May 23, 2023 — Meeting Transcript

I always forget to wait for her. We have a real exciting beginning to our meeting, so in order not to delay it any further, will you please call the

roll? There we go. Thank you. Alderman

Berkowitz. Here. Alderman McAndrew.

We're still in practice session?

Are we not?

Yeah, we need to start the one.

Sorry. What did we say? It's okay. What did you ask?

We were still in practice session.

Ready? Alderman Berkowicz. I'm here again. Alderwoman McAndrew. Here. Alderwoman Buse. Here. Aldewoman Patel. Here. Aldeman Gary Feder. Here. Aldermen Rick Hummell. Here. Mayor Harris. Here. City Manager David Gipson. Here. City Attorney O'Keefe. Here. Thank you.

Ready? Alderman Berkowicz. I'm here again. Alderwoman McAndrew. Here. Alderwoman Buse. Here. Aldewoman Patel. Here. Aldeman Fader. Here. Aldermen Hummel. Here. Mayor Harris. Here. City Manager Gibson. Here. City Attorney O'Keefe. Here. Thank you.

All right. Now's the time in our meeting when we ask for public requests and petitions from the audience. If we have something that you want to talk to us about that is not on our agenda tonight, is there any online audience with us? Now's your chance. No? Okay, very good. I don't think we have anybody, so now we can get on to the fun part. We have with us tonight several of, well, quite a few of the MIAC students. These students have worked all year to learn more about our city government and attended a meeting every month pretty much and had tours by each department of city government and worked as a team to go to committee meetings and other boards and commissions meetings and all in all it's It's quite a bit of time that they put in. So we're going to give them their actual official certificates tonight, and also we'll be giving out the Mayor's Award. So I'm going to start doing that now.

We're done. We're going to take a big group picture so no one run off until the end, okay? I'm going to call out your name. All right, so these are just the members that are here. There are some members... Come on up. Picture. Okay, can you come on over here and you can hold your... Thank you. Thanks for participating. Helen Yee. Samantha Braidwood. Nora Rose. Not here. Ismael Robles Reza. Did I say that right? Yeah. Oh, good. Okay. I've been working on it. l whining there you go and alex slen okay very good all right so thank you guys again they understand how city go first i guess some people to, but we'll let everyone know anyway that Alex Slim, his award is just for Above and Beyond. Participates and is responsible So at least it's not here. And then the other person that won the mayor's. Oh, whining. Maybe local government is in your blood. All right, and then we have one last gift to give out. One of our advisors is retired. Our appreciation of your tireless efforts to make. So would you want to baseline? Yeah. You know, just stay here and hold your flowers. Thank you. And actually, Jenny, we

need you in the picture too. Jenny, you want me to take a picture with? Let's stand in front of the podium. Can you get it? I want to see your flowers.

Thank you. Okay. All right, I think we're ready to then

move on to the public hearing for the use permit for Maryland Avenue Restaurant. And I'm probably gonna mispronounce it, Jensen, is that right? I'm gonna open the public hearing and request proof of publication. And you want a city manager will report.

This is a public hearing to consider an application for a conditional use permit submitted on behalf of 888 Food, LLC doing business as Jensen to allow for the operation of a 2000 square foot restaurant with an outdoor dining area. The subject property is located on the north side of Maryland Avenue between North Forsyth Boulevard and North Brentwood Boulevard. The property is owned C1 Neighborhood Commercial and is located in the Maryland Gateway Overlay District. The site is developed with a single-story structure that previously housed craft beer cellar. Gen Zen Ramen will be open seven days a week from 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. The restaurant concept is a full-service sit-down restaurant serving Asian fusion cuisine. The applicant has stated an intent to apply for a liquor license. The restaurant will have 66 indoor seats and 20 outdoor seats. Off-street parking is not required for restaurants located in the Central Business District, measuring less than 3,000 square feet. The Plan Commission considered this request at its meeting on May 15th and voted unanimously to recommend approval as requested. The staff recommends that the Board of Aldermen approve a conditional use permit for the operation of Jensen-Rahman, located at 8113 Maryland Avenue, per the conditions outlined in the resolution.

Okay, thank you. Any questions or comments from the Board up here? The applicants are here, so if you had questions...

I just have one. I'm excited for you all to open and it sounds wonderful. And I hope you consider or are already familiar with the Green Dining Alliance and sustainability in your work as you proceed with the restaurant. Okay, thanks.

Any other comments, questions? Yes. Yes.

I was just wondering what the hours of the operation were of the prior restaurant or the

beer. Were

they comparable?

I'm sorry, I don't know. I don't know

how late they were open. The

majority of the restaurants along this block have hours of operation that allow them to go until 10 p.m., with some minor exceptions to start at 11 a.m., but that also allows delivery in those later starting conditional use permits for prior to 7 a.m. So some of the restaurants that are currently on the block do not operate to the extent of the hours that their conditional use permits would allow them to.

Is there a concern about the hours of operation here compared with other restaurants on the block?

hours requested are

consistent with other restaurants in this area and within downtown

thank you can i

ask when you think you'll open um

yeah so uh can they come up

to the mic come on yeah come on up yeah um

And if you would, please, I'm sorry, identify yourself for the record.

Okay. So my name is Ling Li. My legal name is Hao Ling Li, but I'm listed as one of the owners of the restaurant. And this is my boyfriend, late. Yeah, also Li. Yeah. So he's, you know, we both of us are the owner of the restaurant and together with our partners who's not here present today. So we're kind of like the speakers for them. So in terms of like, when are we opening? Hopefully pretty soon. But as you can see, like that place currently don't have a restaurant ready in terms of like equipment, like a commercial hood system. So all of that has to be built. So we're looking at probably two to three months at least of timeframe. Hopefully things can be done within that timeframe. But if not, probably so i'm thinking we're actually yeah so we're thinking probably around the autumn of this year

all right yeah very good thank you very much well we'll look forward to it thank you okay thank you thank you um all right so any other discussion here okay i will close the public hearing

alderman berkowitz I move

to approve Resolution 2023-18, granting a CUP for 8113 Maryland Avenue for a restaurant doing business as Jensen.

Second. Any discussion? All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Okay, very good. Off you go. Yeah, thank you. Thank you. All right, next on our agenda is our consent agenda. Do you want to read what's on there or should I?

We don't necessarily need to read the items. I do know that we have a request to remove one of the items from a member of the board and that is the item related to electric vehicle charging stations. We could entertain a motion to approve the balance and then discuss that item.

Okay, very good. open

discussion uh need a motion to remove that or just that we say it is just a motion to

approve the other items and then we'll take that one up individually

so um unless there's other discussion alderman berkowitz would you like to move to approve the consent agenda minus the ev charging stations

minus the ev charging sessions

okay

I move to approve the consent agenda with the items listed with the exception of the EV charging stations.

Second. All right. Any other discussion? All those in favor? Aye. We have to do a roll call.

Okay, sorry. Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderwoman McAndrew. Aye. Alderman Buse. Aye. Aldermen Patel. Aye. Alderman Gary Feder? Aye. Alderman Rick Hummell? Aye. Mayor Harris?

Okay, sorry. Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderwoman McAndrew. Aye. Alderman Buse. Aye. Aldermen Patel. Aye. Alderman Fader? Aye. Alderman Hummel? Aye. Mayor Harris?

Aye. Thank you. Now, do we need a motion to discuss the EV charging stations?

We don't need a motion. It's on the agenda, so we can go straight into the item. Could we move Alex Elmstead

to the panelists, please?

So Alex Elmstad... with CCF also does work for the city of Clayton. And in this particular case, he's put together the grant application that's before you this evening. Did the board wanna hear the report on this particular item or are there specific questions for Alex?

I'm the one that asked for this, and so I have some questions. They're mostly clarification questions, but if you want to present anything beforehand, that's fine. It's a lengthy one, so

I'll leave it up to you all. If you feel like you have a handle on the topic, we can go straight to questions.

That's my preference. All right, great. So I'm generally in favor of all this. It's just that I am looking for some clarifications on what's written here. So the memo talks about seeking authority to add additional locations and chargers, but then the resolution is pretty specific about just doing 10 in the subject five locations. So I just wanted to be clear on that particular point that we're only approving the five or the 10 in, or in five locations at this time. So at

this time, what the board is doing is just authorizing the submittal of the grant application. Uh, the supporting documents there, you're right. Does not include these other locations that may be added later. Uh, So the only authorization we're seeking is to submit an application. What will happen with this process is if we're awarded the grant, then at that point in time, we'll have to go through the competitive bidding process to actually buy the units and the board will have to approve the appropriation of the funds to purchase and install those chargers as well. So the conversational. continue there.

