HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-03-12 Bd Comm minutesItem Number: 5.a.
+ r
ui �1 lat
• yyrrmr��
CITY Ok IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
March 12, 2019
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Community Police Review Board: January 8
Final/Approved
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
MINUTES — January 8, 2019
CALL TO ORDER: Chair King called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Monique Galpin, Latisha McDaniel, David Selmer, Orville Townsend
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Staff Chris Olney, Legal Counsel Patrick Ford
STAFF ABSENT: None
OTHERS PRESENT: Iowa City Police Chief Matherly
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Motion by Townsend, seconded by Galpin, to adopt the consent calendar as presented or amended.
• Minutes of the meeting on 12/11/18
• ICPD General Orders 89-04 (Civil Rights)
• ICPD General Orders 99-01 (Police Vehicle Pursuits)
Motion carried, 5/0.
NEW BUSINESS
Community Forum Discussion — Olney reminded the Board of the annual community forum.
In previous years it was held in April and there was usually a discussion topic or presentation.
Galpin suggested a Police Department representative be involved in the forum, possibly having a
presentation or introduction of the City's 1St newly appointed female Captain. Chief Matherly offered to
have the Police Department give a presentation and be available for questions.
The Board agreed to hold the forum at the Public Library on Monday April 29, 6:00 P.M.
The specific forum topic and agenda would be discussed at the next regular meeting.
OLD BUSINESS
Proposed Ordinance Change Discussion - Galpin and Townsend reported back regarding the 12/18
City Council work session which discussed the proposed ordinance change. Galpin stated that the
Council was open to approving ordinance changes to items 1-10. The CPRB would have the option to
request the Police Chief and or City Manager participate in discussions between the CPRB when their
conclusions differ prior to issuing their report.
Olney noted that in the future when disagreements are noted, the CPRB public reports will be placed
on the regular agenda for Council discussion and transcripts of that discussion will be sent to the
CRPB. The City Attorney's Office and Police Department will be preparing an ordinance reflecting the
CPRB's requested changes excluding item 11.
Townsend said this was a great step but would like the Board to consider an additional ordinance
change proposal which would require two designated City Council liaisons to attend CPRB meetings
CPRB
January 8, 2019
Page 2
twice yearly. After discussion, it was agreed upon to defer any further action until Staff can provide
additional information regarding the City's policy on requesting Council attendance at
Board/Commission meetings.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION
None.
BOARD INFORMATION
None.
STAFF INFORMATION
None.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Motion by Selmer, seconded by Townsend to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section
21.5(1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or
federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's
possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential
personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school
districts, and 22-7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized
elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are
made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to
the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of
government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to
that government body if they were available for general public examination.
Motion carried, 5/0. Open session adjourned at 6:12 P.M.
REGULAR SESSION
Returned to open session at 6:22 P.M.
Motion by Townsend, seconded by McDaniel to set the level of review for CPRB Complaint
#18-02 to 8-8-7 (13)(1)(a) On the record with no additional investigation.
Motion Carried 5/0.
_TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS (subject to change)
• February 12, 2019, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm
• March 12, 2019, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm
• April 9, 2019, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm
• April 29, 2019, 5:30 PM, IC Library Meeting Rm A (Community Forum)
• May 14, 2019, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm
ADJOURNMENT
Motion for adjournment by Townsend, seconded by Galpin.
Motion carried, 5/0.
Meeting adjourned at 6:23 P.M.
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2018-2019
(Mppt-i na np+Pl
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
-- = Not a Member
TERM
2/13118
3/19118
4/17/18
4123118
1 5/8118
6/12118
7/23118
8/21118
9111118
1019118
11/13/18
12!11/18
118/19
NAME
EXP -
Donald
7/1/19
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
O
X
X
X
King
Monique
7/1/20
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Galpin
Orville
7/1/20
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
Townsend
Latisha
7/1/21
---
---
McDaniel
---
---
�._
._..
--
----
-----
X
O
X
x
Royceann
7/1/21
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
O/E
._._
---_
—_
--
Porter
-----
----
-----
David
7/1/21
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O
X
O
X
O
X
Selmer
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
-- = Not a Member
Item Number: 5.b.
+ r
ui �1 lat
• yyrrmr��
CITY Ok IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
March 12, 2019
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Historic Preservation Commission: January 10
MINUTES APPROVED
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
January 10, 2019
MEMBERS PRESENT: Kevin Boyd, Zach Builta, Helen Burford, Sharon DeGraw, G. T
Karr, Cecile Kuenzli, Quentin Pitzen
MEMBERS ABSENT
Thomas Agran, Gosia Clore, Lee Shope
STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow
OTHERS PRESENT: None
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (become effective only after separate Council action)
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Boyd called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There was none.
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS — CONSENT AGENDA:
803 Church Street — G oosetown/H o race Mann Conservation District (porch reconstruction).
Bristow explained this property is near Ace Hardware and was built originally as a two-story
gable. She said the side addition was added later and there was a whole back addition with a
two -car garage underneath. The front porch will be replaced with this project.
Bristow shared slides showing fish scale shingles in the gables and vinyl siding and soffits on
the porch. She said the porch has its original roof structure but everything else below has been
replaced. The roof has been failing. Because of this and failures in the newer parts of the porch,
and the fact that it is an enclosed porch, which is discouraged in an historic district, staff
recommends demolition of the existing porch.
Bristow showed a 1926 view obtained from Sanborn fire insurance maps that shows the first
section of the house, the one and one-half story gable to the side with two porches. She said
the porch being discussed faces Church Street.
Bristow said Staff had to look at some of the houses in the neighborhood to come up with a
replacement plan. She showed porch examples to help explain the proposal. She said the
owner proposed a solid railing because she has had an enclosed porch for the entire 30 or 40
years that she has lived there so she does not want an exposed front porch. It will be a little
porch in the corner of the L of the house.
Bristow shared one example with a very ornamental and spindled porch, believed to be more
accurate to the original on this house. She said because the porch is being replaced completely,
not retaining anything original, this kind of ornament would not be used, but it shows the roof
line and how it fits with the house. It is a pretty flat roof that comes into the corner of the meeting
of the two gables. There would be a pilaster orengaged column back against the wall that
supports the back of the porch and a few columns out along the front.
Bristow said this project would have a more simple, basic column. It would fit in the corner of the
L and extend the same depth as the current porch since we know that roof structure is original
on the porch. She said the overhang is known and there would be a pilaster orengaged post at
the side wall and one at the outer corner and, just to keep it simple, there would be only one
column in the span.
Bristow displayed slides of the porch now and what it could look like. She said Staff looked at
reference materials for simple ways to replace some of these porch elements. She displayed a
drawing with a simple, 6 x 6 column that a contractor could make and it would look appropriate
with the house.
Bristow said the project would remove the existing porch, which probably has an original roof
that is heavily deteriorated, but nothing else that's original. She said the porch would be rebuilt
completely with a new roof with external gutters instead of an internal gutter, and new floor
structure, new columns, and a solid baluster. The owner is being encouraged to leave the
exposed lap siding that is in there already without trying to cover it. Bristow thought the owner's
goal down the road would be to remove the vinyl siding from the rest of the house.
Kuenzli said she understood the reason for the solid panel enclosing on the front porch, but
noted it was related more to a Craftsman style than a Queen Anne style. She wondered about
instead using square spindles to keep it simple, spaced closely together, with the space
between the spindles equal to the width of the spindles, to still maintain a sense of privacy but
be stylistically more accurate for the period of the house.
Bristow said the owner is very hesitant about not having an enclosed porch anymore. She
knows the porch needs to be rebuilt because of its deterioration but her intent, originally, was to
rebuild it as a closed porch, which cannot be done according to the guidelines.
Bristow said they are getting rid of the hedge in front of the porch and it will look a lot better.
Once the porch has been opened up, the owner may be comfortable with leaving it open or with
putting in a simple square spindle railing instead. Bristow hoped the owner would decide to
forgo the solid baluster but, knowing her hesitation, Staff proposed this plan as a compromise.
DeGraw asked if the ceiling was salvageable.
Bristow did not know the extent of the damage yet. She would suggest they salvage anything
they could. She also wasn't sure about the floor and whether any of it could be salvaged.
Kuenzli asked why it was acceptable to use K-style gutters instead of specifying half-rounds.
Bristow said Staff did not specify gutters. She noted half-rounds would match what the owner
has on parts of the house, but they also have K-style. Because of the history of additions on this
house and some of the siding, there is a bit of a mixture. She thought the owner could go with
half-rounds, but it might depend on budget.
MOTION: DeGraw moved to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at
803 Church Street as presented in the application with the following condition: Porch
flooring is either vertical-grained Douglas Fir, pretreated decking with gaps under 1/8
inch, or Azek porch flooring with an eased edge. Builta seconded the motion. The motion
carried on a vote of 7-0 (Agran, Clore, & Shope absent).
738 Dearborn Street — Dearborn Street Conservation District (porch reconstruction).
Bristow explained this property is about midblock between Center and Sheridan. It is a 1924-ish
bungalow. It has had some additions and changes, but it does have an original stucco coating
on the walls. She said her documents state the walls are tile construction but did not know if
that's what was found in the work that had been done in the past.
Bristow shared slides demonstrating the front porch currently has wrought iron railing and
columns. The porch floor structure has been redone and the skirting around the porch is a
decorative concrete block. She said the applicants came in because the columns were starting
to deteriorate. It was time to replace them and to get something a bit more appropriate to the
home.
Bristow said she looked at the porch and shared a picture noting remnants from the past that
were still there and that would be retained. By looking at the remnants, Bristow felt the original
porch had a kind of paired column not often seen in Iowa City, something a bit more ornamental
and more expensive to build.
Staff ended up going with a taller masonry pier that extends above the porch floor and has a
battered column that rests on top of it. Bristow shared an example that has been used for a few
other projects, including at 741 Grant Street. She pointed out the masonry has a cap and the
battered column has its own base with its own capital and will be the model for this project.
Emerson Andrishok did both the sketches and the rendering for this project.
Bristow shared the drawing of the column, which will have a masonry base. She said the
existing skirting, the decorative concrete, will be cut back so that the piers can be attached into
the corner of the porch with the battered column above. The railing is a square spindled railing
with a little bit of a solid area in the middle, which is found on a few other bungalows like this. It
also alleviates the long run of the railing. Bristow shared Emerson's rendering of the porch. She
said given the substantial change this will make to this porch, Staff finds it appropriate.
MOTION: DeGraw moved to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at
738 Dearborn Street as presented in the application. Builta seconded the motion. The
motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (Agran, Clore, & Shope absent).
REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF
Minor Review —Staff Review.
1205 Seymour Avenue — Longfellow Historic District (front entry step replacement).
Bristow said this is not an historic landing and it is being replaced similar to the way it is. There
will be no skirting because it is pretty close to the ground. She said it was probably originally a
little concrete step like all the neighbors, but there is no real reason to do that again because it
is a little cost prohibitive. She said it will be painted or stained this time so it will last longer.
Along with this, the owners have a rotten window sill they are replacing and a storm door. While
not regulated, they are having a new custom one remade.
530 Summit Street — Summit Street Historic District (rear breezeway column and frieze
reconstruction).
