September 28, 2021 — Meeting Transcript

Meeting for, that woman always interrupts me. Welcome to our meeting for September 28th. And June, you want to call the roll? Yes.

Alderman Lentz. Here. Alderman Berkowitz. Here. Alderwoman McAndrew. Here. Aldewoman Buse. Here. Aldewoman Patel. Here. Here. Alderman Gary Feder.

Alderman Lentz. Here. Alderman Berkowitz. Here. Alderwoman McAndrew. Here. Aldewoman Buse. Here. Aldewoman Patel. Here. Here. Alderman Fader.

I'll hear.

Mayor Harris. Here. City Manager David Gipson.

Mayor Harris. Here. City Manager Gibson.

Here.

And City Attorney O'Keefe. Here. Thank you.

Okay. The next thing we need to do is approve the minutes from September 14th, if I can have a motion.

I'll move to approve the minutes from December 14th.

Second.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Okay, those are approved. Now's the time in the meeting for public requests and petitions. Anything that is not on our agenda is something that the people attending could ask us about or talk about. Does anybody in the attendee list have something they'd like to bring up that is not on our agenda tonight. And yes, we have quite a few people in our attendee list. That's good. Anybody have anything? All right. Well, you know what to do if you end up having a comment. Okay. Now we will open a public hearing for the CUP for Whiteown Boulevard Pinot Restaurant.

All right, thank you,

Mayor. And request proof of publication. Thank you.

This is a public hearing to consider approving a resolution for an amendment to the conditional use permit issued to Scarola LLC for the operation of a restaurant known as Pino at the subject location, which is 7600 Wydown Boulevard. The conditional use permit issued in December of 2012 for the operation of Z Pizza was administratively transferred in December of 2015 to allow the operation of Pino. The conditional use permit was subsequently amended on April 12, 2016, to allow outdoor music events to be held on the surface parking lot in front of the building one Sunday a month during the months of June through September between the hours of 4 and 8. The current conditional use permit allows for hours of operation from 1030 a.m. to 9 p.m. seven days a week. The restaurant owner is requesting an amendment to the conditional use permit to extend hours of operation on Friday and Saturday until 10 p.m. It should be noted that the properties to the north, south, and east are residential. Staff recommends that the Board of Aldermen approve the requested amendment to allow hours of operation for the Pinot Restaurant until 10 p. m. on Fridays and Saturdays pursuant to the conditions contained in the resolution. And I believe we have the applicant

Pepe and the attendee list there.

I don't see him in there.

Pepe,

do you want to talk to us at all? He's

been transferred over. Here he is.

Pepe, you have any comment about your request or you don't have to?

I'm here. I just wanted to say thank you for, uh, giving me the opportunity to have the hours extended. Um, I think we've been pretty diligent with our hours and with our business and with, um, being a pretty community forward oriented towards, uh, you know, being proactive and trying to do what we can to us to stay as a community driven business. And that's it. I just, uh, Just want to move forward and stay diligent with what we do.

Very good. Well, you certainly have won the hearts of the people in the neighborhoods around you and beyond. You're such a great neighborhood, really an institution now, even though how long have you been there?

Coming up on six years. Oh,

well, we're glad you're there. And so I will. With that, I will ask the board if there is any comments about this.

I would just say, Pepe, too, I just want to congratulate you on you really are a model business in terms of how you've been able to reinvent yourself throughout the pandemic. Obviously, the pandemic was horrible for restaurants. And honestly, my dad moved here about a year ago and you are definitely his go-to place for taking new people that he meets. So you've really won him over and he's a real restaurant critic. So congratulations to you on that. Thank you. But I guess I'm wondering, Ira, have you heard anything from, or Susan, have you ever heard anything from the residents around in terms of noise? Are they concerned at all? Or have you heard anything or?

I have received, I've received absolutely no complaints of anyone in that area. I guess I had a question for David in that ilk. David, were people notified that this was something he's requested and that it would be on for this evening?

Yes, sir. This was a posted public hearing.

Okay. So yeah, no, I haven't heard anything from anybody in any negative way whatsoever. Susan.

Hi, this is Susan. I stand as planning director. There has been a neighbor across the street, I believe to the east, who had some concerns over the lighting. And I believe that lighting was actually removed. And then they had some questions about some of the events that were previously approved by the board, I think four weekends out of the year. But that's all I've heard. They were aware of this meeting and I assume they would be in the audience if they, or may have wanna speak if they have further concerns.

Can I interrupt real quick? Mayor Harris' computer started restarting. She's asking that Mayor Pro Tem Lentz take over the meeting.

Oh, boy.

And there is a hand up in the attendee list for the

public hearing here. Okay. If there is a handup, if there are no other board comments, if you could bring over whoever has their hand up, that would be terrific.

That's Mr. Lee Falk.

Actually... That's Ms. Lee Falk, but we do live right across the street from Pino. We love having them as a neighbor. I second everything that... Ms. McAndrew said about them being creative and reinventing, we just have to keep working to be good neighbors with as long as the lights go out a half an hour after closing and they keep the outdoor noise level down, then we're all happy campers here and couldn't be more thrilled to have Pino across the street, but got to keep that neighborly thing going.

Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. PB Harmon Zuckerman, Thank you very much for that comment. Any other hands in the audience. PB Harmon Zuckerson, Know PB Harmon Zuckerton, That you can see David or June. PB Harmon Zuckerstein, Then if that's the case, and there are no other comments I will close the public hearing. PB Harmon Zuckleman, Does that mean I Then move. Can I make my own move? I'm

back.

I'm back.

You're doing an admirable job. I'm tempted to let you keep on going for the rest of the meeting. Okay.

I was suddenly at a stumbling point whether I could close the meeting and be at motion as well.

Yes, close the public hearing. And I'll make a

motion.

