January 25, 2022 — Meeting Transcript

All right. Well, welcome everybody to our January 25th meeting. And will the city clerk please call the roll?

Alderman Lentz. Here. Alderman Berkowitz. Here. Alderwoman McAndrew. Here. Aldervoman Buse. Here. Aldewoman Patel. Here. Aldermen Gary Feder. Here. Mayor Harris. Here. City Manager David Gipson.

Alderman Lentz. Here. Alderman Berkowitz. Here. Alderwoman McAndrew. Here. Aldervoman Buse. Here. Aldewoman Patel. Here. Aldermen Fader. Here. Mayor Harris. Here. City Manager Gibson.

Here. Here.

City Attorney O'Keefe.

Here. Thank you. Okay. I'd like to now consider approving the minutes from January 11th. I will move to approve the minutes from January 12th.

Second.

All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay. And now is the time in our agenda for public requests and petitions. And this is for items that are not gonna be considered within public hearings tonight. I will say this, we are gonna be talking about traffic calming for Audubon. And if there's anybody here in our audience that is, here for that and wants to comment at that point we'll we will take your comments um during that items discussion so but any other uh comments or questions from the uh attending audience that is not on our regular agenda or in the public hearing i don't see any so in that case um we can open the public hearing for fresh and healthy or fresh healthy sorry

Thank you, Mayor. This is a public hearing in the subsequent resolution to consider granting a conditional use permit to operate a restaurant to be known as Fresh Healthy Cafe. On December 9th, 2021, Rick Hetzel, Restaurant Manager, requested a conditional use permit for the operation of a casual restaurant at 6451 Clayton Road. This is the Demund Point development. The restaurant will feature sandwiches, salads, and smoothies. The restaurant space measures approximately 1,400 square feet. Proposed hours for operation are 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through Friday and 8 p.m to 6 p.m. Saturday and Sunday. The restaurant will have a total of 28 seats, 14 inside and 14 outdoors. Parking spaces will be available in the building's garage and deliveries will be made at the rear entrance. Plan Commission considered this request on January 4th and voted unanimously to recommend approval. Staff recommends that the Board of Aldermen conduct a public hearing and approve the resolution granting a conditional use permit to RLH Fresh Healthy Number 3 LLC with the stipulations contained in the resolution.

Okay, very good. I'll open the discussion. Any questions or comments from our audience? And is the developer or the... operator here. I don't see any hands. I don't

believe so.

Okay. All right. We won't hear from them. Well, I'm excited to have a fresh, healthy restaurant coming in. I was going to ask about the menu.

So I can tell you from the plan commission, it is a franchise. This would be the first one in the St. Louis area. I believe the closest locations in Cape Girardeau currently, uh, it is located in a, in a hospital and this will be across the street from St. Mary's. Um, so there's, there's, I know that's part of their, their business strategy is, is the individuals, uh, that are guests at hospitals, uh, coming over to use it. Um, Aside from that, as the name implies, it is fresh, healthy food.

Okay, great. Thank you. We can Google it and see what it looks like.

I can add to that if you want. Oh,

okay,

sure. Well, I got my first two vaccination shots in Cape Girardeau and I actually went to one of these both times that I went down there. I happen to like it. I think it's a good compliment to our foods in Clayton. So I highly recommend it. I think you would be great.

Super. Okay. Well, any other comments or questions from our board? Okay. Very good. So I will close the public hearing and take a motion.

I'll move to approve Resolution 2022, a conditional use permit for RLH Fresh Healthy, number 3 LLC, doing business as Fresh Healthy Cafe, located at 6451 Clayton Road.

Second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay, that takes care of that. Mr. City Manager, the obligation refunding bonds.

Yes, so we had a sale this morning. It occurred at 10 a.m. and it was successful. We received four bids from four bidders with three bids being quite close in amount. The bids are evaluated based on the lowest true interest cost or TIC, which provides the city with the lowest cost of total debt service. The final sale amount was $10,180,000, which will provide the city with $1,016,495 savings over the remaining life of the bonds. The average annual cost savings is around $85,000 per year over the next 12 years, which is less than expected but still significant. The successful bidder was Robert W. Baird and Company Incorporated. The ordinance and exhibits have been updated to reflect the results of the sale, and a red line version has been provided to the Board of Aldermen that was sent out this afternoon. The ordinance will need to be amended for these changes prior to a final vote to approve the sale of the bonds. Staff recommends that the Board of Alderman amend the bill to the attached version labeled bill number 687 or 76.1 and to hold a second and final reading of an ordinance authorizing the sale, issuance, and delivery of general obligation refunding bonds in the amount of $10,180,000. And we do have our bond counsel and our financial advisor here this evening if you have any questions about the sale that occurred today. And our finance director, Karen Dilber, is on as well.

I'm even more senior than Rich, so I'll ask a question first. Is the reason that we got less than we expected is just because of the trend in the market right now, or are there other reasons?

That's correct. I believe, and I'll let Todd speak to that, but there has been fluctuation in the bond market and the stock market. We saw a lot of that over the last couple of days here. So timing-wise, I do think that market fluctuation had an impact on the final amount.

And this might be, this is a follow-up question. Maybe it's a dumb question, but if we kind of figured it might go down because of fluctuations in the market, would we ever just wait until things look better and sell them then?

So we had previously noticed this particular date and this time. We did that some time ago, and that's just how it works. We're required by law to give certain notice before the sale of these bonds charter as well, and we have to follow a process. So we noticed a date, and it just happened to fall into a more volatile period, and that happens. But at the same time, while it's less, I wouldn't say it's significantly less, and there are still a lot of savings here, and a lot of that's owed to the city's credit rating.

Yeah, okay. Any other questions? Is there

anything to add to that, Todd or Mark, that you've been seeing lately?

No, I think you did a very good job of explaining that. And part of this too, this is really the second and final piece of the plan of finance that we discussed and put into place early last fall. And so you may recall, we did the special obligation bond refunding in October. And then the plan was to come back at this point for the general obligation bond. So it's kind of been maybe a six month process from start to finish, but it's just the market's a little bit different right now. And that's really why we had a few less bids than what we would have expected. But as David indicated, the results are very good, still a million dollars of savings. So we're very pleased with that.

Okay. Anybody else, comments or questions? Okay. I guess we will need a motion.

I think we need a motion first to amend the bill 6876 with the updated numbers as has been provided as bill 6876.1. Very good, Rich.

Wow. Okay. I'm going

to second that.

You need a second, yeah. Okay, we got one from Ira. Yeah. All right. And so Mr. City Attorney?

Madam Mayor, a voice vote on the motion for amendment would be in order.

So we don't have to read it. Okay.

We will read it, but after amendment.

After. All in favor of the amended amendment? Aye. Any opposed? Okay.

Then I will introduce bill number 6876.1 to approve the sale of general obligation refunding bonds series 2022 to be read for the second time as amended by title only. Second.

Any discussion? Okay, Mr. City Attorney.

Bill number 6876 as amended second reading in consideration for adoption an ordinance authorizing and directing the issue and sale and delivery of general obligation refunding bonds series 2022 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. Alderwoman Buse. Aye. Alderman Gary Feder.

Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderwoman McAndrew. Aye. Alderwoman Buse. Aye. Alderman Fader.

Aye.

And Mayor Harris.

Aye.

Thank

you. Okay. Bill number 6882, the real estate for the old police station.

