MOPR'S   3/6/06   VP   BOA   MTG   MINS

 

Notes:  With a standard agenda the mtg started at 7:30, adjourned 8:43pm.  The chamber room has been painted & the copier in the back is no longer enclosed.  On 2/6/06 the chamber room was & remains rearranged.  Barricading the BOA on their stage (dais) is a huge empty table & the 2 tables with the city staff & such from the back of the room are now up front, perpendicular to the stage with the podium that had been properly-angled on the right side, now centered between the tables.  The audience has been pushed to the back of the room where it's even more difficult to hear;  Speakers' backs will be to them & hinder the view of stage people mumbling as usual far from their mics. 

 

Present:   RH,  DLC,  DA,  JKB,  MW,  Interim Mayor JW,  EM,  Ed Walker,  MP,  MMW,  SD. 

 

Audience:   Guesstimate 17 + 5 city staff & such (Pam, Jeff Schaub, JM, DC, LtM). 


 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  1 of  23

 

JW:  Call this mtg to order of 3/6/06.  I have no audience uh request cards but I see we have a special guest, Laura Kinder, the School Superintendent & I'm allow her some time if she wants to come up & introduce herself to the Bd & the audience & field any ques's that she has for us at this time.  MsKinder:  (standing instead at her chair)  Ok, I didn't really have any ques's.  I just think it's important for us to have good communications between the ald, the city & the school dist.  & I've been visiting with some of u recently.  I certainly appreciate that but I did want to tell all of u to please contact me if the school can be helpful in any way.  Tku.

 

JW:  Ok, tku very much!  I'm sure they all will.  RH, Do u have anything to add to the agenda tonight?  RH:  Nothing, YH.  JW:  DLC.  DLC:  Uh yes I do uh the Ec Growth had a mtg here Thursday.  I'd like to get some info on that;  I have several ques's;  & also, the Eminent Domain was put into a cmte & we did not act on - could not act on it.  I'd like for that to be discussed this evening & too many uh (Sam Wardens?) is in our info pkt _ _ _.  JW:  Ok, we'll do both those under the Mayor's Report if that's alright.  DLC:  _ with me.  JW:  Tku.  DA.  DA:  Uh yes, YH, I have one item & uh probably under the Bldg Cmsnr's Report - a ques uh from a resident in Crescent Valley Ct.   JW:  Ok, we'll do that under uh Jim's report.  DC:  That'd be fine, tku.  JW:  JKB.  JKB:  Nothin', YH.  JW:  Ald Walker.  Ald Walker:  Nothing, YH.  JW:  MP. 

 

MP:  Uh just a ques for EM.  JW:  On - regarding (pause) - MP:  Ummm changing the mins, amending Sec 405.7 _ _ _ _ letters for zoning.  Changin' it so where when we have a PBH, they have to - whether they have it before the Bd _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ notify prop owners.  JW:  We'll put that under uh Bldg Cmsnr's Report.  MP:  Tku. JW:  Is that it?  MP:  Yes, sir.  JW:  MMW. 

 

MMW:  Yeah, I just briefly wanna go over info on the annexation map plan _ _ _ _ (construct a?) Ballwin letter;  it (isn't?) in the pkt . Uh & a couple cmts I guess for (the policemen who?) cover that over there, um their report (is enlightening?).  JW:  That'd be FINE!  MMW:  Uh then I also was curious about this uh MO svc (sending?) a letter - perhaps this dept kinda summed that up but (did?) not show it.  I guess _ _ _ _ _ _.  JW:  We'll make sure he gets updated on that.  MMW:  That would be fantastic, tku, YH, _ _ _ _ _ this point.   JW:  SD.  SD:  Not at this time, YH, tku. 

 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  2 of  23

 

JW:  & I, I believe Gene Blandford is somewhere hidin' in the back back there.  Uh I'd like to move him towards the uh upper part of the agenda so we could uh hear his cmts & ques's too.  MW:  (takes roll)  8 present.  (Pledge)  JW:   Can we have a motion to adopt the agenda as amended?  ?&?: So moved.  DA?:  2nd.  JW:  Is there any discussion or ques's?  (ayes - none heard opposed)  Motion carries.  We have Bd mtg mins;  wbp?  ?:  Move approval.  MMW:  2nd.  JW:  That'll be uh both sets, February  - ?:  That's correct.  JW:  21st & 22nd.  SD?:  Yes, YH.  ?:  _ _ - JW:   Is there any discussion?  (ayes - none heard opposed) Motion carries. 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  3 of  23

 

I think uh right now we'll entertain Mr Gene Blandford.  Please come up, give us an update on the New Town Dev & anything else u wanna talk about.

 

MrB:  Uh, tku, uh Mr Mayor.  Um I guess uh I'll start with uh what's happened in about the last month or so.  Uh I've talked to numerous individuals, the devr.  I've talked to numerous prop owners in the New Town area.  Uh, uh I would say that the process is moving along in a normal fashion;  uh Sansone is out uh trying to acquire options on the properties still.  Uh I think they are getting uh - are they moving along uh as well as can be expected? 

 

Uh last Thursday, uh we had a mtg here at city hall with uh probably 20 or so people in attendance with uh - it was more the uh Dept of Ec Dev.  Some people from the State uh came down.  Uh we talked about the project with them.  Uh I think your project was well rcv'd.  Uh one of them told me they didn't know your levee was done, so I think that's a good thing that we had that mtg so they at least know that the levee is, is completed & moving fwd. 

 

Uh they were told that uh any type of project down here has a lot of infrastructure needs, primarily a road & uh access issues & that uh if, if the project was gonna move fwd, that the city uh thru its redev mechanisms could provide some assistance possibly but that more than likely there would need to be some assistance from the State or others to try & tackle some of the infrastructure needs down hereUh this morning I emailed uh them a couple of the maps that they show - uh that we showed 'em at the mtg on Th just to keep uh VP in front of 'em.  Umm with that I would say that I would think that over the next month or so that we should have uh much more info than we have now.  Uh I think we're getting close to a point where we'll be able to uh come to the public with a better picture of what uh we think might happen down here. 

 

Uh just to update the public a little bit, uh the New Town Dev or the New Town Plan that we've been sort of talking about now for 6 months or so, sort of can see the eastern half of the New Town area or the lower part of VP down here east of 7th St is industrial!  Sansone submitted a proposal as u all know that showed that broken up into several uh what I would call smaller lots than a biz park layout which would be 3 to 5-ac lots with maybe 50 to 75K sq' bldgs on 'em.  Now they're talking about doing some sort of supplier-type part assoc'd with the Chrysler uh Plant.  Uh I think I can say that VP is probably in the running with at least one other cmty that I know of uh for that type of use assoc'd with the Chrysler Plant.  Um they're talking about a need in this area for about a M sq' of industrial uses, some of those assoc'd with Chrysler & just uh the market demand. 

