HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-03-02 TranscriptionPage 1
ITEM 2. OUTSTANDING STUDENT CITIZENSHIP AWARDS
- Grant Wood Elementary School
Hayek: Would the students from Grant Wood Elementary please come forward. Hi,
everyone! I'm the Mayor, and this is the City Council, and this is an opportunity
for us to hear from students from the district, and this, uh, this evening it's our
turn to hear from Grant Wood students. So, we're proud to have you here and
we're...we're happy to hear from you and we'd like you to just take the
microphone, one after the next, and give us your name, and if you'd read your
statements to the crowd, that'd be great!
Phanthavong: My name is Shawn Phanthavong. Igo to Grant Wood Elementary School. I am a
sixth grader in Mr. Glenn's class. I help the school by being involved in reading
buddies and conflict managers. I was a bank officer, then I became in charge of
my classroom for about two months. I would like to thank my parents for
supporting me throughout the years, and Mr. Glenn for nominating me for this
award. (applause)
Colford: Hi, my name is Devion Colford. I'm a sixth grade student from Miss Teal's class
at Grant Wood Elementary. I like to help people everywhere. At home I babysit.
I take my sister and cousin places they need to go, and pick them up from those
places. I'm a great role model to them. I keep the house clean for my parents. At
school, I help teachers take important materials to where they need to go. I open
doors when needed and since sixth graders are the oldest students, I try to set the
perfect example for younger children. I'd like to thank Miss Teal for everything,
my school, my dear family, Iowa City, and you all for this great award. Thank
you! (applause)
Fuentes: My name is Ester Fuentes. First of all I'd like to thank my teacher Mrs. Brock
because she is an awesome teacher. Second of all, I'd like to thank my parents for
helping me in my times of need. I love to get involved in fun activities like Jump
Rope for Heart. I'm in (can't hear) patrol at Grant Wood where I'm responsible
for putting up the flag, for putting up the Iowa and American flag. I also played
two years of saxophone. I think I got this award because I help others, I'm good
at doing my work, and I like to volunteer for things. I work well with others and I
also like to do things with lots of pride and enthusiasm. Thank you very much for
this award. (applause)
Hayek: Well done! Fine presentations by all of you and you're excellent representatives
of your school, and thanks also to the faculty from your school, uh, who are in the
crowd. We have an award for all three of you and it's the same award -just has
your name on it - uh, and I'll read it now. This is a citizenship award. For his or
her outstanding qualities of leadership within Grant Wood Elementary, as well as
the community, and for his or her sense of responsibility and helpfulness to
others, we recognize you as an outstanding student citizen. Your community is
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 2
proud of you. Presented by the Iowa City City Council, March 2010.
Congratulations! (applause) (away from mic)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 3
ITEM 3. PROCLAMATION.
a) Special Olympics Month -March 2010
Karr: The next item is a proclamation for the Special Olympics Month, and we have a
number of Olympians with us.
Hayek: Welcome, everyone! I'm Matt Hayek, I'm the Mayor, and this is the City Council.
We're very proud and honored to have you here tonight. I'm going to read a
proclamation from the City. It goes as follows. (reads proclamation)
Karr: Here to accept is Cindy Coffin, Rec...Rec Division Supervisor and Special
Olympic Volunteer Coordinator.
Coffin: Sergeant Eunice Kennedy-Shriver founded Special Olympics in 1968 with less
than 100 participants in the first competition. Special Olympics Iowa has served
Iowans with intellectual disabilities for 42 years, and in 2010, Iowa provides
training and competition in 22 sports to over 13,500 athletes from across Iowa's
99 counties. The mid-winter tournament, coming up March 12 and 13 at the
University of Iowa Fieldhouse will bring over a thousand Special Olympics
athletes and their coaches to the Iowa City area to compete in team basketball,
basketball skills, cheerleading, gymnastics, and power lifting. Once the athletes
arrive in Iowa City, all their expenses are covered through the proceeds of our
fundraising events. Those events include 'sponsor an athlete campaign.' Area
businesses are so important with their donations to the campaign, without them
we could not enjoy the success that we have had and hope to continue, about
$10,000 from that. Our 'polar plunge' coming up March 27 at the Coralville
Reservoir, and the Law Enforcement 'torch run' uh, brings in $30,000. Celebrity
this. year -Tim Dwight! And the 'swing and the celebrities golf tournament' with
University of Iowa athletes and coaches in June - $20,000. Um, we are the only
event in Iowa that fully funds our event, and second largest event in Iowa.
Summer games in Ames has over 2,000 athletes competing, while Dubuque, uh,
winter games held in January has 450 athletes. The Iowa City Council gives our
Special Olympics' athletes they so deserve by making March Special Olympics
Month. The athletes that we have attending the proclamation are Mary Ruth
Arensdorf, Donna Butterbaugh, Mary Kay Eckermann, Eliana Friedman, Jill
Michalek, Keli Petersen, Laurie Ruth, Jean Saxton, and Brian Bates. I'd like to
say the Special Olympics' oath: let me win, but if I cannot win, let me be brave in
the attempt. Thank you. (applause)
Hayek: Well, congratulations! Get after it later this month!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 4
ITEM 5. COMMUNITY COMMENT (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA).
Hayek: This is an opportunity for members of the public to address the Council on items
that are not on our agenda tonight. If you'd like to address the Council, uh, please
form a queue and uh, we would appreciate it if you could keep your comments to
five minutes or less.
Westefeld: Thank you, my name is John Westefeld, a Member of the Parks and Recreation
Commission, and as I think as we indicated, uh, several months ago, we're trying
to, uh, come to give you periodic updates about things going on in the Council, so
not at every meeting, but at...as many meetings as we can, uh, a Member of the
Commission will try to come and give you a little bit of an update on things that
we're discussing, uh, in the Commission. So, just a few things I wanted to make
you aware of, uh, first of all our new officers as of this past January. Craig
Gustaveson is the Chair Person of Parks and Recreation. Lorin Ditzler is the Vice
Chair, and Clay Clausen is a new Member of the Commission. Um, we'd like to,
uh, say that we were very happy and supportive of Mike Moran being named
permanent Director of Parks and Recreation. We think he did an outstanding job
as, uh, interim Director, essentially doing two jobs for many, many months and
we're very pleased that, uh, appointment. In a recent meeting in fact Mike was
telling us one of the first things he did was he met individually with every
member, uh, of his department and asked them for input on the department, in
their job, and how they're feeling about things, what can be done better, and just
really got input from every single member. We thought that was telling about the
kind of commitment I think that he will bring to the position. Uh, three or four
initiatives I just wanted to update you on. The Master Plan, we're continuing to
devote a lot of attention to that, both the staff and the Commission, and the staff
and the Commission. So staff independently, Commission, and then working
together to try to continue to address that and implement it. Terry Trueblood
Recreation, uh, Area is moving towards Phase Two. Um, as I've said in the venue
before, I think it's going to be an amazing facility, and we're hoping to have some
kind of dedication ceremony in the not-too-distant future, uh, for the Terry
Trueblood Recreation, uh, Area. Um, on your agenda tonight are some possible,
uh, changes to the Farmers Market. The only thing I wanted to say about that
was, we discussed these in the Commission and those, uh, suggestions largely
come from a survey that was conducted, and we feel like, uh, they're all things
worth trying, to see how they go, so we hope you'll consider those. Uh, and then
finally, we've also spent a lot of time examining the affiliate group fee structure
and at your April 5th and 6th, uh, meeting, we'll be bringing to you some, uh,
suggestions and ideas about, uh, that fee structure. So that's something else we've
been spending a lot of time on. And other than that, uh, just like to thank you for
your support of Parks and Recreation. Thank you.
Hayek: Thanks, John.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 5
Lensing: Hi, I'm Michael Lensing, and I'm on the Senior Center Commission. First of all
we just want to thank everybody for all the support they give to the Senior Center.
We've been in the process of doing aself-assessment and accreditation manual,
which has been going on for the last two months, and that should be completed
shortly...keep up our accreditation. Um, the one big thing that we've spent the
last couple meetings on is developing a conduct policy for the Senior Center, um,
for certain use of the policy and (mumbled) rooms that are being...conduct of
people that...that uses the Senior Center. Um, we had an election of officers, Jay
Honohan is the President, and Chuck Felling is the Vice Chair, and I am the, uh,
Secretary. I'm not good at taking notes, but we have Emily who is very good at
doing that, so um, I do attend. Um, and we've been lucky enough to, uh, do a lot
of things with nutrition programs that are coming on, and uh, the other thing
we've also, uh, worked on getting a board together for what's called the Center, or
Friends of the Center, which'll be kind of like our fundraising branch for the
Senior Center. And with that, that's pretty much...we just want to say thank you.
Thanks.
Hayek: Thanks, Michael. Anyone else wishing to address the Council on items not on the
agenda tonight?
Rigby: Hi there, uh, my name is John Rigby and I'm a, uh, student at the University of
Iowa, and uh, speaking to you tonight, uh, about a decision that was made
yesterday, uh, regarding the, uh, downtown situation, regarding the 21-ordinance
with the bars. Uh, this is a situation and, uh, it really, uh, certain issue that is kind
of indifferent to myself. I'm of age and it really doesn't affect me, but as a
representative and as a voice for the concerned students, uh, at the University of
Iowa, I'd kind of like to, uh, just, and obviously this doesn't have to take place
now. I know the discussion will take place later, but um, some of the concerns
that are coming out of the student body are really, why now, why, you know, two
years and some change after the decision, um, was made in November of 2007,
um, why now? Why is this an issue that is being handled in this forum? Um,
where it's being decided by the Council rather than, um, as a referendum, rather
than, um, in the general election. So, uh, thank you and thank you for your
service.
Hayek: Thank you.
Shipley: Hi, my name is Jeff Shipley. I serve as Student Government as the Liaison to the
Council. I just wanted to comment on two things. First, I was kind of surprised,
um, when this issue was brought up last night (mumbled) work session because to
me it is obvious that the culture of prohibition that we have, um, we're forbidding
people to do, you know, things. It really accomplishes nothing. I mean, kids are
getting into drinking pretty early on. It's a pretty wide-spread problem, um, and it
is, you know, shown to be destructive, even a lot of people admit that because,
you know, we're focused on the 21 age, we have problems like a hard alcohol
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 6
culture, um, and a lot of young people having, uh, coming out of college with
criminal records. Uh, and you know to me binge drinking is a cultural problem
and it's really nothing that, um, the course of power of the State is really going to
be able to affect too much. There's going to be no magic ordinance that's going to
really make this problem go away over night. Um, and about the inclusionary
zoning discussion, I just wanted to reiterate something, uh, what Susan suggested
and Connie alluded to last night is really studying the housing market right now,
um, and not placing, you know, any burden on the developers and really just
understanding what's going on, so thanks for your time and listening to me.
Hayek: Thanks, Jeff. Anyone else? Okay, we'll move on.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 7
ITEM 6. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS.
a) CONDITIONALLY REZONING APPROXIMATELY 5.05 ACRES
LOCATED AT MORMON TREK BOULEVARD SOUTH OF EAGLE
VIEW DRIVE FROM COMMERCIAL OFFICE (CO-1) TO
INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL (CI-1) (REZ09-00011)
1. PUBLIC HEARING
Hayek: This is a public hearing. The public hearing is open. (bangs gavel)
Davidson: Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Members of the City Council.
Hayek: Jeff, let me interrupt you. I think at this point let me ask for any ex pane
communications, anyone on Council has had with anyone, uh, regarding this
item?
Bailey: Yes. I spoke with the Planning Director today, um, specifically regarding some
buffering issues, and the concept of the entryway, into the city, which were
addressed in some of the minutes.
Hayek: Anyone else? You may proceed. Thanks.
Davidson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm Jeff Davidson, the Director of Planning for the City.
Uh, Item a under Planning and Zoning items this evening is a request from Dealer
Properties, uh, Iowa City, LLC. Uh, the requested action is a rezoning from CO-
1, Commercial Office, to CI-1, Commercial Intensive. The purpose is to allow
use as a car dealership, uh, at a location at, uh, commercial subdivision at Eagle
View Drive and Mormon Trek Boulevard. The property's approximately 5 acres
in size, and is predominantly undeveloped. PIP Printing's new building is located
in this area. Uh, the Comprehensive Plan calls for office park and intensive
commercial, and I'll summarize the Comprehensive Plan issues for you in...in a
moment. Uh, the property was annexed into Iowa City in 2003. So this is a fairly
recent, uh, annexation. You see the location here, this is the interchange of U.S.
Highway 218 with Highway 1. (mumbled) mouse out here. Um, and this is the
commercial subdivision that's located along the relatively new alignment of
Mormon Trek Boulevard. Here's, uh, Highway 1, uh, the existing...let's see, I
believe it's the Honda dealership is here now. Um, and uh, as I said, this is U.S.
