Notes:  Many police personnel are in the audience.  Newspaper/Magazine Reporter Diane Plattner arrived after I had addressed the BOA.  Mary Shapiro of the Press Journal arrived after 8:30 pm when the BOA had gone into Ex Ses.  (Ref Maureen's Nightmare.)


Present:  RH, TB, DA, JKB, MW, DM, EM, JW, MP, MMW (Ald Mike M. White), KT.



5/3/04 BOA - Section  1 of  17


DM:  MW, Would you take roll, please.  (see above)  MW:  8 present.  DM:  Quorum being present, I call this BOA mtg for 5/3/04 to order.  (Pledge Allegiance)  I have 2 Speaker Requests from the audience;  are there any others from the audience?


 _ _ none, _ the Bd, we have - RH, do you have anything to add?  (RH, TB, DA & JKB have nothing to add to the agenda.)  JW:  I have 2, YH, I'd like to get a Crescent Valley Ct bid update & uh probably under Jim's report, a Morton's Grove discussion


MP:  A few things, YH, Summertree Condos, the streets over there;  & on Francis Ave, there's a basement that's been excavated out for like 2 ft or 2 yrs;  & the culvert pipe on Main St right past the cemetery - DM: Is that the one near 44 & Francis that kind of like your basement that's been excavated?  MP:  Uh-huh.  DM:  Ok. That won't be_ _ _ er after that - MP:  _ culvert pipe just west of the -  on Main St, past the cemetery;  & the dirt in front of The Elevator;  & then the new trucks - _ city trucks;  & also the letter (that or they?) sent (it?) to Krupp Const about the grass on Boyd;  & then also the Employee Handbook. 


DM:  Is that that (seed or or cedar?) _ _ _ _ - (some laugh) JW?:  _ _ some of that seed.  DM:  Go ahead.  KT:  Must be that seed.  ?:  I'm quittin'.  ?:  No, no, (one at a time?).  MP?:  That's alright;  I'll quit.  ?:  No, _ _ -  ?: Keep it comin'.  MP:  & then the Employee Handbook, I'd like to put that in Leg Cmte because there's so many loopholes & openings in there.  DM:  Ok, by Ex Action, I'll go ahead & place that in Leg Cmte.  MP:  Tku.  ?: _ _ _ _ - MP?: That's in there - JW:  That's in there. 


DM:  MMW.  MMW:  Uh, I just have uh one thing that's probably written up in the Police Report _ _ _ student.  DM:  KT.  KT:  Uhhh, the house on the corner of Main & Vance;  & (my cavorting issue?)  ?: _ _ -


DM:  Is there a motion to approve the agenda as amended?  JW: YH, I'd also like to add an Ex Ses for St L County Police Dept.  DM:  _ _ for personnel issue, make sure we get it (in there?) _ _ _ _ _.  So for personnel which will be discussion of the police _, Ex Action er Ex Ses.  DA:  YH, also for, if we could for pending litigation.  DM:  Alright.  KT:  _ _ _ it can be executive.  DM:  Well, if we approve of the agenda with these 2 items, that would be Ex Ses.  JW:  So moved.  ?:  2nd.  DM:  q/c?  All in favor, say - (voice vote - none heard opposed).  Motion carries. 


5/3/04 BOA - Section  2 of  17


First we have Maureen Morris on the levee. MM:  My name is Maureen Morris & I owned property at #8 Arnold Dr until it was taken from me allegedly for the levee.  Please make my cmts part of the City's Journal.  For the record, at the last Bd mtg, I said that I didn't think it was proper or ethical for the City Atty EM to prepare a legal doc on behalf of the tenants of the landowner that he condemned, namely me. 


& the caption on this is, "Objection of the City of VP to Motion of Defendant Morris of Distribution of Cmsnrs' Award" & it's signed by EM, Atty for the Plaintiff;  & it ends with, "Wherefore, premises considered, Petitioner prays this Court sustain its objections unless all tenants of #8 are provided notice of it & an opportunity to be heard".  I would like this to also be made part of the City's Journal (I hand them EM's legal doc)


& I'd like you to also know that um EM convinced my tenants, as he did my Condemnation Cmsnrs, that I was charging too much rent.  & also know that on my 3rd trip to court last 2/25, trying to collect overdue rent & such from those tenants, one of them yelled at me, quote, "EM told us to quit paying you" - DM:  Do you - MM:  end quote. - DM:  have a lawsuit against the city regarding this?  MM:  Regarding this, no.  I imagine that EM -


DM:  I'm being advised - I'm sorry to not allow you to speak, but I've been advised that there is a lawsuit.  MM: I can't speak?  DM: Not if it's on an issue that is pending litigation, so.


