[0:00] All

[0:16] right, I'm going to call the city of

[0:17] Iowa City meeting to order. Roll call,

[0:20] please.

[0:21] >> Alter here. Bergus,

[0:23] >> here.

[0:23] >> Harmson

[0:24] >> here.

[0:25] >> Mo,

[0:25] >> here.

[0:26] >> C,

[0:26] >> here.

[0:27] >> Teague,

[0:27] >> here.

[0:28] >> Wine

[0:28] >> here.

[0:30] All right, I want to welcome everyone in

[0:31] council chambers to your city hall and

[0:33] to those joining us virtually, welcome

[0:36] as well. We're going to get started with

[0:38] item number two, which is proclamations

[0:40] 2A is constitution week and is read by

[0:43] councelor Harmson.

[0:46] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[0:49] Whereas September 17th, 2026 marks the

[0:52] 239th anniversary of the drafting of the

[0:55] Constitution of the United States of

[0:57] America by the Constitutional

[0:58] Convention. And whereas it is fitting

[1:01] and proper to officially recognize this

[1:03] magnificent document in the anniversary

[1:06] of its creation. And whereas public law

[1:09] 915 guarantees the issuing of a

[1:12] proclamation each year by the president

[1:14] of the United States of America

[1:16] designating September 17th through the

[1:18] 23rd as Constitution Week. And whereas

[1:22] the Constitution has been amended from

[1:24] time to time to define basic rights, to

[1:26] extend those rights to all persons, and

[1:28] to modify other specific aspects in

[1:30] light of contemporary concerns. And

[1:33] whereas it is fitting and proper to

[1:35] officially recognize the patriotic

[1:36] celebrations which will commemorate the

[1:38] occasion. Now therefore, I, Sean Harson,

[1:41] on behalf of Bruce Teague, mayor of the

[1:43] Iowa City, Iowa, do hereby proclaim the

[1:46] week of September 17th through the 23rd,

[1:49] 2026 to be Constitution Week in Iowa

[1:52] City and reaffirm the ideals of the

[1:55] framers of the Constitution that they

[1:57] had in 1787 by protecting the freedoms

[2:00] guaranteed to us through this guardian

[2:02] of our liberties. And accepting will be

[2:06] uh Cherylyn Evans and Anne Sudter.

[2:10] >> [applause]

[2:25] » Welcome.

[2:27] >> Thank you.

[2:31] » The Daughters of the American Revolution

[2:33] was founded in 1890. Our pilgrim chapter

[2:37] here in Iowa City has celebrated more

[2:39] than 110 years of service to this

[2:42] community. The DAR works to honor the

[2:46] memory of the patriots who fought for

[2:48] American independence. It also seeks to

[2:50] maintain and protect historical sites

[2:53] and artifacts related to the

[2:55] Revolutionary War area era. The

[2:58] organization is involved in various

[3:00] community service projects, educational

[3:03] programs, scholarships, and initiatives

[3:06] to support veterans. On September 17th,

[3:10] 1787,

[3:11] 39 delegates to the contin

[3:14] constitutional convention signed our US

[3:17] Constitution. The daughters of the

[3:20] American Revolution instituted the

[3:22] celebration of Constitution Week in

[3:25] 1955.

[3:26] And in 1956, President Dwight D.

[3:30] Eisenhower officially declared September

[3:33] 17th to the 23rd as Constitution Week.

[3:37] We encourage all citizens everywhere to

[3:40] take time during this week to appreciate

[3:42] the principles of freedom, equality, and

[3:45] justice for which our forefathers

[3:47] strived. The D are very appreciative of

[3:51] this Constitution Week proclamation.

[3:53] Thank you so much, Mayor Teague.

[3:56] >> [applause]

[4:03] » 2B is food waste prevention week and

[4:05] this will be read by councelor her uh

[4:07] Bergus.

[4:09] >> Whereas according to the Iowa Department

[4:10] of Natural Resources 20 2022 Iowa

[4:15] statewide material characterization

[4:17] study approximately 20% of materials

[4:20] disposed of in the Iowa City landfill

[4:22] are food waste items. And whereas

[4:25] land-filled food waste produces methane,

[4:27] a potent greenhouse gas. And whereas

[4:30] food waste reduction ensures the water,

[4:33] energy, and land resources required to

[4:36] produce food are not wasted. And whereas

[4:39] efforts to save quality food from being

[4:41] wasted support local food systems to

[4:44] feed community members in need. And

[4:46] whereas the city of Iowa City promotes

[4:49] environmental sustain sustainability

[4:51] through reducing food waste at the

[4:53] source. Now therefore, I on behalf of

[4:56] Bruce Teague, Mayor of Iowa City, Iowa,

[4:58] pro hereby proclaim the week of

[5:00] September 28th through October 4th, 2026

[5:04] as Food Waste Prevention Week in Iowa

[5:07] City and urge our community members to

[5:09] recognize the importance of reducing

[5:11] food waste to strengthen our Iowa City

[5:14] community and to reduce climate impacts.

[5:17] And receiving this proclamation tonight

[5:19] is Jane Wilch, our recycling

[5:21] coordinator. [applause]

[5:32] Welcome.

[5:35] >> Thank you. Good evening, everyone. I'm

[5:37] Jane Welch, the city's recycling

[5:38] coordinator, and thank you very much to

[5:42] the city council and Mayor Teague for

[5:44] this proclamation to celebrate food

[5:46] waste prevention week in our community.

[5:49] Uh food waste makes up about 20% of what

[5:51] enters our landfill and this equates to

[5:54] more than 25,000 tons of food.

[5:58] Composting is part of the solution to

[6:00] reduce landfill food waste. And we are

[6:03] very excited and grateful for our

[6:05] compost facility expansion which is made

[6:08] possible by generous funding from the US

[6:10] Environmental Protection Agency and the

[6:13] Iowa Department of Natural Resources.

[6:15] Construction is happening right now.

[6:18] Once construction is completed this

[6:20] fall, our next step is increasing access

[6:22] to composting in our community.

[6:25] While composting is an important part of

[6:27] reducing food waste entering our

[6:29] landfill, reduction is the first

[6:30] priority which focuses on preventing

[6:33] food waste from being formed in the

[6:35] first place. through a partnership with

[6:38] Tableto Table, our local food rescue

[6:40] organization. Our love food fight waste

[6:43] program launched in April 2022

[6:46] to offer our community members

[6:48] approachable ways to reduce food waste,

[6:50] take climate action, and save money. We

[6:53] greatly appreciate the proclamation to

[6:56] recognize the importance of food waste

[6:57] reduction and prevention. Thank you,

[7:00] Mayor Teague and City Council.

[7:02] >> Thank you. [applause]

[7:09] 2C is Hispanic Heritage Month. Whereas

[7:12] Hispanic Heritage Month is a month-long

[7:15] celebration of Hispanic and Latino

[7:17] history and culture and is important

[7:20] because it provides an opportunity to

[7:22] celebrate the integral part of the

[7:25] Hispanic Latino community has had in our

[7:28] growing and strengthening our democracy.

[7:31] And whereas Hispanic Heritage Month

[7:33] provides an additional opportunity to

[7:35] explore the incredible impact Latinas

[7:38] and Latinos have had on the United

[7:41] States

[7:43] uh of uh United States, Iowa, and Iowa

[7:45] City for generations. Whereas the long

[7:48] month-long celebration provides more

[7:51] time to properly recognize the

[7:54] significant contributions Hispanic

[7:57] Latinoameans

[7:58] have made in the United States. And

[8:01] whereas Hispanic Heritage Month does not

[8:04] cover one single month, but instead

[8:06] begins in the middle of September and

[8:08] ends in the middle of October.

[8:11] The time frame of this month is

[8:13] significant because many Central

[8:15] American countries celebrate their

[8:17] independent days within these states.

[8:21] And whereas we will continue to advocate

[8:23] for Hispanics, Latinos as represent as

[8:27] representation matters, Latinos and

[8:29] Latinas continue to shape our nation as

[8:33] business owners, activists, artists,

[8:35] public servants, and more. From serving

[8:39] in the US military to being champions in

[8:41] the fight for civil rights, Latinos and

[8:44] Latinos remain strong leaders and change

[8:47] makers. Now therefore, I, Bruce Teague,

[8:50] mayor of Iowa City, do hereby proclaim

[8:52] September 15th through October 15th,

[8:54] 2026 as Hispanic Heritage Month, and

[8:58] encourage residents to in to inspire

[9:01] equity, create alliances, celebrate

[9:04] diversity, and join in the 2026 Latino

[9:07] Fest that will make that will take place

[9:10] on September 19th at the Ped Mall in

[9:13] downtown Iowa City from noon until 900

[9:16] p.m. and accepting this. We have a few

[9:19] people um Edwin, Eloy, and Janet.

[9:25] [applause]

[9:44] » Good evening. I'm my name is Evan

[9:47] Badarees and I am

[9:50] the founder and organizer of Sunset

[9:52] Salsa, an independent

[9:55] >> [snorts]

[9:55] >> um initiative

[9:57] that has uh created free opportunities

[10:00] for music, dancing, and community

[10:02] connection here in Iowa City. For me,

[10:06] it's a privilege to receive this

[10:07] proclamation on behalf of the Iowa City

[10:10] Latino community. I accept it in

[10:12] recognition of the families, artists,

[10:16] business [snorts] owners, community

[10:18] leaders, and many other whose

[10:20] contributions have strengthened and

[10:23] enriched this beautiful city we have. I

[10:27] sincerely thank the city of Iowa City

[10:28] for recognizing our culture, our

[10:31] history, and the people who work to keep

[10:35] them visible, accessible, and welcoming

[10:38] to everyone. It's an honor to join you

[10:41] guys this evening and to represent our

[10:45] community.

[10:46] >> Thank you. [applause]

[10:55] >> Good evening.

[10:58] >> Everybody, my name is Eloyan. I'm uh

[11:01] from Mexico City. I'm a professor of

[11:03] dance at the University of Iowa. uh come

[11:07] arrived here in 2005 21 years ago with

[11:11] my wife thinking that we will use only

[11:13] Iowa City just for one year or two years

[11:15] and keep moving on from the univer that

[11:18] we come from the University of

[11:19] California or vine but the welcomeness

[11:24] the diversity that has changed from 20

[11:27] 21 years ago to now it it really changed

[11:31] our heart and say like this is a good

[11:34] place to make a family and be safe. And

[11:40] uh I just want to thank you. Thank you

[11:42] all of you to welcome this our community

[11:46] as Latinos, Mexicans, but also uh it's

[11:50] important to for me to know as an

[11:52] artist. I second what uh my colleague

[11:55] just mentioned to support the arts to

[11:59] support the writing to support dance

[12:02] music to fulfill our soul to with that

[12:08] we can face the difficulties in these

[12:10] moments in these times the climate in

[12:13] this country is not easy I recognize

[12:17] that but I'm very grateful to be living

[12:20] in this beautiful city and I Thank you

[12:23] all and then we accept this

[12:25] proclamation. Thank you.

[12:26] >> Thank you. [applause]

[12:31] » So my name is Manny uh Galves. I just

[12:33] want to be very short. Um as you

[12:36] mentioned, it was mentioned in the

[12:37] proclamation. This is the 50 years of

[12:39] the Latino Fest. I want to just take

[12:41] this opportunity to say thank you uh to

[12:44] every uh person in the government, but

[12:46] the most important thank you to the

[12:47] community. Thank you to everybody and

[12:49] residents in Iowa and Johnson County

[12:51] because all the support like we received

[12:53] no just this 15 years but since we

[12:56] arrived to Iowa 100 years ago, we are so

[12:59] happy that we are here and and I think

[13:02] the most important um as we said like

[13:04] this year, you know, like 15 years of

[13:07] dreams. We want to keep dreaming

[13:08] together with everybody in the city,

[13:10] with everybody in the county and Iowa

[13:12] and and again I think like uh we want

[13:15] actions every day. so that dreams come

[13:18] true. Thank you so much and I see you. I

[13:20] hope I see you everybody Saturday.

[13:22] >> All right. Thank you. [applause]

[13:29] » 2D is a recovery month and this will be

[13:31] read by Mayor Pro Tim Alter.

[13:34] >> Whereas behavioral health is an

[13:36] essential part of overall health and sub

[13:39] substance use and mental health

[13:40] conditions affect individuals, families

[13:43] and communities nationwide. And whereas

[13:46] National Recovery Month is observed

[13:48] every September to celebrate individuals

[13:50] in long-term recovery, honor the

[13:52] dedication of families and service

[13:54] providers, reduce the stigma surrounding

[13:57] mental health conditions and substance

[13:59] use disorders. And whereas the impact is

[14:02] apparent across Iowa and in our local

[14:04] community with about one in five adults

[14:07] in Iowa living with some form of mental

[14:09] illness, 22.2% 2% of adult Ians

[14:13] reporting binge drinking and 431 Johnson

[14:17] County residents receiving substance use

[14:19] treatment in FY2025.

[14:22] And whereas recovery month observance

[14:25] can help people become more aware and

[14:28] able to recognize the signs of mental

[14:30] health and substance use disorders and

[14:32] connect people with effective and

[14:34] welcoming local services and resources

[14:36] where people are met with dignity and

[14:39] understanding.

[14:40] And whereas our community is fortunate

[14:43] to offer robust local prevention,

[14:46] treatment, and recovery resources from

[14:48] many organizations and programs along

[14:51] with community coalition collaborations.

[14:53] Johnson County Prevention Partnership

[14:55] and Public Health and Safety Team FAST

[14:59] comprised of health care and treatment

[15:00] providers, attorneys, medical examiners

[15:03] office, probation, parole, first

[15:06] responders, elected officials, crisis

[15:08] teams, community- based organizations,

[15:11] nonprofits, and community members. and

[15:14] free Nlloxxone, the life-saving opioid

[15:17] overdose medication, embedding machines,

[15:20] and other locations listed at joeco

[15:23] recovery.org.

[15:25] And whereas for the above reasons, I am

[15:28] asking all residents, local businesses,

[15:31] healthc care providers, and community

[15:33] organizations to honor this month by

[15:36] supporting those on the path to healing

[15:38] by sharing resource information from

[15:40] your life. Offering support 247

[15:45] and joecovery.org

[15:47] listing available Johnson County

[15:49] resources and events supporting this

[15:51] year's observance.

[15:53] Now therefore, I, Megan Alter, on behalf

[15:56] of Bruce Teague, Mayor of Iowa City, do

[15:58] hereby proclaim September 2026 to be

[16:01] recovery month in Iowa City, Iowa. And

[16:04] accepting this is Susan Vleta with

[16:06] Johnson County Prevention Partnership as

[16:09] well as Kate Winter Rink. [applause]

[16:25] Welcome.

[16:26] >> Yeah.

[16:27] >> Hi everyone. Great to see you. Two

[16:30] things. First of all, sometimes when

[16:33] things go on behind the scenes, these

[16:34] groups that you talk about and all these

[16:36] resources, we know about them, but we

[16:38] don't necessarily know how they're all

[16:39] working together. And let's face it,

[16:41] sometimes we don't all work together as

[16:43] best as we could. Right? There's a

[16:46] couple of organizations or I'm sorry, a

[16:47] couple of teams coming together to work

[16:49] on substance use disorder. Um, and it's

[16:52] not just organizations. It's a lot of

[16:54] people that really care about this

[16:56] issue. Um, some of those folks here

[16:58] today represent Community Family

[17:00] Resources. They represent Unity Point

[17:03] Abbey. We've got University of Iowa um,

[17:05] Addiction Recovery Collaborative, UI ARC

[17:07] as it's known. There's Thrive in the

[17:10] community, Thrive Now. There there's a

[17:12] lot out there. Um, if folks are looking

[17:14] for assistance,

[17:17] it's there hopefully, right? Or talk to

[17:19] us. If not, let us know about those gaps

[17:21] that you see. And last, um, I just want

[17:25] to say recovery is possible. A lot of

[17:27] people think people don't recovery

[17:29] recover from substance use disorder. And

[17:31] I bet a lot of us, um, myself included,

[17:34] have folks that haven't. Um, but people

[17:36] do recover.

[17:39] >> Thanks.

[17:39] >> Great. Thank you.

[17:40] >> Thank.

[17:41] >> Hey, everyone. Uh, my name is Kate

[17:44] Wintering. Um, I've been proud to call

[17:47] Iowa City home since um, July 30th,

[17:50] 2024. Um, I wanted to, the main reason

[17:54] why I wanted to get up here and speak is

[17:56] I wanted to,

[17:58] you know, um, speak on, you know,

[18:04] getting my story out and having y'all

[18:06] hear it from someone who's been there

[18:08] and who's done that. Um I have struggled

[18:12] with um alcohol misuse in the past. Had

[18:17] uh my own mental health struggles as

[18:18] well. Um I live with complex PTSD,

[18:22] anxiety, depression, and I've been three

[18:26] as of the 26th of this month, I'll be 3

[18:28] years sober from alcohol. So, I'm pretty

[18:32] excited about that. I don't know how I

[18:34] made it that far, but hey, I'm there,

[18:37] you know? So [applause]

[18:39] um

[18:41] in regards to you know

[18:45] one thing I want to say about recovery

[18:46] is like I feel like one thing that is

[18:49] absolutely paramount and that I think we

[18:51] need as as a society not like every

[18:54] single person [laughter] but like

[18:57] there's still a handful of people we got

[18:58] to get going on reducing this stigma.

[19:01] Like one thing that I think a lot of

[19:04] people

[19:06] realize when they get so caught up in

[19:08] the stigma surrounding mental health and

[19:10] substance use is the person that is

[19:14] struggling with addiction or struggling

[19:16] with mental health. They got a secondary

[19:19] battle that people have the other the

[19:23] people judging them have no idea about.

[19:26] So I think it's important you know

[19:29] instead of judgment

[19:31] instead of approaching these types of

[19:33] situations with judgment approach it

[19:36] with empathy because if you get if

[19:40] people are open being able to open about

[19:42] what's going on, what's causing them to

[19:45] misuse, what's causing them to feel

[19:48] stressed or depressed or anxious,

[19:52] we'll be able to we'll be able to get on

[19:53] the right steps to help

[19:55] So, that's one thing I wanted to add.

[19:59] Um, I'm very I'm a big stickler when it

[20:02] comes to crushing the stigma surrounding

[20:04] mental health. And it might not be

[20:07] something it's going to be something I

[20:09] refuse to stop talking about until I see

[20:11] significant improvement. Thanks

[20:13] everyone. Thank you. [applause]

[20:24] » 2 E is welcoming week read by councelor

[20:27] Salah.

[20:28] >> Whereas Iowa City success depend on

[20:30] ensuring all resident feeling welcome

[20:33] through our community. Today Iowa City

[20:37] recognize our over 10,000 foreignb born

[20:41] residents as indis indispensable to our

[20:46] community's characters. New resident are

[20:49] vital part of our city social and

[20:52] economic culture. bringing fresh

[20:55] perspective and new ideas, starting

[20:59] businesses and contributing to the ver

[21:02] the verb diversity that we all value.

[21:07] And whereas this week we celebrate the

[21:10] spir of unity that is bringing neighbor

[21:15] together across Iowa City. During

[21:18] welcome week, I invite all Iowa City

[21:21] resident to join the movement of

[21:24] communities nationwide by acting in in

[21:28] spirit of welcoming. By working

[21:31] together, we can achieve greater

[21:34] prosperity and make our community the

[21:37] kind of place where diverse people from

[21:41] around the world feel valued and wanted

[21:45] to put down roots.

[21:47] and way as regardless of where we are

[21:50] born or what we look like, we are all

[21:55] Iowa City resident. We aspire to live up

[21:59] to our highest social

[22:04] values of acceptance, equality and equity. Uh and treated

[22:12] newcomer with compassion and respect

[22:16] creating a verb community for all to

[22:19] live in. and whereas let us come

[22:23] together to create more prosperous

[22:26] community and to reaffirm that Iowa City

[22:30] continue to stand as a beacon of freedom

[22:34] and opportunity.

[22:36] Let us come together to create an

[22:39] inclusive supportive community where

[22:42] resident of all origin can live, work

[22:47] and play. Therefore, I, Mr. Hersal, on

[22:51] behalf of Bruce Te, Mayor of Iowa City,

[22:54] hereby proclaim September 10 to

[22:58] September 19, 2026 at the welcome week

[23:02] in Iowa City, Iowa.

[23:05] [applause]

[23:08] And here to accept is Tom Martinez from

[23:11] Greater Iowa City. [applause]

[23:20] Welcome.

[23:22] >> Thank you very much. Um, yes, my name is

[23:24] Tom Martinez. I'm a program manager with

[23:27] Greater Iowa City covering community and

[23:29] workforce development. Um, I feel very

[23:31] honored to be to be kind joining the

[23:33] ranks of so many very valuable and good

[23:36] proclamations this evening. Um,

[23:38] welcoming week is a national initiative

[23:40] and we uh join thousands of different uh

[23:43] communities across the country in this

[23:45] effort. Um I just want to thank um we

[23:47] have so many different organizations who

[23:49] are participating but I want to uh

[23:51] specifically thank um some of our uh

[23:53] public uh partners specifically to

[23:56] Shayen Harrington with city of Iowa

[23:57] City, Abby Cobb with the city of North

[23:59] Liberty uh Alan Hampy Alexander with the

[24:03] uh Corville Public Library and Paola

[24:05] Haram Hayara with Johnson County. Um,

[24:09] all events uh can be seen on the welcome

[24:12] area.com or greater Iowa City's website

[24:15] under the events page uh when you type

[24:17] in welcoming. Uh, thank you again and

[24:19] have a good night.

[24:20] >> Thank you. [applause]

[24:30] » Hello.

[24:31] My name is Katie Rosh and I am

[24:34] here on behalf of the Iowa City Public

[24:36] Library and the Iowa City Public Library

[24:37] Friends Foundation. And I want to share

[24:39] how deeply our institution values

[24:42] welcoming week and the spirit behind it.

[24:44] The library is at its heart a community

[24:47] space where everyone belongs, no matter

[24:49] where they come from or what language

[24:50] they speak. Enriching our community as

[24:53] our neighbors with their stories,

[24:55] culture, heritage, and friendship. We

[24:57] are now a year out from expanding our

[24:59] world languages collection which offers

[25:01] books in Arabic, Chinese, French,

[25:03] Korean, Spanish, Swahili Swahili, and

[25:06] Vietnamese. This collection is shaped

[25:08] not only by what's most useful for our

[25:10] community, but also by partnerships with

[25:12] readers and speakers of those languages,

[25:14] immigrants,

[25:16] families, and writers from the

[25:18] University of Iowa's international

[25:19] writing program who have generously

[25:21] donated their own works to enhance her

[25:23] collection. Through their support, the

[25:25] Iowa City of Friends Foundation, our

[25:27] donors, and the support of our

[25:28] municipality, we're able to keep growing

[25:30] these collections and programs so the

[25:33] library continues to reflect the people

[25:35] we serve. It's one way we live out the

[25:37] message of welcoming week every day, not

[25:39] just this week, but year round. And just

[25:42] this last Saturday, the Iowa City Public

[25:43] Library welcomed members of our

[25:45] community to participate in a welcome

[25:46] week event complete with complimentary

[25:49] donuts, coffee, and juice where the

[25:51] public were invited to share their words

[25:53] for a public display prompted by the

[25:55] words, "What makes you feel like you

[25:56] belong? What makes you feel how do you

[25:59] welcome someone?" Answers range from

[26:02] Midwestern mom casserles, hugs and ice

[26:05] cream to smiles, neighborhood picnics,

[26:08] and invites to show a new community

[26:09] member around our beautiful welcoming

[26:11] community. You can see that upcoming

[26:14] display very soon at the library. We're

[26:17] proud to stand alongside our community

[26:19] partners in celebrating welcoming week,

[26:21] welcome week. And we invite everyone to

[26:23] come to the library, explore our world

[26:25] languages collection, come to a story

[26:28] time in English, French, or Spanish for

[26:31] children, and discover the many ways

[26:32] libraries help people feel at home.

