Notes:   Sophia from the Post-Dispatch attended this mtg.  At 9:17 pm, they went into Executive Session.  (I'd love to tape & transcribe those!)


SOME mtg topics:  Judge Charles Ford addressed the bd re the 4th amended TIF Agreement & paymts to the school;  copying the city's Bd of Ald mtg tapes;  (section 6) Levee IPR mtgs;  Vance Rd sidewalk;  (section 9 & 10) fabricated creek bridge;  Cotton Co lay-off;  Precision Forgings;  annexation south of VP,  & Treecourt is mentioned;  MW can't find copies of city's 12/02 thru 4/7/03 bd mins;  tree bids;  permits;  McBride sold 12 of 22 lots;  violation letters - occupancy;  727 Leonard HUD foreclosure;  inspections, Carol House,Valcour;  new school add-on;  refrigerators/coolers, freon;  DA asks Mike Brueckmann how public is receiving him (Mike);  MW's seniority & vacation status;  PP;  Crescent Woods streets, etc. 


Present:  RH, TB, DA, JKB, MW, DM, EM, JW, RC, BL, KT (Alderwoman Karen Thorson).


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  1 of


DM:  MW, Would you take roll please?  (see above)  Call this reg bd mtg of 5/5/03 to order.  (Pledge Allegiance)  RH, Do you have anything to add to the agenda?  RH:  Nothing, YH.  DM:  TB?  TB:  Nothing at this time, YH.  DM:  DA?  DA:  Yes, YH, I have 4 items;  the first item will be um, Kena Ave, one-way-um street;  the 2nd item um, would be annexation;  the 3rd item would be an executive session for personnel.  & then I'd ask um, do you plan on agendizing the um, school's request?  DM:  Um, Mr. Ford does have a speaker's request.  I don't know if EM was gonna bring up anything we asked last mtg about the uh - I'll go ahead & bring that up under the Mayor's Report.  DA:  That's all I have, YH. 


DM:  JKB?  JKB:  Yes, I have uh, Ken's Auto Body at 638 St. L Ave;  Precision Forgings & the bldg behind it, I don't know the address, I think they sold it, but I don't, there's no address, you might know, for it. 


DM:  JW?  JW:  Just one, YH, the consideration of re-pickling up, recycling at the Summertree Vlg Condominium Assn.  DM:  The recycling at Summertree Condos?  JW:  Yes.


DM:  RC?  RC:  Uh, yes, YH, I'd like to uh, uh bring up uh, seniority/ vacation time-type things being restored.  See if that's, if any of that's been goin' on or whatever.  I'd also like to uh bring up that I need an official uh, copy of the tape of the last bd of ald mtg;  & I'm gonna see how I can get that done & whatever I need to do.  I'd like to uh, check on the former uh city clerk's uh vacation check, discuss that.  & I'd like to also uh, the former city clerk's remaining 2-days of pay.  DM:  He was paid for those last day.  RC:  Uh, I'd still like to, to bring it up.  Uh, & also I'd like to uh ask if there's any situations uh, concerning the uh unemployment uh, how the city is, uh how the city feels about unemploymt, _ _, that type thing.  & uh, I, I wanna make sure that the school issue is uh definitely there;  so I'm gonna place it on the agenda.  & I'd also like to uh, ask for an update on the uh, Crescent Wood Streets & when the letter's goin' out, that type of thing.  That's should take care of it, YH. 


DM:  BL?  BL:  Nothing, YH.  DM:  KT?  KT:   Not at this time.  JKB: YH.  DM:  JKB?  JKB:  The stop sign at Benton St.  DM:  Is that 3rd & Benton?  JKB:  3rd & BentonDM:  Is there a motion to approve the agenda as amended?  DA:  So moved.   JW &?:  2nd.   DM:  Let's also add, EM's brought up, uh from the US Cotton, we'll add that to the Mayor's Report.  Motion & a 2nd, including an Exec Ses for matter of personnel?  TB:  I think John _ _.  ?: _ _ _ _ _ _ _.  DM:  That a discussion?  (voice vote-none opposed)  Mr. Chuck Ford, you've gotta Speaker's Request;  do you care to speak at this time, please? 


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  2 of


CFord:  For those of you that don't know me, my name is Chuck Ford;  & for the last 14+ yrs, I've served on the VP Bd of Education.  You should've received a letter from me uh, giving details about the school dist's request.  I know I, I know I've only got 2 mins. 


But uh, on our 4th Amended TIF Agreemt, uh, there was built into that uh, the city got $2.5 Million in bonding capacity to finish the levee;  & then there was an add'l Million $ in bonding capacity.  & the agreemt was uh, that that Million $ would be paid over 10 yrs.  We understand that there, because the COE didn't, didn't spend enough or that, that substantial amt of paymt, I've heard over $600,000, was uh, rebated back to the city.  You have that in uh for, for this yr.  


We're, we're making a request because of a budget crunch that we have,  & I hope, hopefully, what you'll do is - uno, with the state budget, what the state economy is like, public ed has taken hits across the bd.   & we could use - we're asking an accelerated uh, paymt of $200,000 out of that.  That obviously would be credited against the 10 that was agreed to well over a yr ago. 


& for those of you that don't know, how the TIF is funded.  TIF uh, basically, freezes the taxes in the TIF'd area at, at the base yr.  The add'l taxes that are generated in that area for the next 20 yrs or however long it is, goes to pay for the capital improvemts, in this case the levee.  Uh, hopefully, not just to be blunt, the lion's share of that tax dollars would've gone to the school.  Some of it would've gone to, to the fire dist;  certainly some to the library dist;  & some of it would've come to the city.  Uh, obviously, we, we think, we know that the largest share of that is, uh from the school dist & goes, for those of you that care, approx $660,000 uh, this yr, went into the TIF that would've uh, come to the school up there, for us to spend our, our money.  So it's money that we didn't get, but we all, we're all in this together to get the levee built.  & since that rebate's there & we need the money, we're askin' now for the $200,000.  Any ques, anybody on the bd?


DM:  Anyone on the bd have a ques at this time?  DA:  YH, it's not a ques, but just a cmt to the bd.  Um, uno, over the course of um at least 12 yrs that I've been on this bd, we've went to the school on at least 4 occasions, I believe, & asked that we um, be allowed to borrow more money.  Um, which, it is true that the more the city grew, the more their revenue came in, but indeed, it was money that would've went to them.  & each time um, we've been able to come to an agreemt to do that.  Um, the money being requested, is money that we borrowed with the intent of paying back to the school over 10 yrs.  So we're gonna pay it back at some point in time anyway;  we're obligated under this agreemt to do that.  So this is just, um as Mr. Ford said, an advance of what we're going to pay back.  So I think that if we're in a position to pay this, uno, early, we should, we should do it.  I think it's the right thing to do because we are -


DM:  I was tryin' to hold this to ques at this time since we're not on the agenda, so I apologize for the - DA:  Tku, YH.  DM: Tku, Mr. Ford, appreciate your time.  BL:  I have a ques, YH.  DM:  Of course like I said, I'd like to _ _ _ _ _, but go ahead please.   BL:  Just for clarification, uh, Charlie.  Now, the 200,000 if we give you now, is that also include the Oct paymt or will we be re, that's where our next paymt will come too?  CFord:  Yeah, uh we're honestly, uh we would like this to be the 9th & 10th paymt.  BL:  Oh, ok.  CFord:  So at the back end - BL:  So in Oct, we still need to pay another - CFord:  Yeah, because we, we've already got that in our budget (they chuckle), that's all budgeted.  & the #'s that I gave ya, with the deficits, include that.  BL:  Tku.  CFord:  Anything else?  We appreciate your consideration on this.  DM:  Tku. 