218, uh, right here. Um...here is the area that is under consideration, uh, this
evening for the rezoning. Um, as indicated, it is proposed for a car dealership and
one of the things that as a political body you'll want to consider, uh, is that
it...there has been a desire, uh, in the auto industry in our community that those
uses tend to aggregate together as a function of the market, and they have decided
to aggregate in this area of Iowa City. Whether or not that is a good thing or a
bad thing is to, is...is up to you to decide, but this action this evening would
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 8
facilitate that continued, uh, location of car dealerships, uh, in this area. Um,
the...in terms of the Comprehensive Plan, the...the proposal to go from what is a
less-intensive commercial zone to a more intensive commercial zone, uh, in terms
of the Comprehensive Plan, we feel that, uh, either is...is acceptable in terms of
the comprehensive planning for the area; however, the notion of going to a more
intensive use, and the CI-1 zone is one of our more...it is probably the most
intensive use, other than the industrial zones, uh, what we will want to consider is
the impact on the surrounding area and specifically two residences that are
directly adjacent, uh, to the property. Um, in terms of transportation
infrastructure, obviously the...the creation of the new arterial street, Mormon
Trek Boulevard, now the extension over the river, um, this is projected to be a
major arterial corridor, have commercial development along it (mumbled) it's
consistent with what we, uh, have expected to have happen in this area. Getting
down to a little bit more of the microscale, we were able to negotiate with the
subdivider, uh, in 2003, uh, the location of access points. This is considered
Eagle View Drive here will be the principle access point of Mormon Trek
Boulevard. The...the access to the specific site here will be at this location, and
at this location, on Eagle View Drive, and then in the future, see if I can get this
thing out... in the future there may be an access down here through an easement
over, uh, this lot when it develops, but there will not be direct access to Mormon
Trek Boulevard, which is a good, uh, good traffic circulation system in terms of
keeping the arterial working well and...and, uh, good traffic safety on that.
Um...in terms of the surrounding area, obviously this is...this is a lot in a larger
commercial subdivision. To the...to the east then as you proceed down the hill is
a large flat area, currently in Johnson County, until you get to the Airport
property, um, which according to the Comprehensive Plan is slated for industrial
development. I think likely what you'll get down in this area, and on the Airport's
property, where the runway was taken out, is a combination of industrial uses and
airport uses that are fairly industrial in nature. So, uh, again, in terms of the
commercial intensive zoning, or the existing commercial office zoning, we feel it
is consistent with what the overall comprehensive planning calls for in this area.
Um, in terms of the...the adjacent uses then, in going to the more intensive
commercial use, uh, we do want to take that into consideration. Uh, you may
have seen the additional information that went to the Planning and Zoning
Commission, uh, about the adjacent property. Uh, it is expected that the adjacent
property and the two residences will redevelop over time. We...we, they're
currently in the County. We don't, uh, know for sure when that will occur.
There's also the possibility, uh, and I think it needs to be expressed as a
possibility, of a public park occurring on a portion of that property. If you read
the conditions that are attached to that part going in, I don't think it's anything
that's going to occur in the near future, and you may wish to take it into
consideration, but the existing two residences are principally what, uh, the
strategy here that I'm going to explain in a second is...is designed to address. Uh,
the Parks and Recreation has considered this proposed rezoning, uh, in light of the
possibility of a park being established in the future. They're fine with it, with the
conditions that are attached to the Conditional Zoning Agreement. Uh, the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 9
Airport, uh, Director...Operations Specialist was also consulted, and feels that
there's nothing here that's inconsistent with the, uh, operation of the Airport. The
two conditions which, uh, if approved, uh, would be part of the conditional
rezoning, uh, pertain to, uh, the buffering, uh, here, uh, which is, uh...would be at
the S-3 standard, and the S-3 standard is basically a dense hedge, 5 to 6-feet in
height, at least 50% of which is evergreen, uh, and that's what would be
along...it's approximately 250 feet, which is between the residences over here and
the proposed, uh, use. The other thing is with respect to lighting, and I think
you're aware we do have lighting standards, uh, pertaining to light trespass and
maximum foot candles and that sort of thing, which of course will have to be met,
uh, those are specifically designed for commercial uses. Um, in addition to that,
the...the maximum pole height that is allowed for light poles is 35 feet, and for
the poles in the middle of the lot, they will be to not exceed 30 feet, uh, the poles
along Eagle View Drive, which is here, uh, will not exceed 20 feet, and along
Mormon Trek Boulevard will not exceed 24 feet. So, um, the...the standard that
is in the CZA is that nothing...none of the light poles will extend more than 30
feet, but the applicant has indicated that they'll be constructed at the heights I just
gave you. Um, so again, so the...the standard with no lights more than 30 feet tall
and the S-3 screening, uh, those are the two conditional standards in the...in the
zoning that you're being asked to consider tonight. So, with those, uh, with those
two conditions in place, the recommendation from both the Planning and Zoning
Commission and from City staff is for approval. Uh, any comments or questions?
Oh, I did have a couple of...there's the site currently, um, and looking back
towards the, uh, the Honda dealership there. Any comments or questions for me?
Bailey: I have a...I have a question, and I know you've been through this a lot before so
I'm sure that you've looked into it. You talked about the Airport...I'm assuming
that we didn't need any F...FA, or any other review beyond their review?
Davidson: Um, certainly whatever review, if there is any review required, that will have to
be a condition. I know there are some lights in this area, the red lights that you
see, if a...if a structure...for example, when this...when the proposed building
here is built, if it exceeds a certain height it may be required to have a light on it,
depending on how tall that building is, and that'll all be handled at the permit
stage.
Bailey: Okay. So, all right. Thanks.
Wilburn: And the air space is already zoned to account for that so...
Bailey: Right!
Davidson: Anything else for me before you continue your hearing?
Wright; Um, the S-3 screening standard, is that going to be pretty much impermeable to
light, uh (mumbled)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 10
Davidson: At least 50% evergreen, so obviously during the summertime it's going to be
denser than during the...
Wright: Sure.
Davidson: Thank you.
Hayek: Anyone else wishing to address us during the public hearing?
Driscoll: Good evening. My name is Jane Driscoll...and I speak to you tonight on behalf
of my grandfather, George Dane, who owns the property at 4120 Dane Road SE
which is, um, directly east of the property under rezoning con, uh, consideration.
I'm also joined tonight by my parents, who live in the residence at that property,
that my grandparents built in 1948. We would like to acknowledge the Planning
and Zoning Commission for embracing their responsibility during this process of
rezoning and hearing our concerns and suggestions. This evening we wish to
share some information with you about those concerns, uh, for the current and
future use of the property. In addition to a family residence, this property has an
apple orchard, grape vines, flowering trees and bushes, walnut and oak trees, farm
crops, livestock and other amenities. From the high hill where the house sits one
can look out to the northeast and see downtown Iowa City, City High, the Iowa
City Airport, and then to the east across the Iowa River valley to Lone Tree, West
Liberty, and south to Hills. To the west the rolling hills of the Iowa prairie, and
from here you can see the fireworks of four communities. The sun rises are as
beautiful as the sun sets. My grandfather believes that we are all tenders of this
land for a short time. The land was a gift to us, and we must be mindful of its
care. With foresight of generations to come, in 2005, these 17 acres were
designated as a future park so that the sledding hills and beautiful vistas will
remain for the world to enjoy. Once our family is done with this property, the
entire site will be gifted by deed to the Iowa Heritage Foundation, that will turn
over management to the Iowa City Parks and Recreation department for use as a
park area and recreation area, as deemed by the terms of the gift. With that in
mind, we look across the road to the west, uh, to the property under consideration
for rezoning. While we find the proposed car dealership less than desirable, we
are not so unrealistic to think that that property will never be developed. We do
have some concerns though. Car dealerships and residence...residential uses
don't mix, and I can't say that I know of any parks that border car dealerships
either. The uses are simply not compatible. Outside storage...storage lots such as
car lots require intensive lighting. We propose...while the proposed lighting has
been revised to have shorter directional lights, on the north and east sides of the
property, the lights on the south edge of the property along Mormon Trek are
proposed to be 30 feet tall and these lights will be oriented towards the north and
east to illuminate the car lot, which is also in the direction of our residence.
Blinds already have to be kept drawn from lights of existing car dealerships along
Highway 1, and this restricts the use and enjoyment of views...and views by
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 11
neighboring residents. It is difficult to star gaze in a park with the glow of
security lights illuminating the sky. Noise is also of concern. Speaker systems
are used to page customers, sales people, service staff of the nearby dealerships,
and they are audible from our residences. Speakers closer to our property will
obviously be easily heard as well. Cars are delivered to these dealerships on large
carrier trucks that require a lot of space to be unloaded. Sometimes these trucks
are actually unloaded off the lot. We have observed many...many times on
Mormon Trek where the carrier trucks pull into the center lane of the street on
those three lanes and unload the cars from there. Eagle View Drive is a two-lane
street that will not accommodate unloading of cars from a large truck. Car
dealerships bring increased traffic as they are sales driven, and they must attract
customers to make those sales. Eagle View Drive already sees regular daily
traffic, uh, it must also accommodate farm vehicles, grain trucks, mail delivery,
emergency vehicles, maintenance vehicles, and snow plows. This can create
congestion if not planned for accordingly. In addition, there are plans to develop
the property to the north of this parcel between Grace...Grace Drive, which is off
the screen, and Eagle View Drive. We hope the proximity of these proposed
accesses as Jeff described...on the plan there, uh, to the corner of Mormon Trek
will be reviewed closely as those exiting the lot could create bottlenecks at that
corner, and that can be seen from similar configurations around Iowa City. To
attract customers car dealerships have large volumes of cars on their lot. Most
have merchandise on several sides of their building, and a service center, as well.
Thus there is activity all around the property. Considering the location of the
building on the lot can help to limit the noise and traffic in specific areas. We
agree with the conditional zoning regarding a landscape buffer of 20 feet for the
planting of trees on the eastern edge of the property, and the landscape screening
complying with the S-3 standard. We recognize the limitation on lighting height
in this conditional zoning; however, lighting remains a serious concern for us.
We invite you to join, or to visit our property and the future site of a city park, as
you consider this rezoning. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you!
Larson: My name's Dave Larson, and I'm representing the car dealership here tonight.
And, uh, I'm here to answer any questions that you might have at the present, if
you have some in regard to this.
Champion: In this modern day of technology why do car dealerships still use...loud speakers
instead of beeper systems or.. .
Larson: Sure! Well, uh...
Hayek: Why don't you hand those to the Clerk (mumbled) around.
Larson: (away from the mic, unable to hear) Um, current Honda... can you hear me okay?
The current Honda dealership there actually has speakers that are projecting
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 12
directly at that house, and you'll see on those sheets the, uh, the speakers, and then
there's also another picture there of a, uh, they're posted on the side of the
buildings there. I've talked with the car dealership. They weren't aware of that
sound problem that they were getting from the Honda dealership, and so they've,
uh, they've actually shut off all the ones to the south, and also are going to be
turning down the ones on the east that are directional towards this house. And
what we've done on the current plan is that we've pointed all the speakers away
from, um, away from the housing area there. We've also lowered them so that
they'll...they won't be more than half of the, uh, space, uh, on the pole. Okay?
So we feel, and even then, they're willing to, uh, if there's a decibel issue there,
they're willing to lower that. Uh, they want to make sure they're good neighbors
there. They don't want to offend them. They consider the neighbors as...as
potential car buyers, so they want to make sure they're happy as well. Okay?
Also on the lighting, I won't pass this around, but all the lighting, uh, is on the
edge around Mormon Trek and around Eagle View is only going to be 17 feet tall,
except there is a three foot concrete so it's a total of 20 feet tall, all along the edge
of the, uh, those two streets. And it's only the ones in the center that are going to
be the, uh, 30 feet or less, and actually I think on the plan they're even, uh, less
than that. No, I think they... is, uh, 30 feet. But the ones, uh, next to the housing
and so forth are also going to be lower, uh, than that. And also they're going to be
shielded. So there's a shield that will keep the light on the site. So those two
issues, both of the, uh, the loud speaker systems and the lighting, they're trying to
do everything possible to keep that at a minimum. They will also power down at
a certain time in the evenings, so that that should, uh, hopefully will not be a
problem to them.
Hayek: Are the lights in the center of the property, the 30 foot...
Larson: Right, those are the ones, actually they'll be 27 feet on three foot pedestals.
Hayek: Okay, are they... are they shielded, or are they... going to broadcast light in all
directions?
Larson: Well, they...they pretty much have to broadcast it. That's where they're covering,
and covering the light on the cars, and so they can't really shield in the center part
of it, but they can around the edges to keep it from shining on to the neighbors'
house there.
Hayek: Okay.
Larson: Any other issues that you can...
Hayek: Any more questions for Mr....
Larson: Oh, also trucks. Uh, they will be...they were not aware of the fact, uh, the
Billions from South Dakota were not aware of the fact that they were unloading
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 13
on Mormon Trek and so, uh, they will not be unloading on the streets. They'll be
loading in the car dealership parking area. So that shouldn't be a problem. That's
not saying that, uh, something might happen. I don't know what it would be at
this time, but uh...most of the time it's not going to be an issue. Anything else?
Hayek: Any questions for Mr. Larson? There could be. You might have to come back up
to the podium.
Larson: Okay.