[26:34] Thank you.

[26:35] >> Thank you. [applause]

[26:41] » We have more people from the welcome

[26:43] week committees.

[26:44] >> It's a party. Shouldn't it be a party?

[26:47] >> Good evening, Paula. the community

[26:49] engagement and policy coordinator for

[26:51] the Johnson County Board of Supervisors

[26:53] Office. Um, as exciting as it is to

[26:55] highlight welcoming week and the

[26:57] incredible I believe we're up to 21

[26:59] events that are uh official core events

[27:02] this week that we would love to see you

[27:03] at as it closes out, not just on

[27:05] Saturday, but at African Fest on uh

[27:09] September 26, if I remember my dates. I

[27:11] do also want to uh bring to recognition

[27:14] that uh all of Johnson County is the

[27:16] first place in Iowa in the state of Iowa

[27:18] that is a designated welcoming

[27:20] community. And so uh Tom Martinez

[27:22] highlighted the core committee which is

[27:24] wonderful. But the city of Iowa City, of North Liberty, City of

[27:27] Coralville, and lots of our smaller uh

[27:29] rural areas also participated in a

[27:32] year-long process to be audited to make

[27:34] sure that systems are being built to

[27:37] make sure that we are welcoming, uh to

[27:39] community members from near and far. And

[27:41] so, uh also want to highlight that and

[27:44] uh appreciate the work that your staff

[27:46] does each and every day to make sure

[27:48] that those systems exist and how

[27:50] exciting it is to be the only place in

[27:52] Iowa that is designated welcoming. So,

[27:54] thank you to the work that you all do.

[27:56] >> Great. Thank you. [applause]

[28:03] And thanks to everyone that came for the

[28:04] proclamations.

[28:07] All right, we're going to transition

[28:09] over to our consent agenda, which is

[28:12] items 3 through 8. Could I get a motion,

[28:16] please?

[28:16] >> So moved. Mo,

[28:18] >> second by.

[28:19] >> Moved by Mo, second by Salai. And anyone

[28:23] from the public like to address this

[28:24] topic? If you are online and would like

[28:27] to address anything on our consent

[28:29] agenda, please raise your uh virtual

[28:31] hand. If you're in council chambers and

[28:34] want to address something on our consent

[28:36] agenda, I invite you to come forth at

[28:38] this time.

[28:45] Seeing no one online or in person.

[28:49] >> Council discussion.

[28:53] » Roll call, please.

[28:54] >> Mo,

[28:55] >> yes. Salah,

[28:56] >> yes.

[28:56] >> Teague,

[28:57] >> yes.

[28:57] >> Wine,

[28:58] >> yes.

[28:58] >> Alter,

[28:59] >> yes.

[28:59] >> Bergus,

[29:00] >> yes.

[29:00] >> Harmson,

[29:01] >> yes. Motion passes 7 to zero. We're on

[29:04] to item number nine, which is community

[29:06] comment. This is a opportunity for folks

[29:09] to come up to speak on any item that is

[29:11] not on the council agenda. I wanted to

[29:14] see um if there's any hands that want to

[29:16] speak on this item on community comment.

[29:22] Seeing no one. All right, we're going to

[29:24] move on with our uh agenda. We're going

[29:27] to go to 10, which is planning and

[29:29] zoning matters. 10 A reszoning 2041

[29:33] North Debuke Street, North Deuke Road.

[29:36] Ordinance conditionally reszoning

[29:37] approximately 17.8 acres of land located

[29:41] at 21 2041 North Debuke Road for mixed

[29:45] use zone to lowdensity multifamily

[29:47] residential zone with a planned

[29:49] development overlay. I'm going to open

[29:51] up the public hearing and welcome

[29:53] Danielle.

[29:54] >> Good evening, Mayor Danielle Sitsman

[29:55] Neighborhood Development Services. As

[29:57] you read this evening, this is a

[29:58] resoning for the area in the dashed

[30:00] outline. Um, it's comprised of three

[30:03] parcels that were u previously part of

[30:05] the ACT campus or near it and owned by

[30:08] JNB. They were recently purchased by

[30:10] Oaknull. Uh, they will be platted into

[30:12] one single lot eventually and before

[30:14] development at that time. The purpose of

[30:16] this resoning is the request by Oaknull

[30:19] Retirement to uh h reszone it from the

[30:22] previously zoned mixeduse designation to

[30:25] a lowdensity multif family designation

[30:27] for the development of uh housing. This

[30:30] would be a spectrum of care typical to

[30:32] what Oakn typically does. It would

[30:33] include 83 approximately 83 independent

[30:37] uh uh multif family units, 37 assisted

[30:41] multif family units as well as 14

[30:43] skilled nursing care units. Um the

[30:46] request is to better align the the

[30:47] zoning with that proposed use. Um this

[30:51] shows the surrounding zoning showing the

[30:53] previous resoning to purple for much of

[30:55] the campus. Um again this is the area

[30:58] dashed in in white there. As I said it's

[31:01] going from a mixeduse zone which was

[31:02] applied to much of the campus to a more

[31:04] specific RM12 lowdensity single family

[31:07] with an OPD overlay on it. That's for

[31:09] plan development because of the present

[31:11] presence of sensitive areas. So they've

[31:13] submitted a a development overlay plan

[31:16] as well as a preliminary sensitive areas

[31:17] plan inventorying those sensitive areas.

[31:21] Um the density in this development is

[31:23] therefore much less than it could be

[31:24] because they're um avoiding slopes and

[31:27] woodlands. There are impacts to wetlands

[31:29] however and we'll talk about those a

[31:30] little bit as we go on. So again

[31:32] previously three parcels sold to Oaknull

[31:35] to be made into a single lot for

[31:36] development. Um they are requesting one

[31:39] waiver as part of their planned overlay

[31:41] and that is for an additional 10 feet of

[31:43] height. Typically the maximum height

[31:44] would be 35 ft. They're requesting uh

[31:46] that height be increased to 45 ft. They

[31:48] do have topography on the site. So the

[31:51] way we calculate heights is based on

[31:52] averaging. So because they have a lot of

[31:54] slope um it probably won't be perceived

[31:56] as 45 feet in every area but it does

[31:59] average out to u being greater than what

[32:01] the average would normally allow be

[32:03] allowed to be to be because this is an

[32:05] OPD. There are multiple criteria that

[32:07] are reviewed in addition to the standard

[32:09] ones for just typical resonings. So,

[32:12] we'll go through those. The typical

[32:13] resoning standards are for consistency

[32:15] of the comprehensive plan and

[32:17] compatibility with the neighborhood.

[32:19] This is consistent with the

[32:20] comprehensive plan. Um the comprehensive

[32:22] plan did not anticipate redevelopment in

[32:24] this area. So there's no specific um

[32:26] planning language for the Northwest

[32:28] District, but certainly there are um

[32:30] goals and strategies addressing infill

[32:33] and compact efficient development um and

[32:35] supporting infill and a diversity of

[32:37] housing types. Um as far as

[32:39] compatibility with the existing

[32:41] neighborhood, um due to the existing mix

[32:43] of land uses surrounding this, this is

[32:45] um proposed to be uh compatible. It's

[32:48] housing where there is other types of

[32:49] housing or appropriate to be housing

[32:51] along a major street. Um it's also

[32:53] buffered from a lot of other um less

[32:55] intense uses by the road network and the

[32:57] just a larger distances inherent in this

[32:59] campus. And there's also um offices,

[33:02] future commercial, um a fire station and

[33:05] other mixes in this uh general area of

[33:08] town. So getting into the specific

[33:11] criteria for an overlay, we look at

[33:12] density and design. This is well below

[33:15] the allowed density for this amount of

[33:16] land. um it could support much more

[33:20] units, but as I said, they're sensitive

[33:21] features and so those are being largely

[33:23] respected um with the um provision of

[33:25] the um approximately 119 units.

[33:30] We also look at mass and scale. This

[33:31] would be one single one building with

[33:34] multiple stories, three stories. Um

[33:36] parking is largely going to be behind

[33:38] the building and out of sight from the

[33:40] road network and the the public realm.

[33:42] Um there also extensive pedestrian

[33:44] connections planned between the existing

[33:46] Oaknull uh development nearby. Um open

[33:49] space would be provided privately on

[33:51] site as required for multif family

[33:53] housing and we've [snorts] looked at the

[33:55] traffic circulation impacts in the in

[33:57] the neighborhood. Um in addition to

[33:58] vehicles with like I said those

[34:00] pedestrian paths for residents to uh

[34:03] both circulate on the sidewalk system

[34:05] around the site and between the two

[34:06] sites.

[34:09] Um we did look at the um public

[34:13] utilities in the vicinity. The final

[34:14] construction plans for those public

[34:16] streets and infrastructure are being

[34:17] reviewed as part of the platting process

[34:20] for the Kestrel Hill subdivision. So not

[34:21] necessarily with this lot, but we have

[34:24] evaluated the storm water sanitary sewer

[34:26] and water needs and also propose

[34:28] proposed conditions related to uh this

[34:30] resoning for uh their construction.

[34:34] Um, as far as whether this development

[34:36] would have adverse effects beyond what

[34:38] an a regular nonopd development would

[34:41] have, we don't find that there would be

[34:42] any expected u impacts beyond

[34:45] conventional conventional development

[34:46] anyway.

[34:48] Um, these land uses are um in the public

[34:50] interest. There are certainly uh

[34:52] additional housing units. Uh they're

[34:54] being provided as senior housing units,

[34:56] so they'd be age restricted. Um again

[34:59] those that would be in the public

[35:00] interest to diversify the housing stock

[35:02] both in this neighborhood and throughout

[35:03] the city. Um as I said a large portion

[35:06] of this property is also remaining open

[35:08] and there are extensive setbacks really.

[35:10] So the mass and scale of this

[35:12] development is largely buffered on its

[35:13] own site. Regarding the environmentally

[35:16] sensitive areas that I mentioned, they

[35:18] are well below the impacts to slopes

[35:20] that would be allowed only impacting 5%

[35:22] when they could go up to 35. Um the

[35:24] woodland retention is double more than

[35:26] double what's required. However, there

[35:28] are impact impacts to a wetland that are

[35:31] being proposed. However, they would be

[35:32] in compliance with the city's ordinance

[35:34] as well. Um they plan to um mitigate

[35:37] those impacts offsite at a 1:1 ratio.

[35:40] Unfortunately, the wetlands on site have

[35:43] extensive um invasive species uh in

[35:46] them. So to restore them would be

[35:48] largely to uh disrupt them anyway. So um

[35:52] rather than do that the the um stream

[35:55] quarter will be um improved. However the

[35:58] w the wetland itself will be mitigated

[35:59] offsite. [snorts]

[36:01] So the erosion and the stream bank

[36:03] stabilization will occur on site but the

[36:06] uh applicant will also then make

[36:09] contribution to an offsite. So again as

[36:11] I said there's a long history in this

[36:13] area of resonings. This is the one

[36:15] highlighted in blue. Um I expect we'll

[36:18] probably see a few more resonings site

[36:20] by sight. uh for this large campus as it

[36:23] goes along. But for the time being, this

[36:25] is just uh one site for one development.

[36:29] So based on a review of the relevant

[36:31] criteria, staff recommended approval

[36:33] with um four conditions. The some of

[36:35] those conditions were carried forward

[36:37] from the previous resonings. Um some of

[36:40] them have to do with a compensatory

[36:41] mitigation for the wetland, ensuring

[36:43] that it's done at a 1:1 ratio through

[36:45] the purchase of credits with the US Army

[36:47] Corps of Engineers.

[36:50] And I believe

[36:53] there's not too much more to summarize

[36:54] there. It's pretty much the same

[36:56] conditions as were um stated in the

[36:58] previous resonings. So at their

[37:00] September 2nd meeting by a vote of six

[37:02] to zero, the board uh the planning and

[37:04] zoning commission concurred with staff's

[37:05] opinion and also recommended uh approval

[37:09] and we have received the signed CZA. Um

[37:11] tonight we do have in the audience the

[37:13] developer and their engineer. So if you

[37:15] have any questions, they're here to

[37:16] answer those as well.

[37:17] >> Great. Any questions for Danielle?

[37:21] >> Danielle, when you said that the storm

[37:22] water management is mitigated offsite,

[37:24] is that the purchase from the US car

[37:26] engineers for wetland um alternative

[37:28] locations?

[37:29] >> Not the storm water, it's the sensitive

[37:31] areas.

[37:31] >> Sensitive areas is Okay. I'm conflating.

[37:33] >> I spoke.

[37:34] >> No, no, that's okay. So, can you

[37:37] separate those out for me? What what

[37:39] >> storm water is we would consider that

[37:41] infrastructure. So, the storm water is

[37:43] part of the overall subdivision. So,

[37:46] they'll do either on-site storm water

[37:48] management for their the site on the

[37:50] site or they'll have a regional system.

[37:52] They have to have that all before they'd

[37:54] get to building permits. So, I don't

[37:55] know the exact design. Maybe they can

[37:57] answer that for you. The sensitive area

[37:59] about the wetland is more about just the

[38:01] wetland. And so, that's um something

[38:03] that they've addressed in their

[38:05] sensitive areas analysis. Okay. They did

[38:08] study the wetland to see if it what

[38:09] could be improved, could be stabilized,

[38:11] but the preponderance of it was filled

[38:14] with invasives and so it was really

[38:15] going to be pretty destructive either

[38:17] way.

[38:17] >> Understood. Thank you.

[38:19] >> Is this the moment to ask about um

[38:21] signalization studies or is that a

[38:23] different part of the process?

[38:25] >> Uh that would be better. I'm not even

[38:28] sure if I could tell you which point.

[38:30] Hit me with your question. Let's see

[38:31] what it is. So my question is just given

[38:33] the fact now that um because I I know at

[38:36] one time there was a signalization

[38:39] discussion when scooters was going in

[38:41] and whatnot, but given the fact now that

[38:45] the ACT building will retain office

[38:47] space and it actually will be filled

[38:49] that ICCSD and that there is this

[38:53] development albeit for you know an older

[38:55] demographic. I'm just wondering if that

[38:58] changes the dynamics at all and if there

[39:00] is a need for a signalization study just

[39:03] given the fact that that is kind of a

[39:05] tight

[39:07] location um with a with traffic coming

[39:11] off from South Dodge and from Scott and

[39:14] then with now Debuke Road actually

[39:17] probably seeing a bit more traffic in

[39:20] and out. So I was just wondering if that

[39:21] was a great question

[39:22] >> if this would be something where it

[39:24] would be revisited. Um you know so when

[39:26] the reasonzoning for the campus first

[39:28] came through uh several actions ago

[39:31] resoning is the point at which we have

[39:32] the best tool for assigning a condition

[39:36] um we did look at it the traffic at that

[39:38] point and we act we had traffic studies

[39:40] and and we have um the city did review

[39:42] the flow of the traffic both on North

[39:44] Dodge through the corridor on Scott to

[39:47] the north Deuke road all of those

[39:49] impacts were studied um this resoning is

[39:52] being tied to just this one development

[39:54] did not rise to the level of revisiting

[39:56] that. Um, knowing that the inside of the

[39:58] circle of ACT campus had been planned

[40:00] for housing at the time of that study.

[40:03] Um, and now it's being used probably for

[40:07] office instead. Um, you know, those

[40:09] impacts probably hit slightly different

[40:11] times of day, but the number of people

[40:12] is not all that different. Um, I think

[40:14] at this point this resoning would not be

[40:16] appropriate for that and I think the

[40:18] city has taken on the position that we did everything we needed to do at the

[40:23] previous one. Um if if signals need to

[40:25] be rettimed at this point it would be on

[40:27] us. So

[40:30] >> I don't know if that's a clear answer.

[40:32] This resoning is probably not the point

[40:34] which to place a condition.

[40:36] >> Would there be a point um or would this

[40:38] be something that would go through MO if

[40:40] at a future point there was enough like

[40:42] wow there's quite a bit of busyness

[40:45] going on here that that would be

[40:46] something that would be addressed

[40:47] through MO perhaps.

[40:48] >> Sure. Yeah. Well the city's CIP projects

[40:50] would cip right. We would the

[40:53] engineering staff would be monitoring

[40:55] the traffic flows and every year there's

[40:58] some signal tinkering that happens with

[41:00] signalizations just timing. So we have a

[41:02] consultant that checks out once a year.

[41:04] If it gets beyond that scope of that

[41:06] project then we take it on as a CIP

[41:08] project to make improvements.

[41:09] >> Okay. I was even thinking to the extent

[41:12] of that would there need to be some kind

[41:14] of signal actually at that juncture

[41:16] where there's debuke road with

[41:19] >> Captain Brave or whatever discussed that

[41:21] was certainly discussed those

[41:22] intersections are very close together

[41:24] and so to increase capacity you're

[41:25] adding lanes and there's a lot of

[41:27] impacts there so with scooters I think

[41:29] you might even recall we

[41:30] >> I'm not sure if we discussed islands

[41:32] publicly at that point but it certainly

[41:34] was all on the table with staff when we

[41:36] reviewed those applications. Yeah,

[41:38] >> good question,

[41:40] >> Daniel. The last condition about the

[41:42] roadway. Um, I'm just having a hard time

[41:44] understanding where exactly. So, the the

[41:47] improvements to North Deuke Road between

[41:50] North Scott Boulevard

[41:52] >> and where.

[41:53] >> So, there the the all of the roads on

[41:55] the ACT campus are private. So, this is

[41:58] a carryover condition to ensure that

[41:59] those private roads are brought up to

[42:01] public standards before they start being

[42:02] used by the public. So, there's a little

[42:04] bit of section that's in this vicinity.

[42:07] And so this is addressing making sure

[42:08] that happens with this project or before

[42:10] this project. Um the rest of the road

[42:13] network is also something that needs to

[42:15] be studied and made sure that

[42:17] >> and that'll be kind of happen as it

[42:19] develops.

[42:20] >> Okay. Thank you.

[42:24] » All right. Thanks. Uh wondering if any

[42:27] of the developers want to make any

[42:29] comments at this time.

[42:34] » Welcome. Welcome. Good evening. I'm Mark

[42:37] Seabold. I'm a principal architect with

[42:39] Shy Hattery here in Iowa City. I've been

[42:40] working um with Danielle and staff and

[42:43] with Oaknull for the past boy year on

[42:45] this development and just working on the

[42:47] different resonings and things like that

[42:48] and frankly all the resonings and and

[42:51] redevelopment that's happening on the um

[42:53] corner there of uh or intersection of

[42:55] I80 and um and Dodge Street. So, thank

[42:58] you for all your past support on that. I

[43:00] guess I'm just here to answer any

[43:02] further questions if you have any

[43:03] further questions from the um design

[43:05] team.

[43:08] >> There is an additional traffic light

[43:09] going on ACT Drive also. So that'll help

[43:13] >> traffic coming in and out of this

[43:15] development. I believe that was on this

[43:17] year's schedule, but I think it's been

[43:18] pushed to next year for that final

[43:19] installation. So just from a traffic

[43:21] standpoint,

[43:22] >> I did see that um almost half of the

[43:24] woodland or 40ome percent of the

[43:26] woodland was going to be preserved. I'm

[43:27] guessing that's sort of where that

[43:29] ravine is. Yeah.

[43:30] >> That kind of comes from the other side

[43:32] of of Scott. [clears throat]

[43:33] >> Yes. I mean, this resoning really is

[43:36] identical to what we did with Oaknull

[43:38] East, you know, the first time around on

[43:39] that phase one where we kind of found

[43:41] that sweet spot where it was cleared and

[43:42] then it drops off to the ravine. So,

[43:45] very similar in that we're embracing

[43:47] those views, embracing those woodlands

[43:48] and then using the um you know, the

[43:50] cleared area to provide more um resident

[43:53] amenities and more um outdoor amenity

[43:55] space.

[43:56] Thank you. Okay.

[43:59] >> Thank you.

[44:00] >> All right. Anyone from the public like

[44:02] to discuss this topic? If so, please

[44:06] come forth. And if you're online, please

[44:07] raise your virtual hand.

[44:11] And there is a sign in up here. Oh,

[44:14] please. Yep. And there's a sign in up

[44:16] here. You can just drop it in that

[44:17] basket.

[44:18] >> All right. Thank you.

[44:19] >> And we'll ask you to state your name and

[44:20] city you're from. You'll be given up to

[44:22] three minutes. Welcome. My name is Elden

[44:24] Snder and I live on Oaks Drive in Iowa

[44:27] City, which is north of of uh

[44:32] >> Dodge Street. And uh I frequently walk

[44:36] through the intersection of Dodge Street

[44:39] and North Deuke Road. And I see a lot of

[44:43] potential accidents. I see a lot of uh

[44:46] mishaps. I see a lot of road rage there

[44:48] as people try to merge into

[44:51] from two lanes into one coming from

[44:53] different directions and I'm concerned

[44:56] about the impact that this development

[44:59] which I think is fine but I'm concerned

[45:01] about it how it's going to impact the

[45:04] traffic light especially on uh Dodd

[45:08] Street and Scott Bolard.

[45:11] Thank you.

[45:12] >> Thank you. Anyone else like to address

[45:14] this topic?

[45:18] Welcome.

[45:21] >> Please state your name and city you're

[45:22] from.

[45:23] >> Uh evening everyone. I'm Nick Hats. I'm

[45:25] uh from Iowa City on behalf of Shive

[45:27] Hatterie. I'm the civil engineer for the

[45:28] project. Uh and also Shy Hatterie

[45:30] performed the traffic uh impact studies

[45:33] associated with the various uh

[45:35] resonings. There were two of them done

[45:37] um that contemplated the entire kind of

[45:39] 100 acre uh first phase of the full ACT

[45:43] campus uh redevelopment. Um and what

[45:47] that did was it kind of contemplated all

[45:49] of it for its like highest traffic

[45:51] generation based on the the various

[45:53] proposed zonings. Um and and basically

[45:58] that signalization of ACT Drive and

[46:02] Dodge Street was basically critical in

[46:04] order to allow the the full kind of

[46:06] holistic traffic signal including Scott

[46:08] and Dodge to function at adequate levels

[46:11] of uh service. Um at this time there

[46:15] were not any improvements required and

[46:17] then this included review by uh MO JC

[46:20] and the city. Um and there were not any

[46:23] improvements needed uh by that North

[46:25] Debuke Road and Scott Boulevard at that

[46:28] time. Um I would also like to note that

[46:31] you know that that's kind of highest

[46:33] trip generation per the zoning. However,

[46:35] we also know that you know it's

[46:37] anticipated that the existing campus is

[46:39] going to be retained as just office use which is substantially less trips

[46:44] than the theoretical maximum zoning. Uh

[46:47] similarly, this project um as as

[46:50] Danielle outlined for the amount of

[46:52] units versus allowable density of

[46:54] allowable units is still well below the the amount studied by the traffic

[46:59] studies. Um and then also my last kind

[47:02] of point there is there still is um

[47:04] further analysis uh to be done as you

[47:06] know you kind of work further east um

[47:09] into the other kind of roughly 300

[47:11] acres. Um, so that could um in the

[47:14] future trigger the need for additional

[47:16] traffic off-site infrastructure

[47:18] improvements.

[47:19] Let me know if you have any other

[47:20] questions on that.

[47:21] >> I'll have you sign in. Um,

[47:23] >> yeah.

[47:23] >> Thank you. Anyone else from the public

[47:26] like to address this topic?

[47:33] » Hello, my name is

[47:34] >> Welcome. Please state your name and city

[47:36] you're from.