MM:  Ok, well, this is about the redev of VP.  I have a letter here from Sebastian Rucci & it's dated 12/21/99;  & it's written to Mayor DA at the time.  It says, "Enclosed is a copy of a plan for the dev of Arnold's Grove.  Larry Hedrick & I assembled most of these properties 2 yrs ago.  However, we were unable to overcome issues regarding acq/dev with city staff & other officials.  The benefits to dev'g this area rather than building the levee with a det pond are many.  This area is the entrance to the city & by filling the land as proposed, the levee is built & 5 acres of commercial dev created. 


After we assembled most of the land 2 yrs ago, we were unable to proceed with a Tax Increment Financing proposal to develop the land due to the TIF already in place for the levee.  All said, it was decided that the city must purchase the land.  That was more than sixteen months ago & to-date, not a single parcel has been acquired.  Recently, we were given an opportunity to obtain up to 300,000 cubic yards of earth fill.  The fill would easily lift this area out of the floodplain completely. 


We would like to assist in getting the acq of this land moving fwd so that we may preserve the newly-found opportunity to obtain the 300,000 cubic yards of earth fill.  There are at least 2 ways to develop with the city making the initial acq.  The city could acquire the land & then lease the land to us or the city could acquire the land & sell the land to us.  In either case, we are interested & wish to start formal negotiations with the city.  We look fwd to your input on how to proceed. 


The enclosed plan shows fully the potential for this property & we hope that the city will maximize the potential for this area.  The proposed plan would create, would certainly create an interesting entrance & substantial revenues to the city.  Thank you & Merry Christmas. Sincerely, Sebastian Rucci." 


& his plan here shows that he wanted a Quik Trip at AL & a restaurant & a strip mall.  Now back in '98,  Sebastian Rucci gave me a $100,000 contract for my property, a fair market value.  I would've netted $100,000.  Ed Harrawood would've had $500,000;  & Sebastian Rucci would've benefited;  the city would've benefited;  everybody would've benefited except the COE.  Now we have everybody being condemned & the COE spending $5M, is what I estimate, on just the AL levee.  Now I would like to know WHAT ISSUES Sebastian Rucci could not overcome with city staff & other officials. 


?: _ _ - DM:  So of issues - did he say he could not - MM:  His letter said that he could not overcome issues regarding acq/dev with city staff & other officials.  I'd like to know what those issues were that he could not overcome, that now the landowners have been ripped-off & the COE is spending 5 Million tax dollars on this levee. 


DM:  Sounds like Mr. Rucci would be the one to ask because he's the one that said issues couldn't be overcome.  MM:  Well, mayor uh, at the time it was Mayor DA & he's here.  Can he give us any insight on this?


DA:  No, not, not really.  Um, I'm sorry about that, but um this land was taken as part of a levee construction um funded with federal money.  Um therefore, development of it was never considered um altho the proposal, many proposals, were made, none were ever entertained by this Bd under my administration, um nor do I recall any under um Mayor Michel.  Again, I cannot put input as to his obstacles because it was never presented um to this bd at, at, at any level. 


MM:  Ok, I would like this (I hand them Rucci's letter & plan) also to be made a part of the City's Journal.  I just think it's a shame that we're wasting all this money, taxpayers' money on this levee at AL & rippin' off the landowners because as I understand, instead of Ed Harrawood getting $500,000 that he could've got back then, he ended up with a net of $160,000 for his property.  & EM tells me in the beginning that my property is only worth $30,000!  Tku. 


5/3/04 BOA - Section  3 of  17


DM:  Next, we have Phil Soto.  MrS: Good evening, ladies & gentlemen.  My name is Phil Soto.  Since you've placed the uh Personnel Manual into Ex Cmte uh - DM:  LEG.  MrS:  er LEG Cmte, I don't wanna waste any of your time.  I think it would be more appropriate if I just approached you with a letter addressed to the Mayor & to the BOA, my concerns on that particular manual.  So rather than waste any more time, I'll do that.  DM: I appreciate your brevity. 