Bristow said there is a breezeway in the back of this house. The property has been for sale for a
while. She said she received a call stating things had been removed without permission.. They
are going to put back the columns, but in a more substantial and accurate size. They will do the
arches again because it could have originally had the arches.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 13, 2018
MOTION: Kuenzli moved to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's
December 13, 2018 meeting. Karr seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0
(Agran, Clore, & Shope absent).
COMMISSION INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION:
2018 Historic Preservation Awards.
Bristow reminded everyone to come if they could. She said the only thing not decided is what to
get for refreshments and welcomed suggestions. A few were given. Costs and funding options
were discussed. Bristow noted the award ceremony is a way for the Commission to reach out to
the public, show what has been accomplished, and gain support.
Previous Agenda Items.
Downtown District.
Boyd said the City Council is going to have a work session to talk about the Commission's
recommendations to move forward on the National Historic District and to create some kind of
working group. The Downtown District, which spoke last month in favor of the National Historic
District, is preparing to write a letter from their board stating the same.
Transfer of Development Rights.
Boyd said Council decided not to do this.
410/412 Clinton Street.
Boyd said 410/412 Clinton Street needed six votes on Tuesday night and got five, so it will not
be a local landmark. Susan Mims and Mazahir Salih were the two no votes.
Market Street.
Bristow said staff has been working with a structural engineer and historic architect as a
consultant to evaluate sites, moving, rehabilitation, and are working on the budget.
Bristow said she had thrown together a very basic budget at one point. The City Manager
wanted a memo about it so it could go into their work session for the budget. The numbers
included the move, but then also making it structurally stable on its new site and moth -balling it,
as well as the cost for someone to rehab the property. Council had a work session about it on
Saturday and Bristow was at their follow-up work session Tuesday to answer questions. She
thought their overall feeling was that the rehab number was astronomical, but it is also not
something that the City needs to do unless the City rehabs it.
Bristow said originally the University wanted to buy all those houses, take them down and build
an entrepreneurial business center, but they are not doing that. Now they are going to take them
down and retaining it as open space.
Because that situation has changed, the Mayor has proposed that he and the City Manager
meet with the University to discuss leaving it in place. The Mayor feels that as the oldest
residential house left in town, it is important to save it.
Bristow said the consultant is developing an official draft report which will include the costs so
those costs can be explained a bit more for Council. Since all of the costs change a lot
depending on the site, it will be an estimate.
Bristow said if Council can come up with a budget placemark and then pick a site, the final
version could have real numbers related to that site. Bristow thought the official draft of the
architect's proposal would be available before the end of the month.
Bristow thought the University wanted the house gone by August 1st but hoped that date could
be negotiated.
DeGraw asked for the estimated cost to move the property.
Bristow did not have the numbers with her, but thought the original place -holder estimate was
$330,000. The updated numbers added $182,000 to that. She pointed out the numbers are high
because the site and route with transformers and poles is not known.
Bristow noted keeping it in its current location would be the best option. If that cannot happen,
further budget discussion with Council will be needed. If Council thought the costs were too
high, they might choose not to move it, which means it will come down.
Annual Report.
Bristow said next meeting the Commission's annual report to the state would be ready for
review and a vote to approve. The report will show what we have done this past year. She also
said, depending on scheduling, their planning session could be held.
ADJOURNMENT: Kuenzli moved to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Builta.
The meeting was adjourned at 6:20 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Judy Jones
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2018-2019
TERM
2/8
3/8
4/12
5/10
6/14
7/12
8/9
8/23
9/13
10/11
11/08
12/13
1/10
NAME
EXP.
AGRAN,
6/30/20
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
THOMAS
BAKER,
6/30/18
X
X
X
X
X
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
ESTHER
BOYD,
6/30/20
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
KEVIN
BUILTA,
6/30/19
0/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ZACH
BURFORD
6/30/21
--
--
--
--
--
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
,HELEN
CLORE,
6/30/20
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
GOSIA
DEGRAW,
6/30/19
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
SHARON
KARR, G.
6/30/20
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
T.
KUENZLI,
6/30/19
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
CECILE
MICHAUD,
6/30/18
X
X
X
X
X
-
--
--
--
--
--
--
PAM
PITZEN,
6/30/21
--
--
--
--
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
QUENTIN
SHOPE,
6/30/21
--
--
-
--
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
O/E
LEE
IX
SWAIM,
6/30/18
X
X
X
X
GINALIE
WAGNER,
6/30/18
X
X
X
X
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
FRANK
Item Number: 5.c.
+ r
ui �1 lat
• yyrrmr��
CITY Ok IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
March 12, 2019
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Housing & Community Development Commission: January 17
CITY OF IOWA CITY
M E I'd 0 RAN D U M
Date: February 22, 2019
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Kirk Lehmann, Community Development Planner
Re: Recommendations from Housing and Community Development Commission
At their February 21St meeting, the Housing and Community Development Commission
approved the January 17, 2019 meeting with the following recommendation to the City Council:
By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends to City Council funding the full requested amount
of Legacy Aid to Agencies applications as shown below for FY20 and FY21, and that Council
invite HCDC to discuss this recommendation at their soonest available work session.
Agency
Request
4 Cs Community Coordinated Child Care
$20,000
Arc of Southeast Iowa
$20,000
Big Brothers Big Sisters of Johnson County
$25,000
Crisis Center of Johnson County
$66,000
Domestic Violence Intervention Program
$50,000
Elder Services Inc.
$40,000
Free Lunch Program
$16,000
HACAP
$25,000
Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County (HTFJC)
$30,000
Inside Out Reentry Community
$30,000
Iowa City Free Medical Clinic/Dick Parrott Free Dental Clinic
$17,500
Iowa Valley Habitat for Humanity
$25,000
Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County
$55,000
Pathways Adult Day Health Center/ Aging Services, Inc.
$25,000
Prelude Behavioral Services
$20,000
Rape Victim Advocacy Program
$23,000
Shelter House
$85,000
Table to Table
$20,000
United Action for Youth
$33,000
Total
$625,500
Additional action (check one)
x No further action needed
Board or Commission is requesting Council direction
Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action
MINUTES
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
JANUARY 17, 2019 — 6:30 PM
SENIOR CENTER, ASSEMBLY ROOM
FINAL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Megan Alter, Mitch Brouse, Charlie Eastham, Christine Harms, John
McKinstry, Maria Padron and Paula Vaughan
MEMBERS ABSENT: Vanessa Fixmer-Oraiz
STAFF PRESENT: Kirk Lehmann, Erika Kubly
OTHERS PRESENT: Kristie Doser, Lauri Mitchell, Christi Regan, Ellen McCabe, Sara Barron,
Barbara Vinograde, Susan Gray, Ron Berg, Brian Loring, Becci Reedus,
Genevieve Anglin, Mark Sertterh, Jamie Kearney, Jenny Winegarden,
Nicki Ross, Sara Barron
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends to City Council funding the full requested amount of
Legacy Aid to Agencies applications as shown below for FY20 and FY21, and that Council invite HCDC
to discuss this recommendation at their soonest available work session.
Agency
Request
4 Cs Community Coordinated Child Care
$20,000
Arc of Southeast Iowa
$20,000
Big Brothers Big Sisters of Johnson County
$25,000
Crisis Center of Johnson County
$66,000
Domestic Violence Intervention Program
$50,000
Elder Services Inc.
$40,000
Free Lunch Program
$16,000
HACAP
$25,000
Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County (HTFJC)
$30,000
Inside Out Reentry Community
$30,000
Iowa City Free Medical Clinic/Dick Parrott Free Dental Clinic
$17,500
Iowa Valley Habitat for Humanity
$25,000
Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County
$55,000
Pathways Adult Day Health Center/ Aging Services, Inc.
$25,000
Prelude Behavioral Services
$20,000
Rape Victim Advocacy Program
$23,000
Shelter House
$85,000
Table to Table
$20,000
United Action for Youth
$33,000
Total
$625,500
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 17, 2019
Page 2 of 12
CALL MEETING TO ORDER:
Vaughan called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM.
APPROVAL OF THE DECEMBER 20, 2018 MINUTES:
McKinstry noted that Eastham is active member of the Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition but
not a member of the Board as listed on page 5. Vaughan however is on the Board of the Johnson County
Affordable Housing Coalition.
Eastham moved to approve the minutes of December 20, 2018, with correction. McKinstry seconded. A
vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR TOPICS NOT ON THE AGENDA:
Becci Reedus (Crisis Center) appreciates the effort of the Commission as this is her 1011 year of
application cycles. In those 10 years the allocation from the Crisis Center has gone from $40,000 to
$39,000 and hasn't seen any increases. In 2008, pre -flood numbers for food services at the Crisis Center
was about 32,000 for the year and this year they will see about 54,000 to 55,000 and the $40,000
allocation is slipping in terms of its impact for the agency. Reedus noted that each agency could talk
about how the impact and the dollars received is not growing and that is concerning. Reedus noted she
sits on the steering committee for the Access Center and greatly supports it but is concerned by the
number of dollars that is being considered for its support. For example, the City is proposing to raise the
utility tax to support the Access Center but Reedus wonders why the City cannot raise the utility tax to
support nonprofits in the community. She attended Council's budget work session and asked some
councilors if they get requests for increased nonprofit funding and the answer was no. There was no
information in the budget workshop information that indicated there was communication at all from this
Commission to City Council to alert them nonprofits are falling behind. Reedus has seen the growth in the
budget and city population, and is concerned that with that growth comes more problems, more people
that need to be fed each year, and more people relying solely on the food bank for food. Other issues the
City talked about were the closing of Proctor & Gamble which also concerns the Crisis Center. There is
not a lot of corporate support in Iowa City, there are not a lot of big foundations to turn to, and nonprofits
trying to increase their budgets are doing so using development staff who need to be paid well. Reedus
feels this Commission could help nonprofits advocate to City Council for additional money each year.
Council even talked about a local option sales tax which Reedus supports, but Council is not talking about
any of that additional income going towards nonprofit funding. Nonprofits address needs that exist in the
community, they do not create the need, and without addressing the need, problems will be even greater
in this community. She thinks the Commission needs to address this with City Council.
Vaughan thanked Reedus for her comments and asked Staff to put this item on next month's agenda.
Sara Barron (The Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition) will be resuming their community
meetings on the fourth Friday of every month presenting housing topics of interest to people. The topic in
January will be Habitat for Humanity sharing initiatives they are working on as well as talking about the
new interfaith committee that they are developing. The meeting is at noon on Friday, January 25 at the
Johnson County Health and Human Services Building.
