The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2020-09-01 CorrespondenceItem Number: 8.a. CITY OIF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 1, 2020 ATTACHMENTS: Description Anne Duggan - Bar behavior Leighton Hill - Urgent need to enforce Iowa City mask mandate Kellie Fruehlin From: Anne Duggan <annem.duggan@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2020 6:41 PM To: Council; John Thomas; Pauline Taylor; Bruce Teague; Mazahir Salih; Susan Mims; Janice Weiner; Laura Bergus Cr Geoff Fruin Subject: Bar behavior A RINK Dear Mayor Teague and members of the City Council, Here is a link to an article in the Cedar Rapids Gazette noting the land office business in downtown bars this last week, including the Summit, the Airliner, Bo James and others. https://www.theeazette.com/subject/news/education/maskiess-university-iowa-students bars covid 20200823 While this is a case of the barn waving the horse goodbye and the customers choosing to be reckless, I think that it is important for the city to condemn the mandate flouting on the part of the bar owners and managers. They opened up their establishments to crowds of unmasked people, in enclosed places, playing music at a level that means people need to yell to be heard, a perfect venue to expel the virus. We can talk all day about the UI's role in all this, but the city's responsibility starts when they bring their young and dumb selves into city limits and are allowed places to infect each other, the employees of the bars, and the rest of us. Please join me in condemning this behavior on the part of both the customers AND the owners and managers of the ba rs. Sincerely, Anne Duggan Sent from my iPad Kellie Fruehling From: Hill, Leighton <leighton-hill@uiowa.edu> Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020 8:17 PM To: Council Subject: Urgent need to enforce Iowa City mask mandate Attachments: Summit 8:17:20.JPG Ai R11K Dear City Council, My name is Leighton Hill, and I'm currently a graduate student in epidemiology at the University of Iowa. I am writing regarding concerns that I and many other students share about the lack of the mask mandate enforcement in Iowa City. I've attached a picture taken outside Summit on Tuesday August 17th, 2020 around 9:15 pm. This bar was one of many in downtown that is completely disregarding the mandate, which states the only restaurant -related exemption to the mask requirement is when one is seated and drinking/eating in a restaurant. The mandate also said masks must be worn whenever outdoors and social distancing at six feet is not possible. It is clear from this photo that this is not being followed and there is a lack of enforcement in any way by the city or its establishments. With our already rising number of COVID-19 cases, this will significantly increase the risk very quickly for the entire community as students return in large numbers. I am reaching out to anyone who may have a role in helping to enforce this mask mandate or create new, stricter guidelines. If bars/restaurants are allowed to be open, they absolutely need to be held accountable to the standards Iowa City has set in place or face consequences for their complete ignorance to health and safety. It is unethical to allow this irresponsible behavior to continue under our current circumstances. I am happy to talk more about this and work with anyone to brainstorm potential solutions. Thank you for reading this, and I hope to hear back soon. Sincerely, Leighton Hill 1 4 �r 06 1 k•e, ,fir Kellie Fruehling From: Geoff Fruin Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2020 3:40 PM To: Kellie Fruehling Subject: FW: Covid pandemic Please add to future correspondence. Thanks - From:LaTasha DeLoach Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2020 3:11 PM To: patriciathomann48@gmail.com Cc: Geoff Fruin <Geoff-Fruin@iowa-city.org> Subject: Fw: Covid pandemic Hi Patty, -:ft 8,c. Late Handouts Distributed -31-2Z)— (Date) 31-2Z)(Date) I received your second email asking that this email is sent to City Council. I am sending this over to the City Manager to get this to them as soon as he is able. Thank you for the wonderful follow up and compliment to the staff and programs of the Senior Center. Thank you, LaTasha From: Patricia Thomann <patriciathomann48@email.com> Sent: Thursday, August 27, 20201:54 PM To:LaTasha DeLoach Subject, Covid pandemic RISK Wow. Our communities worst fear is manifesting its awful wreckage. No surprise. But really I'm writing towards a positive approach. This community is composed of many talented artists. Some are performing artists, offering us/having offered the enjoyment of their special talents. So many I won't try to list them. We have Prairie Lights which brings fiction, poetry, essayist to read to us. We have many churches with beautiful choirs, etc. What if they brought their talents to the outdoors. Even prerecorded, run throughout the city over an intercom system. Listeners/watchers from their porches, front yards, at their windows, all safely distancing. Kind of like Christmas carolers for the shut-ins! Our community, our people are and have been suffering so many difficult emotions. We are hurting, despairing, worried. If there are ways to bring relief, to help us bind together as a community which looks for hope for our future, is there a way for our city government to reach out to the plethora of other community leaders to ask for ideas and ways to put ideas into action. I know city government is not the keeper of our personal souls. But you are leaders of paramount importance. The speakers who lead us toward the future. We so need that NOW! Thank you for all you do . Patty, t)afl48@aol.com --tt e, ry Kellie Fruehlin From: Lisa Bockenstedt <Ird5353@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, August 30, 2020 6:03 PM Late Handouts Distributed To: Council Subject: This article says "worst in the world " A (Date) I'm writing to you today to show you an article worth reading and to ask the city to please stop all large gatherings such as the sidewalk sale. I realize a mask mandate was put into place but go anywhere and you will see it's not being enforced. The mandate must be enforced! We need random patrolling and fines because this is totally out of control. Even though the sidewalk sales claim that masks will be mandatory you would have to be a fool to believe people will listen, its evident all over town people arent listening. I'm sending you the article and a link to my friends page Sara Anne Willette, she is working with auditor Rob Sand to hold the governor and test iowa responsible for fudging the covid numbers on purpose. Iowa City the worst in the world.... https://iowastartingline.com/202O/O8/3O/a mes-iowa-city-covid-outbreaks-are-worst-in-the-world/ Sara Anne Willette https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story fbid=10108356662972359&id=14808578 CITY OIF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 1, 2020 ATTACHMENTS: Item Number: 8.b. Description Carol deProsse - Video of another police shooting rocks the nation as Wisonsin man fights for his life Carol deProsse -Another one Zack Rundlett - Protesters hit by car Aaron Peter- Iowa City Police Kellie Fruehling From: Carol deProsse <lonetreefox@mac.com> Sent: Monday, August 24, 2020 11:54 AM To: Council; Bill Campbell Subject: Video of another police shooting rocks the nation as Wisconsin man fights for his life https: //protect-us.mimecast. com/s/GiUzCERyoLt8z7BINY3i3?domain=dailykos.com This email is from an external source. Kellie Fruehling From: Carol deProsse <lonetreefox@mac.com> Sent: Monday, August 24, 2020 4:02 PM To: Council; Tracy Jon Sargeant; Bill Campbell; Community Police Review Board Subject: Another one Ar R11K https://www.dailvkos.com/stories/2020/8/24/1971837/-Louisiana-police-fired-11-times-killing-Black-man-as-he- walked-away Kellie Fruehling From: Zack Rundlett <zrundlett@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2020 6:56 PM To: Council Subject: Protesters hit by car Af r RI K This incident is a direct result of your directives to the Iowa City Police Department. Your policy will no doubt lead to serious injury or death. Asa citizen of Iowa City I hold all of you responsible for allowing this incident as well as the previous incidents earlier this summer/spring. I have included below the Iowa Code related to blocking traffic. The "VICTIMS" must be held accountable for their part of this incident. 723.4 Disorderly conduct. A person commits a simple misdemeanor when the person does any of the following: 7. Without authority or justification, the person obstructs any street, sidewalk, highway, Zack Rundlett Kellie Fruehling From: Aaron Peter <arpeter8325@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2020 1:56 PM To: Council Subject: Iowa City Police i IR[SIK Council Members, I am writing as part of the "silent majority" to express my support for the Iowa City Police Department. I am sure you have been inundated with calls to "defund and dismantle" the ICPD. I implore you to pause and look around the country where they have tried this misguided and poorly thought out plan. Cities around the country that have defunded or disbanded units have seen violent crime rates raise dramatically. Defunding will only further contribute to this rise in crime here in our local community. As a resident of Iowa City I know the ICPD is full of extremely professional and well trained officers coming from a diverse background who love this community. Please don't throw them under the bus and please support them so good officers don't walk away. I also have a loved one who attends the Iowa Law School. A defunded ICPD would mean longer response times if, god forbid, something awful were to happen at the university. Instead of defunding and dismantling, we should look at other similar sized cities across the country where programs that incorporate Social Workers have seen incredible success. However, sending unarmed untrained social workers into dynamic and violent situations alone is a recipe for disaster. The number one priority of the government is to provide safety and security to its citizens. Defunding and dismantling is counter intuitive to this and again, I implore you to pause and consider proven solutions and not cave to a vocal and enthusiastic minority of the city. Thank you, An Iowa City Citizen Kellie Fruehling From: Audrey Keith <audreykeithiowa@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, August 28, 2020 10:36 AM To: Council; Geoff Fruin Cc: exec@iowacitydsa.org Subject: ICDSA Letter in Support of IFR Attachments: DSA letter supporting IFR.pdf RISK Hello Council members and City Manager, Late Handouts Distributed (Date) Attached here is a letter from the Iowa City Democratic Socialists of America, in support of the demands put forth by the Iowa Freedom Riders. Thank you for reading, stay safe and healthy, and we will see you at the next council meeting! -Audrey Keith Co -Chair Iowa City Democratic Socialists of America To: council@iowa-city.org From: exec@iowacitydsa.org �J\ DSA Letter to City Council in Support of IFR Demands Dear Council Members of Iowa City, We, the Iowa City Chapter of Democratic Socialists of America (ICDSA), write to you in support of all the demands made by the Iowa Freedom Riders (IFR). We expect that additional support from the community will create additional urgency in The City's efforts to resolve these crises, as well as solidify the IFR's reputation as representing Iowa City's progressive population. We, as members of the working class and other targeted identities, have many reasons to be in solidarity with the Iowa Freedom Riders, especially when it comes to defunding the police and replacing them with the Community Wellness and Accountability architecture: • The 5 proposed teams all represent services which have many barriers to access, especially for the working-class poor and other targeted folks such as those with disabilities, BIPOC, and queer people. • The 4 proposed new departments align with the values and goals of the ICDSA. • The police system protects property more than people, which then disproportionately benefits the owning class, and leaves many people vulnerable to abuse, both physical and judicial. • Over -policing causes higher incarceration rates, thus increasing exploitative prison labor, and for those with records, not even necessarily convictions, there are lower employment rates, wages, and access to professional and academic opportunity. • There is a history of police being used to break up peaceful assemblies, including labor strikes. • The working class is also over -policed, often punished for violations that are regularly a result of lacking money to repair broken tail lights, equipment for unkempt lawns and sidewalks, and get targeted while walking home at night since they can't afford taxi fare or their own car. This type of over -policing also disportionately targets certain neighborhoods such as the south side. • City finance and labor resources are being wasted by relying heavily on the police to perform services that are outside of their wheelhouse. The majority of the citizenry's difficulties have repeatedly shown to stem from lack of funding for social services. For example, one of our members testifies that an entire generation was over -policed in the Southside neighborhoods while the City did not put in a sidewalk for a safe route to the grocery store. These daily struggles compounded with the discrimination by employers in hiring people with addresses here and in low-income apartment complexes. Although eventually, the City put in sidewalks, and the Mayor's Youth Employment Office and a park, the latter two were removed and a police substation was installed instead. Southside residents reported the same difficulty and fear caused by assumptive and escalating over -policing as decades prior at the Speak Up, Speak Out events held this June in local parks by local officials. Our membership, like much of the greater grassroots progressive community, has been appalled to learn that the Iowa City Police Department uses 25%' of the City's budget for general funds. The local community has spent years lobbying for meager expansions to departments such as Parking & Transportation; infamously understaffed, using dilapidated equipment, with insufficient bus scheduling, and unable to improve/expand their services. Parking & Transportation receives 1% of The City's budget for general funds; 1/25th as much as the ever-expanding Police Department. This gross misallocation2 of city general funding toward a department that enforces the punishment of the populace for their struggles must end immediately. The reversal of this negative funding toward positive change will have multiplicative benefits. ICDSA demands that a member of the IFR be allowed to represent and clarify their interests, as needed in City Council sessions prior to activity from the upcoming Truth and Reconciliation Commission. After the TRC becomes active, ICDSA demands a representative from the TRC would then take the IFR's place. This representative will be on hand to directly clarify misunderstandings of wording, intent, and priority from the IFR's demands. As part of previously stated demands, there was supposed to be an investigation into the events on the night of June 3rd, 2020, which led to protestors being tear -gassed by law enforcement. The city council has since walked back on this promise, citing expenses and new video footage from police cameras as reasons why an investigation would not be worthwhile. ICDSA joins IFR's demand that this video be released to the public. It is counter to the city council's interest to admit that it is too expensive to hold local law enforcement accountable. This admission proves the point that ICPD needs to be defunded, not just reformed, by showing that police accountability is rarely brought to fruition. The tear -gas attack on a peaceful supports all IFR demands made now and henceforth in the matters of policing, and budget reallocation. protest was already a betrayal of the public's trust, but foregoing any ownership of these actions after the fact further compounds that betrayal and mistrust. Releasing the new, revealing, video footage from June 3rd, 2020, the same as what the council members watched, is the first step in attempting to salvage some of that trust. ICDSA asserts that the IFR represents the Iowa City progressive community's hopes and desires, and thus a representative would enhance and improve the City Council's ability to serve the community. ICDSA ICDSA pledges solidarity, cooperation, and support for any City Councilors that favor IFR and TRC representation at Council meetings. Thank you for reading, Iowa City Democratic Socialists of America hops:/Zwww8.iowa-ci .ora/WebLink/O/edoe/1949603/FY2021 %20Adopted%20Budget%20and%20FY2020- FY2022%20Financial %20Plan.pdf pg 96 2 httos://www. bleedingheartiand.com/2020/07/22/larae-lowa-cities-si)endina-more-on-police-less-on-social-services L 0, Kellie Fruehling From: Stephanie <stephaniesharf@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, August 30, 2020 4:27 PM To: Council Late Handouts Distributed Subject: Spray Paint on Iowa City Public Buildings (Date) RISK Hello City Council, As a person who keeps up with current events, I have some grievances regarding political and social issues that I would like to air publicly, My local hardware store has some cans of spray paint for sale. I am just wondering as an Iowa City resident, is it permitted for me to spray paint some slogans (and excuse me, there will probably be profanity) on public buildings here? What about on the Pentacrest, like the Old Capitol? Just wondering if this is legal because I noticed some slogans painted after the recent protests on August 28 -29th. If not, why is one particular group Iowa Freedom Riders allowed repeatedly to do this with no consequences, an action that no doubt will cause the spending of taxpayer money as the paint is removed? Thank you in advance for your kind response. Please let me know if and when I will be allowed to spray paint my slogans as I will not be purchasing any paint unless informed it is legal to do so. Stephanie Sharf West Side resident stephaniesharf@email.com --t�g.6 Kellie Fruehling From: Geoff Fruin Sent: Sunday, August 30, 2020 6:57 PM To: Kellie Fruehling Cc: Eleanor M. Dikes; Ashley Monroe; Rachel Kilburg; Bill Campbell; Denise Brotherton Subject: FW: Checking In Kellie - Late Handouts Distributee This was copied to the full Council. Please add to the late handouts. (—�7 Geoff (Date) From: Iowa Freedom <iowafreedomriders@Rmail.com> Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2020 6:21 PM To: Laura Bergus; Susan Mims; Mazahir Salih; Pauline Taylor; Bruce Teague; John Thomas; Janice Weiner Cc: Raneem Hamad; david.drustrup@gmail.com Subject: Checking In 1 RISK Dear Councilors, We'd like to first thank you again for the two meetings this week we had with Councilors Bergus, Mims, Thomas, and Weiner. Raneem and David both left those conversations feeling much better about our future collaboration. We also heard your feedback about meeting you all in the middle around our strategy and process for protesting going forward, including Councilor Weiner's ask for more confidence building measures. While we will be marching tonight, we will consider as a group whether we should do some protests "in place" in the coming days, as we recognize this is preferable from your perspective. We will continue to file permits as well and will add any destinations that we have planned. Finally, as multiple councilors pointed out, we need to be more forthright and honest about the Council's relationship with IFR. This includes pointing out to our supporters that you have shown good faith in working with us, especially recently. We 1 will be intentional about that tonight as well when we speak with our crowd. We hope to continue to frame you all as collaborators on this mission. We hope these are meaningful steps to show you that we are interested in building trust with you all. As we discussed during meetings, we have a few asks to continue building our joint relationship. We hope these seem reasonable and actionable to do from now until Tuesday: 1. Form the policing subcommittee. Since our recent conversations have felt so productive and collaborative, we feel that maintaining communication and momentum will be essential. If we have point -persons to contact and meet with regularly, we will take that as a token of your good faith to the work ahead. 