October 12, 2021 — Meeting Transcript

David, there it is, recording in progress. So David, do you want to say anything first or just have Matt launch into his presentation?

Okay. Get to screen share here. Going full screen on a PDF, is that still visible?

Yep.

So, Matt Malek, Director of Public Works. We're here tonight. I'm going to go over a traffic calming program that we're working to develop the City of Clayton. We're going to go through a few different phases of the program and different steps. Right now, this is a kind of just a working framework, if you will, from some analysis I've done of different traffic calming programs in the area and even some outside the area. Each one has a different nuance, different criteria, different approaches. And we've tried to take those and combine those into something we think would fit in the city of Clayton as a starting point to begin a discussion. This is not meant to be a final document in any capacity. It's just what we think are maybe a good first steps. So the purpose is kind of twofold here. With the presentation, it's to gather feedback on this framework so that we can further refine this traffic calming program. And the program we'll get into, but will give us a step process on how to address one of the most common concerns we get, which is speeding in neighborhoods. So the purpose of the program, which I just preempted myself there, was Define that process, establish qualifying criteria for different levels of traffic calming measures. So sometimes those are physical, sometimes it's enforcement, sometimes it's education. There's more than just installing something in the roadway. Look to utilize traffic calming measures to reduce speeds and volumes where appropriate for acceptable levels based on the street. We want to use these measures to maintain maximum mobility and access for all users of the street as well. It's not just vehicles. At each stage, you'll see through here, it's built in, but the neighborhood involvement throughout each one of these stages will be important getting their feedback, whether it be they raise the issue to the city staff or they're voting on a particular issue perhaps, or some of the ideas we came up with or a particular solution, excuse me. Look how these get funded, you know, the procedure for the development of the project itself and how we go about getting the funds and then the If for some reason it's not working out, whether staff identifies it or the residents are not liking it, how are we going to evaluate that and what would it take to remove it if for some reason nobody likes it anymore?

Trying to get to, I got maps here somewhere. Oh, I know where it's at. So functional classification is given by East-West Gateway. that based on the amount of volume a roadway carries, and usually the speed limit is higher on these roads, they have different functional classifications. So you'll see here, this is a map published by East West Gateway. So within city of Clayton, we have obviously 170, which runs through the city, but primarily what we deal with are arterials and major and minor collectors. These routes, carry usually thousands of vehicles per day, usually have a speed limit of 35 miles per hour or more and are not generally suitable for trying to slow traffic down because it would lead to congestion issues. So whenever we go, since we're here, whenever we go to try to get grants from East-West Gateway, these are the only streets that are eligible for grants is another way these are utilized. So you'll see in the downtown area, Sorry, as I zoom in the lines get a little thinner, but almost all the streets with the exception of Cravalet are. You get, zoom out, Y down would be one of those routes that is a major collector. So it feeds into other residential areas. Then as you go up Forsyth, up Merrimack and out Forsyth to the east. But those are generally based on the amount of volume that road carries.

So Matt,

Just Matt. So all those other streets, all the side streets, they would not be eligible for any funding then. Correct. It's just major roads. Yeah,

that's correct. Not through East West gateway. There may be other programs that occasionally depending on like if you were going to put maybe some kind of pedestrian facility that would maybe cut through an area, but generally just to, for the maintenance of those streets, they are not eligible.

But your criteria that you're talking about would apply to any streets that we consider needing a calming measure.

Yeah, we lay out some criteria that identify some streets that just by way of the program would be exempt that I'll try to cover. But the idea, like many things, we'd want to be able to look at each situation on a case-by-case and be able to have the flexibility. A program is a guiding framework I guess, but you can always make individuals determinations.

So the process we've kind of come up with at this point is we're going to go through each stage in the next few slides, but the way we kind of see this working. And again, we'll still need some refinement because I see some scenarios that I'm like, oh, okay, what are we going to do here? And we can work that out in the final policy or program, excuse me. But the request could initiate with an individual or a group. It's good to get the HOAs where applicable involved and it'll involve the police department, public works and the alderman of the ward. They'll at least be notified usually on the police and public works side, we're involved in some capacity of the initial steps. So what we've outlined, the program has three stages. The concern, depending on how it's presented to the city or if the city identifies it doesn't have to just be generated by the residents. We'll enter at stage one or two. And from there we'll determine how we proceed forward. So based on that request, as we get into these stages, you'll see those impacted areas that are identified. So as we get these requests, we will look at the area that may be impacted if we were to do some kind of installation, a permanent installation and make sure we identify those properties so that as the residents are looking to get support or discuss with their neighbors, the ultimate design, they would have a list of those properties. And also outlines who would be doing any involved in the petitions or the voting. The neighborhood involvement is included in each stage. So it can include meetings to get to the heart of what the issue is, the surveys, et cetera. So implementation of a permanent traffic control measure subject to the final stage and funding availability so a permanent measure would be something that there's a design for there's a construction cost for and there would be an alteration in the roadway generally in robo and then you know just uh you know if at any point it's determined that it's not in the best interest uh to proceed with a certain installation or a certain measure at a certain place um it's a you know emergency responders the city we'll be getting input from them. So if there's anything that comes up that we think cause an issue, there's the ability to take a step back, look at it and say, okay, it's not right in this location regardless of where we're at in the process. So stages of traffic calming, these kind of mimic what we do now to an extent, but just to hopefully formalize and really focus the efforts on when not just responding always to one request with a full traffic study, but getting some support in the area to identify that there is an issue before putting a lot of staff time behind trying to come up with a solution. So goal one is just if we had a single resident concern in an area. So we would look to do a few things. A lot of this would involve input from the police department, which is what we do now. So it would be enforcement of the posted speed limits. We might have installation of the speed trailer or the signs which are installed that run the stealth mode as well as the on mode. And then utilize whether it be social media, reaching out to the trustees, but some kind of public service announcements because many times it A lot of the people driving through the streets are the residents. So being able to reach out to them directly through one of those avenues would be good. So if beyond stage one, we're still seeing, OK, there still seems to be an issue. The resident could petition the surrounding areas within 500 foot. and get support letter from the HOA, again, applicable. This would trigger stage two, which would involve a potential variety of things. A lot of them look like what we do now with the collection of the data and the analysis of the speeds, the volumes. We'd review the crash history. We'd meet with the residents to see what the true issue they're seeing is and see if there's anything else that needs to be considered. As part of this is getting to those criteria that Alderman Lentz was mentioned earlier, that we'd evaluate these projects against. So once we've collected some of that information, we would look at these next four bullet points and see if it would qualify for moving on to the next stage. So it would be primarily a residential street with posted speed limit of 25 miles per hour or less. 85th percentile speeds would be five miles per hour beyond the posted speed limit. So in our areas, a majority of our speed limits are at 20, but we do have some Clayton Gardens, I think some Old Town that are posted at 25 as far as public areas. An average daily traffic of 300 to 2,000 vehicles per day.