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 17, 2019
Page 3 of 12
MONITORING REPORTS:
Kristie Doser reported on the Domestic Violence Intervention Program (FY19 Aid to Agencies). She noted
CDBG and Aid to Agencies funding supports their shelter services, specifically staffing so they can have
additional support for individuals staying in the shelter. She shared a couple of stats on shelter services
for FY18, they housed 298 individuals and children in the shelter (pretty much a 50/50 split on adults and
children), they are full 100% of the time and therefore also sheltered 72 adults and children in hotels for
short periods until space opened in the shelter. Doser noted they had 170 families that contacted them
that they were not able to house when needed and therefore had to negotiate with those families about
their safety, and work on options with them on how to respond to their situation. Doser noted that about
five years ago services for domestic violence and sexual violence in Iowa was restructured, which
reduced domestic violence shelters from 26 to 8 in the entire state. Therefore, CDBG money is incredibly
important and allows DVIP to do support services for victims such as support groups, counseling, and
advocacy in court and help victims work with DHS and other systems within the community. Doser noted
they are looking to expand nights of safety services, last year they served 13,030 nights (meaning for
every person that stayed at the shelter, they calculated how many nights they stayed there), which is
higher, meaning the average length of stay in shelter is growing, which relates to resources that are or
aren't available. The average night length of stay has been as low as 21 nights per family to the current
average of 26 nights. That means they lose resources in the community, or housing is difficult to find, so
they stay in shelter longer and fewer people can get in. The 170 families not able to get in would have
equated to 4,470 nights needed. Doser gave an example of how devastating domestic violence is and
how much a dollar can leverage. When people think of domestic violence, the first question is "why did
they stay". She says the question is what would it take for a person to remain safe from the one person
that knows everything about them including their home (does the partner have access to it), the children,
the car, money, the job, etc. For domestic violence, perpetrators have more leverage than most criminals,
so the amount of impact they can have on a victim's life is tremendous. On average, perpetrators will stalk
their partners for 21 months, that is almost two years of harassment that affect your job, children, school,
etc. These services are immediate and urgent and that is why the funds are so important to DVIP.
Eastham asked to see what a fully funded DVIP program would look like in the future. Doser said she
would be happy to have that conversation. Eastham stated he has heard a major issue is placing people
from DVIP into housing and wonders what types of available housing are needed. Doser noted their
services are in no way comprehensive, they are crisis intervention solely and the care and healing they
must give to the victims and how to support them moving forward.
Mark Sertterh reported for Shelter House (FY17 Cross Park Place, FY19 A2A & Rental Acquisition). He
began with the Cross Park Place project which funded land acquisition for the new facility at 820 Cross
Park Place. It just held its open house and will have 24 units of permanent housing for the chronically
homeless. The land was purchased in April 2016 and individuals should be able to move in at the end of
this month. With FY19 Rental Acquisition funds, they are looking to purchase a fourth house for
permanent housing but are still finding other funding streams to buy a home. If they cannot obtain the
additional funding they will then go to a bank to see about a possible mortgage to proceed. Sertterh
noted with the Aid to Agencies money is used for staff support at the emergency shelter, which provides
for the immediate needs of people in housing crisis. They serve more people every year, last year they
served over 900 people in shelter. Aid to Agencies provides staff support for people's needs and safety
He noted that DVIP and Shelter House have partnered in the past couple years for Rapid Rehousing
dollars from HUD to help people who experiencing homelessness. It has been a win/win for both
agencies.
Eastham asked for clarification on how the Rapid Rehousing money from HUD is used. Sertterh said the
money is for anyone who is literally homeless and on the streets or in shelter to be used for short-term
rental assistance (up to one year).
Vaughan expressed congratulations as she attended the open house for the new facility.
Eastham made the same request to Shelter House he made for DVIP, if they could provide what a fully
funded program would look like. Sertterh agreed it would be a great discussion to have.
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 17, 2019
Page 4 of 12
Ron Berg from Prelude gave an update on their project (FY19 Rental Rehab). The CDBG funds are to
replace a hot water heater at their 12 unit transitional housing complex. They expect to have the bid
documents out for that project in the next couple of weeks.
Susan Gra v from 4Cs presented an update on their project (FY19 Daycare Technical Assistance). She
noted all agencies do amazing work and it is hard to compete with domestic violence, free medical or free
lunch programs and other first level of needs for families to survive, but if the community doesn't support
childcare no one has an opportunity to break out of the cycle of poverty. They just received the CDBG
funding in November but Johnson County Empowerment funding allowed them to fund their project
before the CDBG funding. The 4 C's program works with childcare providers that serve at least 51 % of
children on childcare assistance, that is, lower income and at -risk children. Currently, they actually serve
100% of children with childcare assistance which shows the lowest income providers (87.5% of the
providers) participating in this program are at 0-30% income. Last year there were 17 on the program and
they now have 21, 12 of which have their first language as something other than English and the other 9
are English speaking but serve minority children. 18 of the 21 have become registered with the Iowa
Department of Human Services and 2 more are ready to submit. Gray noted last year they worked really
closely with 5 providers to get them registered which was a lot of work. Another issue the providers work
with is that everyone in the child's family needs a physical which requires to educating them on cultural
differences that doctor visits are needed when healthy as well as when sick. The program helps childcare
providers become more financially viable with their small business. Gray noted that childcare assistance
is a huge problem in Johnson County due to childcare fees being so much higher and they struggle to
find places for children. CDBG funding helps increase the opportunities for childcare and it is critical that
young children receive good quality care and are well nurtured to have a better chance in school. 4C's
motto is to support the providers until the work is done. A challenge of the past few months has been
when providers must move from one apartment to another due to landlord issues and they can lose the
DHS funding during the move time. 4C's held a meeting recently at the Neighborhood Centers with 100%
of the providers and they are incredibly appreciative of the support and are excited to learn more. This
meeting on business practices, keeping records up-to-date, and other business tips was well received.
Alter asked how many children are in each of the 21 providers. Gray said the immigrant family childcare
providers can have up to 6 children, but those in apartments will usually have 3 or 4. Other home
facilities can have 12 children with 2 providers and 4 extra after school. Overall Gray feels around 200
children are impacted.
Alter asked for an estimate in Johnson County for the number of children ages 0-5 who need childcare
versus number of available slots. Gray does not have that statistic, but noted that Johnson County is not
as bad as other areas in Iowa. She noted there is a difference in slots available in childcare centers
versus homes, home childcare is now down to 10% which may be impacted by places such as North
Liberty that have centers with 200-300 slots in one center.
Lehmann noted these were CDBG Economic Development dollars and is technical business assistance
for low income children providers. This comes from a different pot of funds than Aid to Agencies.
UPDATE ON ARTHUR STREET HEALTHY LIFE CENTER PUBLIC FACILITY PROJECT:
Lehmann noted the presenter had a conflict with students so she was not able to get away. She instead
sent a brief written statement. The Arthur Street Healthy life Center is still working to engage stakeholders
for the building purchase. The proforma for the clinic practice looks promising and potential partners
looked at the building last week. She would like to be able to give another update at the next meeting.
Eastham asked if there was a deadline they were working against for using the funds allocated.
Lehmann said the deadline was originally June 30 but the fact that they haven't signed an agreement
means another deadline in March will be initiated as half of their funds should be expended per HCDC
policy. Lehmann said it is a local deadline based on fiscal years and can be flexible as long as other
CDBG projects are expending funds.
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 17, 2019
Page 5 of 12
DISCUSS FY2020-2021 LEGACY AID TO AGENCIES FUNDING REQUESTS AND CONSIDER
BUDGET RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL:
Lehmann asked if the Commission wanted to discuss the priorities first or go off the points allocated. The
priorities come into play in the point totals and based on their allocation targets.
Vaughan suggested starting with the priorities because that will determine the funding. Based on the
initial allocations most Commissioners agreed with a few exceptions.
For 4C's Harms had a different priority. Harms noted at the last meeting, HCDC decided to determine the
priority based on the use for funding requested. She changed her priority to medium because it is
employment training to certify caregivers and not as much childcare services. Padron asked if they are
ranking based on the mission of the whole agency or just the project because the Commission needs to
be consistent. Vaughan noted they clarified last time they would rank based on the project. Alter offered a
counter perspective that there is such a need and it is difficult to get certified this type of training, so it
creates better quality childcare and therefore should be a high priority. Padron agreed it should be a high
priority as the training is necessary for quality childcare. Brouse stated the intent of the program is to
create more caregivers through the training which will help people sustain a job and have a career.
Harms agrees to the consensus of a high priority.
Vaughan noted Arc of Southeast Iowa is next, which is evenly divided as a medium or high priority.
Padron added her priority of medium. Brouse noted he originally had it as a medium but after HCDC's
conversation last meeting, it seemed to him they intend to spend the money on a daycare program so he
switched it to high. Padron noted it is not daycare of everyone but for special needs and that is why she
ranked it medium for disability services. Harms admitted she was unsure but feels it could be a high
priority because it is for childcare, and while it is not impacting many people it is so specialized and so
needed because it is difficult to find this type of childcare. Vaughan agreed with Harms but agrees it could
be high priority. It was decided to leave it as a Medium/High category.
Vaughan moved on to Big Brothers Big Sisters, most Commissioners ranked it as medium but a couple
said high. Harms ranked it as high because of the mental health services aspect of the children served,
the kids come from homes with single parents, parents in jail, substance abuse, have many siblings and
underlying mental health issues that are sometimes overlooked by parents and schools. A lot of these
children can feel overlooked and no one takes the time to do anything about it. This organization can spot
some of these issues and pair children with caregivers and bring stability into their lives. Vaughan and
Padron both chose medium priority as it is a youth service, the majority agreed.
Elder Services was majority of medium but Harms also gave that a high priority because it is Meals on
Wheels and transportation which are both high priorities. Vaughan noted the majority of the Commission
ranked it medium and with no further discussion it would remain listed as medium.
Vaughan moved on to The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County (HTFJC), everyone else listed it as
high priority, Vaughan ranked it low because it would be used for operations rather than direct services.
McKinstry noted that with HTFJC many municipalities designate certain projects with their funding and
therefore HTFJC is limited on how they cover operating expenses. Additionally HTFJC multiplies by many
times the money that is given to them through other sources (federal funds, tax credits, etc.) and for that
reason he feels it is a high priority. Vaughan concurred with the group and agreed it could be a high
priority. Alter noted the impact HTFJC is huge.
Next discussed was Inside Out Reentry. Vaughan also noted she was the only one that ranked it as low
since it was to be used for services and administration but again consented to the majority of high priority
Vaughan moved along to Neighborhood Centers and noted she ranked it medium because it was listed
as indirect costs but is okay with high priority if that is the rank of the group. McKinstry noted it will go
directly to subsidized childcare and Vaughan agreed that was a high priority.
Prelude was next, Harms feels they are addressing the homelessness and mental health, many of their
clients have mental health issues that result in substance abuse which results in homelessness, a lot of
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 17, 2019
Page 6 of 12
these clients have worn out their welcome with friends, family and because of their issues with mental
health they turn to alcohol and drugs and are put out on the street. Alter agreed and would be willing to
change her ranking to high. Padron understands that everything is high priority but they cannot rank
everything high priority, Harms understands and notes everyone's heart says high but the reality is they
cannot all be. Harms agreed and is fine with a medium priority ranking.
Finally was United Action for Youth, Alter felt it was a high priority as it funded homelessness and mental
health for the youth. Teenagers have a child, their parents kick them out, they have nowhere to go, and it
is a big issue and needs to be addressed. Vaughan also rated it high because of the homelessness
piece. Padron agreed it should be high. The consensus of the group was to change it to a high priority.
Vaughan thought moving to allocations they would start with low priority allocations, as there is only one
agency that scored as a low priority, the Iowa Valley Habitat for Humanity. Eastham noted 5% of the total
allocation was targeted to low priority activities and there is a minimum of $15,000 for any agency.
Eastham therefore he feels Habitat should be allocated $15,000. The rest of the Commission agreed.