[47:36] >> My name is Dalton Straer. I'm from Iowa

[47:38] City. I just had a very quick question

[47:39] to the developers. Um, I noticed it said

[47:42] >> you can speak to the council.

[47:44] >> The uh it mentioned in the proposal that

[47:47] the sewer line would need to be upsized

[47:49] due to the increased density of

[47:51] population and I wanted to know what the

[47:53] plan was to pay for that whether that

[47:55] would be on the city or on the developer

[47:58] and also what plans were in place for

[48:00] the traffic in that area during the

[48:02] construction that would be required for

[48:04] upsizing that sewer line.

[48:06] >> Thank you. I'll have you sign in there.

[48:10] And while the council um

[48:13] there won't be any opportunity for the

[48:15] council to engage in conversation right

[48:17] now, but should the council want to take

[48:19] that up individually, they can uh do

[48:21] that during our deliberation.

[48:23] Anyone else want to uh talk on this

[48:26] topic?

[48:29] Seeing no one in person and seeing no

[48:31] hands raised online.

[48:33] Before I close this, I just want to ask

[48:35] council if they're inclined to vote with

[48:37] PNZ.

[48:38] >> Yes.

[48:39] >> Okay. All right, I'm going to close the

[48:41] public hearing. Could I get a motion to

[48:43] give uh first consideration?

[48:45] >> So moved. Mo

[48:46] >> second. Alter.

[48:48] >> Council discussion.

[48:50] >> I really before we I live there too. I

[48:53] live off Quincson Street in Quinc

[48:56] Street. So I think those are serial

[48:58] concern. I would like to know the answer

[49:00] of the questions that are brought by the

[49:02] public.

[49:03] >> Yep. So this is relating to the sor

[49:05] line. Is there Oh, please. Yep. uh come

[49:09] up and

[49:11] >> um I'm not aware of the uh the

[49:14] subdivision developers um development

[49:17] agreement financial aspects of if the

[49:19] sewer line upsizing um has any sort of

[49:22] city participation. Um I think it's

[49:24] likely that it's entirely on the

[49:26] developer, but Jeff or Kirk may know

[49:29] some of that. Um,

[49:31] as far as I'm aware, that's being

[49:33] upsized by the developer, the

[49:35] subdivision developer

[49:37] for the sewer line in uh north uh Debuke

[49:40] Road.

[49:41] >> The other um question was related to the

[49:44] >> traffic during construction.

[49:47] >> The traffic during the upsizing.

[49:49] >> Yes.

[49:49] >> Um so this particular line is um you

[49:53] know on North Deuke Road just north of

[49:55] this. Um, and the particular manner that

[49:57] it's going to be upsized is u by pipe

[50:00] bursting. So essentially they're just

[50:02] going to they're not going to actually

[50:03] because it's extremely deep. Um, and so

[50:06] they're basically just going to dig down

[50:08] right by the manhole itself and then

[50:10] burst the pipe larger without actually

[50:13] trenching down to the pipe uh the entire

[50:16] length. So you'll probably have some

[50:18] like one lane closures. Um, but there

[50:21] also isn't a whole lot of kind of cut

[50:23] through traffic there at the moment. So,

[50:24] it's not like there's going to be

[50:26] significant closures on uh the major

[50:28] arterial like Scott or something like

[50:30] that. So, I would expect it to be pretty

[50:32] minimal impact.

[50:34] >> Okay. Thank you.

[50:39] » And can staff confirm about the who's

[50:41] bearing the cost of the sewer upsizing?

[50:44] >> Yeah. Uh Ron, do you want to come up and

[50:45] just talk about when the city would

[50:47] participate? I'll just remind council we

[50:48] don't have a development agreement with

[50:50] the um act redevelopment team nor do we

[50:54] have one with Oaknull. So any process

[50:56] would just be standard.

[50:58] >> Generally it is the developer um

[51:00] responsibility. If there's a greater

[51:02] public interest to upsize that's when

[51:04] the city may consider involvement.

[51:06] >> Right. So so [clears throat] when we

[51:07] have an improvement that it serves a

[51:09] larger area we then would pay for the

[51:11] upsizing that would be above and beyond

[51:13] what their minimum size would be

[51:15] >> for that specific Yes.

[51:17] >> Great. Thank you.

[51:19] >> Good. Thank you.

[51:24] » Any other discussion?

[51:27] >> Well, I don't have much to say other

[51:29] than I will be voting for it. I think

[51:30] this is a great evolution of that part

[51:32] of town and I think we've seen Oaknull

[51:34] has created some great facilities out

[51:36] there and trust them to do more and it's

[51:39] consistent with the comprehensive plan.

[51:41] Um, I do think though we should probably

[51:43] keep looking at it out there as far as

[51:45] what signalizations are needed, what

[51:48] traffic studies are needed as it evolves

[51:50] because it's, you know, every time we

[51:52] hear a new plan, it's slightly

[51:53] different, um, just because of what what

[51:55] we need. And I do know a few people who

[51:57] live out there and they're, you know,

[51:59] um, sometimes concerned about how dark

[52:00] it is along that corridor um, driving at

[52:03] night. But, um, that is not for the

[52:04] purpose of resoning. I will be voting

[52:06] for this, but I do think it's wise for

[52:07] us to continue to focus on that part of

[52:09] town.

[52:10] Yes.

[52:12] >> Roll call, please.

[52:13] >> Sala,

[52:14] >> yes.

[52:15] >> Teague,

[52:15] >> yes.

[52:16] >> Wine,

[52:16] >> yes.

[52:17] >> Alter,

[52:17] >> yes.

[52:18] >> Burgers,

[52:18] >> yes.

[52:19] >> Harmson,

[52:19] >> yes.

[52:20] >> Mo,

[52:20] >> yes.

[52:21] >> Motion passes 7 to zero. We are on to

[52:24] item 11, our regular formal agenda 11A,

[52:27] 2027 Woodside Drive Repair Project.

[52:31] Resolution approving project manual and

[52:33] estimate of cost for the construction of

[52:35] the Woodside Drive Repair 2027 project

[52:39] establishing amount of bid security to

[52:41] accompany each bid, directing city clerk

[52:44] to post notice to biders and fixing time

[52:46] and place for receipt of bids. And I'm

[52:50] going to open up the public hearing and

[52:51] welcome.

[52:52] >> Good evening, mayor and council. My name

[52:54] is Tim Schmmedi and I'm a civil engineer

[52:56] with the city's engineering department.

[52:58] The Woodside Drive Repair 2027 project

[53:01] is the replacement of a sanitary sewer

[53:03] manhole. The pavement associated with

[53:05] the work and upgrading a nearby storm

[53:08] sewer.

[53:10] The project is located on Woodside

[53:13] Drive. Woodside Drive is a private road

[53:15] on the west side of Iowa City just south

[53:18] of Kick Stadium.

[53:21] The sanitary sewer manhole on Woodside

[53:23] Drive is partially brick and partially

[53:26] concrete. The brick portion of the

[53:28] manhole is degrading structurally and

[53:31] the overall depth of the manhole is 16

[53:33] ft deep. The manhole is at the center of

[53:36] Woodside Drive. So because of that depth

[53:38] and the location of the manhole, the

[53:40] entire width of the street will have to

[53:42] be uh removed and replaced. Within the

[53:45] pavement removal limits is a nearby

[53:47] storm sewer drain that's very undersized

[53:49] uh gets clogged easily with debris and

[53:52] creates puddles there. So, we'll be

[53:54] replacing that with a storm sewer intake

[53:56] and upgrading the connection to the

[53:59] existing storm sewer.

[54:02] Because Woodside Drive is a private

[54:04] street, the sanitary sewer work will be

[54:06] taking place within a 25- ft permanent

[54:09] uh sanitary sewer easement. Uh, and the

[54:12] storm sewer work will be taking place in

[54:15] a temporary construction easement that

[54:17] was agreed upon with the property owner.

[54:21] This project meets two parts of the

[54:23] city's strategic plan. First one being

[54:26] economy. Uh it ensures that the current

[54:28] infrastructure is not requiring yearly

[54:31] maintenance and uh prevents the further

[54:33] deterioration of the structure which

[54:35] would result in uh added replacement

[54:37] costs down the line. And the second one

[54:40] being the safety and well-being of the

[54:42] community. avoids failure of the manhole

[54:45] that could cause impacts to pedestrians

[54:47] or vehicles and also prevents uh

[54:50] potential backups of sewer into the uh

[54:53] nearby buildings.

[54:55] The estimated construction cost of the

[54:58] project is $105,000 and this will be

[55:00] coming from the annual sewer projects

[55:02] fund.

[55:04] The bid opening for this project is

[55:05] October 22nd and the contract will be

[55:09] awarded on the November 2nd council

[55:10] meeting. The start date for construction

[55:13] is May 24th of next year. The

[55:15] substantial completion date is at the

[55:17] end of July and the final completion

[55:19] date is at the end of August. Uh here's

[55:21] how I can be contacted. That's all I

[55:24] have. Thank you all for your time. Are

[55:25] there any questions?

[55:27] >> Uh I had a quick question um

[55:30] talking more about um who

[55:34] pays for you know sewers and stuff like

[55:37] that. Um, I was just curious because I

[55:39] know that um uh we with like our water

[55:44] infrastructure if uh property owners

[55:46] they have they have to pay for that

[55:49] particular extension that goes onto

[55:51] their property um when it fails. Uh and

[55:54] so the longer that is, the more money

[55:56] they have to pay and everything. So I'm

[55:57] wondering because this is a private

[55:59] driveway, what when does it stop being

[56:02] our responsibility even though it is our

[56:04] utilities if that makes sense?

[56:07] Um, yeah, I would assume that it'd be

[56:09] So, this is a manhole that's public.

[56:11] There's not it's not a service line

[56:13] directly into the building, which would

[56:14] be separate. So, really that ends with

[56:16] that that service line really. But if

[56:18] that service line this this manhole

[56:20] itself doesn't have any service lines,

[56:21] but if it if that was the case, that

[56:24] service line replacement, um we would I would assume do part of it if we're

[56:29] replacing the entire manhole, but other

[56:30] than that, if it's broken up halfway

[56:33] between the manhole and the the home,

[56:35] that that would be on the property

[56:37] owner.

[56:38] >> Okay.

[56:40] >> Is this project wholly in Iowa City or

[56:42] is there a portion in University

[56:43] Heights? So the temporary construction

[56:45] easement is partially in University

[56:47] Heights there. Um but the rest of rest

[56:50] of the project is within Iowa City.

[56:52] Yeah.

[56:53] >> You mentioned that the manhole is

[56:55] partially brick. Do we have a sense of

[56:57] how old that is? And I'm just curious

[56:59] how often do we run into brick manholes?

[57:01] Uh I'm not entirely sure how old that

[57:04] brick part portion of the manhole is,

[57:05] but um there are I've run into a decent

[57:09] amount of brick manholes uh in the city

[57:11] here that we

[57:12] >> once we know they're they're brick, we

[57:14] try to get them replaced.

[57:15] >> And what do they get? What's the

[57:16] material that it's replaced with?

[57:18] >> Concrete.

[57:18] >> Okay. Thank you.

[57:22] » All right. Thank you. Anyone else? Uh

[57:25] anyone from the public like to address

[57:27] this topic? If you're online, please

[57:28] raise your virtual hand. If you're in

[57:31] council chambers, please come forth.

[57:33] [snorts]

[57:34] See no one online or in person.

[57:38] I'm going to close the public hearing.

[57:40] Can I get a motion, please?

[57:42] >> So, moved.

[57:44] >> Second, Bergus.

[57:45] >> All right. Moved by Mo uh seconded by

[57:47] Bergus for approval. Uh, council

[57:49] discussion. Just a motion for approval.

[57:52] Yeah. Council discussion

[57:55] >> hearing none. Roll call, please.

[57:57] >> Teague,

[57:58] >> yes.

[57:58] >> Wine,

[57:59] >> yes. Alter,

[58:00] >> yes.

[58:00] >> Fergus,

[58:01] >> yes.

[58:01] >> Harmson,

[58:02] >> yes.

[58:02] >> Mo, yes. Salah,

[58:04] >> yes.

[58:04] >> Motion passes 7 to zero. 11B, Riverside

[58:07] Drive pedestrian bridge at Iowa Avenue

[58:10] rehabilitation project. Resolution

[58:12] approving project manual and estimate of

[58:15] cost for the construction of the

[58:16] Riverside Drive pedestrian bridge at

[58:18] Iowa Avenue rehabilitation project.

[58:21] Establishing amount of bid security to

[58:23] accompany each bid, directing city clerk

[58:26] to post notice to biders and fixing time

[58:28] and place for receipt of bids. I'm going

[58:30] to open up the public hearing and

[58:32] welcome. Good evening, mayor and uh

[58:34] council. My name is Alen Daki uh senior

[58:37] engineer in the public works department.

[58:40] Uh today I will show you a brief

[58:41] presentation regarding the Riverside

[58:44] Drive pedestrian bridge at Iowa Avenue

[58:47] rehabilitation project.

[58:49] Um this project was previous previously

[58:52] bid in October 2024. So most of you um

[58:57] uh will already be familiar with this uh

[59:00] the scope of the project and the

[59:02] information presented tonight.

[59:04] Since we received no bids during the

[59:06] first letting uh we have made several

[59:09] revisions to the plans to address

[59:10] constructibility issues that might have

[59:13] affected contractor uh contractor

[59:16] interest.

[59:18] While the overall project remains

[59:20] substantially the same, the revisions

[59:22] have resulted in changes to the proposed

[59:24] traffic control approach, which I will

[59:27] highlight those when I will get to the

[59:30] traffic control uh slide.

[59:34] Uh this project is located uh on

[59:36] Riverside Drive uh just south of IO

[59:38] Avenue uh intersection.

[59:42] And um for a little bit of background

[59:45] information, uh this buil this bridge

[59:47] was built in the early 1960s

[59:50] and it is similar to the Burlington

[59:52] Street Bridge.

[59:54] And um this bridge has facilitated a

[59:57] safe and con convenient connection for

[59:59] thousands of students, faculty, and

[1:00:01] staff between downtown Iowa City and the

[1:00:05] University of Iowa Medical Campus.

[1:00:08] Uh a 2019 bridge inspection report

[1:00:11] identified the need for significant uh

[1:00:14] rehabilitation to ensure its continued

[1:00:16] safety and functionality. This

[1:00:18] pedestrian bridge has been reinspected

[1:00:21] this past July to determine the

[1:00:24] progression of um the deterioration.

[1:00:29] Uh in the next couple of slides I will

[1:00:31] show you the current conditions and the

[1:00:33] extent of the deterioration justifying

[1:00:36] the need for in-depth structural

[1:00:38] repairs.

[1:00:41] As you can see in the uh in this slide

[1:00:44] uh the bridge exhibits significant

[1:00:47] cracking spalling and general

[1:00:49] degradation of the concrete structure.

[1:00:53] Um, the bridge has outdated railings,

[1:00:56] inadequate or inexistent lighting, and

[1:01:00] worn surfaces that contribute to a

[1:01:02] visually unappealing appearance.

[1:01:05] To extend its useful life, this

[1:01:07] pedestrian bridge needs extensive

[1:01:10] structural repairs.

[1:01:15] Uh as for the project scope uh this

[1:01:17] project generally include uh structural

[1:01:20] concrete rehabilitation of the existing

[1:01:23] bridge, spiler ramp and stairs,

[1:01:26] structural concrete coating, expansion

[1:01:29] joint replacement, ADA improvements to

[1:01:32] the sidewalk connecting with the Iowa

[1:01:35] River Trail

[1:01:37] and aesthetic improvements including new

[1:01:41] handrail, new electrical lighting in uh

[1:01:44] new bridge deck coding.

[1:01:48] Uh in the next slide I'll highlight the

[1:01:53] staging and the traffic control. Uh

[1:01:56] first I will start with what has changed

[1:01:59] from the 2024 leting. Um during the 2024

[1:02:03] letting the traffic control was very

[1:02:05] restrictive due to the requirement for

[1:02:08] nighttime work only and um which was

[1:02:12] basically 9:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. And it

[1:02:15] also required that all traffic lanes to

[1:02:17] be open um by by morning

[1:02:22] uh and during daytime hours. And that

[1:02:24] led to

[1:02:26] uh basically um led to constructability

[1:02:29] issues because uh repairing the bridge

[1:02:32] would require formwork that would need

[1:02:34] to remain in place for a minimum of 28

[1:02:37] days for the concrete to cure. Because

[1:02:40] of that, we went back to um and

[1:02:43] revisited the design and we made the

[1:02:45] following changes to the traffic

[1:02:47] control. Riverside Drive will now be

[1:02:50] allowed to be reduced to one driving

[1:02:51] lane uh southbound and north northbound.

[1:02:55] Newton Road and IO Avenue will be closed

[1:02:58] at River Riverside Drive for the

[1:03:00] duration of the project. Pedestrian

[1:03:03] bridge will also be closed for the

[1:03:05] duration of the project. And lastly, uh

[1:03:08] pedestrian and vehicle detours will be

[1:03:10] posted for the public.

[1:03:15] Uh this exhibit shows um the actual

[1:03:18] traffic control during the general two

[1:03:20] stages of the project. Um the in the im

[1:03:24] image on the left you can see the

[1:03:26] outside lane closure which will allow

[1:03:29] for the work to take place on the spiral

[1:03:32] ramp and the outside portions of the the

[1:03:37] bridge itself. While the image on the

[1:03:39] right shows the um lane closure over

[1:03:44] inside lanes and the work area uh being

[1:03:48] in the middle highlighted in red. During

[1:03:51] both of these stages

[1:03:53] um IO Avenue and Newton Road will be

[1:03:56] closed. Um we'll probably likely will

[1:04:00] allowed um emergency access only for

[1:04:03] emergency vehicles.

[1:04:09] Um for construction timeline and cost,

[1:04:12] we'll have a bid opening on October

[1:04:14] 12th.

[1:04:16] Um and the award will be on October

[1:04:19] 20th.

[1:04:21] Uh construction specified construction

[1:04:23] start date is May 17, 2027

[1:04:27] and uh construction completion is August

[1:04:30] 20th, 2027 before um university semester

[1:04:35] begins. The estimate estimated

[1:04:38] construction cost is $1.4 million out of

[1:04:41] which the portion for um the city of

[1:04:44] Iowa City is 25% or approximately

[1:04:47] 350,000.

[1:04:52] And with that um I ending my

[1:04:55] presentation if you have any questions.

[1:04:57] >> Can you go back to the schedule again

[1:05:00] and can you how does that align with

[1:05:03] University of Iowa schedule? So the date

[1:05:06] of May 17th is the first Monday after

[1:05:09] the commencement ceremonies uh end.

[1:05:12] >> Yeah. But they wouldn't be doing any

[1:05:14] work that day probably. And then and

[1:05:17] then August 20th. How does that align

[1:05:18] with school start?

[1:05:19] >> Um that is um the Friday before the

[1:05:24] start of classes which is I believe

[1:05:26] August 22nd. And what kind of measures

[1:05:28] does the contract have in place to make

[1:05:30] sure that the contractor actually gets

[1:05:32] done by that August 20th date?

[1:05:34] >> Uh for this uh rebid effort, we are

[1:05:38] actually implementing um incentive and

[1:05:40] disincentive. The incentive consists of

[1:05:44] um an amount equal to $2500 per day for

[1:05:48] a maximum of of 10 days in which the

[1:05:51] contractor is incentivized to finish

[1:05:54] early if possible. If not, the same

[1:05:57] amount will apply as liquidated damages

[1:06:00] indefinitely

[1:06:02] until they reopen um Riverside Drive,

[1:06:05] Newton Road, Iowa Avenue, and the bridge

[1:06:08] itself.

[1:06:09] >> Thank you.

[1:06:12] >> I had a question. U did I hear correctly

[1:06:15] um that

[1:06:17] the ownership of this will be in the

[1:06:19] city's hands after it's finished or

[1:06:22] >> uh No. So the bridge is currently owned

[1:06:26] by Iowa DUT, the city of Iowa City and

[1:06:29] the university. Uh Iowa DOT has uh we

[1:06:35] have a a memorandum of understanding

[1:06:37] that dates back to probably more than 20

[1:06:41] years in which uh Iowa DOT is

[1:06:44] responsible for 50% of U major

[1:06:48] maintenance costs and the city and

[1:06:51] university 25% respectively.

[1:06:54] >> Okay.

[1:06:56] Alen, you mentioned the um improvements

[1:06:59] I think relating to accessibility for

[1:07:02] the connection with the Iowa River

[1:07:04] Trail. Is there going to be any work on

[1:07:07] the tunnel that goes underneath Iowa

[1:07:09] Avenue?

[1:07:10] >> Um no, the the the tunnel going under

[1:07:14] Iowa Avenue. Um I believe that one was

[1:07:16] completed two years ago. That was a

[1:07:18] separate project. Uh it also involved um

[1:07:22] a railing replacement too.

[1:07:24] >> Mhm. Okay. And then just if you know did

[1:07:28] the and I realize it's not apples to

[1:07:30] apples because of the restrictions that

[1:07:31] we had when this was um bid the first

[1:07:34] time but do you have a sense of how the

[1:07:37] cost change from 2024 to now?

[1:07:40] >> Um the cost estimate back in 2024 was

[1:07:44] 1.3 million and this one is 1.4. Um of

[1:07:47] course it reflects u increases in

[1:07:50] inflation and um materials. However, we

[1:07:55] also have a this cost also includes

[1:07:59] 25,000 the for the incentive.

[1:08:02] >> So, just a a minor increase I would say.

[1:08:04] >> Yeah. Thank you.

[1:08:05] >> Sure.

[1:08:09] » All right. Here are no more questions.

[1:08:11] Anyone from the public like to address

[1:08:13] this topic? If you're in C council

[1:08:16] chambers, please come forth. I do see

[1:08:18] one online. Please state your name. Uh

[1:08:21] Noah, I'm going to acknowledge you.

[1:08:22] Please state your name and city you're

[1:08:24] from. Welcome.

[1:08:29] » Hello. Can you hear me?

[1:08:30] >> Yes. Welcome.

[1:08:32] >> Hi. Hello. It's good to talk to you all

[1:08:35] again. It's been a minute. Um, so I have

[1:08:37] some questions about so this is

[1:08:41] allegedly there's going to be

[1:08:43] accessibility upgrades. So I'm just

[1:08:44] wondering like who were disabled people

[1:08:47] consulted in what they need for to make

[1:08:50] it more accessible or is it just

[1:08:53] >> people making this decisions

[1:08:58] » and you can continue to u make your

[1:09:00] comments and council could choose to um

[1:09:04] take up any item during our

[1:09:06] deliberation.

[1:09:07] >> Okay. And also, what is the uh slope of

[1:09:11] this ramp going to be, the spiral ramp?

[1:09:14] Because if it's just going to be a 112

[1:09:16] or a 114 like your library ramp, that's

[1:09:20] not a good ramp. It needs to be

[1:09:23] just spit along here. At least 116

[1:09:27] preferably. I mean, 120 would be great,

[1:09:30] but I understand that'd be a spacing

[1:09:32] problem. So, I'm just curious like what

[1:09:35] what's the actual accessibility of this

[1:09:37] thing going to be and I would love to

[1:09:40] see the council expand more on that and

[1:09:42] ask more questions about the

[1:09:44] accessibility of this.

[1:09:46] >> Thank you.

[1:09:47] Anyone else like to address

[1:09:49] this topic?

[1:09:51] You can have a seat. Yes. Thank you.

[1:09:54] Anyone else? Seeing no one in council

[1:09:57] chambers or online,

[1:10:01] I'm going to close the public hearing.

[1:10:03] Could I get a motion to approve, please?