Hayek: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to address us during the public hearing? Okay,
hearing none, close the public hearing. (bangs gavel)
2. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE (FIRST CONSIDERATION)
Karr: Motion to accept correspondence.
Wright: So moved.
Champion: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Wright, seconded by Champion. Discussion? All those in favor say
aye. Opposed say nay. Motion carries.
Bailey: Move first consideration.
Champion: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Bailey, seconded by Champion on first consideration. Discussion?
Wright: Um, actually, another question that came up for Jeff, um, it's about a screening
question again. The S-3 is, uh, 6-foot standard at the time of planting. Is that
correct?
Davidson: Um, yeah (mumbled) I don't believe... it's 5 to 6-feet in height. Jann, can you
help? Can you just come up? Jann here's really the expert on the specific
standards so might as well get it right!
Ream: I wasn't prepared for this. (laughter)
Wright: It's just convenient that you're here!
Ream: Yes. I'm Jann Ream, I'm the Code Enforcement Assistant in Housing Inspection
Services. The height, the 6-foot height is...a grown height.
Wright: A grown height, okay.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 14
Ream: Right, um, generally when an S-3 screening goes in, um, they are mature
plantings that are anywhere from 3 to 5-feet in height.
Wright: Okay.
Ream: And typically even though 6-foot is the minimum, they do tend to grow taller.
Wright: Yeah. Thank you.
Hayek: Thanks, Jann.
Champion: They do provide a really nice (mumbled) evergreens do, at least the ones in my
yard. They grow fast.
Davidson: Did you have any other questions, Mike?
Wright: Um, how far back from Dane Road is the property?
Davidson: Is which property?
Wright: Uh, the property for the car dealership.
Hayek: The residential property. Are you referring to...
Wright: No, I'm referring to the dealership itself. Dane Road runs where on this map. I
couldn't quite...
Davidson: Oh, Dane Road, I'm sorry. 400 feet.
Wright: Okay.
Davidson: Anything else?
Hayek: One question, Jeff... just I guess another stab at staffs, um, feeling on the lighting
issues. We've heard from the family, uh, I assume you've heard from the family
in connection with the earlier stages of this development, but um, is there
anything you've heard tonight that causes you to have renewed or a different
concern regarding lighting?
Davidson: Well, certainly I tried to emphasize in the staff report that the issue of lighting
adjacent...from a CI-1 use, um, adjacent to a residential use is something we take
very seriously. Now, you know, there's going to be matters of degree as to
whether or not you believe what's proposed is adequate. Uh, it was the decision
of the Planning and Zoning Commission after a lot of deliberation (mumbled) is
adequate, and when...as I said, there are also lighting standards that were very
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 15
specifically put into the zoning code when there were over-lighting issues, in
particular with convenience stores was one of the things that...that generated the
need for the standard. So we have addressed with some standards that the
applicant will be required to meet. Now, you know, whether or not that's
adequate enough is, you know, kind of a matter of confection, uh, but
the...conjecture, but the, uh, the Planning and Zoning commit...Commission did
believe that the, uh, condition that was placed in the Conditional Zoning
Agreement was reasonable in terms of this specific project and the two adjacent
residences.
Hayek: Thank you. Further discussion?
Champion: I'm going to support it. I think it's...I can understand that they want to be by other
dealerships because I think that's true with women's clothing too. The more you
have the better you do. It isn't competition; it's enhancement! Uh, so I am...I
am...I'm going to support this with all the, uh, recommendations from Planning
and Zoning on the lighting and driveways, and etc., etc.
Bailey: Yeah, I agree with that, the clustering I think is particularly important, and...and
we know from large and small developments that clustering makes a lot of
economic sense. I think a lot of care has been taken to be sensitive to the area in
which, um, the adjacency of the residences. I mean, I like it...the fact that it's
come in with the high level of screening and the consideration for lighting, so it
seems...there's alot of thought that's been put into this, and it makes sense. I also
appreciate the access points not being on Mormon Trek. I think that that makes a
lot of sense as well.
Wright: I think this is actually very well designed. Um, and I think as many precautions
have been taken as possible. I think the deal breaker for me is the fact that this is
future park land next door, and an S-3 screening is going to take a long time to
cover lights that are 30 feet in the air. And that's...I...I don't think there's any real
way to get around that, because there's going to be a fair amount of light bleed
into what is eventually going to be park, and certainly at the time being is...is
residential property. Um, I...I just don't understand that an S-3 screening is going
to be adequate to protect some light, even if it doesn't flow directly into the
property, it's going to be just like that beacon standing up there.
Bailey: Yeah, but I...I mean, I thought about this, and I read this part about the park land
and...and um, I mean, eventually. (both talking) and...and it seems like quite a
long time because gifted by the deed, um, when um, when the Danes are not
interested in using it any longer, with some rules and regulations proposed by the
Dane family, but if it becomes a City park, we know the regulations for our parks.
They're typically closed at night. I mean, the idea that this will be a park for star
gazing actually, probably won't be the case because most of our parks close at.. .
Wright: At the close of 10:00 or 10:30, but even so (both talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 16
Bailey: And...and I think that...I think understanding that there will be commercial
adjacent to this area, whether it's this kind of commercial or other kind of
commercial, I think we're going to have the challenges, and I think once again, the
care has been taken in the consideration and um, I'm not willing to put off
commercial development that we're trying to accommodate the surrounding
adjacent uses. I'm not willing to put off a commercial development like this in
anticipation of an eventual park, even though I have great...a great deal of respect
for our park system.
Champion: It might save us money. Maybe their lights will light the park for us! (laughter)
Bailey: We can tilt them a little bit!
Wright: Just what you want, a really well lit park!
Champion: I do! (laughter)
Wright: So I...because of the adjacency, I...I just can't support this. I think in another
location this would be a terrific dealership. Um, but given the future use of that
land, I just don't see it being a successful match.
Hayek: Further discussion?
Mims: I'm going to support it. I would encourage the dealership to do everything they
can in terms of, um, going above and beyond the requirements in terms of the
lighting, in terms of the shielding, and angling of the lighting, the powering down
as much as possible at night. Um, and... and maybe even going above and beyond
on the...the 20-foot boundary. I mean, when you talk only 50% evergreen as the
minimum, I mean, I think it would be a very nice gesture in terms of neighbors to
really have, you know, more screening than that, and plantings that, like you said,
Mike, I mean, you can get various evergreens that will grow 20 feet high, you
know, and they're not that expensive either. So to really look at some of those
additional kinds of things and the, and the screening and, uh, the shielding and the
angling of the lights to be as accommodating as possible. Because I do think the
clustering of the car dealerships, I mean, that's already happened out there. It's
going to continue to happen, and like you said with the...with the Mormon Trek
going through it just...it makes sense to consolidate those things.
Bailey: Well and the screening also enhances the commercial property, I mean, it's not
just...it won't just benefit for a screening, and buffering from residential, so...I
think that's a good idea, to enhance to the degree as possible.
Dickens: I think it's very important to be a good neighbor. I live next to the Press-Citizen
and during the summer it's not too bad because the trees blocking off a lot of the
sound, and of course the Press-Citizen doesn't have the papers coming in there
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 17
anymore, so I think it is very important that you...that the dealership is a good
neighbor to the residential area, even though eventually it will become park land.
It's very important that's understood.
Hayek: I, uh, I have the greatest respect for the Dane family. They've just been wonderful
members of the community for a long, long time, uh, I...I echo the comments of
Susan, Regenia. I think, uh, a lot of careful consideration's been put into this, uh,
matter, um, P&Z passed it unanimously after a lot of deliberation on... on their
end. Um, so I'm comfortable with this, uh, but I do think this dealership, uh,
should enter Iowa City with a good neighbor attitude in mind and we trust that
that will occur. Further discussion? Roll call, please. Item passes 6-1.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 18
ITEM 6. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS.
b) CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE REZONING APPROXIMATELY 132
ACRES OF LAND FROM COUNTY AGRICULTURAL (C-AG) ZONE
TO INTERIM DEVELOPMENT -RESEARCH PARK (ID-ORP) ZONE
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF
HIGHWAY 1 AND INTERSTATE 80 (REZ09-00006) (SECOND
CONSIDERATION)
Hayek: The applicant has requested expedited, uh, consideration and...and FYI, we have
received confirmation from the Secretary of State that annexation has been
approved at the State level.
Wilburn: I move that the rule requiring that ordinances must be considered and voted on for
passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally
passed be suspended, that the second consideration and vote be waived, and the
ordinance be considered for, uh, voted for final passage at this time.
Champion: Second.
Hayek: Moved to collapse by Wilburn, seconded by Champion. Before we proceed, let
me ask for any ex parte communications.
Bailey: I've talked to the developers, um, not specifically about this aspect of the project,
but I have been in contact with the developers, but nothing regarding this vote
tonight, the rezoning.
Hayek: Anything else? Okay. Further discussion? Roll call, please. Motion passes 7-0.
Wilburn: Move adoption of the ordinance.
Wright: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Wilburn, seconded by Wright, uh, to final adopt. Uh, discussion? Roll
call, please. Item passes 7-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 19
ITEM 7. APPROVING THE IOWA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY'S FIVE (5)
YEAR PLAN FOR 2010-2015 AND THE ANNUAL PLAN FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2010.
a) PUBLIC HEARING
Hayek: This is a requirement, uh, on the part of the Housing Authority to submit afive-
year plan, as well as an annual plan. I'm going to open the public hearing. (bangs
gavel)
Rackis: Good evening, uh, this is the second five-year plan, uh, in my tenure with the
Housing Authority, and uh, you...you are correct. This is a HUD requirement.
The five-year plan, uh, describes the agency's missions and...and long-term plan
over the...the next five years. And then...in that same year and subsequent years,
uh, the Housing Authority is required to submit an annual report as to how we are
doing in...in terms of meeting the five-year plan. Uh, being, uh, a person that
despises duplication, uh, when we did the first five-year plan, it, uh, happened at
the same time that, uh, City Steps was being developed. So, City Steps, which is
Planning and Community Development's five-year plan, is also similar five-year
cycle. It, uh, their plan is submitted in December. Our plan is submitted in April.
So what we did five years ago, and what we did this year, is simply partner with,
uh, the Community Development Planning staff in the development of City Steps.
Now the one aspect that was...was different that we undertook on our own was to
survey all of our public housing tenants and family self-sufficiency participants,
to see if there was any desire for them to participate in a resident advisory board
to be part of the strategic planning process. Uh, we used some students from the
University of Iowa to do that and we got very good results from the survey;
however, um, what we concluded from the survey, um, was that the comments of
what our tenants and participants wanted was beyond the scope of the Iowa City
Housing Authority. Uh, what they wanted was, um, the streets fixed, uh, they
wanted, um, sort of fixing up abandoned homes in their neighborhoods. Uh, they
wanted neighborhoods to be empowered, and they wanted, uh, the Housing
Authority and the City to address the sort of city-wide perception of an increase in
crime. So, our conclusion with that, um, with that survey is that is what the
Neighborhood Associations, uh, are for, is to help empower neighborhoods and to
help those residents. So, in keeping with, um, what we started in 2008 partnering
with Neighborhood Services, uh, we continue to push for our participants and
residents to, uh, find out who their Neighborhood Associations are, join those
Neighborhood Associations. Now in relation to City Steps, uh, we also provided
all of the, uh, participants that completed our survey the City Steps survey, and
invited them to participate in the City Steps, uh, public hearing process,
which...which many did and we do have an increased involvement in, uh,
Neighborhood Associations. So with that, um, essentially City Steps becomes our
planning document, and we're just incorporating Housing Authority strategies
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 20
within that, and then referencing City Steps in...in our five-year plan. Now, as
far as an annual report, we're to report who we serve. Uh, our jurisdiction is
Johnson County, Washington County north of Highway 92, and pretty much the
bulk of Iowa County, save for, uh, Victor, Iowa, because nobody really operates
in Iowa County. So if a family finds a unit in Williamsburg, we will help that
family, uh, find housing and support that housing. Uh, so...uh, who's on the
program...uh, that's always sort of one of the hot button issues, and as you can see
in the annual report, based on data that we report to HUD, uh, from October 1,
2008 to January 31, 2010, 98% of all families participating in our program are
elderly, disabled, and working families. And in... in looking at the working
families, that is 41 % of our program. In terms of today's snapshot number of the
families that we are serving, that amounts to 553 families. Uh, when you look at
income that we report to HUD, uh, we currently have, um, a little over total
participants, adults, minor children, is about 2,700. And when you look at all
family members and income reported by all family members, 42% report that they
are receiving income from employment. What that translates into is 1,138
individuals on our program are working and uh, and supporting their household.
Uh, another number to take a look at, uh, our program is not an entitlement
program. Uh, there are rules and conditions, and it's an income-based program.