Matt, can I ask you, why does it matter how many vehicles there are if The issue is whether they're speeding. So if you have only 100 vehicles in a day, but every one of those vehicles is speeding through that neighborhood, I'm just wanting to know, I mean, how does the number of vehicles, why is that an important factor?

Well, it could be from just the perspective of funding is limited on for such activities, focusing it where it's going to have the most benefit. Um, also if it's, if it's that low of a volume, the, the impact overall, if you have a road where 700 people are speeding, um, like 85th percentile speed is seven miles per hour over the speed limit. You're having a lot more impact than a road. Some roads we've got with like 120 average vehicles per day where that might be seven cars. So not to say that a speeding car isn't dangerous in each situation, but you're certainly having a lot more, um, on those roads that have a much higher ADT. And again, this would be something we could evaluate as the program development happens, but a lot of these programs do have minimum and maximums for those types of reasons, but there's still flexibility that could be accomplished.

Okay. All right. Thanks.

And then we talked a little bit already, the arterials, the major collectors, which were for Clayton, the streets that were on that map that we looked at. And then primary emergency response routes would not be eligible. So the primary emergency response routes really involve a few select routes. A lot of them are in the downtown area and wouldn't be something that would probably get this kind of attention anyway, and they already have higher traffic volumes. sections of Bonham, Brentwood, Carondelet in the downtown, Maryland Avenue. Oh, there's a list at the bottom, excuse me. I don't have to read it all off to you, but this was collected, it looks like about 10 years ago. Internally, we went through a process of beginning to put a program together, but it was never finalized. And these routes were ones that were identified in that program. As we work to develop this further, check those with police and fire to confirm them, but those were our identified emergency routes at that time. So once we've collected that data and compared it against the qualifying criteria, we'd share that with the resident group. The PD could do enhanced enforcement as opposed to speed limits. And again, these are activities that may be included, but aren't necessarily we're going to do all of them in every situation, or doesn't mean we can't add something to it as well. So we could consider installation of temporary low cost measures to see if the next step we would take would be something that would yield results. So whether it be we install some planters or some cheaper pylons before we would go installing curb lines. If we did install sense measures, we could, you know, again, install counters to determine the effectiveness. And then if levels begin to fall, depending on what we did to have those levels fall, we could evaluate it. If through enhanced enforcements, we see levels fall, maybe we set a timeline where we revisit it or they do occasional enhanced enforcements or speed trailer and we revisit it with new counts and speed data to see, okay, it's still working or Okay, do we need to look at taking it to the next step?

Matt, I have a question just kind of following up on Ira's question. So these criteria, qualifying criteria that you have listed here, are those criteria something we're going to discuss and decide what the criteria are? Are these the criteria that you are basically recommending?

I think it's going to be a combination of both. From looking at other programs, these are common criteria. I think I looked at the five mile per hour beyond the posted speed limit is a pretty common one. The average speed limit or the average speed three miles per hour beyond is something I've kind of looked at adding. The ADT, there's a little variation in that with other programs, but the idea of whether it be this evening, future meetings, is collecting some of that feedback on these things from you all as we look to develop this. It's not going to, I don't picture walking away from this and finalizing this report tomorrow, but this was kind of an initial step based on what I think would fit the city.

Well, so just for frame of reference, I don't recall What is the ADT on some of our neighborhood streets? Anyone, Crestwood, Audubon, any examples that you remember?

Sure. So if we take a look at our, this is a traffic count map we have posted on our website and I went through and just put some rough numbers on it here. I will zoom in closer. I see some people leaning in. If you see a white box, that is a number that's probably older than 2017. I believe is the date. If you see a yellow box, it was taken from probably in the last four to five years. Just a newer traffic count is all it is. So if we look at a Crestwood, and this is traffic in both directions, we are looking at 900 average daily traffic as ADT. So 940 vehicles per day down by Clayton Road. As you pass Clavarack, it goes to 820. At the north end up by Wydown, you're at 610 vehicles per day. You know, on the east side over here at Ridgemoor, you know, you're at 310. Down in the Moorlands, like Clayton Road, you vary from 1,500 down to 610. For just a comparison's sake, let's go up in the north end of town. Forsyth, as you pass Kingsbury, is 2,750 cars per day.

Okay. Thank you.

Um, so the next step beyond, uh, stage two would be stage three sled again, uh, resident petition with a 67%, um, support within a thousand foot of the area. Now this thousand foot, um, we would generally look at that and restrict that to the neighborhood is my thought. So you might have somebody on, um, HAB-Jacques Juilland, An auto bond that backs up to collaborate but they don't use that as their primary route of access so it's not going to have an impact to them directly getting to their home. HAB-Jacque Juilland, Then they may be excluded from that so it's not just 1000 foot circle necessarily we'd have to look at that, but if it would be on a route that home might be 2000 foot away but that's their primary access, they may be included as the the interested area as well included with the interested area. So this stage would be, again, another meeting as needed with residents to discuss potential measures that could be installed. We'd review the data from stage two, try to come up with a plan, a consensus amongst residents and some estimates for these. Now we may come up with one plan, two plans. It depends. Some things might lend themselves better to certain situations where other areas might only have one thing that makes sense. And while I didn't put together a toolbox of implementations here that we would utilize, there are a number of traffic calming measures out there. But a lot of areas don't look to draw from the 20 or so measures that are out there. They try to keep it somewhat simple so that HAB-Jacques Juilland, motors and residents know what to expect so you might you might see yourself drawing on a typical three or four items so that some coherent with it, but nothing says you have to do it that way, but i've seen with other other areas. HAB-Jactes Juilland, So once those recommendations would be developed. We would put that out to, like we think we've met with the resident group. We've come up with some designs, put that out to the residents for a vote. Again, the same area with the 67% would agree on the traffic calming measure and that would have a project that would be identified. So from there, we'd move on to funding and implementation. Different cities have different ways that they do this. Some devote a certain budgeted line item to it, I guess annually, and you could write projects within that to receive this. We weren't sure just yet on the best way to proceed with that, but I think the way it would break down at least initially would be depending on the costs associated to install the measure. So a lower cost project, HAB-Jacques Juilland- I might refine this dollar amount more, but if it's under $5,000 staff would write a recommendation to the city manager for approval into the current budget as it allows or inclusion in the next budget other projects that go kind of beyond those dollar values and get into moving curb lines around and really get higher costs. HAB-Jacque Juilland- We would share that with the board for approval as part of the annual budget or it becomes a capital project in some cases. TAB, Mark McIntyre:" Following the installation of such project the traffic coming we'd look to evaluate it between six and 18 months, the idea being, we would want to get the counts and speeds roughly the same time as we took them prior to installation. but still give it time to get up and be functioning. After that newness wears off, if you will, anytime we put up a new sign, you put up a speed trailer, people pay attention for a while and then it kind of fades. So get past that period and then still collect the data in roughly the same time. A lot of programs I reviewed had criteria for removing such installations. I guess it might happen quite often, whether it be people turn over in an area or they just decide they don't like it. So the initial request would be two years or greater from the date of the implementation. It would be considered. So it would need to follow our evaluation too. And then the similar process for bringing it about, residents submit a petition for its removal. Once we check that petition, we would reach out to the affected area and then require a 67% vote for removal, same way as implementation. And then if a traffic calming device is removed, generally we would set a timeline for, okay, we're not going to go through the process again, starting in three months. So in this case, we put two years following the date of the removal.