And if I may, I believe the text of the resolution reads for installation of 10 or more charging ports at five or more city properties.

Right. So in what I was getting at then is just to understand the scope of this. So it says in here that, and I'm, I guess I'm confused by it. Um, I get the impression that the grant application might require a minimum amount of 500,000, yet we're requesting less than that, knowing that sometimes they allow for that. So again, I'm just wondering in terms of scope, um, And I hear what you're saying regarding the actual funding agreement down the road. I'm just trying to get a handle on what is it exactly we're trying to accomplish with this resolution.

Exactly what you just stated there. So we're going to try to obtain the grant using $240,000 for the project amount if necessary. that isn't sufficient. We need to get to that $500,000 floor. You're absolutely right. In some cases in these federal grants, you can go below the floor and still be awarded the money. In this particular case, if we have to reach the floor, we're going to have to add those locations in order to qualify. So this initial authorization would allow us, if we needed to hit the $500,000 dollar floor, to go ahead and add those additional units onto the application. And then once the award is granted, then we would go through that other process to appropriate

funds. Okay. And we may not know the answer to this now, but it would be interesting to know the answer. I'm not familiar with these, how the payment mechanisms work with these charging systems and whether or not are we contemplating simple cost recovery in terms of what we're charging? Are we looking to make a profit, cover our variable and fixed costs? Have we even thought about that yet?

We haven't gotten into the details of that. We just know that the units we purchase, we want the capability to charge. That's a conversation. Well, I shouldn't say charge. Collect a fee. I don't want to confuse everybody since we're talking about charging stations. But anyhow... the units we want to buy we want that capability we'd have that conversation later with the balderman to determine fees what we do know is that hourly rate uh to supply the electricity to those units ranging from 221 an hour to 377 an hour depending on the type of unit you would buy so that fee could vary depending on the exact

units

we purchase.

Okay, and do we know at this point whether there is such a thing as a universal charging station or are they only for certain cars in certain charging stations? Like, are Teslas unique from any other EV? I would have to

defer to Alex on that. I know he's been doing some research on these things.

Yeah, that's a universal charging station. I mean, we're going to answer that question directly. We're going to try to achieve the most universal charging station that exists in terms of the equipment while also, as David talked about, being able to to charge the user a fee or not deciding on, you know, to recoup the costs. So basically allowing it to have those features. I'll say additionally, we're working with sustainability committee to make sure that whatever this universal charging piece of equipment is, that it is the correct one that, you know, we've heard that some of them are sometimes malfunctioned, that you might see them a lot. But every time somebody pulls up to one, it might be in need of service. So we're kind of targeting that based upon what not only works, but also is both affordable and universal. Yes.

But does the application require you to be specific about what it is? Or can you say an amount and then make that decision down the road?

Yeah, it doesn't require you to be specific. And that's because a lot of the times the total cost of each station is dependent upon where your nearby electrical power is. So therefore, the cost of each station can range from not only the equipment, but also the labor and installation and electrical work that needs to occur at that particular location in which you're trying to I will say that the stations that we have been looking at at the parking lots, we're trying to do it to where it is the cheapest and most logistically feasible, both in terms of the equipment and the electrical installation.

That's all. I appreciate that. Thank you.

questions uh okay so then we need a motion to approve that particular item

move to approve resolution 2023-20 which is a grant application for ev charging stations

second any discussion all those in favor do we have to call the roll on that one too

no

all those in favor aye opposed Hey, city manager report.

All right, the first item on here is an ordinance for a condominium plat. On April 28, 2020, the Board of Aldermen approved an application plat supporting documents from MRM Manlin Development Group, owner of 114, 116, 118, 120, and 122, collectively known as Building A, and 126, 128, 130, 132, and 134, collectively known as building B, Gay Avenue, for the approval of a condominium flat at those addresses to be known as the townhomes of Clayton. The conditions of the plat approval were not met and the approved plat was not recorded. On March 21st, 2023, the applicant submitted an application condominium plat bylaws and declaration. The subject townhomes are under construction and are comprised of two five unit buildings. The city's subdivision regulations require that all improvements required must be either fully installed or guaranteed by a cash deposit or construction bond for new construction of condominium units. Construction of the development is progressing. However, not all improvements have been completed at this time. During staff review, the applicant requested that the plat be presented to the Board of Aldermen despite not complying with the subdivision regulations as is allowed by code. Staff is of the opinion that the requested plat is in compliance with applicable codes, ordinances and standards with the exception of full installation or adequate security for completion of required improvements as required by the subdivision regulations. Staff recommends that the plat be approved on the condition that director of planning and development services approves a list of remaining required improvements and projected costs for completion, and that installation of such improvements is guaranteed by adequate security as required by law. And then this afternoon, Anna Krane, our Director of Planning and Development Services did send out additional information that had specific items that still need to be completed on that site. And as the condition states there, We need to compile a list and then attribute costs to those remaining items. And the developer would be required to put up a bond in that case. So I know Ana can answer any kind of questions you may have about that remaining work. I know we had inspectors at the site today taking a look and getting all of this updated for tonight.

All right, the first item on here is an ordinance for a condominium plat. On April 28, 2020, the Board of Aldermen approved an application plat supporting documents from MRM Manlin Development Group, owner of 114, 116, 118, 120, and 122, collectively known as Building A, and 126, 128, 130, 132, and 134, collectively known as building B, Gay Avenue, for the approval of a condominium flat at those addresses to be known as the townhomes of Clayton. The conditions of the plat approval were not met and the approved plat was not recorded. On March 21st, 2023, the applicant submitted an application condominium plat bylaws and declaration. The subject townhomes are under construction and are comprised of two five unit buildings. The city's subdivision regulations require that all improvements required must be either fully installed or guaranteed by a cash deposit or construction bond for new construction of condominium units. Construction of the development is progressing. However, not all improvements have been completed at this time. During staff review, the applicant requested that the plat be presented to the Board of Aldermen despite not complying with the subdivision regulations as is allowed by code. Staff is of the opinion that the requested plat is in compliance with applicable codes, ordinances and standards with the exception of full installation or adequate security for completion of required improvements as required by the subdivision regulations. Staff recommends that the plat be approved on the condition that director of planning and development services approves a list of remaining required improvements and projected costs for completion, and that installation of such improvements is guaranteed by adequate security as required by law. And then this afternoon, Anna Crane, our Director of Planning and Development Services did send out additional information that had specific items that still need to be completed on that site. And as the condition states there, We need to compile a list and then attribute costs to those remaining items. And the developer would be required to put up a bond in that case. So I know Ana can answer any kind of questions you may have about that remaining work. I know we had inspectors at the site today taking a look and getting all of this updated for tonight.

Thank you. I'll open the discussion. Any questions from the board? I'll go in order of seniority here. No. Is the developer here?

Yeah. Can I ask you a question?

Come on up and state your name and all that good stuff.

Bruce Bartlett, behalf of the developer.

Is there a reason that you're doing it in this process? Like usually, you know, the condominiums are done before people see the plat, so I'm just wondering why it's being done in this

way. We're looking to start closing in two weeks. Everything is going in on this list, except for there are stone balusters that had to be field measured and they aren't in yet. So we're anticipating 30 to 60 days for those to get in. That's really the only thing on this list that we anticipate not being done over the next week to 10 days. So we're asking for this conditional approval, and then we'll work with the staff to get the bonds posted necessary to complete those improvements. But we anticipate everything being done except for some stone balusters.

Everything's done inside?

Pretty much. I mean, there's still work going now, but it will be done prior to closing. Yes.

And so people are potentially going to be moving in?

Yes, we're hoping to start closing the first week of June.

Okay. And the surrounding area will be restored?

We've anticipated all the landscaping, all the sod, all the outside improvements being done with the exception of these stone balusters.

Streets will be cleaned up? Yes. Thank you. Mayor, I don't know if there's some people in the audience too. I don't know. Yes.

Okay. Thank you. Yeah. All right. Great. I wasn't sure why. All right. Maybe we'll just take some questions from the audience right now, if that's okay. And then we'll return to the board comments. So you might want to stay near the front.

Mike may have unused the developer. Future unit owner.