Yeah, make a

motion. I'll make a move to approve resolution number 2021-17, granting a conditional use permit to Scarola LLC for the operation of Pinot Restaurant located at 7600 Wydown Boulevard.

Second.

Any questions or comments? Okay, all those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? All right, Pepe, you got your hours. We'll all be over after the meeting for dinner.

Thank you so much.

Appreciate it.

Thank you. All right. Good night.

All right. We're ready for the city manager's report. And the first thing being the property tax levies second reading.

Yes. And June, if you could bring over Janet Watson.

Okay.

Sorry.

How many more times we get to bring over Janet Watson?

I'm going to leave

her there. One more meeting after this.

Good point.

So eight or nine times. Let's see here. We'll get her involved as much as we can. There we go. Good evening, Janet. Were you going to go through this or did you want me to go through the amendment here?

I'll be glad to go through it.

Okay.

Thank you. The first item is an ordinance setting the 2021 property tax levies. This will be for next fiscal year, fiscal year 2022. We have just received the assessed value revised numbers from the county after the board of equalization process and we have adjusted our calculations and the new construction amounts remained the same but the assessed values did go down People protested or appealed their reassessment and some of those were resolved in the property owner's favor. And so we have changed the rates. We've changed that in the memo that we provided, but we also changed that in the ordinance. And so we will need to amend bills 6859 by the text of bill 6859.1. And the items that changed, the general revenue, residential and commercial had slight changes. And the police building debt service had slight changes. Then the special business district had a change in the residential rate. So the areas that went up the ceiling actually increased where for the general obligation debt service for all areas by 0.003 and the special business that commercial by 0.001, that is over the prior year. And you can see that many of our rates actually decreased as compared to the prior year. Are there any questions?

Any questions, anybody?

You know what? It

will be my last time explaining this complex process.

I'm going to ask in our attendee list if anybody has questions. If everybody understands how these tax rates are set and if you would like further explanation, this is a good time. Okay, I guess not. All right, Janet, I thought I might give you more to talk about, but oh well. All right, so Alderman Lentz, I guess we need to do an amendment, you say first?

Yes, so I would like to move to amend Bill 6859 by the text of Bill 6859.1 which will adjust the rates according to the tables provided in the 6859.1. Second.

Any discussion? All right, Mr. City Attorney.

Mayor, I believe there would be a voice vote on the motion to amend.

You're muted, Mayor.

I was thinking maybe you're going to read the amended bill, but all right. So as far as the amendment goes, we have a motion. We have a second. Do we have a second?

Yes.

Okay. All those in favor of the amendment?

Aye.

Any opposed? All right. Now...

Then I'll introduce Bill 6859.1 to approve an ordinance setting the annual property tax rates for year 2021, which is fiscal year 2022, to be read for the second time by Title Omen.

Second. Okay. Any discussion? All right. Now, Mr. City Attorney.

Bill number 6859.1, second reading and consideration for adoption, an ordinance levying and establishing the rate of annual taxes for general municipal purposes, police building debt service, general obligation debt service, and special business district purposes to be collected by the city of Clayton, Missouri for the year 2021.

Alderman Lentz.

Aye.

Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderwoman McAndrew. Aye. Aldermoman Buse. Aye. Aldewoman Patel. Aye. Aye. Alderman Gary Feder?

Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderwoman McAndrew. Aye. Aldermoman Buse. Aye. Aldewoman Patel. Aye. Aye. Alderman Fader?

Aye.

And Mayor Harris? Aye. Thank you.

Okay. Bill number 6860, the fiscal 22 budget second reading. Mr. City Manager.

Thank you, Mayor. In July, the Board of Aldermen received the City Manager's proposed Fiscal Year 2022 Operating and Capital Improvements Budget. The Board reviewed the proposed budget during a meeting on August 20, 2021. The Board of Aldermens then held a public hearing and the first reading for the budget at the meeting on September 14, 2021. The attached ordinance approving the Fiscal Year 2022 operating and capital improvements budget is now presented for second reading and final approval. Staff recommends that the Board of Aldermen approve the fiscal year 2022 operating and capital improvements budget as submitted.

All right, I'll open the discussion. Any questions or comments from the audience? Okay, any discussion by the board? All right. Mr. City Attorney. Oh, Alderman Lentz. Sorry. Skipping ahead.

Okay. I'll introduce bill number 6860 to approve fiscal year 2022 operating capital improvements budget to be read for the second time by title only.

Second. Further discussion. All right. Mr City Attorney.

Bill number 6860, second reading and consideration for adoption. An ordinance adopting an annual budget for fiscal year 2022 commencing on October 1st, 2021 and appropriating funds pursuant thereto. Alderman Lentz. Aye.

Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderwoman McAndrew. Aye. Aldenwoman Buse. Aye. Aldowoman Patel. Aye. Aldermen Gary Feder.

Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderwoman McAndrew. Aye. Aldenwoman Buse. Aye. Aldowoman Patel. Aye. Aldermen Fader.

Aye.

and Mayor Harris. Aye. Thank you.

Okay, next up the sale of special obligation refunding bonds.

Yes, Mayor, the proposed ordinance provides for issuing bonds for the purpose of refunding the 2011 outstanding special obligation bond issue so the city can achieve approximately $525,000 in savings over the lifetime of the bonds. The total estimated amount of bonds to be issued is approximately $4,915,000. That amount with the bond premium will generate the amount necessary to refund the current bonds. The maturity date on the bonds is currently December 1, 2031, which occurs during the fiscal year 2032, and that date will remain the same after the refunding. The city's current bond rating for the special obligation bonds was reaffirmed today, so this was great news at AA plus or a AAA rating today. when issuing general obligation bonds. So this is really the highest rating possible. And this high rating, of course, will result in lower interest costs for the bonds. The attached ordinance would authorize and direct the issuance, sale, and delivery of the $4,915,000 in special obligation bonds. In accordance with the notice of bond sale, the sale of the bonds will occur at 10 a.m. on October 12th, 2021. And we will know the final issuance details at that time. Thus, the proposed ordinance should only be introduced for first reading at this meeting. So the ordinance and the attachments that you saw tonight, those will all be updated with the information after the sale on the 12th and then that evening. we'll have the second reading and the final approval. Staff recommends that the Board of Aldermen hold a first reading of an ordinance authorizing the sale, issuance, and delivery of special obligation refunding bonds in the amount of $4,915,000. And we do have our bond counsel and financial advisor here this evening if you have any questions.