Yes, so this is the final piece for this development. We had some items on our last agenda. The city and HB Clayton LLC entered into a purchase and sale agreement dated October 5th, 2017 relating to the redevelopment of the former Clayton Police Headquarters located at 227 South Central Avenue into a hotel. The purchase and sale agreement was first amended on October 11th, 2018 and again on May 14th, 2019. The developer assigned its rights to Concord HBK Clayton LLC on June 15th, 2019. And the city entered into an assignment and assumption agreement with the two entities with ordinance 6602. The developer and Concord HB K Clayton LLC now desire to convey the property to a different entity, Concord HB Kay Clayton owner LLC, and have requested that the city consent to the assignment pursuant to an assignment and assumption purchase and sale and real estate transaction rights among the city, Concord HBK Clayton LLC, and Concord HB Clayton Owner LLC. The developer is in the final stages of securing debt and equity financing for the project as it begins construction and wishes to contribute its assets to the new entity, which will be the landowner and borrower on the debt financing. will also be in the chain of ownership for limited investors. The current members of Concord HB Clayton LLC will retain ownership and control of the deal. Staff recommends that the Board of Aldermen approve the ordinance, and we do have representatives here from 227 South Central and Gary Carter, our Director of Economic Development, if you have any questions.

Okay. Well, let's take some questions. Alderman Lentz, anything?

um maybe i'm just looking for someone to just boil that down into the simplest terms is it just that this new entity is a different set of individuals or is it a different financing deal?

So I'm Sam Koppler. I'm one of the partners in this. I was with you guys a couple weeks ago, so you're probably tired of me by now. But all we're doing is we've secured investment capital and the investors have requested to form a new entity that is a clean entity that's new since this entity was formed in 2019 um this is you know it's standard practice but in order for this to proceed we need to get full approval of the city

all right so no change of ownership really no it's the same uh owners perfect that's all i need thanks

okay any other or let's see i'll just i'll just keep going down the line um alderman mccandrew no I'm seeing a lot of no. Alderman Berkowitz, any questions here?

Nope.

Susan? Okay. I have one question. When is it going to be done?

Well, we are in environmental abatement right now. We're a little bit behind because we got hit with COVID and like the rest of the world. But we're going to start demolition hopefully mid-February. And that will be about an eight-week process. And then we will put a shovel in the ground hopefully by April. So, yeah. to answer your question would be about a two-year project. So we'll be opening by the spring of 24.

OK. All right, good. That would be awesome. Yeah, it's going

to be a great project. You're going to

like it. Yes, we're excited. OK, any other questions or discussion? All right, Alderman Lentz.

I'll introduce Bill 6882, approve an assignment and assumption of real estate transaction rights relating to the redevelopment of 227 South Central Avenue to be read for the first time by a title only. Second.

Any discussion? Okay, Mr. City Attorney.

Bill No. 6882, first reading in Ordinance of the City of Clayton, Missouri, approving an assignment and assumption of real estate transaction rights agreement by and among the city, Concord HBK Clayton LLC and Concord HB K Clayton owner LLC, and authorizing certain actions in connection therewith.

All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right.

Then I'll move that the board give unanimous consent to consideration for adoption of Bill 6882 on the day of its introduction.

Second. All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Okay, let the minutes reflect the board has given unanimous consent.

And I'll introduce Bill 6882 to approve the assignment and assumption of real estate transaction rights relating to the redevelopment of 227 South Central Avenue to be read for the second time by title owner.

Second. Any discussion? Okay, Mr. City Attorney.

Bill number 6882, second reading and consideration for adoption. An ordinance of the city of Clayton, Missouri, approving an assignment and assumption of real estate transaction rights agreement by and among the city Concord HBK Clayton LLC and Concord HB K Clayton owner LLC and authorizing certain other actions in connection there. Alderman Lentz.

Aye.

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

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

Aye.

And Mayor Harris. Aye.

Thank you. So we have those use and maintenance agreements coming up with these four property owners. And I'm just asking, it looks like, do we have to vote on each one separately or can we consider it all together since it's basically the same? I

plan to read one report. We do have four separate ordinances here. Kevin, is there a single motion that could be made for four separate ordinances or do those need to be broken out individually?

Each ordinance, each bill would have to be acted on separately.

That's what I thought. And because they're bills, we're going to have to go through the whole routine of second readings and all?

Yes, sir.

And I'll just give the single report to cut that part out. So what we have here is we're going to replace the fence that's along the northern eastern sides at Widown Park. And to set this up, we did have a boundary survey of the property The survey confirmed that the current fence was not installed along the property line of the park. The properties adjoining the park four have a portion of the property on their side, of city property on their side of the fence. The city met with the residents and agreed that we would reinstall the fence in its current location with the exception of one property where the corner of the fence intrudes. However, we intend to pull that section of the fence back completely onto park property. So we have four homes here that require the use and maintenance agreement. for the homes that will retain a portion of the property. We inform the owners that we will require the maintenance, use and maintenance agreement to clarify responsibility for ongoing use and maintenance of the property. Before you tonight are proposed use and maintenance agreements with the owners of 7622 Willingka Terrace, 7628 Willingka Terraces, 2632 Willingka Terraced and 7611 Y down Boulevard. There's a separate ordinance for each individual property on tonight's agenda. If approved, construction on the fence will commence this spring. Staff recommends that the Board of Alderman approve the use and maintenance agreement ordinances adjacent to Wydown Park. And Toni is here with any questions you may have about this particular application. Her first meeting as Director of Parks and Recreation.

Congratulations. Are you feeling the power now, Toni? The power of the position with this fence. More like the pressure. Okay, well, I'll open the discussion. Are there any either questions or comments from our audience? Or from our board? Doesn't look like there is. So I think we can move in right into the motion for property number one from Ms. Wack.

Okay, so let's introduce bill number 6883 to approve a use and maintenance agreement with Elizabeth Wack, property owner of 7611 White Ann Boulevard to be read for the first time by title only. Second.

Any discussion? Okay, Mr. City Attorney.

Bill number 6883, first reading and ordinance providing for the execution of a use and maintenance agreement for right-of-way adjacent to Wydown Park.

That was short. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? All

right. Move the board give unanimous consent to consideration for adoption of Bill 6883 on the day of its introduction.

Second. All those in favour?

Aye.

Any opposed? All right, let the minutes reflect. The board has given unanimous consent.

And we'll introduce Bill 6883 to approve the use and maintenance agreement with Elizabeth Wack, property owner of 7611 White Island Boulevard, to be read for the second time by title only.

Second. Any discussion? Mr. City Attorney.

Bill number 6883, second reading in consideration for adoption and ordinance providing for the execution of a use and maintenance agreement for right-of-way adjacent to Wydown Park.

Alderman Linton. I'm sorry. Alderman Lentz.

Yes.

Yes. Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderwoman McAndrew. Aye. Alderman Buse. Aye. Aldermen Gary Feder. Aye.

Yes. Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderwoman McAndrew. Aye. Alderman Buse. Aye. Aldermen Fader. Aye.

Aye.

And Mayor Harris? Aye.

Thank you. All right, we'll move on to the Rosens property.

Then I'll introduce Bill 6884 to approve a use and maintenance agreement with Amy and Mark Rosen, property owners of 7628 Malinka Terrace, to be read for the first time by title.

Second. Any discussion? Mr. City Attorney?

Bill number 6884, first reading an ordinance providing for the execution of a use and maintenance agreement for right-of-way adjacent to White Elm Park.

All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? All right.

I'll move the board give unanimous consent to consideration for adoption of bill 6884 on the day of its introduction. Second.

All those in favour?

Aye.

Any Opposed? All right, let the minutes reflect. The board has given unanimous consent.

Then I'll introduce Bill 6884 to approve a use and maintenance agreement with Amy and Mark Rosen, property owners of 7628 Malinka Terrace, to rewrite for the second time by title.

Second.

Any discussion? Mr. City Attorney.

Bill number 6884, second reading and consideration for adoption. An ordinance providing for the execution of a use and maintenance for right-of-way adjacent to Y-Down Park.