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  3 of


DM:  Bd mtg mins from the mtg of 4/21/03, what's the bd's pleasure?  JW?:  Move approval.  DM:  Is there a 2nd?  TB:  I'll 2nd.  BL: Ques.  DM:  BL.  BL:  YH, I talked to a couple other ald, & they seem to remember it that way on the, but up here on the Page 2 at the top, I'm not sure what moved by acclamation, but um, when you'd asked for nominations for pres of the bd, I recall & a couple people I talked to, said, so I nominated RH & TB had 2nd'd it, but somehow, it ended up I was 2nd. (silence)


 DM:  So what are you requesting the change to show?  BL: Yeah, I guess Tom is that the way -  DM:  What'd you want it to show?  BL: Just that uh, BL moved to nominate RH, pres of the bd & 2nd'd by TB.  DM:  Does the maker of the motion & 2nd agree? 


TB:  Well it says here, JW moved to, by acclamation, to approve RH as pres of the bd, 2nd'd by BL.  & I don't remember doin' that;  I thought _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .  JW:  We're gonna have to play the tape, so that's whatever.  There was nobody against it but RC.  BL:  Right.  JW:  So what's the difference?  (a few indecipherable mumblings)  DM:  BL, you get, you're changing _ _ _ make a motion for the mins to show  - BL:  Well, we can listen to the tape I guess if it comes down to it.  I mean obviously, we're gonna discuss a copy of it soon anyway.  DM:  Well if we're gonna vote on the mins now;  I guess we should listen to the tape at this time 'cause - BL: No, I'd rather not 'cause like you said, it - I remember only one person was absent & one voted against it;  so I think we're ok.  I don't wanna listen to the whole tape _ _ _ _.   DM: Any other q/c?  (voice vote-none opposed)  Motion carries. 


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  4 of


RC:  YH, Good time to talk about the tape?  DM:  RC, you have the floor.  RC:  I, I would like to make a motion that uh, uh, I spoke of THEE, I, I don't think THEE allowed it, _ _ the right terminology for that.  I wanna make sure that the bd is (given or givin') clear direction that it's ok for me to make a copy of the last bd mtg uh tape.  So I, I guess I'll just make that motion _ _ _ _ _ _.  DM:  Is there a 2nd for RC to make a copy of the tape?  DA:  2nd for cmt.  DM: I'd like to ask our - from the way I understand it, the tape cannot leave the office.  So - RC:  That's fine;  I'll, I'll make arrangemts so that that never, never leaves the bldg.  DM:  DA.


DA:  Yes, um, I know that in the past, there have been copies made & um, it had to be done here in the um chambers.  & I, I'd ask the um city clerk, she's the one responsible for the tapes.  Do you have a policy of - what's the policy?  MW:  I'm gonna refer this - let me just tell you the way that I think it's been in the past & I'm gonna look down at EM on this, my understanding was that the tape was a tool for the city clerk & we didn't make copies of tapes.  But I'm gonna do whatever bd of ald wants me to do.  But I'm gonna look at EM -


EM:  I think, in the past, what we've done is, if someone wants it, let 'em come in & (hell with the copyright or help with copying it?) if they bring a recorder.  MW:  That's fine.  EM:  & then copy the tape.  MW:  That's fine then;  we'll make it available.  EM:  &, & it is;  you're right;  technically, it's a tool to aid the clerk where we do keep them - MW:  Right.  EM:  for you.  Sometimes, I think as long as you keep 'em, they're still public.  Tho obviously, _ _ _  nothing precludes you from _ _ _ _ mtg. 


DM:  Any other q/c?  RC:  Just one, YH.  We're not tapin' over right now, are we?  DM:  Oops, we just taped over your last _ _.  RC:  just kinda - DM:  I know, I asked MW _ _ _ - MW:  No.  DM:  it's the subject tape.  RC:  That's a little (cute?).  (audience giggles)  BL: I have a cmt.  ?: _ _ - ?: _ _ _  - DM:  BL. 


BL:  Yeah, I just, I know goin' on 4 yrs now that I've been an ald.  I've only had to come in twice to listen to the tape & MW pretty much gave it to me.  & I came up here & put it in 'cause I didn't have a tape player, & I listened to it right out there.  So yeah, I _ _ _ _ _ true that it didn't leave the room, but uhm, uno, again, just to clarify somethin' & one thing was to clarify & one wasn't.  But uh, (not a?) problem as long as it doesn't leave the city hall.  I mean that's why I was always told  _ _ & I just had to listen to it here, which is fine!


TB:  May I make a suggestion that MW is present at the time when they _ _ _ _, & her be _ _ _ _ tapes get misaligned or something like that & it's just a mechanical device that could be.  DM:  _ _ _ record is an excellent _ _ _ _ _.  TB:  Well, we'd like to - DM:  The tape - TB:  possibly MW present.  DM:  Maker of the motion agree?  RC:  Oh, absolutely.  As a matter of fact, I'll uh even go further than that & say that uh, we'll, we'll take whatever that little uh spot on the back of it is & break that out & say it's a true & official copy.  I'll go for that;  great idea.  DM:  2nd agree?  DA:  That's fine. 


RH:  I just have one ques.  Is Exec Session also taped?  MW:  No. 


KT:  I don't understand why he wants to make a copy if he can listen to the tape here.  & once you make a copy, there's always the chance it can go somewhere else.  DM:  RC, you care to respond?  Or, it's your option;  if you don't care to, that's, uno, you - RC:  Uh, doesn't seem like a reasonable ques to me, YH.  DM:  Ok, very good;  it's his o, er it's his perrogative not to respond.  Any other ques, KT?  KT:  No. 


JW:  If the tape's not to leave the room, the original, why should the tape leave the room as a copy?  KT:  Right.  DM:  'cause the tape is official mins.  JW:  I understand.  DM:  So if somebody wants to make a copy of it  _ _ _  _ records 'cause the tape is the public records I guess.  JW:  Could that tape be used in litigation or possible litigation?  EM:  Yes.  DM:  It's the copy - JW:  Ok, that's - DM: possible somebody's gonna - JW:  I know which way I'm gonna vote then, tku.


DA:  YH, second time around if I may please.  This would also be available for uh, members of the media, is that correct? If they wanna come in & get a copy - DM:  If they wanna listen to the tape, they may;  & if they wanna make a copy, they bring their own tape in.   We would be able to charge for the time that MW had to sit there;  a portion of her time that we're allowed to charge uh, for the time for her to be there &, & verify that the tape that was not doctored in any way. 


DA:  & um, uno, just for the record, that there has been a policy in the past that we have allowed people, but it has been at the discretion, or at least under the supervision of the um city clerk, & at her leisure, whenever the time permits.  City business, other city business has always taken priority. 


Um, but again the um recording is just a reflection of what we say & do at this bd mtgs. There really shouldn't be no harm.  Um, we say what we say & fact is fact;  so there's no harm in a tape _ _ _ we need to make sure we say what we mean & always _ _ .  Tku.  DM:  Anyone else on 2nd time around? 


KT:  If you make a tape & you push out that little white tab, that can always be taped over & taped.  So I, I truly think that they ought to listen to the tape or get a copy of the mins.  DM:  Ayone else 2nd time around?  All in favor of the motion for RC to make a copy of the tape, say aye.  (voice & then roll call vote:  Yes:  BL, DA, RC.   No:  KT, JKB, RH, TB, JW.)  MW:  3 yes, 5 no. DM:  Motion fails.  You will not be able to make a copy of the tape.  RC:  YH.  DM:  RC.


RC:  I'd like the record to reflect that I'm, I'm uh just making a formal protest to that.  I don't think that that's even legal.  So, if uh, a court could prove it, YH, I'd appreciate it.  DM:  Point taken.


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  5 of


DM:  Under Aldermanic Cmte Reports, uh, FW&M, JW, do you have anything at this time?  JW:  Not at this time, YH.  DM:  Under Leg, TB, anything?  TB:  Nothing, YH.  DM:  Police Cmte, DA?  DA:  Uh, nothing, YH, tku.  DM:  PW, RH?  RH:  Nothing, YH.  DM:  Nothing in P&Z.  DC, do you have anything for the Levee Cmsn to report at this time?  Emergency Mgmt?  (no responses heard)  Ok. Tku. 


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  6 of


EM:  I, I'd like to make a motion, er a notice that there's a, an IPR mtg tomorrow at 1:00 up here at the city hall & that's an internal COE mtg where they go over progress of the levee.  & they've decided to have these mtgs now, they have been every 2 wks, but since we're coming to, to a, a head here, we're going to have those every wk now.  Um & the place to be notified, just _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ here tomorrow at this uh, at city hall. 