 

I know Fenton has tried to find a location for that sort of use in the last yr for that - devise a project I would say in the last yr or so & I know that uh another town out the 44 corridor has been trying to be able to provide that level of uh industrial sq footage into the southwest market is VP is part of, of the southwest market area for industrial-type projects.  There is no industrial land to use or land AVAILABLE around here & so the market is looking for it & VP is front & center & uh & but there is competition. So uh I think Sansone's are moving fwd as I said & uh I think uh over the next month, (yr?) or so we should get uh a much bigger picture that we can put before u in terms of what we think uh is gonna happen.  Eric, would u like to add anything else from the mtg the other day or anything?

 

EM:  Uh well, I guess if, if there were any ques's about it - this was really a, uh, a mtg between DED, Dept of Ec Dev.  MrG:  & they, they called (the devr?) - EM:  They called this, this mtg with Sansone & this was the, the natural place to meet.  They were here to look at the City of VP actually & hear a presentation from Sansone & we were invited to present TECHNICAL assistance if necessary. 

 

MrB:  It kinda turned into much more of a mtg I think than - EM:  Yeah &, & I think just by the fact that they weren't aware that our levee was done, it was rather good that the, that the uh mayor &, & some other city admin ofc'ls were here.  Umm the mtg lasted an hour, hour & a half.  

 

I guess what, what impressed me most was the factor that time is of the essence.  Uh for this project, they need it to begin by this time next yr (so that?) (someone coughs) uh (voyage?) was uh, was enterable today.  The project with its virture, _ _ (about a M & a half ?) $.  (I didn't?) hear everybody talking about - to pay for it. 

 

MrG:  It was more than a M & a half.  EM:  Uh well not, not - excluding the, the, the road - MrB:  Road & everything, yeah.  EM:  Uh I think the total project was just about $6M.  MrB:  Right.  EM:  Uh I didn't hear anybody talking-up to, to pay for it but everybody - MrB:  &, & I made a point to point out that, as I said before that, that if any type of project is gonna happen down here that it would need to be with assistance & that - part of that reason is, is the city has undertaken uh uno from a financial standpoint uh, uh the city & the taxing dists for that matter - from a financial standpoint, have taken on the burden of using uh incentives to get the LEVEE completed & so the city 'n the taxing dists have already uh, uh provided assistance to do THAT for the lower area of VP & then what's needed now is the infrastructure to support being able to develop that &, & so it was, it was I think made fairly clear that, that it - the project is moving money fwd & the city would like to see assistance from uh from uh somewhere other than the local, local taxing dists.

 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  4 of  23

 

JW:  DLC, u had some ques's - I don't know if he covered any of it or u have - DLC:  Well, I was wantin' to know who CALLED this mtg.  JW:  Sansone & theee - MrB:  State Dept of Ec Dev - I, I didn't take the call.  I mean I don't know who the call came in to.  EM:  I, I guess I got the call Tuesssday I think from Sansone & Sansone said that they had been requested uh, uh to, to give to ED {sic} a tour of the city.  Uh &, & I resolved it in the city call - wanted to know if anybody from the city would be there like in a TECHNICAL _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ &, & that's what happened! 

 

DLC:  Well, I guess my next ques is uh why wasn't the BOA invited to this?  AP:  Right.  EM:  Uh uno well, it really was a - it was an admin sort of a mtg.  Uh it wasn't uh any sort of mtg between city ofc'ls in a LEG capacity.  There was no ACTION agenda or anything else like _ _ _ _ _ _ _  - MrB:  It was more along the lines of just State people to get up to speed on what's going on in VP & that's what it was - EM:  Sure.  MrB:  & most of it was uh informing the State of what's going on here. 

 

DLC:  I think being informed with the State as well as to the city - I think the city fathers should've been invited to this mtg!  It just kind of makes me suspicious of what's GOING ON if we're having mtgs of this sort & the BOA doesn't know anything about it!  We're the ones that are gonna be making decisions in the future, based on the info we RCV!  If they have mtgs & we do not rcv any info, I don't have much for a DECISION!

 

I need the facts that overthrow with one way or the other on these - on this project & being left out of the mtgs at this, this point, just uh just rubs me the wrong way to be honest with u.  I think the BOA should've been invited.  I would hope in the future in discussions IN city hall on matters of this magnitude, I think the BOA should be invited!  May wish not to attend, that's up to them but I think the bd should be invited.  I would appreciate it in the future.  Tku.  (aud applauds)

 

JW:  Is there any other ques's for Gene?  DA:  YH.  JW:  DA.  DA:  Again, my lack of askin' a ques or speakin' on this is not because I'm not interested & concerned;  however, I do have on file, a letter that I have a financial uh, uh conflict of interest in the redev.  So I'll, I'll remain quiet on this issue as well as any discussion on Eminent Domain.  JW:  Tku, DA.  Is there any other ques's _ _? 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  5 of  23

 

MrB:  One other quick update on the CPlan, I'm mtg with uh the dept heads this Thursday to go over some stuff for the, the capital improvemt portion of the CPlan which is sort of the, the part of the CPlan where u look out 5 yrs & sort of thort {sic} to look at the uh how uh how u wanna address uh what u wanna address in terms of uh your budgets.  & I always start with uh the dept heads & get that info from them because they're the ones on the ground;  they know uh they know what's going on & can provide the inside into that.  So I always meet with them 1st & then hope - my goal is that the uh P&Z mtg next Tues uh to put that info together for uh P&Z for them to review.

 

& then uh the - er the CPlan process uh has sort of slowed down here in the last month or 2.  Um I think we need about one more month of uh a slow pace on the CPlan until we can get a little bit clearer picture from San- the Sansone Group on what's going on down here.  But I would think at the - not - at the April mtg, I, I think we might be able to uh move fwd with some things on the CPlan.  Uh the process is moving fwd with that.  Then I know some of u on P&Z;  I just wanna touch base with u on that. That's all I have!

 

JW:  Gene, Just for clarification, I know Sansone was gonna come up with a projected # of jobs that that project maybe could (pause) - MrB:  I talked with the, the people from the State after the mtg the other day & uh told them that uh that's something that we wanted to uh, uh, uh get to kind of quickly here.  So that was one I - in my email to the, to the people of the State where I put those graphics in that I mentioned that & that I've, I've needed to talk to them about _ _ -

 

JW:  Just for info'l purposes so the aud has it fwd, that they DID say that IF they DIDN'T get the $6M road bridge that it's - wouldn't KILL the project;  it just might not make it as attractive, correct? 

 

MrB:  Well, if the, the - in order to make a biz park on the eastern end, um I don't think the bridge is, is - it's sort of a toss-up on how - the bridge would help a biz park on the eastern end I think dev FAST.  The thing that the bridge - where the bridge gets tied in is when u start talking about this (power park or car part?) issues.  Um with the way the uh carmakers build cars nowadays, they uh they have the in-time delivery of, of parts.  So when someone's car's coming down the assembly line on - over there at Chrysler, somewhere around here there is somebody putting the seats together for that car in final-assemply & takin' it over - takin' 'em, takin' 'em over there.  They like to be uh suppliers like to be within 15 mins driving time of the plants that they're serving. 