Alderman Lentz.

Aye.

Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderwoman McAndrew.

Aye.

Aldermwoman Buse. Aye. Aldewoman Patel. Aye. Aldeman Gary Feder.

Aldermwoman Buse. Aye. Aldewoman Patel. Aye. Aldeman Fader.

Aye.

Mayor Harris.

Aye. Okay. Now moving on to the next property, 7632 Willenka.

I'll introduce bill 685 to approve a use of maintenance agreements with the jam and Bala then a crew probably owners of 7632 will include terrorists, we read for the first time by title.

Second. Any discussion. Okay. Mr city attorney sorry.

Number 685 first reading an ordinance providing for the execution of the use of maintenance agreement for right away adjacent to why don't park.

All those in favor. Aye. Any opposed? Okay.

Move the board give unanimous consent for consideration of adoption of Bill 685 on the day of its introduction.

Second. All those in favor.

You

got to follow along now.

That's not easy,

Rich. Just got one more after this. Okay. Let's see, we had a second. All those in favor?

Aye.

Aye. Any opposed? Let the minutes reflect the board has given unanimous consent.

Then I'll introduce Bill 685 to approve of use and maintenance agreement with BJM and Bala Batakuru, property owners of 7632 Willinka Terrace to read for the second time by title only. Second.

Any discussion? Okay, Mr. City Attorney.

Deliver 6885 second reading in consideration for adoption. An ordinance providing for the execution of a use and maintenance agreement for right-of-way adjacent to White Island Park.

Alderman Lentz?

Yes, ma'am. Aye.

Alderman Berkowitz?

Aye.

Alderwoman McAndrew? Aye. Alderman Buse? Aye. Aldermen Gary Feder?

Alderwoman McAndrew? Aye. Alderman Buse? Aye. Aldermen Fader?

Karen Hollweg, I

may hear us. Karen Hollweg, hi Thank

you.

Karen Hollweg

, All right, one

more. Karen

Hollweg I would go on, so I skipped ahead.

Curt Brown, introduce bill 6886 to approve a use of mainstream with Taylor and Elizabeth harbison property owners of 7622 Lincoln terrace to be read for the first time by title second. Karen Hollweg.

Any discussion. Mr. City Attorney.

Bill number 6886, first reading and ordinance providing for the execution of a use of maintenance agreement for right-of-way adjacent to Wydown Park.

All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed?

I'll move the board give unanimous consent to consideration for adoption of Bill 6886 on the day of its introduction. Second.

All those in favour?

Aye. Aye.

Aye. Any opposed? All right, let the minutes reflect that the board has given unanimous consent.

Let's introduce Bill 6886 to approve a use and maintenance agreement with Taylor and Elizabeth Harbison, property owners of 7622 Lincoln Terrace to be read for the second time by title owner.

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

Bill number 6886, second reading in consideration for adoption. An ordinance providing for the execution of a use and maintenance agreement for right-of-way adjacent to Wydown Park. I'd like the minutes to show I was able to read that without looking at it this time. Wow. Alderman Lentz.

I

think

so

too. Yeah.

Okay. Alderman Lents.

Aye.

Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderwoman McAndrew. Aye. Alderaan Buse.

Aye.

Alderman Patel. Aye. Alderman Gary Feder. Aye. And Mayor Harris.

Alderman Patel. Aye. Alderman Fader. Aye. And Mayor Harris.

Aye. Okay, the microsurfacing contract is up. Mr. City Manager.

Thank you everyone for bearing with us through those four separate ordinances there. Thanks, John. So this is the fiscal year 22 microsurfacing project. Public Works Department is requesting approval of the construction contract with Missouri Petroleum Products Company, LLC. This project includes the application of microsurfacing with fiber reinforcement on the roads in Bemiston, Hanley Place, Maryland Terrace, Northmoor, Skinker Heights, and High Point-Dubon neighborhoods. Additional pay items include pavement marking and traffic control. Work is expected to take place in the spring or summer of 2022 and lasts approximately two to three weeks. Maps were included in the packet for reference. Bids were opened on January 7th, and the city received two bids. Missouri Petroleum submitted the lowest responsive responsible base bid in the amount of $418,947.55. Alternate bid A in the amount of $68,625 and alternate bid B in the amount of 19,734.35 from Missouri Petroleum were also low bids. The base bid of the next lowest bidder was 7% higher than their amount. Alternate bid A included select pavement repair work, and both bidders were higher than expected. Therefore, this option is not proposed to be accepted. We are recommending adoption or the approval of alternate bid B, which includes that fiber reinforcement for the roadway. It should help the pavement hold up. better. The total recommended award amount of the base bid and alternate bid B is $438,681.90. The Capital Improvement Fund has adequate funds budgeted for this activity in fiscal year 22. Staff recommends that the Board of Aldermen approve the ordinance authorizing a contract with Missouri Petroleum Products Company, LLC in the amount of $438,681.90 plus authorization to approve change orders in an amount not to exceed $21,318.10 or a total of $460,000 for the fiscal year 2022 microsurfacing project. Matt Malik, our director of the Department of Public Works is here to answer any questions about the contract or about the project itself.

Okay, I'm going to open it up then. I'll just go around the screen. Alderman Lentz.

The reinforcing fiber, Matt. Is that on all the streets or just those that need it?

That's something new that we are trying, along with a few other things we've been trying to extend the life of the pavements. It's a relatively low cost additive that goes straight into the mix design. And it kind of acts as a mini reinforcing fire. It's kind of like rebar and concrete, but at a much, much smaller scale to prevent those transverse cracks from the concrete from propagating through and hopefully less water getting to the base, and less crack sealing going down in the gears following microsurfacing.

So it's really an additive into the slurry, so to speak.

That's correct. You won't even be able to see it. You can see it when it's added in, but you won't be able to see once it's cured. Right. Good. Thanks.

If I could just follow up that question, I wanted to ask about it as well since we're on the topic. So this is new. Have you seen it used other places?

Yes, it's new for us to utilize, but it's not new to the region. Richmond Heights uses it in their asphalt roadways. MoDOT and the county both have a spec and have used it quite heavily. St. Charles County uses it. Those are just some nearby areas that have used it in microsurfacing and their asphalt and showing good results for a relatively low cost. So Something we like to, we've seen for years in place and other areas we'd like to get a little experience on. And the whole goal being to stretch out the treatment between some of these pavement projects.

So you've seen it hold up for years, as you said. That's good. I have this little funny thing in the back of my mind about brick print. So I just thought I'd ask.

It's not going

to peel off, is it?

No, this is an additive that doesn't impact or have any influence I'll say on the mixed design. It just is there as a reinforcement.

Okay. All right, thank you. Sorry about that. All right, I'll keep going. Alderman Berkowitz, any questions?

I wasn't sure if I heard you say, is it gonna go on every one of our streets?

Right now, this is our first project. So it's only those identified on the map. It's gonna be something we're gonna be evaluating and looking to install on future projects, but that determination on that's not been made yet.

So what was the basis for determining where you are going to put it?

It was after we saw a history of surrounding areas and one of the first projects coming up where we felt that it was, we worked it into the budget a few years ago, we were planning on it. And so it's just coming around now to kind of fruition with this project to do a test. We've done some similar things with the asphalt pavement rejuvenator, the sealers that have been showing promising results too.

Okay.

Okay. All right. Alderman McAndrew, questions?

Ira, you know, this is my street. So these are one of my streets. So that's, you know, that's why, you know,

it's... I was waiting for that as the answer.

Right. I know. That's why I'm telling you, like, this is gonna... So I'll be able to let everybody know what I think of the new product. But Matt, I wanted to ask if we've used these people before this company?

Yes. Missouri Petroleum did Forsyth and North Merrimack microsurfacing. And you

were okay with it?