So one thing that we like to point out as well is...is the, uh, length of stay that
families stay on the program. 64% of all families are on the program less than
five years. Uh, the other hot button issues, I think you...you mentioned it last
night is, uh, is obviously the School District's redistricting, and we prepared some
information for the School District and it was in your packet. When you take a
look at, as of, uh, January, uh, 28 or 31st, uh, when I ran the numbers, we had 740
total households did not contain minor children. So 58% of the entire
participating families on our program, the 58% of all households, do not have any
minor children and thus zero impact on...on the School District. Uh, conversely
42% of our families do have minor children. Uh, then based on the numbers
provided by the School District, there's the total enrollment is 11,903. Uh, they
indicate that 29% of that total is eligible for free and reduced lunch, which is, uh,
3,452, uh, K through 12 children. When you look at our program, again on
January 28th, we had a total of 1,239 school-age children; however, when you
compare the income, uh, for eligibility of our program, and how income rises in
our program, actually only 1,141 students, or children in our program, are eligible
for free and reduced lunch. I have no way of knowing whether or not those
families have actually applied for free and reduced lunch. So in terms of K
through 12, uh, children in the School District, and participating in our program,
that amounts to about 33% of the total free and reduced lunch number. Uh, you
know, moving forward, uh, we have an award-winning family self-sufficiency
program. We continue to have a 10% participation rate, or typically 138 families,
which, uh, I talked to HUD, um, the Kansas City Housing Authority, which I
believe has 25,000 vouchers, have about 150 families participating in their
housing, or their family self-sufficiency program. Most housing authorities do
not have a 10% participation rate. Uh, so 138 families is...is quite a good
number, uh, and we're pretty proud of those families, and we have one family
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 21
whose escrow savings account is $20,981. So, we continue to push that program,
which then leads into, you know, homeownership and over the course of time, uh,
beginning in 1998, we've assisted about 135 families become homeowners. So,
in... in coming back then to the five-year plan and City Steps, how are we
accomplishing our mission and goals in the mission and goals of City Steps -
we're providing rental subsidy to help make housing affordable for eligible
families. Then when those families are on the program, they can self-select and
join the family self-sufficiency program, and as their income goes up, we can
divert the dollar that we otherwise would have saved on the rental subsidy to an
escrow savings account, so that they can in effect for savings and use those
savings either to continue to promote self-sufficiency or become a homeowner,
and then the last step is becoming a homeowner. So we're trying to meet the
entire cycle, and I think if you recall from City Steps, City Steps looks at the
needs of renters and...and homeowners. So, again, that's how we are fulfilling
our mission and...and goals. So, uh, with that I would entertain any questions
regarding the...the strategic plan or the annual report.
Hayek: Any questions for Steve?
Wilburn: Just a comment. It's always helpful to have that annual plan with, uh, the
snapshot of who the participants are and uh, and the makeup of who's in the
family that, uh, you know, that most of them are working, that, uh, that most of
the folks in our programs are elderly, uh, working families, or folks with a
disability. It's helpful as a Council Member to participate and educate in the
public, uh, you know, reality versus uh, misperception and so it's helpful, you
know, that annual report with those...those stats so that we can, uh, do our job to
try and confront any misconceptions that are out there, and it's important for us to
be knowledgeable about who's participating in our programs to, uh, to speak to
any misperceptions in the community. So thank you!
Champion: Steve, when you say that, um, 64% leave the program after five years, does that
mean they become self-sufficient or they've left the area? Do you have the
breakdown on that, or do you have any idea?
Rackis: Yeah, actually, uh, last year we had, um, 280 and...and we've just gotten new
software so we're working on, you know, capturing some of this data in...in, uh,
better fashion with the new software, and uh, in terms of...we have, of the 280
families, 52 have been coded left in good standing,' which means they have just
left the program voluntarily. Now many of that 52 I know is because their income
has gotten to the point that we're paying a zero housing assistance payment.
Some people basically leave the program because they get married and they marry
somebody who would put them over income. Some people just leave the
program. I think in some cases, um, some people might end up going into an
assisted living facility that voucher could not be used at. Um, then we do capture
what we call 'zero have' and those are the families that when their income gets to
the point that they're paying full rent, and we're paying zero, at the end of six
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 22
months if that situation still is... is occurring, presumably the income that put
them in that situation is steady enough that at that point we end their participation.
So the 'zero have' is 50 or 23 families. So we have 75 families that basically have
gone off the program, are in good standing, and predominantly due to their
income level.
Bailey: I just also want to make a comment that I'm glad that you included, um, residents'
input. I think that's always an important part of a plan is to include people who
are involved in the plan, and I think it's notable to, um, that the residents seem to
want the same kind of things that, you know, all Iowa City residents want, you
know, better streets, more involvement in their neighborhoods, some
empowerment, and...and concerns about perceptions. So, I thought that was a
very interesting part of the...of your information that you provided.
Wright: It's also very telling about the program that we have in Iowa City that their
complaints were about things that were outside the purview... of your program.
That reflects on everything quite well!
Hayek: Thanks, Steve. Anyone else wishing to address the Council during this public
hearing? (bangs gavel) Public hearing is closed.
b) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION
Wilburn: Move adoption of the resolution.
Bailey: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Wilburn, seconded by Bailey. Discussion? Roll call, please. Passes 7-
0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 23
ITEM 8. ADOPTING THE AMENDED IOWA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY
HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER (HCV) ADMINISTRATIVE PLAN.
a) PUBLIC HEARING
Hayek: This is a public hearing. The public hearing is open. (bangs gavel)
Rackis: Okay, I'm going to try to walk through this quickly, concisely, and with least
amount of confusion possible, if I can possibly do that with some HUD
documents. I'll... so what we have in this memo, we have two plans. The
Housing Choice Voucher administrative plan is...is basically our operational plan
for how we are going to administer a voucher program. Our admissions and
continued occupancy plan is how we will administer the public housing, uh,
program. So we have a series of changes that we are proposing that actually
affect both plans. So what I'd like to do is walk through those changes, knowing
that they affect both plans, uh, and then obviously we have two public hearings on
the two plans. The first one, and this was somewhat news to us, and um,
according to the HUD regulations, the Housing Authority may deny assistance to
an applicant if they owe another housing authority, or us, any money. Uh, we
always were under the impression that that extended to the project based Section
8 facilities like Section 8, or excuse me, Pheasant Ridge. Uh, that's not the case.
The HUD language is very specific when it says 'public housing agencies or
housing authorities,' and what got our attention with this is we did have an
applicant that owed Pheasant Ridge a significant amount of money. Uh, our
feeling was that, um, it's the same federal tax dollars that are supporting the tenant
based program, and the project based program, and if they...in effect have
defaulted on Pheasant Ridge, Capitol House, Ecumenical Towers, any of these
places that we should also deny, uh, their participation until they can repay the
funds owed to those facilities. So that would be common for both plans that we
would be able to deny, and the example being if somebody owes Pheasant Ridge
money. Now, when talking to HUD, um, the regulations specifically say housing
authorities, but their feeling was if we want to go beyond just housing authorities
and include those other facilities, they couldn't find anything in the regs to prevent
that. So, the...the second one, and this was another surprise to us, because we felt
that this was just standard pattern and practice, and that is if a head of household
cannot produce, uh, social security numbers and verification of social security
numbers, we denied the participation of those families on the program. Uh,
because HUD says in their regulations that families have to provide the
documentation required in order to determine eligibility. Well, low and behold,
January 20, 2010, HUD issued a memo saying housing authorities must deny
participation to families who do not produce a social security number. So, again,
our pattern and practice was to deny, so this item is just simply, uh, meeting that
HUD mandate and incorporating that HUD mandate into our, uh, HCV plan and
continued occupancy. Uh, then the, um, the next one...is uh, the, uh, must deny
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 24
period of eligibility, uh...and that is, uh (mumbled) oh, no, the next...the next one
is actually, uh, our selection criteria in terms of how we are sorting families on the
waiting list. Uh, for those of you that were here you recall in 2006 we established
a residency preference, and we, uh, put that residency preference in place at the
beginning of 2007. So, what...what we, what our primary pool of applicants was
elderly families, disabled families, families with children under the age of 18 who
were residents in our jurisdiction. The next pool that we would draw from was
elderly, disabled, and families with children from wherever. Well, what we're
proposing is that, um, we, uh, we look at... sort of changing that to where, and as a
practical matter, I have to point out, I seriously doubt we'll ever get out of our top
preference category. At any given point in time we have 800 to 1,000 applicants
who are elderly, disabled, have children under 18 who are residents. So, we...we
probably will never leave that pool, but if we do leave that pool, it was our feeling
that the next level, uh, of families that should get support would be, um, adult
families with...with two or more household members, and this could be a family
where their minor children are now 18, 19 and out of the unit, where you may
have, you know, a 55- or 57-year-old, uh, married couple because...they can stay
on the program, uh, even if they don't have kids at that point, but that we would
look at, you know, those families on the waiting list that were adult families
without minor children, without disability, and not elderly as being the next. So,
what we're...what we're doing is pushing residents completely to the top of the
list, non-residents down the list, and then at the very end ensuring that any, uh,
single, able-bodied, uh, individual, regardless of where they live, is always at the
bottom of the list. So, again, just a slight shift in ensuring that residents are at the
top of the list, non-residents, uh, not. Uh, then um, the other change that we're
making, I think I described a little bit in the annual report, uh, that on top of the
Housing Choice Voucher funding, we also receive...we have some State tenant-
based rental assistance funds that is targeting chronically mentally ill and frail
elderly. We have some Home funds from the City of Iowa City that is also
targeting elderly, disabled families, uh, so when these funds expire, uh, our
thought was, you know, as the families got to the top of our waiting list we would
flip them onto the Housing Choice Voucher program, uh, it's becoming a, sort of a
paperwork nightmare, not only for us, but for the Community Development staff.
So what we're asking is for a special admission category that when the families
who are served by State Home funds, City Home funds, when those funds are
expired, that we have a special admission and just automatically transition them to
the Housing Choice Voucher program so there would be no break in assistance.
And then, um, lastly the social security issue. HUD always has, you know, you
can deny applications and you can terminate participants. So the same thing with
the social security, uh, issue, if a family, uh, during their annual review is not
producing social security numbers for members that they want to add to their
household, or you know perhaps members that were in the household that are
coming back, so again that if they do not provide that social security verification,
social security number, that we can terminate their assistance, and again, that's in
keeping with the HUD mandate. And then the last is really we have...the way we
calculate income and count income on an interim basis, HUD requires that we do
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 25
an annual review. So an annual review is basically another run-through of
eligibility. Income verifications, disability verifications, family composition. But
during interim periods of time, the family's income changes, we do process those
interim changes. Uh, we have one policy for the Housing Choice Voucher
program. We have one policy for our homeownership program, and we have one
policy for public housing. And what we're doing with this item is simply
changing the homeownership and the public housing policy to mirror the Housing
Choice Voucher policy, and...and part of the reason is we...we really need
to...right now in public housing, if a family's income goes up, we're not
processing a rent change until their annual review, and we simply need to
generate more rental income, and with homeownership we have to be cognizant
of how much housing assistance we're paying out. So again, rather than waiting
for the annual review, we're going to be, uh, redoing the amount of housing
assistance payments that we make on...on an interim basis, so that basically all
three programs have the same policy and procedure.
Hayek: Any questions for Steve?
Champion: No, that's very helpful. Um, what is...the requirements for residency?
Rackis: Well, that's a good question. Because the only entity in the State of Iowa
that...that can define residency by the length of time a person lives here are the
Regents University for determining tuition. Uh, HUD allows us to have a
residency preference. They do not allow us to place a period of time on that
residency. So, uh, it presents, uh, some administrative challenges for us because
what happens is we have to be aware of who's faking it, who's not faking it,
who's, you know, who's trying to jump the waiting list, and who's really a
resident. Uh, with a wait that is pushing two years, we're not really determining
residency at the time of application. Much like everything else on the program,
when a person reaches the top of the list, where we determine whether they're
income eligible, whether they're family composition is eligible, whether they're
disabled...we're verifying residency at that point, and before we even make
mention of they're at the top of the list and we're looking at determining
eligibility, we send out a questionnaire and we require that they bring in
documentation to prove that they're a resident, or that they are working in our
jurisdiction, because HUD also says that we have to include...if a family's
working in our jurisdiction, they get the residency preference. So, essentially
we're, you know, we're looking at, you know, when we're determining eligibility,
are they living here? Can they prove that they're living here, and if they can't
prove that they're living here, we...we do not extend them the residency
preference.
Bailey: So what documentation do you typically use to reflect that?
Rackis: A lease is great.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 26
Bailey: Yeah, of course.
Rackis: Uh, that...that's the best. Uh, something else we look at is, you know, I'm here
and there, I'm staying with friends, staying with other family, but if their kids
have been enrolled in Iowa City schools since September, that's pretty indicative
that they've been a resident. Uh, we're looking at whether or not they're paying a
utility bill, how long, you know, not really how long, but have they been
paying...not just sort of yesterday, and HUDs given us some leeway of, you
know, if somebody shows up yesterday and says 'I'm now a resident' that, you
know, that under sort of the fraud guidelines we can sort of look at, you know,
what is their intent, you know, what have they really been doing. Uh, Sue Dulek
with the City Attorney's office basically gave us some guidelines, you know,
where'd they file a tax return? Uh, are they... are they engaged in another
services? Are they receiving, uh, services from Community Mental Health?