 

Uh with the RR tracks on the western end & that being the only access OUT of the lower area in terms of uh the quickest access to, to Chrysler, suppliers are uh somewhat reluctant to locate down here because there might be train-times that they have to wait for &, & they don't LIKE that.  Uh the, the rumored location that is also looking at, at this - er the potential to put this in is in Pacific which is about 20 mins away;  uh which is outside that 15-min distance that they find desirable but close enough to it that they could probably make it work. 

 

So the bridge factors in when u begin to look at uh most definitely the supplier part, the bridge is a key factor.  Being able to do industrial on that end, the bridge helps it, probably helps it build out faster, also probably gives the city an opp to have comm uses uh in - have an expanded area in the lower area because now people aren't having to cross over the RR tracks & those sorts of things cause they're sort of detrimental to, to comm retail-type uses.  So the bridge helps in terms of uh making it possible to bring in bigger & different types of tenants to an industrial park but it also would help the city in terms of comm & retail dev down in the lower area because of that sense.  So while the bridge is not KEY to industrial uses on the eastern end, it augments & it makes it much more desirable & opens up different markets to the city than if it wasn't _.

 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  6 of  23

 

JW:  Gene, Did u take it that StLCnty was very interested in helping with this bridge & road project?  MrB:  (looks all around behind himself & JW laughs heartily)  Um StLCnty is always uh happy to help on any road project.  Uh according to their rep at the mtg, StLCnty is strapped for cash & has uh programmed a lot of money out, out this way, uh would love to help & hopefully that they will be able to provide uh some help in some fashion.  I'll sort of leave it at that.  JW:  That sounds like a good political answer. 

 

DLC:  I have one more ques.  U're talking about bldgs down here for Chrysler, were u talking about just warehouses to get things shipped into here & then shipped outta here to Chrysler's Plant or are they gonna have any factory down here that'd - MrB:  It would - DLC: _ - MrB:  it would be the - DLC:  parts?  MrB:  suppliers ASSOC'D with Chrysler.  Um the, the way the supplier-types for the major automotive plants work is that for certain pieces of the car, they require uh some add'l assembling, so they're - they would be bringing in parts on trucks.  Uh on some of 'em they would be doing some light assembly.  For instance let's say there was a certain seat that happened to look - certain clips or certain things on, the final assembly of that seat, the, the parts would be manufactured here but the final assembly of the seat would be done here & then the final assembled seat would be trucked back out & over & uno within an hour or so of the ado over here, would be getting put on the car over across the river.  So it's light assembly uh & uh & then warehousing. 

 

DLC:  _ well uno I've always been under the impression that warehouses don't pay much taxes.  So what I'm kinda - uno if we're looking at a warehouse, we're not looking at a lot of tax $.   If u're talkin' about a 6 to $10M bridge to get in here, taxpayers are gonna have to pay for it.  MrB:  Uh - DLC:  So if u're not bldg _ - ?: _ _ - DLC: _ _ - MrB: until we - DLC:  Uno u're confusing me on the tax base here.  Are we gonna be getting a, a big tax base here from this or are we just talking about (pennies?)? 

 

MrB:  Well, I mean 1st of all - ?:  _ - MrB:  u're talking about a M sq' & u're talking about probably in the neighborhood of 30 to $35 a sq' in const costs, so u're about 35M or so & that would result in about a $10M assessed value just for that M sq' & the last time I looked I think in the whole lower area down here, I wanna say the assessed value was 4M or - EM:  No, that's our BASE.  I mean - MrB:  That's the base.  EM:  &, & the base includes everything out to uh - MrB:  Well, no I mean in the lower area here;  not in the TIF. 

 

EM:  But I mean the TIF base is $4M.  So I, I, I would think - MrB:  Maybe it was just 3 & a half or somethin'.  EM:  Yeah.  MrB:  I forget what it was.  EM:  I, I, I, I would think that sounds maybe more like _ - MrB:  so that (a Million?) sq' would, would result in a uno 6 to $7M increase in assessed value. 

 

Uh one of the things that we haven't talked about yet as a BODY because we haven't yet got a refined uh site plan from the Sansone is uh what the city would like to see out of the project that Sansone might be presenting what, what THEY want, but the city has yet - in terms of this BODY, we have yet to have that discussion about what the city has - or what benefits there are for the city.  Until we have some harder-line Sansone uh we're not quite yet ready to have that discussion. 

 

One of the things I plan on doing here in the next wk or so is starting to run some #'s that look at different ways that we might be able to generate revenue from different types of uh sources, TIF, 353, Super TIF um to try & come up with the, with the revenue that will help pay for some of these improvemts.  Um 6 to $7M of incremental assessed value uh at the city's tax rate of - I was gonna say 8 - 850 - 8 - $8 a - let's say it's $6M of assessed value, incremental assessed value, uh so that'd be $480K a yr that would be generated from TIF sources;  not part of the area down here since it's an existing TIF.  So there would be something done from that. 

 

Super TIF allows u to uh capture STATE INCOME TAX that's generated in the area.  Uh usin' a # of about one employee per 1K sq', uh with a M sq', u're looking at 1K employees with a payroll of maybe 55K per employee, but say that's $55M & u wanted the benefits of Super TIF, u're able to capture State Income Taxes generated within your area. 

 

Now u have to get that annually aprop'd each yr but u guys are familiar with having to get monies annually aprop'd by State, Federal uh, uh gov'ts down here.  So there are ways to generate a SIGNIFICANT amt of revenue even from uh industrial uses with the idea that if u're gonna PROVIDE some assistance, it's gonna be for things like roads & the bridge which SHOULD be able to generate some other opps for down here like retail which may be able to get to u uh more revenues from on a SALES Tax side equation.  So we have yet to have that disucssion about the benefits to VP & I intend to have one as soon as we get a little bit (border or harder?) lines on some maps _ _ _ _. 

 

JW:  Is there any other ques's for Gene?  MrB:  Tks for gettin' me UP FRONT!  JW: Wait a min, Gene, _ _ _ _ _.  MrB:  OK!  JW:  Is there anyyy truth - have u heard any of the rumor about the uh Bass Pro Shop people wantin' to get into VP?  I, I even heard that on a radio sta.  They announced they was comin' to StL Ave & Marshall.   MrB:  Uh I heard the same rumor but the only people I heard that rumor from were people from VP.  I did not hear it on the radio.  I asked around, uh I haven't heard anything thru the grapevine but I continue to ask, so uh if I hear anything, I'll be sure & let uno.

 

JW: Tks.  MrB:  It'd be a GREAT location in my mind for one I know that.  JW:  Good wishful thinking anyway.  MrB:  We can always hope for the best, yeah.  JW:  Tku.  I guess we'll see u at the next mtg, next month?  MrB:  I'll be, I'll be at the next mtg next month & I'll be at P&Z uh next Tues.  JW:  Tku. MrB:  & I'll meet the new chairman.  JW:  He's a nice guy _ _.