2. Release the video of the June .3 assaults on protesters. If this can't be done for legal reasons, we request a statement form the City Attorney explaining why this can't be done. Hopefully there will be some debate around the "why/why not" to release the video during Tuesday's meetings so the public can be informed about how you're thinking about this. 3. Either reject or delay the vote on upgrading Lasers. We feel strongly that this deserves, at the very least, more discussion and input from the community. Further, if we are hoping to see a future where some contact with public safety is done by mental health professionals and peer professionals instead of armed police, we should at least consider the prospect of not upgrading ALL taser equipment. These seem like reasonable requests by/on Tuesday, but please let us know if you see any concerns with this. Take good care. Black lives matter, Iowa Freedom Riders IFR Policy & Media Team Email: iowafreedomriders&gmail.com Instagram: @iowafreedomriders z FaceBook: @iowafreedonuider Kellie Fruehling From: Nick Summy <nsummy@hotmail.com> Late Handouts Distributed Sent: Sunday, August 30, 2020 10:27 PM To: Council Subject: Videos of Saturday Night's Protest (Date) Risrt Like many Iowa City residents, I have read about the many Iowa Freedom Riders protests and witnessed the consistent vandalism. Saturday night I decided I would walk along and document the protest. The videos are publicly available here: https:llwww.facebook.com/14802108/videos/10108356789878039/?extid=l iSid mZ9cD W IOKcm https://www.face book.com/14802108/videos/10108356900516319/?extid=M7W IC3o4QB85u lQm My question is: What is it going to take to make this insanity end? This group purposely does not get the lawfully required permits. They harass motorists. They harass people filming along with physically threatening them. They vandalize public and private property with zero consequences. Why is there no police presence at these things? Where are the arrests? There are clearly numerous people breaking the law and it is a matter of time before things are taken too far. Late Handouts Distributed Cl 7� l �—e)RX y� (Date) "� / 2t r� Ti��A1 KDc1 i z1� 3vr /16' Dan Daty 2325 Mayfield Rd. 1m Cdy, IA 52245 dCU fe SNS i>v�fL! !d»/ 16 �� INGt��d f SLS l�Fr� �Afcj l .. ,01L/N r,2L f 7-#L;7- . lqq— pu9Z AducinlG f-3uAG�-� /<'= r��t�L �T<v11G �uc+.fT�s 4-5d'6L ifi[ j / t/ C� l6 wM Kf kF C•--A/L l S /UUk:SI -S ��- ,�Itn'i eD Gov arc F L< r'ddiC " t1 71 �c lC7,v�5 i f?5 c4AI as or-fh7lfvCZ rTy _. rrAJ AUti ( Our- GI111,G;�,S firr9c:-� —� fvA LrFN COUWV�:L TCs\64A- C—r—" I r^ ;122H0 Late Handouts Distributed � F. L ZIA %,\ Aa —u S a ;p V-1 T -C>4 - e r ane teas be cum fvA LrFN COUWV�:L TCs\64A- C—r—" I r^ ;122H0 Late Handouts Distributed 2-3I--�-O Date) 11d 1 i fie Late Handouts Distributed (Date) 1-045 f ()ubAC4 �,[A,Y, �qre,-, ,ut( ] pdi�^ w vu * �11 F?Oj� 7�2, . -�O 2c, Late Handouts Distribuieu -if <�,6 (Date) Late Handouts Distributed g , 19 (Date) fi t7�-�_ �4 V �` a - - -�M --- --- I oto uandnuts Distributed ' -APR t) —I � �% C 4� CA+��_��-�' Cam _� �G�✓ U _i - - Kellie Fruehling From: Rachel Kilburg Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 9:01 AM To: Kellie Fruehling Cc: Subject: Attachments: Hi Kellie, Ashley Monroe FW: Voice message from DAUTREMONT CHRI[3193382470] MB: 7210 220580.mp3 In this voicemail, the caller asks that this is shared with City Council. Thanks, rk Late Handouts Distributed (Date) -----Original Message ----- From: DAUTREMONT CHRI [mailto:donotreply@iowa-city.org] Sent: Monday, August 31, 2020 10:26 PM To: City Manager General Mailbox Group <CityManagerGeneralMailbox@iowa-city.org> Subject: Voice message from DAUTREMONT CHR1131933824701 MB: 7210 Message length: 190 s. (1523 kb.) Kellie Fruehling From: Doug Richou <dougrichou@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, August 31, 2020 9:58 PM Late Handouts Distributed ro• council Subject: Vandalism (Date) Enough is enough! Kellie Fruehling From: derek frank <gbertsroomate@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 8:26 AM Late Handouts Distributed To: council Subject: Not peaceful. Never have been. q -I'ao A (Date) Lasers to officers' eyes. What are you doing besides giving in to demands of those who don't care about facts? https://www.kcrg.com/2020/09/01/des-moines-black-lives-matter-leader-arrested-in-iowa-city-durinp,-protests/ Kellie Fruehling From: Boge, Andrew T <andrew-boge@uiowa.edu> Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 10:53 AM To: Council Cc: Geoff Fruin; Laura Bergus; Susan Mims; Mazahir Salih; Pauline Taylor; Bruce Teague; John Thomas; Janice Weiner Subject: ICPD and the City Budget A11K Dear Council Members of Iowa City – My name is Andrew and I'm a PhD Student at the University of Iowa and a resident of Iowa City. I'm writing to urge all of you to fully work on implementing the demands the Iowa Freedom Riders (IFR) have made. recognize that some of these cannot be done quickly, but clearly stating your support will help create community trust that the Council will truly work to transform institutions that historically and currently harm minority members of Iowa City. For example, the Community Wellness and Accountability architecture is a powerful and truly transformative idea that could allow Iowa City to be an example of what a city could look like without armed police officers responding to every problem or issue in the city. As you are all no doubt aware, the research supports these changes can better a community, and divesting and defunding police departments does not lead to an increase in crime, but actually a decrease. More specifically, for your council meeting this evening, I implore you to fully complete the investigation of the events that transpired on June 3rd, 2020. Walking back on a thorough investigation is not the direction the council needs to move. Citing that expenses and new footage from police cameras as reasons why an investigation shouldn't occur are poor reasons to not try and find out how the city's police department harmed it's own citizens without reason. It seems shortsighted and in direct violation of your voiced support of BLM to say that it is too expensive to hold our local law enforcement accountable. The fact the council doesn't believe the local law enforcement need to be held accountable is further evidence that the ICPD should be defunded, and not reformed. As the ICDSA put it, "The tear -gas attack on a peaceful protest was already a betrayal of the public's trust, but foregoing any ownership of these actions after the fact further compounds that betrayal and mistrust. Releasing the new, revealing, video footage from June 3rd, 200, the same as what the council members watched, is the first step in attempt to salvage some of that trust." If you believe that the investigation is no longer necessary, a full statement from the City Attorney should be released and all associated documentation/evidence. It is likely the ICPD and State Patrol harmed our own citizens, the citizens that you are supposed to serve and represent. Not conducting a fully public and thorough investigation is a grave disservice to both the community, and those harmed who were involved in the protest. Lastly, I implore the council to delay or reject the proposal to allocate additional money to the ICPD to purchase tasers. More money for the department runs counter to your statements that you are in support of the Iowa Freedom Riders. Additional funds for the ICPD, after they just arrested a protester this past evening on August 31St, 2020 with no explanation of the charges brought against him—a clear tactic to try and break up the protest and discourage our constitutional right to organize—proves, once again, that the department is broken and indeed cannot be reformed. Providing hundreds of thousands of tax payer dollars for weapons that would be used against us is a blatant violation of community integrity, trust, and the council's supposed agreement that Black Lives Matter. Once again, I sincerely encourage you all to divest from the ICPD and funnel that money into community programs that would genuinely help those living in Iowa City. I think the City Council is doing good work and in good faith trying to work with the IFR. However, considerable more work is left to be done. With people dying in the streets, the urgency could not be more palpable. There is no more time for waiting. Defund and divest from the ICPD. It is the only way to truly show your support of the Black Lives Matter movement and the incredible work of the Iowa Freedom Riders. Thank you. AB Regards, Andrew Boge he/him/his Department of Communication Studies I University of Iowa Ph.D. Student I Rhetoric and Public Advocacy andrew-boge@uiowa.edu I abogel5@hastings.edu 2 Kellie Fruehling From: Stutting, Allison K <allison-stutting@uiowa.edu> Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 10:59 AM To: Council Cc: Geoff Fruin; Laura Bergus; Susan Mims; Mazahir Salih; Pauline Taylor; Bruce Teague; John Thomas; Janice Weiner Subject: IC Budget and ICPD ARIK Dear Council Members of Iowa City — Late Handouts Distributed (Date) My name is Allie and I am Assistant Director of Corporate and Community Development at University of Iowa Center for Advancement and a resident of Iowa City. I am also the founder of Iowa City Erranders, a local non- profit organization that give errand support for folks in the Iowa City community who are most at risk for sever cases of COVID-19. I am also a recent graduate from the University of Iowa, previously serving as the Executive Director of UI Dance Marathon, a Resident Assistant, Orientation Leader, Hospital Volunteer, and student employee. I'm writing to urge all of you to fully work on implementing the demands the Iowa Freedom Riders (IFR) have made. I recognize that some of these cannot be done quickly, but clearly stating your support will help create community trust that the Council will truly work to transform institutions that historically and currently harm minority members of Iowa City. For example, the Community Wellness and Accountability architecture is a powerful and truly transformative idea that could allow Iowa City to be an example of what a city could look like without armed police officers responding to every problem or issue in the city. As you are all no doubt aware, the research supports these changes can better a community, and divesting and defunding police departments does not lead to an increase in crime, but actually a decrease. More specifically, for your council meeting this evening, I implore you to fully complete the investigation of the events that transpired on June 3rd, 2020. Walking back on a thorough investigation is not the direction the council needs to move. Citing that expenses and new footage from police cameras as reasons why an investigation shouldn't occur are poor reasons to not try and find out how the city's police department harmed it's own citizens without reason. It seems shortsighted and in direct violation of your voiced support of BLM to say that it is too expensive to hold our local law enforcement accountable. The fact the council doesn't believe the local law enforcement need to be held accountable is further evidence that the ICPD should be defunded, and not reformed. As the ICDSA put it, "The tear -gas attack on a peaceful protest was already a betrayal of the public's trust, but foregoing any ownership of these actions after the fact further compounds that betrayal and mistrust. Releasing the new, revealing, video footage from June 3rd, 200, the same as what the council members watched, is the first step in attempt to salvage some of that trust." If you believe that the investigation is no longer necessary, a full statement from the City Attorney should be released and all associated documentation/evidence. It is likely the ICPD and State Patrol harmed our own citizens, the citizens that you are supposed to serve and represent. Not conducting a fully public and thorough investigation is a grave disservice to both the community, and those harmed who were involved in the protest. Lastly, I implore the council to delay or reject the proposal to allocate additional money to the ICPD to purchase tasers. More money for the department runs counter to your statements that you are in support of the Iowa Freedom Riders. Additional funds for the ICPD, after they just arrested a protester this past evening on August 311t, 2020 with no explanation of the charges brought against him—a clear tactic to try and break up the protest and discourage our constitutional right to organize—proves, once again, that the department is broken and indeed cannot be reformed. Providing hundreds of thousands of tax payer dollars for weapons that would be used against us is a blatant violation of community integrity, trust, and the council's supposed agreement that Black Lives Matter. Once again, I sincerely encourage you all to divest from the ICPD and funnel that money into community programs that would genuinely help those living in Iowa City. I think the City Council is doing good work and in good faith trying to work with the IFR. However, considerable more work is left to be done. With people dying in the streets, the urgency could not be more palpable. There is no more time for waiting. Defund and divest from the ICPD. It is the only way to truly show your support of the Black Lives Matter movement and the incredible work of the Iowa Freedom Riders. Thank you, Allie Stutting Allie Stutting (she, her, hers) I University of Iowa, Class of 2020 College of Education I History, Social Studies Executive Director of Iowa City Erranders I iowacityerranders.com 2 Kellie Fruehling From: ICPD Supporter <icpdfan202O@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 9:18 AM To: Council Cc: Geoff Fruin A Honorable Mayor Teague Honorable Councilors Mims, Bergus, Weiner, City Manager Fruin, Taylor, Salih, and Thomas L Late Handouts Distributed (Date) Perhaps I should have sent last night's email today, but I sincerely hope you are planning a public statement condemning this kind of violence taking place against officers in your city. I hope you're equipping our police department to safely handle these kinds of threats, as I am sure the cost for medical bills or a long term disability from such an eye injury far outweighs the cost of prohibiting these unlawful assemblies from continuing. Because all anyone in the "DEFUND THE ICPD" group cares about is the bottom line anyway, right? Enough is enough. The ball is in your court and it is imperative you seize the moment, take a stand, and show those doing wrong to our officers that you do not support acts which jeopardize the safety of the city's employees. To do any less is to empower an escalation of force from these "protestors." https://www.kcrg.com/2020/09/01/des-moines-black-lives-matter-leader-arrested-in-iowa-city-during-protests/ Still Concerned. Kellie Fruehling From: ICPD Supporter <icpdfan2020@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, August 31, 2020 9:32 PM To: Council; Geoff Fruin Cc: Denise Brotherton Late Handouts Distributed Subject: Police Spending A Honorable Mayor Bruce Teague Honorable City Councilors Mims, Bergus, Salih, City Manager Geoff Fruin, Thomas, Weiner, and Taylor (Date) am writing to you today for several reasons. Primarily, it is to voice my support of the Iowa City Police Department. Secondarily, I hope to help you understand why many of the demands lodged by the Iowa Freedom Riders (hereinafter "IFR") are illogical, impossible, and/or downright reckless. IFR has shown through their words and actions that they do not believe in reform or improvement; they want only abolishment of the rule of law and order afforded to us by a police department. A look at the numbers will show that Iowa City is already operating with Not only do their demands show this on their face, but a deeper look into the details show a lack of understanding of basic operations. If you read nothing else, please read this: your police department is very good, very capable, and very professional, and as a council, you are driving your best officers to seek employment elsewhere. You can condemn the injustices elsewhere while publicly supporting YOUR officers and providing resources to insure they receive the training and equipment necessary to avoid missteps locally, but that requires funding, not defunding. An examination of police protection vs. social services spending from 2010 through 2017 (the most recent set of available data) shows per capita police spending in Iowa City is less than Des Moines, Cedar Rapids, Davenport, Sioux City, Waterloo, Council Bluffs, Dubuque, Urbandale, Marion, Bettendorf, Coralville, Mason City, Marshalltown, Clinton, Burlington, Ottumwa, and Muscatine (See Below.) City Spending on Police Protection and Social Services, Iowa Cities of 20,000 Population or more Per capb sp°nding 1999-2017,201760m fMUY 74.M 75% I S 138 S 170 5 157I S 143 5 176 $ 155 Ames 65060 79% S 145 S 146 S 1.34 5 76 $ 69 S 42 CedarFaas 41 255 90% S 141 S 130 S 120 S 130 S 65 S 4.5 Iva 178$ Meiaez 2017 Penton, Wm Police swding $ 105 S 164 Social Spendino Aake4y 55754 9296 S Populalim MSP— Per apitain2017dollam S 33 S Per:a0ain2017ddlarc Urbandale City 87% INT, to 19901999 24302009 20'0.2017 19901999 2000-2409 23`0201' MSA Central Cities 9296 S 171 S 168 $ 169 S 18 $ 23 S 22 sellembi 35,506 64% Oes homes 210.334 6716 S 262 S 234 S 299 S 162 S 13$ $ 191 CedarRaplis 130,4x5 82'% S 201 S 23', S 291 S 118 5 102 5 66 Oa'renW 102,582 75% S 155 $ 203 S 250 S 116 5 106 S e3 $iP Oil 62621 6#% S 204 S 238 5 231 S 136 S 103 5 111 1Va lim 68.460 71% 3 224 $ 220 S 246 5 202 $ 196 $ 186 CaK1IYA 61597 84% S 165 S 256 S 270 S 71 S 48 S 71 Out'ALM 56799 89% 11 172 $ 275 $ 230 3 147 $ 193 $ 175 fMUY 74.M 75% I S 138 S 170 5 157I S 143 5 176 $ 155 Ames 65060 79% S 145 S 146 S 1.34 5 76 $ 69 S 42 CedarFaas 41 255 90% S 141 S 130 S 120 S 130 S 65 S 4.5 Iva 178$ Meiaez 64113 61% $ 170 $ 105 S 164 5 137 $ N S 121 Aake4y 55754 9296 S 158 S 163 S 138 S 33 S 70 5 57 Urbandale 44062 87% S 161 5 177 S 161 $ 30 S 39 S 22 61anm 37 330 9296 S 171 S 168 $ 169 S 18 $ 23 S 22 sellembi 35,506 64% S 173 S 216 S 203 S 33 5 33 S 7 CurahiNe 20636 70% $ 251 S 221 5 199 S 9 5 33 $ 4C ,10111511011 20.671 89% S 163 S 146 $ 146 S 22 S 42 S 65 Limm at}, 27.356 89% S 199 $ 214 $ 213 5 119 5 114 $ 55 f4a'sn W& 27610 61% S 191 S 224 5 207 5 69 S 116 5 116 Cliram 25064 80% $ 164 $ 216 S 211 S 40 S 45 5 58 Sarlrgt0e 25419 84% 5 179 S 234 S 2t3 S 41 S % S 48 Fort Dodge 24.649 84% $ 141 S 147 $ 140 $ 103 $ $4 $ 26 o8umw3 24.624 77% S 146 S 166 S 181 $ 113 S 33 S 32 1ALf, 23,968 7296 $ 166 9 193 S 163 5 156 S _ 146 5 98 25672 7996 1 S 173 S 194 S 194 1 S 91 $ 78 S 62 Many have made waves about the fact that the Iowa City PD's budget is 25% of the city's general fund. Compared to Des Moines (39%), Davenport (38%) and Cedar Rapids (31%), Iowa City's is the lowest of the four largest cities in the state. Because of this, the ICPD ratio of officers to population is currently slightly over 1(by the best data I can find, 82 authorized positions for roughly 75,000 people, 1.09/1,000), the lowest of those four cities, but we also enjoy the lowest violent crime rate and the least frequent incidence of Officer Involved Shootings with only 4 in more than 30 years, three of which were non-fatal. Recently, the council chose to table a resolution allocating roughly $235,000 from the already -approved police budget to the acquisition of AXON Taser 7 conducted energy devices. IFR is vehemently opposed to this purchase for no reason other than they want the money spent elsewhere. With the majority of the city's current Tasers out of warranty, and therefore being carried without the backing of Axon's corporate insurance policy, the city is at risk of exposed liability if a device is used. Additionally, the $235,000 being spent over the course of five years is less per year ($47,000/year) than the $50,000 IFR desperately wants spent on an external review of the confrontation with police on June 3rd. Without that purchase being approved, the city will inevitably create more incidents in which your officers have to use other tools (batons, K9s, firearms) to resolve incidents which could otherwise be resolved with fewer lasting effects than if a modern, mechanically sound Taser were present on scene. IFR cannot provide any empirical data supporting declining this purchase. IFR has said they will continue to march and destroy property and disrupt your city until their demands are met. This is not "reformative justice;" it is tantamount to domestic terrorism. They have made demands of local government and are threatening the government with what will happen if the demands are not met. Addressing IFR's general lack of understanding, I point to several factors 1. IFR continues to demand ICPD issue statements regarding the drowning of Makeda Scott (Which occurred in Johnson County SO jurisdiction) and the arrest of Tremayne Clemons, who was arrested in Coralville and charged in Federal Court by the Iowa DCI; ICPD had nothing to do with either of those cases. IFR's leadership cannot even understand the basic premise of political subdivision. 