with City staff to discuss this, and the Trust Fund will do whatever the City wants them to do with the
money. She can administer the funds however as directed. Hightshoe added that staff has discussed but
no decisions have been made. There have been discussions on only in Iowa City, income levels to target,
etc., but Council wants to hear community input on parameters. Achenbach said the Trust Fund also
discussed that it might be helpful if the Trust Fund can either present to the HCDC and/or the Council what
their standard policies and procedures are to see how money from the Trust Fund is normally spent.
Persson thinks people would be more comfortable moving forward with this project if there were policies
and procedures in place. With the situation with Rose Oaks, nothing was in place so how should the City
learn from that. Achenbach noted their accountability is the same as the City's.
Persson asked about the 30% held in reserve. Will there be policies and procedures in place for those
funds as well, or will it just be reactive. Hightshoe said she was unsure about emergent situations but land
banking is a strategy that staff has previously recommended. Land banking would hopefully be used to
obtain tax credit projects. Emergent situations needs to be defined, but it is hard because one never knows
what may arise. Rose Oaks was a very unique situation that the City has not seen before (no rezoning
needed, no financial assistance requested and the large number of households impacted). Persson feels
that the 30% that is allocated for emergent situations does need parameters.
Byler agrees with Persson and also feels the 30% should be specified how much is for land banking and
how much is for emergent situations. He also feels that if the City wants to create a displacement policy or
Housing and Community Development Commission
August 18, 2016
Page 6 of 14
fund that should be a separate thing.
Harms supports breaking apart the 30% to specify how much should be allocated where, noting that land
banking is very important.
Byler asked why the percentages were broken down this way. He would have allocated 33% for each and
then for the land banking/emergent 33% allocated 30% for land banking and 3% for emergencies.
Hightshoe noted the percentages were just a point to start discussions.
Byler suggests first to allocate the three line items as 33% funding for each. He would also recommend the
33% that goes to the Trust Fund to not have any strings attached.
Persson disagrees with reducing the Johnson County Housing Trust Fund allocation because she feels it
has been underfunded for years and feels its effectiveness has been impaired as a result.
Conger noted that some of the recommendations are experimental, and are not sure if or how they will
work. However the Johnson County Housing Trust Fund is a known entity that works. So feels that should
receive a higher percentage.
Byler asked what percentage of the Johnson County Housing Trust Fund projects are single family rehabs
or down payment assistance. Achenbach said it was about 30%. They don't have a lot of owner -occupied
activity because State funds never go for anything above 80% medium income. They have awarded
almost $4,000,000 in projects in the last 12 years and about a third of that was owner -occupied the rest is
rental.
Byler noted that it appears the Commissioners prefer to leave the allocation of 50% to the Johnson County
Housing Trust Fund. He suggests not having geographic strings on that allocation, but focus the money on
dense multi -family projects.
With regards to the second bullet, the 30%, it could be split 25% for land banking and maximum 5% for
emergent situations. Persson agrees but wants to add that Council must set a policy on how the money is
distributed. Byler said they will recommend 5% with a note that a displacementlemergent situation policy
must be created.
Vaughan noted that the 5% is bothersome because it is being taken away from the land banking, leaving
only 25% for land banking. Byler said they could add if the 5% is not used at the end of the fiscal year for
emergent situations it could be rolled back into the land banking.
Seiple noted that she is interested in discussing other situations that may not be emergent but some
regulations might help. Such as when a lease ends and the tenant is not renewed and looking for ways to
stabilize those situations. Byler said that is addressed in item 14.
14. Tenant Displacement
• Council approval of major site plans when 12 or more households will be displaced and there is
no accompanying rezoning
• Such applications would require a transition plan to better inform residents and the general public
(requires a comprehensive plan amendment)
• Mailings to current residents could be required upon application and a good neighbor meeting
would be encouraged
Housing and Community Development Commission
August 18, 2016
Page 7 of 14
Byler asked if it was legal for the Council to have approval of major site plans. Staff approves site plans
based on legality. Ackerson stated this was more of a notification so the City and residents have more
advanced notice. Byler asked if then it should be stated as Council notification, not approval.
Maryann Dennis (The Housing Fellowship) stated there is a big difference between displacement and non-
renewal of lease. The non -renewal of a lease is a contract ending, not a displacement. Byler said this
policy was being created for a lease not being renewed because of development.
Persson noted that this recommendation discussed a group of a certain size or larger being displaced, not
just one individual situation.
Seiple stated that displacement needs to be defined in the recommendation so there is not confusion
between displacement and lease non -renewal.
Byler stated that he does not agree with Council having to approve site plans. Hightshoe stated it was
meant so that more notice had to be given to tenants. Byler asked then to change the language to Council
is notified of major site plans.
Seiple asked if there was a fire and all the tenants were displaced. Byler said that could fit into the
definition of emergent situation.
Byler stated the Commission's recommendation for #14 would be to change "approval" to "notification" and
to define displacement not to include the end of lease non -renewal.
6. Hold the $1,900,000 million in housing authority funds for an opportunity to leverage significant
private investment and/or to develop/acquire low income replacement housing.
Hightshoe noted that staff is taking notes and will email a summary of the discussion to the Commission
for accuracy before sending onto Council.
Byler stated one possible change would be to add "actively search out private investments" to leverage the
$1.9 million because of the nature of these acquisitions. Hightshoe confirmed that some of these
acquisitions have to be publically owned housing but there is opportunity to do some mixed -unit
developments. For example in the Chauncey project, five of the units will be public housing units. Persson
asked how long those units would be public housing units. Hightshoe said not always forever, they can be
sold, but not anytime soon.
Seiple noted that the recommendations don't specify if they are focusing on families or certain income
brackets so perhaps that needs to be addressed. Hightshoe said most of the units are family, some are
specified for elderly or disabled (over 50% of the vouchers are for elderly or disabled), and the rest are
families.
7. Consider an annexation policy that provides for affordable housing contributions.
Achenbach asked what it meant by contributions, does it mean money into the affordable housing fund or
does it mean in lieu of affordable housing. Hightshoe stated it could mean both.