 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  7 of  23

 

Cmte Reports - we have (June?) LEG Cmte _ Reports - What's the Chairman's pleasure?  U want our vote?  MP:  Uh, YH, on the 2 LEG Cmte Mins of 2/22/06 & then on 3/1/06 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -  JW:  2nd?  MMW:   I'll 2nd it 1st with a ques.  JW:  _ _ -

 

MMW:  _ _ is it possible that we have um adjusted the mayor's salary (based on?) _ _ _ _ _ we have lost hope on it?  _ _ sales tax _ _ _ _ - ?:  _ _ - MMW?:  _ _ just to show (it exactly or it's actually?) _ _ _ - ?: _ _ _ _ - ?:  _ _ _ - JW:  Are u finished, MMW?  MMW:  Yep, that's it. 

 

DLC:  _ _ _ _ don't we have to have an ord on that?  JW:  I guess it would be if (it had to - being enforced?), it would be in back of the - so it would just be approved _ _ mins verifying _ _ _ _ _- ?:  YH,...(exchange tapes, during which I'd noted:  RH:  I didn't hear a 2nd.)  (Due to inaudible speaking & possibly a tape malfunction, 3 mins are indecipherable.)

 

JW:...Is there any more discussion?  ?: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - JW:  All in favor, say - (ayes - none heard opposed).  Motion carried.  Now the min - mins of 3/1/06; wbp?  ?:  Move approval _ _ _ _ - ?:  2nd.   JW:  Is there any discussion?  All in favor, say - (ayes - none heard opposed).  Motion carried.  ?: _ - JW:  DA.  DA:  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - JW:  Ok, tku.  

 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  8 of  23

 

JW:  We have Valley Day Mins of 2/23/06, wbp?  ?:  _ _Valley Day Mins of 2/23/06 _ _ _  - JW:  Any discussion?  All in favor, say (ayes - none heard opposed)  Motion carries

 

We have Valley Days Mins of March 1st? - ?: _ _ _  Valley Days Mins of 3/1/06.  ?: _ _ - JW:  Is there any discussion?  ?: _ - JW:  DLC.  DLC:  The 2nd parag, MMW sug'd to send the page together to Mr Scott Garner saying that he would(n't?) be rcv'g a 60-day extension period (& for any?) amt of - when the city took his property - takin' in order for the city to put improvemts up there (& then helpin' him improve his property?).   Where did they get the authy for makin' this decision for an extension?  (Is this thing valid?)?  JM:  YH. 

 

JW:  I just checked with Jim - the clerk.  Jim's got a cmt but as I - as far as I know, there's no - this won't matter (it's that set thing?) - anything! has been uh -  but I believes  Jim's contacted the guy, is gonna get a written sig on it (for?) the property he gave us. 

 

JM:  Jeff & myself uh have, have contacted him & we {sic} are gettin' a written letter from us {sic} & we are stating there will be no 60-day extension on that & the letter just barely {sic}  states that he is donating the property & the city is using Ademco,  saying one way or the other, he gets no extension.  He still has to abide by all city ords & things like that (in the meantime?).  There is no 60-day extension letter _ _. 

 

JW:  So maybe we should strike the mins - the clause about rcv'g a 60-day extension - JW?: _ _ _ -  MMW?: _ 2nd.  ?:  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - JM:  Is that correct?  ?: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -  JW:  All in favor of _ _ mins, say - (ayes - none heard opposed)  Motion carries...

 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  9 of  23

 

(tape noise)...JW:..._ _ _ we have no ords tonight. Dave wanted to talk under the levee or emerg mgmt, one or the other.  DC:  This is the levee.  Uh back on 2/15 the Levee Cmsn Cmte (had mins?) & DA moved to auth the Levee Coordr to _ _ _ _ possible cable barriers being installed along the levee prop bdry;  2nd by MMW. 

 

Uh in some discussion with uh JM, uh he wanted to really know do u want cable barriers or are we just gonna install some type of post with signs on it.  Uh we would have to go & probably have that surveyed to find out where the extent of 10' from the toe of the levee.  It would be all the way along the land side of the levee.  I would imagine we would want it fenced all the way around the levee wherever it is & have all that surveyed & put uh markers out.  & we could install the posts maybe at every prop line uh on that & with a sign uh on the posts stating uno no uh whatever, trespassing or whatever on this (item fence?).  However the signs would be, I  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _uh I would think they're allowed to put on the sign, AND uh with this - could we do this with uh TIF?

 

JW:  DA, I believe just for clarification would you explain _ _ _ _ bdrys?  DA:   Yes, um the motion, that was just a rcmd um to the motion probably that they have the uh Levee Coordr _ _ (uno?) finds a method of identifying the city's prop line.  As to the cable barriers then, it's not uh _ _ _ _ the reason being we've got bizs now who go to - onto our prop & using some of our levee prop uh at this pointSo this was just a way of uh the city identifying - & the prop owners where to stop using it (& he stopped sworing?).  That led up to the uh cable barriers - was just a sug.  So um but the point about whether (the 2 people?) (he or who?) (asked Brust?) walking into (probably or his property?) - that'd be rather expensive so um (that's my main point.  I couldn't answer?) _ _ -

 

DC:   We have to do it;  I mean we uno I mean I don't know!  How many we have, I mean I would imagine there are 1 or 2 maybe more that are encroaching on it some way or another somewhere in the area I mean, but until we uh - I mean we have one up here on the uh Vance Rd on a - there & we put up a post & they seem to be honoring that.  The last time we were up there, they - they're all on the other side of it.  We, we (probably ques'd it before?) we surveyed the whole thing & figure out where the 10' is from the levee, toe of the levee, all the way around & then put up posts & whether that would uh - maybe if u do it - did have some people up there encroaching on it, u could put a cable up between the post or something like that & put a good sign _ -

 

JW:  Eric, Could this be detailed - DC:  Besides that - EM: _ - JW:  in a city ord?  EM:  just a couple things.  We have (the tistic?) surveys out there so it SHOULD be - it, it's SOMEWHAT (up to a point still on the table?) _ _ _  - DC:  They s- they could be;  I don't, I haven't  - EM:  Why, why don't we - DC:  sit out there - EM:  propose to survey - DC:  lookin' for it - EM:  of the - DC:  down there.  EM:  entire southern leg of the levee?  & I would THINK - I think cable MAY be a GREAT idea depending on how expensive it is 'cause we've had some, some past, some, some BAD experience with encroachmts by uh industrial users out there.

 

JM:  I have a little concern about cable, especially if we're talkin' 10' from the toe of the levee, cuttin' with a mower.  We've never had nothing happen.  We've never had no incidences, BUT say something DID happen with the tractor, I wouldn't wanna cable barrier down there. 