Okay, very good. Any comments or questions from our attendee list? Okay, we have one. Paul Luhmann. I don't know if I pronounced that right.

You got it perfectly right.

Oh, good. Go ahead, Paul.

Yeah, the question I had was, has the underwriter for the refunding bond issue been selected or will that be selected through a competitive bid process?

It is a competitive bid process. Okay.

Okay, so you'll know the underwriter after the bonds are sold?

Correct.

Okay, thank you.

I have something I wonder if either Mark or Todd would talk about just a little bit, or Janet too. So we have this wonderful highest rating possible, and what did we do to get it? What are the most important things? I

think Todd could address that. We've seen a draft of the ratings report that may come out tomorrow. Todd, would you like to summarize that information?

Yes. Good evening, Mayor. Very good question. The rating really is comprised of several different components. Part of it is the operation, the financial operations of the city. where they look at fund balance levels, they look at debt levels and they compare those various credit metrics to other entities not only in Missouri but really throughout the nation. The other metric that gets looked at are income and wealth levels as well as tax base. So certainly Clayton looks very favorable in those regards. And then the third item that is considered is management. And throughout the draft rating report that we reviewed earlier today, as well as in prior rating reports from previous years, they do comment very strongly about how strong the financial management and operations of the city is.

Very good. Just a curious question in your experience. So the fund balance, and I'm assuming we mean the general fund balance mostly, is that what you mean when you talk fund balance? Are you talking about all the fund balances?

Yeah, certainly the general fund balance is the one that gets looked at most, but they do consider the fund balances for all of the governmental funds.

Is there a, for the general fund balance, is there some kind of threshold or sort of tiered, quite tiered, you know, sort of laddering that is looked at in terms of, well, here's you know, here's what you must have to be double A, triple A, or if you go below this, you know, is there some guidance there, some general rule that you've seen or general practice, I guess I would say?

S&P does have medians for each of the different rating categories. And certainly to be in the AAA category, the fund balance percentage for those communities are generally much higher than if you're in the single A category. that if you've got a lower fund balance, it doesn't necessarily mean that you'll receive a lower rating. It's just one of many considerations. The other thing that they look at, Mayor, is the trend of that fund balance. So if it's higher but trending downward, that might be viewed less favorable than maybe having a slightly smaller fund balance, but something that's been steady over several years.

Okay, good. Thank you. That's helpful. Okay, y'all. Any other questions or comments? All righty. Alderman Lentz?

Well, I will introduce bill number 6-8-6-4 to approve an ordinance authorizing the sale, issuance, and delivery of the special obligation refunding bonds to be read for the first time by title only.

Second. Further discussion? All right, Mr. City Attorney.

Bill number 6.864, an ordinance authorizing and directing the issue and sale and delivery of special obligation refunding bonds series 2021 of the city of Clayton, Missouri and approving certain documents and authorizing certain other actions in connection therewith.

All right, all those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? All right, very good. Okay, I guess the next item we have is the MOU for the Police Department.

Thank you, Mayor. The bargaining representatives have met, discussed, and agreed upon the attached Memorandum of Understanding, which contains a resolution of employee compensation for police union members for fiscal year 2022. The MOU establishes base wages and updates procedures for holiday pay. The police union members have ratified the agreement and it is being presented for board approval. Staff recommends that the Board of Aldermen approve the attached resolution authorizing the city manager to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 15 regarding compensation for fiscal year 2022 and other required administrative actions as may be required to comply with the intent of this resolution.

Okay, very good. I'll open the discussion. Any questions or comments from the attendees? No? All right. Any questions or comment from the board?

Mayor, if I could make a quick comment. I just want to thank again the negotiating teams on both sides here. They did a great job getting you know, through these negotiations for this MOU in a timely manner and always respectful and cordial. And everybody did a great job on both sides and on the city's team, certainly Janet Watson, Aaron Hewitt, and Brian Hay, fantastic job again. So, and Chief Smith. So thank you very much.

Great. All right. Alderman Lentz.

I'd like to move to approve resolution number 2021-18, authorizing the city manager to enter into an MOU with the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 15.

Second. Great. Any further discussion? Okay. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? All right. That concludes that. Next, we have the recommendation from the Mayor's Commemorative Landscape Task Force. City Manager, you're going to report.

Yeah, I'll give a brief report here and then I believe there's some conversation to be had. On September 14th, 2021, the Mayor and Board of Aldermen received a recommendation from the Mayor's Commemorative Landscape Task Force to remove the portrait of Ralph Clayton which hangs behind the Mayor's seat in the Council Chambers and City Hall. It was recommended that the portrait initially be a part of an educational display created in collaboration with the Clayton Community Foundation at the center of Clayton, where the whole and truthful story of this important historical figure can be told. After the display period, it was recommended that a suitable place for the portrait could be found in City Hall. This action can be taken with a motion and a simple majority vote of the Board of Aldermen. With that, I'll open it up for any discussion.

Okay. I know that there are at least a couple of people that have some comments. I guess one thing I would like to do is first ask if any of our attendees have a comment or question about this topic. We have one member of the task force with us and that's the only one I see right now. So, okay. So let's open it up for discussion. Yeah, Alderman Gary Feder.