Persson asked if the statement was too broad. Byler felt that was okay in this situation. Byler feels that City
staff can develop policies to oversee the details. Hightshoe noted a concern that if the City makes the
requirements too strict development may go to other municipals. Byler feels the reason inclusionary zoning
works in Riverfront Crossings is because that land is so valuable. He also noted that what makes for
affordable housing is increased availability of housing, so he would not want to put restrictions on
Housing and Community Development Commission
August 18, 2016
Page 8 of 14
annexation that would deter developers from wanting to build in the City.
8. Consider use of TIF on a case by case basis to support residential development and/or annexation
through the provision of public infrastructure and capture the required LMI set-aside for use throughout the
community (Ex: McCollister and Foster Road).
Byler stated he is not a fan of residential TIFs because of opportunities like tax rebates which he feels are
much more effective.
Harms said while many don't like TIFs they are used widely in college towns like Iowa City with very
expensive city centers. This could be used as an experiment and should be left in for that reason. Seiple
noted that residential TIFs are not typically used. Dennis noted that residential TIFS are used to increase
residential development, especially in towns that hadn't had any new houses built in years.
Byler suggested leaving the recommendation in - but all agreed it's not a high priority
9. Pursue regulatory changes to City Code:
• Waive parking requirements for affordable units in RFC and downtown
• Review possible changes to the multi -family design standards for all units in an effort to reduce
cost and expedite approvals
• Eliminate minimum size requirements for PUDs (Planned Use Development)
• Increase allowable bedrooms from 3 to 4 outside the University Impact Area (keep occupancy at
3 unrelated persons)
• Permit more building types by right as opposed to requiring a PUD process (density, multiplex
units, cottage clusters, etc.)
Byler is in favor of all these ideas and Harms agreed. Seiple noted that perhaps the parking requirements
could be waived beyond just the affordable units. Hightshoe said there has been a pushback from
neighborhoods near downtown because of a concern that increased residents in downtown without
adequate parking would push the parking into their neighborhoods.
10. Pursue a form -based code for the Alexander Elementary neighborhood and the downtown core
Byler said this is something the Council is very attuned with at this time. Seiple questioned what the link
was of affordable housing and form -based, if it was just that density was cheaper. Byler confirmed it was,
and also in the downtown core it's about historical preservation as well. Hightshoe added that the goal is a
variety of units.
11. Strategically seek LIHTC projects through an RFP process overseen by the HCDC (ties to use of
the Affordable Housing Fund)
Byler again said this recommendation is straightforward. Hightshoe said there are projects where the
developer will tap into every source available.
Seiple asked if the City was planning to change some of the vouchers into project based. Hightshoe said it
depends on the qualified application plan, if there are a lot of points given to project based vouchers then
they would be willing to consider them.
Housing and Community Development Commission
August 18, 2016
Page 9 of 14
12. Create a committee of staff, developers and other interested stakeholders to determine the viability
and potential parameters of a tax abatement program that would support affordable housing
Byler believes this recommendation should be a very high priority. It could be a way for the City to leverage
funds to create opportunities. Byler also wanted to add he feels Neighborhood Development staff should
also be in the City Manager's office so they can be involved in developments and assisting developers with
opportunities. Persson agreed and said that is a noticeable way to say affordable housing is on par with
Economic Development (which is already in that office).
The Commission agreed to add a recommendation stating in early stage residential development projects
Neighborhood Services staff should be involved in discussions with City Manager.
13. Exempt the Riverfront Crossings, Downtown and University Impact Areas from the Affordable
Housing Location model and consider modifications to reduce size of restricted areas and/or account for
neighborhood densities
Hightshoe noted that the City is already following up on this recommendation. Ackerson will update the
model in October based on the seven factors that go into the model. This year it will be different because
there will be the school information from Alexander School. Additionally they are exempting Riverfront
Crossings because it is inclusionary zoning already. Hightshoe stated it is important to not have all City
subsidized housing located in limited areas of the City.
There was discussion on how the affordable housing location model is structured and if there could be a
better way to construct a model. If the goal is just to make sure all the affordable housing is not
concentrated into one area, perhaps there is a better way to structure the model. Hightshoe said the
current model was created to address the school district concerns of having concentrated poverty and
placing assisted housing (for low income families) scattered throughout the district.
Byler suggested a new system that follows the elementary school district lines and apply criteria for
affordable housing to each of those neighborhoods.
Byler suggested changing recommendation #13 to "exempt the Riverfront Crossings, Downtown and
University Impact Areas from the Affordable Housing Location model and fundamentally change the model
to neighborhoods instead of individual properties." The other Commissioners agreed.
15. Rent abatement for emergency orders when vacation of property is not necessary
Hightshoe noted the only cautionary point for staff is not all people understand this and will often just not
pay rent because of poor conditions which is not acceptable and they can be evicted.
Byler suggested adding to this a recommendation to reflect a focus on education in a bilingual platform
with regards to tenants' rights on physical condition of rentals. Dennis noted that the Affordable Housing
Coalition is also working on more education on tenants' rights as well.
Byler stated those are the 15 recommendations for action and asked if there were any other items the
Commission would like to add.
Conger questioned the miscellaneous other topic of collecting rent data on city permits. She feels it should
be public information and a resource for the public. Hightshoe said collecting that data may be problematic;
landlords can say they are renting units for a certain price but not enough staff to look at every lease to
confirm. Staff is also hesitant about not renewing a rental permit as the owner failed to indicate what rent.
Ackerson stated he spoke with someone about possibility writing a program that could analyze data from
downloads of rental ads on Craigslist and that could be used to assist with data collection.
Housing and Community Development Commission
August 18, 2016
Page 10 of 14
Byler suggested adding a recommendation, #16, to encourage exploring options for collecting better rent
data. Commissioners agreed to include this recommendation.
Byler also asked if the Commission would be able to see the suggestions that will come through the email
that was set up for suggestions on these recommendations. Staff will look into options for that, but noted
all comments will be in the Council packet for public to view.