 

?:  _ _, I'm gettin' the other stuff back!  ?: _ of it - EM:  We're talkin' about what - the southern part of the levee & only on - JM:  Oh, that - EM:  this side & between the det basin & the - JMorDC:  This was for the entire levee tho.  EM:  Oh I, I think - DC:  I don't think - EM?: _ _  - DC:  we need - EM?: _ _ _.  DC:   anything on the - I don't think we need any on the river side - EM:  No.  DC:  we need it on the land side - EM:  Right.  DC:  is where we're looking.   EM:  we need it up & down the det basin area on, on the RR to uh - DC?:  end of - EM:  the eastern side of the levee - (part or park?). 

 

JW:  MMW, Do u have a ques?  MMW:  Yeah, oh, I have a - I had a cmt.  I believe that when we were discussing this, we also took into account uh LtM's uh sug that uh we, we have ta find, find a way that the city can actually enforce the, the, the code of, of this encroachmt & that the only way to do that would be to put up some sort of permanent markers.  So any way u cut it, more than likely is gonna have to be uh re-shot & then bdrys are gonna have to be laid out.  & u're best off probably to do it in one time instead of at each violation have to bring someone in & make sure & verify that everything is either beyond that 10' line or not.  So I think we just wanted to put up something in a permanent fashion that -

 

JW:  How 'bout, how 'bout if we would lettin' uh DC & JM & LtM go out & survey the areas they THINK might be encroached upon 'cause I'm like some of the other people, I don't believe EVERY piece of land's gonna have that, that problem.  So maybe next mtg, DC should bring it back & some sugs on what to use with JM & WHERE - if that'd be fine with - MMMW:  Yeah.  JW:  the bd & - MMW:  That'd be fine. 

 

DC:  One of the places that we have encroachmt is not - a barrier is not gonna help it because it's runoff from concrete trucks as uno & that's - barrier or cable is not gonna do it.  Whatever we have done up there, it does pretty good but this is winter time & the uh concrete bizs (haven't?) been goin' too great, but we haven't looked at it but it may be encroaching on - the runoff & uno I don't know.  JW:  If he (feels subject?) - cause he's - he'll be involved in that & uh - DC:  Yeah, well we'll go to take a look at it & see what it is.  But I mean - JW:  Yeah, he's _ -

 

DC:  there's a lotta difference between a const esmt - we had temp const esmts & then we had const limits & there's a little bit difference NOW between the const esmts & where the toe of the levee is & the 10'.  We may get TW involved in this because they did a lot of surveying on the uh new part of the levee over there on I4 (capital i - 4).  But on the rest of it, I don't know how much uh how much we've got as far as - we can tell where the 10' is.  We know where it is up on, up on the Vance Rd, up on the Fishpot levee because we had the posts up there but the rest of it is kind of uno uh we have to get some type of a, a survey up there to uh see where it's at.  & some of it I mean is - 

 

JW:  That's fine;  just bring us back - DC:  Oh, yeah - JW:  your rcmds to the next bd mtg & we'll (someone coughs) (vote it?) from there.  Tku.  DC:  Most of it'd only be from about 10th St, 9th St on up to uh Leonard Park because that's our, our prop up thru there but it wouldn't be that much but we have to establish some kind of point.  JW:  Tku.  Is there any other ques's for DC?  Tks.  DC:  Tku.

 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  10 of  23

 

JW:  Under the uh dept reports, Mayor's Report, there's a letter in your pkt from the VP Cmty Library requesting a couple of uh new members.  It looks like (Joan Hanna D. Young?) & Dorothy Whitteaker.  DA:  YH, I make a motion to approve both appointmts.  ?:  2nd.  JW:  _ there was a 2nd?  ?:  Yes.  JW:  Is there any discussion?  'cause - &, & for the record, uh one of these people is my mother, so I can't MAKE the appointmt.  So the bd is gonna have to make this appointmt.  I'm glad she's uh got a interest over there. 

 

?:  I'll make that motion, YH.  RH?:  Do we have to vote on _ _ - JW:  For both?  ?:  Yes, _ _ _ - MP:  I do have one ques.  Will the library send a letter uh to people, a letter thanking & _ _ _ _ _ - JW:  Probably, I would think both.  MP:  Tku.  JW:  Is there any other discussion?   ?:   2nd.  JW:  I believe it was 2nd'd.  All in favor of the 2 appointmts, say (ayes - none heard opposed)  Motion carried.  Congratulations (I know?) one of the jobs there. 

 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  11 of  23

 

& I believe this might be a good time for DLC's uh Eminent Domain (E.D.) issue.  DLC:  Yeah, we've been kicking this around for months - JW?:  I know.  DLC:  we do have a couple of sample ords that I requested be put in the pkt in the info sec.  Uh I like the one, personally, from Maplewood.  There're 2 parags that we can't read, Parag 2 & parag 4;  other than that I think we can certainly use the same ord that they have there;  just request our atty to write-up one - not - maybe (a 4th _ 5th - everybody?) _ _ _  fits the occasion.   I would just like to see something to reassure our citizens that we're not giving the power of E.D. to the devr & that we are not going to run down the street & mark an X on everybody's house & taking it within the end of the month. 

 

So uh we would ab- ABSOLUTELY, positively LAST we'd do, would be E.D. on ANY prop if it could not be worked out between Sansone & them.  Sansone would HAVE to come to us for the Condemnation (the process?).  & I think it would be best if we kept that power within the city.  We're not givin' it to devrs &/or puttin' any #'s on it.  I'm opposed to putting any #'s whether it's 10% of the people or 99.9% of the people.  It doesn't make any difference - #'s in a situation like that.  Um I think we're gonna have to work at - if u have a situation come up, have to work on an individual basis for each & every case;  not blanket the whole area.  I think the power needs to be left to the BOA to hear, not just _ _ - 

 

JW:  Just for clarification, there is NO threat or anybody's requestin' E.D. at this current time.  DLC:  No, no.  JW:  Ok (chuckle).  DLC:  Just I would like to have this in place prior to - JW:  Right.  DLC:  writing a full agreemt with whoever develops what.  ?: _ _ - JW:  I guess, I guess there needs to be a motion from the bd in what direction or I hope I heard -

 

 DLC:  Motion to adopt uh an ord similar to, to the (rendy pkt?) & to have the atty to bring it back to the next mtg for the full bd to act on the ord.  JW:  Is there a 2nd?  ?:  I'll 2nd it.  JW:  Is there any discussions?  RH:  Just one, YH.  What would this mean er - it'd probably be to Eric I mean but - JW:   I was gonna ask uh EM, if he had an update or, or a rcmd - RH:  Would the State supercede anything - EM:  Oh, absolutely.  RH:  I'm sure it would.  EM:  Absolutely.  There's a pending bill right now in the House & Senate, uh but I'm sorry I can't remember who invented it, they're introduced by.  They, they've substantially would rewrite the, the definition of uh blight uh & their (jobs would remain?) to pass.  If they did, I mean surely we gotta reload & do our thing again!