And Matt, just like with the request process, the approval process, the removal would also be subject to the city agreeing to it and that the city in its discretion could say, we're not going to remove it. We think it's important or for whatever reason.

In any of this situation along the way, we're not seeking... approval like we would on an easement or on somebody's property. We're all within city right away here. So it's always up to the city to act in its best interest. So next steps beyond this, I know it's high level kind of framework, but really looking to see any real red flags raised or things that people thought that we should take and investigate further as we refine this. We're gonna go back and get probably a few more heads together, get with police and fire as we work to refine this and get a program that we can bring back or share with you for review in the future. So that's really kind of all I had in the way of prepared materials but welcome to take thoughts or questions.

Go ahead, Susan. Just a few. First of all, so this is really citizen-initiated traffic calming. The city will still continue to try to be cohesive around the city, right? This is really addressing if a neighborhood wants something done.

Yeah, this doesn't... This is not meant to take the place of like a complete streets policy or anything that we might do on our own as part of a project or anything that we've identified. If the police were to come to us and say, hey, we're having a lot of accident issues at this location, we look at it, it's because of speeding. It doesn't have to initiate with a resident request. This would be the process for it.

Okay, and it seems to, again, traffic calming isn't looking at really stopping cut-throughs. It's looking at slowing down the people who are going to be in the neighborhood regardless. So you're not reducing, you're not looking at reducing traffic on any streets through these efforts really, is that right?

Well, it's not what we've, it's not traditionally the complaints I guess we get, not that we don't. We would utilize these measures to do both, but the primary criteria we've established are based on speed.

Right, I guess I ask that because the, Yeah, the comprehensive planning is so important because if there's a problem in one neighborhood and neighbors get together and something is done, the traffic's going to be pushed somewhere else if it's stopping cut-throughs. And so it's got to be not just one group of neighbors wanting something. It has to look at the consequences of that, where else it goes. So I hope that that's something considered in looking at these steps. something else I wondered as well, if let's just say it again, it's looking at the comprehensiveness of it. If let's say there was something like, I don't know, a bike path going through a bunch of neighborhoods and one area didn't want the path there. And so they were objecting under one, you know, under these types of processes. Again, my understanding is this is in addition to what the city is going to be doing anyway, to keep a comprehensive flow of pedestrians and bikes and cars going to the main arteries and everything else, right?

Yeah, I wouldn't picture this as being utilized in any fashion to remove or alter things that are installed under any kind of master plan or removal of a bike lane or anything along those lines. This would just be done as a way to hopefully not divert the traffic because there are measures that close down intersections or make them right turn only. So it's half closures. That can do what you said. It causes people to go to the other routes. The idea would be you make that, at least my perspective, is you make it enough of a traffic calming measure that slightly slows people, but it doesn't make them go to another street or seek alternate routes. But I wouldn't picture removing a bike lane on a road to install a traffic calming measure.

And I guess that's the main, the main issue that I hope this addresses that when you're looking at any, I love addressing neighborhood concerns. I think that's, that's something that we need and will be really helpful. But also that's just that criteria of looking at the effect it has on me on the next street over because we don't just want to move, move around the people who are speeding through to, to avoid a stop sign or a bump out or something else.

Yeah. And I think that's where we could further define that impacted area and whether it's part of the group or not, but when we're defining that impacted area considerations when defining it. But we're certainly cognizant of that when we look at, we've discussed these in the past, just pushing the problem to another street so that you move over and you do the same process on the next block that felt the repercussions of such a change is something we'd want to avoid for sure. Thank you.

Bridget, did you have a comment? I was just, Matt, so then stage three anticipates any sort of different traffic calming measures. So it could be as extreme as a permanent bump out or it could be a stop sign or it could be as simple as temporary posts or planters, right? Is that what I am understanding? That if it makes it to stage three, it could be any number of

Yeah, it could be anything. If we get to stage three and we determine enhanced traffic enforcements are the way to go as opposed to installing something that restricts traffic. The only thing I would say there is a stop sign would not be in the tool of traffic calming measures or the last presentation.

HAB-Masyn Moyer- That's what I was actually asked matt was like if you could. HAB-Massyn Moyer- i'd be interested and I don't know if this happened at some point before I was on the board, maybe or but um i've read a little bit about this myself, and I know sometimes people think stop signs are and we've heard residents say that but. according to the folks that study this, like actually defined to us, like what is traffic calming and what are examples of traffic calming measures? Like we've talked about the bump outs. I've seen stuff where it's just even like painting in the intersection or different like there's I know that there's like a wide variety of approaches and I don't know how many of them are actually like recommended by traffic engineers which I'm sure you would let us know because some of them are even kind of wacky frankly that are designed to you know like get a driver's attention or almost like startle a driver so that they slow down. So That would be really helpful for all of us to understand. Thanks.

And there are many different things you can do, whether it's vertical, horizontal deflections. This is the example I have up on screen here, which may be difficult to see, but it's Kirkwoods. They had Alta put this together. I don't know how much money they spent on it, but it does have nice graphics and goes through some nice... different measures. So a choker, I can send and we will develop these and identify these as part of the program. And I can share some information as we're doing that as well. I will say on some of the streets that we have, some of the toolbox items identified for traffic calming are narrower streets, on street parking. We've got quite a bit of that on a lot of our streets. We can't do things like traffic circles due to the right-of-way width restrictions. But there are different things that we could utilize, and some have really high price tags. Some of them have smaller price tags. And I think I would imagine once we get further into this and if we get to the point of implementing a few, we'll settle on some that, okay, this fits us better and is a good bang for the buck, I guess, if you will. Like RRFB, we've actually installed one of those up on the north side of Shaw Park. So that's an example of something that can be utilized in certain situations as well.