Byler noted that while education for tenants is a great idea, he also feels that landlords and developers
need education on Housing Choice Vouchers and how lucrative they can be. Perhaps it can be a bullet
point under recommendation #12.
Hightshoe then asked the Commission to prioritize the recommendations, giving perhaps a top three.
Persson made a motion to recommend the following recommendations as modified from the
Affordable Housing Action Plan presented to City Council on June 21, 2016:
Priority Recommendations
4. Provide staff funding direction heading into the FY18 budget process
HCDC recommends $1,000,000 annually through a regular line item in the budget
funded with property taxes or other revenue streams
5. Develop an annual process for distributing dollars from the City's newly created Affordable
Housing Fund
• HCDC recommends 50% to the Johnson County Housing Trust Fund, with a focus on
multi -family projects
25% held in reserve for land banking
• Maximum of 5% for emergent situations determined by the City Council (if funds not
used by end of the fiscal year, the funds reserved for land banking)
• 20% directed through HCDC for LIHTC support or supplemental aid through the CDBG /
HOME housing application processes
12. Create a committee of staff, developers and other interested stakeholders to determine the
viability and potential parameters of a tax abatement program that would support
affordable housing
Create an education program to promote the benefits of subsidized housing projects to
I and I ord s/developers
13. Exempt the Riverfront Crossings, Downtown and University Impact Areas from the
Affordable Housing Location model and consider modifications to reduce size of restricted
areas and/or account for neighborhood densities
Consider adoption of a new neighborhood based (not address based) Affordable
Housing Location Model to allow and encourage city -assisted development in more
locations throughout the City, including redevelopment of existing affordable housing
Housing and Community Development Commission
August 18, 2016
Page 11 of 14
Remaining Recommended Actions:
1. Continue to fund existing local programs including GRIP and UniverCity as well as review
the set-aside for housing rehabilitation as set in the Consolidated Plan.
2. Adopt an Inclusionary Zoning code amendment for the Riverfront Crossings District (Done)
3. Adopt code amendments that enable the FUSE Housing First use in the community (Done)
6. Hold the $1,900,000 million in housing authority funds for an opportunity to leverage
significant private investment and/or to develop/acquire low income replacement housing
7. Consider an annexation policy that provides for affordable housing contributions
8. Consider use of TIF on a case by case basis to support residential development and/or
annexation through the provision of public infrastructure and capture the required LMI set-
aside for use throughout the community (Ex: McCollister and Foster Road)
9. Actively pursue regulatory changes to City Code:
• Waive parking requirements for affordable and non -affordable units in RFC and
downtown
• Review possible changes to the multi -family design standards for all units in an effort
to reduce cost and expedite approvals
• Eliminate minimum size requirements for PUDs
• Increase allowable bedrooms from 3 to 4 outside the University Impact Area (keep
occupancy at 3 unrelated)
• Permit more building types by right as opposed to requiring a PUD process (density,
multiplex units, cottage clusters, etc.)
10. Pursue a form -based code for the Alexander Elementary neighborhood and the downtown
core
11. Strategically seek LIHTC projects through an RFP process overseen by the HCDC (ties to
use of the Affordable Housing Fund)
14. Tenant Displacement
• Council notification of major site plans when 12 or more households will be displaced
and there is no accompanying rezoning Such applications would require a transition
plan to better inform residents and the general public (requires a comprehensive plan
amendment)
• Mailings to current residents could be required upon application and a good neighbor
meeting would be encouraged
• Develop a displacement policy, including defining displacement (not to include non-
renewal of lease) and "emergent situation"
Housing and Community Development Commission
August 18, 2016
Page 12 of 14
15. Rent abatement for emergency orders when vacation of property is not necessary (use
simpler language for ease of understanding)
• Increase education about housing code violations and how to report
Additional Recommendations:
16. Increase Neighborhood Services involvement in the early stages of residential development
• Suggest having a Neighborhood Services representative located in the City Manager's
office
17. Consider opportunities to collect rent data beyond the rental permitting process
Harms seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ADOPTION OF CHANGES TO THE CDBG AND HOME SCORING
CRITERIA:
Byler noted this was discussed at the last meeting and the Commission agreed to put a heavier weight on
matching funds. The Commission has received some feedback from partners regarding the updated
scoring criteria. One noted that if the minimum award will continue to be $50,000 then it only allows for
large projects. Byler stated he supports funding big projects. The other two feedback statements were in
regards to the smaller organizations struggling more to get matching funds.
Persson stated in her experience she has seen that it is very difficult for certain organizations to raise
money for certain projects. So if the Commission is to exempt some from having to have matching funds,
all must be exempt. Byler agreed but felt it was important for partners to know the importance of
fundraising. In a letter to the Commission from Brian Loring, Executive Director of Neighborhood Centers
of Johnson County, he states funding from CBDG is often a kick off to success full fundraising. Byler said
that is what they would put on their application, that doesn't preclude receiving funding from CBDG. If a
partner has a $100,000 project and receives $50,000 in CBDG, then fundraise for the other $50,000 that is
acceptable.
Hightshoe noted that makes sense however HUD states that they should be the "funder of last resort,"
being the funder that makes the project happen - not kick it off.
Conger stated that with the dwindling funds it is important to also put the money where the most impact
can be made, not just used as leverage.
Byler noted that the scoring criteria are not binding; it is a vehicle to assist with allocation discussions.
Hightshoe noted that the new criteria correctly doesn't advocate for volunteer impact, because there are
lots of projects where volunteers are not practical. Persson agreed but felt it should be reworded because
there are a lot of agencies that keep track of the volunteer hours they have because that helps them
leverage funds from a variety of sources. Funders want to know if there is a commitment from the
community. Byler says the application and scoring sheet state "community partnerships and/or volunteer
resources." Hightshoe said that reflects on the mission of the organization, not the project.