Next agencies with a medium priority ranking were discussed. Everyone assigned the Iowa City Free
Medical Clinic $15,000. Vaughan suggested funding $15,000 to all medium priorities to see how funding
played out. The Commission agreed.
That left high priority agencies to discuss, the highest ranked was the Crisis Center followed by Shelter
House. Vaughan noted some of the average allocations came in below the minimum of $15,000 so they
either need to be raised to $15,000 or not given any funding. Padron said they should be moved to
$15,000 because all the ones in the medium category below a $15,000 average were moved to $15,000.
Brouse noted the Crisis Center ranked the highest and the average allocation was $33,500. Eastham
supported the Crisis Center having a higher allocation because it emphasized shelter and food services.
Brouse agreed and had a higher allocation as well. HCDC decided to round the average of the
Commissioner's individual funding down to the nearest $1,000 and see what the tally looked like. That
brought the total allocation to $368,000 which was $13,000 over the total funds to allocate. Discussion
began on how to reallocate to stay within budget. Vaughan suggested taking $1,000 off of each of the
high priority categories that are above the minimum which left HCDC $6,000 over budget.
Eastham asked about Habitat and why they have not received funds the past few years. Lehmann noted
they received CDBG/HOME funds for specific projects but not funding for operating funds since FY15.
Eastham suggested allocating zero dollars to Habitat and redistribute that it to cover the overage and use
the $9,000 to support other agencies. Vaughan noted no one in the low category would receive funding.
Harms noted that the Commission agreed that whatever is allocated this year to an agency, the same
amount is guaranteed next year, so agencies can have some consistency. That would mean if nothing
was given to an agency this year, such as Habitat, then they would also not receive any funding next
year. Lehmann said Habitat would no longer be eligible for legacy Aid to Agencies but could apply for
emerging funds if that happened.
Padron stated while it is a low priority on the list, it is still a high priority in the community as
homeownership is important.
McKinstry agreed that homeownership an important part of overall services in the City but understands it
doesn't score as high on priorities, but the Commission also committed to fund lower priority agencies.
Eastham feels Habitat will continue to function without funding and the $9,000 should be allocated to
Shelter House which does provide homes to people who are in dire straits.
Becci Reedus (Crisis Center) asked to have all the priorities read to the audience as well as the
allocations from the previous year. Lehmann read through the spreadsheet which totaled up to $361,000,
$6,000 over budget as follows:
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 17, 2019
Page 7 of 12
Priority
FY19
allocation
Recommended
FY20-21
allocation
Iowa City Free Medical Clinic/Dick Parrott Free Dental Clinic Medium
$15,000
$15,000
Prelude Behavioral Services Medium
$16,000
$15,000
Elder Services Inc. Medium
$20,000
$15,000
Big Brothers Big Sisters of Johnson County Medium
$15,000
$15,000
Pathways Adult Day Health Center/ Aging Services, Inc. Medium
$15,000
$15,000
Arc of Southeast Iowa Medium
$0
$15,000
Iowa Valley Habitat for Humanity Low
$0
$15,000
Crisis Center of Johnson County High
$40,000
$33,000
Shelter House High
$50,000
$47,000
HACAP High
$15,000
$15,000
Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County High
$34,300
$25,000
Domestic Violence Intervention Program High
$40,000
$27,000
4 Cs Community Coordinated Child Care High
$15,000
$15,000
Rape Victim Advocacy Program High
$20,000
$15,000
Table to Table High
$15,000
$15,000
Free Lunch Program Hi h
$15,000
$15,000
_
Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County (HTFJC) High
$24,000
$15,000
United Action for Youth High
$27,400
$19,000
Inside Out Reentry Community High
$15,000
$15,000
Reedus questioned if the Crisis Center was the highest scorer in the highest category then why aren't
they receiving a bigger allocation than others. She would like to have justification so she can relay that
back to her board of directors.
A member of the audience asked if there was less funding this year than allocated last year. Vaughan
stated the allocation was $391,000 last year and $355,000 this year. Lehmann noted part of the change is
splitting off money for emerging agencies.
Eastham responded to Reedus' question on the Crisis Center allocation, he acknowledged it was a good
point, the average ranking for the Crisis Center was 58 which was the highest ranking and is willing to
revise the allocations to reflect the higher ranking.
Vaughan noted since they are already over the budgeted allocation, they would need to figure out a way
to allocate more to higher ranked agencies. The first discussion is whether to keep the allocation to the
low priority, it was decided that the Commission would fund low priorities at an earlier meeting.
Alter stated she was for funding it initially but after listening to the discussion about the long-term
repercussions she would be okay with reallocating that $15,000 to other agencies. Vaughan asked for the
consensus of the Commission to drop the low priority category and to allocate those funds elsewhere.
Brouse would be in favor of taking the $9,000 from the allocation and giving $3,000 to Shelter House to
get them to $50,000 and the other $6,000 to the Crisis Center. That would put Crisis Center at 59% of the
funding they asked for and the Shelter House at 58% of the funding they asked for.
Eastham supports that reallocation, but notes the ranking scores rest on several considerations not all of
which strictly applicable to his thinking of the need for the specific kind of service the application is for and
the need for that service and activity. He is inclined to support a higher dollar allocation to Shelter House
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 17, 2019
Page 8 of 12
than Crisis Center at this point. It is his assessment that sheltering people is a bit of a greater need than
food distribution, which is also a big need.
Genevieve Anglin (United Action for Youth) noted that it is understood there are limited dollars but part of
what was discussed was the need of nonprofits in the community to have reliable funding from year to
year and while she doesn't want to take money away from Crisis Center or Shelter House but they are
getting close to what they got last year whereas UAY is going down by $8,000 which is less than 113 of
what they received this year. In the last five years their allocation has reduced more than 50%.
Padron stated the Commission talked about giving new agencies money so it is hard to fulfill every need.
Padron wanted to hear from the Shelter House as to why they asked for $35,000 more this year than last.
Mark Sertterh (Shelter House) stated the amount of services they are providing is exponentially more with
the new services and new project they have coming online with the Cross Park Place building and will be
doing more services for the community.
Becci Reedus (Crisis Center) asked if there was no chance for the Commission to go to Council and ask
for more money to fund nonprofits. Lehmann stated the Commission could request additional funding
from Council with their allocation recommendation. Eastham agreed the Commission should do so.
Lehmann noted some preliminary allocations made here may change based on unknown federal CDBG
allocations. Lehmann said they are using a conservative estimate at this time because last year's funding
was so unusual. Eastham noted that the Johnson County Board of Supervisors is now awarding $1.5
million to basically this same group of service providers.
Kristie Doser (Domestic Violence Intervention Program) shared that because they received reduced local
and state funding over the past five years they are in jeopardy of losing federal funding which would be a
loss of $200,000 to $400,000. She knows they are not the only program dealing with this issue.
Eastham asked for the timeline for these recommendations. Lehmann said it is taken to Council in May
when CDBG/HOME allocations are made. He added the next two Commission meetings will be used for
question and answer for CDBG/HOME applications and for allocating CDBG/HOME funds.
Vaughan noted that when the Commission makes a recommendation tonight they can also request more
funding from Council. Lehmann agreed, noting the Commission makes recommendations while Council
makes the final allocation decision.
Eastham stated that if Council were to allocate an additional $270,000 to the Aid to Agency budget it
would allow the full requests from all applicants. The full request total is $625,500, the current budget is
$355,000 so an additional $270,500 would meet the requests. Padron agrees with Eastham to ask for the
full amount. Alter added that Council is discussing the FY20 budget right now so it is urgent to ask for
additional funding now rather than waiting. Eastham noted at the budget meeting last week the City
Manager pointed out that Council had $2.5 million in funds from this current fiscal year that is available for
a variety of purposes and the City Manager suggested four of five specific allocations for those funds.
$1.5 million or so of those funds was for a reserve fund to build another repair/maintenance facility which
the City needs, but that reserve funding can also come from bonding so he is suggesting to taking
$270,500 from the reserve fund to cover the nonprofit allocations.
Lehmann said the Commission could recommend what they want Council to consider in the motion, he
suggests they make allocations based on the amount they have been given and suggest that additional
funds be awarded to meet the agency requests. Lehmann said they did not need to specifically state
where they want the funds to come from. Kubly agreed they didn't need to say where the money would
come from.
McKinstry suggested sending along a statement that says with the funds that have been allocated the
allocations are as such, but with shrinking funds over the past several years and the needs are
increasing, and additional funding should be considered because agencies need some relief.
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 17, 2019
Page 9 of 12
Lehmann stated they could defer the recommendation. Eastham stated he thinks it should be on the
agenda as soon as possible because it seems to take Council time to absorb recommendations from this
Commission.
Ellen McCabe (Housing Trust Fund Johnson County) mentioned that if the Commission were to submit
the table showing full recommendations along with requested amounts perhaps a column should be
added to show the net impact from current allocations. Vaughan agreed showing the Council all the
information is important.
Ron Berg (Prelude) noted if the trend continues as it is currently it won't be long before every agency is
just getting $15,000.
Eastham feels if a recommendation is made to Council for allocations that total $355,000 he would vote
against that as he doesn't want Council to be able to start off their discussion that option. He wants them
to have the $625,500 as the option to consider. He feels this needs to go before Council sooner rather
than later and that membership from this Commission should be present at the meetings where these
allocations are discussed as well as the agency representatives.
Kubly noted that the Council agenda is already set for the next meeting, if a letter was to be drafted from
HCDC it could go in next week's Council information packet. Eastman added Council will have to vote on
the FY20 budget in March so he would want this on their agenda before the March budget vote.
McKinstry asked if they were to send a letter to Council from this meeting that requests full funding for
A2A, if Council comes back and states HCDC only has the $355,000 to spend will there be time for the
Commission to make those allocations. Lehmann said they might have to add in a special meeting.
Padron noted the Neighborhood Centers scored pretty high and the first three agencies are around 58%
of ask and the Neighborhood Centers is less than 50%.
Alter feels it is best to table the discussion on the allocations, send in the recommendation request for full
funding and see what Council does.
Barbara Vino -grad (Iowa City Free Medical Clinic) acknowledged the Commission has an impossible task,
but wanted to note that had she known there was a possibility of getting more than the $17,500 she would
have asked for more, she made a small request knowing in the past how small the allocations had been.
If the City really has money available many of the agencies would advocate for more.
Eastham moved to recommend that City Council fund the full requested amount of Legacy Aid to
Agencies applications as shown below for FY20 and FY21, and that Council invite HCDC to
discuss this recommendation at their soonest available work session. Harms seconded the
motion.
Agency
Request
4 Cs Community Coordinated Child Care
$20,000
Arc of Southeast Iowa
$20,000
Big Brothers Big Sisters of Johnson County
$25,000
Crisis Center of Johnson County
$66,000
Domestic Violence Intervention Program
$50,000
Elder Services Inc.
$40,000
Free Lunch Program
$16,000
HACAP
$25,000
Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County (HTFJC)
$30,000
Inside Out Reentry Community
$30,000
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 17, 2019
Page 10 of 12
Iowa City Free Medical Clinic/Dick Parrott Free Dental Clinic
$17,500
Iowa Valley Habitat for Humanity
$25,000
Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County
$55,000
Pathways Adult Day Health Center/ Aging Services, Inc.