For years. Yeah. They're one of a few that apply the product. So we kind of get pretty regular bidders, but the bids have stayed competitive. And we were happy to see that given the current economic climate that they stayed consistent year over year still too.

Okay, that's great and then not to get too specific but like there's some pretty big cracks in our street I think probably related to the water main project so will that get repaired before they do the micro surfacing or how does that?

Yes, so that was a that was the ad alternate we did not accept. The work will still be done just by other forces or by in house forces depending on the nature of the repair. We felt that the unit cost was a little higher than we anticipated, and we think we've got more cost-effective ways to get that done. But I'm aware of the alligator cracking that you're talking about over there. That's important. We get that fixed before we put the microsurfacing down.

Okay, thanks.

Good

luck, Richard. Really, good luck. Lots of

luck. Alderman Booth. I have a question, man. I thought, is this a product that... At the corner of Audubon last fall, you all were putting down and testing. Was that something different?

That was something different. That's the asphalt sealer slash rejuvenator. It's a multi, I'm not going to go into a lot of detail, but it's a product that adds life back to the asphalt pavement and kind of creates a tight bond. We've been using, one of the suppliers has been doing a few test samples for going on five years plus now. We've used it in a few areas that it's been doing well. On Audubon in the Moorlands, we used it when we installed it in 2017 and it's been holding the pavement tight together. So different product, but overall goal is to keeping the pavement from cracking.

Okay, very good. Thanks.

Sorry, I got a lot of information on this and I know I talked a little bit so I'll try to keep it shorter. I didn't know I could have said it on McAndrew Street and that would have been good enough. I'm sorry.

That's good. It's good. All good. Alderman Patel, anything from you?

Your passion for our streets is inspiring, Matt. So I just want to make, I'm not sure I followed this in all the discussion we've had. The new product, is that going in on all the streets that are being done this year? Or did you just identify some to try it at? I missed that.

Sure. It's all the streets identified in this contract, yes.

Thank you. OK, Alderman Gary Feder, any questions?

Thank you. OK, Alderman Fader, any questions?

I actually have no questions. I look forward to seeing the same product on South Central, though.

I have one question which nobody asked. So I'm sure it's in the contract somewhere. You have a way of doing this, but I'm going to ask. I looked at the contract. how do we address quality? You know, in there we've addressed timing, we've addressed costs, we've addressed procedures, reporting, you know, who to contact and all that. But, you know, what if, I mean, what is our, our, our claws, if you will, that, that protects us if they don't do a great job. I mean, I'm sure they'll do a great job, but just in case, because, you know, I've, I've seen it over the years where, you know, do it. And then, but one area, the, you know, material is slopped up on the granite curb and it never gets cleaned off, or there's some residue left on sidewalks that never gets cleaned off or whatever, or the, you know, in some cases on the recent microsurface this certain areas just didn't get the material, you know, like maybe on the crown of some of our streets. So how do we, what's our, what's our recourse to go and say, Hey, you know, you need to redo this or you need to come fix it. And how are we protected on that?

So like many of our contracts, we have construction bonds as the primary focus. And we also have retention that we hold on a project. So we pay the value of work complete minus 5% and hold that to the end until all the punch list items are resolved. The way that this product goes down, it is difficult not to get it on some of those items, but they do come back and clean it up. They should be. If we're aware of it, we have inspectors out and then we take complaints from the public that are kind of our eyes out in the field that help us see some of this stuff too. I wasn't aware of anything on a crown that wasn't covered. I'm aware of the overlapping joint when it first gets installed that you can see it. And we've tried to, the last couple of years, publish out some frequently asked questions with the letter we publish on a website to let residents know it's not the same as a new asphalt roadway that's been rolled. So it is a little different product in that regard, but between the bond and the retention is the way we've utilized that to ensure that the punch list items like those get completed. To my knowledge, they eventually do. And sometimes it takes some time after they've kind of demobilized from the area, but- those are the mechanisms we have to ensure that stuff.

Okay. All right. I know, I just know, I feel like there's always some, you know, nagging concerns by people after these microsurface jobs. And so I just want to make sure that we can really, you know, enforce that. So. I would

say a lot of them do have to do with the aesthetic, which we are sensitive to.

Yes, yes.

Quality of the product. We're getting so much of the aesthetic. That's how it's being delivered. But we are sensitive to that. Try to be.

Yeah. OK, cool. Bridget will be our quality control agent since it's her street. OK, if there is nothing further on that, we will take a motion.

I'll introduce Bill 6887 to approve a contract with Missouri Petroleum Products Company, LLC, for the fiscal year 22 microsurfacing project to be read for the first time by a title owner.

Second. Further discussion? Okay, Mr. City Attorney.

Bill number 6887, first reading, in order to approve a contract for the Missouri Petroleum Products company, LLC, for fiscal year 2022 microsurfacing project

All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay. I move

the board give unanimous consent for consideration for adoption of bill 6887 on the day of its introduction.

Second. All those in favor. Aye. Any opposed. Okay. Let the minutes reflect the board has given unanimous consent.

And I'll introduce Bill 6887 to approve a contract from Missouri Petroleum Products Company, LLC, for the fiscal year 22 microsurfacing project to be read for the second time by Tye Laughlin.

Second.

Well, any discussion? No. Okay. Mr. City Attorney.

Number 6887, second reading and consideration for adoption. An ordinance approving a contract with Missouri Petroleum Products Company LLC for the fiscal year 2022 microsurfacing project.

Alderman Lentz.

Aye.

Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderwoman McAndrew. Aye. Aldowoman Buse. Aye. Aldewoman Patel. Aye. Aldermen Gary Feder. Aye. I'm sorry, Alderman Gary Feder. Hi. Thank you. Mayor Harris? Aye. Thank you.

Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderwoman McAndrew. Aye. Aldowoman Buse. Aye. Aldewoman Patel. Aye. Aldermen Fader. Aye. I'm sorry, Alderman Fader. Hi. Thank you. Mayor Harris? Aye. Thank you.

Okay. Okay. Now we are ready for Matt's amazing traffic calming program, but maybe Mr. City Manager wants to say something first.

I'll go through a brief overview here and then Matt will talk about the changes between the last time we discussed this and then this final version that's up for adoption. The city of Clayton seeks to establish a process that considers public input, education data and traffic calming techniques to maintain maximum mobility and access for all users of the streets and residential areas and generally reduce the negative impacts of motor vehicles. In the past, the city of Clayton has fielded neighborhood complaints relating to residential traffic concerns on an individual basis without a defined process many times the staff response followed a similar process as the nature of the concerns was similar but this was not a documented process that the public could review the purpose of this program is to formalize a uniform response process provide guidance and information to residents on the process and identify projects for future funding the attached traffic calming program was developed utilizing staff knowledge of the community examples from surrounding communities, industry standards for analysis and traffic calming measures, and input from several prior public meetings. Staff recommends that the Board of Aldermen approve the resolution adopting the Clayton Traffic Calming Program. And again, I'll turn it over to Matt to talk about just a couple of changes that were made, fairly minor from the last discussion to this one, and then we can open it up for more discussion.

Okay, I'm sharing my screen with the exhibit. Hopefully that is viewable.

So looking back through the red line of this, I think the last time we were in front of you with this particular item was mid-November and I think the holidays hit and some things happened and all of a sudden we're at January 25th. Matt Kallroos- step through a few of the highlighted items that different members of the board had comments on. Matt Kallroostein, At the last time, this was brought for us. COB, Steve Armstead &

hey matt i'm sorry to interrupt really quickly, can you can you zoom in an extra 25 or 30% on that document. COB, Steve Armstrong & Thank you,

thank you,

no

problem.