Dennis asked about item 4.1 regarding income targeting. Hightshoe said what the applicant applies for is
Housing and Community Development Commission
August 18, 2016
Page 13 of 14
typically what they put in the agreement. Dennis stated it is frustrating as a landlord to manage, if you have
20 units and a certain percentage must be under 30%, when an applicant comes in and the landlord
verifies the income is over 30% then the landlord has to take the time to review the individual income
levels of the other 19 units to make sure it will keep the percentage correct. Byler noted that is the case
with any tax -credit project. Dennis also stated that if an applicant comes in and they are $2 over the 30%
AMI, that is still really poor but if the landlord doesn't have a 30% unit, they need to be turned away. Byler
said the points are based on percentages of how many units are below 30% but there are still points given
for up to 50% so it's not like people need to be turned away.
There was discussion on point allocations but the Commission wants to try it this year and see how the
process goes.
Persson moved to use this scoring criteria for this year and if changes need to be made tweak it for
upcoming years. Harms seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
STAFF/COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Ackerson mentioned that the Crime -Free Addendum discussion will be on the agenda in September. Also
in September the Commission will elect the chair and vice -chair for the year.
ADJOURNMENT:
Conger moved to adjourn. Vaughan seconded the motion. A vote was taken and motion carried 7-0
Housing and Community Development Commission
Attendance Record
2016-2017
Name
Terms Exp.
9117
10122
11/19
1121
2118
3110
4121
5119
6116
8118
Byler, Peter
7/1/17
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Conger, Syndy
7/1/18
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
O/E
X
Harms, Christine
7/1/19
--
—
--
—
—
—
X
X
X
Lamkins, Bob
7/1/19
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
O/E
McKinstry, John
7/1/17
—
---
---
---
---
—
X
X
O/E
Olmstead, Harry
7/1/18
—
—
—
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Persson, Dottie
7/1/17
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
X
Seiple, Emily
7/1/18
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Vaughan, Paula
7/1/18
—
---
---
—
—
—
—
—
—
X
Kev:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Vacant
r
®I, CITY OF IOWA CITY
NEW F."t, MEMORANDUM
Date: October 24, 2016
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Kris Ackerson, Community Development Planner
Re: Recommendations from Housing and Community Development Commission
At their October 20th meeting, the Housing and Community Development Commission
approved the September 15, 2016 meeting with the following recommendation to the City
Council:
By a vote of 8-0 the Commission recommends approval all proposed amendments to the
Housing Choice Voucher Administrative Plan.
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 - Done
MINUTES
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COM
SEPTEMBER 15, 2016 — 6:30 PM
DALE HELLING CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL
APPROVED
MEMBERS PRESENT: Peter Byler, Syndy Conger, Christine Harms, Bob Lamkins, Harry
Olmstead, Dorothy Persson, Emily Seiple, Paula Vaughan
MEMBERS ABSENT: John McKinstry
STAFF PRESENT: Kris Ackerson, Steve Rackis
OTHERS PRESENT: Shawn McRoberts
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote of 8-0 the Commission recommends approval all proposed amendments to the Housing Choice
Voucher Administrative Plan.
CALL TO ORDER:
Byler called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM.
NOMINATE AND ELECT OFFICERS (CHAIRNICE CHAIR):
Persson nominated Byler to continue as the Chair. Seiple seconded the motion. A vote was taken
and the motion passed 8-0.
Byler next called for nominations for Vice Chair. The previous Vice Chair was Jim Jacobson who left the
Commission earlier in the year and was not replaced. Persson noted that she replaced Jacobson as the
Vice Chair.
Olmstead nominated Persson as Vice Chair. Conger seconded the motion. A vote was taken and
the motion passed 8-0.
APPROVAL OF AUGUST 18, 2016 MINUTES:
Persson noted a misspelling of her name in the minutes.
Seiple anticipated recommendation #6 was to read "actively pursue." Seiple also noted on
recommendation #14 and #15 should include tenant or landlord education. Byler noted that there was
mention of education in recommendation #12 which was one of the Commissions priorities "Create an
education program to promote the benefits of subsidized housing projects to landlords/developers"
Persson questioned recommendation #15 and had thought something was going to be added to the
minutes that would show what the simpler language was going to be. Ackerson noted that the memo that
went to the City Council had specified that but it will be up to the City Manager to craft the final document.
Vaughn said it is noted in the minutes that simpler language should be used. Ackerson noted it will be a
policy that will need to be crafted. Harms asked if that policy would come to the Commission. Ackerson
replied that no, the recommendations that the Commission sent to the Council will be considered at their
next meeting on September 20. Persson asked if the Commission would see the final document.
Ackerson noted it would be in the City Packet and could be reviewed there.
Housing and Community Development Commission
September 15, 2016
Page 2 of 7
Olmstead moved to approve the minutes of August 18, 2016 with the edits. Harms seconded the
motion. A vote was taken and motion passed 8-0.
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR TOPICS NOT ON THE AGENDA:
Shawn McRoberts (St. Mark's United Methodist Church) stated he was present because he was very
interested in what this Commission was doing and was present to learn more.
Byler opened the public hearing
Ackerson passed out one of the reports that did not make it into the PDF packet. The report summarizes
how the money was spent last year and how much was rolled over for the next year. The report also has
a list of the various projects broken down by the type. Ackerson also noted that the format that is online is
a new template the HUD has created online so there are lot of quirks with the layout.
Byler asked if there were anything particular that Ackerson would recommend the Commission spend
time reviewing. Ackerson replied that most of the document is just summary of what the Government
requires, the tables are the most beneficial to review are on pages 35, 36 and 37. Those tables are a list
of the CBDG and HOME projects that the City completed so it is a good summary to see what actually got
done.
Conger said at previous meetings the Commission had asked for distinction of what monies were used for
owner -occupied versus rentals. Ackerson said that information is in the report. Ackerson said he would
find those tables and send them to the Commission.
Byler closed the public hearing.
Conger moved to approve the FY16 Consolidated Annual Performance$ Evaluation Report
(CAPER) with minor typo edits. Olmstead seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion
carried 8-0.
TENTATIVE SCHEDULE OF PROJECT MONITORING VISITS IN FY17:
Byler noted that the schedule is in the Commission's packets. Ackerson noted that he outlined the dates
that he will ask the grant recipients to present. In the past the Commissioners would sign up to go out and
see the projects themselves, but that was hard to schedule so the partners come to a meeting to present.