5/3/04 BOA - Section  4 of  17


Next, we have Bd mtg mins from the old Bd of 4/19 & the new Bd of 4/19/04;  what's the Bd's pleasure?  JW:  Move approval.  ?&KT: 2nd.  DM:  q/c?  All in favor, say - (voice vote - none heard opposed)  Motion carries.  (indecipherable mumblings)


DM:  We have a request for an application _ for Donahue's application - Is anybody here tonight to speak on that behalf?  Hearing none, we'll hold it over until the next mtg. 


Next, under Aldermanic Cmte Reports - ?: _ _ _  - DM:  Under Bd of Adjustment & Appeals, 2 of the uh terms have expired with one of the persons has decided not to continue.  Appreciate this time serving on there, so if somebody knows of someone that'd like to serve on bd - like to move one of the alternates up so if somebody wants to be an alternate on the Bd of Adjustmts _ _ _ _ the audience after the mtg or somebody please let me know is they want to - care to serve on the Bd of Adjustmts.  ?: YH, who resigned?  DM:  Sherry McGinnis said she's had some other things _ _ _ job _ _ _ _ she appreciates the time that she served on there.  I just wanna appreciate her serving the city in that capacity.  _ _ _ _ _. 


Under Levee Cmsn uh _ _ _ _ - Anything for Emergency Mgmt?  DC:  Not at this time.  DM:  Alright.


5/3/04 BOA - Section  5 of  17


Under Ords & Resolutions, Bill # 1764 has been placed in LEG Cmte. 


I have Bill #1765;  what's the bd's, er, MW, could you read it in caption form, please.  MW:  Bill #1765, Proposed Ord 1628, an ord authorizing the placemt of fire hydrants at certain locations within the City of VP, MO.  DM:  Was this properly posted?  MW:  Yes, it was.  DM:  What's the Bd's pleasure?   DA:  Move approval.  JKB:  2nd.  DM:  q/c?  Hearing none, all in favor, say - (voice vote - none heard opposed). 


One of the things I'd like to, er _ _ _  place in the LEG Cmte is uh 2 readings of an ord.  I guess we, in the past, we would do both in the same night.  Then we switched to 2 following mtgs, so in case somebody from the audience wanted the opportunity to speak on that bill if they didn't know it was coming up, (would?) so (if?) we still have it for 2 readings one night, go ahead & _ _ _ _ _ _.  Bd's pleasure to go to the 2nd reading tonight?  MW, read it in caption form. 


MW:  Bill #1765, Proposed Ord 1628, an ord authorizing the placemt of fire hydrants at certain locations within the City of VP, MO.  DM:  What's the Bd's pleasure?  ?: Move approval.   ?&JKB:  2nd it. 


MP:  Ques, YH.  Where's the map that's showin' where they want to do that?  JEM:  I have one copy that was provided by the Fire Dept.  MP:  Was that by the Fire Dept or the water co?  JEM:  Fire Dept.  DM:  Do you wish to look at it, MP?  Or check it later?  MP:  I'll check it later.  It just says that the water co provided a new map;  not the Fire Dept. 


DM:  q/c?  KT:  YH, What ord # was that?  DM:  1628.  q/c?  Hearing none - (roll call vote:  Yes:  RH, TB, JW, KT, MWW, DA, JKB.   No:   MP.)  MW:  7 yes, 1 no.  DM:  Motion carries. 


5/3/04 BOA - Section  6 of  17


Next, Dept Reports - under the Mayor's Report, _ _ I discussed with uh JM today, this Friday's a holiday for the city & _ we move(d?) the uh big trash pick up to next wk so they'd get 5 days to pick up the trash that it reminded me that this Friday will be - city will still be, er normally would not be picking up the trash.  We'll do a double-load on Mon so the people who normally get their trash picked up on Fri will be picked up by workers who volunteer to work on, er not volunteer, but agreee to work on holiday & get holiday pay & then do the regular trash pick-up on Mon so that -


JM:  Actually, YH,  what we discuss_ _ the employees would agree to is trade that holiday for a holiday of their choice.  DM:  Ok, tku.  I guess the bottom line is people who have Friday pick-up will still go ahead & have the trash pick-up - JM: _ _ - DM: this - JM: _ _ - DM:  try to keep the extra work - JM: _ - ?:  Big trash that's _ _ - DM:  It starts a wk from today;  wk of the 10th thru the 14th;  again, 'cause we say that wk, people think they can put it out 2 or 3 times.  So the day we come to the city the workers come to our house that's their day for a wk so get everything out Mon morning if it sits till Wed, _ rest assured it won't be picked up.  So _ _ _ _. 