DHS, uh, so you know, we're looking at, and of course, you know, if they have
paystubs or a letter, you know, saying that they're going to be employed by, uh, a
particular business. And...and we have people try to, they provide fake leases
and what have you.
Bailey: So, what I hear you saying is you take your residency requirement or preference
very, very seriously and try to do what you can to, um, not only support that, but
um, you know, look into people who may be trying to jump the line basically.
Rackis: Yes. The...the only post office boxes that...that we will give residency
preference to are, uh, DVIP, uh, Shelter House, and um, in many cases, um, a lot
of our disabled applicants where they are receiving services from Reach For Your
Potential, uh, REM, uh, Systems Unlimited, Successful Living...we will accept
residency preference if... if the mailing is going to those organizations.
Bailey: Thank you.
Hayek: Other questions for Steve? Thanks, Steve. Anyone else wishing to address us
during this public hearing? Hearing none (bangs gavel) public hearing is closed.
b) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION
Wilburn: Move adoption of the resolution.
Bailey: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Wilburn, seconded by Bailey. Discussion?
Champion: I have one more question, kind of a social service question. Um...you said there's
a two-year waiting list? And you have to prove some kind of residency?
Rackis: Yes.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 27
Champion: Well, how do these people exist? I mean, they're already in need, they're already
a family in need. So what are they living on in that two-year period?
Rackis: Well, I think, you know, in some respects you're seeing what some of the mobility
in the schools. Families scrape up enough money for a couple month's rent, then
they can't pay the rent, then they're evicted. They're moving into another school
district area. Kids are moving in the school, um, lot of families are doubled up,
uh, you know, until they receive the assistance, uh, in the case of, um, many
disabled, they might be, you know, be relying on a family member that is
providing, uh, you know, some income to them, and just, you know, scraping by.
I mean, I think we see a lot of time people are, you know, I gotta pay the rent so
I'm going to ignore the utility bill, or I gotta pay the utility bill, I'm going to
ignore, uh, the rent, and uh, you know, just try to make do. Uh, you know,
it's...then, you know, but then it's amazing you know some families never, you
know, never...some families in that situation never apply to the program and just
simply make do. I mean, they might have food stamps, maybe get some
assistance through the Crisis Center, uh, other organizations.
Hayek: Further discussion? Roll call, please. Item passes 7-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 28
ITEM 9. ADOPTING THE AMENDED IOWA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY
PUBLIC HOUSING ADMISSIONS AND CONTINUED OCCUPANCY
POLICY (ACOP).
a) PUBLIC HEARING
Hayek: This is a public hearing. (bangs gavel) Public hearing is open. Mr. Rackis.
Rackis: Same as the previous item (laughter). I won't go through that again. (away from
mic)
Hayek: Anyone else wishing to address us during the public hearing? Public hearing is
closed. (bangs gavel)
b) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION
Bailey: Move the resolution.
Wilburn: (mumbled) second.
Hayek: (laughter) Moved by Bailey, seconded by Wilburn. Discussion? Roll call,
please. Item passes 7-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 29
ITEM 10. APPROVING PLANS, SPECIFICATION, FORM OF CONTRACT, AND
ESTIMATE OF COST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE EAST SIDE
RECYCLING CENTER PROJECT, ESTABLISHING AMOUNT OF BID
SECURITY TO ACCOMPANY EACH BID, DIRECTING CITY CLERK
TO PUBLISH NOTICE TO BIDDERS, AND FIXING TIME AND PLACE
FOR RECEIPT OF BIDS.
a) PUBLIC HEARING
Hayek: This is a public hearing. Public hearing is open. (bangs gavel) Public hearing is
closed. (bangs gavel)
b) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION
Wright: Move adoption.
Mims: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Wright, seconded by Mims. Discussion?
Mims: I would just like to point out that, to the public, that this project is being funded
by Landfill user fees, um, it's not coming out of our property taxes. I think as
people look at, uh, you know, the budget that we'll be passing tonight and the
tight fiscal times that we are in, I just think it's important that people recognize
that this is coming from the Landfill user fees.
Bailey: And I hope, I mean, it's an expensive project.
Mims: It is.
Bailey: And, and it's a visionary project...it's, you know, we're going for platinum LEED
certification, we're trying to set an example, and I...I hope that we live up to that
vision as we spend these fees, because I have been generally supportive of this,
since we started planning it, but in our last budget session, or in this last
budgeting cycle, I've become increasingly concerned. Even though it's funded by
fees, fees are fees, I mean, they come from somebody's pocket, and so I'm going
to support this. I've supported it all along, but we as a community, this is an East
Side Recycling, it's visionary with LEED, it's...potentially using bioswells, we've
got to incorporate a lot of this into our own thinking about how we proceed in
public buildings, and I...I think we've got to promote a lot of usage of this
building. If we're going forward with this vision, we have to really in... invest,
um, not only our dollars but our commitment as well. So...after a great deal of
thought, I'll be supporting this tonight.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 30
Hayek: Further discussion? Roll call, please. Item passes 7-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 31
ITEM 11. INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS TO TAKE ADDITIONAL ACTION FOR
THE AUTHORIZATION OF A LOAN AGREEMENT AND THE
ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $17,750,000 SEWER REVENUE
CAPITAL LOAN NOTES, SERIES 2010.
a) PUBLIC HEARING
Hayek: This is a public hearing. The public hearing is open. (bangs gavel) Mr.
Burmeister.
Burmeister: Thank you, uh, Jon Burmeister of Public Financial Management. Uh, as the
Mayor indicated, we did solicit proposals from, uh, underwriting firms this
morning on the purchase of some, uh, sewer revenue refunding capital loan notes,
um, somewhere along your packet you should see a, uh, tabulation of bids. Uh,
we did get the rating reconfirmed at an A-1. That's a very solid rating for the
enterprise fund. If you look at the tabulation of bids, there's actually eight
different bidders, uh, from different groups, and if you look on the kind of left
hand side is kind of front and back, you can see that there was, uh, 21 different
underwriters involved in the...in the eight proposals that you received. So that's a
tremendous amount of interest in your bonds. If you look at the kind of the list of
the names, as well as where the states are coming from, you can see there's
actually 12 different states. They're coming far as, as far away from, as Colorado,
Texas, uh, Virginia, uh, New York, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. So that was really
good interest in your bonds. You'll notice here also, um, kind of the second
column from the right. Does everyone see the 2.6197%. That's what's called the
'true interest rate.' It's very similar to an APR on a car loan, and you can see the
cover there was a 2.67. When we, uh, projected this deal, when we worked with
Kevin on this, we had been hoping fora 3.19%, so I'm pleased to tell you that the
bids came in very favorable today and straights are still holding low, and we've
ended up getting a 2.61, uh, 97%. If you flip to the very back page, you can see
UBS out of New York, New York came in at 318, so there's a difference in
opinion of about a half a percent from the low bid to the, uh, to the high bid, and
the reason I wanted to visit with you here tonight, if you go to the very last page,
uh, as indicated this is a refunding. It's a refunding of your 2000, uh, 2001 to
2002, uh, sewer bonds. So we're going to take the proceeds of this one and pay
off the other ones on July 1st, and if you look at the. last page in the savings, right
in that column it says 'annual savings,' you can see what reduction that we're
going to receive in the debt service payments of your service revenue bonds. You
can see down below there it's a total of $1,892,000 of savings on this bond
transaction. When we had ran the numbers, we were hoping for a million dollars
there, so it's about 80 almost 90% higher than what we had projected. Um, as
indicated in the public hearing, we had been hoping for about a half a million
dollars of present value savings, and I'm pleased to indicate here that we're ending
up going to receive, uh, $1,000,291 of...of savings, so it's 2.5 times larger than
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 32
what we had anticipated. Uh, also I wanted to kind of point out that we went back
in time, and you may recall over the last 18 months we've been coming to you
with various refunding opportunities, and we've added all of those up. There was
actually eight different refundings, including this one, so the City has received, or
saved, in the last 18 months, over $9 million of savings on your debt service costs
in the last 18 months, and I think that's...for a size of..of a community that you
are, that's a remarkable amount of money. Reducing your costs, reducing the debt
payments that you're making to the...to the investors. So we would recommend
that you award to Pipery Jaffery and Company of Minneapolis, Minnesota, at a
true interest rate of 2.6197% and we did receive favorable bids as indicated
on...you'll see on the lower right hand corner of the tabulation of bids, we were
able to, uh, decrease the actual par amount down from the public (mumbled) to
$15,080,000. So when you make your, uh, your recommendation tonight, the
actual par amount is $15,080,000 and I'll just open it up to any questions you may
have.
Hayek: I guess this is the other side of the coin, uh, to loss of interest (several talking,
laughter)
Burmeister: Yes, you're ultimately taking advantage of the other side, absolutely. (several
talking)
Bailey: And I think we do a good job of taking advantage of that. I mean, people who are
really paying attention to that. As the $9 million would indicate!
Burmeister: And the bad news is, is we've taken advantage of all the opportunities that you
have, and we'll have to wait a couple more years to take another bite of the apple,
so we've hit it hard and we saved you $9 million and uh, it's great timing in the
market. Interest rates are real low, and you just had that opportunity where
(mumbled)
Bailey: Great!
Hayek: John drove over from Des Moines. Kevin O'Malley's unable to be here tonight,
but he wanted to make sure that we had coverage at this hearing. I appreciate
your (several talking)
Wright: Nice to hear good news!
Hayek: Any other comment during the public hearing? (bangs gavel) Public hearing is
closed.
b) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION
Wilburn: Move adoption of the resolution.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 33
Mims: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Wilburn, seconded by Mims. Discussion? Roll call, please. Item
passes 7-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 34
ITEM 13. CONSIDER RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE REDEMPTION OF
OUTSTANDING SEWER REVENUE BONDS, DATED DECEMBER 1,
2001, AND SEWER REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS, DATED APRIL 1,
2002, AND DIRECTING NOTICE TO BE GIVEN.
Bailey: Move the resolution.
Wilburn: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Bailey, seconded by Wilburn. Discussion? Roll call. Item passes 7-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 35
ITEM 14. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ANNUAL BUDGET FOR
THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2011.
Mims: Move the adoption.
Wright: Move the adoption.
Hayek: Moved by Mims (laughter) seconded by Wright. Discussion? For the public's
information, a public hearing was held on this item, uh, on February 16th. Roll
call, please. Item passes 7-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 36
ITEM 15. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE THREE-YEAR
FINANCIAL PLAN FOR THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, AND THE
FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM.
Bailey: Move the resolution.
Wilburn: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Bailey, seconded by Wilburn. Discussion? Also for the public's
information, the public hearing was held on this item on February 16, as well.
Roll call, please. Item passes 7-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 37
ITEM 16. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 10 OF THE CITY
CODE, ENTITLED "USE OF PUBLIC WAYS AND PROPERTY,"
CHAPTER 11, ENTITLED "FARMER'S MARKET," AND TITLE 4,
ENTITLED "ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES," CHAPTER 5, ENTITLED
"PROHIBITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS," TO ALLOW THE FARMERS
MARKET TO TAKE PLACE ON WASHINGTON STREET AND TO
ALLOW THE SALE AND CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOL AT THE
FARMERS MARKET. (FIRST CONSIDERATION)
Bailey: Move first consideration.
Mims: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Bailey, seconded by Mims. Discussion?
Bailey: I think this represents an exciting change for the Farmers Market. I'm glad to see
it, um, expanding. I think we all are.
Wright: Also very good policy for getting the input for coming up with these changes.
Bailey: Nice survey!
Hayek: Further discussion? Roll call, please. Item passes 7-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 38
ITEM 17. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 5, ENTITLED
"BUSINESS AND LICENSE REGULATIONS," CHAPTER 2, ENTITLED
"TAXICABS," TO PROHIBIT ELECTRONIC SIGNS ON TAXICABS
AND TO CLARIFY VEHICLE INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS. (PASS
AND ADOPT)
Champion: Move adoption.
Bailey: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Champion, seconded by Bailey. Discussion? Hello.
Bennett: Hi, good evening. Um, I did bring a PowerPoint (mumbled)
Hayek: Could you state your name first (both talking)
Bennett: I'm sorry, I'm Teresa Bennett. I'm here from Five Stars Taxi. I forgot that last
time too, and I apologize.
Hayek: That's okay.
Bennett: Um, I don't know why it's not working, but I did bring some documentation for
you guys to look over. Oh, here, maybe it's going to come up, and I apologize
again. (mumbled) coughing to death. But um, one of the things, I don't know if
you have this (mumbled) message for you that I left for you guys to review. I just
kind of wanted to touch on, uh, some of the revenue that comes through for that,
and which, you know, for us it's kind of a big deal, money! Um, but an average
cab for one cab goes about 2,000 miles a day, and it goes into different areas and
different zones, different places, and this provides opportunity for, uh, revenue for
advertising to different, um, different groups of people. And so I thought that was
a pretty interesting, um, article. I think I sent you a picture and a article about
Holstead (mumbled) this also for, um, she's doing some advertising for her, uh,
real estate company, and they implemented...and I'm sorry, I don't know why it's
taking so long (mumbled) but I think you do have some of those pictures in front
of you. Um, that she's also using the taxi-top with the, um, LCD, flat screen, um,
New York on top of the taxis there that, um, looks like it's going pretty well, and
I...I think it's been around since like 2001. So it's not something that's new,
honestly, I think we're kind of behind the times. Um, there's a company in
Eugene, Oregon called the VersaLogic Corp and they actually make the tops for
cabs. Um, I think it is going to be the next, um, the next big thing for advertising.