Olmstead questioned if the Commission could not do both. Ackerson said that was acceptable, noting
that the Commissioners are all welcome to contact the recipients and go visit the sites.
Byler suggested that the entities come to the meetings and present and then if there are particular
projects the Commission would like to visit that can be set up after the presentation. Seiple agreed that
would work well.
Byler asked if Ackerson could add to his memo on each line the amount awarded to each entity and a
description of the project.
Housing and Community Development Commission
September 15, 2016
Page 3 of 7
Rackis from the Iowa City Housing Authority stated that this agenda item had previously been on an
earlier meeting's agenda but he pulled it thinking they would be adding some items to the discussion, but
never did. Rackis also noted he thought the meeting was next Thursday so that is the date he gave to the
Johnson County Local Homeless Coordinating Board so their absence here tonight is not a lack of
enthusiasm for their own project, it was due to Rackis relaying misinformation. Rackis stated that
everyone is excited about the FUSE (Frequent Users System Engagement) Housing First initiative and
noted he has been on the steering committee for about two years and they came up with this Special
Admission as a way to help with the cash flow of the project. The individuals that this project is discussing
may ultimately qualify for social security or social security disability but they have not been in one place
long enough to apply and go through the application process. Rackis noted that is the problem with
chronic homeless, some of these individuals have come to the top of the waiting list five times but they
never follow through with the paperwork. Rackis also said that instead of tying the voucher to the unit they
encouraged the FUSE project to go with Special Admission because they are optimistic that if they house
someone first and provide the services then maybe someone can move on transitional housing or
supportive community living or even independent living they would then have a voucher to take with them
to ensure that housing is affordable. The FUSE project would then make another referral for that person
that moved out.
Rackis noted that the Housing Authority only has 1,215 vouchers and cannot go over, but there is always
turnover and attrition which averages out to be about 200 per year to go to people on the waiting list.
Rackis explained that even if they are at 100% they are still going to issue a voucher because at the end
of the calendar year it should even out. It is in fact a gamble but it hasn't been a risk.
Byler declared he has no issues with the changes to the language but does question how many homeless
people there are in Iowa City. The memo just states FUSE assists chronically homeless individuals who
are the most frequent users of high cost services at public expense. These individuals:
a. Continuously cycle through a variety of social and public services.
b. Experience chronic homelessness and are a small fraction of the overall homeless population (4-
5%).
c. Have complex behavioral and social challenges that make it difficult for them to succeed in
traditional services.
Byler notes that implies that there are 300 homeless people in Iowa City if they are building thirteen FUSE
units. Rackis informed that there would be 24 units. Byler concedes then that implies that there are 700 or
so homeless in Iowa City. Lamkins stated he read the 4-5% as 4-5% of the homeless population, not the
City's population. Byler agreed but if 4-5% of the homeless would fill 24 units, that would mean the
homeless population is 500-600 which seems astonishing.
Persson stated that the City tries to count the number of homeless each year and if Crissy Canganelli
(from the Shelter House) was here she would likely have that data as they help between 700 and 900
people at the shelter every year.
Rackis stated he took the language from the FUSE brochure. The goal is to have 24 units and the
Coordinating Board had determined that maybe 10 will meet 100% of the FUSE criteria. Based upon the
zoning change that City Council passed the architect was able to expand from an 8-12 unit building to a
24 unit building. Rackis contends that what Crissy Canganelli would confirm is that there are 8-10 people
that will hit all of the FUSE criteria (such as the monetary criteria) and the other people that will be
referred to them may not hit the monetary criteria but they will hit the other criteria in terms of that they
had multiple contact with law enforcement, multiple contact with University Hospitals and Clinics, multiple
contact with mental health, etc.
Olmstead mentioned a program being put together by the County for mental health where they are going
to do substance intervention and asked if the City has been involved with that at all. Rackis is not aware
Housing and Community Development Commission
September 15, 2016
Page 4 of 7
of that initiative. Olmstead also noted that this morning there was a report on poverty in the United States
from the Census Bureau which concluded what states and cities were high and low in poverty, Iowa City
was not on either end of that list but right in the middle.
Rackis stated that he can give Ackerson copies of the brochure that the FUSE project created to help
clarify what some of the numbers mean. Rackis noted that when the School District counts, even families
that are doubled up, they don't get a count of 700.
Persson said she would like to know that number, noting that she has volunteered at the Shelter House
and in the winter/wet shelter so she feels that it could be a high number. Rackis confirmed that the winter
overflow shelter did have numbers up to 120 people and Shelter House at 70 was full so that is already
200.
Seiple asked if this definition supersedes the locational (residency) preference. Rackis confirmed that this
is a Special Admissions, and likely the 24 individuals that will be referred to them are "living" in Iowa City
— they don't have a legal domicile but they are living here.
Seiple also asked if differentiating for the people that will get vouchers that they can carry after this or
having project based vouchers affects the funding then. Rackis replied that there will not be and that their
funding is based on two things, one is voucher utilization because they cannot go over the 1,215 so part
of it is unit based but part is budget based. If they spent $16.9 million in calendar year 2016 then they can
anticipate what HUD will give them for calendar year 2017.
Rackis is very excited about this FUSE project, his understanding is they plan to purchase the site by the
end of September and then it's just a matter of putting all the funding in place and building.
Persson asked how Shelter House's Lodge Program fit into this program. Rackis replied that they are
supporting individuals in the lodges with vouchers.
Byler questioned that when the FUSE facility opens 24 people will come to the top of the list so if
someone is on the waiting list it will likely be for six weeks or so until placement. Rackis said if they get 24
referrals on impact that will make a very minimal impact on someone on the waiting list. When working
with the waiting lists they usually take 100 people off at a time, the usual rule of thumb is if 100 are
offered, about 50 will respond.
Olmstead asked if there was any minimal time of residency required. Rackis responded that HUD allows
housing authorities as a local preference to have residency preferences but there cannot be a residency
requirement.
Olmstead asked if there would be any special consideration for Veterans. Rackis said there wouldn't be
however there will be referrals and they can add a Veterans preference, but the need hasn't yet been
identified. Persson noted that a lot of Veterans get help at Shelter House because they do have a
Veterans program.