Okay. So does anybody in our audience have any questions for the developer about this project? Okay. All right. Very good. All right. Let's keep going. All the women abused, do you have any comments, questions? All the women to tell.

No. Yeah.

You had asked the same question Bridget did earlier. And so I think we hopefully addressed. Yeah,

just trying to understand like what the motivation is. And so it sounds like And maybe I could just make sure I'm understanding this correctly. It sounds like the developer, you're motivated and anticipating having all of these things complete potentially even before our next meeting. And so you are hoping to have this, like you'd like this approved in order to like sort of.

This is just approval of the recording of the plat, which will allow title on everyone else to do what they need to do to get prepared for closing

yeah

the staff will still have to approve occupancy permits and things like that you know which one yeah so I

mean folks won't be able to occupy the building until you've done those things correct okay this

is just for the recording of the actual condominium declaration procedurally and we need to get done so we can be prepared to start closing these units

Yeah. I mean, I think as long as the security, the bond or whatever is needed to ensure the work can be done.

Clearly staff's feeling comfortable with that and that's why they recommend to approve it.

Right. We'll be working with them to clarify the list based on the date that this goes in order. And so Kevin's probably the best to explain what we did here, but we kind of post-dated approval to allow for some additional time to get the bond in order with the appropriate list of improvements.

If you'll notice, the effective date on the ordinance is unusual and it states that it's effective on passage and upon certification by the Director of Planning and Development Services, that either all required improvements have been installed or an adequate security has been received. So the ordinance will not go into effect and therefore PLATS cannot be recorded. And the ordinance also states that that is to occur within 10 days. So once that either verification of installation of improvements or receipt of an adequate security for everything that the city staff says remains to be done, has to occur before the ordinance becomes effective. After it becomes effective, the plants can be filed with the recorder And then the title can go about closing to the satisfaction of title companies and such. It's a rather unusual ordinance.

Any other questions? Yeah.

I guess my question for Ana is, it does seem, as Kevin just said, to be an unusual practice. And I'm still not sure I understand why we're doing this. It doesn't seem like this is typically the way we do. Typically, we get everything buttoned up. I'm not sure why the developer can't get this all wrapped up and instead of urging people to close on June 6th, have your closing on July 6th or some other date. It seems like it would be a lot cleaner and typically the way we do things to get all of this in place as opposed to sort of trying to rejig this process. It just, I'm not sure I understand other than there seems to be some haste to close. I'm not sure. I understand why we're, why we're, you were being asked to do something we don't typically do.

Well, Alderman Gary Feder, I think

Well, Alderman Fader, I think

Kevin. I won't speak for the developer or his council, but they're in the city's code. It allows the applicant to request to proceed to the board of Alderman and though they have not completed. So we are respecting that option, which the code apparently gives to the applicant.

Well, I'm not questioning they have the right to do it. That doesn't mean we should approve it. And I'm still not sure I understand why we would be asked to approve it.

Let me state this. I don't consider this to be a rare or unusual situation. My experience in development work in other cities typically the beginning the the differences at the beginning we many times post a bond for all of the improvements at the beginning of the project and the plaque gets filed at the beginning of a project which allows you to proceed to closing once all of the improvements are made so i don't consider this really an odd or rare request in the big picture of development in st louis county um now in terms of why we need this now. I mean, if we don't get this approved tonight, the next Board of Alderman meeting is when, which will cause these people to not be able to close the first part of June if we hold this and don't get approval to file the flat. I think the city will have sufficient security that we're going to complete those improvements. And by the way, they're minimal of what's not going to be completed. I mean, all of the landscaping is gonna be done. It's all there, it's all graded. It's a matter of getting the sod down, getting the landscaping in and the stone balusters just supply chain issues that they aren't going to be here in time for us to have those completed prior to the anticipated date of closing. We have people anxious to get in their units. So that's why we're asking for it now as opposed to waiting.

So if all of the requirements were met would this come before us? This is coming before us because it would still come before us again, even if all the requirements were met. Yes. Correct.

Okay. So my only point I think would be if you're suggesting that the homeowners are very anxious to close in early June, I'm sympathetic to that. If the reason where you want to close in June is because the developer wants to close, I'm still concerned that the homeowners, potential homeowners may be rather wary of closing. Units

are going to be completed. I mean, I don't know if you've driven by the building. It's substantially complete now. It's all graded. It's ready for landscaping. The interior of the units are substantially completed. complete. I mean, there's actually inspections going on now, I believe. So, and yeah, the homeowners are probably ready to speak to encourage. I think they're ready to get closed. It's been a challenge getting this project done.

Would you like to address the board? Yeah, come on up.

Thank you board members for hearing a homeowner out. My name is Steve Huntley and I will, I'm the buyer for unit four at the town homes of Clayton. I'm returning home to St. Louis after 45 years away because our grandchildren are here. We bought this unit or put the money down on it last summer. We sold our home out of state back in October, leased it back for five months and we've been in the new residence in for the last eight weeks. So four more weeks or whatever it would be is for my wife, our dog and myself is not something, it's a lot of agony. So we've been working closely with Mike to get this thing built out so we can move in. We've got a closing date scheduled for June 6th. The movers are coming up from out of state in two days after that. So it would be so heartbreaking for my wife and also our kids sold their house, so they're gonna come with us while their new house is being built. It's just gonna be terribly heartbreaking. There's a

lot of pressure.

So you asked about the sympathy of a homeowner So that, Mr. Alderman, is what I'm telling you. Now we're really looking forward to living in Clayton. I grew up next door in Ladue. We're loving living in Clayton-

I know you like it much better than Ladue.

The green space, the urban setting, the restaurants, it's great, but we're ready to get settled. So I hope that you will not only consider what's allowed by the law, but what's in the best interest of your future and current citizens. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Can I ask a

question?

Yeah, go

ahead. Who

did you want to ask? Oh, Mr. Hunt. Mr. Homeowner. We have a question for you

from the board. Yeah, I'm sorry. I just was curious. You realize that what we're doing tonight only applies to the plat?

Yes, I do.

So moving in will be a different stage and a different process. Yes.

in my civil mind infections are what leads to the certificate of occupancy so right i know that mike has to go through all those and i know that for example we think you talked about the balusters what wasn't mentioned is they bought i think they work with the city and they have all these wood creds and banisters so i'm glad to see somebody looking out for us from the city but yeah i understand i understand that This is not automatic. There's a list of a bunch of stuff that needs to be done. I was at the property today, my wife, and I can see lots of stuff happening.

You have pictures that show a lot of stuff that needs

Does that help? Yes. Thank you. Anybody else before I trip up the aisle again? Okay.

Thank you. Sir, sir, sir. I will just say a lot of our questions tonight really are your protection. Like we want to make sure that everything is done so that. Your protection. Yes. Yours as in the homeowner's protection. So

that's. I read this package. I got the whole package. I read the whole thing. Every bit of it. and I support what the staff has recommended, and I hope that you will see fit to approve it. Thank you. Anybody else?

Alderman Rick Hummell, did you have a question?

Alderman Hummel, did you have a question?

Yeah, I just have a couple of minor process questions. Not for you, sir. Thanks. on just a couple of process questions um do when we go through this part of the process are the bylaws typically part of the package and what i'm really wondering is is whether we're we as a city are approving them or just recognizing the fact that they need to have bylaws

right it's required that they provide the declaration declaration and the bylaws but we don't typically get into any sort of back and forth as to what the specific rights are for the condominium but mostly establishing the condominium plat needs to have the associated bylaws with it

so so we're not reviewing

them to make sure that

they're legal

um but also that there is a structure to provide for continuing uh maintenance of the common areas and governance of that so that's

why we that's why we look at them okay so we do read it to make sure those certain minimum requirements are in there

that's what we're looking yes sir

okay um and then um I think this is maybe an error or I just don't understand. There's a couple pages from the St. Louis County recorder's office in my package that have nothing to do with this property. Were that just errors that were part of the package?

I'm not sure about what those are exactly, but they did have to provide proof that they're in good standing with St. Louis County as far as the property

owners. These are just the owner property information that's found on the county's website for two owners that have nothing to I just want to make sure it had nothing to do with the application. That's all. It's on page 131, 132. There's an aerial and then there's some descriptions of properties located in Bridgeton and in maybe Webster or something.

They just didn't look like it had anything to do with this package.

I think they were included as just

attached accidentally onto their other pieces of their bylaws. Not relevant. That's all I wanted to make sure.