5/3/04 BOA - Section  7 of  17


MW:  Clerk's Report.  MW:  Um, I just have 2 - the, both of them are in the packet.  I put a memo in there about the MO Municipal League Newly Elected Officials Conference;  if anyone would like to go to that, please let me know so I can make their reservations right away;  I think that's in June. 


Uh the other one I have is something from St L County Municipal League, uh the Annual Installation Dinner that's gonna be held on - well, it says we have until 5/17;  uh but anyway, if you'd like to go to that - (hell!?), it's 5/21, Fri, May - ?: _ _ - MW:  Right there is behind the 5/21 so if you just let me know if you'd like to go, I'll make the reservation.  DM:  JW. 


JW:  I move in that direction that all the city officials (serve?) have elected are allowed to attend & be paid by the city.  DM: That both the newly elected officials' seminar & the Installation Dinner?  JW:  Yes, yes.  KT:  2nd. DM: q/c?  Hearing, none, all in favor, say (voice vote - none heard opposed)  Motion carries.  MW:  That's all I have.  DM:  Ok.  MW:  Tku.  ?: _ _ -


DM:  I was talkin' to Mrs. Kettler & so I said she has one mtg a month at the 2nd mtg of the month where she's - bring her uh issues fwd from the Parks Bd so tonight we'll dispense with Parks. 


5/3/04 BOA - Section  8 of  17


Moving on to PBW Coordr's Report - JM.  JM:  YH, It looks like I've got about 6 items that the Bd members brought up today.  I'm assuming it's gonna come up under PBW.  Would you like me to just kind of start us?  I wrote 'em down.  DM:  Yes, If you would, please.  JM: Uh #1, JW brought up the Crescent Valley bid update.  I don't have the date in front of me, but it has been advertised _ _ a date is set for bid openings & um we - it, it was advertised.  I just don't have the date;  I'd have to research the records but - JW:  That's fine;  I'll just get it from ya. 


JM:  Uh #2, the culvert at Main St - Tom & I have not really got a chance to review that & the 2nd thing is the Bd has really been kind of tight with what they're wantin' to do with Fund 17 money & wherever we go & there's gonna be a, a fairly inex er a fairly expensive repair there & until the Bd authorizes that kind of a money, it's kind of just in uno, a design stage or comin' up with a quick fix that _ _ _ _ _ _ - DM:  Did TW recommend a box culvert down at (Gwenton?) we were talkin' about _ - JM: It was - DM:  box culvert _ -


JM:  It was in the West Side Storm Study;  there was a box culvert uh uno being replaced _ the existing um ground.  I think it's a 36" pipe that's under there now & uh I, I don't, I wanna say around (17?) thousand & up.  & I'm just goin' off the recollection - I mean there was a (memo cited?) before. 


MP:  YH, What would be a temp fix?  JM:  I would, with, with Tom's approval, I would consider grouting of an extension onto the, what would we wanna call that, the east side of that property, off of the road, driving as such that _ rip-rap would (not increase steadily?), might get a _ _ _. That's one of the things I want to discuss with um the eng. 


JW?: Why don't you go up to his house?  JM:  Yes, yeah.  Extendin' it that way, then possibly turnin' a little bit & then puttin' some larger rip-rap around it;  try to stabilize the bank. 


MP?:  _ I make a motion to go ahead & do somethin' like that _ _ _ 'cause that street is startin' to crack.  ?:  Ok.  JW:  2nd that.  DM:  q/c?  All in favor, say (voice vote - none heard opposed)  Ok, if you talk to TW either or if you think you have enough info from TW already or if you need to _ _ out a _ _ _ for - JM:  Tom has not even looked at it with his - it's just based on me lookin' at it.  I, I wanna, I wanna get a little bit of Tom's uh _ _ _ sayin' yeah, I agree _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. 


5/3/04 BOA - Section  9 of  17


Third item was Morton Grove's stormpipe update - the update is still we're waiting for the Bd to uh give me the money for that.  I believe that Tom has talked to (the devr?) _ _ _ _ thousand dollars. 


JW: _ I think the uh mayor put all those items in the FW&M _ _ _ _ _ - DM:  Do you have some time for that or are we lookin' at it to see if we have the money for them at least to do the eng'g study?  JM:  Tom & I - they, they authorized Tom I believe 3 hrs to review this.  DM:  I thought that was the case _ the actual, saved with the actual project that we need to review in FW&M for uh - at least TW does have some time to give us an idea of what work would be required;  I guess a ballpark est on the cost of it. 