Olmstead moves to recommend approval of all proposed amendments to the Housing Choice
Voucher Administrative Plan. Lamkins seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion
passed 8-0.
UPDATE ON ENERGY EFFICIENCY GRANT PROGRAM WITH AMERICORPS AND MIDAMERICAN:
Ackerson wanted to notify the Commission that the City is working on this new project partnering with
AmeriCorps. This is a project operated out of UNI that have set up teams in communities that spend a
year visiting cities conducting energy audits of all the publically-city owned housing units. Ackerson noted
this will be great for the tenants because the improvements that are made can help reduce utility bills.
This group will conduct what is known as "blower door" test where they try to find leaks in windows, doors
and foundations and fixing those. They will be replacing lighting, checking the furnace and air conditioning
Housing and Community Development Commission
September 15, 2016
Page 5 of 7
units, and then make a list of things that the City can do after fact (like adding insulation into the walls or
attics or replacing doors, etc.).
Vaughn questioned if any inefficient appliances will be part of the review or faulty plumbing. Ackerson
replied that he is not sure about the plumbing but he will find out, as also with the appliances.
UPDATE FROM CITY ATTORNEY REGARDING CRIME FREE ADDENDUM:
Byler noted the response (in the agenda packet) from Susan Dulek, Assistant City Attorney, was very
thorough and thanked the City Attorney for that work.
Persson asserted her concern because the crime free addendum was presented to the commission
without any explanation as to why. Seiple stated she was the one that requested this information.
Persson understood the conversation but feels that if there are problems with a landlord using this
addendum too much they should have a right to respond and there should be fairness. Byler noted that
this memo was meant to clarify fairness and non-discrimination for all tenants, but especially for those
projects receiving city assisted funds.
Byler noted that if this Commission wants to pursue this topic as a future meeting agenda item, we could
discuss an email compliant system for people who feel they have been wrongly treated with regards to a
crime -free addendum in a lease. It could be treated much like how the Human Rights Commission
receives complaints that are then investigated by staff.
Byler began by reiterating the current policy that the Commission has is if anyone wants information
included into the Commission's packets, which comes out a week before the meeting, has to forward that
information to Ackerson. Byler stated that items can always be passed out at the meetings, but the policy
is to not pass out any new information at a meeting and act on it at that meeting. It needs to be placed on
a future agenda. If information becomes available between the week of the packet distribution and the
meeting date, it still needs to be sent to Ackerson to be distributed.
Ackerson noted that because this Commission allocates funding it is important for the Commission to be
as transparent as possible and the City will not distribute materials to the Commission without also
making them available to the public. Ackerson said he has been considering adding a correspondence
item to each agenda because there are people who find articles that are housing related either locally or
nationally. That way if they are on the agenda there is an opportunity to discuss them if people want to,
but they are not action items.
Olmstead asks that Staff not censor anything that the Commission gives to be added to the packet.
UPDATE ON PUBLIC INPUT BEING SOUGHT REGARDING CITY STEPS:
Ackerson explained that every year the Commission tries to do outreach to the community and get
additional input and identify if there are any changes that need to be made to CITY STEPS (the five-year
plan) and identity if there are any new priorities. Tracy Hightshoe is meeting with folks in Mobile Hospital
today and then later this month on the 28th Ackerson will visit IC Compassion, which works with refugees,
so if anyone is interested in going with Ackerson let him know. Staff will bring the feedback from these
visits to the Commissions next meeting. At the October meeting the Commission will also have the
opportunity to propose any amendments to the Plan they might have.
Housing and Community Development Commission
September 15, 2016
Page 6 of 7
STAFF/COMMISSION COMMENT:
Seiple noted that she attended the Iowa Finance Authority Conference in Des Moines last Wednesday
and saw the presentation Crissy Canganelli on the Lodge Project, the FUSE project, and the new zoning
that is facilitating that project.
Olmstead declared he is in need of volunteers for Election Day. There is a group that will provide
transportation to persons with disabilities to the precincts but they would like persons at the precincts to
greet them.
Byler noted that in the last round of applications to this Commission a person stated that they feel they
would be a good person to be added to this Commission and that prompted Byler to send an email to the
Mayor noting his opinion is in disagreement. That email was released through an open records request,
so Byler just wanted to make everyone aware.
ADJOURNMENT:
Olmstead moved to adjourn. Seiple seconded the motion. A vote was taken and motion carried 8-0.
Housing and Community Development Commission
Attendance Record
Name
Terms Exp.
10122
11/19
1/21
2/18
3/10
4121
5119
6/16
8118
9115
Byler, Peter
7/1/17
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Conger, Syndy
7/1118
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
Harms, Christine
7/1/19
—
—
—
—
—
—
X
X
X
X
Lamkins, Bob
7/1/19
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
O/E
X
McKinstry, John
7/1/17
—
—
—
—
—
—
X
X
O/E
O/E
Olmstead, Harry
7/1/18
---
--
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Persson, Dottie
7/1/17
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
Seiple, Emily
7/1/18
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Vaughan, Paula
7/1/19
--
—
—
—
—
—
—
X
X
Key:
X
= Present
O
= Absent
O/E
= Absent/Excused
—
= Vacant
5b(5)
Minutes
Human Rights Commission
September 20, 2016
Lobby Conference Room
Approved
Members Present: Eliza Willis, Andrea Cohen, Paul Retish, Shams Ghoneim, Adil
Adams, Kim Hanrahan.
Members Absent: Joe D. Coulter.
Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers.
Recommendations to City Council:
No.
Call to Order:
Ghoneim called the meeting to order at 5:31 PM.
Approval of August 16, 2016 Minutes:
Hanrahan moved to approve the minutes; the motion was seconded by Willis. A vote was taken and the
motion passed 6-0.
Funding Request for Celebrating the World's Children:
Hanrahan moved to approve funding for $100 contingent on an itemized budget being sent to the
Commission by the next meeting date. The motion was seconded by Retish. A vote was taken and the
motion passed 5-0. Cohen abstained (submitted funding request).