I mean, cabs go everywhere. New York already has cabs that implement this,
based on GPS, so it actually does go by where they...where they go, based on
what advertising's going to be, so it meets that, you know, neighborhood that
they're actually in. So I guess tonight I just want to touch on those key points and
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 39
talk about, um, one of the things I noticed that digital signs, we already use it in
our City buses, currently, um, it's a very primitive form, but I mean, you gotta
start somewhere. And I guess all we're really asking is for the opportunity and for
us to leave this on the table for a while, and have a chance to discuss it further and
look into it deeper and see where we might end up, um, so not just decide today
that... obviously we're not going to resolve anything today either about where we
want to go with it, and what it's going to look like, and obviously there's going to
be a need to the amendments in the, uh, requirements for, um, inspection and
those kind of things, but...I think we just need to take some time and leave it on
the table, give me some time maybe to speak with other cab companies and look
at some other cities. I'm still gleaming some information from other cities who
are actually doing this and have done it for some time, see what that looks like for
them. I know the issue before has been flashing lights, which I kind of want to
get away from that term. It seems to put a mindset in people's mind about what
the signs would look like, and I don't think...I think it deters from what we
really...what they really do look like. Like I said, I apologize (laughter and
mumbling)I don't have the PowerPoint there, but I did send you I think some
pictures to see kind of what they look like, and they are, you know, they look
nice. They're not ugly. They aren't real bright, um, I mean it's colors, again, like I
said, colors can be changed, those kind of things. So I think, you know, there's a
lot of other things that I think we would eventually like to put on the table too
regarding the cab industry in general, you know, rates, meters, there's a lot of
things that need addressed, um...
Champion: We know!
Bennett: ...obviously we're not going to address those all tonight, and (laughter) I would
like the opportunity though to leave this on the table, maybe at a later time we can
discuss it and come back to it, see what it looks like, um, I just don't want an
industry left to one person's interpretation of what a term, you know, that term
putting restrictions on... on something that could be, uh, (mumbled) for all of us,
so I guess that's all I really wanted to say tonight. Like I said, I'm not really as
prepared as I would have liked to be. I've been sick all week, so I apologize, but
um, now maybe our pictures going to come because I'm done! (laughter) Yeah!
I even came earlier to make sure it would work, but...(laughter and several
talking) I'm up here, yeah, uh-huh.
Hayek: Sorry to be a stickler, but you've got about two minutes left. (both talking)
Maybe you could run through this...
Bennett: I apologize, the...pictures there weren't working. (laughter) Let's see. I know
safety was one of the issues that was talked about too, um, because downtown is
pretty congested, but I really don't think it's that much of a distraction, like I said
based on some of the pictures I've seen and...and the areas I've seen it used in and
um, and I'm still talking with cities like Chicago and New York, waiting for some
feedback from them...on, uh, and oddly enough, they have cab commissions, uh,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 40
it's like the cab, limousine, taxi commission. It's not governed by the cities, so,
it's a little bit different in those cities, but here's what I was talking about, like the
City has already kind of used digital signs, so I mean, I know they're on the
inside, but we're just asking for something similar on the top that would be, you
know, could be very basic, um, here's the ones in New York. And the one on the
top, actually a digital one there that shows (mumbled) the one I think that's used
GPS. So it advertises based on what street it's on and...and those kinds of things
and the one on the bottom is the, the lady I spoke of, um, for her real estate
company, and this is the one I'm talking about that's more the LCD and it's a little
more attractive. Not really flashing, not really bright. Um, i-phone even has an
app so you can catch a cab; I thought you'd find that interesting. I thought it was
kind of funny. (laughter) Um, I know that maybe we should talk about maybe
implementing taxi stands to...to, um, address the safety issues. Um, I know rates
has been kind of a talk as well, and obviously we won't talk about those tonight,
but I think (mumbled) on the table because it's an issue. Here's a little bit closer
view of what I'm talking about, what they would look like. So again, not real
bright. You can make 'em static so they don't move. They look nice. They get
the point across, and they feed to a larger group of individuals, people who are
walking, going, like I said, cab goes about 2,000 miles a day, and we have 14
cabs, so how many miles is that we're going to cover every day...into areas
besides just downtown Iowa City, so like I said I just kind of wanted you to
maybe keep it on the table for a while longer and maybe we could address it
again, and um, see what that looks like for everybody. Thanks.
Hayek: Thanks, Ms. Bennett.
Karr: Motion to accept correspondence.
Wright: So moved.
Mims: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Wright, seconded by Mims. All those in favor say aye. Opposed say
nay. Motion carries. Further discussion? If there's anyone else from the public
who wishes to address us on this item, you can step forward. Back to Council.
Wright: I appreciated the...the audio visuals there, the visuals I guess, uh, giving some
good examples of what an electronic sign can be. It's not a flashing light. And I
just...I said from the beginning, I think that this proposed ordinance is far too
restrictive in terms of outlawing any electronic signs on a cab, whether it's just
simply a directional sign, um, we saw some examples who would be...you'd be
hard pressed to confuse those with flashing lights or emergency lights. I think
you would also be hard pressed to consider that those are going to be posing a, uh,
any specific danger or uh, adding to confusion in the downtown. Um, I...I think
this just goes far beyond what we need to do, uh, in Iowa City for this particular
issue, and we would still be...certainly be able to stay within the State law. So I
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 41
will continue to vote no on this one. I think it's just...it's just a little bit too heavy-
handed.
Champion: I kind of like the signs!
Bailey: Although I (several talking)
Champion: ...they're not obtrusive at all! They're kind of fun, especially if you're just
standing on a corner waiting to meet somebody, in a city like New York or
Chicago, where there's constant cabs going by you, you see all the different... all
the different things on'em, um, but I don't know how we...how we can get this
done, but I...I would be in favor of deferring this decision.
Bailey: One of the things I, you know...the visuals helped. Um, for sure, I...I went both
ways actually, when I saw them, but they do introduce some sign clutter into our
neighborhoods, and last year we...we removed sign clutter from our
neighborhoods when we talked about rental signs. So...it's interesting to think
about that impact -yeah, in a commercial district I could see how they aren't
confused with flashing lights. They could be distracting, I mean, lit anything
when you're driving, when you're walking, can be distracting. It actually depends
upon your...your visual ability and if you're old like me, I mean, you adjust less
well to bright light and darkness, but um, the concept of introducing that
additional sign clutter in neighborhoods is something I perhaps want to think
about or would consider, um, if we went ahead and...and voted tonight, I would
probably continue to vote against this. If people are interested in rolling this into
a macro discussion about cabs, I might be so inclined.
Champion: I'd be very willing to do that. Um, it's...I mean, my eyes are a lot older than
yours, and I didn't have any problems, even in the big cities, so (laughter and
several talking)
Bailey: My eyes have aged at an incredible rate!
Wright: Well, Connie suggested a deferral.
Bailey: Uh-huh.
Wright: Um, is that a formal...
Champion: Yeah, it's a formal motion.
Wright: I'd second. (person speaking away from mic)
Hayek: Well, uh...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 42
Bailey: I do think we need some process information though about impact (both talking)
but.. .
Dilkes: I would suggest if you're interested in...in deferring or in eliminating, amending
the ordinance to take out the second paragraph of the amendment, leaving the first
one in. I think we need to take care of the first one.
Bailey: So take care of the flashing lights issue, is that what you're suggesting? Um, and
then consider this other issue separately?
Dilkes: Right, you could take that issue up with your whole cab discussion that you said
you wanted to take up.
Champion: I'm actually going to vote to amend...
Bailey: Move to amend.
Champion: Move to amend...I'm going to vote to amend! Move to amend to keep the
prohib...to prohibit flashing signs.
Bailey: Flashing lights.
Champion: Flashing lights, and then um, defer the rest of this ordinance into our general cab
discussion.
Bailey: I second that...amendment or (mumbled)
Dilkes: Yeah, let's don't defer the actual ordinance. Um, let's...let's just amend this
ordinance to eliminate paragraph 2 of the amendment.
Champion: Okay, just take off my last sentence.
Dilkes: And...cause then we will have final reading on the ordinance, which says you
have to comply with State code and including the flashing sign...flashing issue,
and then we'll take up the additional regulation, City regulation, of electronic
signs when you talk about cabs. That's what you would do if you did that.
Champion: That's what I said. (laughter)
Hayek: So the motion is to amend the proposed ordinance to keep the flashing lights
prohibition, drop the rest.
Champion: Right.
Hayek: Moved by Champion and seconded by Bailey. Discussion on that?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 43
Wright: That works well.
Hayek: Okay. Uh, that's a voice vote then, isn't it? All those in favor of the amended, of
the motion to amend say aye. Opposed say nay. Motion appears to carry 7-0.
Karr: So now we'll vote on the ordinance as amended.
Bailey: Move adoption of the ordinance as amended.
Wright: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Bailey, seconded by Wright. Discussion? Roll call. Item passes 7-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 44
ITEM 18. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 10 OF THE CITY
CODE, ENTITLED "USE OF PUBLIC WAYS AND PROPERTY,"
CHAPTER 3, ENTITLED "COMMERCIAL USE OF SIDEWALKS,"
SECTION 5, ENTITLED "USE BY MOBILE VENDORS" TO INCREASE
THE VENDORS IN CITY PLAZA AND TO DECREASE THE MINIMUM
HOURS REQUIREMENT. (FIRST CONSIDERATION)
Mims: Move first consideration.
Bailey: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Mims, seconded by Bailey. Discussion?
Champion: I think this is a good change. The hours that the vendors had to be there a lot of
times they weren't (noise on mic) any business at all, and L ..I think this is a good
move.
Hayek: Further discussion? Roll call, please. Item passes 7-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 45
ITEM 20. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE INSTALLATION OF
SPEED HUMPS ON SHANNON DRIVE BETWEEN ROHRET ROAD
AND ANDREA COURT.
Champion: Move the resolution.
Mims: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Champion, seconded by Mims. Discussion? If you want to approach
you may.
Shelly: Hi, my name's Christy Schelling, I work at...I live at 1356 Shannon Drive, and
um, I just wanted to point out a few things. Um, first of all, although, um, I mean,
we do realize that the volume of the traffic has increased greatly on that
road... since the road's been opened up to Melrose, so volume is a great... is a big
issue. Um, we can't do much about that, but we would really like to see some
control of this (mumbled) and that is why, um, we as a neighborhood got together
and went to through the traffic calming project in order to look at some ways that
we might be able to slow people down, um, and as you...I think you see in, um,
some of your documentation that the average speed was quite a bit higher than the
posted 25. Um, it is...as a neighborhood, I know it doesn't look like it, but there
was a large consensus, um, I think only...43 out of 100 some, 50, households
responded, but I'd like you to keep in mind that on the whole half of the drive is a
assisted living facility and while I cannot say that those people did not return their
survey card, I would think that it's probably pretty likely, given the outcome that
we had, um, at the, uh, planning, or the traffic calming meeting at the libr... at the
school. Um, so I think there's a lot more support than it really seems to look like,
based on the numbers and I've actually talked to many people in the neighborhood
and...and we're...we definitely need it, um, it's...it's a residential area. I won't let
my son ride, and he's 15, and I won't let him ride on the street any more, on his
bike. Um, there's been an accident on the road with a bicyclist being hit and um,
we just really feel strongly and I really urge you to go ahead and pass the speed
humps. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you. Further discussion? Roll call, please. Item passes 7-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 46
ITEM 21. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ADOPTING AN UNSUCCESSFUL OR
DELAYED PROJECTS POLICY FOR CDBG AND HOME PROJECTS
AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 04-68.
Bailey: Move the resolution.
Wilburn: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Bailey, seconded by Wilburn. Discussion?
Champion: I'm...not going to support this. I think I...I think they have a way to extend those
projects by coming back to the City Council, and um, I just don't think this is a
necessary change and I...I could also see some problems in it.
Mims: I agree, and I think also with our whole discussion coming up of housing and all
the various related issues, um, I'd like to look at this as part of that, and...and I
agree with what Connie said. I think there's the opportunity to look at those
extensions now through City Council, and would prefer to have it done that way.
Bailey: I'm going to support this change. I really, um, am very supportive of the work of
this commission, and...and trust their judgment. I mean, they have a much closer
sort of eye on these projects and...and I think do a great job with due diligence.
So I'm comfortable with this process as the change, as proposed.
Wright: I agree with Regenia on that one. I...I fully trust the judgment of the, uh,
Housing and Community Development Commission. I think they have in the past
managed to do this very successfully and your point of their knowledge of these
projects, you know, quite a bit more detailed and intimate than ours is...is well
taken.