DM:  Is one of the things, I guess procuremt of the land for the levee?  EM:  That, that's, that's just one topic of conversation & utility relocations.  DM:  & will we have all the land secured by the end of May?  I believe that was _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - EM:  That should be.  DM:  Ok, glad to hear that.  All the land will be procured by the end of May so the COE can keep moving ahead. 


TB:  What time is that?  (no response heard)  MM:  What time?  EM:  1:00.  DM:  That's here at city hall? 1:00 tomorrow, Tues, at city hall.  BL:  YH, will that be every Tues then?  EM:  It'll be every Tues, but not necessarily here at city hall, tho;  I, I think it'll alternate between here & the COE.  DM: Is that open to the public, EM?  EM:  Yes, it is.  DM:  Tku. 


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  7 of


Looking at Old Business, tryin' to decide what, from there, I'll bring it up, some of these items under the Mayor's Report.  Under ords & resolutions, we have Bill #1723;  MW, was it properly posted?  MW:  Yes.  DM:  Please read it in caption form, please.  MW:  Bill #1723, proposed Ord #1595, an ord amending schedule 2, proposed ord of VP MO by adding a new stop sign location at Ann Ave & Lookout Ave.  DM:  What's the bd's pleasure?  ?:  Move approval.  ?:  2nd.  DM:  Moved & a 2nd, any q/c? 


RH:  I just have one real quick if I could, YH.  I have had so many complaints lately about the traffic on Lookout, Fernridge, Ann Ave.  It looks like a major freeway;  I thought after this new hiway was completed, that it would relief some of the pressure;  but evidently, it happened, it hasn't.  I asked people ask me, what does this sign mean that says no thru traffic from here to here;  what does this sign mean that says uh, such & such weight limit;  what does this sign here mean, local traffic only.  That's all I've got.  Tku.


DM:  Any other q/c?  (voice vote-none opposed)  MW, read ord, er read Bill #1723 in caption form please.  MW:  Bill #1723, proposed Ord #1595, an ord amending schedule 2, proposed ords of VP MO by adding a new stop sign location at Ann Ave & Lookout Ave.  DM:  What's the bd's pleasure?  ?:  Move approval.  ?:  2nd.  DM:  Any q/c?  Roll-call vote please.  (Yes:  JW, RC, BL, KT, DA, JKB, RH, TB.)  MW:  8 yes.  DM:  8 yes, zero no's.  Bill #1723 passes;  that's Ord #1595. 


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  8 of


DM:  Under the Mayor's Reports, first item, Bd of Adjustmt - I'd like to appoint Vivian Blackman to the Bd of Adjustmts.  She's uh agreed to take on this duty.  We don't have anybody in Ward 2 at this time, so I'd like to have a motion from the bd for approval.  ?:  I'll move approval.  TB?:  I'll 2nd.  DM:  Any q/c?  BL:  Who's seat came up or did somebody resign?  DM:  Um, Miriam, Hansel I believe was her last name?: _ _ _ _ - DM:  Yes, her term came up & she (someone coughs) some of the things, but I do appreciate the time she spent on there, but _ _ _ _ - RH: Can we send her a letter, YH.  DM:  We should send her, right.  RH: of some type _ _.  Tku.  DM:  Any other q/c?  (voice vote-none opposed)  Mrs. Blackman, appreciate you uh, volunteering your time to work with the city right.  It's certainly appreciated by all of us. 


A while back I talked about city administrator;  I know some other people had also.  I had the opportunity to talk to Brent Hobgood, who works with Fred, City Administrator for Town & Country.  The reason I talked to him, he's the Pres of the St. Louis Area for Professional Gov't for both administrators & city mgrs.  He said he'd try to help us get some uh, get up & running with it.  He gave me the name of a person who used to work for Rock Hill;  right now, (they?) said he would possibly come in if we could get, want to get started with this, he'd come in & help us get, uno, position started.  & once position's up & 'fore we could either interview other candidates, or this _ _ _ _ _ or, wrote down the name of the uh -


Anyway, it's the gentleman who used to work for Rock Hill; see, see if he would be willing to come in, or somebody else in the area who's a retired city administrator, or just somebody who's takin' a break from some other area.  So I'd like to place this into Leg Cmte for review of a city, possibly uh starting up the position of City Administrator. 


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  9 of


Next is the status of Vance Rd sidewalk.  Do we have all the esmts & everything we need for the Vance sidewalk?  EM:  I, I asked the ques of uh Weis Eng'g & he was told that we are ready to apply for permits from uh, where the nursery needs to pave it, all the way to Hanna Rd, &, & the only impedimt is that there is a Zambrana Plan that Weis has modified.  & Weis needs to seal & produce that same set of plans under their seal & submit it. 


DM:  Now is that the plan went to James' property?  EM?:  Could be -  EM:  It's, it's, it's the entire const.  ?: _ _ _.  So it'll be done in 2 phases, basically;  that's phase 1.  & then the 2nd phase would be everything to the east including the bridge, would be phase 2.  &, & we do need some uh, property interests from MSD _ _ _ _ _ _ & some (someone coughs) temp slope esmts from the (Blacksmith family?), but that's down the road.  Phase 1 is _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.  I was told that would be done later this wk. 


DM: So as soon as that's submitted, then we get permits, then the city _ _ can continue on the sidewalk?  JW:  Maybe EM knows, or maybe he doesn't -  Is the grant that we received still applicable to that, or has the timeframe - EM:  No, from, from what I understand, it was uh, fixed & so the money's there just waiting.  They have disbursed out on uh, property (in that levee/levy?) & this is with uh, const.  JW:  Tks.


KT:  Uh, EM, did you say, did you say that they're maybe doing both sides of the road or just the one side, the north side of the road?  & taking it all the way to Main St or Meramec?  EM:  Eventually, it'll go, I, I don't think it goes quite to, well I guess it does go uh, to Main St.  It, it, it, it meets up with the levee, uhm, there, & I, I'm not sure what the plans are, but I guess it would go to Main & stop there.  Uh - KT:  North side, or north & the south?  EM:  No, no, not, not on the south side;  the south side, the problem was, is that at Highland Vlg, the, the lots jut out so that there's no room for a sidewalk on that side.


KT:  The what?  EM:  The, the, the bluff comes down - KT:  Ok.  EM:  There, there's just not enough room in the ROW for a sidewalk there.  KT:  Ok.  &, &  the timeframe for this north side sidewalk is what?  EM:  Uhm, hopefully, it's something, I'm not sure about our timetable for const, but I mean it's something that should be started this, either Spring or late Spring.  KT:  Of this yr?  EM:  Of this yr, yeah.  DM:  Any other q/c on the sidewalk? 


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  10  of


BL:  One ques, now this bridge under that creek - when will that be?  I mean -  EM:  That's the 2nd phase & I, uno, obviously after the 1st phase is done.   Uh, the, the idea is, is that we'll get a credit for the labor that the city does on that.  You take that credit & submit it to the state & then order the bridge.  Uh, it, it'll be fabricated some place else because (someone coughs) _ _ _ _ _ _ _. 


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  11 of


DM:  Next item is the school, the $200,000 paymt;  DA, you asked _ _ _ _ _.  DA:  Yes, I did.  Again, I guess the ques would be, & I'd have to ask the city atty, um, (someone coughs) position to do this.


EM:  Let me answer this - questions!  As of the end of 3/03, we had $2,487,482  in the TIF Project Fund, um, & that includes the 960 uh rebate that, that uh, Judge Ford referred to.  That rebate was simply money that was paid early.  It's going to have to go back to the COE over the next 2 yrs.  Uh, but the balance, which would be about $1.5 Million, uh 1 Million of that is allocated for the school & a Half Million for the remainder of our property acquisitions.  We've got 4 property acquisitions that, that we're still working on uh, thru Condemnation. 