[1:10:05] >> So moved. Whit line

[1:10:06] >> second.

[1:10:07] >> All right. Council discussion.

[1:10:10] Uh yeah, I guess I would just ask um

[1:10:12] what uh is the um decision-m process

[1:10:17] when it comes uh when it comes to you

[1:10:20] know the what is deemed as an upgrade of

[1:10:23] accessibility and also what are we

[1:10:25] looking at for grading when it comes to

[1:10:28] the ramp?

[1:10:35] » We're having staff come back up. Thanks.

[1:10:38] >> Thank you for your question. Um, we will

[1:10:42] be addressing some accessibility issues,

[1:10:46] especially pertaining to the uh sidewalk

[1:10:50] that goes by uh by the river and

[1:10:54] connecting connecting with the sidewalk

[1:10:56] that goes under the bridge. However,

[1:10:58] when it comes to the accessibility

[1:11:02] pertaining to the actual spiral ramp,

[1:11:05] unfortunately, that is not something

[1:11:06] that is part of this project because

[1:11:09] this is a maintenance project and under

[1:11:12] Federal Highway Administration guidance.

[1:11:16] uh maintenance projects are not uh

[1:11:19] required to

[1:11:22] uh pursue major

[1:11:24] um major improvements in ADA compliance.

[1:11:28] We have uh had conversations uh I

[1:11:31] believe two years ago with uh Congress me uh Congress member uh Mo and

[1:11:37] we went um

[1:11:40] we spent great deal of research and we

[1:11:44] have all this u information available

[1:11:46] for your uh uh information if you if you

[1:11:50] like it. Y

[1:11:51] >> and I believe uh the Federal Highway

[1:11:54] Administration makes a distinction

[1:11:56] between maintenance and alteration. So

[1:11:59] for a maintenance project

[1:12:02] making uh these extensive ADA

[1:12:06] improvements are not uh mandated.

[1:12:09] However, if it would have been an

[1:12:11] alteration, then yes,

[1:12:14] we would have been required to make uh

[1:12:17] significant changes beyond what is

[1:12:19] currently in the scope scope of this

[1:12:21] project.

[1:12:21] >> And the ADA um uh improvements on the

[1:12:24] sidewalk would be the width of the

[1:12:26] sidewalk or

[1:12:27] >> the width, the running slope, the cross

[1:12:30] slope.

[1:12:30] >> Okay.

[1:12:33] >> Thank you,

[1:12:34] >> Alen. Do you know the slope of the

[1:12:35] spiral ramp? Um the slope of the the

[1:12:38] spiler ramp um I know for a fact because

[1:12:41] I measured it myself. Uh the cross slope

[1:12:44] is compliant so it's less than 2%. The

[1:12:47] running slope uh on the actual uh

[1:12:49] corkcrew is over 8.3 which is the

[1:12:53] maximum allowed. It's I believe 9.7

[1:12:59] » and addressing that would require

[1:13:01] basically

[1:13:03] u complete demolition of the of the

[1:13:07] spiral ramp and a complete redesign of

[1:13:09] the bridge

[1:13:10] >> and is that more comparable to what

[1:13:12] we're doing on Burlington Street where

[1:13:13] we're eliminating the

[1:13:15] >> where we have the very long area to

[1:13:18] >> it will be probably similar. Yes, we

[1:13:20] will need a lot more area to allow um uh

[1:13:24] reduction in the running slope.

[1:13:26] >> Mhm. So, we don't expect this bridge to

[1:13:29] be accessible as far as the bridge part

[1:13:32] itself with that degree of slope.

[1:13:35] >> Correct.

[1:13:35] >> Okay.

[1:13:39] » All right. Thank you.

[1:13:41] >> You're welcome.

[1:13:42] >> Continuing council discussion.

[1:13:48] Roll call, please.

[1:13:49] >> Wang,

[1:13:51] >> yes.

[1:13:51] >> Alter,

[1:13:52] >> yes.

[1:13:53] >> Bergus,

[1:13:53] >> yes.

[1:13:54] >> Harmson,

[1:13:54] >> yes.

[1:13:55] >> Mo,

[1:13:55] >> yes.

[1:13:55] >> Salah,

[1:13:56] >> yes.

[1:13:56] >> Teague, [clears throat]

[1:13:57] >> yes. Motion passed to 7 to zero. We are

[1:14:00] at item number 11 C. Can I get a motion

[1:14:03] to reconsider amending budget positions

[1:14:06] in the police department? resolution

[1:14:08] amending the budgeted positions in the

[1:14:10] police department by adding two

[1:14:12] full-time police officer positions and

[1:14:15] one full-time police sergeant position.

[1:14:19] And item number one, um, could I get a

[1:14:22] motion to reconsider the motion to

[1:14:24] defer?

[1:14:27] >> So moved. Alter

[1:14:28] >> second, Armson.

[1:14:30] >> All right. And I'm going to, uh, have

[1:14:32] our city attorneys, uh, Eric Gors, um,

[1:14:35] kind of give us some comments at this

[1:14:36] time. Thank you, mayor. Um, we don't see

[1:14:38] a lot of [cough and clears throat]

[1:14:40] motion to consider, so it's worthwhile

[1:14:42] uh talking it through procedurally,

[1:14:44] particularly for the benefit of the

[1:14:45] public who's present or might be

[1:14:47] watching at home. Uh, motions to

[1:14:49] reconsider can be made by anyone on the

[1:14:52] prevailing side of the earlier vote,

[1:14:54] seconded by any council member. And then

[1:14:57] uh if the motion succeeds then it just

[1:15:00] return it basically voids the earlier

[1:15:02] vote and you're back right to where you

[1:15:04] started last time in this case for the

[1:15:06] motion to defer. No motion or second

[1:15:08] needed. It's already there. Um if uh the

[1:15:12] motion to defer uh then fails uh then we

[1:15:16] would be back to the underlying main

[1:15:19] question that is the motion to approve

[1:15:21] the resolution which adds three police

[1:15:23] officers to uh the police department. Um

[1:15:27] and uh all the other rules that would

[1:15:30] apply to approving an item would apply

[1:15:32] at that point.

[1:15:34] I just have a question [sighs]

[1:15:37] like um reconsidering this and putting

[1:15:40] back is this could be like true also all

[1:15:42] the thing that you just like explain is

[1:15:45] this like true for any kind of cases

[1:15:48] like if we resume something and

[1:15:53] it like passed and it was only four to

[1:15:56] three and I come next time and say I

[1:15:58] would like to put it back on the unit

[1:16:01] because I want to like Uh anyway, I just

[1:16:04] wanted to bring it back or ask three

[1:16:07] council member or the mayor to put it

[1:16:09] back just like I don't know if you got

[1:16:13] my point. Is this like all the time for

[1:16:15] any another cases or this certain votes

[1:16:19] that we can reconsider it after it

[1:16:22] failed or it passed or anything?

[1:16:24] >> Well, the most significant hurdle is

[1:16:27] that the motion needs to be made by

[1:16:28] someone who's on the prevailing side on

[1:16:30] the earlier vote. So, it's not just

[1:16:33] someone who is upset and wants a second

[1:16:35] bite at the apple, for example. It has

[1:16:36] to be someone who was on the winning

[1:16:38] side.

[1:16:38] >> On the winning side.

[1:16:39] >> Yeah. On the earlier.

[1:16:40] >> That's what I mean. Whatever that vote.

[1:16:42] Yeah. Okay. Whatever the vote was. Um I

[1:16:45] haven't researched whether there would

[1:16:46] be any difference in a resoning. Uh

[1:16:49] obviously there are some differences

[1:16:51] there because you've got a property

[1:16:53] owner in play and so forth. I would need

[1:16:55] to research that to be able to answer

[1:16:56] that.

[1:16:57] >> Yes. just like knowing like which one we

[1:17:00] can do it or not. Yeah. Yes. I I got

[1:17:03] confused on that.

[1:17:04] >> Happy to talk about that if that ever

[1:17:05] comes up.

[1:17:06] >> Thank you.

[1:17:07] >> Sure.

[1:17:11] » Any questions by the council to Eric?

[1:17:15] Any more questions? Okay. Council

[1:17:17] discussion.

[1:17:21] And so, um, just so the council know,

[1:17:24] we're going to have three actual,

[1:17:27] um, opportunities should things continue

[1:17:30] to move forward with votes. Um, and so

[1:17:34] the first two are really council

[1:17:38] um,

[1:17:39] what would I say more of a council votes

[1:17:42] and then the third um, should uh, we get

[1:17:46] to the third opportunity then we'll

[1:17:48] bring up the uh, the public will have an

[1:17:50] opportunity to um, be a part of the

[1:17:53] discussion because we'll be back to that

[1:17:55] original item that was on our last

[1:17:58] meeting. All right. So hearing no other

[1:18:01] any other questions or any comments

[1:18:05] hearing none roll call and this is a

[1:18:08] motion to reconsider the motion to

[1:18:11] defer. So just for clarification

[1:18:15] um I'm going to ask Eric just to clarify

[1:18:18] what

[1:18:18] >> Sure.

[1:18:19] >> a yes and a no means.

[1:18:20] >> Sure. So this is just shall we revisit

[1:18:22] the earlier vote essentially? Yes or no?

[1:18:25] Yes. Uh, a yes vote would mean, okay,

[1:18:28] we're going to go back to that earlier

[1:18:29] motion to defer and then talk about that

[1:18:31] and then vote on that. No is nope. Happy

[1:18:34] with what we did last time. Let's stick

[1:18:36] with the status quo.

[1:18:39] >> Roll call, please.

[1:18:40] >> Alter,

[1:18:41] >> yes.

[1:18:42] >> Bergus,

[1:18:42] >> no.

[1:18:43] >> Harmson,

[1:18:44] >> yes.

[1:18:44] >> Mo,

[1:18:45] >> yes.

[1:18:45] >> Salah,

[1:18:46] >> no.

[1:18:46] >> Teague,

[1:18:47] >> yes.

[1:18:47] >> Wine,

[1:18:48] >> no.

[1:18:49] >> Motion passes four to three. All right,

[1:18:52] we're at item number two of this one. If

[1:18:55] the motion to reconsider passes, which

[1:18:57] it did, uh the motion to defer already

[1:19:00] moved and seconded will come to a vote.

[1:19:03] So motion to defer item until after the

[1:19:07] strategic planning session. It was moved

[1:19:10] by Bergus and seconded by Isala. And now

[1:19:13] this is the opportunity for the council

[1:19:15] to discuss before we take another roll

[1:19:17] call. for these items. Is there like

[1:19:20] community comment or

[1:19:22] >> uh the next item

[1:19:23] >> only the the main

[1:19:25] >> if we get to that one

[1:19:27] >> correct? This is more

[1:19:30] >> um council related

[1:19:32] >> procedural versus substantive is how put

[1:19:34] it.

[1:19:34] >> Gotcha. Um, I guess I would just ask,

[1:19:37] um, out of curiosity, um, you know, I I think at we made the decision at the

[1:19:44] last meeting to wait until we have our

[1:19:46] strategic plan conversation and also

[1:19:48] wait for some other numbers to come out.

[1:19:51] Uh, I I just get pretty confused. Um, I

[1:19:55] feel like in many like any other

[1:19:57] circumstance, I think that would be a

[1:19:58] normal thing to do. I feel like when we

[1:20:00] talk about law enforcement on this

[1:20:01] council, it just people kind of stop um

[1:20:05] thinking how they normally would and

[1:20:07] it's very frustrating for me. Um and I

[1:20:10] think that when I look at this giant

[1:20:12] thing on our board, it's our values. The

[1:20:15] first one is racial equity and we're not

[1:20:17] even willing to wait until

[1:20:20] a racial bias study comes out before we

[1:20:22] add to the police department. It doesn't

[1:20:24] make any sense to me. um and the fact

[1:20:26] that we already made the decision and

[1:20:28] now we're doing this convoluted way of

[1:20:29] getting it back on the agenda when I

[1:20:32] think we all know that um probably after

[1:20:35] we have a conversation

[1:20:38] um

[1:20:40] after we have a conversation it would

[1:20:42] probably end up the same way. So knowing

[1:20:45] that this is a position, these are

[1:20:48] positions that are going to take years

[1:20:49] to fill and knowing that I think that

[1:20:52] this is an extremely important thing for

[1:20:54] the community and also for our values

[1:20:56] here. Um

[1:20:59] what what's the harm?

[1:21:03] With due respect, uh, Oliver, um,

[1:21:08] we didn't

[1:21:10] all agree for the same reasons of that.

[1:21:13] We agreed to wait for the numbers and

[1:21:16] until our strategic plan.

[1:21:19] I agreed to defer because I wanted us to

[1:21:22] have a conversation,

[1:21:24] which I put forward in our work session

[1:21:26] for us to put one on the books.

[1:21:30] I said personally I needed to sit with

[1:21:32] this information. That was my reason for

[1:21:35] it.

[1:21:35] >> I actually made a calls to all

[1:21:38] counselors explaining that. So I with

[1:21:42] respect

[1:21:44] we were not a consensus of we all agreed

[1:21:47] to wait for the this particular piece of

[1:21:50] information and for this it was not that

[1:21:53] was not what we all felt and also to put

[1:21:57] that we all are

[1:22:01] somehow not adhering to the values that

[1:22:04] are in front of us

[1:22:06] if we're not

[1:22:10] voting in the same way

[1:22:13] that's problematic to me.

[1:22:16] I would just add that um it is routine

[1:22:22] that this council ha has had before

[1:22:26] uh us opportunities to increase staff to

[1:22:31] reposition staff um outside of uh budget budget times outside of really um

[1:22:41] I I think that you know the the waiting

[1:22:44] for [snorts] something um that has not

[1:22:47] always been. I I can't recall one time

[1:22:50] where we were waiting for something when

[1:22:53] staff came before us with a request

[1:22:58] for um additional staff or repositioning

[1:23:01] of staff outside of our um budget

[1:23:04] period. So, I just wanted to bring

[1:23:06] clarification or or um just wanted to

[1:23:09] state that this is while I think people

[1:23:13] are calling this unusual, this is not

[1:23:15] unusual because this is a is a

[1:23:18] department of the city of Iowa City that

[1:23:20] is coming before the council to request

[1:23:23] outside of the budget time for

[1:23:26] additional staff.

[1:23:29] I would just add that I think what makes

[1:23:31] it unusual is that it is a subject that

[1:23:34] we know the council is divided on and so

[1:23:36] requesting

[1:23:38] a deferral in order for us to have more

[1:23:40] information I don't think is a big ask.

[1:23:43] I just want to add that based on our

[1:23:46] work session conversation earlier today

[1:23:49] when we the question before us now is

[1:23:51] whether we would defer until after our

[1:23:54] strategic planning session. We did learn

[1:23:56] that um based on councelor Salah's uh

[1:24:00] conversation with the executive director

[1:24:01] of ECOG who will be administering that

[1:24:04] process that they hope for that to occur

[1:24:06] in midocctober. So we don't have that

[1:24:08] scheduled yet but as far as our

[1:24:11] strategic plan facilitator is concerned

[1:24:14] they were looking for about a month from

[1:24:16] now for us to have that conversation

[1:24:18] just so that we have a good

[1:24:20] understanding of the time frame that

[1:24:21] we're actually talking about.

[1:24:24] And I also believe that we're not saying

[1:24:27] that we are going to the idea of hiring

[1:24:29] those people for the sake of what

[1:24:31] happened at the bed mall. So I I just

[1:24:34] believe that we already have three

[1:24:36] position available right now and they

[1:24:39] can just and even I my suggestion was to

[1:24:44] proceed with that adding maybe more

[1:24:46] money to make one of them is a surgeent

[1:24:49] and continue and just wait for us to

[1:24:51] evaluate everything and come back and

[1:24:53] see what exactly is needed and the

[1:24:56] strategic blind going to be like soon.

[1:24:58] So I don't know why we want to just like

[1:25:01] push it even though I'm sure 100% we are

[1:25:03] not between now until we get that study

[1:25:06] and discuss this we are not going to

[1:25:08] hire another three police officer we're

[1:25:11] not the the thing that we even don't

[1:25:14] want to wait that's really concerned me

[1:25:18] >> the reason that I don't think we need

[1:25:20] time to excuse me

[1:25:22] [clears throat and cough]

[1:25:23] the reason that I don't think we need

[1:25:24] time to defer is because this is

[1:25:26] something that we have been talking

[1:25:28] about for years since before I was

[1:25:30] elected on every single budget cycle.

[1:25:33] Something that we are continuously

[1:25:35] collecting data on on what our ratios

[1:25:37] are that's been in the study of the

[1:25:39] police for years and how we're

[1:25:40] offkilter. We've been studying um what

[1:25:44] we think is appropriate for a long time.

[1:25:46] And this year in this budget cycle, I

[1:25:49] would have voted for more police

[1:25:50] officers. But after talking with this

[1:25:53] group through a three-month budget

[1:25:55] discussion and individual conversations

[1:25:57] with individual counselors, I believe

[1:25:59] that pushing for additional police

[1:26:01] officers would have led to a split 43

[1:26:04] budget. I naively believed that this

[1:26:07] current budget that had no increases in

[1:26:09] the number of police officers was a

[1:26:11] consensus budget and that's why I went

[1:26:14] along with it. So for me, no, this is

[1:26:15] not directly just tied to the ped mall.

[1:26:18] It's the reality that we have 60, 70,

[1:26:21] 80,000 people in our downtown. And in

[1:26:24] the past, we've had two police officers.

[1:26:26] When you think about how many people are

[1:26:30] in Kinnick Stadium, that's that's fewer

[1:26:32] and there's like 120 police officers.

[1:26:34] Now, I'm not saying we should mirror

[1:26:36] that at all, but the the mismatch

[1:26:38] between how many people who are in our

[1:26:40] downtown, who are both members of our

[1:26:42] community, but also outsiders. outsiders

[1:26:44] that we can't necessarily reach with a

[1:26:46] lot of our prevention programming like

[1:26:48] that. That is something that I felt for

[1:26:50] the last couple years was inappropriate

[1:26:51] and that we needed to think more broadly

[1:26:54] about that. But I didn't push it. I

[1:26:55] didn't push it because I believe that

[1:26:57] our community wants us to build

[1:26:58] consensus. And I was naive. I was wrong.

[1:27:01] We didn't get there. We had a 4-3 vote

[1:27:03] this year. So for me, I don't need more.

[1:27:06] Or is it sorry 52 52 vote? Apologize. It

[1:27:09] was a reconsideration. But I guess

[1:27:12] that's that that to me was was is is

[1:27:15] this all part of one long conversation

[1:27:17] and we should continue to get more data

[1:27:20] and we should continue to calibrate and

[1:27:22] adjust and we're not going to just sort

[1:27:24] of have a moment in time where we're

[1:27:25] done talking about this. I fully expect

[1:27:27] every city council after us to

[1:27:29] continuously have these conversations. I

[1:27:30] expect them to. But at this point in

[1:27:32] time, I don't need more time. So on the

[1:27:34] narrow issue of deferral, no. Just a

[1:27:38] quick clarifying question for staff to

[1:27:40] be clear for the record with what you

[1:27:41] just said, Josh. Um, has staff requested

[1:27:46] three additional officers in

[1:27:50] the last six I don't I don't recall a

[1:27:53] time that there's been a request for

[1:27:55] additional officers outside of this in

[1:27:57] my tenure on council. No, we had um you

[1:28:01] know over the last probably 10 years

[1:28:03] we've had requests for individual

[1:28:05] positions sworn and civilian but not 30

[1:28:07] at one time.

[1:28:08] >> Okay. Just to be clear that there wasn't

[1:28:10] a

[1:28:10] >> and I didn't say that staff recommended

[1:28:12] it.

[1:28:13] >> Right. Okay.

[1:28:14] >> I specifically said that I talk to the

[1:28:16] downtown district regularly. They track

[1:28:18] how many people are downtown and it's a

[1:28:20] lot of people and I love downtown. I

[1:28:22] spend a ton of time down there and you

[1:28:25] know I think

[1:28:25] >> I was just trying to clarify cuz I I

[1:28:27] thought I heard you say we've been

[1:28:28] talking about this for years.

[1:28:30] >> Well, we've been talking about the

[1:28:31] appropriate number of police officers.

[1:28:33] It comes up every single year.

[1:28:35] >> This is the first time staff has

[1:28:36] requested this.

[1:28:37] >> You're right. But you're conflating two

[1:28:39] issues.

[1:28:39] >> Okay.

[1:28:40] >> So, we talk about how many police

[1:28:42] officers is the correct amount of police

[1:28:44] officers all the time. Do you agree with

[1:28:45] that?

[1:28:46] >> I don't recall. We talk about how many

[1:28:49] police ever

[1:28:50] >> every single year we've said no more

[1:28:52] police officers or I shouldn't say we

[1:28:54] that has been a demand no more sworn

[1:28:56] officers.

[1:28:57] >> I think all the problem I remember we're

[1:28:59] talking about the police is there is

[1:29:01] budget sitting there every single years

[1:29:04] is not being used and let us use it for

[1:29:06] something else and and you know because

[1:29:08] every year they don't use it because

[1:29:11] they did not hire the three police over

[1:29:13] that we approve. I think that was the

[1:29:15] only conversation we talked and it was

[1:29:17] like being seen to the community and to

[1:29:19] this council are we are cutting the

[1:29:21] police budget and that was not true.

[1:29:23] There is money was sitting there is not

[1:29:26] being used every year for five years and

[1:29:29] if we just bought affordable housing

[1:29:32] with that money every year $300,000

[1:29:35] we if we built two houses now we would

[1:29:38] have have almost 10 houses and for the

[1:29:41] five years. So that's what we were I I

[1:29:44] don't know correct me if I'm wrong.

[1:29:45] That's the only thing that we was

[1:29:47] talking about. We never talk about the

[1:29:49] ratio between the resident and how many

[1:29:51] police we have to have. We already above

[1:29:53] three officer in never being filled out

[1:29:55] for five years. And that's what we are

[1:29:58] talking about. And right now we say fill

[1:30:00] it. Fill the three officer and wait for

[1:30:02] us to like go and see the study and make

[1:30:05] sure uh do we really need to increase

[1:30:08] the police officer? Is that the solution

[1:30:11] for like preunding crime or or like the

[1:30:14] shooting in downtown or anywhere in the

[1:30:16] city? That exactly what we want to see.

[1:30:18] Maybe that's not the right solution.

[1:30:21] This is the recommendation by the staff

[1:30:23] and I don't believe it's based on any

[1:30:25] study that I know. The staff can come

[1:30:28] tomorrow and say actually we need 10

[1:30:30] police officer more so we can keep this

[1:30:32] community safe. But based on what that's exactly but I don't remember

[1:30:38] council Josh that we talked about how

[1:30:40] many beliefs we still have comparing to

[1:30:43] how many resident in Iowa City.

[1:30:44] >> I will say that we um did um every time

[1:30:50] with the exception of this past year uh

[1:30:53] where there was not an ask for

[1:30:54] additional police racial um police

[1:30:59] racial racials always come up. uh it's

[1:31:03] just a part of um any staff request. So

[1:31:07] yes, we did talk about staff ratios when

[1:31:10] it comes down to the police department.

[1:31:12] Now, I will say that most of the um some

[1:31:14] of the positions that we approved were

[1:31:17] specialty uh police positions. So, um

[1:31:21] maybe what we'll do is come back to the

[1:31:24] um topic which this is um and I'll ask

[1:31:29] um because we had a motion to defer

[1:31:32] which did pass. So, uh I'm going to ask

[1:31:35] Eric to just guide us on what this

[1:31:38] number two item means. This is uh

[1:31:41] returning to the original motion uh made

[1:31:43] by councelor Bergus and seconded by

[1:31:45] councelor Salah to defer uh this

[1:31:49] discussion the underlying substantive

[1:31:51] question of whether we should add three

[1:31:53] police officers to the force uh until

[1:31:55] after strategic planning is complete.