JM:  We met with the residents in the area & walked over what Tom & he had did a, we'll call it a shop drawing & I have that in my office so it won't - we're going to be describing it to the residents in the area & uh give 'em some other visuals not with the seal on it _ _ _ _ & we hope that the city crews could uh do the work & we feel pretty confident _ _ _ that work also & uh resolve (most?) of the storm water issues that we _ _. 


JW:  Yeah, but he's gonna up the dollars _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - JM:  15 or 20,000 I believe.  DM:  Is that material & labor?  JM:  Uh we were just lookin' at material & bringing uno possibly _ _ _ _ _ _ might be a - DM:  So at least 15,000 for material & rental equipmt?  JM:  Yeah, I was hopin' to fund the labor out of my dept. 


5/3/04 BOA - Section  10 of  17


4th item is dirt in front of The Elevator - Um I've been in touch with um Jeff (Gloomer?) quite frequently;  his dad asked me to look into this.  I called the water co;  it was approximately 2 wks ago;  I don't have the exact date.  & they told me that they would have a crew out there the next day to start workin' on that.  & uh if anybody's been drivin' thru there, they have been repairing sidewalks & approaches & uh I'm only assuming that they're just gonna continue to the west & complete all those repairs as uh as the work gets completed. 


MP?: _ _ _ by next _ _ _ _ _?  JM:  I can't speak for the water co.  MP:  'cause this was brought up about a month or so ago & it seems like nothin' ever happens _ _ _ _ _ _ - JM:  Do you have a response?  Um the only discussions I had with it was with um the water co.  They were tryin' to hold the city liable for it;  tryin' to say it was the city's expemse & wanted us to pay them for repairin' it.  I had some issues with that & I spoke with 'em on it.  They kind of just walked off of the job _ _ _ _ I was at The Elevator & Mr. Grellner mentioned something;  I call him Judge _ _.  But Mr. Grellner mentioned it to me & I told him I would look into it.  I called uh Rick Olsen with the water co & he, that day, & he told me that he was gonna, er his person that was under contract, that work had started the next day & it did.  & I called Jeff back & I told Jeff & I spoke to Jeff again the last wk.  I called _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ was taking place there.  The water co has not contacted me & gave me any update since my initial call to Rick Olsen.


AP(audience person): We cannot hear you. JM:  I'm speakin' directly into this. 


MP:  I guess what I'm askin' is, a month & a half ago it was brought up & it just seems like nothin' was gonna - until you talk to JM.  JEM:  When I contacted MO Am Water Co is when the discussion about the city havin' to pay for the upgrades to the sidewalks started;  & that discussion took a long time to get thru.  Their position was that all the sidewalks that they tore up to install the new main, the city would have to pay to replace.  & - DM: _ _ - JEM: (if?) the city's position was different than that & it took quite some time to resolve that (fact?). 


DM:  Could we put the - have 'em put the dirt back for now & then discuss the sidewalks so at least it's lookin' better than it looks now?  JM:  They're makin' the repairs now, YH.  I can check with the contractor if he's out there workin' tomorrow & ask him if he's got his timeframe of when to be completed.  From what I see of the work, I can't see them bein' more than a wk out, but I don't wanna speak for him.  DM:  _ _ _ check;  tell him - JM:  I will, I will gladly look into it & talk to the contractor & MO Am Water Co & get a completion date.  DM:  Tku. Go ahead & issue (at least?) this time_ _ - ?: For now _ _.  JM:  You had - oh, I'm sorry.


5/3/04 BOA - Section  11 of  17


JW: Could I slip one ques in here real quick?  Back in behind the, behind Mr. Carroll's house & Bonnie & Donny - ?: _ _ _ _ - JW: _ _ _ _  - DM:  Oh, ok, I'm sorry.  JW:  that uh ditch that the State has created back there;  there's no safety rail or anything.  Have they - I know you've been in contact with 'em - kids have already been around that thing playin' & that thing gets pretty deep & rugged there.  Are they gonna put in safety rail or will they put a safety rail?  I don't want the city to do it because that means we'll take liability;  'cause they built that thing & they had no fencing around this pit.  It's just a big open pit;  concrete, rocks & sharp edges stickin' out.  Do uno if they're, or could you get 'em to put something up? 