Um, there also is, in, in what's called the Pilots Acct, which is the paymts In Lieu of Taxes Acct, $704,000 & another 25,000, so call it 730 in, in those accts.  & those accts are the accts that actually pay the principle & interest.  Uh, it, it's something that, that's due uh, twice a yr, interest is in the Spring, er principle is in the Spring, interest is in the Fall.  Um, we are currently running a suplus on that, uh, &, & we expect the surplus to pick up.  Uh, the surplus is, is running at 100 or so, so you'll see, we don't have it funded, but there's a, a Special Allocation surplus. 


It's currently unfunded, but bear in mind, this is a, a bond issue that we just floated in Oct - Uh, what I'm saying is, is that there should be $100,000 annually, in that acct;  & that acct CAN be used once the Project Acct is extinguished to pay on-going project, uh projects down in the TIF.  So the answer to your ques, yeah, I, I think it's there!  We had it built in;  when we uh, did the bond issue, it was a Million $ in reserve for the uh, uh School Dist.  &, & that was their, (an or un?)authorized project cost. 


DA:  YH, if I may, one more ques?  DM:  DA, you still have the floor.  DA:  Ok um, if we agree to uh, pay out this 300,000 now, would it be a correct statemt to say that we're not actually givin' the school this money, it's money that we had anticipated, planned on givin' in the first place;  & should we decide not to, say 5 yrs down the road, not have the money to pay the school or decide not to pay the school, would we then be kind of in breach of an agreemt or contract with the school? 


EM:  Well, we have to have the money to pay the school.  But the way the note is structured, we can spend no more than, I think it was $2.42 Million on the levee, without the permission of the school dist.  Uh, &, & it was done by note, so yeah, it's a breach of the note.  &, & the 2nd part is, we can't spend any more than the $2.4 Million unless the school dist agrees. 


If we get to that position, let's say that, that our project costs are going to be more than, than the uh, the money that we have in there.  Um, at that point, we can go back & look at our Special Allocation Surplus funds, that's the money that was excess over & above the principle & interest paymts;  & that money can be used, with the consent of the school dist, to pay off the, the excess costs.


DM:  Well, I mean if the most we can spend is $2.42 Million, what was the point in spreading out the paymts over 10 yrs?  'cause I thought part of that was, if we needed more money to kind of help cushion the blow, we'd spend the extra 100 or 200,000 now;  & then we would have the money by the time of yr, say 8 & 9 rolls around, to pay for the school, er keep paying the school their paymts.  But if we can only go for 2.4 Million, it sounds like we were not being very pro-active.  Or makin' those paymts over 10 yrs instead of right now, how did we save ourselves?


EM:  Well, I, I don't think there, there was any, any, like a savings of money.  Um, I mean that's just the way it was structured.  It was structured over a 10-yr period at $100,000 _ _ _.  KT:  _ _ who - excuse me.  Who structured it?  EM:  TIF Cmsn & Bd of Ald & the School Bd;  it, it was a, a joint effort by _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.   


KT:  Did it say why it was structured this way?  EM:  No.  I, I remember the discussion was uh, uh, to the effect that uh, uh, this, this would be sort of an insurance that, that we would know that there would be enough money available uh, to, to be paid out uh, over a period of _ _.  KT:  So there was a reason for the structure being that way?  EM:  Uh uno, anyone on the bd is welcome to, to correct me on that, that's fine;  I'm not gonna lecture. 


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section 12  of


JW:  Just for point of clarification, & I'm gettin' tired of bein' blamed for high taxes in the city.  & uh, who knows the exact #, maybe Dr. Lea does if he's here, what is the per 100 rate that the school is currently charging on our taxes?  DrLea:  $5.80.  JW:  MW, what is, what does the city get per 100?  MW:  I believe it's 60 cents?  I wasn't here - (a few talk at once:  57, 7, 56)  Last yr,  I wasn't here when it was set.  DM:  _ _ a little under 60 _ _ _.


JW:  Because I'm always gettin' blamed for high taxes, high taxes.  The city isn't the cause of high taxes & who made that agreemt with the school?  My understanding was if we got into yr 8, 9 & 10, & we didn't have the money, we didn't have to pay.  & otherwise, I was misled then on the, the agreemt.  & maybe there's other ald that, that uh, remember it another way;  I don't know.   I don't have a problem with givin' the money up-front, BUT in yr 4 or 5 from now, when we run out, we gotta go back to the school & beg for more mercy;   & uh, it's not fun. 


& uh, I don't think we're gonna have the funding.  I just heard the COE say, we need $7 Million & the Pres has only approved $2 Million.  So we might have a whole lot of money settin' here, you might as well give the school ALL their money, IF we don't get Presidential funding to cover the 7 Million, instead of the 2 that we're currently have. 


DM:  On top of that too, a Million versus 7 Million, JZ called me last wk, who's the Project Mgr for the COE, & said some of the money for the current FY is being transferred out of VP Project _ _ other areas that are deemed higher priority at this time.  So we're gonna have to really be beggin' & maybe even groveling to get the money for next yr;  'cause 2 Million versus 7 Million is quite a drop _ _.


EM:  Well, there's $150,000 that's being transferred out in funding that can't be spent this yr.  However, we're, Congress is getting a commitment as to that, that that money will be allo, reallocated by next yr.  & I guess, in fairness to what you said, there is some emergency provisions in there for yrs 7, 8 & 9.  & if, if there was a situation, then it allowed the city to go thru to the surplus accts in order to pay _ _ _TIF _ _ _. 


RC:  YH, _ _ _ _ have more trouble with uh someone comparing the taxes to take care of people who are already beyond their education, or they're just, I don't know, people who are trying to educate the children.  I believe that _ _ $ amt that is spent on the children is probably well worth it.  & I also believe that to compare the apple to the orange, is really unfair here.  Uh, the future...(exchange tapes)...RC: school system is surrounded by giants;  it's the David among the Goliaths, if you will;  & it's doing very well.


Now, we haven't exactly been the model of levee-bldg ald;  now there've been a lot of reasons for that.  & they've been gracious enough to pay since,1993 I believe, whenever they froze the cap.  They continue to take in the students.  They continue to try to do some of the improvemts they need because they don't have room, & to keep the teacher-student-ratio where it should be so they can be competitive along with the equipmt.  This is not money that's going towards Valley Days, bd of ald;  this money is going towards the children & their future.  So I, I really don't think comparing those 2 with this is really a fair judgemt.  So I'm, I'm sayin' let's, let's give it to 'em. 


DM:  BL, 1st time around.  BL:  This, um, I guess would be directed to EM.  Now a min ago, you said that a Million $ of this money that's in this acct, technically, is the school's.  Technically, that would be 900,000, right?  We've already paid 'em 100,000, right?  EM:  That's correct.  BL:  Now let me ask you one other ques.  This acct I guess is an interest-bearing acct even tho that interest now pays crap, excuse my language.  Um  - DM:  Is that a technical term?  BL:  What goes, where does that money, does that have to go back towards the TIF?  I mean we can't take that money & use it in GR I guess, but I mean that should generate some extra income, right? 


EM:  Well, well, &, & that's correct;  it does.  It all sits in a, a, what's called a Project Fund acct which has uh, it's invested in strips, um, it, it, had, there really, it's embarrassing how little interest it generates & uno, it's great to have 2 points anywhere, but _ _ __ _ _ - BL: _ __ _ _, right?  I mean - EM:  Oh yeah, all the money goes in, back into that project. 


BL:  My only fear is, is, is about NOT voting for this, 'cause I think, like JW said, uno, it, it could come 4 or 5 yrs from now, we have to go to them & say, hey, can we miss a paymt?  We're really tight here;  we're in a bind.  It may be before we're at that agreed-on point;  & uno, I, I don't know if they would have a, if they would be able to say no to us if we worked with them, like they've worked with us in the past.  That would be my only biggest fear is , is if it's their money that's in that acct, & they need it now & we don't give it to 'em, say on the the 4th yr, something happens like uno, we continue to go down this economy & we can't meet our requiremt to them, I don't know what we're gonna do.  I guess we have to meet it.  That's all I have.