If I add one more thing, and I hesitate because I know it's so anecdotal. But I was in Chicago last weekend and in the neighborhoods, and we did a lot of strolling. And there was pretty much, it's an old neighborhood, so maybe this is outdated, but there's a pretty much a four-way stop on almost every corner. And it may well have been, and it was quite delightful to stroll, but it may well have to keep traffic from cutting through from the arteries. But it did keep the neighborhood very calm and a lot of people outside and on the streets up there. So I don't know.

Yeah, I only

defer to your expertise.

Well, yeah, and that's what we want to do for sure. But, you know, I guess it would be great, and maybe you've done this already, but maybe to just reiterate why a stop sign is not traffic calming. If somebody has to slow down and stop, it sort of defies logic that it's not traffic calming. So I know we've got some people listening in tonight as well. I wonder if you could just address that.

Yeah, and I think, well, I don't have to open up what I had before, but so the purpose of the stop sign at the intersections are to control the right-of-way, to control the users of the intersection. I get into anagram soup here, but the Federal Highway Administration is the body that dictates a lot of different standards. The manual on uniform traffic control devices is a standard that all states follow in some capacity. Specifically states that it's not to be used for speed control. So the manual that dictates all this says, if you're trying to solve a speeding issue, you should not use this. You have the drawback of people will speed up beyond the stop sign thinking that they If you stop at a stop sign that you feel is unwarranted, you feel that I need to make that time up. There are studies that show people speed up once they get 100 foot or so beyond the stop sign and coming up to it. It can give a false sense of security because the stop signs like that are rolled through more often than not because they are unwarranted and people are thinking that cars are going to stop. I've not fully read them, but there are studies that show that it increases rear end collisions. So vehicle on vehicle collisions. There's a, it will push similar to a traffic calming device that was really restrictive. It could push traffic to another street as well. I'm sure I'm blanking on some of the reasonings, but that's a few of the points.

Certainly seems logical to me that the safest flow of traffic is a steady safe speed rather than stop and go that as you said could be HAB-Jacques Juilland, People don't know if they're going to actually stop or not they're speeding their back there hitting people in the rear end whatever but a steady constant safe speed would be. HAB-Jacque Juilland, The goal that seems to me of traffic coming

yeah and the other things with with the stop signs regardless of where they are you have the the added noise, the added pollution that goes along with those and. 85th percentile speed, which I know we've discussed before, was a way that if you look at a highway, not saying that it's used everywhere or it's appropriate in all situations, but if you look at the highway, the thing that's really unsafe about a highway is cars traveling at different speeds. Obviously the speed you're going at, but if you get a lot of cars traveling at a wide variety of speeds, that is when it can become dangerous. So establishing that speed limit on a highway HAB-Jacques Juilland, As close to that range where most people are already traveling are trying to get them to group into that speed range is is a safety measure that's utilized on the highway so yeah that same concept would apply all the months.

Matt, I know you've done this, but when I drive just across Clayton Road from my neighborhood, I go right into Richmond Heights. Let's take Boland, which is actually Crestwood going south and any number of those streets over there just across Clayton road. They do have a lot of stop signs, but the other thing they have are a lot of signs just asking people to slow down. They have a bunch of different little slogans they use, but slow down, we love our town, some stuff like that. I mean, are those considered, are those in the bucket of traffic calming measures that in the toolkit that are options? Just curious.

So based on research that I've found, I will say that there are some cities that utilize those things. Vast majority do not. being that it's installed in the right-of-way and in many times trying to mimic a regulatory street sign that's not a MUTC compliant sign, we've not installed those. There's, I think, oh, I can't remember if it was Michigan or Tennessee. There were some cities I was running across where they did something like that. They're very few, but generally those are not MUTC compliant signs and we don't install them in the right-off.

Okay, but something like what you're showing on the screen are things that you think are possibilities?

Yeah, those are standard signage that regardless of where you would drive across the country, you would expect to see and know what it means. This is a pedestrian crossing situation, but yeah, depending on the scenario, we would look to Muted for the appropriate signage.

OK. Any other comments from the board or questions?

Yeah, I have just a comment. So Matt, have we employed these kinds of traffic calming things other than stop signs? Have we employed that in areas of the city that you can point us to?

We've done some temporary measures HAB-Jacques Juilland, Are not in place currently I think we did something play Shire if you go on Davis drive, we have one of the speed signs that that shows your speed as you go through. HAB-Jacqe Juilland, down the roadway. HAB-Judy Nogg, We do have, as I mentioned earlier, while it's not something we went out constructed it's just by nature of being we have on street parking we have the narrow road widths. But as far as projects to go out and install, a lot of these devices you might see in this toolbox. There's not a lot of different examples that I can point you to.

I can try to find some. The police department does put their trailer and they've got a radar sign on Y down. And I think that's the police department doing that though, right?

That's

correct. Yeah. So we haven't actually had a situation where a neighborhood has expressed interest in slowing down the traffic because there are speeders going fast. We haven't yet been in a position where we've tried other than stop signs, where we've tried these other measures which might be narrowing or putting other kinds of things in the way so that people will slow down. I just want to know if we have any of that yet in the city, if we've done it yet.

So in the downtown area, when the streetscape was installed and the bump outs were installed would be one example. That could be considered a traffic calming measure as it narrows the street as vehicles come to an intersection. But I believe the primary functionality of that was probably to shorten the pedestrian crossing as well. So I don't know what was the precipitous behind that coming to be, but that could certainly be something to point to in the downtown. Right,

but do we have- I would know- My question is- Go ahead, I'm sorry.

Jump in, like in my own neighborhood in Hillcrest, we've had- group of residents who engaged with the police department and public works on the topic of speeding and concerns that they had. And we've certainly seen responses, primarily the type of response we've gotten has what we've done so far, I guess I should say is the the speed sign that draws your attention to how fast you are going. And we've had those in and around Hillcrest for some time now. HAB-Masyn Moyer-

I feel like and he'll crest also just installed the speed tables just over the border in the city so that's well it's in the city. HAB-Massyn Moyer- We should be able to take some data as to whether doing any good, and the soon as you cross into clayton right.

HAB-Michael Leccese Jr.: yeah i've asked our police and fire to you know evaluate those two and provide feedback i've talked with Stan mobile hill over there when. They were looking to install those as a trial, but they are on Aberdeen and Arundel. I think the quote I saw on those was about a little over $4,000 each.