[1:31:57] Um, so I want to, if I may, refocus the

[1:32:01] council's discussion at this point

[1:32:02] anyway to the question of shall we defer

[1:32:06] until that later date or shall we

[1:32:09] proceed to the underlying question which

[1:32:11] was already moved and seconded at the

[1:32:12] last meeting uh tonight. And then of

[1:32:15] course if we uh if the motion to defer

[1:32:18] fails then council will have a full

[1:32:20] opportunity to discuss the question on

[1:32:22] the merits of whether we should uh add

[1:32:25] three officers. And of course that would

[1:32:27] be after um the mayor reopens public I

[1:32:30] believe is his expressed intent. Y

[1:32:33] >> yeah.

[1:32:34] And I I mean I would say in

[1:32:37] regards to, you know, my comments, I

[1:32:39] know that yeah, everybody views uh the

[1:32:42] values that we have up there. you know,

[1:32:44] people can have different strategies and

[1:32:46] different um opinions on what they mean

[1:32:48] and everything, but I I just think for

[1:32:50] me it's just kind of like a

[1:32:54] since we already voted to defer and we

[1:32:57] know that the stud is going to come out

[1:32:58] soon and we're going to have that

[1:33:00] discussion mid October probably about uh

[1:33:04] the about the plan. You know, I think

[1:33:07] that that's um I to me that just kind of

[1:33:10] feels pretty obvious. Um, but I like I

[1:33:14] said, I know I'm not saying anybody's

[1:33:16] trying to go against the values that are

[1:33:18] up there. You know what I'm saying? Or

[1:33:20] um, like obviously we can disagree on

[1:33:22] that, but um, yeah, that's all I have to

[1:33:25] say about deferment. I suppose

[1:33:27] >> I I I will say as far as uh deferment

[1:33:31] when we're talking about revisiting our

[1:33:34] strategic plan, I think we are all aware

[1:33:37] that we will not be getting into the

[1:33:38] weeds

[1:33:40] >> on

[1:33:42] anything and I think we mentioned that

[1:33:44] um in the last meeting and anytime we've

[1:33:47] talked about our strategic plan um yes

[1:33:50] we identify priorities and such um but

[1:33:53] even then once we get to those

[1:33:56] priorities ities. Some won't come before

[1:33:58] the council for discussion. Uh staff

[1:34:01] will run with that. Some will come uh

[1:34:04] for us before us on discussion. Even

[1:34:07] with that um the

[1:34:11] I do see this as a separate um item. I

[1:34:17] don't believe that this is based on that discussion.

[1:34:23] it it it it doesn't seem like it is the

[1:34:25] same questions

[1:34:28] um for the discussion that we're going

[1:34:31] to have once this do become come before

[1:34:33] the council. Um I think that the

[1:34:36] discussions on what the other ends we're

[1:34:39] going to be doing, we're going to

[1:34:40] continue to have those conversations and

[1:34:42] just like councelor Mo said, those

[1:34:44] conversations will continue even beyond

[1:34:47] you know any of us sitting here on this

[1:34:49] council. So I will say while you know uh

[1:34:53] we have you know this has been deferred

[1:34:57] for the strategic plan as well as for

[1:35:01] that and conversation. Um, one, the

[1:35:04] strategic plan is broad. Uh, we'll

[1:35:08] identify some priorities uh by this

[1:35:10] council and then when we do have

[1:35:12] specific conversations by this council,

[1:35:14] which we already have uh one on our work

[1:35:18] um our pending work list, work session

[1:35:21] list. Um even that I won't get into the

[1:35:25] specific nitty-gritty of the police

[1:35:27] department positions. Um, I think it'll

[1:35:30] be a lot of discussions on um and how do

[1:35:33] we include our um um police officers and

[1:35:38] police department with all of the AND

[1:35:40] services that we already have uh

[1:35:42] enhancing them as well as potentially

[1:35:45] well no I was saying as well as adding

[1:35:47] additional for our community.

[1:35:51] And just to re exc excuse me just to

[1:35:53] reiterate in in conversations that I had

[1:35:55] with each counselor prior to this

[1:35:58] session in talking about this, one of

[1:36:00] the things I needed to sit with and to

[1:36:02] as I did sit with this and digest was in

[1:36:05] fact that a strategic refresh is this is

[1:36:08] not the same situation as

[1:36:11] saying we now are in a place to do a a

[1:36:15] new strategic plan. We are revisiting

[1:36:17] and re looking at the priorities that we

[1:36:20] have

[1:36:22] and that this conversation to look at a

[1:36:25] holistic approach to public safety would

[1:36:28] either suck up all of the oxygen which

[1:36:30] is not fair to the other instances or it

[1:36:33] would not be getting enough attention

[1:36:34] within a strategic pri refresh. Right?

[1:36:37] So that was something that actually I

[1:36:39] talked to each counselor about and said

[1:36:41] so it deserves its own conversation. And

[1:36:43] so that was kind of part of what I

[1:36:45] needed some time and then

[1:36:47] >> it was all right to say so

[1:36:50] >> here's where I'm at. I appreciate you

[1:36:52] bring that up. Yeah.

[1:36:53] >> And that's why I also then brought up in

[1:36:55] the work session, let's have

[1:36:56] >> a dedicated session to talking about

[1:36:59] that. So

[1:36:59] >> and I think that's awesome

[1:37:00] >> just as a I mean I'm just saying as sort

[1:37:02] of a reiteration to to what the mayor

[1:37:04] was saying.

[1:37:06] >> The this isn't new right now. like we

[1:37:09] talked about this or I mentioned it that

[1:37:11] this was some of the conclusions that I

[1:37:13] came to after the last

[1:37:16] >> conver the last formal meeting.

[1:37:18] >> Yeah. And and I just and I just think

[1:37:20] that having that conversation

[1:37:24] before this vote would be more

[1:37:25] appropriate. We can disagree on that. OB

[1:37:28] like obviously, but um uh especially

[1:37:31] when

[1:37:33] yes, this has been talked about for

[1:37:34] years. And by this I just mean what

[1:37:36] direction do you go with how we how you

[1:37:38] address public safety? Do you just kind

[1:37:40] of like do the norm and just hire more

[1:37:41] police officers or do we look at other

[1:37:43] communities that have you know and I I

[1:37:46] feel like the and conversation and I I

[1:37:50] really do trust that we're going to have

[1:37:51] the and conversation but I think we can

[1:37:54] imagine some of the hesitation and

[1:37:57] skepticism that I might feel when you

[1:37:59] know years you know before I was on

[1:38:01] council looking at council when uh I

[1:38:04] just haven't seen that conversation go

[1:38:06] forward you know at a at at a pace that

[1:38:08] I think is um urgent enough. Um, and

[1:38:14] sometimes I feel like we're we're always

[1:38:16] going back to

[1:38:18] it's very frustrating when I feel like

[1:38:20] we explain ourselves um like I will

[1:38:23] explain myself my my positions the exact

[1:38:26] direction uh that I'm thinking and then

[1:38:31] I sometimes I feel like people aren't

[1:38:32] listening and

[1:38:35] the exact same argument that I hear just

[1:38:37] says gets said over and over again when

[1:38:40] I'm like that's not the argument that

[1:38:41] I'm making. So, it's just like I just

[1:38:43] want to be able to bridge that gap

[1:38:44] before we can vote on something. And I

[1:38:46] think the conversation that you're

[1:38:47] proposing could be a really good

[1:38:49] opportunity for that and that's why I'm

[1:38:50] so grateful for it. Um,

[1:38:53] >> yeah,

[1:38:54] >> everyone. So, this is the thing. If we

[1:38:57] held this conversation

[1:39:00] to strategic planning, if we held this

[1:39:03] conversation to our work session, do you

[1:39:07] think this council would really be

[1:39:10] focused in on the and or do you think we

[1:39:13] would be focused in on three positions?

[1:39:15] I don't this is a separate conversation

[1:39:19] from the and and the strategic planning.

[1:39:23] It is a separate conversation. If we if

[1:39:25] we combine it, the entire conversation

[1:39:29] is going to be focused in on should we

[1:39:32] hire three positions.

[1:39:34] This is a separate conversation and I

[1:39:36] think at least for me I'm ready to, you

[1:39:40] know, move forward to um [clears throat]

[1:39:42] reconsider, you know, the vote or it

[1:39:45] would really be the motion to defer that

[1:39:47] is on the um that we're going to be

[1:39:50] voting for right now.

[1:39:52] I just want to answer you know just

[1:39:54] comment on that.

[1:39:55] >> Yes I know it's separate it's completely

[1:39:58] separate from like two separate topic.

[1:40:01] >> It's a staffing request.

[1:40:02] >> Yes it's a staffing request but based on

[1:40:05] what who said that if we have three

[1:40:09] additional police that's will really

[1:40:12] reduced like the shooting and

[1:40:14] everything. I guess just like

[1:40:16] >> they're not saying that it would reduce

[1:40:17] shooting. They're st right now. We have

[1:40:20] people working overtime. They're already

[1:40:23] doing it. They're already working this.

[1:40:25] >> But what we already have three like

[1:40:28] position that we did not fill it out for

[1:40:30] the about three years. They can use that

[1:40:32] >> to reduce

[1:40:35] overtime.

[1:40:36] If we're talking about overtime only

[1:40:39] >> right now,

[1:40:40] >> those other two positions are what I'll

[1:40:44] call consider them specialty positions

[1:40:46] and they also, you know, can be filled.

[1:40:50] It it takes time as we know for them to

[1:40:52] get through the process. But I think the

[1:40:55] question that we probably should return

[1:40:57] to, not um to um is to really go back to

[1:41:01] anything relating to the deferment,

[1:41:02] which of course you were on that topic

[1:41:04] as well.

[1:41:08] All right, I'm going to call roll call

[1:41:09] at this time.

[1:41:10] >> All right, this question is whether we

[1:41:12] shall defer till after the strategic

[1:41:14] planning session. Alter,

[1:41:17] >> no.

[1:41:18] >> Bergus,

[1:41:18] >> yes.

[1:41:19] >> Harmson,

[1:41:20] >> no.

[1:41:21] >> Mo,

[1:41:21] >> no.

[1:41:22] >> Salah,

[1:41:22] >> yes.

[1:41:23] >> Teague,

[1:41:23] >> no.

[1:41:24] >> Wine,

[1:41:25] >> yes.

[1:41:26] >> Motion fails um four to three.

[1:41:31] All right, we're at item number three.

[1:41:35] Um because the motion failed, the

[1:41:38] underlying substantive resolution

[1:41:41] already moved and seconded will come to

[1:41:43] a vote at this um at this time. Um it

[1:41:46] was moved by alter and seconded by Mo.

[1:41:49] And then at this time, I'm going to

[1:41:51] reopen the public uh discussion uh

[1:41:54] period. If you are online, I'll ask that

[1:41:57] you raise your virtual hand. If you're

[1:41:59] in uh council chambers, I just want to

[1:42:02] get a sense of how many people want to

[1:42:03] talk to this topic. If you can just

[1:42:05] raise your hand. All right. We'll um ask

[1:42:09] uh people to come up. There is a sign a

[1:42:12] little sticker in the back that you can

[1:42:14] or cardboard in the back that you can

[1:42:16] prefill out your name and just drop it

[1:42:18] in the basket up here. Uh and you won't

[1:42:20] have to uh sign in. We're going to go

[1:42:24] with 3 minutes um for everyone. Um,

[1:42:28] typically we go about 30 minutes or so.

[1:42:30] I'll just kind of see where we land.

[1:42:33] Um, I anticipate u we'll be able to um

[1:42:36] have it. We're going to get everybody up

[1:42:38] here to speak. Uh, we want to hear from

[1:42:40] you. We're going to start um here. And

[1:42:43] please state your name and city you're

[1:42:45] from.

[1:42:56] Before

[1:43:04] I get started, is what do I do about

[1:43:06] this security alert?

[1:43:08] >> Should just close it.

[1:43:09] >> Well, I click close and it opens up

[1:43:11] again.

[1:43:12] >> No.

[1:43:15] Can you move it?

[1:43:19] » We'll just move it. Okay.

[1:43:23] Um so these pictures were taken near the

[1:43:26] ped mall that is 1 2 3 4 5 6 seven seven

[1:43:31] officers standing around in a circle.

[1:43:34] Um, so if we are currently staffing

[1:43:37] these positions with overtime and the

[1:43:39] council is seriously considering paying

[1:43:41] for a dedicated pedall beat permanently,

[1:43:43] I do think it's important that we think

[1:43:45] through how an incident might play out

[1:43:46] in practice as Mazir uh was talking

[1:43:49] about like the idea that this could

[1:43:52] prevent a shooting. Um, so like if a

[1:43:56] similar scenario to what happened in

[1:43:58] April were to happen again, there's a

[1:44:00] lot of drunk college kids downtown, as

[1:44:02] Josh pointed out, a lot of people

[1:44:03] downtown all the time. An altercation

[1:44:06] occurs and someone pulls a gun and opens

[1:44:08] fire. Uh, first we should note that the

[1:44:11] station is like a couple blocks from

[1:44:13] where that picture was taken. Um, and I

[1:44:16] have heard that the police response time

[1:44:18] to the April shooting was something like

[1:44:19] 43 seconds. I don't know if that's

[1:44:21] correct or not, but I think it took me

[1:44:23] probably 43 seconds to get up here and

[1:44:25] get the presentation started. So, I

[1:44:26] don't think you can get a response time

[1:44:28] much faster than that, but if I'm being

[1:44:30] generous, we'll say like having this

[1:44:31] beat, staffing this beat shaves 10

[1:44:33] seconds off police response time because

[1:44:34] every second counts in an emergency,

[1:44:36] right? Especially if someone's been

[1:44:38] injured. Except the thing is cops aren't

[1:44:39] EMS. So, we're not staffing paramedics

[1:44:42] on the ped mall. And in this scenario

[1:44:43] where a shooting has resulted in an

[1:44:45] injury, rapid police response doesn't

[1:44:47] change the circumstances for the

[1:44:48] shooting victim. they are still shot and

[1:44:51] they still have to wait for the

[1:44:52] ambulance. So now that police are on the

[1:44:54] scene, there's a few different ways the

[1:44:56] scenario could play out. Let's say like

[1:44:58] in April, the shooter flees before

[1:45:00] police can apprehend them. That person's

[1:45:03] going to be arrested somewhere else by

[1:45:04] some other cop who isn't on this beat.

[1:45:06] And in that scenario, staffing

[1:45:07] additional police has done literally

[1:45:09] nothing to change the outcome. But let's

[1:45:11] be generous again. Let's say those extra

[1:45:13] 10 seconds allow police to arrive before

[1:45:15] the shooter has a chance to flee.

[1:45:17] Remember that we're in the middle of a

[1:45:18] panicking crowd of drunk college kids.

[1:45:20] How does a cop apprehend a shooter? Do

[1:45:22] they fire their own weapon? If one cop

[1:45:24] fires, will the other six start

[1:45:25] shooting, too? Will they be able to

[1:45:27] discern friendly fire from an external

[1:45:29] threat? What is the likelihood police

[1:45:30] disarm shooter in an inebriated crowd

[1:45:32] without causing any further harm to

[1:45:34] bystanders? And here in lies the

[1:45:36] fundamental flaw with policing as a

[1:45:37] response to violence. Because police are

[1:45:39] armed agents of the most violent branch

[1:45:41] of our municipal government, staffing

[1:45:43] more people with the means and

[1:45:45] permission to lethal force, to use

[1:45:46] lethal force makes it definitionally

[1:45:48] impossible to end violence in the

[1:45:50] community. We can all plainly see that

[1:45:52] the status quo was not working. If

[1:45:54] police proximity to downtown was an

[1:45:56] effective tool to prevent violence, the

[1:45:57] April shooting never would have

[1:45:58] happened. You cannot keep sinking more

[1:46:00] money into police, expecting them to

[1:46:02] solve problems driven by poverty,

[1:46:03] patriarchy, and alcoholism while letting

[1:46:05] the programs that could actually address

[1:46:06] those conditions go woefully underfunded

[1:46:08] in comparison. If you are going to vote

[1:46:11] on this issue, you need to understand

[1:46:12] that putting more people with guns on

[1:46:13] the pedal is the absolute shest way to

[1:46:16] ensure more people get shot.

[1:46:18] >> Thank you. Um, online, is there anyone

[1:46:21] that would like to speak? Please raise

[1:46:22] your virtual hand. And if you're in

[1:46:25] council chambers, I ask that you just

[1:46:26] come up, come forth. Well, I guess I'll

[1:46:29] just leave this up because I can't

[1:46:30] figure out how to close it. It's a good

[1:46:32] visual aid for everyone who wishes to

[1:46:33] comment on the issue.

[1:46:35] >> If you're in council chambers and wish

[1:46:36] to speak, please come forth now. Thank

[1:46:39] you.

[1:46:44] » Please state your name and city you're

[1:46:46] from.

[1:46:48] >> Hi, my name is Storma Brink. I'm from

[1:46:50] North Liberty, but I've worked in Iowa

[1:46:51] City for nine years doing various

[1:46:53] nonprofit work um at different

[1:46:55] organizations, typically serving

[1:46:57] vulnerable people and marginalized

[1:46:59] populations. I don't support adding more

[1:47:01] police positions to the budget because

[1:47:03] we've repetitively asked for

[1:47:04] alternatives to traditional policing due

[1:47:06] to the disproportionate targeting of

[1:47:08] marginalized individuals by the police

[1:47:10] and the violence perpetrated by law

[1:47:11] enforcement on the citizens of this

[1:47:14] town. I have concerns that adding more

[1:47:16] police, especially to the downtown

[1:47:19] region will result in the targeting of

[1:47:22] more marginalized people who frequent

[1:47:24] the area or live there, especially the

[1:47:26] homeless. Um, police do not prevent

[1:47:29] crime. They just respond to it. Staffing

[1:47:32] police at the schools has not stopped or

[1:47:34] reduced school shootings. And so I don't

[1:47:36] understand why it would make any

[1:47:38] meaningful impact on violent crime um

[1:47:41] when we haven't been able to do that at

[1:47:43] any other location that there have been

[1:47:45] a history of mass shootings. The

[1:47:47] response time to the ped mall as Kellen

[1:47:49] talked about was incredibly short about

[1:47:52] 43 seconds. And I don't think that

[1:47:53] staffing more police will make a

[1:47:55] meaningful difference in ensuring the

[1:47:56] safety downtown. But for the

[1:47:58] marginalized and homeless people who

[1:48:00] live there and frequent the area, I do

[1:48:02] think it will make them less safe and

[1:48:04] more likely to become incarcerated. I am

[1:48:06] asking you to vote no on adding more

[1:48:08] positions and I'm asking you to instead

[1:48:11] maybe consider funding community

[1:48:12] initiatives that aim to target the

[1:48:16] causes of violent crime. Thank you.

[1:48:19] >> Thank you. I'll have you sign in,

[1:48:20] please. Thank you. And um I'll invite

[1:48:24] the next speaker up. And I do also

[1:48:26] invite people to the back to get a

[1:48:28] little uh card so you can write your

[1:48:30] name and just drop it in the basket. So

[1:48:33] I'll welcome the next speaker at this

[1:48:34] time.

[1:48:39] » Welcome. Please state your name and city

[1:48:41] you're from.

[1:48:42] >> Mary McCann. I live in Coralville. Um

[1:48:45] Roy is here and half of what I was going

[1:48:49] to say had to do with that. So, I'm sure

[1:48:53] she's going to come on up here and talk

[1:48:55] about it, but um so I will speak for

[1:48:58] myself. Um

[1:49:01] I appreciate the concern about race as

[1:49:04] you know from the time I was a child was

[1:49:07] raised by a mother who dragged me

[1:49:08] through marches where I was certain one

[1:49:10] of us was going to be killed. Um, and I

[1:49:14] then spent my adult life southside of

[1:49:16] Chicago and coming here to work on the

[1:49:20] southside over here with people. Um,

[1:49:24] I believe in scrutiny

[1:49:27] and I believe that the chief believes in

[1:49:30] scrutiny. The problem here is that we

[1:49:34] have people working overtime.

[1:49:37] is not a good thing for law

[1:49:39] enforcement.

[1:49:41] having a peaceful life away from law

[1:49:44] enforcement is essential.

[1:49:48] He's trying to protect his people by

[1:49:50] giving him the opportunity to have a

[1:49:53] normal life. And I think you're

[1:49:55] overlooking that because we're all

[1:49:56] consumed about discrimination. We're all

[1:49:59] consumed about disparity. But I would

[1:50:02] ask you please to reframe what you're

[1:50:04] thinking about and realize that if

[1:50:07] you're not taking care of the overtime

[1:50:08] problem, you're not taking care of the

[1:50:10] police. And that is your responsibility.

[1:50:12] I was raised in a family with five

[1:50:15] religious practices.

[1:50:20] All political parties. It's a real party

[1:50:23] when we get together. Multiple races and

[1:50:26] the freedom to express their own

[1:50:28] identities. That's a given in my family.

[1:50:32] In their positions in law enforcement in

[1:50:34] the military, none of their religions or

[1:50:36] political beliefs are part of their

[1:50:38] career work. And that's the only thing

[1:50:41] we agree on when we all sit together and

[1:50:44] discuss the problems. I've been outraged

[1:50:46] by the Iowa laws that were codified

[1:50:50] using a religion to end personal

[1:50:52] freedoms we once valued in Iowa. Banning

[1:50:55] books, ending parental rights, bodily

[1:50:57] autonomy, the list goes on and on and

[1:50:59] all of you know it.

[1:51:02] I am sad to say that when we talk about

[1:51:05] the anti-law enforcement group,

[1:51:09] you do the same thing my family does.

[1:51:13] Religions punish one group of people to

[1:51:17] achieve their own utopia.

[1:51:19] And I see much of that going on when we

[1:51:22] talk about anti-law enforcement. So I

[1:51:25] will ask you to rethink some of your

[1:51:26] thoughts and understand again the

[1:51:29] well-being of the police officers and

[1:51:31] law enforcement is really essential if

[1:51:33] you want them to handle themselves with

[1:51:36] absolute decorum

[1:51:38] and safety.

[1:51:40] >> Thank you. I'm going to um ask you to

[1:51:42] state your name for the record um

[1:51:44] because you did not mention your name

[1:51:45] when you first started.

[1:51:46] >> Mary McCann.

[1:51:47] >> Thanks. And I'll have you sign in. I'll

[1:51:50] ask the next speaker to come forth and

[1:51:53] um we'll have you state your name and

[1:51:55] the city you're from.

[1:52:00] Welcome.

[1:52:02] Thank you. My name is Nick Kangelo. Live

[1:52:05] here in Iowa City. Actually, for the

[1:52:07] last 10 years, I've been living right in

[1:52:09] downtown in the Ped Mall. So, I get to

[1:52:11] see on a daily basis some of the

[1:52:13] changes, some of the things going on.

[1:52:15] The ped mall, the whole downtown is a

[1:52:17] pretty crowded area. when we have

[1:52:20] athletic events, cultural events, it is

[1:52:23] a whole different situation that many

[1:52:26] other towns don't have that that kind of

[1:52:28] influx. What I have found in my own life

[1:52:31] is that people act much better towards

[1:52:34] one another when they feel safe, when

[1:52:37] they feel that what's precious to them

[1:52:40] is taken care of. One of the amazing

[1:52:42] things is our ped mall is a thoroughare

[1:52:46] for college students. And right in the

[1:52:48] middle, the damn thorough here, we have

[1:52:50] a children's playground. Brilliant.