TAB, Mark McIntyre:" One of the first items that was discussed was how the 85th percentile speed as one of the criteria was described that may have been perhaps misleading so we just tried to say. TAB, Mark MCIntyre:" At the speed say shows that measured speeds exceed the post it's feeling like greater than five miles per hour so try to simplify that language then but still reference the fifth percentile speed that's just an industry standard. TAB, TAB, Mark McCIntyre:" Moving on to. the different stages of the program, there was some comments regarding the petition area in relation to the area of concern. So we added some language after getting a few heads together on this about trying to define and make it clear to the users where that area might fall. So we identified it and you'll see in three different areas, really it's just The area of concern that's identified in the request form, in any direction of a street that touches it, 500 foot or 1,000 foot. If it's an intersection, it goes from all legs of that intersection. So anything that could be impacted. So rather than just saying a radius which might capture a home and a neighboring subdivision that wouldn't be impacted by it, it's just trying to identify it along the roadway. And I'll call that out in a couple other areas

where it's

the same. Here, not all of this wording changed, but these are the primary areas that did change. Same thing. The 1,000 foot identifying if it's at an intersection would go along all streets. This is the area where we, again, define the area of concern. If city staff determines it's beyond HAB-Jacques Juilland, That 1000 foot then we define that as the affected area. HAB-Jactes Juilland, Moving on to. HAB-Judy Nogg, Excuse me, the implementation and stage three there was a comment, then that we thought it was good to include is that if you get to one of these neighboring city boundaries. where an affected area might lie or be included, we would notify that neighboring city. So if we had something at the end of Linden or something where it spills over into U City, we would notify U City. And then the request for removal, it was just referencing back to the petition area for what ultimately had the traffic calming device installed, it just references back to that same petition area. So you would petition or take a vote of that same area that initiated the petition, just language to try to make those two match. And that was really the changes from the last meeting, just some cleanup, getting through the holidays and getting it back in front of you. That's what I have to cover as far as changes. I'm happy to take any questions.

If it's okay with everyone, I'm going to see if any of the folks from the Ottawa neighborhood, from the Morelands there are here. I know some are here. Do you all have questions? June can move you over. We'll let you ask questions before we go into it with our board. We have PJ McDaniel. Okay. Is PJ moved over? I think so. PJ, you have the floor.

Oh, I'm sorry. Can you guys hear me all right?

Yes. Yes.

First of all, thank you. This has been quite an education on how this process moves along. And I commend all of you to spend as much time as you do going through all of the different processes. And I guess my question and these changes that just were gone through, how does that affect what we're trying to accomplish relative to putting in a speed bump or just trying to calm the speed along Autobahn that we've talked about in the past. I understand some of the, I guess, trying to redefine a lot of this, but what kind of, how does that affect what our group has been trying to accomplish here for the last couple months? And thank you again for allowing us to share our thoughts.

So the process

that we, well, the lack of a process we had in place whenever the Audubon concern was brought to us has led us down the road that we follow on many of these different concerns. What this program was designed for was to capture what we've kind of already been doing but better identify how we should move through this process and rather than just saying, yeah, we'll look at this or we'll put out some speed counters. It defines how we're gonna try to step through it so everybody knows. The Audubon area in particular, we would look at where it fits in within this process. I think we had just by nature of it coming before this program, we had already kind of initiated stage two without a petition, if you will, because we went and we collected a data speed and volume data and did an analysis of the area. And even got so far as providing some preliminary traffic calming measures as suggestions. So it would be a matter of picking that back up in this stage two process with the resident traffic calming request form and the petition. And then it would move through, we've already got some of this data, but we would look at sharing that back with the residents in the HOA and then consideration of low cost measures. And then it could move on to permanent measures that have usually a capital component to it that would require a budget approval. So right now I think you're around with Audubon around the stage, to process, and this hopefully defines the path forward from there. I hope that answers your question.

Yeah, thank you very much. So it sounds like our potential next step would be a petition from our neighbors. Is that accurate? That's correct. Okay. All right. Thank you very much for the clarification. Thank

you.

Okay, anyone else attendees would like to. Yeah, Josh. Go ahead, Josh.

Hi. Hello and thank you. You know, much as my neighbor PJ said I. I want to thank you, specifically Mr. Malik and Mr. David Gipson and the aldermen that have spoken on our behalf to just the work that's been put in on this project. And it has been rather long, but it's understandable that you're trying to standardize this for the whole community, not just for Audubon. So I get what you're trying to do here and That's appreciated. And I have looked through the packet and it looks like, you know, many of the things that we talked about, stop signs, speed bumps, slow children at play signs are all not being considered as part of this program. I did notice that Speed tables are included. And speed tables seem to, maybe Mr. Malik could speak to this, seem to have the same effect as a speed bump where you do have to slow down significantly to go over it. I wonder if he could speak to that and how they differ, the speed bump and the speed table.

Hi. Hello and thank you. You know, much as my neighbor PJ said I. I want to thank you, specifically Mr. Malik and Mr. Gibson and the aldermen that have spoken on our behalf to just the work that's been put in on this project. And it has been rather long, but it's understandable that you're trying to standardize this for the whole community, not just for Audubon. So I get what you're trying to do here and That's appreciated. And I have looked through the packet and it looks like, you know, many of the things that we talked about, stop signs, speed bumps, slow children at play signs are all not being considered as part of this program. I did notice that Speed tables are included. And speed tables seem to, maybe Mr. Malik could speak to this, seem to have the same effect as a speed bump where you do have to slow down significantly to go over it. I wonder if he could speak to that and how they differ, the speed bump and the speed table.

Sure. Some terms you'll hear tossed around, you'll hear speed bump, speed hump, speed table. Those are an increasing length, basically. Speed bumps are what you'll see in some private neighborhoods. Speed humps you might see in the center of Clayton or the high school parking lot, I think over in Ellenwood, private subdivision. And speed tables are more extended. So you have almost a ramp up, a flat spot, and a ramp down. as those get longer, they're more easily able to pass a little bit higher speed traffic in each iteration. So the idea of a speed table is it's designed to allow a comfortable ride near a certain design speed being that of maybe the posted speed limit or whatever is chosen. But if you were to go faster, it would be more uncomfortable and more of a bump, if you will, if you hit it. The idea being that speed bumps many times will drive traffic to neighboring streets, have lots of noise and pollution and wear and tear on vehicles where these more of the speed humps and speed tables aren't as much of a deterrent to push that traffic to those neighboring streets.

Understandable. I guess... You know, that seems to be most appealing of the options that are available to us. I mean, at least from my perspective, would you say that would be something that would be considered for the specific traffic calming situation on Audubon?

I think the things we've tried to identify in this program are things we think that could work in different areas throughout town. I'll be the first to say this is our first attempt at it. I'm not going to claim we've got it perfect the first go around. I think, you know, it'll be an iterative process a little bit to refine this. Some examples of these that have recently been installed but not within the city of Clayton but are in Hillcrest just outside of the city of Claydon on Aberdeen and Arundel. So that's given us a chance for our emergency services to evaluate those. getting feedback from them. I think it's certainly something that could be viewed as an option, but also does carry a capital cost with it.

I wonder how they will hold up to snow plows, you know, heavy, heavier trucks going across them. Certainly the snow plowing of a plow itself, you know, not knowing it's there or not really paying attention if it would cause damage because of the hub and that would go for, you object in the roadway, whether it be a speed bump or speed hump or a speed table. Have you seen any research regarding that or anything that would indicate if that would be an issue?