I was wondering who was hogging those speed signs. I guess now I know.

I mean, they're all over. They're on our street periodically. I mean, the police department does a great job of responding to people when they complain.

Well, we've tried to get one in White Owl Forest. We had one for two days and then it disappeared. I haven't seen one since. It's been a year and a half. um that that's that's all you know and i think it would be good to have it on a lot of streets i don't know that we have a lot of them um but i certainly think the data needs to be collected and i and my real question was was if if we've employed these measures then do we have data that says yes it works i mean that's that's really the crux of the question so

we don't have a lot of data in that and that that was part of as i was going back and trying to draw on just speed and volume data You know, some of it is aged and we've been updating some of it as we go. But to lay out these criteria, you know, the collection of some more data on these where we might expect to see issues will be something we'll look at doing as well. But to go back and be able to say an AB versus a traffic calming measure we've installed before, I don't have... I can't think of a solid example I guess I've got on that, but that's what the evaluation phase of this would hopefully provide. Even if it's for those temporary measures like some planters to provide a narrowed roadway or

something. It seems like you could probably collect that data fairly quickly after installing whatever measure we use, right?

We would probably let it ride for a little bit. At first, you'll get some artificially low numbers, I would imagine, from people at something brand new, like whether they're looking at that sign that was installed or thinking, oh, am I going to fit through here or is it going to be an issue? But as they get comfortable with it, they're going to get back to their speeds that they would normally drive at into the future. And so we wouldn't measure it the next week. We would wait a while. So it would probably take a few months to collect that data, I would imagine.

Okay, good points. Thanks. Thank

you. I'm going to take you back to what I raised earlier about unintended consequences. If a measure is put in one neighborhood, what will happen? Maybe a couple of streets over. And I went back to what you said in the impacted area and the way it talks about in process, that seems to be who's going to have voting rights and whether they want the effort put in or not. And I just wonder if it would be helpful to add a bullet point looking at that broader impact, is there a broader impact on surrounding streets? So you get beyond that narrow impacted area.

That's a good idea. I

agree.

I don't know if any of the board members have questions right now. We do have a question in the listening audience here that I would like to take if that's okay with everyone. Kathleen Gund has her hand up.

Can you hear me? Yes. Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to respond to Ira's comment about has this been used around the city in the past? And I used to live on North Central and this is going back many, many years. But before the gates were put in or like they're not really gates, they just kind of are like fake gates right north of the library. The cut through traffic and the speed of that traffic. was like the decrease in that was dramatic after those were put in. So that wasn't a stop sign, it was just like a narrowing of the street. So I just wanted to offer that. I'm not sure if Matt was working in the city at that time, but I consider that a traffic calming measure that while expensive was really effective. Okay. Thank you.

Thanks. I wonder, I wonder if I can add a comment on that. You know, we talked about the Maryland Avenue and the bypass. And I think that we, we were, we were also very interested in the fact that that we, we, I think we considered that as a traffic calming device as well. And so I'm, I'm, I mean, I'm interested to see when we get those, you know, that street finished as to whether or not that happened, but I guess we need a before. I don't know that we have a before, um, to get the after. Do you know if we have anything, Matt,

in terms of any information? Yeah, we've got something that would be, I think, relatively recent enough. And then data from traffic studies from developments, while it may not be in as much detail, I think we'll have good data that we can compare it against. But yeah, when you were asking earlier, I was meant to say that while it's not yet complete here soon, knock on wood, that will be one that will serve as the traffic calming measure between Hanley and Forsyth.

Okay, um, one, one real quick thing, which is, Matt, we've still, you know that sign you mentioned in Davis place. I think it would be interesting to just do a measure on that to see if it's effective at this point because it's been there a while. So, see if it slows people down. New counts. Yeah, yeah. If you do that. If you could, I think we've got that. We might as well look at it. Okay. It's actually after seven o'clock when we normally start a regular meeting. Sorry,

Mayor, we have another handout.

I was just about to say that. We do have one other handout hand up. And so I'm going to take. Let's take that. But I know it's Josh, Josh Dubinsky. And Josh, I know that this is really important for you. But if you could be pretty brief, that would be great.

Sure. And you know what? If it's not appropriate for me to talk right now, I can wait till a more appropriate time. I know there's been a lot of time spent on this tonight. So if you'd like me to hold my comments until later, I can.

If you can give it a couple of minutes and that's it, that would work.

Okay. Just briefly in terms of the standards that are being used, which I believe Audubon fulfills those standards, just in general for the city, I think it's also important to evaluate the amount of minors that are living in a given area. So within a certain, whatever the parameters are for each stage, I think at some point there has to be a consideration for the amount of minors that are living in that area and then maybe taking, you know, extra precautions as needed, given that children are at risk and they don't understand right away and cars need to travel at a reduce speed as a result with kids in the street. And I just think that's a factor that should be in play. The second point I wanted to make was in terms of a stop sign, I understand the concerns. I understand that, you know, stop signs aren't always obeyed. People roll stop signs. They can create conflicts in that regard and maybe other stop signs can be ignored as a result of there being too many stop signs. Now, in the Morelands area, you know, we see two stop signs on Westwood for six intersecting streets. We see three stop signs on Glenridge for seven intersecting streets. And on Audubon, we see only two stop signs for nine intersecting streets. So adding a stop sign where we're talking about a Cromwell isn't... excessive burden for the neighborhood. It doesn't, it doesn't, it's fitting with Glenridge. Actually, Audubon has more intersecting streets, so it seems like it'd be even more appropriate. And then on Crestwood, you know, for the two intersecting streets that they have, there's stop signs at both of those intersections. So You know, I think, you know, a stop sign has to be evaluated on a case by case basis. You just can't make a blanket blanket statement that no stop signs no good here because research, you know, shows in other areas that it doesn't work so I will say that and The other thing is, in terms of doing chokers or doing chicanes, with our parking restrictions, I wonder if Mr. Malik could speak to how that would work with us having seasonal parking on either side of the street. And then we would certainly have to have no parking any time areas. to accommodate the chokers or chicanes or the speed tables even, and how that would look if we were to do something in that regard.

I think we're going to have to ask, you know, Matt's going to come back to us with more ideas and more refined presentation based on the input tonight. And If Matt, if you could just keep that question with you and address it at the next go round because we are now almost 10 minutes past our meeting start time.

And Mayor, I'd just like to say thank you and thank you to the board and thank you to Mr. Malik. I appreciate all the work. that's being done on this. And hopefully we can come up with a solution that can make our kids safe and make the residents in Audubon feel safe and something that will be effective to slow down traffic on our street. And thanks to all of you.