[1:52:53] Because what it says is that there's

[1:52:55] room for different age groups. We have a

[1:52:58] library right there. We have senior

[1:53:00] citizen center very close. This is a

[1:53:03] town that actually is quite well

[1:53:05] integrated. A lot of university towns,

[1:53:08] the university is on the hill and the

[1:53:10] town is elsewhere. We're much more

[1:53:13] integrated than that. When I look down

[1:53:15] and I see the the children's playground,

[1:53:17] there are kids from all ethnic

[1:53:19] backgrounds, colors, playing and the one

[1:53:22] thing I know as a grandparent that all

[1:53:24] the grandparents, all the parents there,

[1:53:26] the one thing they would not dispute is

[1:53:29] they like knowing that their kids are

[1:53:32] safe. Police is one of the ways we

[1:53:35] should assure that. I think having more

[1:53:38] police is really going to be important

[1:53:41] to our future and to our present. But

[1:53:44] just adding police is not enough. What

[1:53:47] we need to add are police who are

[1:53:51] trained in the values of this community.

[1:53:55] I have seen often times, not everybody

[1:53:57] agrees, but I've seen several times

[1:53:59] going by where police actually use the

[1:54:02] words that diffuse situations. They're

[1:54:06] strong in being there for people. And so

[1:54:09] if we can have more of that kind of

[1:54:11] police, then we're really getting

[1:54:13] somewhere.

[1:54:15] >> We will all be a much better community,

[1:54:17] if we feel safe towards one another. And

[1:54:20] I trust you that if we do hire more

[1:54:22] police that you will see to it that they

[1:54:26] are trained in the kinds of values that

[1:54:28] really matter to us. Thank you.

[1:54:30] >> Thank you. I'll ask the next speaker to

[1:54:32] come forth.

[1:54:42] Please state welcome. Please state your

[1:54:44] name and city you're from.

[1:54:45] >> I'm Lisa Martinick from Iowa City. Uh

[1:54:49] and I'm curious what outside research

[1:54:51] y'all consulted to decide on this course

[1:54:53] of action, that being the addition of uh

[1:54:55] three police officers. Uh and what

[1:54:58] exactly do you hope to achieve? And if

[1:55:00] it is for example a reduction of

[1:55:02] violence downtown

[1:55:04] uh what gives you the reason what data

[1:55:07] gives you the reason to think that that

[1:55:10] will achieve it. Uh local context always

[1:55:13] has to carry weight of course but

[1:55:15] ignoring the extent body of evidential

[1:55:17] research is a disservice to community

[1:55:20] and I I think it's part of your jobs

[1:55:21] right. I understand the desire to

[1:55:24] address perceived problem points but not

[1:55:26] every day is for example a game day. I'd

[1:55:29] appreciate appreciate a datainformed

[1:55:31] plan reasonably based on expected

[1:55:33] outcomes before hiring positions. Why

[1:55:37] three? Is it a magic number? You said

[1:55:40] people are already working overtime to

[1:55:42] cover this. Do we have any real reason

[1:55:44] to think that specifically is having the

[1:55:47] desired effect?

[1:55:49] Local data is necessary and great, but

[1:55:51] that alone cannot inform a good

[1:55:54] decision.

[1:55:56] And were you all aware that just now

[1:55:58] while we were all talking, a member of

[1:56:00] ICPD shot someone at a trailer park?

[1:56:04] Thank you.

[1:56:05] >> Thank you.

[1:56:08] I'll call up the next speaker, please.

[1:56:12] state your name and city you're

[1:56:14] from.

[1:56:14] >> I am Jess Lang. I live in North Liberty

[1:56:16] and I work for Johnson County.

[1:56:18] >> Welcome.

[1:56:18] >> Um, I was born with a gift to Gab, but I

[1:56:21] am not a public speaker, so I wrote

[1:56:22] something so that I don't forget

[1:56:24] anything. Um, so I am Jess Lang. I'm the

[1:56:26] coordinator for the Johnson County

[1:56:28] Community Violence Intervention. Uh, we

[1:56:30] work with people who are at high risk

[1:56:31] for gun violence. Um, I apologize that

[1:56:34] we weren't here for the last meeting,

[1:56:35] but our twoperson team was in Ankenany

[1:56:38] at a youth and justice youth and family

[1:56:40] justice summit. Um, the partnership

[1:56:43] between CVI and Iowa City Police

[1:56:44] Department as well as law enforcement

[1:56:46] agencies throughout the county uh is

[1:56:49] critical in the success of our work.

[1:56:51] Marcus and I spent a very long late

[1:56:54] night into the early morning at the Ped

[1:56:56] Mall the weekend after the shooting in

[1:56:58] April. Uh we heard nothing but

[1:57:00] positivity from the young and older

[1:57:01] patrons [clears throat] that they

[1:57:03] appreciated the additional officers and

[1:57:05] felt safer knowing that they were there

[1:57:06] and close by. We witnessed no negative

[1:57:09] interactions and actually witnessed lots

[1:57:11] of healthy exchanges with law

[1:57:12] enforcement, including lots of college

[1:57:14] kids displaying smiles and even some

[1:57:17] laughter after witnessing a horrifying

[1:57:19] event only a week earlier.

[1:57:21] This was not something even I expected,

[1:57:23] but it was a good welcome site and I

[1:57:25] believe good for everyone. The creation

[1:57:28] of this new team will allow the Iowa

[1:57:30] City Police Department to participate

[1:57:32] more fully in our efforts with CVI.

[1:57:35] Chief Lon and the department have been

[1:57:36] incredibly supportive, but current

[1:57:38] staffing levels often make it hard for

[1:57:40] their officers to participate. Having an

[1:57:43] additional law enforcement presence

[1:57:44] downtown opens up the possibilities of

[1:57:46] collaboration and outreach, not only for

[1:57:48] CVI, but for our downtown district, the

[1:57:51] university, and the community as a

[1:57:53] whole. Keeping the residents and

[1:57:54] visitors in our city safe is a

[1:57:56] responsibility of all of us. We will

[1:57:59] continue to work hard and find ways to

[1:58:01] keep our community safe, alive, and free

[1:58:03] of gun violence. with the help of the

[1:58:05] entire village coming together. As

[1:58:08] always, thank you for your continued

[1:58:09] support um of CVI. Thank you.

[1:58:12] >> Thank you. I'm going to ask you to write

[1:58:15] your name or are you going to drop it in

[1:58:16] the basket? Well, great. Thank you,

[1:58:18] >> Marcus. Marcus did it.

[1:58:19] >> All right. Um I'll ask the next speaker

[1:58:21] to come forth. If you're online and want

[1:58:23] to speak, please raise your virtual

[1:58:24] hand.

[1:58:28] Welcome. Please state your name and city

[1:58:30] you're from.

[1:58:31] >> Um [clears throat] Marcus Brooks. uh

[1:58:33] live here in Johnson County. I'm the CVI

[1:58:35] outreach worker. Um representing as the

[1:58:39] uh community violence intervention

[1:58:41] outreach worker here in Johnson County.

[1:58:43] Uh I agree with the Iowa City Police

[1:58:45] Department and UIPD continuing to

[1:58:47] partner with CVI to the best of their

[1:58:50] ability. It is a great idea and continue

[1:58:52] to strengthen the number of law

[1:58:53] enforcement in downtown Iowa City.

[1:58:56] We are confident that this will reduce

[1:58:58] violence or any attempts for violence to

[1:59:00] take place. most importantly ensures

[1:59:03] safety for pedestrians and students.

[1:59:05] Getting ahead of potential incidents is

[1:59:07] the key and presence or excuse me,

[1:59:09] presence is a primary form of influence.

[1:59:12] Uh CVI would like to thank uh say thank

[1:59:15] you to Iowa City Police Department and

[1:59:17] UIPD as well for their efforts. As the

[1:59:20] outreach worker of Johnson County, I

[1:59:22] will continue to do my best to further

[1:59:23] outreach to those in need along with my

[1:59:26] colleagues Jess Lane, coordinator of

[1:59:27] CVI, Neighborhood Centers of Johnson

[1:59:30] County, Johnson County Attorney's

[1:59:32] Office, and Johnson County Public

[1:59:33] Health. Thank you.

[1:59:35] >> Thank you.

[1:59:37] I welcome the next speaker.

[1:59:40] I want to see the hands of anyone that

[1:59:42] remain that want to speak. At this time,

[1:59:45] I'm going to ask you to raise your hand

[1:59:47] all the way up. Those that want to speak

[1:59:49] 1 2 3 4 five six those are the six that

[1:59:52] we'll have remaining speaking anyone

[1:59:54] online that want to speak please raise

[1:59:56] your virtual hand at this time so that I

[1:59:58] can make count

[2:00:02] I see no one please welcome

[2:00:06] please state your name and city you're

[2:00:08] from

[2:00:09] >> Emily Cross Iowa City. My name is Emily

[2:00:12] Cross. I serve as the undergraduate

[2:00:13] student government president at the

[2:00:15] University of Iowa. In my role, I serve

[2:00:18] as the voice for the undergraduate

[2:00:19] students. I [snorts] am writing in

[2:00:22] support of additional police officers

[2:00:24] for downtown Iowa City. The safety of

[2:00:26] full-time residents, students,

[2:00:28] businesses, and visitors in downtown

[2:00:30] Iowa City is an issue that deserves

[2:00:32] thoughtful and sustained attention.

[2:00:35] >> [snorts]

[2:00:35] >> Downtown is an important part of the

[2:00:37] student experience and thousands of

[2:00:38] students regular regularly spend time in

[2:00:40] the pedestrian mall and surrounding

[2:00:42] areas. Our downtown is frequently

[2:00:45] mentioned by students and their families

[2:00:48] as their appeal in choosing Iowa.

[2:00:51] Students should be able to attend

[2:00:52] events, support local businesses, and

[2:00:54] enjoy downtown all while feeling safe

[2:00:56] and secure. I recognize the concerns

[2:00:59] raised during council's recent

[2:01:00] discussion. Several council members and

[2:01:02] members of the public emphasized the

[2:01:04] importance of examining available data,

[2:01:06] considering alternative approaches and

[2:01:08] policing or to policing, excuse me,

[2:01:11] understanding the financial implications

[2:01:12] of additional positions and evaluating

[2:01:14] models used by other communities.

[2:01:17] There are important considerations

[2:01:19] particularly as the city enters

[2:01:21] discussions surrounding its strategic

[2:01:23] priorities and budget. The discussion

[2:01:26] highlighted the unique demand placed on

[2:01:27] public safety personnel in high density

[2:01:30] down in the highdensity downtown

[2:01:32] environment particularly during the

[2:01:33] nighttime hours.

[2:01:35] The city already values the relationship

[2:01:38] based policing through the initiatives

[2:01:39] such as the downtown leaz liaison

[2:01:41] program which focuses on proactive

[2:01:43] patrols outreach and building

[2:01:45] relationships with downtown businesses

[2:01:47] and patrons. Students [snorts] are not

[2:01:49] simply visitors to downtown Iowa City.

[2:01:51] We are residents, employees, customers,

[2:01:53] and members of the broader Iowa City

[2:01:55] community. Our [snorts] experiences and

[2:01:58] concerns regarding safety should be

[2:01:59] considered along with crime data,

[2:02:01] budgetary considerations, community-

[2:02:03] based interventions, and public safety

[2:02:05] strategies.

[2:02:07] I recognize that adding addition

[2:02:09] additional personnel is significant and

[2:02:11] long-term investment. The city's own

[2:02:13] strategic plan emphasizes both improving

[2:02:15] safety and maintaining fiscal

[2:02:17] responsibility

[2:02:19] [snorts] while also supporting the

[2:02:20] innovative public safety models and

[2:02:22] partnerships with community

[2:02:23] organizations. I encourage council to

[2:02:26] carefully consider how additional

[2:02:27] resources may be deployed effectively,

[2:02:30] what measurable outcomes can be

[2:02:32] expected, and how the city will continue

[2:02:34] to support approaches to community

[2:02:36] safety. As USG president, I will

[2:02:39] continue to serve I will continue

[2:02:41] serving as a bridge between the

[2:02:42] University of Iowa student community and

[2:02:44] the city of Iowa City. I appreciate the

[2:02:46] council's willingness to engage in this

[2:02:49] discussion and consider multiple

[2:02:50] perspectives. Thank you for your

[2:02:52] continued commitment to the safety and

[2:02:54] well-being of Iowa City.

[2:02:56] I look forward to continued

[2:02:58] collaboration between the city and the

[2:02:59] University of Iowa as we work for as we

[2:03:02] work toward a downtown environment where

[2:03:03] all members of our community can feel

[2:03:05] safe, welcome, and supported. So, I

[2:03:08] encourage you to vote in support of the

[2:03:09] additional officers. Thank you.

[2:03:11] >> Thank you.

[2:03:22] » Welcome. Please state your name and your

[2:03:23] council. Uh my name is Matt Hayek. I

[2:03:26] live in Iowa City. I served on the city

[2:03:28] council for eight years and I'm here to

[2:03:30] tell you it's a lot easier to be out

[2:03:32] here than up where you are. Um, I'm with

[2:03:35] a law firm that has been downtown for a

[2:03:37] hundred years. I co-own a small building

[2:03:41] downtown, uh, where our office and our

[2:03:43] restaurant are located. I spend a lot of

[2:03:46] time downtown. Um, and the property

[2:03:48] taxes on our building are staggering.

[2:03:50] And I do appreciate the budget pressures

[2:03:52] you face. But I'm here tonight to urge

[2:03:55] you to fund the downtown walking patrol

[2:03:57] request. I think a key ingredient of

[2:04:00] downtown's success, as was mentioned

[2:04:02] earlier, is the geographic integration

[2:04:05] of the university. It's often hard to

[2:04:08] know whether you're standing on campus

[2:04:10] or next to campus when you're downtown.

[2:04:12] And this sets us apart from places where

[2:04:14] the university is cordined off. Think of

[2:04:17] you and I. Think of Iowa State.

[2:04:20] But behind that success is an implicit

[2:04:22] promise from the university and the city

[2:04:25] that they will ensure the safety of

[2:04:28] those who live here, those who study

[2:04:30] here, and those who visit here. And if

[2:04:33] that promise cannot be met, if there's

[2:04:35] even a perception that downtown is

[2:04:38] unsafe, I think we jeopardize the

[2:04:40] university's interests and that of the

[2:04:43] community. We want the art lover to come

[2:04:45] to our festivals. We want the music fan

[2:04:48] to go to the Angler. We want the foodies

[2:04:50] in our downtown restaurants. And very

[2:04:52] importantly, we want parents to feel

[2:04:55] comfortable with their students coming

[2:04:58] downtown, especially when the ped mall

[2:05:01] is packed. My daughter attends the

[2:05:04] University of Wisconsin,

[2:05:06] and Madison is just as progressive as

[2:05:08] Iowa City. But when my family spends

[2:05:10] time on Madison's Pet Mall, the presence

[2:05:14] of officers there on foot, in cars, even

[2:05:17] on horseback is more noticeable than

[2:05:20] here. The city of Madison provides more

[2:05:23] police staffing per capita. And as a

[2:05:26] parent, I am comforted to know that the

[2:05:29] community where my daughter is spending

[2:05:30] her college years is doing what it can

[2:05:33] to protect her.

[2:05:35] This should not be controversial. You

[2:05:38] have a compelling staff memo and

[2:05:39] importantly you have a very willing

[2:05:41] partner in the university. My suggestion

[2:05:44] is to get this done and to send the

[2:05:46] message that this council is committed

[2:05:48] to safety in our downtown. I thank you

[2:05:50] for your service.

[2:05:52] >> Thank you.

[2:05:58] » Welcome. Please state your name and city

[2:05:59] you're from.

[2:06:00] >> Hello. My name is Dalton Straer. I'm

[2:06:02] from Iowa City. Uh, one thing I wanted

[2:06:04] to bring up, it kind of been mentioned

[2:06:06] before about the integration of the

[2:06:09] University of Iowa and Iowa City, how

[2:06:10] the lines are blurred, how a lot of the

[2:06:12] downtown traffic is students, drunken

[2:06:15] college students,

[2:06:17] uh, etc. And so one thing that doesn't

[2:06:20] really seem to be part of the

[2:06:21] conversation on this joint task force

[2:06:24] between University of Iowa Police

[2:06:26] Department and the City of Iowa City

[2:06:28] Police Department on sort of like who is

[2:06:31] shouldering that responsibility and as

[2:06:34] part of this new task force? Like why is

[2:06:37] it how much is the university providing

[2:06:39] additional police downtown as part of

[2:06:42] this versus the city of Iowa City? Where

[2:06:45] was that split made? How? Why

[2:06:49] questions about that?

[2:06:52] >> Thank you.

[2:06:53] >> Thanks. And I believe you signed in

[2:06:54] earlier. Is that correct?

[2:06:56] >> Yeah, that'll be fine. I welcome the

[2:06:58] next speaker.

[2:07:03] Welcome. Please state your name and city

[2:07:04] you're from.

[2:07:06] >> Hi, my name is Paige Libre. I live in

[2:07:08] Coralville. Um just a few comments about

[2:07:12] this is um my main question is basically

[2:07:17] are we adding police to feel more safe

[2:07:19] and it sounds like we are and I would

[2:07:21] ask you to consider if additional police

[2:07:23] officers make you feel safe

[2:07:26] how are your life experiences affecting

[2:07:28] that safety you feel and maybe consider

[2:07:31] that other people around you don't feel

[2:07:34] more safe in the same way that you do

[2:07:36] when there's more police around.

[2:07:42] When one portion of the community is

[2:07:43] suffering and their suffering starts to

[2:07:46] impact another portion of the community,

[2:07:49] we should not try to reduce the

[2:07:51] suffering of that second community. We

[2:07:53] should focus on reducing the suffering

[2:07:55] of that first community that's showing

[2:07:58] pain.

[2:08:00] I think the request for additional

[2:08:02] police funding and additional police

[2:08:04] positions is reactionary and it's also

[2:08:07] very predictable. We could have seen

[2:08:09] this coming. We could have talked about

[2:08:10] what what could be done already. I'm not

[2:08:12] sure if you have.

[2:08:16] And my last point is that if downtown

[2:08:18] businesses who are doing very well

[2:08:22] want police presence, they should fund

[2:08:26] police presence. It should not be on the

[2:08:28] city. Thanks.

[2:08:30] >> Thank you.

[2:08:33] Invite the next speaker. I I'll go

[2:08:35] online to Noah. Welcome.

[2:08:41] » Hello.

[2:08:42] Welcome. Please state your name

[2:08:44] and city you're from.

[2:08:46] >> Hi, my name's Noah. Um, I'm just here to

[2:08:49] urge y'all to vote no on expanding the

[2:08:53] police.

[2:08:55] Um, a previous speaker mentioned ICPD

[2:08:58] just shot somebody. So, at the bare

[2:09:01] minimum, we should maybe defer this vote

[2:09:04] on to see like if ICPD just, you know,

[2:09:08] murdered somebody. I think that's

[2:09:11] something, you know, maybe this council

[2:09:12] should take in consideration before

[2:09:15] permanently massively expanding it with

[2:09:18] 300k to half a million dollars every

[2:09:22] single year.

[2:09:24] I think we should just slow down this

[2:09:26] role to push more cops in our community.

[2:09:32] Like for years I keep hearing this

[2:09:35] council talk about this yes and yes to

[2:09:37] and the yes is always more cops more

[2:09:40] funding for cops

[2:09:43] and then the and just gets ignored and

[2:09:45] or we give them like a couple thousand

[2:09:46] to the ands while we're giving millions

[2:09:50] and now a half a million more every

[2:09:52] single year to the yes. So there can be

[2:09:55] no and if you keep finding the yes you

[2:09:57] can't have the and part of the

[2:09:59] conversation. You're precluding it.

[2:10:01] you're stopping it. Everyone in that

[2:10:03] room knows the state just made it so

[2:10:06] much harder. Everyone knows the

[2:10:08] financial situation of the city and yet

[2:10:10] they're saying yes, we're going to

[2:10:12] commit to half a million dollars to cops

[2:10:14] more every single year that we can't get

[2:10:16] rid of.

[2:10:19] I think that's ridiculous.

[2:10:22] Thank you. Vote no.

[2:10:24] >> Thank you. All right, we have just a

[2:10:26] couple more speakers. I'll invite them

[2:10:28] up at this time.

[2:10:32] Welcome. Please state your name and city

[2:10:34] you're from.

[2:10:39] » Yeah, my name is Nyx. Um, I live in Iowa

[2:10:42] City. Um, I just want to say that, you

[2:10:45] know, listening to your conversation,

[2:10:46] it's I just found it a little bit

[2:10:49] appalling that the strategic plan and

[2:10:51] the strategic values of the values of

[2:10:53] the community are not central to this

[2:10:56] conversation. I I believe that should be

[2:10:58] central to everything that the city does

[2:11:00] is taking into account the strategic

[2:11:02] plan and the values of the city. Um and

[2:11:06] OB, you know, as um councelor Wine

[2:11:09] pointed out the right on top there,

[2:11:11] racial equity, social justice, and human

[2:11:13] rights. I'm looking right at it. Um, and

[2:11:17] it just really I mean it really made me

[2:11:19] think about like what happened after

[2:11:22] the shooting that happened on the ped

[2:11:24] mall and the like vitriol like vitriolic

[2:11:27] racist white supremacist that was

[2:11:29] happening on Facebook that was

[2:11:31] perpetuated in our town and on my

[2:11:34] street. Um,

[2:11:36] where there was white supremacist

[2:11:38] literature dropped by white

[2:11:40] [clears throat] supremacists who

[2:11:42] probably live in our town. Um, but I see

[2:11:45] no conversation about making sure that

[2:11:49] communities, marginalized people, black

[2:11:51] people in your town feel safe when

[2:11:54] that's happening. Um, and they know that

[2:11:57] people believe those things. That's not

[2:11:59] a part of the conversation. But we are

[2:12:02] talking about

[2:12:03] half a million dollars to go to police

[2:12:07] and not making sure they feel safe.

[2:12:10] Yeah, that's all.

[2:12:12] >> Thank you.

[2:12:14] All right, I think we only have one more

[2:12:16] speaker. Uh, please come forth.

[2:12:21] >> Please state your name and city you're

[2:12:23] from.

[2:12:24] >> Boy, Saman Porter, Iowa City.

[2:12:36] » Good evening, mayor and members of the

[2:12:37] city council. My name is Roy San Porter.

[2:12:40] I am here tonight as president of the

[2:12:42] Black Voices Project and as a new

[2:12:45] downtown business owner preparing to

[2:12:46] open Roy Sand Soul Food Express in the

[2:12:49] old Capitol Town Center. Tonight, I am

[2:12:52] giving my full support to the proposal

[2:12:54] to hire three additional Iowa City

[2:12:56] police officers to serve downtown

[2:12:58] district.