 

?:  2nd time around.  JW:  Is there anybody else 1st time around?  DA:  YH, again because I have the letter from legal counsel's name that I must recuse from this I will.  JW:  I understand & I'm sure JKB is probably going to & MP.  MP:  YH, I'm - I'm gonna say the same thing _ _ recuse _ _ _ _ _ _ -

 

JW:  Tku.  MMW, are u - MMW:  I, I, I kind of agree with uh RH as much as - the, the stuff from the State coming down, I'm not sure how they're gonna _ _ it.  I mean if it leads us to a corner, then have to face it - take place for EM to do his job until - JW:  Be good for EM!  MMW:  Good for EM!  (chuckle)  MMW:  Um unless u're kinda popular.  ?: _ _ - MMW:  I'm not sure if that, that - if they have u come to us with a plan that's gonna be _ _ _ & overloading us.  I think we've got a fair amt of time left.  Um but I do agree with u _ (been some sort of?) _ _ on it.  JW:  Tku.  Anybody else 1st time around before I get back to DLC? 

 

DLC:  I wanna cmt on doing this.  I know the State is looking into this & I do hope they come down with something.  I know that the laws right now are very vague & as far as blighting & whatever -  it's just a shame.  I do hope the State comes down with something.   But on _ _ _, if the State does not come down with one, we will go at least another yr with what we have on the books, not what I think, uno to protect the citizens to a degree & we're, we are trying to support them & using this only when it's absolutely necessary & not giving this power to the devr.  That's the only reason I want something on the books NOW.  Tku.

 

JW:  Tku.  Is there any other 2nd time around?  All in favor of the motion, say (ayes - none heard opposed)(chuckle)  (They win?).  (MMW laughs)  Motion carried.  ?:  3 recuses _ _ -  ?: _ _ _ - JW:  Better count, make sure we did that right. 

 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  12 of  23

 

& uh I believe MMW had - I'll take the annexation under MMW's name.  I believe this calls for EM (to skip?) while we're on the same page.  Go ahead.  MMW:  Yeah, I just had a ques.  I, I saw the, the letter in the paper & I was wondering if (they?)'re gonna do anything as far as that goes.  Is there a way to check back?  EM:  Oh sure.  MMW?:  Are we gonna do something about it?

 

EM:  I, I can tell ya I, I've done 3 things.  I've talked to the City of Fenton um it, it's uh - I can't think of his name - MMW?: _ (Art Thompson?) - EM:  (Art?) who?  MMW?: _ _ city administrator _ _ - EM:  Umm, I , I spoke with him.  They've got a, a, a big dev down there.  JW:  Hu-humm.  EM:   (_ _tape noise_ _)  but we've decided to share map plans that, that we would submit &, & it's my intent unless I hear some (clearly?) instruction, to simply submit the last plan that we did in 2000 (&?) 2005 & (decide?).  & I'll bring that uh to the bd at the next mtg & let everybody take a look at it.  _ _ basically everything that's not annexed now in a city all the way out to EUREKA uh west;  uh then to the south of Manchester & Ballwin to the uh north;  Kirkwood, Des Peres to the east, uh phase that in.  So Fenton does wanna meet with us uh to, to look at overlaps uh as well as uh uno as did Ballwin.  Ballwin called _ _ _ _ _ _ - ?: _ _ -

 

EM:  There's one other issue going on that, that may or may not impact annexation & it is that the residents of uh Westerman & _ _ _ _ - sit at 4 streets - Spindel, uh have approached MSD with establishing a Sub Dist as those people have no sewer svc.  

 

I'm not sure what the status of Tree Ct Industrial Ct is.  I suspect that they DO have sewer svc I believe.  I talked to the atty today for the Road Dist up in that subdiv & in my calendar of 1995, we did uh seek to annex that area;  it was turned down.  & I figured that one of our commitmts was we could get some PBW in that area, make assessmt before we send it or they'll send it back to me.  (It wasn't?) what it used to be.  They wanted a settlemt too rebuilding the land to our town.  But again, I, I, I will bring the map plans in next mtg.  The bd just takes a look at 'em & modify 'em, make sure we get a mtg for it & then they'll be submitted in uh a timely fashion after they have their settlemt.  JW:  Hu-humm. 

 

DA:  YH.  JW:  DA.  DA:  Um could I ask if there are any (new or re?)devs in the Kennedy action that we have in regards to the annexation of the former City of PPk?  EM:  Well, we had a hrg on it uh about 3 wks ago & both parties, the Bdry Cmsn & the city, asked the judge to defer ruling on a motion, it was a Motion to Dismiss simply because the issue of the scope of judicial review, whether or not it's a new trial or whether or not it's on the record, as such the record appears, it is before the MO Supreme Ct in a case that was argued, I think it was Sept 18th.  ?:  (Wow?) -  EM:  The Supreme Ct is taking a really, really long time to decide it.  As of TODAY, it's been what, 6 months & they still haven't decided the case, so I, I don't know.  It sort of _ _ _ _.  It, it's deferred at least until 5/15 I believe _ _ _.  JW:  Is that it, DA?  DA:  Yes, tku.  JW:   Any other ques about annexation?  Tku, EM. 

 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  13 of  23

 

I have one item - Jim might be able to take care of it under his report.  We have a bid for Forest Ave.   JM:  Yes, I do have a request under my report.  JW:  Ok, I'll just save it till then.  I was gonna do it right off - wait till under u.

 

& uh I seen in the pkt, a request from the P&Z Chairman that he'd like to have a LEG Cmte in regards to some mods or understandings.  I just wanna know if that's what the bd's pleasure to place that item in with (Jim's - for the?)  chairman.  Do u move in that direction?  MP:  I'll move in that direction & put that in LEG.  MMW?:  I'll 2nd it.  JW:  Any discussion? 

 

DLC:  I have one ques.  JW:  DLC.  DLC:  Mr Mayor, (We or will u?) also discuss(ed?) uh (u've or who?) signed up the seniors here at _ _ mtgs.  _ _ _ _ _ _ come in & sign(ed?) up.   (_someone coughs_)  your plans also to _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _  - JW:  That's fine.  DLC:  Tku.  JW:  Tku.  All in favor of the motion, say - (ayes - none heard opposed).  Motion carries. 

 

I believe that's it unless I missed somebody's aldermanic _ _ other things, other depts, but does the clerk have anything?   MW:  The only thing I have is uh I polled the bd, but I did it on 3/1- if they'd like to approve that.  JW:  Is there a motion to approve the - poll the bd & (staking?) on the demolition of the - DA?:  So moved.  ?:  2nd.  JW:  Is there any discussion?  All in favor, say (ayes - none heard opposed)  ?:  Abstain.  JW:  Motion carried. 