Okay, great. Thank you. Yep. That's our goal. Okay. Thank you so much, Matt. That was really thorough and great. Appreciate it. So I think we're good to go ahead and start the seven o'clock meeting. So I will go ahead and open that meeting. Welcome everyone. And the first order of business will be the roll call.

Okay. Alderman Lentz. Here. Alderman Berkowitz. Here. Aldermen McAndrew.

Here.

Alderwoman Buse. Here. Aldo woman Patel.

Here.

Alderman Gary Feder.

Alderman Fader.

Mayor Harris. Here. City Manager David Gipson.

Mayor Harris. Here. City Manager Gibson.

And City Attorney O'Keefe.

Here. Thank you. Great. The next item is the approval of the minutes from September 28th. So could we have a motion?

I will move to approve the minutes from September 20. Second.

All right, all those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay, that's good. And now is the time on our agenda for public requests and petitions. And so if anyone's in our audience that has a topic they'd like to talk to us about that is not on our agenda tonight, now's the time. If you want to raise your electronic hand, we will call on you. I'm looking at the list and I don't see anyone. So I think we're gonna move on. Well, the next item on our agenda is really exciting. Did somebody say something? Okay, so we are we are looking at, or I have a proclamation to make about the Filipino American National Filipino Historical Holiday. But I just wanted to say in advance of reading it that we on the Commemorative Landscape Task Force have really been very interested and learned so much about this community through their representative that we've been in contact with. And she is in our listening audience tonight, Jana Langholz. And Jana, I'm going to read the proclamation, but if you would like to say something after, we would welcome any comments that you might have. We know that we have a history of, that intersects with the Filipino community from the World's Fair. And of course in more modern times, I know we have many community members that this will be very valuable to. So without further ado, I'm gonna read the proclamation and then Jana, if you'd like to address our board in any way, we would welcome that. Whereas the earliest documented Filipino presence in the continental United States was on October 18th, 1857. when the first Vizones Indios set foot in Morro Bay, California on board the Manila-built galleon ship Nuestra Sonora de Esperanza. And Jenna, I'm sure you're, I'm sure I'm butchering all these names, so sorry. Whereas the Filipino American National Historical Society has been observing October as Filipino American History Month since 1991. Whereas the US Congress recognized October as Filipino American History Month in the United States in 2009, 2010 and 2011. And whereas the Filipino American community is the second largest Asian American group in the United States. Whereas Clayton is home to the Philippine Village historical site which holds space for respectful engagement with history and the aftermath of the 1904 World's Fair, with the perspectives of Filipinos and indigenous people at the forefront. Whereas Filipino Americans have played integral roles in the United States military healthcare system and have contributed greatly to music, dance, literature, education, business, journalism, sports, fashion, politics, and so many other categories and so many other initiatives and fields that enrich the landscape of our country. And whereas Filipino American History Month is celebrated during the month of October 2021 Now, therefore, I, Michelle Harris, Mayor of Clayton, Missouri, hereby proclaim the month of October as Filipino American History Month in the city of Clayton. Jana, would you like to say anything to us? We really appreciate all your input and information that you have shared so far. And we all look forward to working with you to commemorate Philippine Village Historical Site in a way that honors the community today. I think she is sending us a chat. June, can you help me out with that?

Okay, let me pull up her chat. She's saying thank you very much to Mary Harris and the board Maraming salams. I don't know what that means.

It may be thank you in Philippine.

Okay.

All right. Okay. I think that's that's that's Jenna's comment for now, I'm assuming. And Jenna, thank you for being here tonight. We really appreciate your presence. Okay. Okay. So next on our agenda would be the city manager's report.

Any questions

What was the expected amount that you were thinking they would sell for?

525. We thought that was a good conservative amount. Okay.

So

That is terrific. Okay, any questions?

I have a technical one. Do I need to propose an amendment first?

Yes, sir.

Yes, please.

It is an amendment by the text of Bill 6864.1.

PB Harmon Zuckerman, I don't need. I don't need the actual amounts. Do I

know, sir. Okay.

PB Harmon Zuckerson, All right, well, I'll move to amend bill 6864 text to PB Harmon Zuckerton, Coincide with the sale of the bonds that is that occurred today.

PB John Gerstle, All right i'll second that i'm not sure what he meant but i'll second. PB John Gerstel,

I believe you meant to amend bill 6864 by the text of bill 6864 not

164.1 i'll

second that one okay. PB John Geristle, that's what I heard him say. PB, Lupita

D Montoya, And also to hold the second and final reading of the ordinance. PB

John Gerastle, that's next.

Okay. I mean, that's what you're recommending. Okay. All those in favor of amending the bill to 6.4.1. Say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Okay. That passes.

Okay. Then I will move to introduce bill 6.864.1. to approve the ordinance authorizing the sale issuance and delivery of special obligation refunding bonds in the amount of $5,010,000 to be read for the first time or second time?

Second

time. Second time by title only. Second.

Any discussion? All right. Mr. City Attorney.

Bill number 6864 as amended by bill 6864.1, second reading and consideration for adoption 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. Alderman Lentz.

Aye.

Alderman Berkowitz.

Aye.

Alderwoman McAndrew. Aye. I all the women abuse. I all the woman Patel. I alderman Gary Feder. Mayor Harris.

Alderwoman McAndrew. Aye. I all the women abuse. I all the woman Patel. I alderman fader. Mayor Harris.

Thank you. Okay, moving on to resolution on the resolution on board norms and procedures, Mr city manager.

Thank you. Hey, we've identified our new typo person. The last time we had a typo person was when Cindy Garnholtz was on the board. So thank you very much. You are appointed. Any discussion on this?

I guess I'm just... 2007 is when that was adopted. I never even knew about it. And I'm just kind of wondering what's the effect of that? I mean, I guess I want to know what's the point, you know?

And

I was going to add as the newest board member that I actually found it very helpful. As much as I've been around City Hall, I found the list of items to be very constructive.

Becky, did you have a comment for us, dear?