[2:12:59] At our Black Voices Project meeting, the

[2:13:01] members in attendance discussed this

[2:13:03] issue and supported adding these

[2:13:05] positions. We understand that our

[2:13:07] officers are working mandatory mandatory

[2:13:10] overtime while also being asked to

[2:13:12] maintain a visible presence on the pad

[2:13:14] mall and throughout the surrounding

[2:13:16] business district. That is not

[2:13:18] sustainable for the officers, our

[2:13:20] businesses or our community. Supporting

[2:13:22] additional officers does not mean that

[2:13:24] we stop demanding accountability,

[2:13:27] fairness, and respectful policing. It is

[2:13:30] a great ideal and continue to strip the

[2:13:32] number of law. We can we can support

[2:13:35] safety while continuing to expect

[2:13:37] officers to treat every person with

[2:13:39] dignity regardless of their race, age,

[2:13:41] income, housing status, or mental health

[2:13:43] needs. These responsibilities must go

[2:13:46] hand in hand. As a black woman, a

[2:13:49] longtime community advocate, a former

[2:13:51] Johnson County supervisor, and someone

[2:13:53] who previously worked as a juvenile

[2:13:55] court liaison, I understand why some

[2:13:57] members of our community have concerns

[2:13:59] about law enforcement. Those concerns

[2:14:02] must be heard and taken seriously. But I

[2:14:04] also believe our families, young people,

[2:14:07] employees, visitors, and business owners

[2:14:09] deserve to feel safe downtown. As I

[2:14:12] prepare to open my business, I am

[2:14:14] investing in downtown Iowa City. I want

[2:14:16] my customers and employees to feel

[2:14:18] comfortable coming to the area, staying

[2:14:20] in the area, and supporting our local

[2:14:22] businesses. A safe and welcoming

[2:14:24] downtown benefits everyone. For these

[2:14:27] reasons, the Black Voices Project, and I

[2:14:29] fully support hiring the three

[2:14:30] additional officers. I ask the council

[2:14:33] to approve these positions while

[2:14:35] continuing its commitment to

[2:14:36] accountability, community engagement,

[2:14:39] violence prevention efforts, and fair

[2:14:42] treatment for everyone. I have listened

[2:14:44] to several people come before this

[2:14:45] council and speak about

[2:14:48] what black people and other marginalized

[2:14:50] members of our community supposedly

[2:14:52] want. Let me be very clear, you do not,

[2:14:55] and I repeat, you do not speak for all

[2:14:58] of us. The Black Voices Project has

[2:15:00] discussed this issue and the members

[2:15:02] present supported hiring these

[2:15:03] additional officers. Please stop using

[2:15:06] black and marginalized people as a

[2:15:08] reason to oppose public safety measures

[2:15:10] without hearing directly from us. We are

[2:15:13] not one voice. We do not all share the

[2:15:15] same opinion. You may speak for yourself

[2:15:17] or your organization, but you do not

[2:15:19] represent every black person or every

[2:15:21] marginalized person in this community.

[2:15:24] Many of us want accountability and fair

[2:15:26] treatment from law enforcement. But we

[2:15:28] also want safe neighborhoods, safe

[2:15:30] businesses, and a safe downtown. We

[2:15:32] should not have to choose between

[2:15:33] responsible policing and public safety.

[2:15:36] >> Thank you. I do have one last uh hand

[2:15:39] that is online. I'm going to acknowledge

[2:15:41] it at this time and this will be our

[2:15:44] final speaker. Uh, welcome Dan.

[2:15:53] You're on mute.

[2:16:01] Unmute yourself, Dan, please.

[2:16:14] You're on mute still.

[2:16:27] Dan, you're still on mute.

[2:16:38] Okay,

[2:16:39] I am going to I Oh, there you are. Well,

[2:16:44] I think

[2:16:44] >> I just went off.

[2:16:45] >> I think he went off and he may come back

[2:16:47] on. I'm not exactly sure.

[2:16:52] >> Um, we'll give it one

[2:16:54] >> minute call.

[2:16:55] >> Yeah, there's a chance that it went

[2:16:56] back. Yeah. Okay, Dan, you're

[2:16:59] acknowledged at this time.

[2:17:02] Welcome.

[2:17:05] » Hi. Can you hear me?

[2:17:07] >> Yes, we can hear you. Welcome. Please

[2:17:08] state your name and city you're from.

[2:17:10] >> Hi. Uh my name is Dan Kbble and I I'm

[2:17:13] live in Iowa City and I'm sorry about

[2:17:15] that. My app crashed. Um, I would just

[2:17:17] like to say that uh there's a lot of

[2:17:19] virtue signaling that happens with the

[2:17:22] council and a lot of you preach uh

[2:17:25] progressive values and claim that you

[2:17:28] support uh the best practices of a

[2:17:31] modern police department, but when push

[2:17:35] comes to shove, y'all don't. For

[2:17:38] example, this agreement will entrench

[2:17:41] ICPD's relationship with UIPD, which

[2:17:44] anybody in this community who's in the

[2:17:46] know will tell you that's not a good

[2:17:49] thing. UIPD is not a good agency. If you

[2:17:52] look at the PDM mall cops, you'll see

[2:17:54] some of these Pedall cops hanging out

[2:17:55] with UIPD officers who have a history of

[2:17:58] excessive force, targeting trans people,

[2:18:01] targeting activists. I mean, it it

[2:18:05] sickens me that y'all are going to be

[2:18:07] putting paying people to hang out with

[2:18:10] verifiably bad cops like Travis Tyrell,

[2:18:13] Ian Mallerie. I mean, UIPD is a horrible

[2:18:17] agency. And it sickens me that uh this

[2:18:22] partnership is going to continue. I

[2:18:24] mean, people like Sean Harmson,

[2:18:26] Councelor Sean Harmson, have gone on

[2:18:28] public record defending UIPD

[2:18:31] discriminating against folks. So, I

[2:18:32] guess it makes sense that people like

[2:18:34] Shawn will vote for this. But like,

[2:18:36] Megan, come on. Like, and like Bruce, I

[2:18:40] mean, y'all know what I mean, what this

[2:18:44] impact what how what kind of impact this

[2:18:46] will have on folks downtown. And it

[2:18:49] sickens me that you're going to be

[2:18:50] putting residents in situations where

[2:18:52] they will be harmed by officers.

[2:18:55] I mean, just go for more practical

[2:18:57] solutions to gun violence than the

[2:18:59] stupid proposal like this. Thank you.

[2:19:02] And sorry again for my technical issues.

[2:19:05] >> Thank you.

[2:19:07] All right. Thanks to everyone that have

[2:19:10] come before the council to give their

[2:19:11] comments. I'm going to turn it over to

[2:19:14] council discussion at this time.

[2:19:23] How am I was taking notes for all the

[2:19:25] speakers because there's always good

[2:19:27] ideas that come from community comments.

[2:19:28] So, thank you for those who spoke up.

[2:19:30] Appreciate that. Um

[2:19:32] >> I'm going to ask you to pull your mic.

[2:19:33] >> Oh, sorry. And I'm also like my voice is

[2:19:35] I'm losing my voice, so I apologize for

[2:19:37] that, too. Um thank you to the speakers.

[2:19:40] Um took notes for everything. Um, I

[2:19:43] don't know about EMS or on the ped mall,

[2:19:46] but it sounds like an interesting idea

[2:19:46] that we should look into and like I'm

[2:19:48] totally open to that. Um, I also

[2:19:51] understand that we want to like have

[2:19:53] people who are in the police force who

[2:19:55] share our values and I see that like Officer Frell is such a great

[2:19:59] example of that and I'd love to see that

[2:20:01] more of that. So like I mean that's something that's you know safety

[2:20:04] and well-being up there. Um, and then I think the thing that struck me most

[2:20:10] and and from the handful of emails I

[2:20:12] received for people who didn't want this

[2:20:13] and some of the comments tonight was the

[2:20:15] idea that we're not investing and not

[2:20:17] doing a whole lot of money and doing a

[2:20:19] whole lot of efforts and spending a

[2:20:20] whole lot of money on prevention and

[2:20:22] alternatives. We need to do a better job

[2:20:24] of explaining how much money we're

[2:20:25] spending on that, how much effort is

[2:20:27] going into that and apparently how

[2:20:28] invisible some of these people who are

[2:20:30] doing that hard work are right now

[2:20:32] because we are doing it. Um, and there's

[2:20:34] we should always do more. I've always

[2:20:36] supported it. I've always voted for it.

[2:20:37] And I've always voted for every budget

[2:20:40] that supports those efforts. So, I I

[2:20:43] will continue to support all of the

[2:20:45] things that are part of safety and

[2:20:47] well-being, police being one of them,

[2:20:49] and I'm going to be voting uh yes for

[2:20:51] this. Just kind of piggybacking off of

[2:20:53] that too, I I was thinking about this as

[2:20:55] well in the mil literally millions and

[2:20:58] millions of dollars of of things that uh

[2:21:02] um I've voted for uh many of the people

[2:21:04] on this council had voted for in budgets

[2:21:06] over the last 4 and 1/2 years. um you

[2:21:09] know the upstream kinds of things,

[2:21:11] everything from affordable housing,

[2:21:12] trying to keep people uh you know, money

[2:21:15] for shelter house for job programs for

[2:21:18] the even some of the more specifically

[2:21:21] talking about downtown. We talk about

[2:21:22] some of the uh reconstruction

[2:21:25] um that we did on Debuke Street and

[2:21:27] other places to improve things like

[2:21:29] lighting uh the alley there that's off

[2:21:32] of um they're kind of by where studio

[2:21:34] is. I mean, a lot of things. There's a gosh, I could go on and on,

[2:21:38] but millions and millions of dollars

[2:21:39] worth of upstream kinds of things,

[2:21:41] cooperation with CVI, and thank you for

[2:21:44] the work that you do. Um, and and um

[2:21:46] just all kinds of things that we we do

[2:21:49] on on these upstream kinds of of

[2:21:51] projects. Um, we also have supported

[2:21:54] other kinds of projects that have been

[2:21:55] violence uh uh intervention um up sort

[2:21:58] of upstream kinds of things. And thank

[2:22:00] you to former supervisor uh Porter and

[2:22:03] our mayor who I know have personally

[2:22:05] been involved in some of those efforts

[2:22:06] and have helped um help people get on

[2:22:08] the right track and be stay on the right

[2:22:10] track. And so so these things are all

[2:22:12] happening and you're right, sometimes we

[2:22:14] don't do a good enough job of making

[2:22:16] sure the public is fully aware of that.

[2:22:18] So um so those are all things that

[2:22:21] happen. Um, some of the things I like

[2:22:23] about this proposal specifically that

[2:22:25] comes to us and one of the things that

[2:22:26] uh you talk about other upstream ways of

[2:22:28] preventing violence and what we saw is

[2:22:30] we saw the uh the police chief in the

[2:22:33] wake of April 19th increase the amount

[2:22:36] of foot patrol and police presence

[2:22:38] especially in the ped mall in a targeted

[2:22:40] area for targeted times uh you know

[2:22:43] Thursday, Friday, Saturday night and of

[2:22:45] course April 19th I mean that wasn't football season right? So,

[2:22:49] this isn't going to be limited to I

[2:22:51] mean, we have a lot more people downtown

[2:22:52] during a football season than home

[2:22:54] games, and that's that's an important

[2:22:56] piece of this, but certainly this that's

[2:22:58] not limited uh to when we could have

[2:23:00] problems. So, the police chief and the

[2:23:02] police department uh ups and increases

[2:23:05] this patrol for a while to to basically

[2:23:07] try out the concept. And during that

[2:23:10] time, we learned here a month ago now,

[2:23:12] um that they were able to confiscate

[2:23:14] half a dozen firearms um during that

[2:23:16] time. that is an upstream intervention

[2:23:19] that other sorts of interventions can't

[2:23:21] do. [snorts] Um you're not going to have

[2:23:22] a social worker try and take a gun off

[2:23:24] of somebody and that's just and no

[2:23:26] social worker I've ever talked to said

[2:23:27] that that's part of their job. Um nor

[2:23:29] would I expect it to be. So those are

[2:23:32] important having presence and and

[2:23:34] somebody did mention that that sometimes

[2:23:35] that presence plays is one of the things

[2:23:37] that plays a role in preventing

[2:23:39] violence. Now, I've been I was curious

[2:23:41] as to sort of it's been a while since

[2:23:43] I've been hanging out downtown uh you

[2:23:45] know around bar bar close. Um so I

[2:23:48] actually did a ride along and walk along

[2:23:50] with the ICPD um here a couple of

[2:23:53] Fridays ago and was able to sort of

[2:23:55] witness that kind of thing and what some

[2:23:57] of the other kinds of interventions

[2:23:58] things that I hadn't thought of look

[2:24:00] like. And part of that, people have

[2:24:02] mentioned, you know, the alcohol use and

[2:24:04] uh, you know, I I think it's fine for

[2:24:06] people to come downtown and enjoy

[2:24:08] themselves and have a good time, but I

[2:24:10] also watched our officers and and always

[2:24:12] in a professional manner sort of uh, you

[2:24:15] know, go in, you know, take fake IDs and that kind of thing prevents, you

[2:24:20] know, young people who are learning sort

[2:24:21] of their limits from over excessive

[2:24:23] drinking. So, it's not just about

[2:24:24] shootings. There are other kinds of bad

[2:24:27] things that can happen in that

[2:24:28] environment. And again, that's something

[2:24:30] unique to that role that that they can

[2:24:32] do, that law enforcement can do. So, all

[2:24:35] of those things together with the

[2:24:37] proposal that has a very targeted space,

[2:24:40] um, a place, a very targeted time, you

[2:24:43] know, the evenings, um, you know,

[2:24:45] Wednesday through Saturday, um, for a

[2:24:47] very specific purpose, and the foot

[2:24:49] patrol, I think all of that makes sense.

[2:24:52] But to me, what really pushes this over

[2:24:54] the top is the component that can't

[2:24:57] happen yet because it's not just about

[2:24:58] the overtime, it's about the community

[2:25:00] policing aspect. So when the proposal

[2:25:03] that came to us included that community

[2:25:05] policing where they've got officers who

[2:25:07] will be consistently downtown um on

[2:25:11] those nights, both the busy and the slow

[2:25:13] nights, building relationships with the

[2:25:16] people that work in downtown from, you

[2:25:18] know, 8 9 10 11:00 and the overnight,

[2:25:20] the bartenders, the waiters, the

[2:25:22] waitresses, the uh you know, bouncers,

[2:25:24] all of those kinds of things. building

[2:25:26] those relationships just like we have

[2:25:28] right now in the daytime with our

[2:25:30] daytime liaison. And so extending that

[2:25:33] into the nighttime hours in a way that

[2:25:35] can be consistent, but you can only get

[2:25:36] that consistency if you have a certain

[2:25:38] number of officers who are dedicated to

[2:25:40] that to that patrol and to that mission.

[2:25:43] I think brings not just the kinds of

[2:25:46] public safety things we're talking about

[2:25:48] here, but other kinds of public safety

[2:25:50] because as we know from the daytime

[2:25:51] liaison that that officer is also

[2:25:54] building relationship to other people

[2:25:56] who are downtown a lot and has been

[2:25:58] instrumental in helping people members

[2:26:00] of our homeless population achieve uh to

[2:26:03] get into the system and and get off the

[2:26:05] streets and get into housing to get

[2:26:07] ahead of problems before they happen

[2:26:09] because they know people that come back

[2:26:11] time, you know, time and time again and

[2:26:14] able to do that. So that community

[2:26:16] policing part plus the benefits of the

[2:26:19] interventionalist nature of having an

[2:26:21] officer can some things only an officer

[2:26:23] can do. Adding all of those things

[2:26:26] together really puts me uh you know

[2:26:28] going to be a yes vote on this.

[2:26:33] » Um I think I'd just like to clarify. Um,

[2:26:36] I I I think that there's kind of a and I think partially it's like the way that

[2:26:41] the conversation is framed. Um, uh, and

[2:26:46] I also believe, you know, the general

[2:26:48] public isn't really privy to a lot of

[2:26:50] like the conversations that ha that have

[2:26:53] been had. And um uh I I I think people

[2:26:59] think that you know the

[2:27:02] well I speak for myself here the the

[2:27:05] issue has never really been what I think

[2:27:07] that the chief should do with his

[2:27:08] resources. If that is a place where the

[2:27:11] police think that they should prioritize

[2:27:13] using their department and increasing

[2:27:16] their presence there at that time. I

[2:27:18] think that that's the chief's call. I

[2:27:21] think that um we can achieve the same

[2:27:24] thing and everybody can get what they

[2:27:26] want if we were able to do that

[2:27:28] education if we were able to have the

[2:27:31] conversation because you know I hear

[2:27:33] like we're already doing all we can you

[2:27:37] know um and that's just not true. I

[2:27:40] mean, not all we can. We're doing so

[2:27:42] much, you know, and it's like I I just I

[2:27:44] feel like if we were able to actually

[2:27:46] have a conversation and listen to each

[2:27:48] other more, and that's not just on every

[2:27:49] that's on me, too. You know, I think

[2:27:50] that we should all do a better job of

[2:27:52] even in the hard things talking to each

[2:27:54] other, making sure we understand each

[2:27:55] other because what it comes to it is,

[2:27:57] you know, you look at programs like the

[2:27:59] Durham Heart program for instance, you

[2:28:01] look at Denver Star, you look at Atlanta

[2:28:02] pad, you look at the mediation program

[2:28:04] in Dayton. I mean, those are just a

[2:28:05] handful off the dome. And they are able

[2:28:08] to do the exact same things when it

[2:28:11] comes to increasing police capacity

[2:28:14] um without hiring additional police

[2:28:16] officers. It gives these communities

[2:28:19] people to take things off of the police

[2:28:21] department's plate and make them able

[2:28:23] and available to respond to the most

[2:28:25] violent things. Nobody's talking about

[2:28:26] sending social workers to a gunfight.

[2:28:30] Nobody's talking about sending social

[2:28:32] workers to um violent things. This is

[2:28:35] about a pro programs that are just

[2:28:40] proven to work. and um when they're

[2:28:44] properly financed, when they are given

[2:28:46] the opportunities to thrive. Um and I

[2:28:50] just really think that um you know,

[2:28:52] we're talking about diverting calls that

[2:28:56] is way more than three police positions.

[2:29:00] So, I think everybody can have what we

[2:29:02] want, you know. Um I think everybody

[2:29:04] could be happy in this situation. I I

[2:29:06] think that the conversations around

[2:29:07] policing is hard. I think that the

[2:29:09] average people are not like, you know,

[2:29:12] really really really looking into these

[2:29:13] things. And I think that when we talk to

[2:29:15] our community partners who are already

[2:29:17] providing like a very bare bones version

[2:29:20] of these things, um they say they they

[2:29:23] can come out and say this is these are

[2:29:24] the resources that we might need, you

[2:29:26] know, and those are the conversations I

[2:29:27] would love to have. And I know we all

[2:29:29] want the same thing. We all want a safe

[2:29:30] downtown. Like I've said before, I live

[2:29:32] there. It's chaotic um at 2 am when I'm

[2:29:36] woken up by drunk people throwing

[2:29:38] objects at my house. But um yeah, I I

[2:29:42] just really think that um you know, the

[2:29:45] conversation has been framed as if we

[2:29:48] are voting yes or no for this thing to

[2:29:50] exist. whether or not

[2:29:53] when speaking for myself, I just think

[2:29:56] we can provide the same thing through

[2:29:57] different means that would not only

[2:30:00] potentially like save the city money,

[2:30:02] but it would provide an essential

[2:30:04] service that when you look at the places

[2:30:06] with these types of programs, it's just invaluable to those

[2:30:11] communities and it's hard for them to

[2:30:13] walk them back because they're so

[2:30:14] popular. Um, and so yeah, I I I think we

[2:30:19] want the same thing. we disagree on

[2:30:20] strategy and that's okay and if we vote

[2:30:22] to have these extra police officers, you

[2:30:24] know, um I'm just looking forward to

[2:30:27] have that and conversation with all of

[2:30:28] y'all because I know we all want the

[2:30:30] same thing and um I appreciate you

[2:30:34] again, Megan, for uh earlier in the work

[2:30:37] session bringing up that we should have

[2:30:38] this holistic public safety

[2:30:40] conversation. Um so I'm looking forward

[2:30:43] to it.

[2:30:47] » Thank you for that. I guess I come full

[2:30:50] circle to when actually the this was

[2:30:52] first introduced at the work session uh

[2:30:55] by uh Jeff and and Chief Lion

[2:30:59] um with their proposal.

[2:31:01] >> I always say Lion I apologize to both

[2:31:05] Chief Lion and Chief Lon. Um,

[2:31:08] and I talked about I'm yes and and I

[2:31:11] think that what has what I'm hearing

[2:31:12] more and more is that actually um, and I

[2:31:15] don't think anybody on the dis here is

[2:31:17] going to really disagree that we aren't

[2:31:19] having a yes and conversation. We're

[2:31:21] trying to figure out it's a

[2:31:24] no and conversation. And I think

[2:31:29] I am I still am a yes and yes I see

[2:31:34] the reason for having three more

[2:31:37] officers who are dedicated to the

[2:31:38] downtown for a very specific purpose and

[2:31:41] a specific reason for doing work that I

[2:31:44] think could be really helpful for the

[2:31:46] downtown area. not just the ped mall but

[2:31:48] for that area A as well where there are

[2:31:51] also crimes being committed usually um

[2:31:55] unfortunately assaults

[2:31:57] um and I think that there can be both a

[2:32:01] response mechanism but I think there's a

[2:32:03] lot in terms of community policing that

[2:32:05] can actually be um proactive

[2:32:09] from the police um I I take a lot of

[2:32:13] stock and heart from the fact that in

[2:32:15] fact six weapons were taken off of the

[2:32:17] ped mall without incident since April.

[2:32:20] In terms of data, I like that data. Um,

[2:32:24] and I'm an and because yes, there is

[2:32:27] more we can do. Yes, we need to continue

[2:32:30] looking at it. And we do have programs

[2:32:34] that I don't think we have highlighted

[2:32:36] and and and brought to surface or it

[2:32:39] talked about how can we make them more

[2:32:43] successful? How can we make them more

[2:32:45] robust? Um, you know, in part it's

[2:32:48] because they're buried within not

[2:32:51] specific conversations about public

[2:32:54] safety, but in terms of what we're

[2:32:56] already doing in terms of how we're

[2:32:58] funding aid to agencies, about the work

[2:33:00] the community is doing, about the work

[2:33:03] that um our substance use agencies are

[2:33:06] doing, about how we are working with um

[2:33:09] housing, how we are working with mental

[2:33:12] health. We're funding those every year

[2:33:15] through our regular budget. And that is

[2:33:17] a part of proactive

[2:33:20] foundational. How do we try to prevent

[2:33:23] some of this? Is it enough? No.

[2:33:27] And we need to do more. So, I am I just

[2:33:29] want to reiterate my commitment to this

[2:33:31] while saying it it it

[2:33:35] is more nuance than saying

[2:33:39] y'all aren't doing anything or you're

[2:33:42] all doing it completely wrong or you

[2:33:46] know and and I know that

[2:33:48] passions get hot

[2:33:50] and we all have particular ways in which

[2:33:52] we're looking towards this but um I'm

[2:33:56] committed as I said from the work

[2:33:58] session and then had to sit back, digest

[2:34:02] a lot of information and I returned and

[2:34:05] I am full circle. I am a yes to this to

[2:34:08] these positions and I am committed to

[2:34:10] saying okay and what else are we doing

[2:34:14] in a continuum so that we have a fuller

[2:34:17] more robust way of looking at public

[2:34:18] safety and approaching it.

[2:34:22] >> I'm just really glad we're actually

[2:34:24] having this conversation. It's tense.

[2:34:26] It's difficult. I hear people, you know,

[2:34:28] in in different places maybe than we've

[2:34:32] been before and been able to speak

[2:34:34] publicly about. I think fundamentally

[2:34:37] differences of opinion are about the

[2:34:40] degree and speed and level of

[2:34:42] investment. You know, I think about my

[2:34:44] conversations with Chief Lon and with

[2:34:46] Jeff is, you know, we consistently come

[2:34:49] back to like, wow, we agree on so much.