Okay. I know that there are at least a couple of people that have some comments. I guess one thing I would like to do is first ask if any of our attendees have a comment or question about this topic. We have one member of the task force with us and that's the only one I see right now. So, okay. So let's open it up for discussion. Yeah, Alderman Fader.

Mayor, Member of the Board, I had recommended and do recommend that the language of the recommendation that is before us tonight be amended with reference to the final sentence of the recommendation. and that the current final sentence in that recommendation be deleted, and the following sentence replace it. And that is that it would read, after the display period, it is recommended that a suitable place for the portrait and an accompanying display should be found in City Hall. The reason for my suggested change of language is that I think it is critical that at such time as the portrait is removed from its place in the chambers, moved to the center of Clayton where it is part of a larger display. In my opinion, the board should formally indicate that there is a desire that at that time, the portrait and the accompanying narrative will be returned to City Hall. And that is why I suggested slightly different language, essentially replacing language that talked about it could be brought back to City Hall with language that said it should be. I don't know whether it was intentionally written in such a way to suggest that a further decision would be made as to whether it would be returned to City Hall, but I don't think we should revisit the subject at some point in the future. I think it should be part of this decision that the portrait and a narrative be part of City Hall. And that's why I suggested the change. I might add that at the mayor's suggestion, which I appreciate, I had an opportunity to have coffee yesterday with the mayor and Dr. Jeff Ward from Washington University, who was part of the task force. And I explained to them my thinking behind this change of language and certainly got the impression both the mayor and Dr Ward I thought that was an appropriate suggestion. It seemed to me the consensus is that it is important for people in the community to know more about Ralph Clayton. This attempt to have a narrative display together with his portrait is important, and it's not only important that it be done at the center of Clayton, but I think in the most important building in the city, City Hall, It should be part of a permanent display where it is if something could be terminated at some later date. But I think that's consistent with the goal of the task force, and I think Dr. Ward and the mayor agreed with that as well. And it would certainly be on that basis that I would be supportive of the recommendation. So those are my comments. I do, and Mayor, I do recognize this could be deferred to some other time. I do have thoughts about how this whole process should go forward, assuming this recommendation is approved. I think the timing and the methodology is important, but it wouldn't affect my feelings about the language in the recommendation, so defer that discussion to some later time, but So my only thought at this point is to make that change in the wording, which I think is consistent with what I would hope we all want to do with this particular project.

Go ahead, Rich.

should, could, would, whatever. I think that my concern is more that we specifically specify city hall and not in some public building and public display in a public building. That it might make more sense to have it in Hanley House. It might make more sense and be more visible and to keep it in the center. I'm just questioning whether we should be that specific and get into the decorating of City Hall and all our other places.

Yeah, I sort of have a problem. More than anything, probably with the process, I think this recommendation went through quite a bit of channels. And I think if they intended that this portrait necessarily land in City Hall, I think they would have said that. And they didn't. And for us to change it at this point, I think is really kind of a slap to those committees that vetted this resolution. So I'm kind of reluctant to do that. I think ultimately, that may be where it ends up. And I think that was their point was, you know, that should be something left to whenever that time comes. And that's that board would like to do that. But I don't really want to tell another board sometime in the future, this is what you have to do. So I'm just reluctant, Gary, to go along with changing it. And I read your email and I think your intent was to make it a commitment that this is what would happen. and should happen. And I don't know that I'm there. I mean, I think that's what they would have said if that's what those commissions intended. So the Landscape Commission and the CEC, they both came to us with it in this way. I think Rich's point is also good. I mean, we don't get involved in decorating the City Hall. We never do that. It's not something we do. So...

Can I just respond? I disagree in great part because I think this is an important matter. And at the end of the day, it's an aldermanic decision. It's not, you know, we seek recommendations from a task force or commission, but the decision about what to do here is an aldermanic and I think the proper decision is exactly what I've stated here, which is that the a portrait if it's going to be removed which it seems obvious it will um that it it belongs at city hall not stand alone but with a narrative that is yet to be determined but i i don't think that simply because the task force used certain language this is not the task force's recommendation this is the board of alderman recommendation and we should be willing to look at it and again i i wouldn't suggest based on my conversation with dr ward that He was suggesting he speaks for the task force, but I specifically went over this language with him and certainly it was my intention, my impression, at least that he saw no problem with that. He agreed that it was appropriate for this ultimately return to city hall. But again, he didn't speak for the task force. But at the end of the day, I think they made a recommendation. This is an aldermanic decision and the aldermen need to decide what is correct.

Okay, Becky you have your hand up and then I do have a couple comments to clarify things, but go ahead.

Thanks. I'm not in the, I'm not interested in being in the business of deciding what goes on all the walls of city halls or other public buildings. I think that what's relevant as a board action is in this specific case is the fact that we're removing the portrait from the council chambers. That's really the key aspect of this that I believe warrants and requires board action, and it is not what happens after that that is, in my mind, like an appropriate action for the board to take. So I prefer not to dictate or specify precisely what happens to the portrait when it is taken down, simply to note that it should not be prominently displayed in council chambers where we work to foster an inclusive community.

Okay, thank you. Susan, I know you probably, yep, you've got your hand up. Go ahead. I'll go last.

Yeah, I'll just be really quick. I read that as it reads as a recommendation of the Landscape Task Force. So that was a concern I had process-wise and Ira hit on that. And also... to leave it to CCF and the landscape task force to find the appropriate place to best display this. It would be my, it would certainly be my preference that again, we are not, that's not a decision that we want to make at this point in time.