2. IFR demands the city require its officers to live in city limits. Besides this being prohibited by Iowa's Civil Service Code, think of the demand. This group is marching around the city, chanting vile things at our officers, spray painting threats of violence, and at the same time are demanding these officers move their families into the very city where this is all happening. Surely as city councilors, you can appreciate this: if people started showing up at your house causing property damage and chanting threats of physical harm, would many of you want to continue living in this city and serving the council at the risk of your well-being and your family's safety? I sure wouldn't. 3. IFR initially demanded a 25% reduction in police budgeting. They then decided this was too aggressive and revised it to "only" $5 million. As you know, this is more than 25% of the budget. This is a great place to live, work, and own a business. Our police department has operated just fine for so many years without defunding them. Why would any of you think you should suddenly change the way things have been funded when it has worked so well under your tutelage to this point. Why is it that when something atrocious happens in Minneapolis, or Kenosha, or Ferguson, you would think it means there's a need to change how our city is doing things? There is a clear cultural issue with the Minneapolis PD; it is not the same here. In what world do we identify a deficiency with something and think that the way to fix it is to take money away from it? Here are my suggestions take back control of our city and move us forward. 1. A public statement from the council acknowledging the good track record of the ICPD as an agency, and the council's support of the ICPD 2. Hire an outside agency to conduct an outside review of the city's police department staffing needs so there is data to support maintaining current staffing and spending levels. If we trust an outside agency to review the city's use of force, we should trust them to review the city's staffing 3. Approve the resolution for the Taser purchase so your officers have more ways to resolve situations with a lower probability of long-term injury or death. 4. If you insist in defunding, place it to a city-wide vote. Please, keep our police department intact. Listen to those of us that pay taxes in your city. We are fortunate, given the city council's actions in this time, that we still have people who want to be our police chief right now. It is, in no small part, because of the officers and their professional track record. I am unwilling to place my name on this correspondence because I don't trust IFR to not make my life a target of their vitriol next, but I can be reached at this email. I hope you'll be understanding of that. Thank you. Concerned Citizen and Business Owner. Kellie Fruehling From: ICPD Supporter <icpdfan2020@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, August 31, 2020 9:29 PM To: Council Cc: denise-brotheron@iowa-city.org Subject: Police Spending AR Honorable Mayor Bruce Teague Honorable City Councilors Mims, Bergus, Salih, Thomas, Weiner, and Taylor City Manager Geoff Fruin, Late Handouts Distributed q-1-�-0 (Date) I am writing to you today for several reasons. Primarily, it is to voice my support of the Iowa City Police Department. Secondarily, I hope to help you understand why many of the demands lodged by the Iowa Freedom Riders (hereinafter "IFR") are illogical, impossible, and/or downright reckless. IFR has shown through their words and actions that they do not believe in reform or improvement; they want only abolishment of the rule of law and order afforded to us by a police department. A look at the numbers will show that Iowa City is already operating with Not only do their demands show this on their face, but a deeper look into the details show a lack of understanding of basic operations. If you read nothing else, please read this: your police department is very good, very capable, and very professional, and as a council, you are driving your best officers to seek employment elsewhere. You can condemn the injustices elsewhere while publicly supporting YOUR officers and providing resources to insure they receive the training and equipment necessary to avoid missteps locally, but that requires funding, not defunding. An examination of police protection vs. social services spending from 2010 through 2017 (the most recent set of available data) shows per capita police spending in Iowa City is less than Des Moines, Cedar Rapids, Davenport, Sioux City, Waterloo, Council Bluffs, Dubuque, Urbandale, Marion, Bettendorf, Coralville, Mason City, Marshalltown, Clinton, Burlington, Ottumwa, and Muscatine (See Below.) City Spending on Police Protection and Social Services, Iowa Cities of 20,OD0 population or more Per calla suendiog 19$9-2017, 2017 cb&ws !xra0ry Ames C4dwFalll Average 2U17 Paro¢n; N5n• Pdloe SWdin S 157 S 134 S 120 S 143 $ S 76 S S 139 S Sociat $ 155 S 42 $ 45 _ din USA Subuft V120 6116 Populalicrn ftark Per 3.aptain2017ddlarsPerapain2017ddlys $ 207 $ 69 S Cily Y%51 Des Mdnes Whw 1950.1399 2034=2009 23'0•Z017 199013 29110-200$ 96 29'0.2011 USA Cmtrd CKbs 56754 925, S 158 S 163 S 136 $ 30 S 70 S 57 Ur6end* 44,062 DCI Mares 210.330 671E S 262 $ 234 S 259 S 162 $ 135 $ 191 Cela Rapi4,5 130,435 U% $ 201 $ 23` S 241 5 118 5 132 S 68 Da Vod 102,582 7514 'a 156 $ 233 S 250 $ 116 S 136 $ 93 SgbxCiti 82821 69% S N4 3 239 S 231 $ 136 $ 103 $ 111 Waledou 68450 71% 3 224 $ 220 S 245 $ 202 $ 1951 S 188 Camel &u5s 62547 84% S 185 S 256 S 270 S 71 $ 48 S 71 Dglue 58.719 89% $ 172 $ 205 $ 230 S 147 $ 193 S 175 !xra0ry Ames C4dwFalll Average 742711 65050 41255 66178 75% 79% 9D% 80% S 139 S 145 S 14t S 170 $ 146 S 130 S 157 S 134 S 120 S 143 $ S 76 S S 139 S 176 6A 65 $ 155 S 42 $ 45 $ 142 $ 149 S 137 S 119 S 1.33 $ K USA Subuft V120 6116 S 191 S 220 $ 207 $ 69 S 116 S Y%51 Des Mdnes 64111 81% 5 170 5 185 $ 154 S 137 S 96 S 171 AnkCny 56754 925, S 158 S 163 S 136 $ 30 S 70 S 57 Ur6end* 44,062 87% S 162 $ 177 $ 161 $ 3D S 39 S 22 Maim 37 330 92% S 171 $ 166 S 169 S 18 $ 23 $ 22 Iletkndai 35506 84% "a 173 $ 226 S 203 S 33 S 33 $ 7 CeraleAe 20636 70% S 251 S 221 $ 199 $ 9 3 33 $ 4C Joon an 20.871 64% $ 163 S 146 S tib S 22 S 42 S 64 mmacdy 27,356 89% $ 180 $ 214 S 213 $ 119 $ 114 $ 55 MV3J%A3twr V120 6116 S 191 S 220 $ 207 $ 69 S 116 S 116 Dlrron 25.084 8944 S 184 $ 216 S 211 S 40 S 45 : 58 euringi n 25410 64% S 178 S 294 S 213 S 41 S 36 S 48 Fol D*e RUB 84% S 141 S 147 $ tag $ 103 $ 58 $ 26 beumwa 24 624 77% S 146 S 166 S 181 $ 113 S 33 S 32 14mr mom 23968 72% S 166 $ M S 183 S _ 155 _ S 145 $ 90 A-aW 25672 79% $ 173 S 194 S 194 S 91 $ 78 S 62 Many have made waves about the fact that the Iowa City PD's budget is 25% of the city's general fund. Compared to Des Moines (39%), Davenport (38%) and Cedar Rapids (31%), Iowa City's is the lowest of the four largest cities in the state. Because of this, the ICPD ratio of officers to population is currently slightly over 1(by the best data I can find, 82 authorized positions for roughly 75,000 people, 1.09/1,000), the lowest of those four cities, but we also enjoy the lowest violent crime rate and the least frequent incidence of Officer Involved Shootings with only 4 in more than 30 years, three of which were non-fatal. Recently, the council chose to table a resolution allocating roughly $235,000 from the already -approved police budget to the acquisition of AXON Taser 7 conducted energy devices. IFR is vehemently opposed to this purchase for no reason other than they want the money spent elsewhere. With the majority of the city's current Tasers out of warranty, and therefore being carried without the backing of Axon's corporate insurance policy, the city is at risk of exposed liability if a device is used. Additionally, the $235,000 being spent over the course of five years is less per year ($47,000/year) than the $50,000 IFR desperately wants spent on an external review of the confrontation with police on June 3rd. Without that purchase being approved, the city will inevitably create more incidents in which your officers have to use other tools (batons, K9s, firearms) to resolve incidents which could otherwise be resolved with fewer lasting effects than if a modern, mechanically sound Taser were present on scene. IFR cannot provide any empirical data supporting declining this purchase. IFR has said they will continue to march and destroy property and disrupt your city until their demands are met. This is not "reformative justice;" it is tantamount to domestic terrorism. They have made demands of local government and are threatening the government with what will happen if the demands are not met. Addressing IFR's general lack of understanding, I point to several factors 1. IFR continues to demand ICPD issue statements regarding the drowning of Makeda Scott (Which occurred in Johnson County SO jurisdiction) and the arrest of Tremayne Clemons, who was arrested in Coralville and charged in Federal Court by the Iowa DCI; ICPD had nothing to do with either of those cases. IFR's leadership cannot even understand the basic premise of political subdivision. 2. IFR demands the city require its officers to live in city limits. Besides this being prohibited by Iowa's Civil Service Code, think of the demand. This group is marching around the city, chanting vile things at our officers, spray painting threats of violence, and at the same time are demanding these officers move their families into the very city where this is all happening. Surely as city councilors, you can appreciate this: if people started showing up at your house causing property damage and chanting threats of physical harm, would many of you want to continue living in this city and serving the council at the risk of your well-being and your family's safety? I sure wouldn't. 3. IFR initially demanded a 25% reduction in police budgeting. They then decided this was too aggressive and revised it to "only" $5 million. As you know, this is more than 25% of the budget. This is a great place to live, work, and own a business. Our police department has operated just fine for so many years without defunding them. Why would any of you think you should suddenly change the way things have been funded when it has worked so well under your tutelage to this point. Why is it that when something atrocious happens in Minneapolis, or Kenosha, or Ferguson, you would think it means there's a need to change how our ci is doing things? There is a clear cultural issue with the Minneapolis PD; it is not the same here. In what world do we identify a deficiency with something and think that the way to fix it is to take money away from it? Here are my suggestions take back control of our city and move us forward. 1. A public statement from the council acknowledging the good track record of the ICPD as an agency, and the council's support of the ICPD 2. Hire an outside agency to conduct an outside review of the city's police department staffing needs so there is data to support maintaining current staffing and spending levels. If we trust an outside agency to review the city's use of force, we should trust them to review the city's staffing 3. Approve the resolution for the Taser purchase so your officers have more ways to resolve situations with a lower probability of long-term injury or death. 4. If you insist in defunding, place it to a city-wide vote. Please, keep our police department intact. Listen to those of us that pay taxes in your city. We are fortunate, given the city council's actions in this time, that we still have people who want to be our police chief right now. It is, in no small part, because of the officers and their professional track record. I am unwilling to place my name on this correspondence because I don't trust IFR to not make my life a target of their vitriol next, but I can be reached at this email. I hope you'll be understanding of that. Thank you. Concerned Citizen and Business Owner. Kellie Fruehling From: Sent: To: Subject: & Hello Council members, Hillary Schofield <hbschofield@gmail.com> Tuesday, September 1, 2020 11:42 AM Council Deer hunt and BLM s Late Handouts Distributed R-�-2-0 (Date) I am asking that you commit more fully to the resolutions that were passed to ensure racial justice is secured in Iowa City, and to incorporate the recent amendments submitted by the Iowa Freedom Riders. Please, do not cut corners and do not act in the interests of privilege. Additionally, I implore you to either delay for one year or restrict to 30 days the scheduled deer culling. The loss of city parks during this stressful time is unacceptable and must be minimized. Thank you, Hillary Schofield Kellie Fruehling From: Karrie Price <karrieprice@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 11:59 AM To: Council; Geoff Fruin Subject: Safety r R11K Good afternoon, l: l Late Handouts Distributed (Date) I am writing out of deep concern for the ongoing spray -painted hate messages, unrest and widespread intimidation tactics being allowed to occur within our community. The destruction is costing us taxpayers money and anguish, but far more importantly it is costing our community it's dignity, unity and it's peace officers their morale. The $1 million it cost to restore Old Capitol could have possibly helped with the the budget issues that led to the four athletic programs that were cut and the 19 athletic dept jobs that have been eliminated. Allowing this continued unrest is more than just defacing property, it's empowering hate and has emboldened crime in our community. I realize you initially allowed the unenforcement because you felt it was best to allow the right of peaceful protests and could serve as a way to move forward and spark change. I think it's apparent now that your initial strategy is no longer working. Your strategies and response requires change. Having IFR vehicles speeding through my residential area with no license plates numerous times over the past few months is deeply troubling both as a resident and as a parent to young children. It's not a good feeling as a parent that on top of the uncertainty of this pandemic where these kids have to isolate with few friend interactions and always wear a mask, we had to rush home quickly from the nearby Hyvee and Walgreens because they told us to "go home and be safe" as they boarded up their doors. This is now small town, Iowa City. In regard to the flash bangs and tear gas issue, I understand the IC officers were told by state troopers that it was unsafe to allow pedestrians on the interstate at night with semis going 70mph. Sometimes things have to be done to keep areas clear of danger. I ask you, would it have been a better situation to allow for mass casualties on the interstate? That was the alternative. Please remember MLK's message holds true for eternity. You cannot drive out hate by empowering hate. The community no longer feels safe for many peaceful community members just trying to work and raise their families here. The spray painted threats to officer's lives (black, Asian and white) makes our community feel hate -filled. "Death to cops", "ACAB", "1712", "Kill pigs" vandalized on buildings should feel deeply troubling and sad to all humans that value life for all people displayed in our once vibrant downtown area. ICPD officers have families in this community that they serve and are human beings in their uniforms and when they take off those uniforms. They need to be offered the same amount of protection and respect that all community members should receive. The police officers of this community had and have nothing to do with the death of Mr. Floyd and have been subjected to months upon months of continued inhumane abuse (spat on, verbal profanities, lights blinding them in their eyes etc). Enough is enough. The obvious disunity by the leadership toward the police needs to change immediately or the chaos and unrest will just continue to perpetuate. Please stand together and work with the police to make the changes needed. A strong community cannot prosper without you working with them as trusted partners. I attended the chief of police candidate meet and greet. Two of the three candidates have experience with high profile massacres (Tree of Life synagogue, EI Paso Walmart). We would be wise to hire one of those experienced candidates promptly to restore leadership, safety and order for the good of ALL of the community. The department needs to be allowed to do community policing. The officers need to be allowed to foster trusted relationships within all aspects of this town to keep its residents, commuters and students safe. People that value diversity and unity have chosen to live, work, attend school and/or raise their families here. If things do not urgently change, we all can easily reevaluate those choices. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Karrie Price Iowa City resident and concerned parent Kellie Fruehling From: Asa Crowe <whompachomp@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 12:59 PM To: Council Late Handouts Distributed Subject: Budget/Meeting Tonight q— I — 20 (Date) R�'sn Dear City Council, Thank you for your responsiveness to the Iowa Freedom Riders back in June. Please follow through with your commitment to their demands on the original timeline you agreed to back then, expedite them with possible. More social services and less police can't happen soon enough. I know many letters have been sent with more details, consider this my seconding of them. With gratitude, hope, and scrutiny, Asa Crowe 4K Kellie Fruehling From: tenni Mitchell <jennimitch13@gmail.com> Late Handouts Distributed Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 4:07 PM To: Council; Geoff Fruin Subject: Concerns for our hometown 9- I _ 2�-Cj Dear City Council Members and City Manager Fruin, (Date) My name is Jenni Gable -Mitchell. My husband Brian Mitchell and I are lifelong Iowa City residents. We were both born and raised in Iowa City, graduated from City High and both attended and graduated from the University of Iowa. Brian played baseball for the University of Iowa and for one year as a minor league ball player for the Toronto Blue Jays. His time playing baseball allowed the two of us to travel and experience life in other parts of the United States and Canada. We married in 1999 and made the decision that there was no place like home and decided to buy a home in Iowa City and start the next chapter of our lives of raising a family here. We prided ourselves so much on our upbringing and community in Iowa City that many of the friends that we made in college and many of our friends we grew up with did the same. Prior to having children I worked for 3 years for Congressman Jim Leach in his local office as an Immigration caseworker. It was a job that I loved and reaffirmed why I loved the Iowa City community so much. The diversity in our town in part because of the U of I is unlike anywhere else, the people from different ethnicities and cultures were brought to the forefront even more and I embraced it. After our first son was born in 2003 I made the tough decision to not return to work and become a full time mom. Fast forward 17 years, Brian and I now have Junior and Freshman boys that attend City High and a 6th grade daughter at Shimek Elementary. Brian became the head baseball coach at City High in the fall of 2o11. To say that our lives completely revolve around City High Baseball is an understatement. Brian has made it his mission to provide adolescents in this community with the best baseball experience but more importantly provide them with a safe, family-oriented community that is made available to everyone no matter what the adolescents demographic situation may be. The Little Hawk Baseball family that he has built is unlike anywhere else in this area and has formed positive relationships with kids, families and coaches from all backgrounds that's second to none. Unfortunately, the last year or so we have witnessed a change in our community that has had us second guessing the choice that we made so long ago to raise our family in Iowa City. The summer of 2019 brought a scary situation that took place at Mercer park that involved a shooting in the parking lot while the sophomore baseball team was practicing and caused our team to have to take cover in their dugout, since then there have been multiple situations of gunshots being fired in the Mercer Park area and it's disheartening that we have to constantly worry about the safety of our family and our ballplayers on almost a daily basis. This past summer Of 202o has brought more unrest and safety concerns with riots and vandalism that has taken over our downtown area that was once a vibrant place where we loved meeting friends and family. Understandably, the Covid pandemic has played a role in things not being the way they've always been but the added level of safety concerns and vandalism