I've not seen research directly on the plowability of some of these, more just anecdotal. The more gradual speed humps, speed tables, you don't have that abrupt change to where the blade of a snowplow is going to encounter it. directly and really do damage. I think what you might witness is on the up slopes of each of these, you might notice a little bit more wear, but the gradual shift in the incline of those should lessen that when you compare it to a speed bump. These are, even though they both have speed in the name, they're quite different devices when you're both navigating over them or plowing them, I think. So be concerned of, and we'll make sure our operations folks know where they're at, especially fresh after an install or something along those lines, but less of an impact than a speed bump.

Right. I'm focusing in on that because the other options, which are chicanes or street chokers, which sort of function like chicanes in a way, it seems like if that's going to take place over an extended period of the roadway on Audubon that we're talking about, we're going to have, you know, parking issues because of the nature of the no parking zones as it is now, which is no parking on one side of the street six months out of the year, no parking on the other side of the street, six months out of a year. And then in order for these, you know, calming devices to be put in, you're going to have to have no parking any time signs in addition to the seasonal no parking signs. So do you have Any suggestions on how that would maybe work on Audubon if we did something more elaborate than a speed table, if we did something that extended a longer distance of Audubon?

So yeah, the things you mentioned, whether it be the curb bump outs to create them or other mechanisms, the lateral shifts or the chicanes you see on the screen, which basically just creates a non-direct route of travel. TAB, Mark McIntyre, or a pinch point in order for people to have to slow down there's multiple ways you can achieve those it can be done. TAB, Mark MCIntyre, With something I think we talked about before, Mr defense was try a lower cost method to try to advance something along and to try it and under this program we would still advocate to try to do such things if we could do put some planters out or some temporary. delineators to see if something like this is going to work. It might be step one on the way to a permanent installation that can be done at a low cost. I would say anything like this where you're narrowing the roadway down, yes, there's a potential that that's going to impact parking. It is a trade-off that has to be done with the desire of the neighborhood. And that's the reason we get the involvement of the neighborhood along the boats and input from HOA.

Right, right. Because I would think on the opposite side of those bump outs, you're going to have to have no parking any time areas to accommodate the choking of the street at that point. So Yeah, I think that could cause some issues with neighbors. Some are going to be more adamant about not having those in front of their house or on the other side of their house than others. And it would seem like for something like this to be successful, it's going to have to be appropriately placed. It's going to have you know, measured out in a way that makes sense to, you know, slow the traffic. So it can't just be to everybody's will and, you know, desire. It has to sort of be done in a way that is going to be effective. And I'm wondering if that is realistic for Audubon.

So the program, again, we'll the intent I will say anyway, is to gather as much feedback as we can from the neighborhoods and hopefully we hear these perspectives. There will still, I imagine there's gonna be times where certain latitudes have to be taken by the city to do what we think accomplishes the overall goal if we have to make small changes. But we would ideally present that in a package back for a vote to the neighborhood. So I think the percentages we've established with the vote, make sure that it's something that is warranted by the neighborhood and it is desired, but doesn't mean that everyone has to agree because I think we know that that can't happen. Right. So as you get into linear installations that extend more than just one specific area of concern, then you do expand that area of the people you'll be impacting and we'd be having vote on these things. So I think, is it possible that we find something here? Certainly. Knowing what that right answer is, I think takes the input from the public.

Yeah, I was just going to say, Josh, I mean, I think what we're here to do tonight is just approve the process that I think Matt's done a great job of thinking through and providing us with. And then separately, we can deliberate on what's the right answer for Audubon.

I understand. I totally understand. And I was going to try to wrap it up because of that, because I know it's not just about our street. And like I said, I know this is about coming up with a standardized process for people to apply and to deal with this issue on several streets, not just on Audubon. So I do appreciate your time and I appreciate the thought and the effort and energy that's been put into this by our city manager by mr malik and also by the board and of course you as well uh mayor harris so i appreciate your time tonight

no problem that's what we're here for do the ward two aldermen have any comments at this point just because we've got our ward two folks in attendance

i have a question looking at um Karen Grove- This this what we're looking at approving tonight, first of all, noting that it doesn't preclude any other actions what we've always done this is simply. Karen Grove- This is just one avenue to make sure that there's some uniformity and accountability across the city but matt the. Karen Grove- As I read that there's a there's a percentage of neighbors who have to identify the problem and want the city to look at it. Karen Grove- And then there's another percentage if they want something removed, but I think the situation audubon is a good example of. What if there's disagreement on the method chosen to address an identified issue? You know, what if the neighbors want the speed table yet the city is recommending something else. Is there any going back and checking on that or does a neighbor have any control about what the city actually then decides to put in?

That's a question for Matt.

Yes, sorry. I didn't realize the mute button moves to the share screen. Sorry. So we tried to identify in stage three is when we go back and work with the residents and or the HOA about defining what that would look like that goes before a vote and find what that installation would look like. We weren't able to And the intent is you work with the neighborhood to try to come up with a solution that goes to a vote that we don't want to put out a vote that we know is going to fail. I mean, that doesn't do any good. It shouldn't be an automatic slam dunk, but if everybody votes against it, I don't think that's any good. But to capture what you do in each situation on if you go, you know, you presented three options and the neighborhood doesn't like any. I mean, if we needed to narrow it down more like that, we could include more language. um i'm open to suggestions on how to do that i found it difficult to try to identify uh every scenario rather than we just tried to capture the intent of working with the neighborhood try to come up with some plans we think would be appropriate

yeah and ultimately it's it's up to the board of aldermen to determine what measures go on to the right-of-way within the city And that's how this is structured as well. So the vote from the neighborhood is certainly important, will be taken into consideration and it's something that's required in order to even have the board consider it. But ultimately it is up to the board to approve the improvement, whatever that may be. And then in the cases, a lot of these stage three improvements, there's a budgetary consideration as well. So not only are you approving the traffic calming measure, but you'll have to appropriate the funds in the annual budget in order to carry out the improvement at all. So the final authority does rest with the board.

And I think it's very well written and the overall feel is a cooperative and responsive work with the neighborhoods. So I think it's great. Okay.

Any other comments or questions?

I just want to say, I think that there has to be an overall understanding that the reason we're doing this is for safety. And that, you know, we all have a role in making sure that our streets are safe and they're safe for kids and they're safe cars and they're safer for pedestrians of all kinds. And I think, you know, I think we keep in mind that it's always good to have these kinds of guidelines and these procedures in place, but ultimately it's still the people that are involved who are gonna ultimately decide what's the best under these scenarios. And I trust all of our city employees that that's the goal. I trust the board will also work towards that being the goal. And I think this is great because if not for Josh and PJ and their neighbors, bringing all this to our attention and us doing some of that data work to show that yes, in fact, there is, this is an affected area for sure. you know, we wouldn't be doing this incredibly hard and good detailed work to provide the parameters and to help get us to the point of doing what we understand to be the safest thing for our neighborhoods. So I really appreciate everybody working together on this. And I think so far, I think it's been a really good result.

Great. Okay. In that case, oh, I'm sorry.

Yeah, just two quick comments. One is that I can tell you, having sat outside our speed bump here in Ellenwood for 15, 16 years, however long, I've never seen any damage from a plow on it. It's not as high, I don't think, as the one on Hillcrest is. Going over the one at Hillcrest, it seems a little more severe than ours is, but nonetheless, there's been no damage to it in all the years I've looked here. Second thing is, Matt, Down on Pershing in the Central West End, they just installed strips of cobblestones. So instead of putting a hump, they dug out the street and laid cobblestones. They actually did it twice because the first time they did it, they purposely raised the cobblestone slightly to create a little more And it was apparently too much and people were blowing tires. So they had to redo the whole thing. And now they're down to a point where they're actually almost too low, and you get no impact at all. But the concept I thought was interesting. Because you always hit a cobblestone and you start going, oh my gosh, it's all this. It's like rumble strips. It's a little different. So anyway, just bring that to your attention if you're ever down in the Central West End, drive down Pershing and take note of it. That's

all. I bet it's pretty too, Rich. Does it look good? Oh, it looks very nice. Yeah.