For some reason, those must have been attached to Exhibit D in the Declaration.

That's all. All right. If there's nothing else, Alderman Berkowitz. Reduce Bill No. 69...

I'd like to introduce bill number 6976 to approve a condominium plat for 114, 116, 118, 120 and 122 building A and 126, 128, 130, 132 and 134 building B Gay Avenue to be read for the first time by title only.

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

Number 69 to 76, first reading an ordinance providing for the approval of a plat for the townhomes of Clayton, a condominium located at 114, 116, 118, 130, 122, 126, 128, and again, 130, 132, and 134 Gay Avenue in the city of Clayton, Missouri. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed?

Right. Alderman Berkowitz. I

move that the board give unanimous consent to consideration for adoption of bill number 6976 on the day of its introduction.

Second. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? All right, let the minutes reflect. The board has given unanimous consent.

I'd like to introduce bill number 6976 to approve a condominium plat for 114, 116, 118, 120, and 122, building A. And 126, 128, 130, 132, and 134, building B, Gay Avenue to be read for the second time by title only. Second. Any discussion? To the attorney.

I would ask the board's indulgence to recognize the Scribner's error in the title of this and the first 130 should be 120. Chalk it up to the fact that the city attorney is a lousy typist. Bill number 6976, second reading and consideration for adoption. an ordinance providing for the approval of a plan for the town homes of Clayton, a condominium located at 114, 116, 118, 120, 122, 126, 128, 130, 132, and 134 Gay Avenue in the city of Clayton, Missouri.

Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderman McAndrew. Aye. Alderwoman Buse. Aye. Aldermen Patel. Aye. Aldeman Gary Feder. Aye. Aldemann Rick Hummell. Aye. Mayor Harris. Aye. Thank you.

Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderman McAndrew. Aye. Alderwoman Buse. Aye. Aldermen Patel. Aye. Aldeman Fader. Aye. Aldemann Hummel. Aye. Mayor Harris. Aye. Thank you.

Okay. You're all set. Thank you. Good luck.

Um, I believe there's folks in the audience who were here for items on the consent agenda who may not realize that we've actually approved what they came here for. All right. So I recognize, I believe I recognize the owner of kitchen Clayton.

Okay. Okay, good. I wasn't.

So we approved your liquor license during an item called our consent agenda with no issues. And you're welcome to stay. Thank you. We appreciate you. Yeah,

it's a great place. It's great.

Thank you guys. So sorry. Yeah, there we are. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Oh, thank you. I did not know. Okay. So that makes me think that when we go through the consent agenda, we should say We're doing the consent agenda and it contains not the full verbiage, but just the headlines.

Yeah, like what

makes

sense for us to talk about? Or just

to know that now we're addressing your thing. Okay. All right. Mr. City Manager, emergency measures.

As the Board of Aldermen approved certain emergency measures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic on March 20th, 2020, or March 24th, 2020, excuse me. The ordinance provided for flexibility in the calling and conducting of public meetings and authorized the city manager to temporarily suspend enforcement of regulations and to adopt interim temporary alternative measures determined to be reasonably necessary to protect the public health. The state of Missouri announced an end to the COVID- 19 pandemic crisis on April 1st, 2022 and the federal government officially ended the national emergency on May 11, 2023. The attached ordinance would end the local emergency measures put in place in March of 2020. Staff recommends that the Board of Aldermen approve the attached ordinance ending the COVID-19 pandemic emergency measures.

Very good. I'll open the discussion. Any questions from the board?

One question. That includes Zoom meetings counting as in-person meetings, doesn't it?

It does not. Actually, our system the way it is currently set up does comply with the Sunshine Law. So as long as you can see the person that's remote and the person that's can see everyone in here, then we're compliant with the Sunshine Law

Okay, thank you. Great question. So is there any noticeable impact that we'll feel? Did you say that?

No, not through this. No, we haven't put an emergency measure in place in over two years now.

Okay, let's thank you. Some of the emergency measures that we did put in place back then, we've kind of codified it like 10th or whatever.

Curbside parking, expanded parklet provisions to go liquor ordinance was something we passed temporarily.

Okay. If there's no discussion, Alderman Berkowitz.

I'd like to introduce Bill number 6977, Ending the Emergency Measures Related to the COVID-19 Pandemic, to be read for the first time by title only.

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

Bill number 6977 First Reading, an ordinance ending emergency measures to protect the public health during the coronavirus pandemic crisis.

All those in favor? Aye. Opposed?

I move that the board give unanimous consent to considerations for adoption of bill number 6977 on the day of its introduction.

Second. All those in favor?

Aye.

Let the minutes reflect the board has given unanimous consent. I'd

like to introduce bill number 6977, including emergency measures related to the COVID-19 pandemic to be read for the second time by title only.

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

Bill number 6977, second reading and consideration for adoption, an ordinance amending emergency measures to protect the public health during the coronavirus pandemic crisis.

Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderman McAndrew. Aye. Alderwoman Buse. Aye. Aldermen Patel. Aye. Aldeman Gary Feder.

Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderman McAndrew. Aye. Alderwoman Buse. Aye. Aldermen Patel. Aye. Aldeman Fader.

Aye.

Aldernan Rick Hummell.

Aldernan Hummel.

Aye.

Mayor Harris.

Aye. Thank you. All right, last but not least on this agenda, waste collection assistance.

Yes, so I have a brief presentation here that was included in the packet. This is something that came up as we approved the waste collection contract a couple of meetings ago. So this is just kind of a rough draft of a waste collection financial assistance program. It's really crafted around what St. Louis County has in place currently. That is the only local example I can find of a financial assistance program that's really based on income rather than senior citizen status or other factors. So some general parameters that theirs contains that I think would be useful here. First of all, assistance would be given on an annual basis consistent with our fiscal year renewal required by September 30th. Only single family and two family properties would be eligible. If you're in a rental unit that's typically going to just be, you know, passed along as a part of your rent or included in your rent but that's something that the property owner themselves are going to pay. So in this case, we would propose that it's just single and two family properties, and that they be owner occupied. Applicants would have to inform the city of any changes to income or occupancy status. And then one thing that's a little bit different here, we have the oops ticket program that was a requirement within the waste collection contract. We would have applicants basically commit to recycling and if they have more than one oops ticket and they do track that as they give those out. then we could revoke the financial assistance. So whether we want that to be one or two oops tickets, I do think it's important that we encourage recycling if you're going to receive assistance. And then finally, the city will not cover any previous balance or debt collection fees at the time of application. So any questions about

any of these general parameters here or discussion on these items?

Nobody else? So I was curious about, because we are, so St. Louis County has a program like this and we are in St. Louis County, but as so like our residents wouldn't be eligible to apply or is it only apply to unincorporated areas?

Okay. Where they cover the service.

Okay. Thank you. And this idea of like the penalty for not recycling correctly, is that modeled off of the county or that's an idea that your staff is suggesting to consider?

Yes, based upon the fact that we have an oops ticket system that's basically tracking these things. So I don't know how the board feels about that type of provision in there, but I know that recycling is a priority for us.

How easy is it for us to validate the... I'm wondering whether we'd even want to talk to sustainability and equity about this idea too, potentially. What do they think about that? I certainly like the idea of encouraging recycling. And then is it easy for us to validate where places are owner-occupied? Like, that would be part of the application, I guess, because they have to apply. So as part of applying, we'd be able to validate that the person applying is the owner of the property. You need to match the

county records.

Okay.

Thank

you.

Yes?

I can add something.

On the oops ticket, the idea to encourage recycling is great. But you get an oops ticket if you simply

put recycling in trash then. I'm wondering, would it be And in consequence, if you avoid the oops tickets for recycling.

It's the other

way. The oops tickets are only attached to recycling. So if it's contaminated, if all your recycling is in a plastic bag, if you have a lot of food waste and with your recycling, then they'll put a ticket on it and explain what happened and cause them to not pick it up and leave that ticket there.

Right. So I think there is that risk that it would encourage people to do everything.

The way to ensure you don't get an oops ticket is to not recycle. is the one way to actually be sure. Yeah, I think that's why it would be perhaps useful to just consider that a little further. I don't know.

And the idea of encouraging- Other

ways, what are our options for that?

And the reason it works that way is you shouldn't have bags in the recycling container. In the regular waste container, it's all bagged up and they really don't know what's in there.

Yeah, I understand all that. We just have to be careful that it's written- Unintended

consequences.

Correct.

Right.