JM:  That was one of the items that we discussed, JW, when we were tryin' to get the State to authorize us to put some lights & things of that nature up.  & I warned the full bd at that time about taking the liability for these items over street lights because they weren't gonna, they were holdin' us back then;  basically, um take over the maintenance of these items & we'll let you put your streetlights up.  They have started on our wish list that we told 'em that we wanted done before we'd accept maint.  But other than makin' some repairs to that inlet that kind of sits behind Bonnie & Dottie's, Harrington's, Joe Harrington's & that area, they made some repairs to that. &there was a collapsed pipe,; they cleaned that out & repaired that.  There's been no mention to me um we could always request anything & see what they say.  But I, if, if we're wantin' some type of a fence, I would kind of like somebody to show me exactly what they're wantingIf there's a resident or if you'd like me to meet you there - um if you're just talkin' about the open ditch that's runnin' behind them -


JW:  Yeah, (Lonnie?) & Donny is Mr. Carroll contacted me about it, so if you could (get within his own?) I think any kind of safety - I don't think they're wantin' anything special, just somethin' to keep the kids from fallin' down there _ _ _ _ if it's alright with the mayor & the Bd.  DM:  Yeah, something _ _.  There's a ditch in here _ Quinwood I thought _ _ talkin' about at first.  JW: Yeah.  DM: _ _ _ _ the other ditch - JW:  Yeah.  DM:  on there.  JW:  No problem _ _ _ - DM:  Yeah, I know - JW: _ _ - DM: now I guess. 


5/3/04 BOA - Section  12 of  17


JM: Also there was an item brought up;  um letters to _ regardin' the grass on Boyd.  MP:  I was just wonderin' if _ _ _ _ _ - JM:  Have not had a response back to them, from them;  I'm sorry.  Uh I do anticipate contacting uh TW & see if they have possibly contacted him since he was our agent with them. 


5/3/04 BOA - Section  13 of 17


& the last item, YH, I don't know if that was supposed to be brought up under me or not, was 3 new trucks.  You didn't say where you were placin' that.  MP:  Are you gonna put beacon lights on _ _ _ _ _?  JM:  We're looking at a um uh newer um light system that's more up-todate _ _ _ _ _ _, but yes, we're plannin' on puttin' some type of a safety light & a back-up beepers on those 2 trucks.  MP: _ _ _ _ yellow flashing light? 


JM:  Relatively the same um we have - the mayor & I have been in discussions with that & um I have not got over to look at some of the uh ideals that we're lookin' at & pricin' 'em.  There's been a lot of things goin' on with the levee & relocations & things & uh one of the ideals we were lookin' at was about, I wanna say 200 & somethin' dollars, plus we would have to install them. The lights are probably uh in the upper 100's & $800 is the yellow beacon lights. 


DM:  Well I guess foul.   JM & I were lookin' at the trucks Env'l Svcs is using working on the levee & they use the, I guess, federal code for truck safety.  One of the things had lights built into the tail lights & flash & was pretty uh easily seen just because of the bright strobe - ?: _ - DM: fact that they were both in the front & the rear so I thought that that would give us a good reflection & down the road, if we do so, we wouldn't have the hole in the roof like the other trucks required.  So if it meets the safety requiremt, it also keeps the truck _ _ _ good shapes. 


MP:  I guess I was just lookin' at the price & if you really price 'em, they're not  _ _ _ _ - DM: For strobe light _ _ _ - MP: Strobe light, yes. Compared to uno 100 or 100 & a 1/2 _ _ - JM:  Um I've priced 'em at 3 different locations & they were in the $200 range.  If you wanna talk about installation, yeah, they were probably 190 to 100 er $225 installation, but it would be my hope if we did that, that our uh mechanic would install them.  MP:  But you still have to pay him to install 'em.  JM:  Yes. MP:  So the price goes back up. 


JKB:  YH,  I'd like to _ _ _ the guys that does it all the time, professionals that installs it.  DM:  Is there an instruction manual to follow that...(MTG CONTINUES about truck lights & then per DA, a dangerous tree limb on a city-property tree in the 600 block of Leonard, between Leonard & Vest in the alley;  then)...DM:  JEM, you have the floor.