Yeah, I just wanted to note that I did receive it when I onboarded and certainly glanced at it. And we discussed it at the retreat. And what I would say is that I didn't understand it was something that we would like. I guess. I mean, I hate to say I didn't take it seriously because I think the changes that we made, like I'm very comfortable with the changes that we've made, I guess, for the most part. But I guess I thought what occurs to me is that if I thought we were going to be like I guess, voting on this and formalizing it more. I think I would have considered a bit more time on it. Like there are some things that I think are potentially still sort of like questionable or confusing, frankly. So I don't know though, like how much it's worth to spend a lot of time on it either. I hate to say that again, but that's just kind of where I'm sitting. I mean, I think even like the second thing under values, like we talked about that at the retreat that there was a word there that we didn't like and we changed a word. But I mean, I would almost say like that isn't a value. Like just in terms of like how this is organized and items are categorized doesn't to me make a ton of sense. So

I would, I would say that, um, like Ira, I've been on the board for a long time and had not don't remember ever seeing this. Uh, on the other hand, we've had a number of retreats, uh, prior to almost everyone except maybe Michelle. Maybe Ira, you've been in a few of these where we've actually talked through these things, not in the context of this document, but in the context of how we relate to each other. And I can say that one of the positive things is that the reason this document hasn't surfaced is because we do get along and we do practice these things. So I would say, no, do we need it? Apparently not, at least not right now, but it's nice to have it and have it there and um it is how we operate and let's just say we're all smart enough to know that's how we should operate and and we're effective at it

i will just as the historian i would just add you know um when it was produced and agreed upon in 2007 it was needed and um so without going any further i think there can be times when these guidelines can be brought out to remind people, hey, this is kind of acceptable behavior and this is professional behavior for a board. So I think it is important. I'm glad David that you're reviewing it with new folks. I think maybe your predecessor, maybe he didn't because I think Rich and Ira apparently haven't seen it. But it can, there can be situations, there can be board compositions where something like this is very valuable to have. Becky, if you are taking it more seriously now, if you really feel strongly about some revisions, I think we can table it and you can, you know, email some of your, you know, you know, we can, we can move forward the next time, or if, if it, you know, you can tell us what those suggestions are right now and we can, um, amend it. Um, every year ready to do.

Yeah. So I want to be clear that there really isn't, there isn't anything that I like object to that would cause me to vote against approving these if we move forward with that vote tonight. So, um, I'm, uh, if not uncomfortable with any of them, I don't think. Like the one that I thought was the weirdest is it says attend a commission board meeting occasionally to foster understanding and communication with resident members. And I thought that was confusing because we each sit on specific as liaisons on specific commissions. And I don't think we should attend those occasionally. The expectation is to attend them all the time. And I don't know if the suggestion is that we drop in on others or if this was before a time when we had representation on all the commissions, that was the one that kind of jumped out at me the most as like, I'm not gonna do that. I'm not gonna drop in on somebody else's commission unless there's really some hot topic. Like it's somebody else's good area to, you know? So I don't know if there was a different intent there. That was just one of only a couple examples that I thought were kind of interesting.

I honestly don't remember the historic origins of that bullet point. But I'm happy to take it out if other people... I mean,

we could just strike it. There is one about attending the meetings that you... are expected to attend, which to me is what matters, I guess.

Is anybody object to striking that bullet point?

No objection.

I have no objection, but my feeling is if she's, Becky, if you've got other things, I'd rather we review it, table it and review it rather than nitpick it one at a time. So there may be other things you have, I don't know.

Well, yeah, I was just taking this to me, her comment to me, Becky, I was taking this to mean that this is the one you had singled out, but are there other things you would like to see changed? And if so, let's table it.

Yeah, let's table then.

Okay, good.

Motion to table, I think.

Yes,

we do. The table, do I move to table or just? Anyone can. Okay.

Go ahead, make the motion, Becky. Okay.

I don't want to step on your toes, but I don't want you to make the motion that I'm making. It's not on

my script.

I move that we table

this for

tonight.

I'll second

it. Any discussion? Okay. All in favor of tabling, say aye or raise your hand.

Aye.

Any opposed? Okay. Very good. So Becky, I guess I would just ask if you could organize your thoughts on that and get it to David in time to work with us on any revision so at the next meeting we can turn this around. Thanks. Sure.

you. Now we have the destruction of records on our agenda.

Any questions or comments from the audience? Any questions or comments form the board?

Did he say 2019 traffic? Did you say that? I thought I heard that.

correct. These

It seems a little recent, no? I mean...

Yes, I talked to the staff over in courts and the police department, and we did confirm that according to the records retention schedule, they did qualify to be destroyed.

I would assume so, but I haven't

talked. Yes, they are. I did get a document from TVB today that showed the St. Louis County 21st Judicial Court had approved it.

So if let's say we wanted to do some statistical analysis of 2019 to determine how the courts has acted with regards to certain things, this would destroy that ability? Or do we have some record of this, whether it be electronically or some other way? Do we have still a history of these things, even though the paper records are destroyed?

Okay. All right. So if we're

The prosecutor took as they were working the case and stuff... but not necessarily official record of

So as far as any of the administrative entities that are saying this is okay, I guess I'm just reminded, I know the Bar Association has their own rules about at what point in time you can destroy records of an attorney. And I don't know if they apply or not, but does anybody know?

That I don't know. I just follow what the state statute's records retention schedule is.

Well, I think an attorney can destroy files with the client's consent, which is what's going on here.

Oh, okay. All right. That's how that works. That's

fine. That's an assumption, Ira. But I mean, if the client consents to the disposition of the file, I can't imagine there's a bar rule that says I can't do it. Okay.

No, it makes sense, Kevin. Yeah, I agree. Okay.

All right. Any other discussion? Okay,

Alderman Lentz. I move to approve the disposal of the records as listed in the board report.

Any discussion? All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Okay, great. And then last on our agenda is our meeting dates for 2022.

Mayor, can I just comment here? And I apologize to you and David. I probably should have sent this message earlier. But spring break is the week of March 22nd, 2022. And from a selfish perspective, I'm hoping we're not on Zoom. And I want to be here for meetings. Also, a good chunk of Clayton leaves town. So is it possible to have the meetings March 15th and March 29th that month? In order to facilitate. I

usually customary in the past, um, as we approach that day, then the board decides which date will have a, you know, have the meeting on due to those types of, um, events that come up.

So I'm sorry. So I don't understand. So would we wouldn't change it today then? I

mean, we could, if, if yes, we could, I'll just have to get the. my calendar out and.

Or what you're saying is we can wait until February or some kind of, we know it today. Those of us who want to travel can maybe go ahead and plan travel then. And then we can figure out if the, as it gets closer, whether to move the date up or back or

correct. With the, with waiting simply because I think it's, Different schools have different dates of spring break. And so we never know what's really going on.

No, I mean, I'm just talking about the Clayton School District. And a lot of our people who are interested in our meetings are Clayton residents who send their kids to Clayton School District, I'm not talking about other private schools. I'm just talking About Clayton. So yeah, I will. And then

the two of us have school aged children.

and David, David's 30.

Moyer, It just, it's the first time it's happened since I've been on the board where it's fallen during spring break. So that's all I usually try to take a look when we HAB-Marsyn Moyer, approve these meeting dates. So,

Mm hmm.