Yeah, and also I know that you're looking at the definition of income as well.

Yes, and that'll be on the next slide here. Um, so establishing need, uh, any other questions on general parameters before we move on to that?

Okay. And I was just curious, I think I mentioned you on a call that, you know, I think it'd be helpful to us to see what St. Louis County's application form looks like so we could see how they, how they handle that. Uh, and I'd be interested, you know, what is their experience? Obviously it's hard to compare city of Clayton with St. Louis County, but yeah, how many applicants do they get? Um, you know, I think the program in and of itself is by nature greatly limited by the fact that we can't deal with multifamily because I suspect if you're talking about people who live sort of paycheck to paycheck, my guess is that's where most of them are. They're not in single family homes, but it'd be interesting to see what St. Louis County does, what their application looks like and what their experience is before we actually adopt something here.

So we can get data from the county. When I went back and looked, the bullets that we'll go through in a couple of slides here were taken straight from their form. And this is essentially what they're asking for on their application. So we can provide the form, but I think it's pretty much all captured here on an upcoming slide. And we did talk a little bit about one other income requirement. So we can discuss that as well. So in the establishment of need, St. Louis County uses 150% of the federal poverty level to determine low income for this purpose. Theirs is very low. So $45,000 for a family of four is the income threshold for the county program. So we could go with something like that. We could also use the HUD median household income. So if you remember the conversation we had with the developer earlier, about an affordable housing unit. We were talking about HUD medium household income limits and what percentage we wanted to set that out, set that at. So I just have some examples here. So 30%, 50%, 60, and 80. And then if you look at the top part here, it actually is determined by family size, so the number of people in the home. So if you had a family of five And we set it at 80% of the median household income. They would have to have a total household income under $82,000 to qualify for the program. So I don't know if there are any thoughts about where you may want to set this threshold. I do think, again, personally, the $45,000 threshold is extremely low. And I'm not sure how many

families that would actually help here in Clayton that have single family homes. Any thoughts on that?

Well, I would agree it's extremely low. I would think we would have a threshold that would be slightly higher than that. I'm looking at the 60% income level that might be a little more appropriate for us. If others have other ideas, I'm obviously open. I'm not, this is just, look at this really, you know, to see how we can help people that really clearly could not, would not be able to handle this check, this amount. And I think if you have a family of four and you're making $57,000, I think you qualify,

assuming you have no other assets. Yeah, I

mean, I don't know why. I mean, in other words, yes, I agree with that. Is there... maybe if you're making 75,000, it's okay. We think you can probably swing it, but what's in between those two? It's a pretty big spread. I don't know. I don't think more of like elderly people really that are on fixed income of social security and things like that. And I have to say, unfortunately, I really have no clue about someone on social security what their income might level might be you know i don't know if there's any way that that's going to differ based on that or something work history based on their

earnings yeah it varies

they're not making more than forty thousand dollars as an individual uh social security earner that's about well i was

gonna say what's the most they could make i don't really

probably just a little less than three thousand dollars a month would be the max

okay so that would be thirty 6,000 if it was maxed out.

And that would be very high. Right.

But what did we, when we were talking to the developer for that apartment building, what percentage should we

use? We did 100%. The median household income. I can pull that up.

That was for affordable housing? Right.

Do we have any demographic data on... how Clayton residents or homeowners line up with these median household incomes?

I can pull up the census data, but it's significantly higher than the numbers here.

Right. And they would be like, we wouldn't have the data on the spread. We would have the data on median

information.

Yeah.

Correct.

I'm just, I mean, I feel like, well, I mean, um, I don't know if you're going to get to this. I don't see in what was, we were presented ahead of time, anything to like try to project the cost of the program to the city. Um, obviously we're talking about one or two family homes. So we know it's $640 a year, um, per household. Right. Um, and so like thinking about that, I mean, I, um, I think if you're trying to live in Clayton, if you actually own property in Clayton that you're paying property tax on, even if you don't pay anything else, I think that the 80% is, is going to be challenging for you to, to be surviving on. And so, um, I mean, I'd be willing to consider and if we I don't know how much we can get the data on like what the cost would be to the city or what other ways we can look at this. But that's just what I'm thinking.

Yeah. So we need to look at what the cost would be in the city under different scenarios, clearly, right? I just don't know how we

predict it. What

percentage of county residents sign up for this? Do you have any idea?

And I don't know that we can get that information, but I don't think that's going to apply either. A lot of the unincorporated areas in St. Louis County have significant areas that meet the poverty threshold that they have there. Yeah, it would be so

different. It would be a benchmark.

Can I ask a question?

Absolutely.

So just as another way of thinking about this, when the day comes that we may need to ask for a tax increase or in any of the time that we ever asked a tax increase in the past, did we ever pass anything that provided the low income household a rebate or abatement of their property tax?

Not that I'm aware of.

Yeah. So I have no problem with us considering a program, but I think it's a precedent that if every time we're going to look at some kind of a thing that we're going to also have a compensating program for it, that could become a real problem for us. So I don't, I guess I would prefer that we, our goal here is to really look at a severe hardship as opposed to maybe a mild hardship or something, or at least that's my perspective. So I just want us to be careful about how we're approaching this. I know we all want to be accommodating and understanding, and so I get that. But I also think the likelihood of people that are here that are going to be subject to this should be relatively small, and it's probably going to be a senior citizen with little to modest income. And so that's kind of what I think we're targeting here.

I think that too,

yeah. I think that we do need to have some idea of costs, which I know will be hard to get. But there is some comfort or some wisdom in staying somewhat close to what the county asked. 60%, whether we do it as a two-year trial or something, we need to see the applications. We need to see how this actually works and if it truly is doing what we intend it to do. And If we keep it at a level like 60%, I think of other organizations when they do something, there's always that hardship exception too. Somebody else may not quite qualify, but they come in with an appeal. And I know that adds some discretion, which can be uncomfortable, but that may be a way for us to kind of see if this is achieving what we need it to, yet still have that exception for somebody who may truly need our help but may not fall under some set criteria.

interesting point

well let me ask this is there have you gone all the way through your presentation

uh no i've got two more slides

let's have you finish this and then we'll see what other information we would need to make a decision which maybe will be delayed

does the census help us at all is there any census uh information for clayton specifically that we could use

I can go through and take a look and see what we can find there. The other thing, though, that's going to be a complicating factor to some extent is even if it breaks down information into some kind of cohort based on median household income, the lower income percentage is going to incorporate a lot of multifamily. So a lot of college students are going to fall into that category. So trying to figure out on the single family side of things, what those median incomes may be. I don't think we can come up with that number and I don't know how to go through data to find

it. Yeah, I get it.

So establishing need in this to Alderman Gary Feder's point really comes from the St. Louis County's form that they utilize. So applicants would be required to provide the previous year tax return and then one of the following. So one month of current paycheck stubs, a letter from an employer letterhead on letterhead with number of hours worked and dollar amount paid per hour. So employment verification, basically a letter from division of unemployment or of employment about unemployment status. And then finally, a statement of Social Security award letter, VA benefits letter or a pension letter. So we're really looking for them to submit income sources. And then the discussion I had with with Alderman Gary Feder and I think I've had it with a few others that we want to be careful of. is individuals that may not have any income outside of maybe a social security check but they have a lot of non-taxable assets or things they sell on a regular basis that aren't necessarily reported because of that non-tax status or the non-taxible status so how do we capture that in here so

So establishing need in this to Alderman Fader's point really comes from the St. Louis County's form that they utilize. So applicants would be required to provide the previous year tax return and then one of the following. So one month of current paycheck stubs, a letter from an employer letterhead on letterhead with number of hours worked and dollar amount paid per hour. So employment verification, basically a letter from division of unemployment or of employment about unemployment status. And then finally, a statement of Social Security award letter, VA benefits letter or a pension letter. So we're really looking for them to submit income sources. And then the discussion I had with with Alderman Fader and I think I've had it with a few others that we want to be careful of. is individuals that may not have any income outside of maybe a social security check but they have a lot of non-taxable assets or things they sell on a regular basis that aren't necessarily reported because of that non-tax status or the non-taxible status so how do we capture that in here so

like recreational marijuana well

or a huge stack of municipal bonds

can we have the income include passive income

Yeah, so I think we could add another category in here and ask for income

generating assets.