5/3/04 BOA - Section  14 of  17


JEM:  Mr. Mayor, uh I have 3 things from the Bd;  uh Summertree Condos Street update.  Um EM & I had been working on a proposal trying to get that resolved & notified 'em to no avail in the past.  The owner of the street has been notified that he is allowing a nuisance to be in existence on his property. Um & he has not responded at this point in time.  It is EM's & my intention that EM thru our discussions was going to file a civil lawsuit against the owner of the street for failure to, for allowing a nuisance to - _ _ _ _ allowing a nuisance to remain unabated in circuit court, civil court. 


EM:  Of course I need, I would need the Bd's permission to do so.  We can discuss that at length later this evening uh sort of in conjunction with _ _ _ _ _ _ _.  DM?:  If this is private property, would the city file a lawsuit or would the Condominium Assn file that?  EM:  Mutually together;  um you can't maintain a nuisance even on private property _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. 


MP:  When they have uh - ?: _ _ - ?:  _ _ - ?: _ -  ?: _ - MP:  Can the city allow to go over there & cut it & tax _?  Put the (boom?) on their taxes?  DM:  I believe we send a letter;  then after the 2nd letter, if they don't do it, then we can charge $50 per 1/2 hour _ _ _ _ -  MP:  Well, this has been going on for a long time.  EM:  It's a separate reordinance & that's correct.   


MP:  So why can't the city go in there & repair the street & charge it as taxes?  EM:  I, I suppose we could, but the amt of money involved here is considerable & I don't know if you'd want to even approach it that way.  I would think that you'd rather approach it so that the city's not out of the money.  MP:  Alright.  EM:  We, we can discuss it uh _ _ possible litigation _ _ _ - MP:  Are we spending money at (Carneke's?)  EM?: Sure _ _.  MP:  We're spendin' it now!  ?: _ - MP:  I mean each time this comes up, it's more money spent;  by that time they could've been done.  EM: _ I think - let's talk about it a little later in Ex Ses;  you'll hear some, some of the estimates _ _ _.  MP:  Ok. 


5/3/04 BOA - Section  15 of  17


JEM:  KT brought up the house on uh Main & Vance. There seems to be a bit of uh confusion as to who owns that house at Main & VanceI've had uh numerous discussions with the mayor, we have &, & uh EM concerning this matter.  I've requested a Letter Report thru a uh title co to determine who the true owner of the property is.  Um at that time, we will take the appropriate next step, either notifying the owner of the property to - uh that we're gonna pursue demolition on the structure, a Demolition Hearing on the structure or uh depending upon how it urns out, we may be able to not have to go thru the demolition process.  I can't elaborate beyond that at this point. 


KT:  Uh the _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ pick-up or something, does that belong to that house or does that belong to the uh the strip mall?  JEM:  I'm not positive who the owners of the vehicles are.  I've requested Chad Luis with the Police Dept to go check those vehicles.  They are properly licensed & they're parked on an improved surface.  I don't know who the owners of the vehicles are, but he did check that for me 'cause I assumed one of 'em might not be licensed 'cause it hasn't moved in 6 mos or longer;  & he informed me that they were properly licensed.  KT:  I thought maybe they belonged to that house.  JEM:  I don't believe there's anyone - the house is vacant.


44 Francis, basemt excavation - uh I will contact the owner regarding that & inform him that he needs to regrade that lot to fill it uh, remove the excavation.  I don't know whether there's enough material on site, but certainly it can be graded so that there's not a drop off.  I will notify them _ _ _ _.  MP:  On both sides, it's _ _ _ _;  it's just like a 6' drop off.  JEM:  If we don't get a response uh from the owner in a timely manner - if I have trouble getting a hold of 'em, I will talk to Jim.  Um I know we have a lot of orange const fencing & as a temp measure, perhaps we could erect some fencing around it to keep the kids away from the hazard until we can resolve it.  As uno due process sometimes takes quite a while & that child could fall in at any time so I'll talk to Jim regarding it tomorrow & see if we can't coordinate something. 


5/3/04 BOA - Section  16 of  17


DM:  _ anything else that the Bd - MMW:  I was, I was curious;  we've had a, a few mtgs ago you had approached the Bd about updating the uh housing uh maint codes.  _ _ _ you were still - what the status of that is?  JEM:  Um to the best of my knowledge, it's still in the LEG Cmte.  Uh we've obtained - at the 1st mtg, we were requested to - I was requested to order um a copy - 4 copies of the property maint code doc for considering.  I've done that & uh they are in the mayor's office with Rosemary.  They can be - the ald...(exchange tapes - being unfamiliar with new Ald MMW's voice, speaker ID is a bit difficult)...