Proclamations
Willis moved to approve the Commission submitting two proclamations for the Mayor's consideration.
The motion was seconded by Hanrahan. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. Either Cohen or
Coulter will accept the National Hispanic Heritage Month Proclamation at the Council's October 4 formal
meeting. The proclamation for National Disability Employment Awareness Month will be scheduled for
the formal Council meeting of October 18. The commission will decide at its next meeting date who will
accept it.
Building and Crossing Bridges Together:
Ghoneim reported out on the event schedule and confirmed panelists. The printed program for the event is
currently being created by the University of Iowa Center for Human Rights. Bowers will send out the
schedule to all Commissioners in a follow up email.
Human Rights Breakfast:
Adams, Willis (possibly via speakerphone) and Retish will serve on the selection committee for the
awards. Commissioner Coulter will serve as an alternate.
Job Fair:
The annual job fair was held on September 13. Over 22 local employers participated in the job fair
representing a variety of different industries. Job seekers were down a bit from past years with
approximately 100 attending throughout the 2 -hour event.
Ad Hoc Committee:
Willis and Hanrahan along with the League of Women Voters have several upcoming Why Vote? What's
in it for Me? events scheduled for late September and October. The purpose of the program is to canvass
neighborhoods and communities within Iowa City that have low voter turnout to encourage residents to
register to vote.
Iowa City Community School District Equity Committee:
The Committee is currently focusing on data from the elementary schools by reviewing report cards for
each building and looking at the student climate and teacher climate.
Reports of Commissioners:
Hanrahan reported that the next Annual LGBTQ Summit will be held in February of 2017.
Ghoneim reported out on several events that she is participating in including programs sponsored by the
University of Iowa Center for Human Rights, the University of Iowa School of Social Work and the
Council on International Visitors to Iowa Cities,
Adjournment: 6:45 PM.
Human Rights Commission
Attendance Record
NAME
TERM
EXP.
10/20
15
11/17
IS
12/15
15
1/19
16
2/16
16
3/15
16
4/18
16
5/17
16
6/21
16
7/7
16
7/19
16
8/16
16
9/20
16
Joe D. Coulter
1/1/2019
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
Adil D.
Adams
1/1/2019
—
--
--
O/E
O
O/E
O
X
X
X
X
X
X
Eliza Jane
Willis
1/1/2019
---
--
---
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Paul Retish
1/1/2017
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Orville
Townsend, Sr.
1/1/2017
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
R
R
Karol Krotz
1/1/2017
—
—
—
—
—
—
--
O
O
O
R
R
R
Andrea Cohen
1/1/2018
---
—
—
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Kim
Hanrahan
1/1/2018
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O
X
Shams
Ghoneim
1/1/2018
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Key
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E= Absent/Excused
R = Resigned
-- = Vacant
5b(6)
MINUTES APPROVED
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
AUGUST 10, 2016 4 P.M.
RECREATION CENTER — MEETING ROOM B
Members Present: Suzanne Bentler, Larry Brown, Clay Claussen, Maggie Elliott, Cara Hamann,
Paul Roesler, Joe Younker
Members Absent: Wayne Fett, Lucie Laurian
Staff Present: Juli Seydell Johnson, Chad Dyson, Zac Hall, Tammy Neumann, Parks &
Recreation Staff,
Others Present: None
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Claussen called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m.
OTHER FORMAL ACTION:
Moved by Younker. seconded by Brown, to apnrove the June 8, 2016 minutes as written. Passed
7-0. (Felt & Laurian absent
PUBLIC DISCUSSION
None
JOINT MEETING WITH COUNCIL
Seydell Johnson announced that the Parks & Recreation Commission to participate in a joint meeting with
the Iowa City City Council on Tuesday, September 6.
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Elliott. seconded by Bender, to adjourn the meetine at 4:06 p.m. Motion passed 7-0 (Felt
& Laurian absent.
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
August 10, 2016
Page 2 of 6
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
NAME
vn
'nv
M
in,
in
�Z
�0
,0
v
e
D
e
TERM
o0
N
a
`rw
?
M
O
M
N
O
EXPIRE
r
°°
°
o
'"
'"
N
a
in
D
°°
S
Suzanne
1/1/17
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Bentler
David
1/1/15
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
Bourgeois
Larry Brown
1/1/18
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
Clay
1/1/18
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Claussen
Maggie
1/1/17
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
Elliott
Wayne Fett
1/1/19
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
Cara
1/1/16
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
Hamann
Lucie
1/1/15
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
Laurian
Paul Roesler
1/1/18
*
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
Joe Younker
1/1/16
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting LQ = No meeting due to lack of quorum
* = Not a member at this time
5b(7)
APPROVED
MINUTES
Iowa City Telecommunications Commission
September 26, 2016 — 5:30 P.M.
City of Iowa City Cable TV Office, 10 S. Linn St. - Tower Place, LEVEL 3A
Call to Order: Meeting called to order at 5:30 P.M.
Members Present: Nick Kilburg, Laura Bergus, Paul Gowder
Members Absent: Derek Johnk
Staff Present: Ty Coleman
Others Present: none
Recommendations to Council: NONE
Election of Officers:
Coleman explained that an election was needed to fill the seat of former chair, Alexa
Homewood, following her resignation from the Commission. Kilburg moved and
Gowder seconded a motion to elect Derek Johnk as the chair of the Telecommunications
Commission. The motion passed unanimously.
Kilburg moved and Bergus seconded a motion to elect Paul Gowder as the vice chair,
replacing Derek Johnk in that role. The motion passed unanimously.
Approval of Minutes:
Kilburg moved and Gowder seconded a motion to approve the August 29, 2016 minutes
as presented. The motion passed unanimously.
Announcements of Commissioners:
None
Short Public Announcements:
None
Consumer Issues:
Coleman referred to the consumer issues report presented within the Commission's
meeting packet and that it was a bit lengthier than in previous months. Kilburg asked
whether there had been any resolution to a billing issue regarding a customer who had not
paid his bill and was being assessed late fees by Mediacom, as well as additional charges
by a collections agency. Coleman noted that the customer continued to assert that he
shouldn't have to pay some of the extra fees. It was stated that while Mediacom had
APPROVED
communicated to the Cable TV Office that they would remove one of the $8.50 late fees,
the customer reported that he had not received an updated bill reflecting this change.