Mims: The only other thing I would add is even going back and reading the minutes and
looking at their discussion and just pointing out that this was a 5-3 vote on the
commission's part in terms of recommending this policy. So it was certainly far
from unanimous on their part in recommending this change.
Bailey: Yeah, but I think as this change occurs that they'll...they'll fine tune it as a
commission and going back to their expertise with the projects and their
understanding of it. I'm comfortable leaving it in their hands.
Hayek: I spent four a half years, I believe, on the...on the commission, likewise fully trust
them, but I think I'm more comfortable maintaining, uh, the current policy. I
believe I would be open to considering changes in the deadlines, if... if the current
ones are onerous or...or not realistic and are causing problems, but I'd rather have
some clear deadlines, um, even... even if we shift those a little bit. Any further
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 47
discussion? Roll call, please. Item fails, uh, 3-4, Mims, Champion, Hayek,
Dickens in the negative.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 48
ITEM 22. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION N0.97-326
ESTABLISHING A PUBLIC ART PROGRAM AND RESOLUTION NO.
02-72 SETTING THE ANNUAL ALLOCATION, TO SET A NEW
ANNUAL ALLOCATION OF $14,750 FOR PUBLIC ART.
Wright: Move the resolution.
Bailey: Move the resolution.
Hayek: Moved by Wright, seconded by Bailey. Discussion?
Bailey: Um, I love this program. I'm disappointed to see this funding level, and I'm
hopeful that, um, at some point in the near future that we can reinstitute our very
distinctive program. I mean, it's a leader in the State and I think it's important to
our sense of place as a community, um, when our Great Places application, part of
our Great Places application is to extend the Literary Walk, and that's one of our
public art projects, so I think we need to acknowledge the impact of...of what
we've done in public art and um, really have a commitment by this Council to as
quickly as possible to ramp this back up, in ways if we want to look at
fundraising, which is something that the Public Art Commission has explored, I
think we should explore that, but I think that this city needs a commitment to
public art. It serves everybody. You don't, um, there are no income requirements
for public art.
Champion: I totally agree with you, Regenia. I really love public art. I don't view it as
important as a library, but it's right up there. (laughter) It does provide for people
of all income levels visual pleasures.
Hayek: Further discussion? Roll call, please. Item passes 7-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 49
ITEM 23. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO
ATTEST A CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE IOWA CITY
SOCCER PARK RENOVATION PROJECT.
Hayek: We have a new update in our packet. We've got bids from... several entities, the
lowest bid was MBA Concrete out of North Liberty, uh, for $211,833 and the
engineer's estimate was $240,000.
Mims: Move the resolution.
Wright: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Mims, seconded by Wright. Discussion? Roll call, please. Item
passes 7-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 50
ITEM 24. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO
ATTEST A CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE NORTH
DODGE STREET PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OVER I-80 PROJECT (ESIM-
080-6(685)243--OS-52).
Wilburn: Move adoption of the resolution.
Dickens: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Wilburn, seconded by Dickens. Uh, and the, uh, lowest bid, uh,
received, uh, was from Peterson Contractors, Inc., out of Reinbeck for $2... $2,
well, $2,213,562.82. The engineer's estimate was uh about a million dollars
higher.
Wright: (several commenting) these come in so significantly under our expectations.
Hayek: And for the public's information, this project will be funded with an Iowa DOT
Economic Stimulus grant in the amount of $1.8 million. The City's local share
will be funded with Road Use Tax proceeds, water revenues, and waste water
revenues. Further discussion? Roll call, please. Item passes 7-0. How's
everyone doing? (several commenting) All right.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 51
ITEM 25. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ADOPTING AN ASSESSMENT
SCHEDULE OF UNPAID MOWING, CLEAN-UP OF PROPERTY, SNOW
REMOVAL, SIDEWALK REPAIR, AND STOP BOX REPAIR CHARGES
AND DIRECTING THE CLERK TO CERTIFY THE SAME TO THE
JOHNSON COUNTY TREASURER FOR COLLECTION IN THE SAME
MANNER AS PROPERTY TAXES.
Bailey: Move the resolution.
Wilburn: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Bailey, seconded by Wilburn. Uh, before we get into discussion,
there's been a request by staff, it's in a memo that we've got, to defer the Yenter
property manner, matter, uh, the staff has entered into a tentative agreement, or an
agreement, with him to pursue a judgment in lieu of a tax assessment. So the
request is to, uh, defer that portion of this item to the April 27 meeting.
Champion: Move to defer. Do we have to do a motion, I mean can we just...
Hayek: Yeah, why don't we.
Dilkes: Yeah, let's do a motion to defer that one and then we'll proceed with the
remaining one.
Wilburn: Second.
Hayek: Moved to defer by Champion, seconded by Wilburn. Discussion? All those in
favor say aye. Opposed say nay. Motion carries 7-0. Now we can take up the
other property.
Sullivan: Hi, my name is, pardon me, my name is A. J. Sullivan and I live at 1555 Tracy
Lane. I apologize for not being here at the last meeting, uh, I was at home with
my son, but I watched online and I do appreciate that feature of these meetings.
Um, our property, if you remember, is assessed a $250, uh, fine for weed removal
on the Sycamore side of our property. Um, and our main concern, um, with it was
the extreme vagueness of the wording of the complaint. Um, we got a note, uh,
that said that, um, we were simply to mow the tall grass and weeds along the
Sycamore side, um, after, uh, their inspector had come out and looked at it. And,
um, I think you, in your packet you have the picture of the property there. Um,
and the hill that you're looking at in our picture in the back of the packet, um, is
ground cover and the, uh, then there's a strip, uh, past the sidewalk between
Sycamore and our property, um, that is grass uh, in that part, um, and so uh, in the
memorandum that Jann Ream sent to you guys, um, outlining their involvement
and all this, we agree with that. It's pretty accurate the way, um, everything went
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 52
down. We don't have any major disagreements with that. My only concern with
that, um, and it's not even a huge concern was that, uh, at one point in here, her
statement, uh, and now I can't find it. It said, uh, she agreed to remove the $75
admin, $75.00 administrative fee and cut the charge from the contractor in half.
Um, and she could correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't remember, uh, offering
that. She offered that, um, to us before we even, um, discussed anything else with
that, and so um, my only concern was that it seemed, in the wording of that, it
seemed as though, uh, we offered, hey, will you take off the fee, will you cut it in
half, and she agreed to that, and to my recollection it didn't go down that way.
And that's my only concern with her memo. As to the specific complaint in there,
uh, we got the note that said, uh, and she quotes it in there, uh, under the
corrective action required to mow tall grass/weeds along Sycamore. And, when I
went to the City Code to look at the, uh, nuisances declared and violations, um, in
terms of the, uh, duty to cut noxious weeds, it says each owner and each person in
the possession of control of any land shall cut or otherwise destroy in whatever
manner prescribed by the weed official. So the manner that was prescribed is
mow or cut tall grass and weeds along Sycamore. That was the only thing that
was described to us. Um, and then, uh, somewhere along that process, mow
tall/grass/weeds along Sycamore turned into after looking at the required
corrective action in the notice of violation, I agreed that the instructions were
rather vague and could have caused some confusion and then it turned into I also
explained to Mr. Sullivan that in looking at the photograph it should have been
apparent that the weeds along the embankment were part of the problem, and then
it became I pointed out some thistles that were growing up again through the
ground cover. Um, and so the...our problem with this whole process was we
were given one notice on our property that said mow tall grass and weeds, and
there was a whole lot of other explanation apparently that was behind that, that we
weren't given. We didn't call to find out specifically what tall grass and weeds
they were referring to in that situation. Um, and so...really, uh, what this comes
down to, um, is what they wanted versus what we were told, and um, I guess that
all I really would need to say is that if this were your property, um, if you had a
hill, um, where even the inspector, or Miss Ream herself, pardon me, um, was
willing to say that the ground cover on the hill was good ground cover. It was
crown vetch. It's good for a slope that can't erode onto the sidewalk and cause
any problems. Um, if you knew you had that on your property, if you knew that
the only strip where you had grass was along that sidewalk, and you were given
directions to mow grass/weeds along Sycamore side, would you have gone
through and taken down all of that ground cover, or would you have taken care of
the few weeds that were in, on that hill, and then the grass and the weeds that
were along that sidewalk. Um, we took care of the grass that was along the
sidewalk. We cut all that back. We cut the few weeds down that were on the hill,
um, as she noted when she came back out in November, uh, you could start to see
that some of those weeds were actually coming back through, so clearly we didn't
kill them all the way down when we took them out, um, we thought we had. We
had not, apparently. Um, and so I guess all I'm asking is that if it were your
property, would you have cut down all of your, uh, ground cover and then, or had
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 53
someone do it for you in that case and then expect to be billed fully for work that
was unnecessary and unclear from the start. And I don't know if you have any
questions for me about this situation at all or not.
Hayek: Does anyone have any questions for Mr. Sullivan?
Champion: I think you made it pretty clear.
Hayek: Thanks for your presentation.
Sullivan: Thank you.
Hayek: Ms. Ream is here if anyone wants to hear from staff.
Champion: Well, I think...I think sometimes, um, the customer can be right. Maybe not fully
right, but somewhat right, uh, and it wasn't very clear...the message. The
message was not very clear. And I think this is just an instance where the city,
I'm not saying the city acted badly. Things turned out badly.
Wright: I don't think there's, uh, certainly no bad intent. The instruction of mow tall
grass/weeds along Sycamore is not...it's not a little unclear -it's vague!
Bailey: And...
Wright: And I'm afraid it does not address what the intended correction...corrective action
was, uh, whether or not it should have been apparent from the instructions given,
it wasn't.
Bailey: Are we...Jann, I do have some questions for you, if you don't mind. And
thanks...I'm glad you're here. Um, just...are we usually more specific? Do
people usually follow up? What happens with these kinds of directions, I mean,
what...it seems like...I'm tending to agree with Connie. Something broke down
here with...with really understanding intent and what was being discussed.
Ream: Just to give you a little background. Typically what HIS does during the summer
is we hire, um, a weed intern who is a full-time, temporary staff, um, and we try
and give him or her as much direction as possible to train them as they go through
the course of this summer job. And, um, when I first met Mr. Sullivan out at the
site, I did agree the instructions were vague. Um, but when I looked at the
photograph, um, our weed intern took before he sent in the work order, um, to me
it appeared obviously, besides the ground cover, that there were still quite a bit of
weeds growing on that hillside. So I tried to come up with some sort of a fair
solution, and um, that's what I (mumbled) quite a bit.
Hayek: There's a photo from August 3rd in that shows the sidewalk running up and down
there, and it shows grass...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 54
Ream: Sort of encroachment on the sidewalk?
Hayek: Yeah, can you... how much of the sidewalk is encroached, or was, in that
photograph? It looks like it's a fairly narrow strip of exposed sidewalk, with the
bulk on either side is...is covered by (both talking)
Ream: Probably varied, I don't know, maybe...as narrow as two and a half to three feet
maybe in some, maybe three feet in the narrow.. .
Hayek: Four foot sidewalk?
Ream: It's afour-foot sidewalk, yes.
Wright: As a gardener, I can. look at the photograph and...I can certainly see some issues
with that slope, but I...I just as somebody reading those directions who may or
may not be, um, a gardening fanatic, I...I just found that it was just too vague.
Champion: I actually got a notice in the city, about my hedge was too far on the sidewalk, but
it was very explicit. I had no problems correcting the problem. It was exactly, it
showed me a picture that, the hedge an inch or so over the sidewalk, and it was
very specific what needed to be done. And the timeline to do it in. So I know it
can be done in a way that you know what needs to be done. But I think this was
a big mistake and I just say send 'em home and forget. They got a kid.
Hayek: These are hard situations, you know, and...and homeowners show up, uh, for
financial reasons. Many here are based on principle, and that may be your
motivation here, um, and we try to do the fair thing, and it's an inexact process
because we're just getting input and photographs through a packet and we weren't
there, um, but and...I guess it seems to me that this is a fairly, what has been
proposed is a pretty reasonable approach to this, and I guess what it comes down
to for me is...is that it did say, um, mow tall grass and weeds, and I look at the
photo when, from August 3 when...when the inspector came back, and...and
huge portion of that sidewalk is covered with vegetation. I would interpret that to
suggest that that should have taken place by then. So, um, close call but...but I'm
supportive of this, I think. And... and in large part because I think a very
reasonable approach was suggested when...when staff actually met with the
homeowner.
Wilburn: I'd have to agree with you.
Hayek: Any other discussion on this?
Ream: I just wanted to point out one thing to Council, not about the Sullivans, but about
Mr. Yenter. The memo that I gave to you was trying to find a solution for him in
terms of, um, something better than being assessed to his taxes. Um, he is here
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 55
tonight, and I do feel that if... if he does want to address you, even though you did
vote that it be deferred to April, if he feels that he still wants to address you, is
that possible?
Hayek: If... if we get the okay from our City... esteemed lawyer we can do that.