RH?: What codes are we using now, date-wise?  JEM: Um, we have a - RH?:  Wasn't it '94?   JEM:  code that was written by the city & I'm, I'm, I apologize, I don't have my ord book up here, but I don't know the exact date when it was adopted.  It's in the '90's uh & it is kind of a - we wrote it ourselves apparently, from what I can see;  it's not a national doc.  ?: _ '94 _ - JEM:  & so there are (handicaps?) -


MMW:  The reason why I asked, you brought, you talked also when we were talking about this was (TIF?), something with insurance that would bring it up to - ?: update - MMW:  update or - JEM:  We were talking about bldg codes & the other, yes.  Those, right now we're using the '99 bldg code.  Um there is the 2000 & a 2003 Edition that has come out.  Uh my recommended at the uh LEG Cmte that we update all the codes to 2003 & then further recommended we get - the code is published every 3 yrs & we should get on the 3-yr cycle in order to maintain th newest codes so that we can get the insurance ratings approved & thereby reduce the rates for the residents. 


MMW?:  When reducing the rates, it's our - trying to - Do we have to come up to the newest codes or can we step up 2 yrs, a yr?  I mean is it like a step up or does it go up to 2003 or whatever?  JEM:  The - If we are within 2 generations of the codes, uh we're ok.  The reason that I recommend we just come up to the 2003, is that it is the current code that's been out since Jan.  It'll be published again in 2006 & we're in 2004, so we wouldn't get very much life out of goin' to the 2004.  We'd have to go to the 2003 to be within 2 generations to stay at the point where the insurance industry wants us to be to get the maximum credit.  ?:  2003?  JEM:  Right.  So that's why I'm recommending the '03 code & then if we don't get the 2006 code adopted until 2007, then you've still got that timeframe where it's okay as far as the insurance company is concerned.


MMW?:  Timeframe is how many yrs?  4?  JEM:  Every 3 yrs it's published.  TB:  YH, What were the books that you got?  Were they 2003 that we're gonna look at?  JEM:  2003 Internat'l Property Maint Code are the books that I purchased or renewed.  DM:  TB, Do you have anything else?  TB:  _ just the one thing.  DM:  KT. 


KT:  Is, is this a federal code, a state code, a county code?  JEM:  The Internat'l Code Council is a, is the corporation that writes model codes for this country.  There used to be 3 model code organizations;  they went to a corporate merger & there is now one model code org that writes codes for the U.S.   They are also adopted in other countries um & it's a concensus process.  I can go into detail with it if you (allowed it as another tax collect?). 


KT:  May I have a copy of that _ _ _ _ _ legislation _ _?  JEM:  I'll talk to Rosemary about it tomorrow.  The Property Main Code is very thin.  It's the bldg codes that - JW:  I thought you were gonna give her the whole BOCA code!  JEM:  Oh, that's big!  KT: (chuckle) No, _ _ -  DM:  Any other ques?  Tku, JEM.  ?: _ -  ?: _ _ - JEM:  Internat'l - uhh think they're on the 2000 right now & they're goin' to 2003 right now. 


5/3/04 BOA - Section  17 of  17


DM:  Next under the Police Report, Lt Mowery said he'd like to pass out some accommodations here & I'm honored to be able to assist him on this so _ _ _ _ _.  LtM:  Major (Fitch?) would come up & give us a hand here...


(MTG CONTINUES with about 5 police awards;  KT cmts re VP's Public Image Cmte of Joan Shoop, Vivian Blackman, Jim Zeeks & Brian Whitworth & their mtg this Wed to elect officers;  MMW inquires about ords & whether the police can do anything about kids zipping thru stop signs on their scooters;  then)...


JW:  I just had one ques.  It might've been while you was on vacation or maybe it wasn't - a city official contacted me & uh seems a Friday night, we only had one officer on duty.  Is that a normal practice?  Lt Mowery?:  Oh, it's not normal, but it does happen.  Try to have 2, 3 sometimes, but it doesn't always work out that way.  DM:  Ok, tku.


DM:  Under Bills, we have a disbursemt request.  JW?:  Move (aport?).  TB?:  2nd.  DM: q/c?  All in favor, say - (voice vote - none heard opposed)  Motion carries.  Motion to go into Ex Ses?  DA?:  So moved.  ?&?:  2nd.  (roll call vote)  MW:  8 yes.  (Audience disburses.)