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  13  of


KT:  Uhm, to uh, back-up RC a little bit, the children, yes, are our first concern.  I've got 9 grandchildren & every one of 'em need to be educated & so I _ _ _ _.  But the idea is, last, 2 wks ago the last bd, he only asked for, Mr. Ford asked for 2,000, not _ _ _ _ note.  Now he's askin' for $300,000 & uh, it just, it, to me it sounds like _ _ not to dicker with 'em & I don't like that kind of dealing.  It's uh, uno, we're, we're willing to settle for 1,000 if, even tho we, we'd like 3,000, $300,000, excuse me.  CFord:  Can I speak to that?  KT:  & if - & I don't understand - I, I do understand that the bldg fund comes from an entirely different fund, but I was just told also that they're uh, thinking of buying behind the school, & they're gonna own more property. 


If they're going for more property, they're gonna need more money.  Uhm, I, I have NOTHING against giving the Oct paymt early, but  I can't see giving $300,000 at this time, when we might need it in the economy. 


DM:  Mr. Ford, since you did have a Speaker's Request, were agendized, I'll allow you to speak at this time.  CFord:  There's 2 points I want to make:  First of all, I didn't ask for anything last month.  So I don't know where the idea came from 200,000, or 2,000 to 300,000.  The, the request has always been made & maybe this was conversations between the superintendent & the, & the city atty.  But it's my understanding, superintendent said we need 2, but we, we could take that one paymt, $100,000 here & then $100,000 later.  The $100,000 in Oct, has not been part of the negotiations 'cause that, that's part of the agreemt;  that's, I mean like I said, it's built into the budget & it's built into the budget for every yr for the next 10.  We, we would take 2 of those out.  So we've never gone from, I thought I heard you say 2,000 to 300,000.  KT:  I meant 200,000. 


CFord:  We've gone, we've always been at 200,000 out of what was rebated.  & did I hear that was nine hundred & something thousand?  I don't, rumors 'round the town were 600,000.  EM:  I think it was 960.  CFord:  Yeah, I, I just heard it was 600,000.  My point is, another example of what the, the alderwoman saying that she's HEARD that we're gonna buy property up there;  well, she didn't hear that from anybody up there &, & it's always dangerous to go into that.  So we're consistent I think.  What we didn't have last, last month was IN WRITING what, what the request was;  you've got that this month. 


Secondly, (chuckle) I want to cmt simply because it's been raised about what the tax rate is.  You take $660,000, which is how many, how many school tax dollars went from the school dist to the TIF this yr, had that gone to the school dist, which it would have without the TIF, we could lower the tax levy 50 cents in VP.  So 50 cents of that 5 bucks is goin' to offset what's bein', what's, what's goin' in over there to help build that levee.  &, & that's just one yr's worth;  it's accumulated & as uno it's grown;  & it's gonna grow uh because uh the money's growin'.  But that money would be comin' over to help those kids over there.  We, we, we've worked with you 4 different times to amend this thing, uhm, & we believe that we're not asking for anything extra, but since you, since you got it back now, go ahead, & then this helps you on the backside of it 'cause the last 2 yrs of this, you don't have to worry about $100,000 comin' over to the school dist;  you will have already paid it.  Ok?


DM:  If I made it 900,000, as I understand, we have to, we, the city, has to pay that over the next 2 yrs.  That's not money that we can, can just do whatever.  So _ _ _ - CFord:  No, sir;  that, that, that note very clearly said - DM:  Well, I'm sayin' the 900,000 we got back from the COE.  CFord:  Oh, I'm sorry, yeah.  DM:  _ _ _ agreemt - CFord:  Yeah, we got $200,000.  DM:  That 900, I believe it's 960,000, we have refunded, we're gonna have to pay back to the COE over the next 2 yrs.  So that's - CFord:  But it's my understanding you're gonna be drawin' money off the TIF in the next 2 yrs.  DM:  That's correct;  we'll do that also.  & then, as far as, the way I understand the last mtg, EM said $100,000 this Spring & then the, the (bring?) of our $100,000 paymt last Fall;  then we get the letter & it says 200,000 - CFord:  Yeah, well - DM:  _ _ - CFord:  I believe that was a misunderstanding because - DM:  I'm just tryin' to clarify what we heard last mtg - CFord:  very clearly - DM: what the letter stated then.  CFord:  From, from my perspective on the Bd of Ed, uhm, $100,000 (chuckle) in Oct, that was part of the exisitng deal.  DM:  _ agreemt, yes.  CFord:  is spent out in that budget.  & it was my understanding that, that the superintendent talked to the uh, city atty about possibly uhm, payin' the $200,000 over a period of time.  But it's always been, in my mind, an add'l 200,000. 


EM:  &, & it sounds like it was (well or what I?) understood.  CFord:  & it's an honest enough mistake;  we got $100,000 - DM: _ _trying to  verify _ _ _ letter - CFord:  $100,000.  Ok.  DM:  Tku, Mr. Ford.  Anyone else on the 1st time around?  RH:  Just briefly, YH;  like I said uno, EM's the messenger & I guess the messenger wasn't very clear.  I talked to Mr. Ford probably a wk ago, & asked him to send, send us a letter to explain what he was wanting.  It's that simple.  _ _  & I think his letter explained it _ _.  Tku.  DM:  Anyone else 1st time around?  _ _ _ _ _ spoke.  JW, 2nd time around. 


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  14  of


JW:   Uh, yes YH;  I agree with Charles Ford on this one issue, that uh, he said he doesn't go by rumors;  well how did he hear about the 680,000 that was a wrong # that's really 960?  How did they, who approached them to say we got this big surplus, do you want some money back?  They got more info about the financing of the levee than the bd of ald does.


CFord:  I believe that's public info tho, isn't it?  DM:  It's public info.  I believe earlier you said - CFord:  I said in, in short of an appointmt, I went off of rumors that it was 600 & some odd thousand;  I find out it was closer to a Million $.  But it is closer to a Million $.  DM:  It is closer to a Million & it is gonna have to be paid back over the next 2 yrs.  I think that's money that we're not gonna be able to benefit from here, other than the 1% interest that's - CFord:  In case JW uh, thinks we're, we're buggin' mtgs or something up there, the school dist has a rep on the Levee Cmsn;  he brought the wrong # back to us.  DC:  But he never comes.  (JW & others laugh; & apparently several people cmt inaudibly & DM bangs gavel)  DM: _out there, please.  Anyone else on the bd, do you have a ques? 


RC:  YH, I want to clear something up.  If they're askin' for 200,000 & this yr we, they basically have, have put in 660,000; & the yr before that, they put in a similar amt & so on & so forth;  I don't, I don't follow that.  It seemed to me like what they're really doing is, they're asking, since we don't have a need for the money right now, they're asking to say couldn't their contribution be, say just 400,000 this yr.  That, that, I mean that's sor of the reason for I think 200 now, is not a problem.  Uh, they're still giving the 660 every yr, but we're not able to do anything with it right now & they're, they're facing keeping the quality of the school system up, during some pretty tough times.  & this city's always tried to back the school & the school's always tried to back the city.  So I, I, I don't understand why someone's thinking because they're asking for something, are those folks also realizing that the key to getting 660,000 every yr from them?  It doesn't make any sense to me.


DM:  DA, 2nd time.  DA: . . . (DA continues). . . DA:, give 'em back some of the money that we borrowed for them in the first place.  Tku.  DM:  Anyone else, 2nd time around?  TB:  YH, I think everybody's scared that we're gonna come up on the short end.  I mean I'm just like everybody else;  I'd like to see the school dist have all their money too.  'cause uno, I don't know if there's any way that we can run a guarantee that we will have all the money we need for the levee.  I don't know if there's any negotiatin' or if they can take 100,000 now & 100,000 in Oct & maybe we could feel more secure with more money in the bank acct.  I mean _ _ _ _ negotiable _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 200,000. 


JW: I move in that direction.  DM:  Is there a 2nd?  TB&KT:  I'll 2nd it.  DM:  TB, I didn't catch all that.  Could you please uh - TB:  I guess - DM:  100,000 now for - go ahead & explain that. 