Okay. So a couple of things. I, you know, I sit on that task force too. And I feel like it's probably accurate that the task force did not deliberate as much as we are about the word could or should. They certainly deliberated on many of the words and very well chosen words in that whole recommendation. My understanding from discussions during task force meetings, and we can go back and anyone can listen to those recordings, is that it was viewed as fine if it goes back to city hall at some point and probably appropriate, just not in the council chambers. So I don't think that the task force was embedding the word could with a lot of heavy meaning in terms of they wanted it to go somewhere else. We talked about locations just brainstorming and there's nothing really obvious other than city hall. And so it may be that we will come up with an idea. I don't know. So that's one point. Number two, I'm going to take a little bit of offense at the word decorate because I've heard it used three times today with regard to this. And when you have an artifact that is meaningful in a prominent way in your community, I mean, it's our job to look out for that artifact. And if that means we think it should be hidden from view, that's one thing, but we've got a recommendation here of what to do. But I think that whenever we decide, they've recommended that we put it for a temporary timeframe as an educational display in the Center of Clayton, which I think is a great idea. a display with narrative will be created. And then it's really going to come down to us as to where we want it to go next. And it's not a matter of decorating. It's a matter of safeguarding and putting an artifact of the community that so much of our history is embedded in, good or bad, in a place that we think is appropriate as a board. So that's number two. Well, that's number two, three, and four really all rolled into one. So I don't know if it's that important whether we now say could or should. I will just say that honestly. Gary, I'm okay with should. I'm also okay with could. And I think Jeff and other task force members would be of the same opinion. So- I think in the end, we're going to have the same outcome. This board is going to decide once they see the display and the narrative and get a better feeling for how we want to portray this painting, how we want to display it, what we want to say about it. We won't be the ones writing that narrative, but we will certainly be the ones who are assessing whether or not It's what we want or what we wanna put out. We are the final, the buck stops here folks. So at any rate, I think that it's probably not something we have to decide tonight whether to change this, but I do think down the road, once we've developed a display, we're going to be deciding then what to do with it after it's done in its temporary location.

And Mayor, I wish I would have spoken earlier, but I kind of appreciate what you said. I agree, we've made a decision to take this portrait down and this is not just redecorating in terms of deciding whether to take drapes down. And I don't mean to be trite as to other people's comments, but we've decided whether to take it down. And like you said, this isn't just a simple statue or a simple picture, this is meaningful to our community. for good and for bad. And you know, we've made a decision to take it down. And I think eventually, as you just both mentioned, I would be fine with could or should as well. I think could leaves it open for the task force to, you know, as we look and see what is created, like you said, at the center of Clayton with the display, I think it will be interesting to see what comes of that. And then once we see that and depending on how long it stays there, we can brainstorm and think about how best to display it where we decide. but I'm certainly happy with leaving it as could. Gary, I absolutely understand your concern, but I think leaving it open to could at least gives the task force the ability to continue to have discussions about it and looking at it in context of where it is in the center and maybe it continues to get foot traffic and people are learning more. And as we generate more discussion about it, maybe we think, okay, well, maybe actually having it at the Hanley House would be a better place. I mean, who knows? But I think it does allow a little bit more flexibility in the future.

I think, you know, it's important to note here, guys, that this is a brand new commission. This is their first recommendation. This is our first shot at evaluating such a recommendation. And we really are kind of inventing this wheel as it suits the city of Clayton. Other cities have done it, but no city is alike and no objects or nobody has the same kinds of objects altogether. So we're kind of inventing this as we go. And so there are going to be some indecision points that we have. And so, Gary, again, I understand where you're coming from, too, as I said earlier or the other day. But I think could is okay. for now, and we will have to take on a decision at some point as to where to put it.

My brief comment is based on some of the comments from my fellow aldermen that if we proceed along the way, it is written that in six months or nine months or whatever point the CCF, the display of the center is basically run its course because those things don't stay there forever. It sounds to me like some of the board members would say, okay, well, let's decide. Let's ask the task force whether they want this to come back to city hall because it's not up to us, it's the task force. And that to me is just, that's a real abdication of our responsibility of what is again, you know, this portrait's been up there for 90 years and to treat this as has been suggested as if this is simply whether we wanna have a painting on the wall All I'm saying, again, is at the end of the day, this needs to be an aldermanic decision. And we don't create a task force and then say, well, whatever they say is fine. It's not up to us to make any further decision about it. That to me is just, that's not the way we should be doing things. So I would object to the language as written and I will vote no on the language if it is not revised. And to me, it's unfortunate because at the end of the day, the task force wanted the portrait taken down. I think we all agree with that. We all agree that it should be displayed only with a narrative to explain the context. So I think there's general agreement here but I think there's one aspect of the ultimate home of this portrait is important and it's important how we treat this, I think significant historical

item. Even the word should is no guarantee. It should is one thing but will is another. I'm just saying, I hate to say, but I think we're getting hung up a little bit in semantics. So anyway, Rich, were you going to say something?

I was just asking what the process is at this point. Are we voting on something? Yes. Thank

you. Yep, we should move ahead. So I think what we want to do is David, you said we need to have a motion and vote to accept the recommendation of the task force.

Yes, it would just be a motion and a simple majority.

Okay.

I'll move to accept the recommendation of the Mayor's Commemorative Landscape Task Force regarding the portrait of Ralph Clayton.

And I second that.

Okay. All those in favor? Raise your hand. Aye. Any opposed?

For the reasons, only the reasons I've stated, no.

Yes. Gotcha. Okay. Well, it passes. And so we will move forward with this. I will tell you guys, it's going to take some time to really take action here because space has to be prepared at the center of Clayton. The display itself has to be written and created. And we've got mostly volunteers working on this, although we do have some great resources at the History Museum, Missouri History Museum. Don't expect anything to happen tomorrow, but I'm hoping, I think we have targeted around January or something to actually make a change and have an educational display created.