Right. Sale of assets in the previous year, income generating assets. We can figure something out, but we've got to have something that captures that as well, because I hate to think that people would game the system and have income that's coming in that isn't really reported um and then can document that they are low income on this scale and then avoid paying the trash bill when they certainly have the

tax return would reflect the passive income or it should it should but it wouldn't necessarily um

Well, depending on what they submit, you might not see the non-taxable income on federal bonds or municipal bonds. We'd have to then make sure we get all the schedules. And all I'm saying is it's in what you ask for. You've got to be careful what you ask for, yeah. Right.

I was going to say, again, that's why I thought it was important to see what the application form looks like because The summary here says previous year tax return and not being a tax lawyer. I mean, that could be just the federal returns, not the Missouri return. It's not the returns from other income producing types of things. So I think we at least need to be sophisticated about it so that we're actually getting legitimate responses. And at the risk of being overbearing, I mean, I still think it would be nice if the person would sign the application saying, you know, I believe I qualify as a low-income family, and this would be a substantial burden on me. You know, we're not going to ask him to have an affidavit, but I would least like the person who signs it to say, hey, I really need to help, as opposed to, hey, looks like a great deal. I think I'll just apply. I mean, you know, I think we want people to be sincere. We're not going to question them, but I think we want enough information to feel like the person is entitled to the benefit.

Why not an affidavit yeah

it's fine too, but I was trying not to be too onerous, but I think we do lead that we do need legitimately to know that the person is in need if we're going to do this.

And you want them to say it just to make that statement as well versus us having that obligation to go through every schedule and determine if we think that we want we want. that applicant to say whatever does

it mean to um sign an affidavit like do you have to get a lawyer or like can could june do it like what it's like uh what's the like a notary so so like we could offer to do it for people i just don't want to impose like a burden on someone who is truly low income and has to figure out how do i get an affidavits

right i think the point but if it's that if they make something we can

support

if they make the statement that they fit our criteria Yeah, maybe we have that option to verify, then we don't have that obligation of going with every application going through schedule, you know, every schedule there is and making the determination ourselves. Yeah, we can follow up and verify that there seems to be an issue or something like that.

So what we will do is we'll take the information we get tonight and we'll put together an application form that will have all that detailed information. So we'll share that with everyone next time we go to talk about it. Finally, establishing the discount level. So the county provides 100% assistance if you meet that threshold. So again, theirs is extremely low at 45,000. The question is, do we want to do 100% or something less than that? Now, we had originally thought If we're going to provide 100% assistance, we would just pay the bill directly to Republic. As we talked about that a little bit more, we still think even at 100% assistance, it would probably be wise to still treat it as a a scenario where it's less than 100%. The reason being, you could have somebody that vacates the property and doesn't let us know. And we're paying a trash bill for a few months until we actually find out that that's the case. There's no way to go back and capture that money. So if it's a rebate program, they actually pay the bill, they're still enrolled in the program, they bring it to us, and then we cut a check as a rebate. I just feel like if the communication isn't good with the the participants in the program and they're not letting us know of a move or anything else or change in that status, we could go for several months paying a bill when we don't need to. So I just wanted to get your thoughts on that as well. Where do we set the discount level? And then how do we want to establish this? It is somewhat of a burden or a pretty big burden on their billing department if we try to have republic collect you know 35 from the city and 65 from the resident or whatever it is so it's better that it's in 100 chunks but i just want to get the board's thought on what that should look like

well or if it's a rebate it's transparent to republic doesn't even know about it

correct they're not so they're not involved at all

yeah right

And I think it's good that the residents should be involved in the process. And at some point, they may say it isn't worth my time to ask for a rebate all the time if, in fact, they don't really need it. If they really need it, they'll really do

it. The irony of it is if they really don't have the cash flow to pay it, which is why we're helping, then where are they going to get the cash flow to play it each month?

So for one month, it's like one

month's an arrear. So can they afford one month? I hear what you're saying. If that one month is crippling, then it's a problem.

Can't do it. They can't do it.

Well, and remember, it's quarterly too. It's not monthly. You know, so everybody will get about $160. It'll be about $160, $165 a quarter.

And then quarterly, they'd have to come to City Hall or submit a form or something to actually get it. So they'd have to come during the hours we're open?

Yeah, they would just come in, submit their paid receipt, and

we'd process the check.

Well, I think there's two questions here. One has to do with, of course, the process, but the other has to do with are we going to look at doing this at 100% or at a discount, you know, that basically where we are supplementing it but not paying all of it. So I think we have to figure that out too.

Agreed. Help me understand why we would do any discount um i mean theoretically i understand the concept but but if we're going to get into this um are you suggesting we would just do one system it's either a hundred or some other number or some people would get less than 100 and others would get 100

lighting scale it might be hard to figure out it's like a lot of administrative work it

would have to be consistent i just think if we If we established a certain level where we really believe people can't afford this extra $600, I would just assume provide 100% assistance. Because I think we've determined then that $600 plus a year extra on somebody with fixed income is a lot of money. So therefore, we decide that we will pay it. That

would be my main thing. I agree with that. So, I mean,

I guess, is this your last slide?

It is.

I guess here's the question is what information would we like to see? Because I think we have to talk about this again. What information do we need gathered in order to kind of move through it and make a decision maybe at our next meeting? We would want to see some kind of demographics or some kind of census data that might be relevant. income or demographics because i think it is it probably is mostly an age thing when we're talking about single family homes we'd want to see how many people you know qualify under that i would

just say i'd support david's point he's been making which is um we'll get a number i'm not sure what we're going to do with that number when we get it

well it might help us determine a cost an ultimate cost to us

No, I meant that the income number is all I'm talking about.

But

I would like to know more about the county's experience. I understand the demographics are going to be vastly different. that is, what percent of the population does this? How does it work? What problems have they had? Do they see an increase or decrease in the... Because what I'm thinking, I'm hoping, is that the utilization of this is going to be relatively small. And let's not overly complicate a relatively smallly used program. But if theirs is widely used, well, then maybe that's different. So I just don't know.

Well, but I think you know again to david's earlier point that the unincorporated areas are going to have a much different uh median income much different income spread in total than we have here so it is going to be different but um you know because i mean it can't hurt to know it um i'm i just feel like i i'm trying to search for a way to zero in on what is the level that we need to have as our threshold? I feel like understanding sort of our own residents and their behaviors and needs is really important to the extent that we can from any data that we've got. We know that there are some neighborhoods of single family, we know that those home values are lower. And I know from walking the streets myself, I know where a lot of those elderly people live. And I know, you know, I have an idea of, you know, how many homes are there and, you know, just to try to draw a circle around what that level should be. And should it be just like the social security piece? And that's a good guideline. Let's say it was maxed out. And is there anything we want to add to that level that they might normally be getting? And then we can use that as an estimate to set our threshold. I don't know. I'm trying to get to a number.

We'll see what kind of data we can find. Again, I think it's going to be really difficult to get that granular and figure out by age group what the income level is and whether or not they're in an owner-occupied or rental unit. I don't know that we're going to be able to get that deep with census data. We'll see what we can find, but I don't want to set an expectation that that data is going to be out there easily attainable.

Done surveys, but we don't ask income, do we? One time we did.

We do have that on there,

but

again, that's... Yeah, we'll... And on those surveys though, while we ask that question, we don't get into the owner occupied rental thing either. So I just don't know that we have a... a data set that will yield a whole lot, but we'll take a look.

Okay. Go ahead. I would like to us to consider a couple of things. One, just definitely like continuing to look into what other information we can get to inform our next discussion to bring this to like the boards and commissions that might have an interest in feedback on it, which I think is at least equity. and potentially others and then um and like for us to keep in mind that i think like if we talk about this again in two three or four weeks we probably can still have more discussion and feedback than before actually and like vote again in a future meeting like we don't need to do this in the next

month we have

time so um i would appreciate that personally so

Yeah, and on top of that too, and you all pretty much said this, but we have to keep it relatively simple for applicant and staff and not make this something that is too burdensome on anybody.

And I guess you've asked it, but Republic, do they know of other examples elsewhere that would inform our structure?

Not that very...

far from what the county has. And again, most of the programs that are out there are senior discount type programs and not necessarily income driven programs. I did search around quite a bit online and I found some examples throughout the country. But again, the St. Louis County program that's in

place, I think is as good a template as you're going to find.

Yes, I do. Thank you for reminding me. I saw it and then I kind of forgot to go to it. Yes. Kathleen Gund, can she hear us yet? Yeah. Do you have a question or comment?