TB:  I guess I'm askin' whether I'm gettin' their 200,000, _ 100,000 in Oct to go over & take 100,000 now & their 100,000 in Oct _ _ _ _cuttin' it by 100,000 if that would help 'em or uno - I'm like everybody else on this bd here;  I don't wanna have to go back & float another bond issue;  have to ask somebody's permission for, to get more money, & I'm sure with the rate of inflation & everything bein' cut back, I don't know what - uno, EM could look in his (pursable?) & say that's all we're gonna need is 2,487,000, which I don't think he can, I don't think anybody on this bd can.  Uno, I, I think we're, we're hard-strapped for that.  But I mean if they could (ever get up there?) uno, paying, instead of 2 yrs off of that, pay 1 yr off of that, if that would help them.  They may not be agreeable to it;  I'm not sure.  I'm just throwin' it out here as another alternative. 


RC:  YH, I'd like to make a motion that that get amended to being 200,000 now & 100,000 in Oct.  DM:  Is there a 2nd?  DA: 2nd.  YH, Could I ask Mr. Ford a question?  DM:  Mr. Ford, do you care to answer a ques?  Er,  I'll allow you to ask a ques;  if he doesn't want to respond, that's _ _ _ _ - CFord:  _ answer anything if I can understand it.


DA:  Uh, had the ques been raised of the 200,000versus the 300, or would that be something that just would not work.  CFord:  Well, you have the letter that has the #'s for us to build a budget up there to give - we're not talkin' about makin' salary increase, makin' 'em rich, but to give 'em a salary increase.  Uh, we believe that the least that we could ask for was add'l $200,000. 


DM:  DA, do you have anything else.  DA:  No, tku, YH.  DM: JW.   JW:  Do you think the city could propose a letter like this for the COE asking for us to, uh go just the opposite & say, can we take 2 yrs' paymts & just do away with 'em?  Or take off 200,000 off this yr's conribution to a percentage?  Do you think we'll ever be able to negotiate a deal like that?  Or a bank ever called us up & say, uh, uno, we know you got a 10-yr rate, uno, you're gonna have to pay it off in 8?  We're gonna need this money.  They act like we don't need this money.  I know they need that money.  We got a budget.  They got a budget.  We didn't cause your cut from the state.  We've got our own financial problems.  Uno, we need that money! 


CFord:  I believe the ald's got a short memory.  4 different times, this bd has - JW:  You got rebates every time - CFord: (& they went?) to you.  (DM bangs gavel)  DM: _ _ _ _  JW:  You didn't give us nothin'.  DM:  Anyone else for the first time around to amend the motion from 100,000 to $200,000?  RC:  YH, I have a cmt that I need to make that the ald show up & uh & Whitteaker's responses.  DM:  Anybody else on 1st time around?  RC, 2nd time around.  


RC:  Alright, first of all, he may, he cited the idea of do you think we could go to the COE & ask them to do a similar situation.  Well, since I, I've been builder of the Levee Cmsn, leading _ as been since it's conception up until maybe 6 months ago, I watched every yr, I watched the city have a dispute as to whether or not we were givin' enough money to the COE for our 5% up-front contribution, & I, I watched it go on DAY AFTER, mtg after mtg.  So we have, in a sense, been doing something very close to that & the COE has been very gracious to work with us, knowing that we were in a bit of a tight spot.  & I say the compassion the COE's showed us, is the same compassion I'm askin' the bd to show now.  That's, that's, I mean we have, you've talked to the city atty, he'll tell you that, I guess if they talked one min, they talked 100 min about whose #'s were right. 


DM:  Anyone else 2nd time around?  On the motion to amend from 100,000 to 200,000, all in favor say aye (voice vote & roll call:  Yes:  BL, DA, JKB, RH, TB, RC.  No: KT, JW.)  MW:  6 yes, 2 no.  DM:  On the main motion to pay the school $200,000 as amended now, plus $100,000 regular paymt to go toward the agreemt in Oct, say aye (voice vote-none opposed).  Motion carries.  JW: YH.   DM:  JW.  (few seconds indecipherable mumbles & someone coughs)


5/503 Bd of Ald - Section  15  of


EM:  _ received a letter today uh, from the US Cotton Co.  It's part of what's called WARN, which is the Workers' Adjustmt Retraining Notification, & that, that requires employers to give notice to certain governments of a pending mass layoff.  & the letter just indicates that the city advise you that, on today's date, US Cotton uh, locatdd at 401 Marshall, will permanently reduce the # of employees.  The # of employees it affected (someone coughs) date, a list of positions enclosed.  Affected employees do not have _ _ rights.  Uh, this is the 2nd uh letter that we've received from US Cotton.  I believe the first was an equal # if I'm not mistaken.  Uh, my understanding is, is that the co does intend to close its doors by Dec _ _ _ _ _ _.


5/503 Bd of Ald - Section  16  of


DM:  RC, you wanted to bring up the uh, litigation check from the former city clerk.  RC:  Yes, YH, I wanted to read something if I might.  JW:  YH, I move to table that item.  RH:  2nd.  DM: RC has the floor.  RC:  Tku.  JW:  I have a prevailing motion.  DM:  You have to wait, you have to wait until you have the floor;  then you can make your motion.  JW:  No, I don't.  DM:  Yes you do.  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.  RC, you have the floor. Do you have, do you have a motion with a - you have made the motion which you're on you're, speak (obligation?) time _ _ _ _ _ _. 


RC: What I like to, what I'll do is I'll make a motion, if I can get a 2nd, that I'm allowed to read uh, a couple lines from the employee handbook, which is the, is our abiding rules.  JW:  Move to de, decline.  DM:  2nd to RC's motion to read the vacation info?  BL:  2nd.  DM:  RC, read that please.  RC:  Alright, tku.  JW:  We gonna vote?  DM:  We're gonna discuss;  then we'll vote.   RC:  There's, there's - JW:  He's readin' it. 


DM:  All in favor of RC to read vacation info, say aye (voice vote & roll call:  Yes: BL, RC.   No:  KT, DA, JKB, RH, TB, JW.)  MW:  2 yes, 6 no.  DM:  Anyone care to make a motion to place this in cmte?  DA:  I make a motion to place it in Leg Cmte.  RC:  YH, the only thing that failed is I couldn't read something.  I still have basic - JW:  I 2nd DA motion.  DM:  I think it's the bd's wish not to discuss it at this time based on the motion that was just voted down.  RC:  What kind of a law is that, YH?  DM:  Alright, we have a motion & a 2nd to put it in Leg Cmte.  Discussion on the uh motion to put it in cmte, please.  RC:  Ok, I'd like to - DM:  RC.  RC:  I'd like to make the point that uh, whether I read this or not, our rules say once someone is terminated, you can't keep them from getting their vacation.  I pointed that out to you earlier.  I believe the city atty might be able to give us some, some uh insight on this idea.  Once you're terminated, YH, there is no voting up here that's going to do any good.  It's past that point.  Would the city atty have an opinion on this.


EM:  It, it's administrative on paymt of unused vacation pay.  JW:  YH, this is possible litigation; we need to discuss this at closed session.  I've heard that this person that RC's talkin' - ?: _ _ _  - JW:  RC's tellin' me, er I've heard that uh people - DM:  PP did say last mtg he's was gonna  - JW:  that he was gonna sue us & he sat here & said everybody was racists & everything else.  I don't feel comfortable discussing anything in open session when somebody's gonna sue us. 


BL:  I've just also found that too, if it's was not litigation, it's probably personnel, which, that would be another reason to consider.  RC:  What if they're not personnel any more, YH?  They're fired!  DM:  EM said this could involve litigation, so since PP stated the last mtg that he is gonna get an atty to file suit against the city.  So I ask that the bd hold this over even to executive session or to our next mtg, er executive session either this mtg or a future mtg.  JW:  Is RC representing - maybe he's his atty.  (aud ience giggles)  So maybe we really shouldn't be talkin' about it.  DM:  I think we'll move on.  ?: _ _ _ _ - RC:  Let's vote, YH.  You got a motion;  let's vote on  it.  DM:  Based on the advice of the city atty, since it's involving litigation, I think we're gonna drop the motion.  RC: Will that be placed in the record?  DM:  Yes, it will.  RC:  Tku.