To be clear, Mayor, if I could, granted we're not in council chambers, but we've talked about going back when we have the technical capability. I want to be clear that the portrait will come down even if it isn't ready to be in the center of Clayton. Like if they haven't done the verbiage that is going to be displayed along with it, we will not deliberate in council chambers with Ralph Clayton's portrait behind you.

And I would second that.

That's a decision that we can make.

I guess I thought we did make that decision. We made a

decision to take it down. I think we're talking about logistics, almost somewhat logistics, but I understand what you're saying. And so I'm not opposed to that. I want to make sure that we keep it safe. So yeah, I mean, we know that we will have, you know, and at some point we will have to talk about what we put there instead. So yeah.

Let me continue to be an outlier and say that I think that the portrait should come down at such time as the display is ready at the CCF. It should move over to the CCF at that time. And frankly, what should be done is to determine what should be in its place. I don't see any reason why We should have a blank on the wall. I think that's an equally important decision. You know, what is the more welcoming, inviting item that should be there? There's not a lot of opportunity. It's a fairly small space. But as far as I'm concerned, all of this should be done at the same time.

I firmly disagree with that position. I think if the decision has been made this evening that Ralph Clayton's portrait is inappropriate where it is, then the sooner it's removed, the better. And I don't think we need to be waiting on anything else other than that we are in a position to say that this is not an appropriate portrait in chambers, which means it should be removed immediately. It has been there for a longer time than it should be. And this process took quite a long time. And I think this is the time for us to say, OK, you know, it needs to be removed and it needs to be remove now. um maybe you can maybe you can expedite the rest of it in terms of getting that display going and maybe ccf can figure out a way to quickly get him in a place where it you know he should be or his portrait should be but i don't think we wait i don't think i don't think recommendation has been very clear

agree

yeah i agree i i just think i think it should come down and i'm sure there's something simple we can put there and in the interim whether it be Missouri flag and American flag. I mean, there are a million different things we can put behind the mayor. I just don't know where that is, but yeah, maybe it's in a closet somewhere.

We could have the logo of the city of Clayton. I think that's the best idea I've heard thus

far.

All right. I'm good with Either way, honestly. So that's fine. I think we're all deciding that we're going to go ahead and have it come down. We've got, I don't know when we're exactly going to be in person exactly, but once we are, we'll see to that. And I know Andrea and David and whoever will make sure that we take it down and put it in an appropriate safe place.

We'll make sure it's wrapped and well cared for. Okay.

Okay. All right. Any further discussion on that? David, do you have everything you need on that from us?

I do. Thank you, Mayor.

Okay. The last thing we've got is the third quarter financial report. Mr. City Manager.

Here's Janet Watson, our Director of Finance Administration to give her final quarterly financial report.

Going to be a lot of finals now.

There is, there is. So you've seen the third quarter financial report in the general fund. We used to focus on that. We started the year with projected general fund deficit of a million 290. It looks like the current projected deficit is a million 26. Property tax, the majority of it has been received and revenue is 4.7% less than last year. We have seen some protest cases, some large ones from several years ago resolve in the last couple of months which has lessened that property tax. On sales tax, we are 8.3% lower than this time last year and the pandemic still has a significant effect on our taxes. With your indulgence, I thought I would share a screen to show some property tax or excuse me, sales tax. Very good. So we have a lot of questions about how are we doing in sales tax? And so I thought it would show this. So in 2019, that was our last pre-pandemic year, our last full year without any pandemic effect. In that year, the blue is all of our sales taxes except for the green is public safety and the red is use tax. In 2019, the use tax had just begun, so we got very little revenue that year. But if we had in our last pre-pandemic year, if we had this blue dotted line is what the expectation for full sales tax recovery would be. And so you can see that in 2020, we did have our first full year of use tax, but all the other taxes were down. Then 2021, the first part of the year was down significantly the last few months have actually been pretty strong sales tax. And so then you can see what our projections are for next year. Our projection is not quite at what we think of as full tax recovery, but it's getting close to that.

Is that helpful? Yes. I don't know if you can, I mean, obviously, or it looks to me like Yeah, obviously without the use tax, our 22 number would be significantly below 2019 still, even though recently sales tax has started to come back.

Yes. Yes, and we hope that it remains that way and continues back up, and hopefully we will surpass this projection.

And the other important kind of takeaway is that the public safety sales tax has remained fairly stable. But that is because it's from all over the county. It's countywide tax. And so... The county itself didn't really see a downturn in sales tax over COVID because of all of the strong industry segments that were keeping it boosted up, like box stores, et cetera. Whereas the Clayton City sales tax suffered greatly because we don't have that kind of diversification. If we were to have another bar color that just was city-only sales tax, that's not what the blue is, right? It's just all sales tax.

Yes, it's everything except those new ones.

Yeah, so if we had that bar, I'm guessing it would look even worse than the blue bar.

Yes, the use tax does not seem to follow the local sales tax. That's really probably... large businesses purchasing from out of state. And those purchases may be made far ahead and ordered far ahead of when the materials or items are received. Is

that car sales

too? Yes, that's in all of our sales tax vehicle sales, which has been Coming out of the pandemic was very strong, coming out of the pandemic.

Can I ask a question? Yes. Yeah. For some reason, I sit here wondering about your batting percentage because when I see these projected numbers, right? And I really like to think that that's what's going to happen, right? I kind of think about, okay, but what's Janet's batting average? Do you have a record of how good you have been at projecting these sorts of things? I mean, even to go back in 2020, I mean, when you projected 2020, now I understand COVID hit like early in 2020. But look at how high that actually is for 2020. I'm surprised to see how high that bar graph is for 2020 because that was the big COVID. We also

had six months of full economy before COVID hit. Our fiscal year starts in October, so we had October through into February at least without any adjustments.