$25,000
Prelude Behavioral Services
$20,000
Rape Victim Advocacy Program
$23,000
Shelter House
$85,000
Table to Table
$20,000
United Action for Youth
$33,000
Total
$625,500
Eastham strongly suggested that Vaughan, as chair of HCDC, contact the Mayor and discuss the results
of this meeting and let him know HCDC would like to come to the next available work session to discuss.
Vaughan agreed to reach out.
Kubly added that anyone can go to the Council meetings and talk during the "items not on the agenda"
public comment portion of the meeting. Eastham stated he doesn't like that opportunity because he feels
Vaughan needs to talk directly to the Mayor.
Sara Barron (Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition) asked if the funding for Habitat for Humanity
is included in recommendation to Council. Eastham agreed it would be included in the recommendation.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
OVERVIEW OF HOUSING PRO FORMA TEMPLATE:
Lehmann gave an update on the Housing Pro Forma noting it only affects rental housing projects, though
HCDC will have expected rents and sales prices for owner -occupied projects from the application.
Lehmann explained various items on the Pro Forma. The Pro Forma spreadsheet has instructions which
explains each line item and what they need. Generally when looking at rental projects, costs are
anticipated to increase faster than rents, so the City assumes 2% rent and 3% expense increases. The
Gross Amount of Income is revenue coming in from rents based on the HUD -allowable rent times by the
number of units. There is a line for other income, but it is almost never used because it can be difficult to
anticipate what that income might be, usually it's things like money -operated laundry machines, etc.
Tenant Contribution is other payments like parking or storage space. Gross revenue is all those items
added up. For vacancy loss, we generally assume 5% but it can be higher depending on demographics or
clientele. Revenue minus vacancy creates the Effective Gross Income which is the amount of revenue
expected in a given year. Expenses are pretty straightforward; insurance, maintenance and structural
repairs (which is generally around 1% of the price of the property), management fees (usually between
5% and 7% but some nonprofits don't charge management fees), miscellaneous expenses (accounting,
legal, advertising, etc.). Lehmann noted the City bases their estimates on the Iowa Finance Authority.
With regards to property taxes, a lot of nonprofits do not have to pay property taxes other than the first
year which may result in a negative cash flow that year. The actual cash flow is revenue minus expenses.
Operating reserves should be no less than $350 per unit, it is better to see more as IFA has higher
reserve requirements than the City. Finally the debt coverage ratio is important, a 1:1 debt coverage ratio
means the operating income exactly matches operating expenses. The City needs to see a minimum of
1.2:1 by year three to show enough cash flow to support the project in case something not anticipated
occurs. Some affordable housing lenders use a debt coverage ratio of 1.15.
Vaughan thanked Lehmann for the information as it is very helpful.
Eastham feels the City should follow IFA levels, that their standards are currently different. Lehmann
agreed and will double check that for the future to make sure the City is lined up with IFA for consistency
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 17, 2019
Page 11 of 12
STAFF/COMMISSION COMMENT:
Lehmann announced that Bob Lamkins has officially resigned from HCDC due to time constraints. The
vacancy will be announced on January 22 and per bylaws, the preference is for someone who is
receiving rental assistance or for someone with a financial background.
Lehmann noted the next meeting is February 21. The agenda will include monitoring reports, CDBG/
HOME application question and answer session (applications are due January 18), the emerging funds
applications and the fair housing study. Regarding emerging applications Lehmann wanted to know the
Commission's preference on doing a question/answer period or just allocating amounts due to the small
funding. The consensus of the Commission was to see how many applications and if there were more
than 5 applications to do two sessions, but if under 5 then review at the next meeting with the
CBDG/HOME applications. Brouse noted that if the deadline for applications has to be flexible so more
agencies can get them submitted they should extend the deadline. Currently there is only one application
Lehmann has talked to others so thinks there are a few more applications in process; he will extend the
deadline if they don't receive at least 3 applications.
Lehmann passed out to the Commission an Income by Age, Race, and Location table that the City put
together after receiving questions, he thought the Commission might be interested in the data.
The Request for Proposals is out for the Consolidated Plan so that review will begin shortly. The City is
also reviewing affordable housing programs and staff will bring it to the Commission when it is complete.
Eastham asked about the Housing Pro Forma template and if there would be a rental table included.
Lehmann confirmed it is included in the application.
Eastham noted the Council decided not to follow HCDC's recommendation to allocate an additional
$200,000 to the NEX Project to further reduce rents. He stated the project will build 32 units termed
"affordable" and they provided a rent table for each of those units. He examined the rent table from the
perspective of a tenant making $18,000 annually, which is higher than the average income for the City's
Section 8 program, and within the range of households with rent costs more than 50% of their income
(called high cost burden households). When reviewing the proposed rents from that perspective, 27 of the
32 so-called affordable units would require more than 50% of the income of the tenants. He wanted
HCDC to be aware that low income housing tax credit (LIHTC) projects are not automatically an avenue
for low cost burden rental housing. In fact most LIHTC projects' proposed rents provide high cost burden
housing. That is why he requested HCDC to ask Council for additional funds. The Council declined the
request in part because they interpreted $200,000 resulting in only an increase of three units having very
low rents over the one unit in the developer's original proposal. The reason Council thought $200,000
would not "buy" enough additional low rent units was because in the developer's scenario presented to
Council, the $200,000 would reduce the commercial borrowing and the debt from the commercial
borrowing by about $12,000 per year but the $200,000 would be paid back to the City at 1% over a 17
year period which would be additional debt service. Eastham feels Council did not get accurate and
complete information on HCDC's wishes to understand how much that $200,000 would decrease rents
over how many units. Looking at the letter the developer wrote to Council with their suggestion, they did
not have all the information and didn't realize they didn't have to pay that $200,000 back and it would not
increase their debt service. Eastham proposes that future LIHTC applicants be instructed better on
measures to decrease their proposed rents down to a level that is actually affordable to low income
households. He added that just using 40% or 60% of the AMI as a rent guide is not actually affordable as
most rent prices are well above what can be afforded at the average medium income. It is important to
look at what the rents are, not want the percent of AMI is and if the Commission is going to negotiate with
Council we need to make sure Council understands clearly what is being negotiated.
McKinstry acknowledged it was good Eastham brought this topic up and that the Commission made that
recommendation because it is a process of education for Council, the Commission, and the applicants.
ADJOURNMENT:
Brouse moved to adjourn. Alter seconded. Passed 7-0
Housing and Community Development Commission
January 17, 2019
Page 12 of 12
Housing and Community
Development Commission
Attendance Record
Name
Terms Exp.
7/10
9/20
10/11
11/15
12/20
1117
---
Vacant
Alter, Megan
7/1/21
X
X
X
X
X
X
Brouse, Mitch
7/1/21
X
X
X
X
X
X
Eastham, Charlie
7/1/20
X
X
X
X
X
X
Fixmer-Oraiz, Vanessa
7/1/20
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
Harms, Christine
7/1/19
X
X
X
X
X
X
Lamkins, Bob
7/1/19
O/E
O/E
X
O/E
O/E
McKinstry, John
7/1/17
X
X
X
X
X
X
Padron, Maria
7/1/20
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
Vaughan, Paula
7/1/19
X
X
X
X
X
X
• Resigned from Commission
Kew
X
= Present
0
= Absent
O/E
= Absent/Excused
---
Vacant
+ r
ui �1 lat
• yyrrmr��
CITY Ok IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
March 12, 2019
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Human Rights Commission: January 24
Item Number: 5-d-
M
.d.
Approved Minutes
Human Rights Commission
January 24, 2019
Emma J. Harvat, City Hall
Members Present: Jeff Falk, Cathy McGinnis, Bijou Maliabo, Jessica Ferdig, Barbara
Kutzko, Tahuanty Pena, Adil Adams, Jonathon Munoz.
Members Absent: Noemi Ford.
Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers.
Recommendation to Council: Yes
By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends to City Council funding the below
organizations for the Social Justice and Racial Equity Grant as shown below for FY19.
Agency
Request
Recommendation
Iowa Harm Reduction
$10,577.00
$10,577.00
Refugee and Immigrant
Association
$12,000.00
$12,000.00
University of Iowa Labor
Center
$15,200.00
$15,200.00
Inside Out Reentry
$7,000.00
$7,000.00
University of Iowa Mood
Disorders Center
$11,460.00
$11,460.00
Shelter House
$10,600.00
$10,600.00
Access 2 Independence
$5,260.00
$5,260.00
Neighborhood Centers of JC
& South District
Neighborhood Association
$2,324.00
$2,324.00
Total
$74,421.00
$74,421.00
Call to Order: The meeting was called to'order at 5:47 PM.
Approval of January 8, 2019 Meeting Minutes: Munoz moved to approve the
minutes; the motion was seconded by Falk. A vote was taken, and the motion passed 7-
0. (Maliabo not present).
Social Justice and Racial Equity Grant: (McGinnis steps away from the dais and
does not participate due to a conflict of interest with one of the grant applicants).
Falk gave an overview of the rubric used and the ranking sheet used to evaluate each
grant. Grants were scored based on a total 100 point scale, the organizational
information is worth 10 points, the proposal itself is worth up to 60 points and the
funding amount requested is worth up to 30 points. The rubric serves as a guideline.
Approved Minutes
Human Rights Commission
January 24, 2019
Emma J. Harvat, City Hall
The Excel spreadsheet used for this process calculated each Commissioner's point
totals for each applicant so that the application with the highest points ranked as
number 1 and the lowest point ranked 26. For the overall ranking it went the opposite
way. The grant application with the lowest average amongst Commissioners got ranked
26 and the highest average got ranked 1 (last in line to get funding request
recommended).
There are six top ranked applications that if fully funded fell under the $75,000.
Iowa Harm Reduction 26
$10,577.00
Refugee and Immigrant Association 25
$12,000.00
University of Iowa Labor Center 24
$15,200.00
Inside Out Reentry 23
$7,000.00
University of Iowa Mood Disorder Center
22
$11,460.00
Shelter House 21
$10,600.00
Total
$66,837.00
Munoz asked who had received funding in the past two grant cycles.
FY17
Organization
Amount
Inside Out Reentry
$3000.00
Iowa Legal Aid
$2200.00
JC Affordable Housing Coalition
$2500.00
World of Bikes, IC Bike Library, City of Iowa
Cit
$3250.00
Sankofa Outreach Connection
$13,500.00
Total
$24,450.00
FY18
Organization
Amount
Healthy Kids School Based Health
$12,300.00
Shelter House
$5000.00
Center for Worker Justice
$10,900.00
Total
$28,200.00
Ferdig asked if Shelter House had received funding for this specific program in FY18, to
which staff replied no.
2
Approved Minutes
Human Rights Commission
January 24, 2019
Emma J. Harvat, City Hall
The current FY19 rankings leave $8163.00 remaining to be allocated. The sixth ranked
lowest average, Successful Living, requested $16,320.00, which if recommended would
go over the $75,000 allocated.
Munoz thinks the Commission should spread the wealth, instead of continuously
funding Shelter House. Ferdig commented on this as well.
To encourage diversity of applications and in a year when the funding has been
increased to $75,000, Munoz believes the Commission should not allocate to the
Shelter House who would under the current rankings receive funding for FY19 while still
receiving funding for FY 18. Kutzko pointed out that the FY19 proposal from Shelter
House is a different program than was funded in FY18.