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  17  of


DM: JKB, you had the stop sign at 3rd & Benton?  JKB:  Yes, I'd like to see one put up at Benton.  I don't know many accidents.  DM:. . .


(mtg continues: KT -  sign, caution children playing.   JW - Summertree Vlg Condos & recycling.  JKB - Ken's Auto Body's cars & dumpster.  Precision Forgings a/c unit on pkg lot about a mo & bldg behind, how many businesses in there & have refrigerators sitting out & may be full of gas.)


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  18  of


...DM:  DA, you had Kena Ave.  DA:  Yes, YH.  Um, several months back, we had a um, a petition, I believe RS had brought it up at the time, to uh, to make Kena a one-way street for northbound only.  Um, the petitioner um, I spoke with _ _ the weekend, um, & I, I believe um, um, my partner also received phone calls on that issue.  Um, they appreciate the fact that the city um, had the sign placed there.  However, it's um, more of an inconvenience & really has not helped a whole lot.   Until they'd requested that we um, have that sign & that ordinance repealed, um, & in place, a um, local-traffic-only sign put in place.  & that's uh, a request that I've been, um asked.  & I believe it would require a new ord to be drafted to repeal the uh, previous ordinance.  So I'll make the motion to have that done.  DM:  What's the change?  Kena from a one-way street to local - a 2-say street, but local traffic only.   DA:  Yes.  DM:  _ _ _ _ _ .  Is there a 2nd?  ?:  2nd.  DM:  q/c? 


BL:  This was the street, remember, didn't the police dept tell us that somethin' was goin' on, const or somethin' was causin' a lot of heavy traffic for a short period of time thru there?  Or the street, they thought it would, once the const was finished, it would alleviate that?


DM:  I believe that's what was brought up at the time.  JM:  YH, When we were overlayin' Marshall, there was a lot a lot of traffic.  BL: That's what it was.  JM:  _ at the same time as the ord & the motion came up.  DM:  Sounds like this is a good direction to take then _ _.  q/c?  (voice vote-none opposed)  _ _ _ _.  DA, you had annexation?


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  19  of


DA:  Yes, um, uno, the city's currently in the process of um preparing for uh, an annexation attempt um for some local area south of the city.  & in the future, there may be some other areas we need to um, um, we may want to look at.   & uno, ta, to be successful in annexation, we have to sell ourself;  we have ta um, present um, uno, to the residents of the area that we um, annex, why they should come to VP.  & (caravam?) think we're, we're basically leavin' that up to the um, um city atty, & um & our eng'g group um, that we hired for that.  & I don't know that that's the best route to go.


We've um, made this attempt before & for a lot of reasons that um, that fell short.  So I think we'd be, it'd be wise to be proactive & uno, begin to work on how to sell ourself to this cmty so I'd like to make a motion to have the senior ald uh, from each ward um, sit on a cmte to begin um, a presentation um, for the um, annexation of the southern um, area, south of VP.  ?:  So moved.  ?:  I'll 2nd.  DM:  q/c?  (voice vote-none opposed)  DA:  That's all I have, YH. 


DM:  Would this be only to the south at this time, DA?  DA:  Unless um, unless the bd has some other area that they would - DM:  Well, at the last mtg, unfortunately, you had your family emergency, so you weren't able to attend, but I asked also that we look at annexing Treecourt, which a few of yrs ago, we had a vote on that.  Unfortunately, it failed by a short, a small margin _ _ _ the Treecourt area with the City of VP.  DA:  I think it'd be wise to include that in as well.  DM:  Tku. 


JW:  I move that DA chair that cmte.  DM: _ _ for a 2nd?  ?:  2nd.  DM:  q/c?  (voice vote-none opposed)


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  20  of


 Clerk's Report, MW, what do you have for us?  MW:  I really don't um, have anything at this time.  But I guess I would like to express that uh, the mins from mid Dec or the end of Dec thru 4/7, I can't seem to locate a copies of those;  & I don't think Mrs. Helton has copies.  So I didn't know if any ald have copies that I could have or I don't know if the mayor did.  But I just want to let you know that I couldn't find those.  TB?:  Would there be a tape?  _ _ _.   BL:  Library copy, YH?    MW:  I don't think he put 'em in a packet, BL;  I don't think.  My packet never had the mins in it.  RC?:  What's the dates again, YH?  DM:  From mid Dec of 02 thru 4/03. 


JW:  Ques, YH, for the Clerk's Report.  Could you give me how many license, business licenses was issued before you took the position & how many have you issued up to this date?  MW:  Um, the ones that were issued possibly before me coming in, uno, I'm gonna guesstimate, 'cause I don't know, if they look like there may've been 10, 12;  I'm not sure.  Um, I guess I probably sent into the mayor, maybe 50.  DM:  At least 50 I would say;  between 50 & 60 I believe, _ _;  plus a few of 'em are on my desk tonight _ _ _ _. 


RC:  Follow-up ques, YH.  Did uh, did uh, the present city clerk prepare all the paperwork on those 50?  MW:  Yes, sir, I sure, I certainly did.  I did this time & all the other yrs I was the city clerk.  I did business licenses by myself. 


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  21 of

DM:  Parks Coordinator Report...


(mtg continues - Fishing Derby great success;  trees & flowers planted;  tku to these volunteers....Brignole Park trees trimmed...Parks Bd mtg last month, but no quorum...some things put in Leg Cmte that were in Parks...Knights of Columbus want to use Leonard Pavillion on 9/14 & Gary Haden's letter request refunable deposit by waived, but Pam thinks he wants to waive the fee of $50...& they want beer...& they shall have it...


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  22  of


...JM with PW report...has 3 bids on tree removal at 229 Jefferson Ave, ...1st is Ray's Tree Svc $1800, 2nd Custom Tree Svc $1685, 3rd Omni Tree Svc $1650...RC: What property is it?  JM:  It is the city's ROW on Jefferson Ave, near Nick Smith is one of the residents & I believe the other is Miss Ferin Brown, is her name...- Omni gets it...JW asks about an update letter to the Boyd residents...[exchange tapes]... Boyd discussion continues...)


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  23  of


Mike Brueckmann, Bldg Cmsnr's Report...McBride sold 12 of their 22 lots up in Crescent Springs Subdivision...going to offer 6 different types of houses up there...he has copy of everything they're going to offer...sent out several violation letters, high weeds, unfenced swimming pools, dead trees, structural defects, occupany issues...chasing down problem with 727 Leonard, which is a HUD foreclosure...


Inspections this last 2 wks, 6 homes initially inspected;  7 reinspected.  That doesn't make sense, but some are from previous 2 wks that had to be reinspected.  Apartments turnover, 20 apts & 1 had to be reinspected.  There's a project going on at Carol House that we looked at & a lot of deck & fence const, we go out & take a look at that.  Foundations, framing, one thing or another.  Uh, up at Valcour to see how they're doin'....big, big bldg & new school addition is coming along nicely. 


Mayor asked me to check with some other municipalities that do their own code inspections to see how we're doing in relation to them.  & as I said in the notes, I checked with Ballwin, St. Charles, Kirkwood, Webster Groves, Metro West & Arnold & got copies of the forms they use & we're right up there with 'em.  If you had one of their inspectors inspect down here in VP, the results would be just the same as what we're doing down here.  So we're right where we need to be. 


In regards to the cooler on St. Louis Ave, I talked to the gentleman from Valley Heat Treat a month ago.  & he said he would be rid of that thing by the end of April.  He said he would either have it sold to a guy who deals in those things or he'd have it scraped.  When I talked to him right before the end of April, I said time's running out.  He said, WELL;  so I'm gonna be back with him tomorrow, talking to see if we can get somethin' done.  I'm gonna look in the ord book & see if there's something that covers that.  Uh, I have made contact with a local scrap dealer to see if they're interested;  uh, unfortunately the thing has got asbestos mill boards on the side & that's scarin' off a lot of people.  So uh, we'll see what we can do in the next couple days to get some resolution on this. 