Okay. Well, for brainstorming, Forest Park has these speed tables with like built-in cobblestone components on some of them. It's like cobblestone speed hump. There's all kinds of

options

out there. We want to keep tight control of our purse strings, you guys. Okay. All right. So I think that may be all the comments. Okay. So in that case, we will take a motion.

I'll move to approve resolution 2022-03, adopting a traffic calming program. Second.

Further discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay. That carries. And I think the only thing left is, well, no, wait. Yeah, we've got two things left, sorry. So moving on to the municipal judge selection process, Mr. City Manager.

Yes, on December 14th, the Board of Aldermen discussed several Clayton Equity Commission recommendations related to the selection process and charter provisions for the municipal judge position. The attached resolution will put a formal selection process in place. There are key points within the resolution. It's a three-member panel that would be appointed by the Board of Aldermen and Mayor to interview the judge candidates and make reasoned recommendations to the Board of Alderman and Mayor. A transcript of the interviews, RFQ submittals, and panel recommendations shall be submitted to the Board of The interview panel should be comprised of an elected official and two others who have no direct or indirect conflicts of interest. And a demonstrated interest in equity issues such as public law interest administration justice pro bono nonprofit or similar experience the panel members should have some expertise in criminal justice with an equity lens. And finally, the attached RFQ request for qualifications that was in the packet shall be utilized to solicit applications for the municipal judge position. Staff recommends that the Board of Aldermen approve the attached resolution to adopt the selection process for the municipal judge.

Okay. I'll just go around the screen. Any comments or questions about this, Alderman Lentz?

No. PB, Lupita D Montoya, Alderman Berkowitz I just want to make sure it does make sure I mean we are able to hear those interviews is that was not where we had decided. PB, Lupita Д

Montoya, That we get a transcript right. PB,

Harmon Zuckerman, it's a it's a transcript there's there's nothing to suggest that you can't attend and see it if you'd like to

okay. PB, Lupia D Montoya, Okay i'm alderman McAndrew yeah. PB, Lupi D Montoya, All of them abuse. Nothing. Alderman Patel. Nothing. Alderman Gary Feder.

okay. PB, Lupia D Montoya, Okay i'm alderman McAndrew yeah. PB, Lupi D Montoya, All of them abuse. Nothing. Alderman Patel. Nothing. Alderman Fader.

Just a question. I think that Kevin O'Keefe mentioned at the last meeting that the charter specifically says that this selection is to be made by the Board of Aldermen. And I'm wondering if it's clear enough that this interviewing panel can submit one or more recommendations. It strikes me a little bit that if they are still simply recommending a single person that this becomes more of a veto process for the Board of Aldermen than it is in actually reviewing, let's say, the multiple candidates and saying, we like this candidate the best. And maybe it'll just work itself out procedurally, but I am interested from Kevin's perspective if this really gets us to where the charter expects us to be on this process.

So I will say this while he activates his video. I went back and watched the entire conversation, and we did spend a little bit of time talking about this. The board had basically said, let's not include any kind of limitation or any language at all related to the number of selections or selected candidates that can move forward to the board. And the reason being in the first line of the resolution talks about the charter provision itself, because that ultimate authority does rest with the Board of Aldermen. So in the end, I mean, we're putting this process in place. It's by resolution, but the charter rules. So the board ultimately appoints the municipal judge and that's it. This process is just extra. This is the board saying this is how we want to go about this process. But there's nothing to preclude multiple candidates or one individual.

And Gary, I agree with what you said. You say that there should be that option for the board to consider different candidates. And I had read the section one when reasoned recommendations with the yes. to give that leeway, but maybe it's not clear. The two things that I recall, and David, I didn't go back and listen, or the discussion of whether the interview should be public or accessible to us to actually watch, and then just that, the number of recommendations that should be

made. On the interview process, it was going to be closed from the public. John Lund, The alderman would be available to to go and view the proceedings, however, they not not necessarily participate in ask questions so. John Lund, And then the transcripts provided to the entire board after after the fact, and then on the other item I just based this solely off that conversation at my notes. and the board had taken out the language that referred to multiple selections, and that came from Mr. O'Keefe's advice, and really a reminder that ultimately the Board of Aldermen has the authority to select whoever they want to select, regardless of the number of people that come forward. So go right ahead, Kevin, if there's

anything. I mean, the people, Clayton adopted the charter, and you can't by resolution or even by ordinance deprive the board of powers that the charter says you have and has your responsibility to discharge. This is a process issue as to how this board at this time thinks it ought to go about exercising its authority and the process by which you will gain advice and information. But you cannot by this resolution or for that matter, by adopting an ordinance say that the board does not have the prerogative to make an appointment it deems appropriate to the office.

And so if the board wants to tonight amend that resolution to add language that talks about multiple candidates being moved to the Board of Aldermen, we can certainly include that.

Well, it says every time, recommendations is always plural. So to me, it just seems like it's already covering that there could and probably will be more than one person pushed forward. I don't know. It's always plural.

No, that's how I'd read it. I think the one thing that's not clear is the option of anyone to watch the interviews. If this board wants that, maybe we need to clarify that. But I read it the same way, Michelle.

I'm okay with the language.

Okay. All right. HAB-Juliette Boone, All right, i'm okay with the way the way it is currently so alright, so I seems like we can go ahead and. HAB-Julie Petersen, Have a motion.

HAB-Jacques Juilland, Okay i'll move to approve resolution 2022 dash oh for adopting process for selection of the municipal judge.

Second. Okay, thank you. I

was muted, second.

Any further discussion? All right, all those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay. All right, then the last thing on the agenda is the fourth quarter financial report. Mr. City Manager.

Yes, our Director of Finance, Karen Dilber, is here this evening. Frasier can move her over. There we go. And Karen will give the fourth quarter financial report for fiscal year 21.

Yes, our Director of Finance, Karen Dilger, is here this evening. Frasier can move her over. There we go. And Karen will give the fourth quarter financial report for fiscal year 21.

Good evening. I just want to, I'm assuming that you all have had a chance to look at it. So I'm just going to go through some of the highlights. And our original in our original budget, the general fund had a projected deficit of about 1.2 million and our estimated actual is a surplus of 1.1 1.113 so won't be at 1.13 million 215,000 which is 320,165 more than fiscal year 20 surplus. So we did a little bit better this year than we expected. That is mostly because of the ARPA funding and there were delayed expenses and things like that. Sales taxes, the general fund had about 358,000 more than the original budget and about 482,000 more than last year, which is a 10.9% increase in year over year. The capital improvement sales taxes were $118,600 over the original budget and $112,000 over last year, which is again about a 10.3% increase. The parks and stormwater sales taxes were $70,000 over budget, but $204,000 less than last year, which was about a 17% decrease year-over-year. The general fund expenses were about $1.4 million less than budgeted, but about $373,000 more than last year, which is about 1.4%. The equipment replacement fund, which we did touch on when we did the fourth quarter budget amendment, our expenses were $981,000 less than budgeted. And about $1.1 million less than last year, but that was because purchases were being delayed because of the pandemic or because we can't get things, things like that. And then the capital improvement fund expenses are $289,000 less than budgeted and $1.6 million less than last which is about 23.29%. And again, that's because some things have had to be delayed because of the epidemic. So those are just the highlights of the fourth quarter financials. Did anyone have any questions?

I'll just go around the screen. Alderman Lentz,

questions? On the property tax thing, which we always get caught up on, I think there was a comment in there about the successful appeals and that was part of what was that part of what dropped the property tax or that significant part of it?