Adams suggested asking the City Council to increase the funding from $75,000 this
year to allow for Successful Living to be fully funded.
Munoz pointed out that the Shelter House is ranked at #21 and so it would be the last of
the top six to push out of the top rankings and reiterated that Shelter House had
received funding in FY18 even if it was for a different program. Munoz asked
Commissioners to think about consecutive funding for a well -endowed organization.
Falk asked him to further explain his concern.
Munoz pointed out that his problem is not with the Shelter House application but that
there is an increase in money from $25,000 to $75,000 for FY19 and funding the same
organization did not seem prudent. It would be better to provide funding to organizations
with more diverse representations.
Kutzko agreed with Munoz's comment to be a little more diverse in selection and the
Commission may want to consider spreading the wealth a little more by not giving the
full asking amount to applicants who have received funding in the past.
Falk looks upon it differently, he sees it as giving the money for an activity and not to an
organization. If the activity is new, then in his mind that is worthwhile or a consideration.
This is what he tried to pay attention to, whether the proposal was something new or
not.
Munoz thinks that the Commission keeps recommending funding to well -endowed
organization and does not pay attention to newer organizations that were established in
Iowa City that have more diverse board members. He believes that if the Commission
does not give them a chance, who will, and that concerns him.
Approved Minutes
Human Rights Commission
January 24, 2019
Emma J. Harvat, City Hall
Falk noted that Munoz's concern might be a good concern but that as Commission
members they have no idea of the diversity of an applicant's board.
Munoz concurred but pointed out that the application does ask for the year the
organization was established, its annual budget, and whether it has received funding
from the City in the past.
Pena asked if the Commission wanted to move Shelter House further down on the list.
Pena, like Falk, looked at the idea and the execution of the idea, not the organization.
But he noted Munoz made a valid point, in that resources should not be focused on the
same organizations.
Falk is not in favor of changing the current rankings but thinks the Commission should
take into consideration in communicating with the City Council that they need to be
more explicit in terms of what they are looking for because the message he got is that it
should be a new program and not a new organization.
Munoz finds Falk's comment to be an unfair shifting of responsibility, to say that the City
Council needs to direct the Commission to decide what to do. It is the Commission's call
on what to recommend. Further it is the Commission's responsibility to make decisions
that promote social justice, race and equity concerns. Munoz does not think that
$10,600.00 should be going to an organization that got funding in FY18. Munoz moved
that Shelter House should not be funded and that the Commission should go to the next
highest ranked applicant. (Motion lacked a second).
Falk inquired as to whether there are any other applicants that, based on Munoz's
concern, should be singled out
Munoz said he singled Shelter House out because it was sixth ranked (#21) and the
only organization out of that six that got funding in FY18 and would get it for FY19 too.
In terms of the diversity of board members, and all those considerations, he was
pointing out his thought processes as far as rankings and does not know the actual
racial demographics of the Shelter House board. The major concern for him was that
Shelter House was funded last year.
Pena asked if Shelter House should be taken out in an informal poll. Munoz in the
negative, remarking that if the Commission doesn't start emphasizing lesser known
organizations, the Commission will never progress in terms of the goals of this City
Council.
Ferdig mentioned that because the rules at this time do not prohibit an organization
from being funded for two consecutive years that it would seem harsh to deny Shelter
House's request, Ferdig will vote in favor of Shelter House being recommended funding
il
Approved Minutes
Human Rights Commission
January 24, 2019
Emma J. Harvat, City Hall
but would ask in the future for a restriction to be added that an organization cannot be
funded in consecutive years even if for a new or different proposal.
(Maliabo present)
Falk pointed out the disparity in the rankings and that it is the average that winds up
being used. He thought perhaps next time he should include the average and the
standard deviation.
Ferdig asked fellow Commission members whether they felt the population that will be
served by these programs reflects diverse populations, specifically do the funding
recommendations represent a diversity of populations of persons served. Pena felt most
the applications were targeting the same groups.
Adams wanted to know whether the Commission is interested in changing the policy so
that organizations only get funding once every five years, because the community has
new organizations and we need all the organizations involved to serve a diverse
community. Adams also would like to make a recommendation to the City Council to
get more funding for the grants because $75,000 is not enough.
Falk finds that questions with procedures come up when you are involved in doing the
procedure instead of thinking about it before hand. Falk suggested that Commissioners
keep in mind what some of their challenges were in this process and that a meeting be
held in the future to go over things and make a list and shift to the City Council to
improve the process. If there are things they think the Commission needs to make a
good decision, they need to be placed in the rubric as additions or observations.
Munoz responded that there is a difference between a rubric and discretion. Judgments
are based on the Commission's discretion and the Commission does not need a rubric
to tell them what is right from wrong. Munoz does not need City Council to tell him that
he should emphasis diversity of an applicant's board as far as making
recommendations on allocating funding.
Pena agrees that if there are restrictions moving forward on consecutive funding it
would create more opportunities to new organizations.
Munoz moves to recommend the top six ranked applicants for funding for FY19,
Maliabo seconded, motion passed 7-0.
This leaves $8100.63 left for funding recommendations. The seventh ranked applicant
(Successful Living #20) is over that amount by $8084.31
Approved Minutes
Human Rights Commission
January 24, 2019
Emma J. Harvat, City Hall
Pena mentioned that these are good proposals and would like to recommend for all to
be funded but ultimately, he believes the Commission should stick to the amount
allocated by the City Council and to stay within that budget.
Munoz proposed to skip over Successful Living and to fully recommend funding for
Access 2 Independence #17 and Johnson County Neighborhood Centers and South
District Neighborhood Association #16. Munoz's reasoning is that it would fund two
different projects for two different organizations and would create diversity of
populations being served. Any organizations ranked higher than these two could not be
fully funded because there is only $8100.63 remaining.
Ferdig pointed out that Successful Living's proposal only included expenses for the
entry fees for their clients to events without any other overhead costs to consider.
Because of this it would only cut the scope of the project but still make it possible and
proving a worthwhile endeavor for the organization that ranked next in line. Falk
concurred with Ferdig.
Falk spoke on finding it difficult to look at organizational budgets and comparing that to
what they want funding for and whether it is an appropriate amount. Falk has little idea
on how to evaluate any of that and if he had a better idea, he would want a lot more
information than the organizations have been asked to supply. Falk also does not want
to decide whether an amount lesser is appropriate for an organization. Falk recalled last
year that the Commission decided it wasn't going to fiddle with amounts and just
recommend funding an organization for what they ask. Falk did not mention this as an
argument against doing things but just noting how he operated in this process.
Munoz asked if Falk is proposing for Successful Living's funding request to be slashed
in half. Falk responded he was not slashing it in half, he is recommending giving it half
as opposed to giving it zero.
Ferdig said she was proposing this reduction in allocation to Successful Living because
its proposal is only for entry fees for their clients and that is something that could be cut
in half.
Staff mentioned that some of the discussion could be assisted by looking at the
applications. As part of the process those applying must answer questions on whether
they have received City funds, and whether the proposal could succeed if partially
funded. Staff reported that those questions are intentionally asked because of past
challenges in evaluating. how funding should be allocated.
Munoz, regarding his proposal for recommending funding for Johnson County
Neighborhood Centers and the South District Neighborhood Association and Access 2
Independence, mentioned that Ferdig had asked about the diversity of the populations
IJ
Approved Minutes
Human Rights Commission
January 24, 2019
Emma J. Harvat, City Hall
being served and that in his opinion not many applicants adequately addressed
disability and that is why he liked Access 2 Independence and that it would be more
prudent to fully fund two organizations than to fund only one at half.
Ferdig pointed out that the Commission could opt not to use the remaining $8100.63.
Pena feels that cutting the budget for Successful Living, acknowledging the valid
rationale, would be based upon assumptions. The Commission did not create its budget
and do not know all the operation behind it. Pena feels more comfortable following
Munoz and likes the idea of recommending the funding for more projects.
Ferdig replied that she did not assume anything. It is stated in the grant proposal by
Successful Living --the funding will go towards entry fees. Ferdig followed this up by
adding that she had ranked Access 2 Independence two in her overall rankings.
Munoz moves to totally fund Access 2 Independence and the Neighborhood Centers of
Johnson County with the South District Neighborhood Association, Adams seconded,
the motion passed 5-2. Falk and Ferdig in the negative. Falk noted that he had ranked
Access 2 Independence as his number one in overall rankings.
Staff will set up a Commission work session to discuss opportunities for improving the
grant process in the future.
(McGinnis returns to dais to participate).
Black History Proclamation: Munoz will accept the proclamation from the City Council
at its February 5 meeting date.
Reports of Commissioners: Maliabo participated in two classrooms at Liberty High
School for its Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. One of the classrooms provided Black history
to students who were immigrants and not as familiar with King and his legacy.
Falk also participated in the Liberty High School event and mentioned he learned a lot
more on King's anti -war stance than he knew before.
Kutkzo attended the City's Martin Luther King, Jr., Celebration. She and her husband
also participated at the West High School Martin Luther King, Jr., Day. They discussed
their personal experiences living through the civil rights movement.
Adjournment: Motion to adjourn at 6:48 PM.
7
Member Attendance Sheet
Member
Term
Exp.