Uh, Lawnscape, which is the people behind Valley Heat Treat with all the refrigerators;  uh, we're having on-going discussions about what we can do to eliminate that mess back there.  We did get 'em to clean up one time.  They do a lot of uh, HUD remediation, where they have to haul that stuff out of old (cut?) houses that are foreclosed.  What they do is they actually recycle, er take the freon out of the refrigerators or, or whatever appliances have freon;  salvage that & then they send the old refrigs down, I guess to the auto shredder or something like that.  So we are working with 'em & he wants to expand his fence line & uh get that fence, what's the right word here, wants to make it a privacy fence that is gonna hide this stuff.  But I'm workin' with him to - just gonna bring that stuff in & put it right in the house so they don't have a pile there, uh, rather than lettin' the stuff pile up which is on the (side link?).  So we'll continue to work with him, see if we can get him doin' that.  Are there any ques?  DM:  Anyone have any ques? 


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  24  of


DA:  Yes, YH.  Um, you've been on the uno, have filled this position for several months.  How's the public um receiving you?  Communication goin' good with 'em?  Mike:  In regards to?  DA:  Any issue.  Mike:  Code issues?  DA:  Yeah, when you have to deal with the public.   How are they receiving you?  Mike:  I think they're receiving me well.  DA:  Ok.  Mike:  I, excuse me.  DA: Goin' back to the large refrigerate, refrigeration unit on um, St. Louis Ave, do you have any suggestions about what someone might could do with that?  Op, options, other than have 'em hauled off?


Mike:  Well, I didn't know it had asbestos on it until somebody called it to my attn today.  So that kind of puts a new light on things.  Uh, this particular asbestos that it has on it is what's called transite or asbestos cement millboard;  uh, by itself, it's not a problem, but it is a problem if you saw it, sand it, bust it with a hammer & stuff like that.  So that's gonna create somewhat of a problem.  Did I tell somebody we could haul it off? 


DA:  Well, let me say this.  I brought that to you as a request & a concern of the citizen, um citizen in my ward.  & that's been quite some time;  & I know you made communication with 'em early on.  & um, the situation really hasn't changed;  it set there; still is there.  Um, & probably some people back to that resident sooner than by the time he got aggravated would've been better .  Mike:  Well - DA:  & whether you made some cmts or not, uno, I have ta um, probably discuss that later.  But - Mike:  Let me suggest, sir.  DA: Ok.


Mike:  I did uh, I did initially go over to see Mr. Roo.  I said, Mr. Roo, I've been over to talk to this guy & he says he's gonna have this outta here by the end of April.  It was closing towards the end of April - I had to stop by & see Mr. Roo a couple of times to talk to him.  Uh, I went back over to Valley Heat Treat a couple of times before the end of April;  I said, what's the situation?  He said, well, I couldn't get the guy to buy it, so I guess I'm gonna have to call the scraper.  & uh, I called Mr. Roo &, er Mr. Roo called me on, I guess 4/30 or 5/1 & uh, we discussed what I had uh, discussed with Valley Heat Treat.  So, pretty much, that's where it is.


DA:  & just remember when a, when an ald um, brings you or if a citizen comes fwd himself & brings you a concern, that's usually pretty important to them.  & I'm gonna be honest with ya, that's my job, is to make sure that they're taken care of.  & that's why I depend on (Bill?).  So just um, remember when you're speakin' uh, uno, with a citizen, um, that you are rep'g us, if we agree with um, uno, the way that you're handlin' the position.  So if you'd keep that in mind, I'd appreciate it.  Mike:  Ok, fine.  DA:  Tku.  DM:  Any other q/c?


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  25  of


BL:  I have a cmt, YH.  It may be more for the ald in that ward.  I think Mike & myself are aware of it & maybe the entire bd & the mayor himself.  The piece of property that's at the corner of uh, Crescent & I guess it'd be the west outer road - Mike:  141.  BL:  Right.  Um, it was brought to my attn about a yr ago, um, by an old family from that area, that their kids grew up there &, & they was from VP for a long time, that there was actually a grave on that property.  & then someone from the Fire Dist also told me that they've walked the property.  & at that time, there was a tombstone set in the woods on this grave.  Um, once the property sold, & it was brought to the new owner's attn, uno, just in case he was gonna build or, or reclaim the property, whatever he was gonna do, um, we were in hopes at that time, of possibly him moving the grave;  either to the Sacred Heart Cemetery or wherever. 


All of a sudden now, the tombstone is, is no longer on the grave;  it was taken off by someone & moved up to one of the out-buildings & leaned against it.  & now I understand that the piece of property is about to be sold & it's just that if we could get some kind of, uno, proof or evidence  - I know someone told me that the Post-Dispatch has obituaries datin' back to the early 1900's.  This tombstone has a name on it & it was  from the family that owned that farm at that time.  & a lot of people remember the, the grave bein' there.  It's just - I think it's bad that we let these people go in demolish this house & build a new home without relocating those remains.  Uno, I mean, I'm not sure, I'm sure there's some kind of law in MO, but I wanted the ald to be aware of it & we need to address it & look into it.


DM: Do you know if there's a way to exhume or remove the body.  I know there are ways because when the airport bought out the cemetery, they had to _ _ _ _  - BL: I think there was when they had the stone on the grave -  DM:  But I don't know if we can prove exactly - BL:  I don't know about now, yeah.  DM:  where the grave is - BL:  I guess if they're gettin' ready to put a pool in, they might find out. 


Mike:  Well, the property is so overgrown right now;  there's no way that I know that we could do it with the property overgrown.  I did talk to the uh, Lieutenant back there;  St. Louis has a forward-looking infra red radar, er infra red unit on their helicopter which, if that property was cleared, it would show up a, a infra red differentiation, & if it's in the ground, it's something that's buried - if that property is ever cleared & brush-hogged, uno, possibly they could fly over there & they could take a look & you could see.  It's kind of like lookin' thru a starlight scope which the military use.  You would get a different color if there was something that's been buried there because the heat coming off of it would be at a different uh, intensity than the surrounding areas.  So we're, but right now, it's just so overgrown, it's just like a jungle back there;  it's just -


BL: There's no chance we could even see where that stone is set on the ground anyway.  Mike:  You can't even go 50 ft pass the house without just, you're stopped in the brush & that's just - I don't have a good answer for you at this time.  'cause all brush hogs, I think - DM:  Is there a date on the stone?  BL:  I think - Mike:  Well, I saw something in the files that says 1918, but, & uno, that's, that's kind of 2nd-hand info.  I even called down to the church, thinking well, maybe they had old parish records that dated back that far that would have notice of somebody was buried.  But they weren't buried in the parish cemetery & they said no, we don't have anything like that.  So, uh, I'm kind of, kind of at a loss. 


Now, BL said he had some people that were pretty sure they knew where that was located.  So I've kind of asked him if he could help me with that, I'll be happy to see what we can find out.  BL:  One lady that's visited it several times is now in a wheelchair & if it's grown up as much as you're saying, then I don't know if we could get her back there.  Mike:  Oh!  That'd be difficult;  really difficult.  BL:  Anyway, I just wanted the bd to be aware of it, the ald in that ward.


JW:  I did talk to the individual that, he told me he was closin' on it today & he wanted to build apartmts there.  So you definitely want to find out where that - DM:  Possible remains - JW:  possible _ _ _ _ 'cause _ _ _ _what he would find.  BL: _ _ somebody said Sacred Heart had a section in their cemetery where sometimes they donate aerial _ _ _.  I mean it's, I don't think it would be a real expensive thing - DM:  If they could find - BL: Yeah, find it - DM:  I'm sure that they have to verify that that is the person on the stone.  So I don't know how they do that.  Mike:  Well, we'll, we'll, we'll keep lookin' after it.  Tku.   


5/5/03 Bd of Ald - Section  26  of


DM:  Lt. Mowery, do you have anything for us tonight?  LtMowery:  No, next mtg, YH.  DM:  Tku.  ?: _ _ _?  DM: Yes, he did.  _ _ _ _ _.  ?: _ _ _ _.  DM:  Is there a motion to go into executive session?  RC:  Uh, YH, I've got a couple of items.  I wanted to clear up, uh what's the seniority status & the uh, vacation time status of the new city clerk right now?  _ _ _  need to clear up that up a long time....(mtg continues)...