That's a significant part of it. So when they appeal, it does take time to resolve. And then what happens is we end up with a negative distribution during certain time periods. And that's what happened this year as well.

So there was a significant amount. And are we going back? I know we started two years ago, I think, going back and recouping Um, some monies that we were able to do that. Are we still doing that?

I do believe so. Yes. I was not involved. I apologize on the property tax setting for this year, but, uh, in my discussions with staff, it is my understanding that we were attempting to recruit.

Okay. Good. Thanks.

Okay. Uh, Alderman Berkowitz. I

have no questions. Thanks.

Okay, Alderman McAndrew. No, I don't. Alderman Buse?

No. Thank you.

Alderman Patel? No, thanks. Alderman Gary Feder?

Alderman Patel? No, thanks. Alderman Fader?

I'll pass. Thank you.

Karen, it's very strategic to put this last on the agenda. I had zero control. I have just a couple questions. One is with regard to sales tax, And I apologize. I did look through the report, but I forgot to look for this item. Did you parcel out or tease out our own local sales tax as opposed to total sales tax? And if you know, we went with total trend there.

We went with total. I apologize. I can get you trend information, but can it be tomorrow? Oh, it can be anytime.

Yeah, anytime in the next foreseeable future. Yeah, I'm just interested in what's happening with our own local tax because obviously, you know, the county tax is spread out over a whole diversified tax base. And so we don't have that. So I'd like to see what's what our trend is, if anything good is happening there would be would be good. And then,

Mayor really quickly, if I could, when, just so everyone's aware when we do the first quarter financial report for 22 and we have those sales tax receipts. We had talked about showing trend data for those taxes but also breaking it down a little bit further into sector. within sales tax. So that's something early on in the pandemic we had talked about with hospitality and various sectors within sales tax itself. It takes more work and more research and more reporting on our end, but we think that's going to be really important information Uh, so when we have all the sales tax receipts in for the first quarter of 22, uh, that trend data is going to go a little bit deeper than what we'll even provide to you over the next couple of days for the fourth quarter of the previous fiscal year. So I just wanted to point that out to the board that, um, we're going to try to get a little more micro, uh, within sales tax itself.

Great. I think that's awesome. Um, and you know, in, in, uh, In the report, I mean, we do compare our fiscal 21 to fiscal 20, but I really have to keep asking. I really like to see it personally versus fiscal 2019 because that is pre-pandemic and it's a good benchmark of how we're actually doing. I mean, we could be way up, but we could still be down versus 2019. And that's just an important thing for us to be communicating to our residents and our businesses. Um, and the last question I have is with regard to property tax. Um, I know we County just did an assessment, so I'm not sure what the timing relevancy is of this, but we have new buildings coming online and I, how are we advocating for the property tax, uh, the value assessment on those properties. Are we doing anything there? Because I know that the property owners will be in there advocating for a low assessment as they're building online.

We actually have little influence over the actual assessed value itself that's applied by the county. The way that works, of course, is once the buildings are substantially complete, then they'll go on to the tax rolls, but that doesn't actually... you know, hit until that happens after January 1 in a year or so. It is quite delayed, those receipts that we see for new construction. So where you see buildings going up right now, while the buildings may be complete maybe later this year, you know, it's a good chance we won't actually get the full amount until the end of the next fiscal

year. I might add to that, that the courts have held that taxing districts do not have standing to challenge or contest the assessed value established by the assessor's office?

I know in previous years, and I don't, I can't remember exactly when or what buildings or whatever, but I know that we made some kind of effort with dialogue about, with the county about, you know, as they were beginning to set the values for the buildings. Now, I don't know what went on because I wasn't in the room, but I thought that we made an effort. Maybe it was just an informal effort just to say, hey, you know.

I'm unaware of any effort to challenge any kind of values or influence those. I know there were quite a few discussions, especially with Centene going on in the abatements there to make sure that everybody understood the structure and how the pilots would work and how the abatement would work on those. So there was quite a bit of talk about how exactly those assessments and the ultimate collection would work. Beyond that, I'm unaware of any other discussions with the county.

Yeah, I'm not sure what you're referring to, Merritt. It may well be. I think there may have been some discussions about timing as to when does a completed assessed value come on the rules, especially vis-a-vis abatement.

Maybe so, okay. Let me add to that too. School board experiences and Gary may have more to add to it for a different timing. This came up a lot that the role of the school board in advocating perhaps Kevin before at a time when it was okay to be, I don't know, presenting to, I don't remember, but when the assessments came out and they were surprising and not very favorable to the city and the district, there was certainly discussion about trying to address that. And I don't know what that would look like. I don't know the legal span is that you can actually do, but we certainly had those conversations.

The reason for my comment is that the case is right down the street and was Richmond Heights challenging the assessor's value for the Galleria early on in the process. And the courts just held that the taxing districts, this is a matter between the property owner and the assessor and the taxing district simply do not have standing or a role to challenge or litigate at least. I mean, you couldn't send a nasty letter to the assessor or talk to them, but. Yeah,

and I'm sure it was at the assessor level and not at a litigation level. Just making our voice heard and having a presence. Right,

and that's what I remember too on this side of the fence. And indeed, I

think

Mr. Gary Feder's got a lot of experience. Yeah, I

Mr. Fader's got a lot of experience. Yeah, I

dreamed it.

Yes, my recollection is back then, and I think Abe Lincoln was the assessor when I was on the board, but we had a lot of I think, sort of negotiations, but they were really just discussions where Paul Fedchek, who was then the chief financial person for the district, would talk to the assessor's office. But certainly it never rose to the level of litigation because I think it was understood that that wasn't going to get us anywhere. It was just going to have to try to be a little bit of persuasion.

I'll check around and see what past efforts might've been. We certainly haven't done anything within the last two years here, but I'll see what was talked about

prior. What I remember way precedes you and some of it precedes Craig. So it's been a while. Might have to go back a couple of city managers to find out anything.

I know where they are.

I know you do. Okay. All right then. I think, do we need to do anything with the report or just hear it? Yeah.

Just hear the report. There's no action needed and that's why it's last on the agenda.

Okay. All right. Well, Karen, thank you and your team, Kayla and the whole group for providing a great document. And we'll look forward to getting just a little bit of follow-up information and that'd be awesome. Absolutely. Thank you. Okay. So... We are done with this meeting. Would you all like to have a go around or shall we just go right into adjourn and go into a closed session? I'll leave it up to you all. It's 8.30, so I'm asking you. Go into closed session. I'm happy to

go into closed session.

Okay, good. All right, so need a motion to adjourn?

Need a motion to go to closed session.

Well,

okay. If you're in first?

I don't know.

I'm

always confused about that. Motion

to go into a closed session.

Just the closed session motion. Okay, Mr. Gary Feder. Aye. No, you've got to make motion. I

Just the closed session motion. Okay, Mr. Fader. Aye. No, you've got to make motion. I

have an awful lot of responsibility. All right. I move we go into closed session.

Oh, okay. You may not have the proper verbiage.

Go ahead, Kevin. If I may, if it pleases the board, a motion to hold a closed session pursuant to section 610.0211, 610.02012 and 610.02015 for matters relating to legal issues, communications between the cities and its attorney, contract negotiations and proprietary information.

Very well done. Seconded.

Thank you, Alderman Lentz. Aye. Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderwoman McAndrew.

Aye.

Aldermen Buse.

Aye.

Aldemman Patel. Aye. Aldeman Gary Feder.

Aldemman Patel. Aye. Aldeman Fader.

Aye.

And Mayor Harris. Aye. Now you have a second link for the executive session.

Right, and so I'm gonna be back in like two minutes. Okay, two minute interval here. Okay. Bye.

Bye

everyone. Bye.