I have a question and a comment and suggestion. My name is Kathleen Gund. I live at 329 North Bemiston Avenue. My first question is about the penalty for not properly recycling. What is the penalty for like a regular paying customer if they were to recycle incorrectly?

The penalty is that their trash or their recycling is not collected. So they leave a note on it and they leave it there.

Okay, but there's no financial penalty. So I just want people to kind of like put that in their mind. So we're putting a financial penalty on some of our neighbors in need if that parameter that was suggested is put into effect. I just want everyone to kind of sit on that. My second is kind of like a point. Studies after study have shown that low-income people very often do not apply for programs that would provide them with a financial or some other type of benefit because of hurdles that they have to overcome. to get that benefit. Let that be an application, let that be an interview, let that be like showing up somewhere. So I, any hurdles that or any kind of, not that I think that there should not be an application process, but I just want the board to consider that the discussion has kind of revolved around, we need to keep people from cheating us or applying if they don't have need. And I would be on the side of, I would prefer for my city to help 10 people in need, even if we, uh, accommodate someone who's treating the system. So I just want to kind of put that out there. And the third thing I would like to put out there is perhaps a suggestion that generally people who live in Clayton have a higher income level, even if they are elderly and are living on their social security and their pension or only their social security. But that does not necessarily mean that if their income level is like over 80%, that they do not have a lot of financial constraints. So I thought maybe another sort of parameter, for example, let's say their real estate tax bill as a percentage of their income might be a better parameter to determine the need. If there's someone who has, you know, $60,000 of income between their Social Security and their pension and their income tax bill is $7,000. And then we're adding $600 to that. That person might truly be in need. So those are the three things I just kind of wanted to bring up. And I applaud the board for even thinking about this. And I also, Becky, I love your point about kind of putting this out there that this is what you guys are thinking about and trying to get feedback from some other people who might be interested. That's it. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay

mayor I would say too I mean to Kathleen's point which I think it might be interesting to think about too as we again continue to talk about this is um you know not necessarily a appeal process but as part of the application some sort of you know that there at least is a place where they can explain you know something that Kathleen talked about where you know, there's a huge real estate bill that they're trying to, you know, I don't know, just something where it's not necessarily just totally income focused that, you know, elderly parent has just moved in with them or something like that. And they're taking on more than, you know, just something that's not necessarily black and white on a tax return. So it would be part of the application. Part of the application, yeah.

I think the bottom line should be for us to look at some of those circumstances that won't necessarily come out of a tax return. but would end up perhaps making or forcing some of these people out of their homes just because they can't pay their tax bill or they can't pay these things together with this, you know, this charge. And so it's a matter of wanting to make sure that they do stay in their homes, that this has not caused them to have to leave and that we're going to make sure that that doesn't happen. In those circumstances, as Kathleen pointed out, they might not always show up just in a tax

return.

Mayor, I want to say I agree with Kathleen about the OPS provision. I think it is sort of odd that Because we're giving someone a financial break, we're going to enforce something on them that we're not enforcing on everybody else. I mean, it seems to me if the trash people don't pick up your stuff because you didn't put it in the right container, that's burdensome and you'll figure it out. I don't know why we would differentiate one group for another and penalize them. I do think, you know, again, and I get back to Rick's point earlier, I do think we do run a risk here that if we're not careful about this program, that if and when we have a tax increase and the amount that someone pays is going to be more than, let's say 700 a year, more than they used to pay. you know, I'm sure people will say, well, wait a minute. I can't afford that. You know, it may be when I look at my property tax bill and I'm paying $1,500 more than I used to. And I need a rebate. You guys have that rebate program for trash. So I do think I agree with Rick that once we go down, it's, you know, it's the slippery slope here. I think we really need to be careful about this because I'm not sure increasing the costs now for trash collection as opposed to property tax increase. And people will say, well, they sure can't afford that either. So they also want to rebate. I think we just have to be very careful. And maybe this program, if we adopt it, should be like a pilot program that we agree we're going to look at it in a year and see how it worked. I think we just need to make sure that we see after, let's say, a year, how many people did apply, what was the administrative burden, how much did it cost the city, so that we don't lock ourselves into a program that I think sets us up for four years from now on a much more significant basis. So I think it's risky if we're not careful about it.

Just to point that I don't, there's a pretty slippery slope. Risk is always there. And yes, we absolutely have to be careful. I think this is discreet enough that we can address this change in what's been a long time practice without a specific fee for specific service emerging into some type of tax relief. So, but you absolutely, we have to be careful and aware that this is something that we are carefully defining.

Okay. I mean, I don't know that tax relief is necessarily an awful thing either. I

was thinking the same thing.

Sorry, Becky. But I think, you know, I don't want to consider it a slippery slope. I'd like to look at it as, well, you know what? If this does address a real need in our community and then we have a tax increase then we know that maybe there's a need in our community for some help with that as well. That's a situation that we can study at that point. And at that time, we're not forced to do anything by doing this. We're not forced to anything with respect to tax relief, but I mean, why not take a look at that at the time? So I'm not afraid of that at this point.

Okay, very good. Well, all good points. So I think we've given you a lot of things to think through. And we can talk about it again when you're ready.

Sounds good.

Okay. And we don't have to decide.

We'll

bring it

back soon.

I'm a just do it person. So you just have to work with me on that. Just have to. Okay. Unless there's any other business, I know that we want to go into a closed session. So we could do a go around. I don't know if we, yeah, because some things have been going on. So let's do a quick round table and then we'll get our closed session motion. Alderman Berkowitz, anything to share?

Not at the present time, no. Thank

you. Alderman McAndrew.

Yes. We had a CRSWC meeting and I just wanted to report that membership looks really strong. Corporate still is lagging more than others. But again, we're kind of at COVID, very close to COVID, pre-COVID levels, which is great news. We also talked about, which was great, they kind of updated the scholarship program policy. So that's, you know, again, just to hopefully get more people in the center. They're using some of the guidelines that the school uses for the federal lunch program.

Oh, good.

So we updated that. There were some updates to the end of year school party policy. I didn't necessarily know this, but each school can opt into a party package to use the center, like the pools and stuff like that. So we talked about that. But the other thing too that we discussed which I, I don't know if anybody else has gotten questions but you know silver sneakers. If you don't know this the center has a program where you can if you're part of shoot what is it called Tony's Tony's online but if you're Well, it's like, I think it's through UnitedHealthcare, but you can get into the center.

What is it called? I think it's just UnitedHealthcare. Yeah, I mean, it's lifetime fitness.

Right, so like the center gets reimbursed for a certain amount of visits if you have a certain kind of insurance when you're retired. Silver sneakers like we had there's a couple in polo who was really disappointed because she's on one insurance and he's on the other, so he can go to the Center but she can't because she's on silver sneakers. And we kind of thought it was something where there had to be certain eligibility requirements or we had to provide certain classes and Tony and our staff looked into it and it's actually more. because of silver sneakers, because they don't want to flood the market with, so they don't, they don't want be in a lot of places in a particular. So like for instance, the Heights provides silver sneakers. Um, so we have called and told them that we're interested and they were kind of like, okay, well, we'll let you know. So, um, so that was kind of disappointing because I know there's people in our community that, you know, and it'd be nice to get more people into the center. So, um. Yeah. So that was, that was disappointing, but I appreciated that Tony and her staff really looked into it. And I mean, I don't think that's the end of silver sneakers, but it was, you know, hopefully something will happen with it. So we also had an ARB meeting talked about ginseng and some other things that I guess weren't particularly significant signage. So that's about it. Great.

Thank you.

Alderwoman Buse.

I don't have much. The one thing I'll defer to Becky, she hosted a table at the Gutsy Women Brunch, which was very helpful, very wonderful to be there and much appreciated. but I'll let you handle that one. Thank you.

Anything else? No?