So is that partly how you got the 2022 projection, which is, hey, look how well we did in 2020. We had six months of full, you know. So we're going to be probably pretty close to 2020 and 2022. Well,

David and I looked at it, and we decided that our local sales taxes, the ones that are generated in Clayton, We believed those had the ability to increase 10%. Even increasing those 10% doesn't get us to pre-pandemic levels. And then the public safety sales tax and the use tax are pretty consistent. And so I think one is 3% growth and one is 2% growth. And so that's how we came out with that number.

Okay. I'd still like to see if you're willing, and I know you've got a lot on your plate, but if you could go back and just kind of help us with your batting average, it would be great because I think it's probably pretty damn good. So I'm hoping.

Well, I don't know what it is. I don't know.

I've got it right here from last year. So for the 21 budget, the budgeted total sales tax revenue was $4,526,000, we'll call it. So $4,525,000. The estimated at year end is $4,575,000. So she was within $50,000 in that projection. Unbelievable.

Well, it

isn't me. It's a lot of discussion where we come up with those numbers.

I'm sure I'm sure. Well, thank you for this. This is good.

I think this is good. And I think it's also good for you know, those listening. I think this Is a great chart to throw up on our website somewhere at some point, perhaps we'll do that. We will do that shortly.

The other areas, utility tax, I think we know that that has been down a bit since last year. We still don't have full occupancy in the buildings. Parking revenue is actually a little bit less than last year. Again, we had almost six months of full parking and the amounts are just down because the buildings aren't full. And so that one has had a little slower recovery than some of the other areas that were affected. And the parks and rec revenue is up substantially. Obviously, we have programs and good attendance again. We just don't have as many programs as we had before. In the other funds, the capital improvement fund and the debt service fund, sales and use taxes were down 13.9% from last year's level. That's still in line with all the things we've been discussing. Last year, if you compare it to last year, we had proceeds from the sale of property that was in there last year, which we didn't have last year. And the debt funds are similar to last year. We did issue bonds last year and spend those bonds, and so that does have an effect on those construction funds and the debt service funds. Are there any other questions?

Janet, I was just going to say, I think it's a great chart too, but I think when we put it on the website, can we just make sure that people understand that 2020 on that chart was half good and half bad? And also that the sales tax that we show there is for the entire county. Because I feel like people might look at that and be like, well, I don't know what they're talking about. It doesn't look like it's, I mean, it's down like everybody assumes, but I just think it's helpful for also people to understand that that is not just Clayton sales tax. That's a great idea. Then we'll put a little narrative with it. Yeah, a little bit. Just a little bit so that people understand

it. That's really important. Good add.

Communication.

If there are no further comments, do we need to do anything with this or is it merely an update? I believe it's just an update.

It's just an update, I'm sorry. Okay.

Okay, well that concludes our business for tonight. If we have time, let's go around with any comments from the last, since the last time we met. Any of you have things to share or things you want to say? I'll go in order of seniority as always.

Rich is

shaking his head. I have

nothing to report.

Okay. See, Ira.

I have a few things I wanted to bring up. And one is the, I don't know that everybody knows, I think we did, we all heard, but I think this, was it MCMA that you're all going to? Is this a, at this particular professional meeting, David Gipson won a phenomenal award, the JT Bell, if I'm not mistaken.

I have a few things I wanted to bring up. And one is the, I don't know that everybody knows, I think we did, we all heard, but I think this, was it MCMA that you're all going to? Is this a, at this particular professional meeting, David Gibson won a phenomenal award, the JT Bell, if I'm not mistaken.

That is right. And correct me if I was going to mention that at the end too, but it's fine. We had a terrific opportunity to actually see David receive this award some months ago in person. And so very excited for him and I'm glad that they gave a really good shout out for you again at the Missouri Municipal League meeting conference. That's good. So everyone is really aware of what a fantastic city manager we've got. Yeah, it's

an incredible honor. So thank you.

I actually got a text message from one of the participants who mentioned it to me, who told me that you'd won the JT Bell. And he just talked about what an incredible award it is. It's not just, hey, let's give David something, an award for something. This is a pretty high honor. So we're very proud of you for that, David.

Well, thank you very much. I appreciate that. I appreciate all the support.

Yeah. I have one other thing to talk about from the ARB meeting. I try and pick out what I think was the most talked about item. In this case, you'll all be interested to know that the county was interested in in placing three 85-inch televisions along the outside wall of the county administration building, which is right near the courthouse. I think we all know that administrative building and it's And they're looking for putting these 85 inch televisions for the purpose of announcing public hearings. They wanted to, three of them, no less. One of them was for announcing hearings other than the county council. One of them was for announcing about just the county council hearings. And the third one was just to talk about the hours of operation of the building. The discussion was pretty lively about whether that's something we really wanted to have sitting in that area, especially three live big TVs with moving parts. And it ended up going back to the lawyer to find out. whether we're setting a precedent by allowing this kinds of thing, even if it's a government building, but whether we should be allowing that even on a government building and whether that opens the door for other established businesses and maybe even residential buildings to have their own large TVs placed somewhere where they would like to have them. And so for that reason, it was tabled. But if any of you have any feedback for me, I'd be happy to take it and bring it to the next meeting when this is going to be brought up again. Okay. So that's all I got.