to our beautiful town has us avoiding the downtown area as much as possible. I never thought I would EVER consider moving my family from Iowa City. In the past if anyone would ever criticize anything about my town, I would defend it tooth and nail. I find myself no longer defending my town and as stated before have second guessed more often than I ever thought possible, that we are making the right choice to raise our family here. There are many families like us who feel the same. I understand that the City Council is meeting tonight and I ask that you please consider with care the choices you make with regards to the unrest that is currently taking place in our town and also know that we fully support our police department and the work that they do in our community to keep us safe. Many of them are also lifelong Iowa City residents who also have had the same pride and love for our community that we once did. Thank you for taking the time to read my email. Sincerely, Jenni Gable -Mitchell Sent from my Whone This email is from an external source. CITY OIF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 1, 2020 ATTACHMENTS: Description David Etre - Homeless harassment David Etre - Homeless harassment (2) Item Number: 8.c. Kellie Fruehling From: David Etre <davidetre@icloud.com> Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2020 12:27 PM To: Council Cc nancy@downtowniowacity.com Subject: Homeless harassment City council members, The recent uprise in our local homelessness has become an even greater issue than before. Now with half the ped mall storefront out of business, they have started to congregate/ set up shop outside of the former martinis and union bars.. they blatantly drink in public and start verbally harassing and threatening people walking by.. this has happened to me twice this week alone and have called the non emergency number both times... and the very next night they are in the exact same spot doing the exact same thing. Not sure if the police even responded to my complaint and if they did respond, what ever action they took did not work. We have some really nice/considerate homeless who hold signs and ask for money. I have no issue with them or that, but there are a few who don't even ask for money, they just do drugs and harass people, and those people need to go. We need more police presence downtown, and we need more safety!! There are people moving away from Chicago, NYC, and California, and are looking clean and safe markets. Iowa City can be that oasis of culture in the Midwest, but it must be safe, clean, and affordable. Thanks David Etre Local downtown resident and business owner Sent from my iPhone This email is from an external source. Kellie Fruehling From: 316detre <davidtak09@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2020 8:43 AM To: Council A Iowa City Council member, The recent uprise in our local homelessness has become an even greater issue than before. Now with half the ped mall storefront out of business, they have started to congregate/ set up shop outside of the former martinis and union bars.. they blatantly drink in public and start verbally harassing and threatening people walking by.. this has happened to me twice this week alone and have called the non emergency number both times... and the very next night they are in the exact same spot doing the exact same thing. Not sure if the police even responded to my complaint and if they did respond, what ever action they took did not work. We have some really nice/considerate homeless who hold signs and ask for money. I have no issue with them or that, but there are a few who don't even ask for money, they just do drugs and harass people, and those people need to go. We need more police presence downtown, and we need more safety!! Thanks David Etre Local downtown resident and business owner Thanks, David Etre Iowa Chop House & Formosa Managing Partner -Owner d a vi d tak09 @ pm ai 1. co m (319) 512-8330 Item Number: 8.d. CITY OIF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 1, 2020 ATTACHMENTS: Description Bob Oppliger: Create Bike Advocacy Committee [Staff response included] Kellie Fruehling From: bob oppliger <boboppliger@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, August 24, 2020 11:05 AM To: Kent Ralston Cc: Council; Sarah Walz, Liz Hubing; Sherri Proud; Shelly Simpson; Juli Seydell Johnson; brad freidhof; Becky Soglin; Louise From; John Thomas; Laura Bergus Subject: Re: Create Bike Advocacy Committee AA RILK Dear Kent, In my letter to the city council I was remiss in not describing more effectively how the Bike Advocacy Committee would interact with the MPOJC. But first, please be clear that I think the MPOJC's work to create the Iowa City Bike Master Bike, as well as the companion master plan for the other communities, and the effort over the past couple of years to implement it in Iowa City is laudatory. You and your staff are to be complimented on the exceptionally good work. To the extent that the RTBC and BAC contributed to this, I am pleased. I have little doubt that the "E" for engineering will be praised and provide one of the stronger elements in our BFC evaluation next year. My request to create a Bike Advocacy Committee reflects the LAB's goal to make bicycling a central part of all the thinking, planning and activities of our community. As I suggested, the framework for the committee's agenda should embrace all six "Es" not just the one "E" for engineering. Despite the very good work of the MPOJC's as transportation planners, it is not within their domain to work on the other five "Es."' Within the BAC and RTBC we have the community and government expertise to create the Bike Advocacy Committee and they are underutilized by the MPOJC. If the Bike Advocacy Committee met bimonthly as the RTBC was created to do there would be ample opportunity to respond to the needs of the MPOJC's Urban Area Policy Board and transportation planning for Iowa City and the other area communities. With the remaining four or five meeting dates, the committee could work with law enforcement, parks and recreation departments, neighborhood associations, as well as our climate action committee and local business to create the bike friendly community the LAB envisions. Neither the BAC or the RTBC do that and the fact that the BAC members, meeting dates and minutes are not provided to the public makes it even more difficult to know what's happening. While there may be a bureaucratic reason to maintain the two committee's as they currently stand, I would urge the city to create a Bike Advocacy Committee that looks at bicycling more broadly by focusing on all six BFC "Es." It would better serve our needs. As I mentioned in the letter to city council, Bicyclists of Iowa City, Think Bicycles and Think Iowa City have not been effective in creating a committee to respond to all six "Es" and for all intents and purposes the latter two groups are "dead." A Bike Advocacy Committee would provide a direct connection to local governments and have the "gravitas" to make things happen. As always, I'm available to promote bicycling and facilitate our goal of becoming a gold -level BFC. :.. On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 8:24 AM Kent Ralston <Kent-Ralston@iowa-city.org> wrote: Mr. Oppliger — Thank you for your note and for your continued commitment to making bicycling a safer, more viable, option for both recreating and commuting in our community. Iowa City (and other neighboring communities) have certainly stepped-up efforts in recent years to become more bicycle friendly and Iowa City is currently a League of American Bicyclists 'Silver Level' Bicycle Friendly Community — with a goal to achieve a'Gold' level status. To that end, the City of Iowa City adopted a very ambitious Bike Master Plan in 2017. To assist with the creation of the Plan, the City formed a Bike Advisory Committee which oversaw the creation of the Plan and continues to meet regularly as a working group to assist City Staff to implement details of the Plan. The Committee's membership represents organizations, service groups, and clubs with interests in bicycling, such as: The Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County, the University of Iowa and its Student Government, Iowa City Bicycling Club, Iowa City Bike Library, Think Bicycles of Iowa City, and others. The specific charge of the Committee is to assist with implementation of the Iowa City Bike Master Plan (specifically on infrastructure and policy as prescribed in the Plan) and the Committee is not directly associated with the Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson County (MPO). As you state, the MPO also has a committee working on pedestrian/bicycling issues - the 'Regional Trails and Bicycling Committee' (RTBC) which is separate/unique from the aforementioned Committee. The RTBC is directly responsible to the MPO Urbanized Area Policy Board and provides direct recommendations on how State/Federal transportation dollars are spent in the urbanized area. This Committee is comprised (primarily) of staff members from each of the five urban communities as well as Johnson County and the University and holds meetings open to the public. While the two committees work on creating a more bike friendly community, they are ultimately very distinct in their charge and responsible to separate organizations. Please don't hesitate to reach out directly should you have further questions or comments. Best Regards, Kent Ralston, AICP Executive Director I Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson County Transportation Planner I City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington St. Iowa City, IA 52240 319.356.5253 From: bob oppliger <boboppliger@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2020 7:30 AM To: Council <Council@iowa-city.org> Cc: Kent Ralston <Kent-Ralston@iowa-city.org>; Sarah Walz <Sarah-Walz@iowa-city.org>; Liz Hubing <ehubing@icadgroup.com>; Sherri Proud <sproud@coralville.org>; Shelly Simpson <ssimpson@northlibertyiowa.orl?>; Juli Seydell Johnson <Juli-SJohnson@iowa-city.org>; brad freidhof <bfreidhof@co.iohnson.ia.us>; Becky Soglin <bsoglin@co.lohnson.ia.us>; Louise From <louise@university-heights.org> Subject: Create Bike Advocacy Committee Dear City Council, Please consider reorganizing our two bike advisory committees and expanding the responsibilities to create a Bicycle Advocacy Committee. This would better serve the needs of the bicycling community and our interest in becoming a gold -level Bike Friendly Community, support the community's interest in climate action and offer the opportunity to promote equity and economic development. Currently, I am a member of the MPOJC's Regional Trails and Bicycling Committee (RTBC) and MPOJC hosts a second "ad-hoc" Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC). The RTBC includes members from each of the MPOJC entities, as well as area bicycle advocacy groups and is scheduled to meet bi-monthly but during my tenure on the committee, it has never met more than two or three times in a calendar year. In 2020, to date we have met once. The BAC membership is not public, and minutes not posted but to my knowledge, the BAC meets no more frequently than the RTBC. Both committees are underutilized. The Bicycle Friendly Community (BFC) program is an initiative of the League of American Bicyclists (LAB). Iowa City, as well as Coralville and University Height, are using the BFC roadmap to improve conditions for bicycling and guidance to help make better, bikeable communities. Nationwide, almost 500 communities have been recognized as BFC including five at the platinum level and 32 at the gold level. The LAB's evaluation is free, and communities are reviewed every four years, or sooner at the community's request. Iowa City's next evaluation will be in 2021. In Iowa City's 2017 evaluation (see attachment), one area for improvement was to have a more active bicycle advisory committee. The framework for the Bicycle Advocacy Committee's work would emanate from the six "Es" used in the LAB's evaluation and interaction with several city departments. The six "Es" include: Engineering — including the infrastructure planning and development currently carried on by the MPOJC. Education — not only for children but for people of all ages and backgrounds as well as bicycle and motorist interaction and safety. This is one of the strategic goals of area parks and recreation departments. Equity — LAB's mission statement includes the phrase "bike friendly America for everyone;" implying the need for inclusive planning that responds to diversity. Encouragement -- promoting events, such as Bike Month and the Trueblood 100, and linking to neighborhood associations to offer bicycling opportunities for all ages and abilities. Enforcement — working with law enforcement to promote safe responsible bicycling and safety. Evaluation — creating metrics and methods for on-going review and improvement. A second worthwhile goal would be to better integrate promotion of bicycling with our climate action initiative. If Iowa City aspires to reduce its carbon footprint, it must decrease the air pollution from its largest source, vehicle exhaust. Promoting bicycling is the obvious alternative. Finally, it should be noted that a growing body of evidence suggests that bike friendliness has economic value. Working with the Iowa City Economic Development Group, Iowa City Area Business Partnership and other area businesses would be a third aspect of the committee's activities. In a study published by the American Institute of Economic Research, 32 of 40 communities that they identified as the "hottest" job markets were BFC. This includes eight of the 37 gold or platinum level BFC. Over an extended time, advocates for bicycling have had difficulty maintaining a viable rapport with the city. More than 40 years ago, Bicyclists of Iowa City advocated for our first bike lanes on Jefferson and Market, and 30 years ago created the first Bike to Work Day. About 15 years ago, Think Bicyclists of Johnson County (TB) was created to advocate for the bicycling community. At that time, TB funded a planning study to create bike lanes across the Burlington St. bridge. TB hired the same consultants employed by the MPOJC to create the Iowa City Master Bike Plan in 2017. TB while still in existence today has few members, met once in the past year and even less frequently over the past five years. In the last several years, Think Iowa City tried to convene an advocacy committee. It has now faded into non-existence. By merging the two current committees and creating the Bicycle Advocacy Committee, the city will offer a viable working committee to respond to our community's interests and the benefits of becoming a bicycle friendly community. Sincerely, Bob Oppliger (boboppliger@gmail . com) Education & Advocacy Coordinator, Bicyclists of Iowa City & Board Member, League of American Bicyclists Disclaimer The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. 10 BUILDING BLOCKS OF A BICYCLE FRIENDLY COMMUNITY 1, c r,l r„<<„ c'it, CATEGORY SCORES _--- r„ n,. MEETS High Speed Roads with Bike Facilities 35% ENGINEERING Bicycle network and connectivity 4.2/10 Total Bicycle Network Mileage Y 9 80% t; EDUCATION Motorist awareness and bicycling skills 3.4/io to Total Road Network Mileage GOOD — -- — - - Aw ENCOURAGEMENT 5.5/to Bicycle Education in Schools GOOD Mainstreaming bicycling culture -- – --.- Bike Program Staff to Population 1 PER 36K ENFORCEMENT 3.6/0 Share of Transportation Budget Promoting safety and protecting bicyclists'rights Spent on Bicycling 13% UNKNOWN EVALUATION & PLANNING 5.1/lo Setting targets and having a plan Bike Month and VERY GOOD EXCELLENT Bike to Work Events Active Bicycle Advocacy Group YES YES _--- -- MEETS Active Bicycle Advisory Committee AT LEAST IRREGULARLY MONTHLY Bicycle–Friendly Laws & Ordinances GOOD NEEDS IMPROVEMENT — - - Aw Bike Plan is Current and is Being YES SOMEWHAT Implemented Bike Program Staff to Population 1 PER 36K 1 PER 149K KEY OUTCOMES . IT,, iagr (;old h,:;.(- (pity RIDERSHIP 5.2% Percentage of Commuters who bike SAFETY MEASURES CRASHES 291 Crashes per rok bicycle commuters SAFETY MEASURES FATALITIES 2.6 0.0 Fatalities per rok bicycle commuters 0 o -...� Li KEY STEPS TO GOLD Iowa City Community School District has agreed to make the several commendable changes to incorporate bicycle safety education in their curriculum. This includes teaching all 2nd graders to ride a bike, providing comprehensive bike safety education for 5th graders, and providing educational programming in junior high and high schools, aimed at making biking a lifetime activity as these students learn to drive. Each of these programs is an exciting development and we look forward to hear more about progress on these efforts! Your application indicated that there are local or school policies restricting youth from riding to school.These restrictions can create significant barriers to bicycling for families and youth. Consider whether there are engineering solutions to improve the safety of your bike network around schools so that these restrictions can be removed. Schools and their surrounding neighborhoods should be particularly safe and convenient for biking and walking. Iowa City has a limited on -street bicycle network. Based on the data provided it is unlikely that it provides a low -stress experience suitable for people of all ages and abilities. Ensure that your current bike plan is implemented for continual improvement with the goal of creating a safe and comfortable bicycle network for people of all ages and abilities. D Increase the amount of city staff time spent on improving conditions for people who bike and walk, and encourage your Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) to meet more frequently. The BPAC should offer a systematic method for ongoing citizen input into the development of important policies, plans, and projects. Dear City Council, Please consider reorganizing our two bike advisory committees and expanding the responsibilities to create a Bicycle Advocacy Committee. This would better serve the needs of the bicycling community and our interest in becoming a gold -level Bike Friendly Community, support the community's interest in climate action and offer the opportunity to promote equity and economic development. Currently, I am a member of the MPOJC's Regional Trails and Bicycling Committee (RTBC) and MPOJC hosts a second "ad-hoc" Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC). The RTBC includes members from each of the MPOJC entities, as well as area bicycle advocacy groups and is scheduled to meet bi-monthly but during my tenure on the committee, it has never met more than two or three times in a calendar year. In 2020, to date we have met once. The BAC membership is not public, and minutes not posted but to my knowledge, the BAC meets no more frequently than the RTBC. Both committees are underutilized. The Bicycle Friendly Community (BFC) program is an initiative of the League of American Bicyclists (LAB). Iowa City, as well as Coralville and University Height, are using the BFC roadmap to improve conditions for bicycling and guidance to help make better, bikeable communities. Nationwide, almost 500 communities have been recognized as BFC including five at the platinum level and 32 at the gold level. The LAB's evaluation is free, and communities are review every four years, or sooner at the community's request. Iowa City's next evaluation will be in 2021. In Iowa City's 2017 evaluation (see attachment), one area for improvement was to have a more active bicycle advisory committee. The framework for the Bicycle Advocacy Committee's work would emanate from the six "Es" used in the LAB's evaluation and interaction with several city departments. The six "Es" include: Engineering — including the infrastructure planning and development currently carried on by the MPOJC. Education — not only for children but for people of all ages and backgrounds as well as bicycle and motorist interaction and safety. This is one of the strategic goals of area parks and recreation departments. Equity — LAB's mission statement includes the phrase "bike friendly America for everyone;" implying the need for inclusive planning that responds to diversity. Encouragement -- promoting events, such as Bike Month and the Trueblood 100, and linking to neighborhood associations to offer bicycling opportunities for all ages and abilities. Enforcement — working with law enforcement to promote safe responsible bicycling and safety. Evaluation — creating metrics and methods for on-going review and improvement. A second worthwhile goal would be to better integrate promotion of bicycling with our climate action initiative. If Iowa City aspires to reduce its carbon footprint, it must decrease the air pollution from its largest source, vehicle exhaust. Promoting bicycling is the obvious alternative. Finally, it should be noted that a growing body of evidence suggests that bike friendliness has economic value. Working with the Iowa City Economic Development Group, Iowa City Area Business Partnership and other area businesses would be a third aspect of the committee's activities. In a study published by the American Institute of Economic Research, 32 of 40 communities that they identified as the "hottest" job markets were BFC. This includes eight of the 37 gold or platinum level BFC. Over an extended time, advocates for bicycling have had difficulty maintaining a viable rapport with the city. More than 40 years ago, Bicyclists of Iowa City advocated for our first bike lanes on Jefferson and Market, and 30 years ago created the first Bike to Work Day. About 15 years ago, Think Bicyclists of Johnson County (TB) was created to advocate for the bicycling community. At that time, TB funded a planning study to create bike lanes across the Burlington St. bridge. TB hired the same consultants employed by the MPOJC to create the Iowa City Master Bike Plan in 2017. TB while still in existence today has few members, met once in the past year and even less frequently over the past five years. In the last several years, Think Iowa City tried to convene an advocacy committee. It has now faded into non- existence. By merging the two current committees and creating the Bicycle Advocacy Committee, the city will offer a viable working committee to respond to our community's interests and the benefits of becoming a bicycle friendly community. Sincerely, Bob Oppliger (boboppliger@gmail.com) Education & Advocacy Coordinator Bicyclists of Iowa City & Board Member League of American Bicyclists CITY OIF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 1, 2020 ATTACHMENTS: Description Laura Stern: Complaint Item Number: 8.e. August 25, 2020 Bruce Teague City Council 410 E. Washington St. Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Bruce Teague and City Council Members: This is Laura Stern. Justice denied. The formal procedure I was put through was a sham. I made an appointment with Lonny Pulkrabek to make a formal complaint against Officer Dan Quill. Elley Gould, Lonny Pulkrabek and I went through a formal procedure in which they asked me questions for an hour, they asked me for the contact information of my children, Elley Gould called one of my children, who independently verified my statements during the procedure of the complaint. No paperwork was ever filed. Lonny Pulkrabek chose the welfare of the police officer over the commission of his office. This is the Sheriff of Johnson County. The City Council has a supervisory role over the police. Dan Quill and his wife continue to investigate me. I would like my case reviewed. The police should not be supervising the police. Sincerely, Laura Stern 4021 Maier Ave., SW Iowa City, IA 52240 319 400-2674 Istern@unt.edu 1,10 Item Number: 8.f. CITY OIF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 1, 2020 ATTACHMENTS: Description Nathan Chalkley - Fluoride in the Iowa City water Kellie Fruehling From: Chalkley, Nathan <nathan-chalkley@uiowa.edu> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 12:12 PM To: Council Subject: Fluoride in the Iowa City water AA R11K Hello Iowa City Council, I am a life long resident and soon to be home owner in Iowa City. I would like to bring an issue to your attention. I think that it would be in the best interest of all those living in Iowa City to have fluoride removed/not added to our tap water. There is ample scientific evidence to suggest that their are negative consequences to consuming fluoride in our tap water. Furthermore, the purpose of putting it in the water to improve dental hygiene ignores the fact that almost all toothpaste already has fluoride. All in all, I think that the scientific evidence is pretty clear that we should not be putting fluoride in our water. Being that we in Iowa City pride ourselves on being well educated and believing in science, I think it is time to act on this! Thank you for reading and I hope you will consider this! Best, Nathan Nathan Chalkley, BS Laboratory Manager and Research Assistant http://wessellab.org University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Neurology Cell: (319) 400-5994 CITY OIF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 1, 2020 ATTACHMENTS: Description Mary Gravitt - SEATS bus mishap Item Number: 8.g. Kellie Fruehling From: Mary Gravitt <gravittmary@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2020 12:50 PM To: Council Subject: SEATS BUS MISHAP On Friday August 21, 2020, I made an appointment with Johnson County SEATS to schedule a ride for August 24. Since I am a member of SEATS and have used it on several occasions for doctor appointments and found it reliable. However, this time it was not. Since I am a member, SEATS has all my information as to name, address, phone number and so forth. My address is always a problem for SEATS drivers who are not familiar with my apartment building. There are 12 apartments to Wayne Avenue Apartments. In the inside of the building are found apartments 1 to 4 and 7 to 10. Outside on the back drive is 5-6-11, and 12. My apartment is #6. I have explained the layout of the building on several occasion when making my SEATS appointments, and they have it written in my record. I told them that #6 is located on the outside of the building on the back drive, which is a public drive. Since it is a public drive the SEATS Bus can pull up into the drive to pick me up. In order to assist the driver, I have given instruct that I live on the Arthur Street side of the building on the drive, and this is also in my record. But the drivers always seem to get lost trying to find my apartment and usually call the dispatcher who rings me. Not this time. I My doctor's appointment was 11:15 and I received a robot call affirming my appointments for pick-up and the return trip and it gave me a window of time. I was ready by loam with my front door wide open waiting for the driver. By 11am, no driver, and no call. So I called SEATS and was told that I should have been outside waiting for the SEATS Bus because he would only wait 5 minutes if I were not there. And he was not obligated to call me if he could not find me. I am disabled because of joint erosion and ostepuroses in my knee and am not able to stand for long periods of time or my knee attempts to lock. Thereby standing outside and waiting for the SEATS Bus is almost impossible. When the dispatcher attempted to reach the driver that was assigned to pick me up, the driver was off-line and could not be contacted. When contacted the driver said that he was on Arthur Street at 10:30 and waited for the required 5 minutes and I was not there waiting. The robot call, I am sure state a 10:40 window. However, if he were on Arthur Street, I would have seen him drive down to Muscatine Street from my door which faces that way. I was forced to change my medical appointment. What I am concerned about is what if I were a dialysis patient or a patient going in for an operation, or helpless and desperate for medical treatment instead of going in for a check-up and am relatively healthy other than for my knee. As I senior citizen, I have to look out for others who aren't as fortunate as I. 2 I believe that particular SEATS driver is illiterate and challenged otherwise, or to be dramatic went someplace goofing off so that he could not be contacted by the dispatcher. I want someone at City Counsel to look into my complaint so that no other disabled person will be mistreated by SEATS like I was. Please look at this letter as a formal complaint. I have more to say about the times that I have had to hunt down the SEATS bus that never seems able to find my place, but one complaint at a time. Mary Gravitt 2714 Wayne Avenue #6 Iowa City, IA 52240 319.341.6230 3 Item Number: 8.h. 1 CITY OF IOWA CITY ��.:. -dry in � at COUNCIL ACTION REPORT September 1, 2020 Removal of (2) metered parking stalls and establishment of a Commercial Vehicle Loading Zone on the north side of the 300 block of East Market Street. Prepared By: Frank Waisath, Associate Transportation Planner Reviewed By: Kent Ralston, Transportation Planner Tracy Hightshoe, Neighborhood and Development Services Director Fiscal Impact: None. Recommendations: Staff: Approval Commission: N/A Attachments: None Executive Summary: As directed by Title 9, Chapter 1, Section 3B of the City Code, this is to advise the City Council of the following action: Pursuant to Section 9-1-3A (17, 18); Remove (2) metered parking stalls (#M304E and #M306E) on the north side of the 300 block of East Market Street and establish a commercial vehicle loading zone with a 30 minute limit 6 AM to 6 PM and a No Parking 2 AM to 6 AM Tow Away Zone. Background /Analysis: This action is being taken at the request of Transportation Services to provide commercial vehicle parking as a result of the completion of the development at 202 N. Linn Street (aka 'Market House'). Kellie Fruehling From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: RISK Good Morning, Crissy Canganelli <crissy@shelterhouseiowa.orgn Friday, August 28, 2020 11:40 AM Council Request to oppose HUD's proposed rule change 20200826 HUD Sec Letter.docx Atg,i Late Handouts Distributed F -3j--2-0 (Date) I am writing on behalf of the Agency Impact Coalition and Johnson County Local Homeless Coordinating Board. We are sending the attached letter to HUD Secretary Carson to voice our concerns and opposition to a proposed rule change: FR -6152-P-01, Making Admission or Placement Determinations Based on Sex in Facilities Under Community Planning and Development Housing Programs, Docket Number HUD -2020-0047. If passed, this rule change would remove protections for transgender people seeking shelter under the 2016 Equal Access Rule. • Prior to the passage of the 2016 Equal Access Rule, the 2015 US Transgender Survey reported that nearly a quarter of all respondents experienced housing discrimination in the previous year. • One in three transgender and nonbinary people experience homelessness at some point in their lives. That statistic increases to nearly one in two for trans and non -binary people who identify as black, middle eastern, multi -racial, or who are undocumented. • Access to safe and secure housing is sometimes all that stands between transgender people and deadly violence. That violence has a profoundly disproportionate impact on trans people of color with a staggering 91 percent of victims of fatal anti -trans violence in 2019 being black women. Public comment is being accepted through September 22"d. Please consider joining us in opposition to this proposed rule change by submitting concerns through the portal at httos://housingsaveslives.org and writing directly to Secretary Carson. Respectfully, Crissy Canganelli Executive Director Shelter House Co-chair Agency Impact Coalition Chair Johnson County Local Homeless Coordinating Board Dear Secretary Carson We write today as a continuum of housing and human service professionals to voice our concern with FR -6152-P-01, Making Admission or Placement Determinations Based on Sex in Facilities Under Community Planning and Development Housing Programs, Docket Number HUD -2020-0047, which would remove protections for transgender people seeking shelter under the 2016 Equal Access Rule. To the extent this decision is based on protecting the safety of shelter guests across the country, let us say this: we care about safety in America's shelters. And individuals are safest when all women—whether transgender or cisgender—are housed together and when all men—again, whether transgender or cisgender—are housed together. Similarly, nonbinary individuals should be housed with their preferred cohort. The experts agree. in 2016, more than 300 national and local providers co-signed the National Task Force to End Sexual and Domestic Violence Against Women's statement that affirmed housing transgender individuals according to the gender they live each and every day does not adversely impact safety. This is true in the more than 200 municipalities and 18 states that at the time had nondiscrimination laws in place. These laws have protected people from discrimination as well as increased access to critically needed facilities without causing harm to other clients and guests. But this isn't as simple as pressing pause on a rule change that would unnecessarily restrict services to trans and nonbinary individuals to limit a presumed and unproven harm to cisgender individuals. Rather, this proposed rule change would not only not protect the cis community; it would actively harm the trans community. Prior to the passage of the 2016 Equal Access Rule, the 2015 US Transgender Survey reported that nearly a quarter of all respondents experienced housing discrimination in the previous year. Of those who experienced homelessness in the previous year, more than one quarter avoided staying in a shelter because, as a transgender person, they feared being mistreated. Of those who did seek and receive shelter, fully 70 percent reported harassment, sexual or physical assault, or removal due to their status as a transgender individual. When we look at lifetime statistics, the numbers are even more grim. One in three transgender and nonbinary people experience homelessness at some point in their lives. That statistic increases to nearly one in two for trans and non -binary people who identify as black, middle eastern, multi -racial, or who are undocumented. Access to safe and secure housing is sometimes all that stands between transgender people and deadly violence. And that violence does not accrue evenly within the non-cisgender population; rather, there is a profoundly disproportionate impact on trans people of color. The Human Rights Campaign's research shows that a staggering 91 percent of victims of fatal anti -trans violence in 2019 were black women. That the proposed rule will permit staff trained only in service provision, not gender discernment, to assess gender and provide or deny shelter accordingly is both risk and liability. This ad hoc assessment and denial put not only trans and non -binary, but cisgender, individuals at risk too. This is particularly problematic in cases where an individual might not present as clearly masculine or feminine. What a thing, to be denied shelter in a time of desperate need because you don't look man enough, or woman enough. Secretary Carson, this proposed rule change will in no way impact our operations. We will continue to treat housing as the human right that it is without policing gender identity. Indeed since 2007, transgender Iowans have accessed services and facilities in accordance with their gender identities, with no documented rise in safety incidents. But providers elsewhere —whether for overtly discriminatory reasons or due to the horrible Sophie's Choice that limited financial and spatial resources present—might not do the same. The proposed rule change will allow providers to turn people away—into sweltering heat and bitter cold—simply based on their gender expression. This proposed rule change is not the role of the Department charged with creating strong, sustainable, inclusive communities and quality affordable housing for all. if promulgated, you will stand in direct conf|ictw/ithyourverypurpnse.VVeinop|ureymutureversecourse$ndpreservethe2O16Equa|Aocess The Agency Impact Coalition Kellie Fruehling From: Drew Cameron <combatpaper@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, August 28, 2020 10:11 AM To: policechiefsearch; Council Cc: Combat Paper Subject: City Search for Police Chief Feedback & City Manager, Assistant City Manager, Human Resources Administrator and City Council: Late Handouts Distributed x_31 -Za (Date) After reviewing the various components of the ongoing search for the upcoming appointment of Police Chief to the City of Iowa City. I feel that Dustin D. Liston is the best candidate of the three finalists. He has connections to Iowa City that are deep and varied which allows him to understand and remain invested in our community and the health and welfare of all our residents. He has lived and worked outside of Iowa which gives him additional life experience and perspective helpful in acting with compassion and understanding. He has served honorably in the US military which allows him to develop humility and restraint as well as an appreciation for the US constitution. The other candidates, although capable don't carry the variety and depth that Dustin D. Liston would provide us here in Iowa City. Thank you for your consideration in these important matters. Respectfully, Drew Cameron Resident of Iowa City Kellie Fruehling From: Gourronc, Francoise {francoise-gourroncCauiowa.edu> Sent: Monday, August 31, 2020 2:09 PM To: Council Late Handouts Distributed Subject: Iowa City Police Chief recruitment t (Date) RISK Hello, I have been following the recruitment process of the new Iowa City Police Chief. A list of questions was submitted to the 3 candidates by email, offering to address even with short answers many concerns drawn by some Iowa City residents Only one candidate: Jason Lando, took the time to answer this long list of question. I was not always impressed by all his answers but he showed a clear commitment to address and communicate. I don't think we should settle for less. Thankyou Francoise Gourronc 925 Park Rd Iowa City 52246 Notice: This UI Health Care e-mail (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521 and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete or destroy all copies of the original message and attachments thereto. Email sent to or from UI Health Care may be retained as required by law or regulation. Thank you. Kellie Fruehling From: Sent: To: t RISK Dear Iowa City Council - Bob McMurray <the1bob@9mail.com> Monday, August 31, 2020 2:31 PM Late Handouts Distributed Council (Date) I'll preface this letter by saying that I know that in the grand scheme of things noise is a really small question. I know you have much bigger fish to fry at the moment, and in my view Iowa City and the Council are doing a fantastic job leading our city through the multiple crises we face. Thank you. That said, I'm writing to request the council to review (and perhaps amend) the current noise restrictions in the Iowa City Code. As do many Iowa Citians, I play in a band (we do live in the Greatest Small City for the Arts!). But with the pandemic, there are no longer venues for live performance, and it is not feasible to maintain social distancing while playing in close quarters in doors. We've been forced to move outside. However, right now the City code does not appear to permit amplified anywhere except downtown or at a school or church, and there does not appear to be any way to request a permit for any location other than downtown. As a result, a lot of the music in Iowa City has stopped. Thus, these restrictions are not at all unrelated to the current situation we find ourselves in. This particular restriction seems arbitrary to me. If used responsibly, amplified music is not any louder than 1) the (non -amplified) lawnmowers that grace my ears every Saturday morning, 2) my neighbors' backup generator which ran continuously through the night for a week after the derecho, 3) Mid -American's tree trimming teams (before the derecho) which trimming trees all over the city; 4) the City High marching band which I can hear in my house starting at 7AM most mornings (and which 1 quite like), or 5) the City High football announcer which is audible for almost a half mile until 11PM on every other Friday or so. I don't have any particular complaints about these noises (in fact, I like the City High band, and I do mow my lawn [though at perhaps a more neighbor -friendly times]). However, I don't see why amplified music -- which is generally at the same or lower loudness as these other activities -- should be held out and treated any differently than these other things; nor do I see why a school or church should have special treatment over any other organization (e.g., a community group, a band, or even just the neighbors on my cul-de-sac who would very much like to organize an event with music). Why should a band playing in the afternoon receive a visit from the ICPD when a chainsaw running at 7AM is fine? I am not advocating an "anything goes" approach to this problem. It is perfectly reasonable to put limits on sound, and I think a permitting process makes sense as well. However, the code as written seems to unfairly target some kinds of sounds over others. In my view, a code that was focused on the overall loudness of the sound (which is fairly inexpensive to measure), the hours at which certain activities might be permitted, and a permitting process would be much fairer than one that singled out certain groups (schools and churches), and certain types of sounds for preferential treatment. If a more neutral city code is not possible, at least some form of permitting process for sounds outside of the downtown area would be quite nice. I know this is a minor issue, but as right now, we all have to be outdoors to achieve any kind of social interaction while maintaining social distancing. In this way, some revisitation of this issue could make a small difference in a lot of people's lives. Thanks, Bob McMurray and The Negotiators 2023 Rochester Ct. Kellie Fruehling From: Kellie Fruehling Late Handouts Distributed Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 10:50 AM To: 'Bob McMurray'; Council q D Subject: RE: (Date) Good morning, There is an application process for parades/public assembly permits for a group of more than 25 people wanting to use the City streets and/or City Plaza and/or the sidewalks or more than loo people wanting to use any City park. The application and information can be found at the following: https://www.ic og v.org/narkuse. The amplified sound permit is required for the City Plaza only. Please contact me if you have any questions. =10WA CITY A UNCSCO CIFY Of LittQAFUAC �e&e 'Fr tfP,4 (in , City Clerk office: 319-356-5041 410 E Washington St, Iowa City, IA 52240 WWW ICGOV.ORG 0000 From: Bob McMurray <thelbob@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, August 31, 2020 2:31 PM To: Council <Council@iowa-city.org> Subject: I RISK( Dear Iowa City Council - I'll preface this letter by saying that I know that in the grand scheme of things noise is a really small question. I know you have much bigger fish to fry at the moment, and in my view Iowa City and the Council are doing a fantastic job leading our city through the multiple crises we face. Thank you. That said, I'm writing to request the council to review (and perhaps amend) the current noise restrictions in the Iowa City Code. As do many Iowa Citians, I play in a band (we do live in the Greatest Small City for the Arts!). But with the pandemic, there are no longer venues for live performance, and it is not feasible to maintain social distancing while playing in close quarters in doors. We've been forced to move outside. However, right now the City code does not appear to permit amplified anywhere except downtown or at a school or church, and there does not appear to be any way to request a permit for any location other than downtown. As a result, a lot of the music in Iowa City has stopped. Thus, these restrictions are not at all unrelated to the current situation we find ourselves in. This particular restriction seems arbitrary to me. If used responsibly, amplified music is not any louder than 1) the (non -amplified) lawnmowers that grace my ears every Saturday morning, 2) my neighbors' backup generator which ran continuously through the night for a week after the derecho, 3) Mid -American's tree trimming teams (before the derecho) which trimming trees all over the city; 4) the City High marching band which I can hear in my house starting at 7AM most mornings (and which I quite like), or 5) the City High football announcer which is audible for almost a half mile until 11PM on every other Friday or so. I don't have any particular complaints about these noises (in fact, I like the City High band, and I do mow my lawn [though at perhaps a more neighbor -friendly times]). However, I don't see why amplified music -- which is generally at the same or lower loudness as these other activities -- should be held out and treated any differently than these other things; nor do I see why a school or church should have special treatment over any other organization (e.g., a community group, a band, or even just the neighbors on my cul-de-sac who would very much like to organize an event with music). Why should a band playing in the afternoon receive a visit from the ICPD when a chainsaw running at 7AM is fine? am not advocating an "anything goes" approach to this problem. It is perfectly reasonable to put limits on sound, and I think a permitting process makes sense as well. However, the code as written seems to unfairly target some kinds of sounds over others. In my view, a code that was focused on the overall loudness of the sound (which is fairly inexpensive to measure), the hours at which certain activities might be permitted, and a permitting process would be much fairer than one that singled out certain groups (schools and churches), and certain types of sounds for preferential treatment. If a more neutral city code is not possible, at least some form of permitting process for sounds outside of the downtown area would be quite nice. I know this is a minor issue, but as right now, we all have to be outdoors to achieve any kind of social interaction while maintaining social distancing. In this way, some revisitation of this issue could make a small difference in a lot of people's lives. Thanks, Bob McMurray and The Negotiators 2023 Rochester Ct. Item Number: 10.b. �r CITY OE IOWA CITY www.iogov.org September 1, 2020 Letter to the Johnson County Board of Adjustment recommending denial of a conditional use permit for a kennel and daycare facility in the County Residential (R) zone at Lot 2 and Outlot A of Lovik First Subdivision within Fringe Area B - Inside the City's Growth Boundary of the City/County Fringe Area. (CREZ20-0002) ATTACHMENTS: Description PZ Staff Report wAttachments PZ Preliminary Minutes Letter to County BOA r � ,:,® CITY OF IOWA CITY ��,M 4 � T4 MEMORANDUM Date: August 20, 2020 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Joshua Engelbrecht, Planning Intern Re: CUP20-0003 Conditional Use Permit for Dog Kennel and Daycare Facility in Unincorporated Johnson County Background Information Bryan Jensen has submitted a Conditional Use Permit application to the Johnson County Board of Adjustment for the allowance of a dog kennel and daycare facility located on Lot 2 and Outlot A of 4665 Herbert Hoover Highway, in Johnson County. It is the role of the Planning and Zoning Commission to determine if the conditional use that is being applied for, a dog kennel and daycare facility within the City/County Fringe Area, should be recommended for approval to the City Council. The subject property is within Fringe Area "B" of the Fringe Area Policy Agreement, and inside of the City's growth boundary. The Johnson County Zoning Ordinance requires that cities be allowed to review Conditional Use Permits within their extraterritorial jurisdiction (the area covered by the Fringe Area Agreement). Conditional Use Permits in Johnson County require a 4/5 majority vote of the Board of Adjustment to approve if the use is opposed by a vote of the City Council. The subject property is zoned County Residential (R). Adjacent properties to the immediate north, south, east and west are also zoned County Residential (R). Properties to the east within City Limits are zoned Low Density Single -Family (RS -5) and Low Density Multi -Family (RM -12). Properties to the west within City Limits are zoned Interim Development Single -Family Residential (ID -RS), and Medium Density Multi -Family (RM -20), and Commercial Office (CO -1). Proposed Land Use: The Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) defines a kennel as: "An establishment, including structures and run areas, where domesticated animals, such as cats and dogs, are boarded, bred, or raised commercially or for compensation. Includes daytime -only boarding and daycare facilities". The proposed kennel is intended to provide daycare and boarding for dogs with the ability for customers to request additional services such as grooming, teeth brushing and baths. Although the definition for kennel states specifically that daytime -only boarding is allowed, it does not exclude overnight boarding. The applicant has stated that they estimate an occupancy of 50 dogs per day as well as 6-8 employees. The subject property is located inside of the City's Growth Boundary and the City's Northeast District Plan identifies this area as appropriate for single-family residential. It also identifies the existing residential land uses in this area. The County's future land use map land use category for this area is Agricultural. The existing neighborhood character features low density residences to the east, multi -family residential and August 13, 2020 Page 2 commercial buildings to the west, and large amounts of open space to the north and south. The subject property contains approximately 8.2 acres. The proposed dog kennel and daycare facility must comply with the following supplemental conditions (summarized) from section 8.1.23 of the Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance pertaining to Kennels: 1. Kennels shall not be located on parcels of fewer than five (5) acres, except as provided in this section. 2. Kennels may be located on parcels three (3) acres or larger where the following conditions are met. The facility does not provide overnight boarding services. No more than 4 dogs which do not reside on the property are present at any given time. 3. All structures and run areas used to house or exercise animals shall be setback a minimum of two hundred (200') feet from all property lines. 4. Animal boarding facilities may exceed the limits for keeping of dogs or cats contained in this section when counting animals temporarily boarded for compensation. The number of animals permanently residing on the premises shall comply with said limits at all times. Due to the layout of the site, it is unlikely that the project will be able to meet the 200' setback minimum. Although the County has not yet received an application, it does allow for the setback to be reduced to 100' through the special exception process. City Analysis Zoning The proposed dog kennel and daycare use is allowed as a conditional use in Residential (R) County. The use is therefore an allowable conditional use in the current County Residential (R) zone. Fringe Area Aqreement For land within Fringe Area B, Inside the Growth Boundary, the Fringe Area policy states the following: "Prior to annexation, any zoning changes in Iowa City's projected growth area shall also be consistent with the City's adopted land use." o Staff Comment: The proposed application does not contemplate a change in zoning. Development projects within Iowa City's projected growth area shall conform to City Urban Design Standards contained in Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of Iowa City, including but not limited to City specifications for streets and roads, sanitary sewer lines, stormwater management facilities and water lines. Developments which are approved prior to annexation shall be required to be served by a package sanitary sewage treatment plant and common wells with sanitary sewer and water collection and distribution systems which are August 13, 2020 Page 3 constructed to City standards and can be connected to municipal systems upon annexation. Staff Comment: In addition to complying with the City's Urban Design Standards, staff wants to ensure street connectivity in this area. The existing north/south streets, Nex Ave and American Pharoah Drive, are over 1,000 feet apart. Another north/south street is needed in this area, as well as the extension of Grindstone Drive, which is currently stubbed. Due to the importance of ensuring an interconnected street network, staff is recommending a condition that prior to obtaining any building permits from the County, written approval from the City is needed on the location of any future buildings or structures (including fences) to ensure future street connectivity. Current and Future Land Use The subject parcel will likely be included in the future expansion of the City's limits. However, the land cannot be annexed at this time without creating an island of unincorporated County land to the south, which is not allowed by State law. The County's Future Land Use Plan indicates that the subject parcel is appropriate for Agricultural land uses. There is one structure, an outbuilding, currently located on the site. Figure 1 shows the approximate location of the project site to the City limits. To the west of the project site and within the City's jurisdiction, is a recently constructed multi -family building. To the east is a City subdivision that consists predominately of single-family land uses, but also some multi -family. The distances shown in Figure 1 are in addition to the County's setback requirements. Due to the proximity of existing residential, staff proposes imposing a condition that requires any overnight boarding facilities to be located completely indoors within a soundproof building. Fi Limits \ 4414 August 13, 2020 Page 4 Compliance with County Conditions: Staff recommends that all County supplemental requirements be fulfilled in addition to conditions recommended by staff. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of an application submitted by Bryan Jensen for a conditional use permit to allow for a dog kennel and daycare facility on Lot 2 and Outlot A of 4665 Herbert Hoover Highway in unincorporated Johnson County, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the overnight boarding facilities be located completely indoors within a soundproof building; and 2. Prior to obtaining any building permits from the County, written approval from the City on the location of any future building or structure (including fences) to ensure future street connectivity. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Zoning Map 3. Fringe Area Map 4. Application Information Approved by: Davie a Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator, Department of Neighborhood and Development Services Office $ a -2.0— d I Use Only ❑ate Filed Fee Application Number J91-Alson County JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA APPLICATION FOR: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT C(OPY Application is hereby made for approval of a (official use as listed in the Johnson County UDO, and briefly describe the proposed use [e.g. Home Industry for Antique shop, Special Events for Corn Maze, etc.]}: Dod boarding kennel and dog day care facility. Address of Location: Subdivision name and lot number (if applicable): Lot 2 and outlot A of 4665 Herbert Hoover HWY Current zoning: Residential parcel Number: 0907214993 - 9997214002 PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE The undersigned affirms that the Information provided herein is true and correct. If applicant is not the owner, applicant affirms that the owner(s) of the property described on this application consent to this application being submitted, and said owners hereby give their consent for the office of Johnson County planning, Development, and Sustainability to conduct a site visit and photograph the subject property. Bryan and Dave Jensen Name of Owner Name of Applicant (if different) 3571 Hanks Dr. SB, Iowa City, IA 52249 Applicant Street Address (including City, State, Zip) 319-631-8369 Applicant Phone Bryan@topcityconcrete.com Applicant Email Ban Jensen Bryan Jensen Det'ea2020 07.10y16 22,29 05'00' Applicant Signature See back page for Application Submittal Requirements and Checklist ILE Jul- 16 2020 Updated and current its of 06.04.2020_LMN/I PLANNING & SU5 RECE1�ED o, JUL 1.6 2020 ON COUNTY PLANNING, VEL MENT & SUSTAINABILITY We are purposing to build a dog kennel and day care facility to provide day care and boarding for dogs with a variety of socialization. Dog owners will also be able to add on services such as grooming, teeth brushing, baths, treats, as well as transportation. We estimate 50 dogs per day and 6-8 employees throughout the day to help clean, manage the dogs, and provide the transportation. Parking will be available in front of the facility. Due to the quick drop offs, we do not expect more than 8-10 people from the public on site at one time. Hours of operation will be during drop off or pick up or by appointment or Monday — Friday from 6:00 am — 9:00 am or 4:00 pm — 6:00 pm. Employees will be in the building from 6 am — 6 pm, but we will not be open to the public except for pick up and drop off times or by apportionment. The equipment that will be used are kennels and dog grooming equipment. A septic system will be installed and a bathroom for employees will be installed inside the building. There will also be hook ups to the existing well. A signed will be placed by the driveway close to the road. V. 1 I'I 1 , q,I,vIHVHo w 2 ) F LU \ _ - - ; @ - P ® §|\ 2f 2 J.? } { LU § � \ , § / \ , , q,I,vIHVHo w 2 ) F LU \ _ - - ; @ - P ® §|\ 2f 2 J.? u W W N U '0 ° A & cW ueAJ 64 cd .o A C,3 cd a C'4 a cn °2S a'"i .� u a) Cd ami 025 ° oCd U � v a� °aU 0 O r Q\ N M cd O' O .—� ti D N d' 00 U 00 U S M /� L t E cn r -IO H M\ t� \D H\D U M d L', Q A A 0 0 0 m Cd a a Ui U U o a .bC13 Cd (d0 Q U U U c N L\ 0� r �, cN UO �ML00.�M EiC) 0 a s CO � ; a x l � W W N U '0 ° A & cW ueAJ 64 cd .o A C,3 cd a C'4 a cn °2S a'"i .� u a) Cd ami 025 ° oCd U � v a� °aU 0 O r Q\ N M cd O' O .—� ti D N d' 00 U 00 U S M /� L t E cn r -IO H M\ t� \D H\D U M d L', W � H 1-4�a 0 a oa CO � ; a x 1-4 aS .a cri A x .o 4 a � o ° U �U U U ,,U U U al O u 000 C4 \10 O � as�—,� � � � da 94\,o N W\,o 3-4 � m � O x� � � Air W W N U '0 ° A & cW ueAJ 64 cd .o A C,3 cd a C'4 a cn °2S a'"i .� u a) Cd ami 025 ° oCd U � v a� °aU 0 O r Q\ N M cd O' O .—� ti D N d' 00 U 00 U S M /� L t E cn r -IO H M\ t� \D H\D U M d L', Planning and Zoning Commission August 20, 2020 Page 3 of 10 Hensch asked what Fringe Area Agreement they are operating off as he knows the southeast area of Iowa City Fringe Area agreement had expired some time ago. Is this based on that expired Fringe Area Agreement or is there a current agreement that hasn't expired yet. Russett stated the Fringe Area Agreement hasn't expired yet and they are still operating under that one. Hensch asked if in this rezoning are they planning on building a new structure on that 1.76 acre parcel. Engelbrecht stated the application didn't specify so he is not entirely sure but doesn't assume so. Hensch asked approximately how many miles this is from City limits. Engelbrecht is unsure, but noted it is less than two miles. Hensch opened the public hearing. Scott Ritter (Hart -Frederick Consultants) is representing the applicant and is available to answer any questions. He did note at this time he knows of no other buildings to be built there. Hearing no questions for the applicant, and no other public input, Hensch closed the public hearing. Signs moved to recommend approval of CREZ20-0001, an application for a rezoning of approximately 1.76 acres of County Agriculture (A) to County Residential (R) within Fringe Area B — Outside the Growth Boundary of the City/County Fringe Area. Nolte seconded the motion. Hensch noted given the distance from the City, it's not in the growth area and it looks like it's probably close to the two mile outer limit and there's already an existing structure on there he support this application. Signs asked the staff again that there appears to be a little remnant of nonagricultural use or non -field use just to the north of the subject property and could that be re -subdivided at some future time to build another house. Russett replied that would have to be rezoned first before it could be subdivided. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. CASE NO. CREZ20-0002: Applicant: Bryan Jensen Location: Lot 2 and Outlot A of 4665 Herbert Hoover Hwy; Unincorporated Johnson County An application for a conditional use permit to allow for a kennel and dog care facility in the County Residential (R) zone within Fringe Area B — Inside the City's Growth Boundary of the City/County Fringe Area. Engelbrecht noted this application is for a conditional use permit within Fringe area B for kennel and dog care facility. He showed an aerial view of the property and the distance from Iowa City. The property is zoned County Residential and there is a low-density residential development to Planning and Zoning Commission August 20, 2020 Page 4 of 10 the east and then mixed use and multifamily development to the west. The application is also within Fringe Area B however, this one is inside the growth area of the Fringe Area Agreement. Regarding the background, this is an application to Johnson County Board of Adjustment for the allowance of a dog kennel and daycare facility in Johnson County. A conditional use permit allows for a conditionally permitted use on a specific property and the role of the County Board of Adjustment is to determine if a dog kennel and daycare facility meets the supplemental conditions based on the facts presented and they may impose additional conditions if they deem necessary. Engelbrecht pointed this out to make a distinction between the Commission's discretion in policymaking ability and the County Board of Adjustment roll of approving an application based on if it meets required conditions and criteria. The proposed land use is a kennel intended to provide daycare and boarding for dogs with the ability for the customers to request additional services such as grooming (which would require another conditional use permit in the future). The subject property is located inside of the Iowa City growth boundary and the City's Northeast District Plan identifies this area as appropriate for single family residential. Engelbrecht showed some pictures of where the facility would be located and the concept plan showing the proposed kennel and sign. He noted there is development in Iowa City further down the road, open space to the north, and then more open space and some development to the east. The Johnson County Supplemental Conditions state proposed daycare facility and kennel must comply with the following supplemental conditions from section 8.1.23 of the Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance. The first is the kennel shall not be located on parcels fewer than five acres except for as provided in the section. The property is approximately 8.4 acres so the first condition is already met and that means that the second condition doesn't necessarily apply. The second conditions is kennels may be located on parcels three acres or larger if the facility does not provide overnight boarding services and no more than four dogs which do no reside on the property are present at any given time. The third is that all structures and run areas used to house or exercise animals shall be set back a minimum of 200 feet from all property lines. Engelbrecht noted due to the layout of the site, it is unlikely that the project will be able to meet this condition however, the setback can be reduced to 100 feet through the County Special Exception Process. The fourth condition is that animal boarding facilities may exceed the limits for keeping of dogs or cats contained in the section when counting animals temporarily boarded for compensation. The number of animals permanently residing on the premises shall comply with set limits at all times. Regarding the City analysis, the proposed kennel and daycare facility use is allowed as a conditional use in County Residential zones and development projects within Iowa City's projected growth area shall conform to City Urban Design Standards contained in Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of Iowa City, including but not limited to City specifications for streets and roads, sanitary sewer lines, stormwater management facilities and water lines. In addition to complying with the City's Urban Design Standards, staff wants to ensure future street connectivity in this area. Additionally, because the site is located near existing residential uses, staff is recommending the following two conditions for this development. The first being all overnight boarding facilities are located within a soundproof building. Second prior to obtaining any building permits from the County, written approval from the City on the location of any future building or structures is required. Engelbrecht showed an aerial view of the subject property noting it is anywhere from 160 to 230 feet from residential uses, which is the reason for wanting to implement the soundproofing Planning and Zoning Commission August 20, 2020 Page 5 of 10 condition. The existing north/south streets, Nex Ave and American Pharoah Drive, are over 1,000 feet apart so another north/south street is needed in this area, as well as the extension of Grindstone Drive, which is currently stubbed. Staff recommends that all County Supplemental requirements be fulfilled in addition to the conditions that will be recommended by staff. Engelbrecht reiterated the applicant can request a reduction in the 200 foot setback requirement through the County Special Exception Process. The role of the Commission is to determine if the dog kennel and daycare facility should be recommended for approval to City Council and then City Council will make a formal recommendation to the Johnson County Board of Adjustments. Staff recommends approval of an application submitted by Bryan Jensen for a conditional use permit to allow for a dog kennel and daycare facility on Lot 2 and Outlot A of 4665 Herbert Hoover Highway in unincorporated Johnson County, subject to the following additional conditions: 1. That the overnight boarding facilities be located completely indoors within a soundproof building; and 2. Prior to obtaining any building permits from the County, written approval from the City on the location of any future building or structure (including fences) to ensure future street connectivity. Martin asked if this application falls under the purview of needing to do Good Neighbor meeting because this is an area surrounded by Iowa City. Hensch stated likely not because it is in Johnson County corporate limits. Hensch noted the Commission has looked at this parcel before for different agenda items in the past and recalls the development to the west, the multifamily there, created a lot of stormwater issues and runoff to the property to the south so he wants to ensure for this application the City Urban Design Standard are met. He asked if the City have a review process as that development occurs to make sure that happens. Russett stated that since this parcel is over two acres and a non-residential use is proposed, the City would review the site plan. Since it's not being subdivided at this time, they would look at it to ensure compliance with Urban Design Standards, which includes stormwater management. Hensch's second question is mostly just an education piece for the Commission on a Conditional Use Permit, once that's granted, does it go on in perpetuity with the property regardless if the property changes hand, or if the use ceases for at least a year. Russett stated she is not entirely sure if it's in perpetuity or if they need to be renewed. She did note if there are any issues with the use after it's built such as complaints from neighbors, for whatever reasons, it can come back to the County Board of Adjustments for review. Craig stated she was going to ask about the good neighbor policy as well because it does seem there are a lot of people that live within throwing distance of the new dog kennel and the Commission doesn't know what kind of information the neighbors are going to get about this proposal or not. That concerns her as the City limits are to the east and the west. She has concerns about all the exceptions that they're asking, it's smaller than the Johnson County Code says it should be, they're asking for an exception to the setback, it's in the middle of all this residential. Yes there is commercial on the corner but then there is multifamily housing, and it just feels like this whole piece should hook up to the other residential property on east. It doesn't seem logical to her that they're going to plunk down what she sees as a commercial use in the Planning and Zoning Commission August 20, 2020 Page 6 of 10 middle of what is currently residential and most logically would stay residential. She noted she drove out there today and it's a very attractive looking multifamily housing unit. Craig also questioned, it may not have anything to do with their decision making, but they talk about how they're going to use existing water and septic which also serves the house. Currently, it serves both houses and also one driveway is now going to serve the houses and 50 people a day coming to drop off their dogs. Russett noted she can't speak to that, it will have to be reviewed at the site plan stage and they would have to meet the well water and septic requirements but the City would have requirements in terms of our Urban Design Standards and ensuring that if this area's annexed it could be connected to City water and sewer. Craig asked if this application was in the City limits would staff still be approving it. Hensch stated about a year ago the Commission did approve a rezoning for a dog kennel operation at the north east corner of Dodge Street. Townsend remembered but noted that wasn't in the middle of a residential area, it was an area with a lot of other commercial buildings around it, as opposed to this one, which is in a residential area. Signs noted the Code called for a 200 -foot setback from all property lines and looking at the map he doesn't see any way in the world they're going to be even close to that setback from the property lines. Additionally, the report made reference of the need for connectivity to Grindstone and the possible need to have another street coming off of Herbert Hoover. If that new building is built smack in the middle of that parcel the other little building that's existing will make it hard to meet that connectivity. Russett said they would like see Grindstone connect with Nex Avenue. She also acknowledged with the existing structures having a north/south street may be difficult, but that's why they want to review the site plan because the location map and the concept that they've provided is a very rough concept. Signs asked if the site plan review would come back before the Commission or is that just a staff level review? Russett stated it would be a staff level review. Engelbrecht reiterated the applicant can request a reduction of the setbacks. Townsend asked regarding the setbacks, would those proposed come back before the Commission. Russett noted those would just go to the County Board of Adjustment. Signs asked if this property can be further subdivided and if they did have room to take Grindstone over to Nex Avenue and bisect the property, could it be subdivided to where development can be done on that southern half of the property. Russett said it may need to be rezoned, but she does believe there could be more development there. Signs noted then it puts the structure closer to another residential area. Russett spoke to two items that came up in the discussion. The first is the notifying the property owners and the County doesn't have a good neighbor policy that she aware of but they do have notification requirements. The neighbors are being notified of the County Board of Adjustment meeting. And second, this is an unusual situation where they have City and Unincorporated County boundaries like this and as Engelbrecht mentioned in his staff report there had been interest in annexing this land, however the City can't annex this land because there is some unincorporated County to the south which would create an island of unincorporated land which is not allowed by State law. Signs asked if that piece of property remains un -annexed for a length of time can the connection Planning and Zoning Commission August 20, 2020 Page 7 of 10 between Grindstone and Nex Avenue still be made and does the City have any control over that connection and/or the development to the south of that new connection. Russett stated the City would review any rezoning of the area which would go to the Commission and Council and any subdivisions of this land would have to go to the Planning Commission and need to be approved by City Council and need to meet the Urban Design Standards and street connectivity. Hensch opened the public hearing. Jessica Plowman stated she is speaking on behalf of Bryan Jensen and Dave Jensen the brothers that own all 14 acres of that land. Dave lives in the house the small skinny parcel to the west, and the small structure referred to as a house is actually a garage that's probably in disrepair and needs to be torn down. She added there is an unused well under that property that they will utilize for the dog kennel so it doesn't utilize the same well as what's on current houses. The other thing she wanted to address was the 200 -foot setback, she has talked to Johnson County and they said that it shouldn't be a problem for them to get the 100 -foot setbacks. They could fit a 60 x 100, 6000 square foot, building that is long and skinny in there and but that would not allow for an outdoor area for the dogs to go out. So there is a high possibility that they would take an acre of land to the east that Brian also owns with this parcel that they would take a little bit of that to allow for the area for the dogs to relieve themselves and that would meet the 100 - foot setback and could fit a building there. Plowman added they would make the building soundproof; they are very sensitive to the neighbors and the noise. She also added on the east side of the property there is a creek and that absorbs the noise a little bit. Hensch asked if Plowman could elaborate about the soundproofing or the hours that no dogs would be outside because sound seems to be an issue. Plowman stated after 6pm no dogs will be kept outside, they'll be put inside for the evening. They would need evening potty breaks but they'd go out one by one, and no group of animals will not be left out after 6pm. They're all be housed inside overnight and stay inside until 7am. Hensch acknowledged it doesn't occur at this level right now, but if the Board of Adjustment asked for some shrubs or trees or something to add for an additional sound barrier, is that something they would not object to. Plowman confirmed there would be no objections, and noted there are so many trees out there, noting they did have some damage with the recent storm, but there are so many trees that from the street one can't see the house and they wouldn't be able to see this building either. Townsend asked if there was additional land that they own then why didn't they allow enough for those 200 -foot setbacks. Bryan Jensen stated that setback is from the sliver to the west and his brother has three acres so that setback is from his house. The whole area is in different parcels, there's three acres to the west and then there's the 11 in the middle, etc. Hensch closed the public hearing. Signs moved to recommend approval of CREZ20-0002, an application submitted by Bryan Jensen for a conditional use permit to allow for a dog kennel and daycare facility on Lot 2 and Outlot A of 4665 Herbert Hoover Highway in unincorporated Johnson County, subject to the following conditions: Planning and Zoning Commission August 20, 2020 Page 8 of 10 1. That the overnight boarding facilities be located completely indoors within a soundproof building; and 2. Prior to obtaining any building permits from the County, written approval from the City on the location of any future building or structure (including fences) to ensure future street connectivity. Nolte seconded the motion. Hensch noted they have to remember the layers of review of the Code that are above them on this and that the Board of Adjustment will hear this also since this is in the unincorporated area, and it is an existing structure that exists where the special exception can be granted by the Board of Adjustment for that 100 -foot setback. He also thinks they addressed it pretty clearly about the soundproofing, their willingness to do some plantings or something to assist with that. He knows with a lot of development around there, the boarding of pets is really important and there is a shortage of that Iowa City as a pet owner, therefore, this is something that he will be supporting. Craig noted big concerns about the flow of residential as a beautiful new residential building is there to the west, and then there's going to be what most people would perceive as a commercial use before the residential picks up again. Additionally, the fact that this is surrounded on two sides by Iowa City she is having a hard time getting over those two things. Hensch understands that but noted they have to remember that any platting to occur must be approved by others and those issues will be addressed. They are talking about a conditional use here and shouldn't get too overly concerned on things that have to happen yet in the future. Townsend added her concern is not everyone is a pet owner, and not having that 200 -foot setback between the residences and this new use would be a concern to her. A vote was taken and the motion failed 3-3 (Craig, Signs and Townsend dissenting). CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: AUGUST 8, 2020: Craig moved to approve the meeting minutes of August 8, 2020. Townsend seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: None. DEFERRED TO 9/15/20 �� CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street September 1, 2020 Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (3 19) 356-5000 Johnson County Board of Adjustment (319) 356-5009 FAX Johnson County Admin Building; Planning, Development & Sustainability www' I`gov.org 913 S. Dubuque Street, Suite 204 Iowa City, IA 52240 RE: Conditional Use Permit for Dog Kennel and Daycare Facility; Lot 2 and Outlot A of Lovik First Subdivision, Unincorporated Johnson County Dear Members of the Board, The Iowa City City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission have reviewed the request from Bryan Jensen for a conditional use permit for the allowance of a dog kennel and daycare facility. The Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance requires that cities be allowed to review Conditional Use Permits for property within the Fringe Area. At its August 20, 2020 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, staff recommended approval of the conditional use permit subject to the following two additional conditions: 1. That the overnight boarding facilities be located completely indoors within a soundproof building; and 2. Prior to obtaining any building permits from the County, written approval from the City is needed on the location of any future building or structure (including fences). The motion to recommend approval of the conditional use permit failed by a vote of 3-3. The Commission recommended denial of the proposed kennel and daycare facility due to concerns related to the proximity of neighboring residences within City -limits. On September 1, 2020 the City Council reviewed the conditional use permit application and concurred with the Planning and Zoning Commission and recommends that this conditional use permit not be approved. If the Johnson County Board of Adjustment reviews the facts presented in the case and recommends approval of the conditional use permit, the City Council requests that you incorporate the two conditions recommended by staff, which are outlined above. Thank you for your consideration of our comments on this application. Sincerely, Bruce Teague Mayor, City of Iowa City -Wiob Kellie Fruehling From: Jessica Plowman <jessica@topcityconcrete.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 10:04 AM To: Council Cc: dl jensen8@gmail.com; Bryan Jensen; critter@hart-frederick.com; Luke McClanahan Subject: Request for Deferral Late Handouts Distributed RIAAI q- I—� (Date) Good Morning, We would like to request a deferral for tonight's council meeting. If you could please move our motion to the next meeting on September 15, 2020. The Planning and Zoning meeting has some concerns on our motion and we are working on alleviating those concerns and would like to be able present an updated plan addressing their concerns. Thank you for your time! t�/�" , , op off Jess Plowman Office Manager Office (319) 800-5069 Direct & Text (319) 383-3092 Email jessica@topcityconcrete.com Mailing 3571 Hanks Dr. SE I Iowa City, IA 52240 The content of this email is confidential and intended for the recipient specified in message only. It is strictly forbidden to share any part of this message with any third party, without a written consent of the sender. If you received this message by mistake, please reply to this message and follow with its deletion, so that we can ensure such a mistake does not occur in the future. STAFF PRESENTATION TO FOLLOW: 1 r I C04;qui h CITY OF lOVVA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa S2240-1826 (319) 356-5000 (3I9) 356-5009 FAX www.icgov.org Planning &Zoning Items Item 10.b: Conditional Use Permit- Herbert Hoover Highway CEZ20-02 Johnson County Conditional Use Permit A letter to the Johnson County Board of Adjustment recommending denial of a Conditional Use Permit for a kennel and daycare facility in the County Residential (R) zone at Lot 2 and Outlot A of Lovik First Subdivision within Fringe Area B — Inside the City's Growth Boundary of the City/County Fringe Area. (Deferral Requested by Applicant) Background Application to the Johnson County Board of Adjustment for the allowance of a dog kennel and daycare facility In Johnson County, a Conditional Use Permit allows for a conditionally permitted use on a specific property. Role of County Board of Adjustment: To determine if the dog kennel and daycare facility meet the supplemental conditions based on the facts presented; may impose additional conditions if deemed necessary. Proposed Land Use The proposed kennel is intended to provide daycare and boarding for dogs with the ability for customers to request additional services. The subject property is located inside of the City's Growth Boundary and the City's Northeast District Plan identifies this area as appropriate for single-family residential. ,� , y I Liiiiiiiiiii New Building 874 821 j - J --`L- Z �e 78E3921 787 787 � 755 = i60 759 1731, X 732 731 'n3 f7rr 3922 703 GRINDSTONE DR 3501 683 656 � Jjr--, Johnson County Supplemental Conditions The proposed kennel and daycare facility must comply with the following supplemental conditions (summarized) from section 8.1.23 of the Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance. 1. Kennels shall not be located on parcels of fewer than five (5) acres, except as provided in this section. 