1/8
1/24 2/"l 4/16 5/21 6/18 7/16 8/20 9/17 10/15 11/19 12/10
Maliabo
112021
Present
Present
McGinnis
112021
Present
Present -
Munoz
1/2021
Excused
Present
Kutzko
1/2020
Present
Present
Falk
1/2020
Present
Present
Pena
1/2020
Present
Present
Adams
1/2022
Excused
Present
Ferdi
1/2022
Present
Present
Ford
1/2022
Present
Excused
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/F.xeused
NM = No meeting
--- = Not a Member
Requested Amount
Organization
#34
Successful Living
$16,320.00
#35
Iowa Harm Reduction
$10,577.00
#36
Humanize My Hoodie DBA Born Leaders United
$37,045.00
#37
Center for Worker Justice
$12,951.60
#38
Access 2 Independence of the Eastern Iowa Corridor
$5,260.00
#39
Big Brothers Big Sisters of Johnson County
$15,000.00
#40
South District Neighborhood Association
$10,000.00
#41
Sankofa Outreach Connection
$10,000.00
#42
University of Iowa Labor Center
$15,200.00
#43
Refugee and Immigrant Association
$12,000.00
#44
NAACP Iowa City Adult Branch
$15,000.00
#45
Shelter House Community Shelter and Transistion Services
$10,600.00
#46
Inside Out Reentry Community
$7,000.00
#47
Sankofa Outreach Connection
$14,000.00
#48
IC Compassion
$10,000.00
#49
United Action for Youth
$24,800.00
#SO
University of Iowa Mood Disorders Center
$11,460.00
#51
Dream Center, Center for Disability & Development, IC Parks and Recreation
$15,365.00
#52
Sudanese Community Center
$40,550.00
#53
Houses into Homes
$25,000.00
#54
Rape Victim Advocacy Program
$27,600.00
#55
Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County, South District Neighborhood Association
$2,324.00
#56
Fifth Ward Saints North
$4,500.00
#57
Boys and Girls Club Cedar Rapids, Iowa City Unit
$17,000.00
#58
Emma Goldman Clinic
$9,980.00
#59
Domestic Violence Intervention Program
$8,080.00
Total $387,612.60
Rankings for Social Justice and Racial Equity Grant Submissions FY19
Requested Amount
Average Rank
Adams Falk
Ferdig
Kutzko
Maliabo Mufioz
Pefia
Organization
#34
Successful Living
$16,320.00
11.14286
20 1
2
7 26
17
21 4
#35
Iowa Harm Reduction
$10,577.00
4.857143
26 9
4
3 1
9
1 7
#36
Humanize My Hoodie DBA Born Leaders United
$37,045.00
19.28571
2 17
19
19 14
21
24 21
#37
Centerfor Worker Justice
$12,951.60
13.71429
13 21
3
20 23
4
20 5
#38
Access 2Independence of the Eastem Iowa Corridor
$5,260.00
12.42857
17 12
1
2 25
19
11 17
#39
Big Brothers Big Sisters of Johnson County
$15,000.00
15.57143
7 22
22
11 11
16
15 12
1140
South District Neighborhood Association
$10,000.00
18.42857
4 8
15
13 24
20
26 23
941
Sankofa Outreach Connection
$10,000.00
12.71429
15 13
10
9 4
26
9 18
#42
University of Iowa Labor Center
$15,200.00
9.428571
24 23
7
15 6
12
2 1
#43
Refugee and Immigrant Association
$12,000.00
8.714286
25 16
6
6 3
10
7 13
#44
NAACP Iowa City Adult Branch
$15,000.00
14.28571
10 24
11
26 20
1
10 8
#45
Shelter House Community Shelter and Transistion Services
$10,600.00
11
21 6
5
22 2
2
25 15
#46
Inside Out Reentry Community
$7,000.00
9.857143
23 10
8
14 16
3
4 14
#47
Sankofa Outreach Connection
$14,000.00
20.42857
1 20
14
21 21
24
19 24
#48
IC Compassion
$10,000.00
11.57143
18 14
13
16 12
8
8 10
#49
United Action for Youth
$24,800.00
14.28571
10 25
12
1 5
18
14 25
#50
University of Iowa Mood Disorders Center
$11,460.00
10.57143
22 7
17
12 17
15
3 3
#51
Dream Center, Centerfor Disability & Development, IC Parks and Recreation
$15,365.00
11.57143
18 15
20
4 13
7
13 9
#52
Sudanese Community Center
$40,550.00
19.14286
3 5
24
25 22
13
23 22
#53
Houses into Homes
$25,000.00
13
14 4
9
10 15
25
22 6
#54
Rape Victim Advocacy Program
$27,600.00
16
6 19
23
8 19
6
17 20
#55
Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County, South District Neighborhood Association
$2,324.00
12.57143
16 3
21
17 a
14
6 19
#56
Fifth Ward Saints North
$4,500.00
14.85714
B 18
25
24 7
23
5 2
#57
Boys and Girls Club Cedar Rapids, Iowa City Unit
$17,000.00
17.14286
5 11
26
23 9
22
18 11
958
Emma Goldman Clinic
$9,980.00
14.57143
9 26
16
5 18
5
16 16
#59
Domestic Violence Intervention Program
$8,080.00
13.85714
12 2
18
18 10
11
12 26
Total $387,612.60
Funds Available
$75,000.00
+ r
ui �1 lat
• yyrrmr��
CITY Ok IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
March 12, 2019
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Senior Center Commission: January 24
Item Number: 5.e.
Approved Minutes
January 24, 2019
MINUTES
SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION
January 24, 2019
ROOM 205, IOWA CITY/JOHNSON COUNTY SENIOR CENTER
Members Present: Kenn Bowen, Cheryll Clamon, Lorraine Dorfman, Scott
Finlayson, Zach Goldsmith, Hiram Webber
Members Absent: None
Staff Present: LaTasha DeLoach, Kristin Kromray
Others Present: John Schmidt, Angela McConville
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order by Bowen at 4:00 PM.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
None.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE NOVEMBER 15, 2018 MEETING:
Motion: To accept the minutes from the November 15, 2018 meeting with
amendments. Motion carried on a vote of 6/0. Dorfman/Webber
PUBLIC DISCUSSION:
104 rem
COMMISSION ASSIGNMENTS:
Webber will attend an upcoming City Council meeting.
Bowen will attend an upcoming Board of Supervisors meeting.
OPERATIONAL OVERVIEW:
DeLoach reported staff has been working on editing and refining the policies.
DeLoach stated the city attorney reviewed the policies in the commission packet
and had a few minor updates and suggestions.
1
Approved Minutes
January 24, 2019
Commissioners discussed the city attorney's suggestion that in the In -House
Agencies policy the term "non-profit corporations" is too limiting. Commissioners
decided to change it to "not for profit organizations" to lend more flexibility.
Goldsmith asked if this policy would limit the Senior Center from renting space to
for profit organizations. DeLoach stated that this policy was specifically for
organizations requesting free operational space; for profit organizations would
need rental agreement.
In the Visitor and Staff Use of Furniture and Equipment policy under Participant
Use of Exercise Rooms and Equipment, under #2, "Center members" was
changed to "Participants". This lends more flexibility if the Senior Center wishes
to have a trial week for non-members and use exercise equipment. One
grammatical error was updated.
In the Non -Medical Emergency Response and Prevention policy, under #4,
"personnel" was changed to "individual" and in #5 "identified" to "required".
Motion: To approve the Hours of Operation policy. Motion carried on a
vote of 6/0. Goldsmith/Dorfman
Motion: To approve the In -House Agencies policy as amended. Motion
carried on a vote of 6/0. Webber/Goldsmith
Motion: To approve the Insurance Coverage policy. Motion carried on a
vote of 6/0. Dorfman/Goldsmith
Motion: To approve the Medical Emergency policy. Motion carried on a vote
of 6/0. Goldsmith/ Webber
Motion: To approve the Non -Medical Emergency Response and Prevention
policy as amended. Motion carried on a vote of 6/0. Webber/Finlayson
Motion: To approve the Visitor and Staff Use of Furniture and Equipment
policy as amended. Motion carried on a vote of 6/0. Goldsmith/Webber
Motion: To approve the Whistleblower policy. Motion carried on a vote of
6/0. Finlayson/Dorfman
DeLoach reported Johnson County Public Health (JCPL) will be expanding their
partnership with the Senior Center by having dedicated hours in the building.
Room G03 is currently occupied part time by the Visiting Nurses Association
(VNA) who do a number of health-related services. JCPL will be able to
complement the VNA by offering additional services such as HIV and Hepatitis C
screenings, as well as having staff available for questions.
2
Approved Minutes
January 24, 2019
DeLoach is also working with JCPL for the Senior Center to become a point of
dispensing in case of a major crisis. Finlayson asked if there would be training for
this designation. DeLoach replied there would be staff training for this. Webber
asked if staff is trained in first aid, such as the Heimlich maneuver. Staff receives
first aid/CPR/AED training every two years. McConville stated that she had just
recently become a trainer for the community response team, which trains public
volunteers to help in times of crisis.
DeLoach reported she spoke with the Parks and Rec director regarding the WWII
memorial block. They are willing to place t the WWII memorial block in the
veteran's section of the Oakland Cemetery.
Motion: To allow DeLoach to work with the Parks and Rec department to
place the WWII memorial block at the Oakland Cemetery. Motion carried on
a vote of 6/0. Finlayson/Goldsmith
COMMISSION DISCUSSION:
Angela McConville attended the meeting. She works for the City of North Liberty
and organizes their senior meals. She also lives in Oxford and is potentially
interested in applying for the Johnson County at large commission vacancy. Staff
will work to send her the appropriate paperwork.
The Senior Center Steering Council has been dissolved. This group was
originally formed to be a communication hub for the various working groups and
Commission. Over the years it has become more difficult to get people involved
in this group. The member driven working committees (Membership and Program
Committees) will now report directly to the Commission.
John Schmidt, who is the chair of the Membership Committee discussed some of
the projects this committee works on. They do tours of the Senior Center as well
as coordinate new member breakfasts. The most recent breakfast had 40 people
attend.
Dorfman, who is on the Program Committee, reported they are starting to discuss
summer programming. Dorfman noted that she is concerned that they will not be
able to get interested instructors who want to teach outside of the Senior Center
building. DeLoach agreed it will take some networking and it is possible that
there are members or potential members in outlying areas who do not yet know
we are looking to expand programming in this way who may be potential
instructors.
DeLoach discussed that she would like to reframe the Senior Center as a place
for the community as the go to place for expertise and information in the area of
aging. Finlayson asked if there are training opportunities for staff. DeLoach said
that there is money in the budget for staff to attend conferences. Both Buhman
3
Approved Minutes
January 24, 2019
and Edrington will be attending upcoming conferences. Goldsmith asked for a
report on what conferences staff are attending.
DeLoach will give an update on the new Senior Center pantry at the next
meeting.
Motion: To Adjourn. Motion carried on a vote of 6/0. Goldsmith/Webber
4
Approved Minutes
January 24, 2019
Senior Center Commission
Attendance Record
Name
Tenn Expires
2/16/18
3/15/18
4/19/18
5/17/18
6/21/18
7/19/18
8/16/18
9/20/18
10/18/18
11/15/18
12/13/18
1/24/18
Kenn Bowen
12/31/20
X
N/M
X
X
X
X
X
NM
X
X
NM
X
Cheryll Clamon
12/31/18
O/E
N/M
X
X
O/E
X
X
NM
X
X
NM
X
Lorraine Dorfman
12/31/21
X
N/M
X
X
X
X
O/E
NM
X
X
NM
X
Robert (Scott)
Finlayson
12/31/20
--
--
X
X
O/E
X
X
NM
X
O/E
NM
X
Zach Goldsmith
12/31/21
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
X
X
NM
X
Kathy Mitchell
12/31/19
X
N/M
X
X
X
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
Margaret Reese
12/31/17
X
N/M
X
X
X
X
X
NM
X
X
NM
--
Hiram (Rick)
Webber
12/31/20
X
N/M
X
X
X
X
X
NM
X
X
NM
X
Key: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
-- = Not a member
Item Number: 5.f.
+ r
ui �1 lat
• yyrrmr��
CITY Ok IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
March 12, 2019
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Telecommunications Commission: December 17
APPROVED
Iowa City Telecommunications Commission
12117/2018 Meeting Minutes
1 of 6
Minutes
Iowa City Telecommunications Commission
December 17, 2018 — 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: Matthew Brenton, Paul Gowder, James Pierce
Members Absent: Kyla Paterson
Staff Present: Ty Coleman, Sue Dulek
Others Present: Bond Drager
Recommendations to Council: None
Approval of Minutes:
Gowder moved and Pierce seconded a motion to approve the October 22, 2018 minutes as
presented. The motion passed unanimously.
Announcements of Commissioners:
Brenton mentioned that he had been asked by a co-worker about a company called Mobilitie
after he noticed some equipment labeled with their name mounted to a local utility pole.
Coleman said he had not heard anything about this company or its efforts to install equipment in
Iowa City, but that he would look into it. Brenton wondered if the equipment was related to 5G
data technology.
Short Public Announcements:
None.