[2:34:51] It's just I want to push harder and

[2:34:54] faster and, you know, have a commitment

[2:34:57] to going deeper on ways to keep our

[2:35:01] community safe that aren't so focused on

[2:35:04] traditional policing. And I think about,

[2:35:07] you know, I'm glad to see Matt Hayek

[2:35:08] here. I think about the 21 ordinance and

[2:35:11] the 500t rule were things that happened

[2:35:14] in our downtown in my lifetime that I

[2:35:16] remember significantly changed for the

[2:35:19] better the safety of downtown. And I

[2:35:21] think it's, you know, it's been

[2:35:24] frustrating through these last couple of

[2:35:25] meetings to have this framed as there

[2:35:28] was a shooting in order to increase

[2:35:31] safety. We propose these three

[2:35:34] positions. I do think that that set us

[2:35:37] up for, you know, kind of a a fight

[2:35:40] about this one thing instead of having

[2:35:42] this holistic conversation. But I'm

[2:35:44] incredibly grateful that I'm hearing

[2:35:47] commitments from all of you that we

[2:35:48] really are going to have that

[2:35:50] conversation that it's been, you know,

[2:35:51] we'll be on the the work session list.

[2:35:54] And I think that, you know, when we have

[2:35:57] the opportunity to be a datadriven

[2:36:01] community to prioritize

[2:36:03] the values that I do believe we all

[2:36:06] share that we may come to different

[2:36:10] conclusions. That's why I asked to defer

[2:36:13] the item. And you know, I still want to

[2:36:17] have that bigger conversation.

[2:36:20] I think I hear you mayor and I

[2:36:22] appreciate you saying they have to be

[2:36:24] separate conversations. I do think they

[2:36:26] remain really really tightly bound and

[2:36:30] that's why we have members of the public

[2:36:32] saying I do feel safe or I don't feel

[2:36:35] safe if you add more more police. But if

[2:36:38] you know I it sounds to me for this

[2:36:41] evening that the the understanding of

[2:36:44] the majority of council is if this

[2:36:47] conversation is completed then we move

[2:36:49] on to the and and I

[2:36:52] >> and the just to be and I'm so sorry I

[2:36:55] know I interrupted but it's like and the

[2:36:57] and is [clears throat] I truly want the

[2:37:00] and to be as we talk about holistic is

[2:37:03] and how do the police fit into this and

[2:37:06] cannot be a synonym for other. It's it

[2:37:13] is a spectrum, right? It's additional.

[2:37:16] It's how is it as an ecosystem, right?

[2:37:19] It's it's not there's the police

[2:37:22] >> and then there's this other thing.

[2:37:23] >> No,

[2:37:24] >> they are as a fitting

[2:37:25] >> which is why I've always tried to talk

[2:37:27] to them and talk talk about this all

[2:37:29] together. You're exactly right. You're

[2:37:31] exactly right. So, I'm I I am not going

[2:37:34] to be voting to increase the the budget

[2:37:36] and the number of positions because we

[2:37:39] currently have unfilled positions. We

[2:37:42] have an average of $800,000 every year

[2:37:45] over the last, I don't know, 5, 10

[2:37:47] years, whatever the time frame that Jeff

[2:37:49] provided us, um, of unspent money in the

[2:37:52] police department. I understand the

[2:37:54] staffing patterns. I understand the need

[2:37:56] to create the desire to create this

[2:37:58] headroom. Um I but I also know that the

[2:38:02] chief can reallocate resources as he

[2:38:05] sees best fit and we will be committing

[2:38:08] ourselves to um one way of doing

[2:38:12] something

[2:38:14] that will be very very very difficult to

[2:38:16] undo in the future if we want to make

[2:38:18] different decisions.

[2:38:21] >> Okay.

[2:38:22] I wanted to start by saying that I

[2:38:25] really take the recent uh shooting at

[2:38:28] the you know and the violence in the

[2:38:31] community very seriously.

[2:38:34] Everyone should be able to feel safe

[2:38:38] downtown and throughout the IO city, not

[2:38:40] only even downtown and we have

[2:38:43] responsibility as a council to to

[2:38:45] respond to something like this.

[2:38:48] But I do not believe that every time we

[2:38:50] experience violence, the immediate

[2:38:53] answer should be adding more permit

[2:38:56] police positions.

[2:38:58] Before we we make that decision, I think

[2:39:01] we need to ask some basic questions.

[2:39:04] What problem are we trying to solve?

[2:39:07] What is the causing of this problem? And

[2:39:10] what evidence do we have that adding

[2:39:13] three additional police position would

[2:39:15] be defend this shooting or addressing

[2:39:17] the problem?

[2:39:19] We already have three police position as

[2:39:22] my colleague mentioned that have been

[2:39:25] vacant for years. I think was more than

[2:39:28] five years before creating three

[2:39:30] additional permanent position. I would

[2:39:34] like to uh to make every effort

[2:39:37] to fill first the position we already

[2:39:40] have and see what additional capacity

[2:39:42] that will perfect.

[2:39:45] I also think we need to distinguish

[2:39:47] between responding to crime and

[2:39:51] preventing crime.

[2:39:53] More officer downtown may increase

[2:39:56] police visibility and may help officer

[2:39:59] respond when something happens.

[2:40:02] But

[2:40:04] that does not necessarily mean that we

[2:40:07] are preventing the volumes from

[2:40:09] happening in the first place.

[2:40:12] And I want us to think carefully about

[2:40:15] what

[2:40:16] feeling safe means for different members

[2:40:21] of our community.

[2:40:24] I'm going to repeat that. [sighs]

[2:40:27] We need to do that. We need to think

[2:40:29] carefully about what feeling safe means

[2:40:31] for different members of our community.

[2:40:35] Through my work with immigrants and

[2:40:37] refugees community, I know that some

[2:40:39] people come here from countries where

[2:40:43] police and security forces have been

[2:40:45] associated with fear,

[2:40:47] intimidations,

[2:40:49] corruptions or abuse of government

[2:40:52] power.

[2:40:55] This experience do not simply disappear

[2:40:58] when someone arrive in Iowa City.

[2:41:02] For some immigrant refugees, seeing more

[2:41:04] police officer does not automatically

[2:41:07] make them feel safer.

[2:41:10] It can sometime have the opposite

[2:41:13] effect.

[2:41:15] Some people may be afraid to approach an

[2:41:18] officer, report crime, ask for help, or

[2:41:22] even is spend time in the area with a

[2:41:24] heavy police present.

[2:41:28] I am not I am not saying that this is

[2:41:32] the experience of every immigrants or

[2:41:34] every refugees or every black person,

[2:41:38] but it is perspective that should be

[2:41:42] part of our conversation.

[2:41:45] When we talk about what make our

[2:41:47] downtown welcoming and safety for

[2:41:49] everyone, we need to think about that

[2:41:53] police absolutely have an important role

[2:41:56] in responding to violence and protect

[2:41:59] protecting the public.

[2:42:02] But public safety is bigger than number

[2:42:05] of how many officer we have.

[2:42:09] We are also undertaking an important

[2:42:11] work around disparity and traffic stop.

[2:42:15] I want us to learn from that work and

[2:42:18] combine it with the data we have about

[2:42:20] this incidents and broader examination

[2:42:24] of what is causing this viant to begin

[2:42:27] with.

[2:42:29] If we are serious about prevention,

[2:42:31] we should be asking what are the

[2:42:34] circumstance behind this shooting?

[2:42:38] Are there a patterns as we have from the

[2:42:41] report? What intervention could have

[2:42:43] been uh what prevention could have

[2:42:47] prevented this situation before they

[2:42:50] escalated? Do we need more youth

[2:42:52] engagement, mental health resources,

[2:42:56] violence preventions programs, community

[2:42:59] based interventions or partnership with

[2:43:02] business and community organization?

[2:43:05] I want us to look at the problem from

[2:43:07] its root.

[2:43:09] Not only what happened at the downtown

[2:43:12] or somewhere else after 1 p.m. or 1:00

[2:43:16] a.m. or 2:00 a.m. in the morning after

[2:43:18] situation has already escalated. So I am

[2:43:21] not ready to support this the staff

[2:43:23] recommendation to add three permanent

[2:43:26] police position at this time. I would

[2:43:29] prefer that we first work to fill the

[2:43:31] three position. We already have as my CL

[2:43:34] mentioned continue this disparity and

[2:43:37] traffic stop study examine the

[2:43:39] circumstance and the data surrounding

[2:43:41] the recent volumes and have broader

[2:43:44] conversation about prevention and root

[2:43:46] cause. This does not mean doing nothing.

[2:43:49] We should continue using the resources

[2:43:51] we currently have to respond to

[2:43:53] immediate public safety need while we do

[2:43:56] this work.

[2:43:57] And if the evidence ultimately shows

[2:43:59] that additional uh permanent police

[2:44:02] position are needed then we can have

[2:44:04] that conversation.

[2:44:06] But I do not want us to decide on a

[2:44:08] solution before we have fully understood

[2:44:11] the problem. Our goal should not simply

[2:44:15] be more police present downtown. Our

[2:44:18] goal should be preventing violence and

[2:44:20] creating downtown where everyone is safe

[2:44:24] and everyone can feel safe.

[2:44:28] I will be voting now.

[2:44:33] » I want to say thanks to all the

[2:44:34] community members that spoke today.

[2:44:36] Really appreciated your words and um all

[2:44:39] those that that's been reaching out. Um,

[2:44:42] I think there's a lot that my colleagues

[2:44:44] have said and I won't go into all of it

[2:44:46] because I think the the heart of um,

[2:44:51] what I hear is

[2:44:54] what's before us now are those three

[2:44:56] positions and the and conversation. So,

[2:44:59] I want to start by addressing the end

[2:45:02] conversation. So, we've been uh, this

[2:45:04] council is committed to the end

[2:45:06] conversation. every last one of them. I

[2:45:08] already know that committed to the an

[2:45:10] conversation. We've done some elements

[2:45:13] of the an conversation. So, I don't want

[2:45:14] to diminish the work that we've been

[2:45:16] doing uh with the conversation where we

[2:45:20] um I think um where we are today is once

[2:45:24] again saying we're going to have the

[2:45:26] conversation. um the an conversation

[2:45:30] um anytime there has been a presentation

[2:45:34] to this council about the conversation

[2:45:37] uh something tangible this council has

[2:45:40] approved it um so

[2:45:43] I think we've been talking about having

[2:45:46] the conversation and the conversation

[2:45:49] typically comes um we [clears throat]

[2:45:52] we've had the conversation in theory a

[2:45:54] little bit um but we've not had a

[2:45:57] proposal before us um or the proposal

[2:46:00] that we've had before us, we've

[2:46:01] approved. There's been no proposal

[2:46:05] that we've denied on the and

[2:46:07] conversation. And so

[2:46:10] I I don't want, you know, residents and

[2:46:14] my colleagues to minimize um that, you

[2:46:20] know, that our desire for the ant

[2:46:21] conversation or that something's been

[2:46:23] presented uh tangible. Um, I've even,

[2:46:26] you know, made statements that if we uh

[2:46:29] put a dollar amount to the end

[2:46:31] conversation, if someone on this council

[2:46:34] want to put a dollar amount to have the

[2:46:36] end conversation, make that proposal.

[2:46:39] And so that hasn't, you know, has not

[2:46:41] been done. But nevertheless, I do think

[2:46:44] this council will have the end

[2:46:45] conversation. when it comes down to

[2:46:47] staffing, staffing patterns, um I do

[2:46:50] believe that it is this council's um

[2:46:52] duty and job to um hear from our staff

[2:46:56] and make a decision based on the

[2:46:59] information that we have. I I I hear

[2:47:01] that folks are saying that, you know,

[2:47:02] there's been no research, no data. Um

[2:47:05] this has this is a continuing

[2:47:07] conversation

[2:47:09] um that the police department has

[2:47:12] somewhat come before us in in past

[2:47:14] years, you know, requesting additional

[2:47:16] staff. We heard that in 15 years there's

[2:47:19] only been four sworn positions. That's

[2:47:22] in 15 years. Um and I think that's good.

[2:47:25] that that talks about what this council

[2:47:27] has um kind of that's our uh duty of

[2:47:32] making sure that we're looking at what

[2:47:34] the need is in the moment and you know

[2:47:37] even though there's been additional

[2:47:38] positions at time I imagine um that the

[2:47:41] council looked at the positions in the

[2:47:43] moment and made the best determination

[2:47:44] of what was before them um over I I will

[2:47:49] not um I can't overstate the need for

[2:47:55] someone that is trained to be doing this

[2:47:59] work downtown. Um, so we know that our

[2:48:01] staff is doing overtime work and I do

[2:48:04] believe that this is a part of our

[2:48:07] assessment to hear from the police

[2:48:09] chief. I heard um it already stated that

[2:48:12] the, you know, um the chief um made the

[2:48:16] call to put place the officers downtown

[2:48:18] and that's respected um and that's their

[2:48:21] prerogative.

[2:48:23] If we're looking at the overall

[2:48:25] positions that are open, um we know that

[2:48:29] uh the last time we had this

[2:48:30] conversation, nine of all the total 85

[2:48:33] positions, uh nine of those positions

[2:48:36] were not filled because people were out

[2:48:37] on leave or they were um in the academy.

[2:48:40] We have folks that are part of the

[2:48:42] military. They can be gone for a year.

[2:48:44] There's a lot of things when it come

[2:48:46] down to um just staffing patterns. But

[2:48:50] that aside, if the if we're saying that

[2:48:53] I heard 500,000, I heard 800,000 that

[2:48:56] the um police has not um used in their

[2:49:01] budget.

[2:49:02] Um so if they don't use that in their

[2:49:05] budget, um there's been proposals to,

[2:49:08] you know, convert allow that money to be

[2:49:11] used. We know that the police off uh the

[2:49:13] police department is always trying to

[2:49:15] hire. um they had just got up to their

[2:49:18] um full almost to their full capacity

[2:49:21] minus two but just when you do that

[2:49:24] there's another change in um you know a position there. I don't believe that

[2:49:33] I I I I believe that the staffing

[2:49:36] patterns are appropriate. The police

[2:49:38] department is continuing to work towards

[2:49:41] um the 88 number. should this be well 85

[2:49:44] number and should this be approved at 88

[2:49:48] um and I just don't believe that it is

[2:49:50] this council's

[2:49:53] um position to ignore what the staff

[2:49:56] need um as well as just making sure that

[2:50:00] we have well-rested staff that is

[2:50:03] attending to this call that the police

[2:50:07] chief has already made. So, I'll be

[2:50:09] voting for this and the and

[2:50:12] conversation. I do believe that um cuz I

[2:50:16] think I heard the majority of four uh

[2:50:19] leaning towards voting for this today.

[2:50:21] Um

[2:50:23] this will allow the conversation to

[2:50:26] happen without focusing on with because

[2:50:29] I feel like the conversation will be

[2:50:31] derailed to one focus and that would be

[2:50:34] three positions. So should this pass

[2:50:37] today, I really do believe that the end

[2:50:39] conversation will happen. It will be

[2:50:41] holistic that would include public

[2:50:43] safety, which it should. We should not

[2:50:45] be sitting there determining how many

[2:50:48] police positions

[2:50:51] should be appropriate. That is not what

[2:50:54] this council focus should be when we're

[2:50:57] having the conversation and we're having

[2:50:59] that holistic conversation. So, I'll be

[2:51:02] voting for this um for the three

[2:51:04] positions.

[2:51:09] » I'm going to call for roll call, please.

[2:51:11] >> Bergus,

[2:51:12] >> no.

[2:51:13] >> Harmson, [clears throat]

[2:51:14] >> yes.

[2:51:15] >> Mo,

[2:51:15] >> yes.

[2:51:16] >> Salah,

[2:51:16] >> no.

[2:51:18] >> Teague,

[2:51:18] >> yes.

[2:51:19] >> Wine,

[2:51:20] >> no.

[2:51:20] >> Alter,

[2:51:21] >> yes.

[2:51:21] >> Motion passes four to zero.

[2:51:23] >> Four to three.

[2:51:24] >> Oh, four to three. Four to three.

[2:51:27] >> I'm used to seven to zero. [laughter]

[2:51:28] >> Y lot of absences. Four to three.

[2:51:31] >> Yeah. Four to three. Okay. Um,

[2:51:36] could I get a motion to accept

[2:51:38] correspondence, please?

[2:51:39] >> So, move Fergus second. Alter.

[2:51:41] >> All in favor say I.

[2:51:43] >> I.

[2:51:43] >> Any oppose? Motion passes seven to zero.

[2:51:46] We're on to item number 12, which is

[2:51:48] announcements of vacancies new. Um, we

[2:51:52] have the Board of Adjustment, one vac to

[2:51:55] fill a 5-year term, January 1st, 2027

[2:51:57] through December 31st, 2031. Board of

[2:52:00] Appeals, one vacancy for a building

[2:52:02] design professional to fill a 5-year

[2:52:04] term January 1, 2027 through December

[2:52:07] 31st, 2031. Climate Action Commission,

[2:52:10] three vacancies to fill a three-year

[2:52:12] term. January 1st, 2027 through December

[2:52:14] 31st, 2029. Human Rights Commission. Two

[2:52:18] vacancies to fill two-year terms January

[2:52:21] 1st, 20 27 through December 31st, 2028.

[2:52:25] and one vacancy affiliate one-year term

[2:52:28] January 1st, 2027 through December 31st,

[2:52:32] 2027 in accordance with ordinance

[2:52:35] 26-4990.

[2:52:38] Parks and Recreation Commission to

[2:52:39] vacates to fill four-year terms January

[2:52:42] 1st through um January 1st, 2027 through

[2:52:46] December 31st, 2030. Public Art Advisory

[2:52:50] Committee, one vacancy for a art or

[2:52:52] design professional to fill a three-year

[2:52:54] term January 1st, 2027 through December

[2:52:57] 31st, 2029.

[2:53:00] Public art advisory committee, one

[2:53:01] vacancy for at large representative to

[2:53:04] fill a three-year term, January 1st,

[2:53:06] 2027 through December 31st, 2029. Senior

[2:53:10] Center Commission, two vacancies to fill

[2:53:13] three-year terms, January 1st, 2027

[2:53:15] through December 31st, 2029.

[2:53:18] Applications must be received by 5:00 PM

[2:53:21] Tuesday, October 13th, 2026. Item number

[2:53:25] 13 is announcements of vacancies

[2:53:26] previous

[2:53:29] 13A, airport zoning board of adjustment,

[2:53:32] one vacancy to fill a 5-year term.

[2:53:35] Airport zoning board of adjustment, one

[2:53:36] vac to fill a 5-year term. Board of

[2:53:40] appeals, one vacancy for a licensed

[2:53:42] electrician to fill a 5-year term. Board

[2:53:44] of Appeals, one vacancy for a HVAC

[2:53:46] professional to fill an unexpired term.

[2:53:49] Historic Preservation Commission, one

[2:53:51] vacancy for a Brown Street

[2:53:52] representative to fill a three-year

[2:53:54] term. Historic Preservation Commission,

[2:53:56] one vacancy for a Jefferson Street

[2:53:58] representative to fill a three-year

[2:54:00] term. Historic Preservation Commission,

[2:54:03] one vacancy for Woolan Avenue

[2:54:04] representative to fill a three-year

[2:54:06] term. Vacies will remain open until

[2:54:09] filled. We're at item number 14, which

[2:54:11] is C city council information.

[2:54:15] >> There will be an economic development

[2:54:17] committee meeting on September 30th.

[2:54:20] >> At 8 a.m. Come join us. [laughter]

[2:54:24] Can't

[2:54:26] >> um Valor Point, the VA,

[2:54:29] >> yes,

[2:54:30] >> uh housing uh is going to have its

[2:54:33] ribbon cutting tomorrow, which is

[2:54:35] exciting. From 4 to 6. Um there's going

[2:54:39] to be the um soul train block party. I'm

[2:54:44] so excited about it. Um a week from

[2:54:46] tomorrow, so Friday, September 25th from

[2:54:49] 6:00 to 9:00.

[2:54:50] >> Tomorrow was Friday,

[2:54:51] >> right? Oh god, I'm just doing it all

[2:54:55] wrong. Sorry. A week from Friday,

[2:54:58] September 25th, 6:00 to 9:00. And uh

[2:55:01] then there's a couple other things and

[2:55:02] if nobody else mentions them, I'll come

[2:55:04] back. Um, yeah, just kind of reminding,

[2:55:06] we talked about this earlier in the

[2:55:07] meeting, but the uh Iowa City Latino

[2:55:10] Fest is this Saturday in the Pad Mall.

[2:55:13] >> Um, and then the weekend after that,

[2:55:16] >> I'm tossing it off to you, Mos for the festival.

[2:55:21] >> The African festival. Yeah, I was trying

[2:55:22] to say that. But before that, this this

[2:55:25] week have a lot of event about welcome

[2:55:27] week.

[2:55:28] >> You know, if you want to learn more

[2:55:29] about it, go to the Iowa Greater Iowa

[2:55:31] City like website or the county. you

[2:55:33] will uh have all the event and when I

[2:55:36] think tomorrow also they at the county

[2:55:38] building they have also a fair resources

[2:55:41] fair uh from uh 7 from 5 to 7 p.m. And

[2:55:46] uh there is many other events continue

[2:55:49] throughout the welcome week. On the 26th

[2:55:52] we're going to have the African

[2:55:53] festival. Can't wait for that. This is

[2:55:56] become very like amazing event that we

[2:56:00] wait for it every year. Yeah.

[2:56:02] >> And I just want to say that it's the

[2:56:03] same weekend as October Fest. So

[2:56:05] everybody should go to both events cuz I

[2:56:07] think that's so exciting that Iowa City

[2:56:09] has things that are so wildly different

[2:56:11] and beautiful at the same time. So

[2:56:12] >> forget about Soda Fest and only a couple

[2:56:14] blocks apart.

[2:56:14] >> Sodafest. Sodafest Fest only like all

[2:56:17] within walkable.

[2:56:18] >> They got the craft stuff.

[2:56:20] >> Yeah. Make sure to go to all of them.

[2:56:22] >> All of them.

[2:56:22] >> Go to all of them.

[2:56:23] >> Yeah. Um I just wanted to say that I had

[2:56:26] at the farmers market, I had a very nice

[2:56:28] lady stop me and say she doesn't use

[2:56:32] internet or really like uses her phone

[2:56:34] much, but she said that she wanted me to

[2:56:36] state publicly that um our landscapers

[2:56:39] and the people who plant the flowers for

[2:56:41] the city have done an amazing job and

[2:56:42] that she really really appreciates it.

[2:56:44] So, I'll send an email as well telling

[2:56:45] them that, but I just told her I would

[2:56:47] say it from the disg

[2:56:52] » I was going to mention [snorts]

[2:56:53] um and shameless I was like making sure

[2:56:56] I couldn't remember the dates and

[2:56:58] clearly I can't remember days but um

[2:57:00] climate fest right September 22nd

[2:57:03] through the 26th. So that is so and I

[2:57:05] now have my so a week from tonight

[2:57:09] today. So next Tuesday through Saturday.

[2:57:13] So there's going to be events every day.

[2:57:16] >> Mhm.

[2:57:18] >> To celebrate that and Climate Fest is

[2:57:20] amazing. So lots of fun as well as

[2:57:22] educational, but it's also just like a

[2:57:25] lot of fun. So

[2:57:28] >> all right, we'll throw it over to our

[2:57:30] city item number 15, reports on items

[2:57:33] from city staff, city manager's office.

[2:57:36] >> Nothing tonight. Thanks.

[2:57:37] >> City attorney?

[2:57:38] >> No, thank you.

[2:57:39] >> And city clerk? No.

[2:57:41] >> All right, we're at item number 16. Can

[2:57:42] I get a motion to adjurnn?

[2:57:44] >> So move it.

[2:57:45] >> Second. Alter.

[2:57:46] >> All in favor say I.

[2:57:47] >> I.

[2:57:48] >> Any opposed? Motion passes. 720. Have a

[2:57:51] good night.

[2:57:51] >> Thank you.

[2:57:53] >> You

Iowa City City Council Meeting of September 15, 2026

Transcript