Ream: I did not mean for that memo to take away his chance to (mumbled)
Hayek: Okay. Uh, should... should we vote on the resolution before Mr. Yenter addresses
us? Ms. Sullivan, did you want to...
Sullivan: Yes, I'm Sara Sullivan. I live with A.J., obviously. And um, what was...what
was noted, I understand the issue with the vegetation, um, and over the sidewalks.
What I want to be clear is that in the memo, um, Ms. Ream also said that it was
apparent that that was taken care of, in the original memo, that we had. It said it
was apparent that that had been addressed. So, there's the fine line. It was
apparent that the sidewalk edging had been addressed, um, I have...we have a
memo, if it's not in your packet, we have the separate one. Um, and I do have to
say that I misspoke. I apologize for misspeaking last time when I said they
"killed" the back side because that would (mumbled) chemicals. They did not.
They just mowed the entire thing down, and it looked dead because of the
brown...the brown stuff underneath. So, I apologize and want to clarify that. But
when she came and she said it was obvious that we had taken care of it, and her
notes, that's where the problem comes from. Um, for me. The other problem
comes from the fact that they did indeed mow down a whole bunch of vegetation
that shouldn't have been mowed down. And now we're needing to pay for that
part, when we took care of the part that was over the sidewalk. So this is...this is
that fine line, and I understand that it seems like a fair, you know, because it, you
know, I mean from the outside person it does sound very fair. It does, but when
you look at it from our situation, you hear we have to pay $87.50 for somebody
who cut down all of the ground cover on our backyard. That didn't need to be cut
down! So, fair if the weeds weren't taken care of, yeah. I'd say that would be fair.
However, she noted that it was taken care of, and they mowed down our entire
back sidewalk, or our back slope. That's the issue. The billable hours, by Mall
Service, obviously they're going to try and get as much money out of the work
order that you put in that they can, and it was unnecessary. And whether the
repercussions, you know, I mean, they can be debated, the erosion, all that can be
debated. I can't remember if there was a big rain storm (laughter) you know, um,
however, that had an impact. So I guess that's, I mean, there's the fine line. The
fair and the not fair. So...
Hayek: Thank you for that clarification.
Sullivan: Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 56
Hayek: Any further discussion on this? Just...Mr. Yenter, we're going to vote on the
other part here.
Ream: Um, just to clarify my memo when I said that it was apparent that they had taken
care of it, I was talking about the tall grass and weeds between the curb and the
sidewalk. I wasn't stating that they had removed vegetation from the sidewalk
itself (mumbled) that area between the sidewalk.
Hayek: Thank you.
Sullivan: However, this is still a vague comment. The weeds had been taken care of is a
vague comment. The weeds that were not taken care of, they weren't there. So, I
mean, this is the issue, is the vagueness of all the directives. So...I...I agree with
her, but where I can see her intent, however, when I was reading that, that's not at
all what I got.
Hayek: Thank you.
Sullivan: Do you need that memo? Do you have that in your packet, the original memo?
Hayek: I...I don't know whether we have it or not. I.. .
Champion: I don't need it.
Sullivan: You don't need it? Okay.
Hayek: Thank you. Any further discussion?
Mims: I agree that...unfortunately alot of miscommunication, and unclear
communication that went on here, and um, and I agree with Matt that it's, you
know, these are imperfect situations in terms of how you resolve them. Um, but I
guess given...given the particular situation, um, if we err in the decision, I guess
I'm going to err on the side of the community member and support them in this,
and I don't mean any negative reflection on staff at all. I think, you know, we all
learn from how we speak, how we communicate, and how other people hear us,
and this unfortunately was one that just didn't go well, and we move on.
Dickens: I agree.
Hayek: Let's take a roll call then. Uh, item fails 2-5, uh, everybody but Hayek and
Wilburn in the negative. How 'bout that?
Karr: Could we have a motion to accept correspondence?
Wilburn: So moved.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 57
Bailey: Second.
Hayek: Moved to accept correspondence by Wilburn, seconded by Bailey. All those in
favor say aye. Opposed say nay. Item carries, or motion carries. Okay, uh, Mr.
Yenter, if you would like to address us. You're going to have to repeat those
words. We can't hear you in the microphone.
Yenter: I'm Keith Yenter from Iowa City, here at 734 Oakland Avenue is the property that
we've been discussing. The main thing I...I guess my biggest issue on this is, I
really feel like I should have been left alone in the first place. The eight-foot
fence was two-foot retaining wall, six-foot fence, any contractor can tell you that.
Um, it was impossible to get that message across in court because I just wasn't
being listened to, I was just being railroaded. This whole thing seems like it's
been a railroad. Any time you, uh, build anything on property, you have to have
the building materials right there to work on it. When you're using, uh, building
materials that used to be something else, it takes a little bit more and doesn't look
as pretty of a pile of wood, but it was worked on every night, and it wasn't
something that was just laying around. And all these pictures, if you'd look at
'em, they change, every one of them when they're weeks apart. There's nothing
the same in the boards and the stacks and all that whatsoever (mumbled) to last
photo, if anybody does take the time to look at that. I know, um, how I wrote
things out on the paperwork was far from professional, but that's not what I do for
a living, you know, so hopefully it wasn't too hard for you guys to...kind of pick
up what I was trying to put down so to speak, but um, there's so many issues on it,
like I say, the eight-foot fence, the brick...the porch that I got in trouble for not
having a building permit. In fact, all over the neighborhood people have put
bricks or the over their existing staircases, so I did not build a whole new porch. I
just put brick over it, some salvaged brick, you know, for it to look better. Um,
and just so many cases like that, I was being, um, I felt not charged for something
I had done. You know what I mean? Um, and so anyway for...I complied with
what the courts wanted anyway when it come to what was in the basic, in view of
the yard. That back through there was totally out of sight of everybody, even in
second stories, because the fence was so close to the back of my garage, and the
issue of the fence, it was tore out, and then you could see it, well, that was that
day, you know, that they tore out that fence. Basically what it all boils down to,
this was enabling the neighbors to the north of me to get that little sliver of land
back that they had neglected for the last 20 years when they built that fence,
without having to go to court and probably lose over that, um, I never can
remember the fancy term for it, but it's when you don't use a piece of property,
you don't maintain it for a long time, and then, uh, somebody else starts to, you
know, it's on your side of the fence, you have to start mowing. See this was back
when the folks had lived there. So my brother had to mow that and all that. They
never did, and it's 'first possession' is what it's called, and it's, uh, when you
maintained somebody's property because they weren't, uh, in fact many times they
wouldn't even mow on that side of their house until I started working over there,
and then it seemed to be the most important thing going on in their life, what I
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 58
was doing over there. Um, so according to my, uh, plot, uh, records that was done
in 63, my fence was on the property line. It's just that they wanted that one little
corner back. They didn't realize the lots...a little slight angle off of Sheridan
Street. Not off our front grid street of Oakland Avenue. So when they built their
fence they thought it was a square grid, when in fact it was just a little bit tussled
over. And so, they thought they also owned that, one of the pine trees that was up
front that I put hostas around. That made Theresa feel like she had the right to run
over them with the lawn mower every...every week when she'd mow, which I
found disgusting, but I let that go. They've, uh, would come over with little gripes
almost every summer that I was always very cordial...
Hayek: Mr. Yenter, I'm going to interrupt you and ask, you need to limit your comments
to the actual assessment and the issues between you and the City.
Yenter: Well, actually, it's all kind of a part of it, but it's just (both talking) yes. But
anyway, so I really feel that it all boils down to this was a favor to them, to...get
that stuff out of the way, even though....if you actually look at the code, how it's
written, as long as it's out of the sight of all neighbors, and anybody walking by,
passing by, people in their homes, it wasn't illegal, where this stuff was. I have
lots of photos in here of everything prior to the fence getting tore out and then my
stuff getting thrown away. Um, if you guys would like to look at 'em, I can get
'em out and hand them to you...for later, if you'd like. But, um, I just feel like,
um, and...and the two police when I knew that they were coming to do this, I
called on the first, them and the Sheriff s Department to see if, and when they
were coming out, to see if that was going to be that day or not, and both
departments said that they never go out on these cases. And so why they had two
cops there, uh, in the first place is more than I'll ever know, you know, so there's
300 bucks right there that I don't feel I should be having to pay, along with all that
salvaged, um, historical material. It was not junk, believe me, um, we've got
pictures of it going into the back of the trucks. It's, uh, some of St. Pat's steeple
was part of what went, um, there's many details. Um, it was a real waste is what
it was, and I just wish I could explain to you guys closer to show you everything
in here, and I also have, um, proof that I really feel that somebody with the City,
I'm not going to say right now, uh, does do things like Woody Hauser's now on
the south side of me has put a no trespassing sign so I can't work on the other side
of my fence, and a City worker told him to do that, so it'd make it impossible for
me to get anything done there, and I have that recorded. Woody did not know I
had...
Hayek: Again, I'm sorry to interrupt. You really need to focus on (both talking) I
understand that there's some tangential issues, but we need to focus on the actual
dispute with the City and the assessment that's proposed.
Yenter: Yeah, so and that is, I guess, the main one is they should have had to go to court
to get that piece of land back, not pull this trick. That's really what it all boils
down to. Twenty-four hundred bucks is a lot of money to me, and uh, I guess
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 59
that's all I got to say about that right now. I'm not really liking the idea of having
to make payments on it. I'm getting, uh, so far behind with so many others as it
is, but uh, I guess what I got to do is just get that finished, move some place more
accommodating to working class, I guess. So thank you, folks.
Hayek: Thank you for your comments. Okay, let's move on to item 26.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 60
ITEM 31. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION.
Hayek: We'll start with you, Mr. Dickens.
Dickens: Uh, I just attended the Senior Center, uh, forum, must have been last week. It was
not real well attended that night; the Friday before it was very well attended.
They are really moving on a lot of different projects up there and they've got a lot
of involvement and a lot of neat things going on up there.
Hayek: (mumbled)
Bailey: Well, before our next meeting we'll have spring break, and I want to wish
everyone safe, um, safe travels and a safe break and uh, we'll look forward to the
quiet time here and, uh, hopefully it'll be a lot warmer.
Wilburn: Nothing.
Mims: Um, if I read correctly, the Census information will be coming out between
March 15 to March 17. Does that sound right?
Karr: Some of it's out now.
Mims: Some of it's out now?
Karr: In the mailing process.
Mims: Just want to encourage, uh, city residents, including all of our students who reside
in Iowa City to fill out and return the Census information that is critically
important in terms of funding, uh, for the city and so just encourage everybody to
get that back promptly.
Hayek: Great!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 61
ITEM 32. REPORT ON ITEMS FROM CITY STAFF.
Hayek: City Manager?
Helling: I have nothing, but I think Rick does.
Fosse: Earlier tonight the Mayor asked if I could comment on any flood forecasts that are
available for this spring, and coincidentally earlier to day we had a conference call
with the Corps of Engineers on the very subject, and looked at it state-wide. Um,
based on the snow cover that's in the watershed now, we do have some increased
risk of flooding, and they're estimating it at about the 25% range. Um, however,
when they look at it state-wide, we're in a much better position than central and
western Iowa are, uh, where they have a significant risk of flooding because of the
snow cover that exists over there, um, they...in preparation for the snow melt,
they are dropping the reservoir level to 4 feet below the conservation pool, and
that's standard procedure for spring time, and historically that has worked well to
protect us from snow melt run off. Our problems tend to come later in the year, in
June and July, from heavy rains. Uh, we do run a risk on the Ralston and Willow
Creek watersheds because of the snow... snow cover, that if we get a heavy rain
with this snow, we could have some localized flooding. Our Streets department is
prepared to deal with some of the ice jams that can occur at bridges, if that occurs.
Um, the good news is, we're in the beginning of a very good week of weather for
snow melt. We have the gentle temperatures during the day and then the
refreezing at night, uh, so we're getting rid of a lot of that, uh, snow cover, and
again, that weather is favoring eastern Iowa over the central and western parts of
the state. They're not benefitting as much from it. So, for the time being, things
look pretty decent.
Hayek: Good (several talking) very helpful. Credit goes to Regenia for suggesting that
we get that update.
Bailey: I'm getting a lot of questions, so I thought it best come from you.
Hayek: Good! City Attorney? City Clerk?
Karr: Just to follow up on the Census information, uh, it is estimated that for every 100
people not counted in Iowa City, we lose a million dollars over the next ten years
in funding., So it's really critical that we all do our part to respond to the quick
Census. Everyone this year gets the same questionnaire. It's short; ten questions,
ten minutes.
Bailey: That goes to students as well, correct?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.
Page 62
Karr: It goes to every address. Students will be handled in the dormitories, um, as a
group quarters count. Students, uh, living outside of the dormitories will receive
it at their address.
Bailey: So perhaps this would be very helpful for our Council Liaison to emphasize with
that demographic, um, the information you just provided, because you watch the
tough budgets (mumbled)
Hayek: Motion to adjourn.
Mims: So moved.
Wilburn: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Mims, seconded by Wilburn. Discussion? All those in favor say aye.
Opposed same sign. We are adjourned.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the regular formal Iowa City
City Council meeting of March 2, 2010.