2. Kennels may be located on parcels three (3) acres or larger where the following conditions are met. The facility does not provide overnight boarding services. No more than 4 dogs which do not reside on the property are present at any given time. Johnson County Supplemental Conditions 3. All structures and run areas used to house or exercise animals shall be setback a minimum of two hundred (200') feet from all property lines. 4. Animal boarding facilities may exceed the limits for keeping of dogs or cats contained in this section when counting animals temporarily boarded for compensation. The number of animals permanently residing on the premises shall comply with said limits at all times. City Analysis The proposed dog kennel and daycare use is allowed as a conditional use in Residential (R) County. Development projects within Iowa City's projected growth area shall conform to City Urban Design Standards contained in Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of Iowa City, including but not limited to City specifications for streets and roads, sanitary sewer lines, stormwater management facilities and water lines. City Analysis In addition to complying with the City's Urban Design Standards, staff wants to ensure street connectivity in this area. The site is located near existing residential uses within the city limits Staff is recommending two conditions for this development: • All overnight boarding facilities be located within a soundproof building • Prior to obtaining any building permits from the County, written approval from the City on the location of any future building or structure (including fences) to ensure future street connectivity. Compliance with County Requests Staff recommendsthat all County supplemental requirements be fulfilled in addition to conditions recommended by staff Applicant may request a reduction in the 200' setback requirement through the special exception process Role of the Commission To determine if the dog kennel and daycare facility should be recommended for approval to the City Council. City Council will make formal recommendation to Johnson County Board of Adjustment. Next Steps After Commission and City Council consideration, the item will be brought before the Johnson County Board of Adjustment. Planning &Zoning Commission Recommendation The Planning & Zoning Commission recommends denial of an application submitted by Bryan Jensen for a conditional use permit to allow for a dog kennel and daycare facility on Lot 2 and Outlot A of 4665 Herbert Hoover Highway in unincorporated Johnson County, subject to the following additional conditions: 1. That the overnight boarding facilities be located completely indoors within a soundproof building; and 2. Prior to obtaining any building permits from the County, written approval from the City on the location of any future building or structure (including fences) to ensure future street connectivity. STAFF PRESENTATION CONCLUDED � r rrM as � h CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Strect Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (3 19) 356-5000 (3 19) 356-5009 FAX www. icgov. o rg Item Number: 10.c. �r CITY OE IOWA CITY www.iogov.org September 1, 2020 Letter to the Johnson County Planning and Zoning Commission in support of a rezoning from County Agriculture (A) to County Residential (R) for approximately 1.76 acres of property located at 4477 Sioux Avenue SE within Fringe Area B - Outside the Growth Boundary of the City/County Fringe Area. (CREZ20-0001) ATTACHMENTS: Description PZ Staff Report wAttachments PZ Preliminary Minutes Letter to County PZ r � ,:,® CITY OF IOWA CITY ��,M 4 � T4 MEMORANDUM Date: August 20, 2020 To: Planning & Zoning Commission From: Joshua Engelbrecht, Planning Intern Re: CREZ20-0001 — 4477 Sioux Ave. SE Background Information The applicant, Lindsey N. Fudge, is requesting a rezoning from County Agricultural (A) to County Residential (R) for approximately 1.76 acres of land located in Johnson County at 4477 Sioux Ave. SE in Fringe Area B — Outside of Iowa City's Growth Area. At this time the family of Tin Rose LLC, the property owner, would like to rezone this parcel for a family member. Because the property is within Iowa City's two-mile Fringe Area, the Fringe Area Agreement specifies that the City will make a recommendation to the County Planning and Zoning Commission before the County Commission considers the application. The final decision on the rezoning falls within the County's jurisdiction. In addition to the rezoning application, the applicant has submitted a subdivision application to the County to create two lots. One lot is the proposed residentially zoned lot, while the other 34.6 -acre lot will remain zoned Agriculture (A). Per the Fringe Area Agreement, subdivisions of land into fewer than three lots will continue to be regulated by the County; therefore, the City will not be reviewing the subdivision. Analysis Existing Land Use and Zoning The subject area is zoned County Agricultural (A) and currently contains a single-family residence. Properties to the north, south, east and west are zoned County Agricultural (A) with the exception of two properties (4433 & 4439 Sioux Ave. SE) to the north zoned County Residential (R). Proposed Zoning & Surrounding Area The applicants are requesting a rezoning to County Residential (R) which allows single- family homes on lots with a minimum area of 10,890 square feet in size (1/4 Acre) and a maximum area of 1.99 acres. The maximum development density allowed is 1 dwelling unit per acre. Sioux Ave. SE contains several other single-family homes apart from the one on the subject property. Sioux Ave. SE is also currently zoned County Residential (R) north of Osage St. SE. The subject area is surrounded by row crop fields on all sides. Compliance with the County's Comprehensive Plan The Future Land Use Map of the County's Comprehensive Plan designates this area Agricultural. The Agricultural Land Use category typically includes land devoted to agriculture with limited residential development. Any "residential development should be associated with food production or be consistent with the historic use of the property and area." Compliance with the Fringe Area Agreement In reviewing proposed rezoning in the Fringe Area, staff relies on the policies outlined in the Fringe Area Agreement. The Fringe Area Agreement is a component of the City's Comprehensive Plan and applies to areas not specifically planned for in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The Fringe Area Agreement is intended to provide guidance regarding the development of land located within two miles of Iowa City's corporate limits. The agreement's slated purpose is to provide for orderly and efficient development patterns appropriate to non -urbanized areas, protect and preserve the fringe area's August 13, 2020 Page 2 natural resources and environmentally sensitive features, direct development to areas with physical characteristics which can accommodate development, and effectively and economically provide services for future growth and development. This property is located in Fringe Area B — Outside the City's Growth Area. For this area, the agreement states that agricultural uses are preferred. Specifically, the agreement states: "Until otherwise changed by amending this agreement, this area shall be restricted to those uses consistent with a Rural/Agricultural area as indicated in the Johnson County Land Use Plan, and as designated for a Rural/Agriculture area in Chapter 8:1.6 Class A District of the Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance, as amended." According to the Johnson County Comprehensive Plan, the Agricultural land use category envisions agricultural uses, such as row crops and animal husbandry, with "very limited residential development." According to the Johnson County Zoning Code, Agricultural uses are defined as farms, nurseries and greenhouses, orchards and tree farms, with residential uses to be restricted to two single-family dwellings on a farm 40 acres or larger. Summary Although the proposed rezoning does not directly align with the land use policy direction in the Fringe Area Agreement, the residential use already exists and no additional residential development would be allowed by the proposed rezoning. Staff Recommendation Although the proposed rezoning does not directly align with the policies outlined in the adopted Fringe Area Agreement, staff recommends approval of this rezoning for the following reasons: The subject area already consists of a residential property. Dividing the parcel and rezoning the 1.76 acres would better reflect current land usage. 2. The proposed rezoning would not allow for further residential development, as only one unit is allowed based on the size of the lot. Attachments: 1. Aerial Map 2. Zoning Map 3. Fringe Area Map 4. Rezoning Exhibit Approved by: • Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services 0 0.025 0.05 0.1 Miles I i I i I CREZ20-01 4477 Sioux Ave. SE Prepared By: Joshua Engelbrecht Date Prepared: August 2020 Cmmpo3�3 �TIN,ROSE. LLC 'uses i rPFF tLL t y, 4L I X74 4- Planning and Zoning Commission August 20, 2020 Page 2 of 10 CASE NO. CREZ20-0001: Applicant: Lindsey N. Fudge Location: 4477 Sioux Avenue SE, Unincorporated Johnson County An application for a rezoning of approximately 1.76 acres of County Agriculture (A) to County Residential (R) within Fringe Area B — Outside the Growth Boundary of the City/County Fringe Area. Engelbrecht began the staff report with some background information. This property falls within Fringe Area B outside Iowa City's growth area, the application proposes it to be rezoned to County Residential and the applicant has also submitted a subdivision application to the County to create two lots. Per the Fringe Area Agreement subdivisions of land into fewer than three lots continue to be regulated by the County which is why the subdivision application isn't presented tonight. Engelbrecht showed an aerial view of the property showing the full parcel outlined in yellow with the white being the portion to be rezoned. The parcel is surrounded by County Agricultural Land Use zone and is within Area B outside growth. Engelbrecht showed some pictures of the area noting there is already a dwelling on the property. He also pointed out lots of County Agricultural open space with some development in the distance, more open space and agricultural use to the east across the street, and then more development in the distance and open space to the south. Engelbrecht stated in terms of compliance with the County's Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map of the County's Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as suitable for agricultural uses and the Agricultural Land Use category typically includes land devoted to agriculture with limited residential development. The City and County Fringe Area Agreement is a component of the City's Comprehensive Plan and it applies to areas outside of the City's jurisdiction that are planned for in the City's Comprehensive Plan. This agreement provides guidance regarding land development within two miles of the Iowa City corporate limits. Staff relies on this Agreement to review rezonings in the Fringe Area. So, the proposed rezoning is located in Fringe Area B, and as noted several times is outside the City's growth area. Agricultural uses are preferred in this zone, or in this area, and restricts to land uses consistent with rural agricultural land use such as row crops, animal husbandry and very limited residential development. In summary, the County Land Use Plan and the City County Fringe Area Agreement recommend agricultural uses in this area, which does not directly align with the proposed rezoning. However, the residential use already exists on this parcel and the proposed rezoning would not allow for additional residential units to be developed. The role of the Commission is to provide a recommendation to City Council on the rezoning based on Fringe Area Agreement and then Johnson County Board of Supervisors is the ultimate decision maker. The next steps are after the Commission, the City Council will review and provide a recommendation to the Johnson County Planning Commission. Staff recommends that although the proposed rezoning does not directly align with the policies outlined in the adopted Fringe Area Agreement, staff recommends approval of the rezoning for the following reasons. The first is that the subject property already consists of residential development and dividing the parcel and rezoning the 1.76 acres would better reflect the current land usage. Second the proposed rezoning would not allow for further residential development as only one unit is allowed based on the size of the lot. Planning and Zoning Commission August 20, 2020 Page 3 of 10 Hensch asked what Fringe Area Agreement they are operating off as he knows the southeast area of Iowa City Fringe Area agreement had expired some time ago. Is this based on that expired Fringe Area Agreement or is there a current agreement that hasn't expired yet. Russett stated the Fringe Area Agreement hasn't expired yet and they are still operating under that one. Hensch asked if in this rezoning are they planning on building a new structure on that 1.76 acre parcel. Engelbrecht stated the application didn't specify so he is not entirely sure but doesn't assume so. Hensch asked approximately how many miles this is from City limits. Engelbrecht is unsure, but noted it is less than two miles. Hensch opened the public hearing. Scott Ritter (Hart -Frederick Consultants) is representing the applicant and is available to answer any questions. He did note at this time he knows of no other buildings to be built there. Hearing no questions for the applicant, and no other public input, Hensch closed the public hearing. Signs moved to recommend approval of CREZ20-0001, an application for a rezoning of approximately 1.76 acres of County Agriculture (A) to County Residential (R) within Fringe Area B — Outside the Growth Boundary of the City/County Fringe Area. Nolte seconded the motion. Hensch noted given the distance from the City, it's not in the growth area and it looks like it's probably close to the two mile outer limit and there's already an existing structure on there he support this application. Signs asked the staff again that there appears to be a little remnant of nonagricultural use or non -field use just to the north of the subject property and could that be re -subdivided at some future time to build another house. Russett replied that would have to be rezoned first before it could be subdivided. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. CASE NO. CREZ20-0002: Applicant: Bryan Jensen Location: Lot 2 and Outlot A of 4665 Herbert Hoover Hwy; Unincorporated Johnson County An application for a conditional use permit to allow for a kennel and dog care facility in the County Residential (R) zone within Fringe Area B — Inside the City's Growth Boundary of the City/County Fringe Area. Engelbrecht noted this application is for a conditional use permit within Fringe area B for kennel and dog care facility. He showed an aerial view of the property and the distance from Iowa City. The property is zoned County Residential and there is a low-density residential development to September 1, 2020 Johnson County Planning and Zoning Commission 913 S. Dubuque Street Iowa City, IA 52240 RE: CREZ20-0001 - Rezoning of 4477 Sioux Ave. SE Dear Members of the Commission: I r , jp,r. 3 . 7r �III�� CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (319) 356-5000 (3 19) 356-5009 FAX www.lcgov.org The Iowa City City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission have reviewed the request submitted by Lindsey N. Fudge, to rezone approximately 1.76 acres of property located in unincorporated Johnson County at 4477 Sioux Ave. SE from County Agricultural (A) to County Residential (R). The Fringe Area Agreement allows for City review of County rezoning cases for property within two miles of Iowa City. The subject property is located in Fringe Area B - Outside of Iowa City's Growth Area. For property located in this area, the Fringe Area Agreement states that agricultural uses area preferred. Specifically, the agreement states: "Until otherwise changed by amending this agreement, this area shall be restricted to those uses consistent with a Rural/Agricultural area as indicated in the Johnson County Land Use Plan, and as designated for a Rural/Agriculture area in Chapter 8:1.6 Class A District of the Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance, as amended." The proposed rezoning does not directly align with the Johnson County Land Use Plan nor the policies outlined in the adopted Fringe Area Agreement. However, the Iowa City Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval for the following reasons: 1) The subject area already consists of a residential property. The proposed rezoning of the 1.76 acres will better reflect the current land usage. 2) The proposed rezoning would not allow for further residential development, as only one unit is allowed based on the size of the lot. At its August 20th meeting, the Iowa City Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning application. The City Council concurs with the Commission and recommends that this rezoning from County Agricultural (A) to County Residential (R) be approved. Thank you for your consideration of our comments on this application. Sincerely, Iruce Teague Mayor, City of Iowa City STAFF PRESENTATION TO FOLLOW: 1 r I C04;qui h CITY OF lOVVA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa S2240-1826 (319) 356-5000 (3I9) 356-5009 FAX www.icgov.org Planning &Zoning Items Item 10.c: Fringe Area Rezoning—Sioux Avenue SE CRE20-01 Fringe Area B —Outside the Growth Boundary A letter to the Johnson County Planning & Zoning Commission in support of a rezoning from County Agriculture (A) to County Residential (R) for approximately 1.76 acres of property located at 4477 Sioux Avenue SE within Fringe Area B — Outside the Growth Boundary of the City/County Fringe Area. S wl1®iq�� CITY OF 1 N WP 4S�<�<1111t 0 0.0325 0.065 0.13 Miles' CREZ20-0001 4477 Sioux Ave. SE Date Prepared: August 2020 Fringe Area Agreement: Is a component of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Applies to area outside of the City's jurisdiction that are not planned for in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Provides guidance regarding land development within 2 miles of the Iowa City corporate limits. Staff relies on the Fringe Area Agreement policies in reviewing rezonings in the fringe area Review Criteria Fringe Area Rezoning: • Compliance with the comprehensive plan • Compatibility with the existing neighborhood Compliance with County's Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map identifies this area as Agricultural. Agricultural land use category typically includes land devoted to agriculture with limited residential development. Compliance with the Fringe Area Agreement Proposed rezoning is located in Fringe Area B — Outside the City's Growth Area: Agricultural uses are preferred o Restricted to land uses consistent with Rural /Agricultural land use and zoning designations of the County, such as row crops, animal husbandry, and very limited residential development City Council recommendation to the Johnson County Planning & Zoning Commission-P&Z recommendation (August 2020) Planning &Zoning Commission Recommendation Although the proposed rezoning does not directly align with the policies outlined in the adopted Fringe Area Agreement, the Planning & Zoning Commission recommends approval of this rezoning for the following reasons: The subject area already consists of a residential property. Dividing the parcel and rezoning the 1.76 acres would better reflect current land usage. The proposed rezoning would not allow for further residential development, as only one unit is allowed based on the size of the lot. STAFF PRESENTATION CONCLUDED � r rrM as � h CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Strect Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (3 19) 356-5000 (3 19) 356-5009 FAX www. icgov. o rg