 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  14 of  23

 

MMW, u asked a ques about FEMA. MMW:  Yeah, I just wanted - there was, there was a letter from - I know it's in here somewhere, but I just, I wasn't sure I quite got the whole jist of the MO Svc letter, a letter for those who _ _ _ _ -

 

EM:  Every uh 5 to 10 yrs, the Fed Emerg Mgmt Agency um in order to uh update their maps, sends out uh an update uh thru eng'g surveys um &, & uh questionnaires to the entities & this simply overlapped our submission for cert'n of the levee & its - we have submitted the requisite map plans as uno & that's _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -

 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  15 of  23

 

JW:  Is there any other ques's for the clerk _ she does uh her report?  Pam, PKS Coordr's Report.  Pam:  Uh had a quorum at our last PKS Bd mtg, the 1st one we've had (in the last few?) months, so those mins will be at the next bd mtg.  Uh we kept them (back for those being?) taxes & everything _ _ _ _ _ for your approval.  Um the upcoming event is we're having the birdhouse-making class on the squirrels, here making (crafts for?)  (someone coughs)  Sunday at 1:30.  We've got quite a few kids signed up for that.  JW:  Is uh - Pam:  This is our 2nd time  - JW:  which location is that?  Pam:  _ _ we do that in the basemt.  JW:  At city hall?  Pam:  Yeah, kinda messy to do on carpet Brignole, so we'll _ _ _ _ _ _ _ down there.  & uh the Fishing Derby's coming up on 4/22.

 

& um (Scott Isworth?) uno still has been uh contacted vigorously (nearly?) every day for the uh trial system along the Meramec Greenway & uh we're going to meet.  I'm going to be working with them on 3/13.  Uh they've hired an eng'g firm to uh take them to Fishpot & (Casper or cast the?) area _ _ _ _ time _ _ -

 

JW:  & just for info, u & EM  just about have the memorandum completed, everybody - Pam:  Memo Of Understanding (on Docs, Sec 1).  I think basically everything's pretty well set just for your sig on that & uh I think EM's gonna get ya that paperwork tomorrow & then pass it on to (me?).  JW:  Well, that's - Pam:  Does any - JW:  signed off.  Pam:  body have any ques's?  Pam:  Tku.  JW:  Uh tks. 

 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  16 of  23

 

PBW.  JM:  Yes, YH, uh #1 the item u were discussing, uh Thursday last wk 2:00, we opened bids for the Forest Ave Project.  Uh, uh Krupp Const was the low bid, uh $1,000,863 $ & some change.  The city's responsibility for 20% of that which has been approved several yrs ago by the bd.  Um we are requesting the bd accept this uh, um bid

 

& with that, we will prepare a letter, um a citizen (vote or quote?) I've saved that the city's accepted that bid. 

 

DA:  YH, I make the motion to approve the lowest qualified bid.  ?:  2nd.  JW:  & that was Krupp - correct me - what was the amt, Jim, just for the record?  JM:  $1,000,863 - 130 - 37 cents.  JW:  Is there any discussion?  DA:  Yes, Um upon approval of this, when can we expect the start & finish of const?  JM:  Const's probably gonna be well over a YR.  We won't be start of it at least till probably for 30 days after we send our letter to MODOT because when u approve this tonight, we type up a letter, the mayor signs it, we send it to MODOT, modi- MODOT reviews everything & uh Tom said that would probably be at least 30 days uh before we even get a letter back from them provin' it - approvin' it to start.  

 

DA:  Early part of Spring then we'll see const begin then about this time next yr possibly complete _ _ -  JM:  & I'm also gonna be uh in contact with uh the eng & the city atty.  I'm gettin' kinda ansy to send the residents in that area a little letter uh update on uno on the progress of the uh, uh project so once it does start, it, it's not uno somethin' _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Scott.  I haven't got that put together yet.  I wanna make sure the eng & I are working together on that.  I don't wanna send something out on it too quickly _ _ think _ _ be back on line.

 

DA:  YH.  JW:  Is that it, DA?  DA:  No, I think Jim answered my ques.  I would like to make sure that the residents of VP including the Waterford Manor & (that everything meets that rather than to make sense?) - any VP resident that would be effected in that area, uh we probably got uh Park Commons uh & Dougherty Lakes Estates which _ _ _ info that the road _ _ _ _ _ -

 

JW:  RH.  RH:  I would just like the letter myself, personally, just to - I know it's 3 or 4 different phases, which phase is 1st, 2nd & 3rd, uno so on & approx when it will start;  each project's different, each phase of the project _ _ _ _ _.  That's all I have.  JW:  _ DLC, _ _ - DLC:  _ say _ _ get a copy of the report?  JW:  I, I would think Jim - Jim's always been about copyin' the whole bd _ _ _ _ pkt -  JM:  Yeah, I, I, I think that Tom & I'll put something together & put it in the pkt.  JW:  Alright. 

 

JM:  The, the other thing, one of the other items I had on my uh report is the bd approved - JW:  Wait a min, let's, let's vote on that uh - JM:  Oh, I'm sorry;  good idea.  JW:  Let's vote on that, that project, that money.  It's a lotta money there.  I know we don't wanna pass that up.  Is there any other disquestions uh ques's about the bid from Krupp Const on Forest?  All in favor, say (ayes - none heard opposed).  Motion carries.  Send that letter to them (& continue?). 

 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  17 of  23

 

JM:  Ok.  The 2nd item I need is the bd already approved & asked TW to proceed with the grant-writing for the Hanna Road Bridge Project to raise that road & the bridge above floodplain.  Um with that approval, we're to the point now where Tom needs a resolution & so with the bd already approvin' that, I'm, I'm gonna ask that the atty type up a resolution & get the mayor's sig & then see if that can get to TW asap. 

 

& um the POL Dept is working & has already provided some other info as far as accident reports & traffic counts.  Um we have to have all this info back to them by the 31st of this mo.  JW:  I know Pam needs to get with Tom too on the pedestrian bridge - also I think is involved in that project.  I bet she's already talked to him but that's fine;  everybody should work out.  EM's adopted a resolution.

 

JM:  & um we started the process of gettin' reimbursed for the grant on Vance Rd Projects.  Um the mayor signed 2 letters for me this evening & uh waitin' on the bank give us some cancelled checks & with that, we'll send the imbursemt request off & I believe in the amt of about $90K, but we need a burse request from John.  I believe we'll be sending another request out in another - less than 30 days. 

 

 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  18 of  23

 

Uh the city crew has completed the sidewalk & road reconst, storm water project in front of city hall & I think they did a GREAT job um workin' with what we had to work with & the way it turned out.  Um from there we're gonna move on to uh - DLC:  May I say tku, I really appreciate it.  It does look good & _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _I'm very happy.  I know u may not know but they - I'm very happy _ _ _ - JM:  Tku, DLC. 

 

Uh we're also gonna be movin' down to the Sportsplex to start demolition of the old concession stand in the near future & do some things down there to separate the park um from the ballfields &, & our area we use for PBW uh, yard & uh continue on this part of the room as soon as the other material comes in.  Uh other than that uh, YH, I believe that u put something from DA about Crescent Valley Ct.