Post -franchise role of the Telecommunications Commission:
Sue Dulek from the City Attorney's Office introduced herself to the group and said she was
present to answer any questions as the group discusses what it wants its role to be and what it
wants to propose to City Council. Dulek clarified the difference between the concepts of being a
City Council -appointed commission vs. becoming a community group or advisory board. She
noted that, while a council -appointed group may report to Council and is subject to open
meetings and open records laws, a community group with a specific interest could periodically
report or make suggestions to Council and there would not be an official tie between the group
and the City.
Dulek referred to the Climate Action Committee and a bike advisory group as examples of
groups that are not official City boards or commissions, though they are still able to present
themselves to Council when desired and may be called upon by the Council at times for
updates or recommendations related to a particular topic. Dulek said that no matter how the
APPROVED
Iowa City Telecommunications Commission
12/17/2098 Meeting Minutes
2of6
Commission chooses to see itself, it will have to redefine its role now that the local franchise has
expired.
Brenton asked about what happens to the section of the City ordinance that established the
Telecommunications Commission now that the franchise is expired. Dulek said at some point
the Council would need to take some kind of action, but it may be more likely that portions of the
ordinance would be revised rather than removing the franchise enabling ordinance altogether.
Brenton referred to the Climate Action Committee meeting minutes, included in the meeting
packet, that provided answers to questions that group had as it discussed the differences
between an advisory committee vs. a formal council -appointed committee. Brenton said these
answers were helpful in providing clarity on the distinction between the two types of groups.
Gowder said that given that the Commission had already been operating with a small amount of
influence and no actual authority, he felt that becoming an advisory board would not make
sense. He suggested that either the Council should find a meaningful role for the Commission
going forward or that the group should be dissolved. Dulek said that the Council is seeking the
Commission's recommendation on whether it should continue to be a Council -appointed group
and what its role should be. Dulek noted that nearly all of the commissions are advisory in
nature and do not make final decisions.
Gowder noted that a group like the Planning and Zoning Commission seems to perform some
more active duties in a more official capacity, such as holding hearings for initial determinations.
He asked if there were other commissions that did not typically perform relatively formal duties.
Dulek clarified that the Planning and Zoning Commission was, in fact, advisory in nature,
despite carrying out some of its responsibilities in a more formal way. Dulek said that the City's
Senior Center Commission would be similar to the Telecommunications Commission in that it
makes recommendations about the operation and programming of the Senior Center, but does
not make the final decisions. The Parks and Recreation Commission and the Public Art
Committee were other examples of groups that makes recommendations, but without the
authority to make the final decisions.
Gowder asked if there is anything in the domain of telecommunications that the Council has
control over, comparable to the Senior Center and city parks. If so, Gowder suggested that the
Telecommunications Commission's role would be similar to those Council -appointed groups.
Dulek suggested that the group should think about whether there is a role in the community for
which it feels it is important for the City to have a group that meets periodically to consider the
issues related to the role and reports back.
Brenton said that such a role could exist if the group shifted its focus towards advocating for
access to faster and more affordable broadband, as well as looking into municipal broadband.
Brenton mentioned the community group that had presented its desire and intentions to
collaborate with the Iowa City Community School District to provide WiFi to neighbors near
school facilities. He said it could be valuable to focus on whether the City can either provide
broadband or support options to improve the availability of alternatives, especially as it relates to
creating access for lower-income residents.
APPROVED
Iowa City Telecommunications Commission
12/17/2018 Meeting Minutes
3 of 6
Gowder recalled that the last time municipal broadband was brought up by the Council, there
seemed to be only tentative interest in investigating the options and said that if there was not a
prospect for the City having an interest in following up on the topic, then it would not be worth
the time of those who would participate in the group - but if there was an interest, then it would
be worth their time. Dulek suggested that the Commission could propose that the Council form
a committee that would explore municipal broadband with a defined agenda and would report
back in a set amount of time. Dulek referred to the Climate Action Committee and how they had
been given a period of time to develop a proposal for the Climate Action Plan, which was
adopted by the Council, and then the Committee decided to keep an eye on things in more of an
informal manner.
Pierce said that if Council is interested in pursuing the topic, the group could take six months to
research and develop a plan that the City could feasibly carry out that would improve service,
broadband speeds, and affordability. Pierce said the group could also serve as the go-between
for people experiencing service or connection problems, but admitted that he didn't know of a
time when anyone had come to the group in need of assistance. Coleman said that customers
typically contact the Cable TV Office, which works with the local Mediacom staff to resolve an
issue or to at least obtain information to provide clarity to a situation. Coleman said that at one
time, the idea was that the Commission would play a part in mediating between two parties if an
issue escalated to that point. Brenton said the current duties state this, but that he didn't know
of a time when the Commission had served in an enforcement capacity and noted that with the
local franchise gone, the group wouldn't have the ability to enforce anything anyway.
Brenton agreed that it would make sense to ask City Council if there is interest in municipal
broadband and whether a group should be established to explore it. Gowder suggested that if
the Council reconstituted the group into a kind of municipal broadband investigatory
commission, it would confirm its commitment to doing something or at least to listening to a
report on the subject. Brenton said that if the Council confirmed its interest in pursuing
municipal broadband, then an advisory board could be created to investigate and report back in
six months or a year. Gowder added that it would only be worth the group's time if the majority
of Council was interested in voting for something related to the exploration of municipal
broadband. Brenton and Pierce agreed.
Dulek offered that the Commission could propose some practical details about how this kind of
group would operate, such as the number and types of members, for instance, whether they
should serve in a professional capacity in a telecommunications -related field or whether
members could simply be a part of the general public.
Pierce said it would be helpful to get some kind of estimate of how much funding the Council
thinks it would possibly be willing to commit towards carrying out a potential municipal
broadband system, should a feasible plan be developed and adopted. He said it would be
necessary to have a designated contact at the City, such as the City Manager, to determine an
amount that would be conceivable for this kind of thing.
Brenton said the group should write a proposal and asked if they should first send a message
about their intentions to Council or if the proposal should accompany it. Dulek suggested that
including a proposal with some basic points would make it easier for Council to talk about and
make decisions about the recommendation. Brenton asked if the group should come up with a
APPROVED
Iowa City Telecommunications Commission
12117/2018 Meeting Minutes
4of6
proposal and meet to vote on it. Coleman suggested the group form a subcommittee to develop
the proposal. Gowder said he would be willing to help someone to create a proposal. Pierce
said he would have time to devote to drafting one. All members agreed that Pierce and Gowder
would become the subcommittee. Sue said they should feel free to reach out to her with
questions as they develop the proposal. Brenton said that the group could vote on the proposal
at the next regularly -scheduled meeting of the Commission.
Pierce asked if it would make sense for one of the Commission members to go to a Council
meeting to present the proposal. Dulek said that the draft minutes from the next meeting's
discussion of the drafted proposal would make it to Council, where it could be discussed at an
upcoming work session. At that time, it is likely the Council would decide whether to meet with
the Commission and something could be scheduled. Dulek said anyone is welcome to attend a
council meeting and speak during the public comments portion.
Consumer Issues:
Brenton noted there were two months of reports in the packet. Brenton asked about the issue
involving a resident who reported that CenturyLink service was available for his neighbor's
residence, but not for his own. Coleman said the issue was still unresolved and that he has
continued to follow up with CenturyLink contacts and the resident has continued to stay in touch
with the Cable TV Office about the issue. Coleman said the last activity was that CenturyLink
staff reported the issue had been escalated again, but hasn't heard any more. Coleman said he
had recently encountered an acquaintance who he learned was working for CenturyLink and
asked her about who he should contact to advocate for action to be taken. Coleman said his
contact suggested he send her a message about the issue. He said he sent the message and
she had already responded that a new, escalated ticket had been submitted in their system.
Coleman said he was confident that his new contact would help to get the issue resolved in a
timely manner.
Mediacom Report:
Coleman said he received communication from local Mediacom staff that fiber maintenance
would be taking place on January 9, 2019 and that cable TV service would be affected.
Coleman said that typically this kind maintenance is done between the hours of midnight and 6
a.m. in order to minimize the number of customers impacted by the outage.
Coleman said he also received a letter from Mediacom that listed the rate increases that would
take place at the start of 2019. The local broadcast station and regional sports surcharges
continue to climb. The Family TV and Prime TV packages will increase as well. Coleman said
he looked back at past notices of increases and said that prices haven't jumped up by leaps and
bounds, but that the increases haven't necessarily been a slow trickle, either. Coleman said the
local broadcast station surcharge has seen the most significant change over time. This
surcharge is what Mediacom pays local stations to retransmit the primary TV networks,
including ABC, NBC, CBS, and Fox, and is out of Mediacom's control. Coleman said the letter
indicated that over the past nine years, this fee charged to cable companies had increased by
1,150 percent.
Local Access Reports:
Drager said The Library Channel continues to record storytimes and lectures and other common
program types. Coleman asked for a reminder of the date on which The Library Channel would
APPROVED
Iowa City Telecommunications Commission
12/17/2018 Meeting Minutes
5of6
cease to cablecast its programming in an effort to focus on online distribution. Drager said that
April 2, 2019 would be the final day of cablecasting for The Library Channel.
City Cable TV Office Report:
Coleman referred to the written report the Cable TV Office had submitted in the meeting packet
and added that City Channel 4 would soon be featuring its annual Holiday Music Marathon and
New Year's Summer Music Marathon, each running for 24 hours and featuring most of the
concerts Cable TV staff had recorded throughout the year, including the Iowa City UNESCO
City of Literature's Musick series, Friday Night Concerts, Market Music performances, and
more. Coleman said his staff had recently worked with the Senior Center to record a couple of
concerts and live stream them on Facebook. Coleman said he is promoting the marathons as
being a good option for background music for holiday gatherings.
Coleman said that the City Communications Team is starting to produce an audio podcast that
will offer a longer format for the discussion of issues of importance to the community. He said
the podcast's format will be conversational and that the first episode is on historic preservation.
Coleman said that the first episode will be made available sometime in the first half of January.
The podcast will be available on the City's website, the City Channel 4 website, and through
podcast applications such as SoundCloud and iTunes.
Adjournment:
Gowder moved and Pierce seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously.
Adjournment was at 6:07 p.m.
APPROVED
Iowa City Telecommunications Commission
12/17/2018 Meeting Minutes
6of6
TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
12 -MONTH ATTENDANCE RECORD
(x) = Present
(o) = Absent
(o/c) = Absent/Called (Excused)
Gowder
Bergus
Brenton
Johnk
01/22/2018
Meeting not held due
to lack of quorum.
vacant
02/26/2018
x
x
x
x
vacant
03/26/2018
x
x
x
x
vacant
Pierce
04/23/2018
x
x
x
x
x
05/21/2018
x
o/c
x
x
x
06/25/2018
x
x
x
o/c
x
07/23/2018
Meeting not held due
to lack of quorum.
vacant
vacant
08/27/2018
Meeting not held due
to lack of quorum.
vacant
vacant
9/24/2018
x
vacant
x
vacant
x
Paterson
10/22/2018
x
o
x
vacant
x
11/26/2018
Meeting not held due
to lack of quorum.
vacant
12/17/2018
x
o
x
vacant
x
(x) = Present
(o) = Absent
(o/c) = Absent/Called (Excused)