Okay. Great. First, I want to tell you all that Rich says hi. I met with him this afternoon and he misses everyone terribly, but he's doing well. I've been talking to folks about applying for boards and commissions. So that's a number of different people interested so I'm like feeling positive and optimistic about our community engagement, for the most part, which is great. We had a sustainability meeting. Two things that I would just share. One is I asked if we would look at trying to schedule a tour of the MER for material recovery facility that Republic runs. I've heard it's a really cool tour, and I don't know who else has been on it, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who hasn't. So that hopefully might be something we can do in the coming months. And I also wanted to, I think you all probably heard this when Deborah Grossman presented to us but the Sustainability Committee has been very successful certainly thanks to the work of Matt Malik and other city staff in their support of this program, but in getting interns through a couple different programs at Washington University. And so I think it's really exciting because it's something that we've I feel like people always talk about, like, surely there's somebody at WashU who would like to do this. But she actually, like, found the programs and the professors and how the way to get into the system. And the interns actually get paid, but they get paid through WashU. So it's not like we're, you know, exploiting free labor. And also it doesn't cost us anything. And it seems like it's been a really good experience so far. So, yeah. That, you know, could be something I don't know if it happens primarily in the departments that are related to like environmental stuff or if there's even potential for it in other departments and if we see continued success with it maybe it's something we can explore further. Susan mentioned the Gutsy Gala, which is a Women's Political Caucus event that we attended. It's just an organization that works to recruit, train and elect women specifically pro-choice, pro-ERA, things like that, women into office. And there's people represented from all parts of the city and the county, young and old, all races. It's a pretty cool organization, I think. And then the last thing I wanted to share is not specifically city business, but for folks who might know or be associated with a nonprofit organization in St. Louis to be aware of a program called Thanksgiving. It's heading into its fourth year this year. And it's a program that happens in November that partners teams from primarily businesses or large institutions with nonprofit teams to solve, to spend one day in creative problem solving for a challenge that the nonprofit is facing. So I've participated in it the last two years as a business partner and and encouraged like nonprofits that I know of to check it out. But I think it's just a really, they just had their kickoff event for 2023. It's run by an organization called Filament that operates out of the cortex. And if you know a nonprofit or are interested in that or interested in on the business side or anything, Thanksgiving, and I'd be happy to share more about it.

Thank you.

Alderman Gary Feder?

Alderman Fader?

I attended a meeting of the Clayton Community Foundation as a liaison, hadn't been there in a long time. So a lot of new people, a lot of good people. Cordell Whitlock is now the president and he's doing a great job. They talked about a bunch of things. I think some accelerated fundraising efforts just in the general population to get more people to to contribute in some way to the foundation. Talked about, which I hadn't heard for a while, some interest in more restoration of the Hanley House, which needs a lot of work and probably a lot of fundraising to do some things at the Hanley House. Art on Wydown is a big issue trying to, that's a big project of trying to establish some new art pieces on Wydown. And Alex Elmstead gave an update on the commons And so it was exciting to see a lot of new people. And I think the organization's doing well. So that's it for me. Well,

Michelle walked away and I have nothing new to add. So I don't know if I should vamp for a while to fill up the time.

You can do a motion. oh i guess we can't do that yet unless

you're gonna uh have a coup and become the mayor pro tem

i did that already wasn't worth it

i will

tell i have nothing new to add so go ahead

he's been encouraging a coup i don't know new guy and he's encouraging coups right away

i'll add one sustainability note um after the meeting um I was on sustainability a long time ago, including us on school board and Linda Goldstein had done so much with benchmarking and things like that. And I was very pleased that Deb had sat down with her and they had actually caught a lot of that information to carry it forward. It's always sad when people do so much good work and when they leave, it leaves as well. So it's very, very, it's very good to hear that that's captured and carrying forward.

all right um well i can just say and i've said some of these things probably at the um retreat but a we had a really great retreat so thank you and kudos to everybody on that and kudos to anna for her major role there uh but everybody and of course our saviors of the day um saved one of our staff members from i don't know going to the hospital at least and so thanks to everyone um I went to a crime summit you may have read about in the paper. And that was, I thought, really a productive meeting, although there are skeptics abound. And a lot of the commentary that I've heard, if you watch Donnybrook, it was like, ah, nothing will ever happen. But it seemed like all the right people were there and very willing to really work on the problem together. And that's, I think, saying something. I mean, I'm including St. Charles County and also on the Illinois side. So it really is a regional problem that we need to all work on, even though it's sort of concentrated in certain areas. So I felt like it was a really good session. And the consultant, Thomas Abt, ABT, has a book out with a lot of these crime strategies in it if you want to... I got one and I'm happy to loan it out, but if you wanna check it out, it's called Bleeding Out. Sounds terrible, but it really is a lot of positive strategies for correcting situations. And the Commemorative Landscape Task Force met And we have a recommendation on the Philippine Village now that we'll be passing around to First History and then to Equity. And so we'll hope, and then come to us. So that's one more recognition that will be accomplished hopefully soon. And then I don't know if any of you, I can't remember if any of the rest of you went to Parties in the Park. I know you did, but Parties in the park is on a new, is on the move it's on a new tangent now it's going to be on uh north brentwood it was a great location the restauranteurs right there support it and it was i think pretty well attended for the first one of the year so now that people are used to where it is and i i encourage you to go because um We want that to be successful because then people will filter out and eat at our restaurants and do all, you know, spend their money in Clayton.

Mayor, can I add, even though I think it's probably in violation of Clayton, I was there and in violation of Clayson ordinances, I think it is now dog friendly. Oh,

is that right? At

least Louie, who I brought to the, he had a good time and there were other dogs there. So he was very happy.

Sugar had a good time as well. So anyway, those things I just wanted to mention. And then I also want to ask, Mr. Flotkin, you have very patiently, you and your wife and your friend, you've sat through this whole thing. Is there a reason why you are here?

Or

you just like coming to our meetings? You have to say it in the mic or it doesn't go in the minutes.

My name is Paul Flotkin, and I am a buyer on the townhouse of Clayton. And Mr. Bartlett does not speak for all of the people. And it has been our decision this evening to stay quiet for a number of different reasons. But just so you know, it's not the rosy thing. And I've had a lot of communication with Ana, who has been a wonderful professional and really given us a lot of information about what will transpire and what requirements there are. But it is not a good idea for us to challenge and to... call names or we are trying to take a higher road than that. But all of you who have had any contact with this project know what's going on with the project and the amount of time that's taken with the project understand that it has been an impossible situation for the residents and for the buyers.

And you said you are a buyer.

Yes, we are actually the ones we have been. We were the second people to buy. Wow. Okay. First people to buy pulled out six months ago. We're the second. We're all living in. We live on Clayton in the park. As we were sold our house based upon promises were made us and multiple other people are in that same situation. So,

hey, well thank you for sharing.

Thanks for calling on me and, you know, thank you very much for. I'm sorry I mispronounced it but thank you very much. We really do appreciate it and we look forward. to the city enforcing the rules before the keys are handed off because the building, if any of you would walk through the building today, you would find it's 180 degrees from what the description was by Mr. Barlow.

Okay.

Thank you.

Good to know. Thank you very much.

Mayor, can I add, I did talk to Mr. Flotkin prior to, which was partially what prompted my questions that I, and my only thought is I did vote in favor of this measure, but I do think it's really incumbent on the city for a lot of reasons that we'd be very, very diligent about making sure that these improvements are made. And if they're not, that the funds are available because I think The project does have a checkered history. Hopefully the units, when they're all done, it'll be beautiful, et cetera. But it's been a long process for the people who want to buy there, for the people who live on gay. Alderwoman McAndrew and I have heard from many of them many times. And so this last stretch, I think we really need to make sure that this thing is finished up properly because I still have some concerns.

Very

good.

All right. Thank you for calling, Mike.

You are welcome. See you soon. Thank you all. All right, I think that concludes our meeting. And so we could have a motion to go into closed session.

You can. I move that the Board of Aldermen hold a closed meeting with a closed vote and record as authorized by section 610.021 paragraphs one, two, and three of the revised statutes of Missouri relating to legal issues, real estate and or personnel, negotiation of a contract pursuant to section 610.01 paragraph 12 of those same statutes and or proprietary information pursuant to Section 610.021, paragraph 15, and or information related to public safety and security measures pursuant to section 610.0 to one paragraph 18 and 19, the revised statutes of Missouri.

Pretty good.

Roll call.

Second. Sorry, I

forgot about that part. Thank you. Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderwoman McAndrew. Aye. Alderman Buse. Aye. Aldermen Patel. Aye. Aldeman Gary Feder.

forgot about that part. Thank you. Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderwoman McAndrew. Aye. Alderman Buse. Aye. Aldermen Patel. Aye. Aldeman Fader.

Aye.

Aldernan Rick Hummell. Aye. Mayor Harris. Aye. Thank you. Okay.

Aldernan Hummel. Aye. Mayor Harris. Aye. Thank you. Okay.

Well, we're officially in our closed session. Shall we just stay here?