Okay, good. Let's see, Bridget. I don't have anything to report from a meeting standpoint. I just, I guess I want to give kudos to the school district a little bit because I feel like we dealt them kind of a difficult situation last weekend. Homecoming is a pretty big deal around here as I think all of you realize and, you know, because of a lot of scheduling issues but I, you know, the communication really got out and, you know... I think we all learned something about, you know, communicating better with them in the future. But I think they, you know, I think they did their best. We all did our best to try to kind of find a good solution to which was just, you know, a difficult thing. So I want to give kudos to them and for a great weekend of homecoming. I think everybody had a great time and the weather certainly was great. helped helped us all have a even better time so

yeah very good Becky oh Susan sorry

I don't have much subcommittee equity to the subcommittees for the equity commission are working trying to get language acceptable to the city for the restricted covenants to get rid of those and then the Public Safety Law Enforcement Committee is looking at capturing what we did with the panel in selection of judges. So we make sure to carry that forward. And that's about it. And David, the notice of your award was from a Robert Hussey, one of the aldermen. And even the fact that he took the time to make sure that we all knew as it was happening speaks very highly to you as well. So congratulations on that.

Very kind of him.

He sent a text to several. Yeah, I got one too. I think we all did. That's awesome. Yeah. Yes.

Well, I don't think I did. So I'll try not to take offense.

You're too

new. He hasn't gotten my cell phone number yet. There you go.

Okay, Becky, your turn.

Yeah, I would just share that the last couple days I've attended some of the sessions of the Missouri Municipal League Annual Conference, which is held locally here at Union Station this year. So I personally attended some sessions on communication strategy, which I thought was particularly relevant as we look to hire a more dedicated staff and continue to improve our communications. a session on building green communities, which, I didn't pay a lot of attention to the description. And I think I was hoping for a lot of different sustainability related ideas, and it was really focused on buildings and like the energy ratings of building construction. But certainly I learned a little bit at that. And then a session on diversity, equity and inclusion at which our very own Andrea Muscoff talked about, her experiences here in the city of Clayton and particularly getting our Community Equity Commission kicked off and operating so as well as they do, as well as mentioned the task force. And that was a great session. So kudos to Andrea and thanks

Great. Susan, or I mean, no, Gary, sorry.

I enjoyed being part of the homecoming parade. Rich and Susan did most of the candy throwing so I could just practice my wave as we were driving by. But it was really a very nice event. Robin and I went to the Jazz Fest on Saturday night, and I thought it was a spectacular event. Mick Jagger did not emerge from the Ritz as was rumored, but it was a terrific event. And I guess the only thing I would say that I found somewhat disappointing was that it just seemed to me from my observation, and I did hear this from a couple other people who are Clayton residents, that all of us sort of observed that the audience did not seem to include that many Clayton people in But I don't know that to be true, but I think generally it was a terrific event and I sort of in hindsight sort of felt like it should have been promoted more because it's just a perfect setting. That Carondelet Plaza with the fountain behind the group that was playing, it really was a spectacular event and I hope we'll do it again and I hope we can even promote it more. So it was a very nice crowd, but it could have accommodated more. And I'd love to have seen more what I thought were some of our neighbors there than just to fill it out. It was a very diverse group, which was great. But still, it would have been nice to see, I think, more people from Clayton actually be there.

Very good. Well, yeah. Yeah. I agree with that. I went to the jazz festival for a while. I had a conflict, but I got there for about an hour and it was, I thought, fantastic. I had seen Michael Silverman and his entourage perform a couple of years ago in Webster, which they've been doing for a while. And that's where we kind of came up with the idea. But it was great. There were musicians that were here from, you know, the West Coast, the East Coast, et cetera. It was a very jazzy crowd because Mr. Silverman promoted it really well to his following, which is pretty huge. And yeah, I mean, with more advanced planning and all that, I think we could do a better job of promoting. And now when we have a more robust communications department, I think that will help too. But it was fantastic, I thought. I wanted to give a little update on the art fair. I got some numbers today from, um, Sarah Umloff over at cultural festivals and, um, it looks like it was a pretty successful event financially. Um, they really matched their budget in every way in some ways exceeded it. The beverage sales really were, were pretty huge considering they had fewer beverage booths this year. Um, so I think, um, Basically, it was a huge success. I know that a lot of you went to it as well and it was a good crowd. I know that all the artists that I talked to felt that they really did well in sales and that's terrific for them too. Let's see, what else do I have to say? We had the downtown overlay for, you know, the, oh, what do I want to call it? Maryland, what do we just H3?

H3 design, district design overlay.

Yeah, that's what we call it. Okay. Anyway, we had a walk around with the task force and I think we sort of re-envisioned what we had, previously visioned and I think people came away with some good reminders and good understanding. And Ira, we talked a lot about some of your thoughts. And so I know Susan is gonna put out a recap and hopefully once we get that and you get that, we can have a little conversation too to make sure we're capturing everybody's ideas and desires there before it's finalized. But it was a good walk around. I, too, have been to the MML conference the last couple of days. It's a pretty good conference. I've never been before because it's never been in St. Louis, at least that I can remember. So it's good. Again, kudos to David for his award, JT Bell. And I would encourage all of you next time if it's convenient for you to try to go and catch some of these sessions, because I do think they're good. And it's also great. I know I introduced Becky to, I don't know, a dozen people or so. It's good to get to know your counterparts in other cities and parts of the state. I would note that we were wearing our masks pretty diligently because a lot of people were not. So anyway. That's enough said about that. MIAC has had their first meeting and they're currently trying to figure out what to do for their project. We did do the parade and they joined us on the fire truck. We had six MIAC students with us and it was quite a festive occasion. June, I sent you, are you there? Yes. I sent you a photograph. Do you think you can screen share it? Um, I am not on the

city. I don't know if I can't do

it on this computer. Anyway, I was going to show it to you guys, but I'll send it around. Um, I think everybody had a great old time and we missed those of you who couldn't be there, but, um, Anyway, I was just glad that we were able to get the fire truck over to Gayfield given all of the complications that arose and everybody was happy. So that is it from me. Thank you all for your, again, as always for your diligence and time and care in which you invest in this duty of ours.

Thank you, Mayor.

All right. All right. Well, good night. Good night, Chet. Good night, David. Have a

great night. Good night everyone.