Coleman mentioned that the billing process can be confusing to some customers and that
he recommended that the resident go to the local office and have Mediacom staff walk
him through the charges in order to provide a clearer explanation. Coleman questioned
whether the situation was at a point where the Telecommunications Commission might
serve in a mediation role to aid in the resolution of the issue and that he would talk to the
City Attorney's Office to see what advice they might have.
Bergus asked if Mediacom was stating that the issue was out of their hands at this point.
Coleman was not certain, but noted that Mediacom's local office staff had simply
provided him with the related dates and corresponding charges in an effort to explain the
current status of the account.
Kilburg asked if the fact that Mediacom had turned the account over to a collections
agency meant it was now out of their hands or if they still had some say in the matter,
noting that if it was now up to the collections agency, mediating between the customer
and Mediacom might provide any benefit. If Mediacom was still involved, Kilburg said
that there may be a chance to assist with the resolution.
Bergus wondered if the customer understood at the time of signing up for service that
there was a timeframe within which an account could be turned over to collections and
that fees could be assessed by an entity other than Mediacom.
Gowder said that confusion seemed to be the main issue and that perhaps this was a good
reason for the City to be involved, even if only to facilitate an opportunity for better
understanding. Kilburg said that if the issue came up again, it would be worth checking
with the City Attorney's office to see what role might be appropriate for the Commission
to play. Kilburg understood the customer's frustration of being assessed additional fees
while waiting for a corrected bill.
Gowder noted that if the collection fees are serious, the customer may need legal
representation. Kilburg agreed that it would be beyond the scope of the Commission.
Bergus said the ideal scenario would be that Mediacom still has a say in the matter and
that they could tell the collections agency to remove some of the fees.
Coleman said he has continued to relay information from Mediacom to the customer
without much success in helping them to reach an agreement. Coleman said he would
ask the question about Mediacom's current authority in the situation.
Mediacom Report not including litigation:
None
APPROVED
Local Access Reports:
Bergus noted the reports found in the meeting packet.
City Cable TV Office Report:
Coleman said that two new Multimedia Interns would be starting shortly and that they
would be working with the Special Projects Assistant to produce the City's weekly
update program and covering City and community stories as assigned. Coleman said this
internship program has been very successful in the past at freeing up time for the Special
Projects Assistant to work on more in-depth projects while also providing students with
exposure to professional newsgathering processes.
Coleman reported that the City Attorney's Office had given an okay for the Commission
to discuss matters related to other potential service providers - in response to a question
that was asked at the August 2016 Telecommunications Meeting.
Coleman said he recently observed that ImOn has an office located in Iowa City and
noted that the company had been engaged in efforts to provide business Internet services.
Gowder asked about the geographic area in which ImOn would be providing these
services and was curious to know which providers covered what areas within Iowa City.
Coleman was unsure as to what kind of information could be given by Mediacom and
other providers. Kilburg noted that a helpful feature on the City's website could be
developed, wherein residents could identify which service providers were available for
their residence. Gowder said that such a map could also be useful to the City in guiding
future policy, allowing it to identify areas that may not have as many options as others.
Bergus provided some historical context with regards to fiber mapping, stating that the
Commission had looked at this in the past. She noted that it was challenging to get
information from the University about the location of its fiber in the area. Bergus also
mentioned that Mediacom is required to provide its plant maps to the City but that they
may need to be kept confidential.
Bergus noted that the cable TV franchise agreement between the City and Mediacom
requires Mediacom to extend service to areas that meet a certain density threshold, but
that anyone can get service from any provider as long as they are willing to pay to
connect to the existing plant. Bergus said her understanding is that in areas where
Mediacom is not required to extend service, Mediacom can provide a bid to the resident
for cable to be extended from the existing infrastructure to the residence. Bergus said it
may be a challenge to identify what provider's service is available where if it is
technically possible to extend service anywhere, as long as the customer is willing to pay
a share of the cost. Bergus explained that with ImOn providing business Internet in the
downtown area, there is a similar process wherein a site visit is conducted and it is
determined what the costs will be to extend service from its existing fiber to the business.
Bergus said that a benefit of a cable TV franchise for cable TV providers is that it
mandates that service be extended to all residences inside of the city's limits as long as it
falls within the required population density.
APPROVED
Gowder said that a map showing service availability may therefore be impracticable.
Bergus noted that a map showing where cable has been planted could still be useful, for
example, to show where fiber might be going past a residence as it is extended to an area
where not everyone has service. Gowder wondered how much of this information might
be determined by way of public records, depending on how aggressively one wanted to
pursue it.
Bergus noted that the Commission had previously been interested in identifying the
location and ownership of fiber in Iowa City and that a map was generated by the Cable
TV Office. Kilburg said he thought that there was some confidential information
contained within the map. Gowder wondered if the map could be located and be stripped
of its confidential information.
Adiournment:
Kilburg moved and Gowder seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion passed
unanimously. Adjournment was at 5:53 p.m.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
12 -MONTH ATTENDANCE RECORD
(x) = Present
(o) = Absent
(o/c) = Absent/Called (Excused)
Elias
Bergus
Kilburg
Johnk
Homewood
10/16/2015
x
x
x
x
x
11123/2015
x
x
o/c
o/c
x
01/25/2016
o/c
x
x
x
x
02/22/2016
x
x
x
x
o/c
Gowder
03/28/2016
x
x
o/c
o
x
04/25/2016
x
x
o/c
x
x
05/31/2016
x
x
x
x
o/c
06/27/2016
o/c
x
x
x
o/c
07/25/2016
o
x
x
x
o/c
08/29/2016
x
x
x
x
x
09/26/2016
x
x
x
o
resigned
10/24/2016
x
x
x
x
vacant
(x) = Present
(o) = Absent
(o/c) = Absent/Called (Excused)