And we'll end up, you know, if it, if there are important issues going on at that meeting and there are people, citizens who want to be involved, it's just going to kind of inhibit participation. So, because a lot of people leave town.

I'll be out of town on the 15th, but can call in the zoom.

Yeah. I mean, I think, um, Yeah, we're strategic partners with the school district. And so I think it's probably a good idea to go ahead and move it now. We'll add though that there's lots of, some people have kids in college and there's all kinds of schedules going on, but because we are collaborate with them so much, I think this is a good, it's a good suggestion. So, all right. So what's your preference, the 15th or the 29th? I think we're doing both. 15th and the 29th instead of right

yes

Okay. All

right. Does that happen often where the plan commission meeting is the night right before the board meeting?

I'm sure it is. Okay. All right. I guess we need a motion for this.

I'll move to approve the 2022 Board of Alderman meeting dates as amended with March, the dates in March being March 15th and March 29th. I

will second that.

Any further discussion? All those in favor, say

aye.

Aye. Any opposed? Okay, great. Thank you.

Thank you.

You're welcome. All right. Well, David, is there anything further on our business agenda?

Okay. Well, in that case, why don't we go around the computer screen and see if anybody would like to share anything that they've been up to. And we can start with Alderman Lentz.

Well, thank you. I'm just looking over my calendar and trying to find something that I've done. And I'm struggling.

We can come back to you if it's hard to be first. I don't

think I have anything to report today. Although I did that last week, last time we met, and all of a sudden I realized I'd forgotten a big, big thing. But anyway, so no, I'll pass.

Okay. Alderman Berkowitz.

Yeah, I had an ARB meeting as usual last week and there was nothing on there except some things I could bore you with. And I think since I already experienced the boredom, I don't think it's worth passing that on to the rest of you. So I will pass on that. I'd just like to say to Janet Watson, I'm sorry I missed your party. And I was very, very busy, but I heard it was a bash. It was great. And anyone who was there, I hope you will all be happy to talk to me about what happened. So otherwise, what's that? It was very fun. Oh, good. Oh, good Anyway, I will miss you big time, Janet. I mean, you've been amazing. Just absolutely fantastic. So I hope you don't lose touch with us on your way out, okay?

Okay, great. Let's see, who is next? Bridgette.

I had a Parks and Rec meeting last Monday, and we actually met in person outside for the first time in 18 months. So that was really nice. We met in Enterprise Pavilion, and it was a nice night. We got a great... Justin, who's in charge of all the park maintenance and operations, did a fantastic job of just talking to us all about basically what it takes to keep our parks going. And it's tremendous what he does and what he does with the staff. I mean, every time I talk to Patty about something, she'll be like, oh, Justin can fix it, he can fix it. But it was great to really hear from him and hear about all the different things he does just to keep our parks looking so wonderful. So it was a great presentation. And it was nice to meet in person. But he has a great maintenance park maintenance and operations manual that's very detailed if anybody wants to see it I'm sure Patty would pass it along. So, and I had a great time at Janet's party and Janet, I'll miss you so much. So when you did your finance, your last finance briefing tonight, I, in my head, I was like, oh, that's the last one. The last time we'll see her. So, or at least on screen in a meeting. So thank you. Happy retirement.

Thank you.

Okay. Susan, anything?

I thank Bridget for that Parks and Rec report and Janet of repeat all that and thank you so much and congratulations. And the lunch was very fun and that's all I've got. Thank

you. All right, Becky.

Hi, thanks. I just want to share that I went ahead and Googled Maraming Salamat and it means thank you very much in Tagalog. So thank you to our guests who shared that with us at the beginning of the meeting. Thanks.

Mr. Gary Feder?

Mr. Fader?

My onboarding has continued with a terrific visit to our police headquarters. Laura Horwitz and I were taken around by Chief Smith, and he really did a terrific job. And finally, I'd be the last to say also that Janet did a great job, Janet Watson, in my first meeting of the Non-Uniform Pension Board. I never knew or wanted to know much about defined benefit plans, but I know a lot more after one hour with Janet and our consultant than I did before. And I actually think it might be interesting to be involved with it. So my best regards to Janet as well.

Okay, I guess that leaves me. I don't have a lot to report. I do wanna, I can let you know that something that I did that was kind of fun. I was the MC at the, get this, the Porsche Club St. Louis Region Porsche Club annual car show. Actually, it's biannual. It's every other year. And they did it in downtown Clayton. And it was fun. They gave out some awards and there's some really... Beautiful cars that I got to see. You know, there are a number of Clayton residents that participated that I saw too. So that was great. And then-

Mayor, I'm sorry to interrupt. I'm sure Dan would have been an active participant in that. So I'm sure they were talking to you about him because I know he was involved in that club.

Yeah, he

was. And actually I paid a little tribute to him in my remarks. Yeah, luckily I did remember to do that. But yeah, he was a very active member. And Becky and Rich, the DeMunn little family picnic, did we report on that last time? Or has that happened since then? I couldn't find it on my calendar, but it was

great. Yeah, you're right. That would have been since our last meeting. So thanks for remembering that, the High Point Neighborhood Association's Yeah. Like block party.

Yeah, it was it was cool because there were people, you know, residents from the city of St. Louis and, you know, Clayton. And it was nice to see everyone mingling. And by and large, everyone was talking about the same sort of issues. And there was no dividing line there. It was one neighborhood. And it was it was nice to which reminds me, I did attend a meeting with with the Muni League board, with the executive team and Mayor Jones of the city of St. Louis. And we are now meeting monthly to just give ourselves updates and talk about issues and find out where we can collaborate. So I view that as a really good thing. That's a new thing. And it was, I thought, a really productive meeting. Lastly, I just want to say, I used up all my good material at your party, Janet, but... But I just do want to reiterate how wonderful it's been to have you as our finance director, how much you've contributed all along the way in terms of training several mayors and a couple of city managers and been a city manager yourself here and before, and also educating all of us aldermen, making sure we understand you know, the most important thing really our financial status. It's just been a great relationship and we wish you all the best and you can have more time to run around after those five grandkids and spend time in Florida. And so we'll be picturing you there in your happy place surrounded by your grandkiddos. Thank you so much for everything you've done for the city of Clayton. Thank you. It's been a pleasure. Thank you all. Janet, I think you should come to Moats with us one of these days. Maybe I'll see you there someday. Okay. All righty. All right, everyone. I think that concludes things. So that's all. We'll say good night.

Good night, everybody.

Good night. Good night. Thank you.

Goodnight, everyone. See some of you shortly.