 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  19 of  23

 

JW:  Yeah, yeah, Crescent Valley uh ques _  - DA:  Yes, I'm, I'm not sure that it's aprop for Jim but I could address it here & then um we could get - I had a request from a resident of Crescent Valley Ct that um IF the city has a copy of the subdiv's indenture, that he would um like a copy of it.  & I believe the city - that the um trustees of the subdivs are required to keep the city with an updated um copy of the indentures - that he had asked that I um try to re-recopy um for whatever reason - I'm not sure if there's a conflict but um _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _to a member of the bd for that. 

 

So IF that IS available, um I'd ask that a copy um - if I could get provided with a copy of that then I will fwd it to him.  JW:   Jeff could probably come closer than Jim _ _ - provided or not if he brings it back to u.  DA:  Again, I believe that the subdivs are required to keep the city with an updated copy so if we do NOT have it, he should be able to um understand that & (thus?) appreciate it.  Tku. 

 

JM:  Tku, YH.  JW:  Is there any other ques's from Jim?  Well, Jim, tks & tell the crew they're all doin' a good job with the paintin' in the city hall's really comin' alive here;  great job!  JM:  Tku. 

 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  20 of  23

 

JW:  POL Cmndr.  LtM:  Oh, my report is in the pkt.  I would like to draw your attn to the letter from a citizen up on Valley View Ridge - I think _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Ofcr Walsh & the detectives have responded to his house;  & also let uno that uh effective 3/11, Ofcr Walsh is leaving to uh seek a new, another career.  I already replaced him.  The new ofcr_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ in the pkts,  Ofcr Avalon.  JW:  It'd be nice to bring him in front of the audience.  LtM:  I, I will as soon as I get this, get him on the schedule _ _ _ time _ _ __ _ _ _.  Got a letter from Kozeny Wagner.  His crews were _ _ _ _ be a ref.  Whenever I get info about roads being closed or worked on, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. That's all I had.  JW:  Tku.  Is there any ques's for Scott?  

 

MMW:  Well, actually this was about the letter with the cmt that I had earlier _ _ _ _.  I think it's, it's great when a citizen will take the time to write a letter like this.  It's so easy to complain & it, it seems like it's so much effort to hear where they say something good about something.   I really  think these guy's are doin' a good job & I, I just wanted to point out that they are doin' a good job. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.  JW:  U'll be makin' that motion for that extra ofcr pretty soon. (they chuckle)  Tku. Tks, Scott.

 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  21 of  23

 

Bldg Cmsnr, Jeff.  JSchaub:  I really don't have anything _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I've been workin' on permits here lately &, & last month, we, we had about, got about  _ _  (jack-up?) permits, about (25?) occupancy inspections _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I got a list from (the police or Ald Pennise?) on uh tires _ _ _ _ _ _ find out  _  _ _ got it _ _ _ got 'em all taken care of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ letters for that.  

 

JW:  Alright.  Again, I welcome all or any ald that's willing to take a ride with Jeff & Scott, Jim & do the city tour.  We got a lot accomplished in that last go-around & uh a couple more times of that will make a real big difference in town.  Tks.

 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  22 of  23

 

We have no bills.  MW:  Yes we do.  ?:  Yeah we do.  JW:  Oh, we DO have a bill!  Never mind!  MP:  YH.   JW:  (looking with/at his sister's paperwork)  _ can't stand that Mr Slob over there.  _ _ -  MP:  On them letters to  (_someone coughs_)  atty - JW:  Go ahead, I'm sorry. 

 

MP:  We had that uh LEG Cmte mtg 2/15 & we _ _ _ sending it back to the bd about having uh - anybody that's having a zonal change, that they would have to notify the prop owners whether it went before the bd or the P&Z, & the bd approved it on uh the 21st & I don't know whether it was an oversight _ _ _ _ .  ?:  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _  (_ someone coughs LOUDLY_) _ _ _ _ _ _ -  

 

JW:  I thought u was gonna direct your ques to (JIM or the GENTLEman?)!  MP:  Well, no, I guess it'd be to EM too because he said he would start (tracking 'em?) _ _ _ _ to amend Sec 405.720, Item 3.  EM:  We, we just need to call for the PBH & we'll get back _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ next _ _.  MP:  & the next mtg would be - I mean the following mtg, we could have the ord amended?       

 

EM:  At the 1st, the 1st mtg in uh April.  MP:  Ok, I'd appreciate that.  JW:  Is that it, MP?  MP:  Yes sir, tku. 

 

3/6/06 BOA - Sec  23 of  23

 

JW:  & I stand corrected, there IS A bill.  DUE  TOoooo time restraint _ _ _ _ _ in the pkt.  MW:  Exactly.  JW:  U wanna explain what the _ _ - MW:  Ok, it's, it's the bill for Workers' Compensation Ins to MO (Rural or World?) Svcs.  & it's uh I think the due date comes at the end of March & I just don't feel comfortable _ _ _ _ fill out my own _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I just wanna make sure _ _ _ when it comes before u all - & but I (don't wanna?) _ _ without (lookin' at the?) competition _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _  - JW:  _ (combination?)!   (stage people chuckle)  

 

MW:  &, & I DO,  I DO (chuckle), & I DO wanna say that tks to Jim's uh safety breakfast, that the guys down - that each yr, this is comin' in a little lower.   They'll charge us a rate & then they (kinda or come &?) do an audit of all the injuries that we've had in the past yr & if it's - (if it keeps doin' it &, &?) less claims, which we haven't had in a while, it uh it costs _ _ _.  So, they're doin' a good job with accidents.  JM:  Tku.  MW:  Keeping from having accidents I guess.  

 

DLC:   Make a motion to pay the Workman's Comp -  JKB?:  2nd - DLC:  insurance.  JW:  Is there any discussion?  All in favor, say (ayes - none heard opposed) Motion carried.  Pay the bills! 

 

EM:   Mr Mayor, Could echo one, one thing on the Workman's Comp?  Um 7 yrs ago we were with a pool which means we had the worst possible experience rate u could get.  U couldn't even get competitive bids on Comp Ins.  I've got - just  (_someone coughs_)  (where he said?) since we're together, it, it would cut down on claims & we're OUTTA the pool & that we're (weighted or rated?), the city should see _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -

 

JW:  Tku.  Hope that works for everybody.  JM:  If we have any claims, u're in trouble, buddy. (JW laughs heartily) No, tku, tku. (they all laugh)  It's been 2 or 3 yrs since we've had a loss _ claim injury & we've had minor injuries such as poison ivy, uh small lacerations.  The crew has done a very good job & they appreciate the safety mtgs _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.  JW:  Tku.  Is there a motion to adjourn?  ?:  I'll make the motion.  ?:  2nd.  JW:   Roll call, please.  MW: (does) (Yes?).  JW:  Mtg's adjourned.