June 13, 2023 — Meeting Transcript

Ready to say hello. Okay. All right, we'll wait for you guys. All right, musical chairs. Okay, yes. Okay. Hello,

everybody. Welcome to our discussion session tonight. And without any further ado, I'm just going to have David start in on the budget.

John Potter, Great Thank you mayor so tonight we are going to talk about some preliminary budget information and we started this conversation at our retreat a few weeks back. John Potter, Regarding compensation, so we had a comprehensive compensation study performed this year to see where we were relative to the comparators that the city has on a list so. I'm going to go through this really briefly because we've talked about this quite a bit. And what we're looking for today is direction on employee compensation for the fiscal year 24 budget. There are still two options. Our recommendation continues to be to go with the option of the 85th percentile from the study. We also had the 70th percentile on here to be discussed as well. So, again, the last compensation study that was comprehensive was done in 2016, and then we had an update in 2019. What we have been seeing, and you can see it on the chart here, is a significant increase rate of turnover that's really picked up a lot of pace since 2020. We're now in double digit turnover, so just about 11% in 21. And then fiscal year 22, we were about 16 and a half percent. And year to date, when we put this together, really about the six month mark of the year, we were already at 9% turnover, so trending upwards of 18 to 20%. turnover year to date. So the departments where we're getting hit are really, you know, critical departments where we've had the most turnovers. So that would be areas like IT and finance, some of those core functions that the city has, where we've had up to 80% turnover in those departments. HR, same thing. We've had both our HR generalist turnover within the last year or so, and then we're now onboarding a new HR manager. So a lot of those core functions that support all of the other departments, we've seen those hit particularly hard and people leaving for the private sector that pays substantially more than what you're seeing on the public side. So again, here's the list of comparators. I shared this at the retreat. And then another important thing to recognize is that when we do the compensation study, it's a point in time. So we collected data in February. So it incorporated all the January 1 fiscal year cities, all of the increases that they had given, but it doesn't incorporate the July 1 fiscal year cities of which we have several comparators. So their new fiscal year will start, but we haven't incorporated their increases. So whatever we put into place now, we're probably going to slip a little bit by October 1st against some of these cities. So we could say, let's go 85th right now. But then when we actually get to October one could be around the 80th percentile. If we go with the 70th, we could drop below that. But just to give you an idea where some cities are at, University City is the lowest on there with a 2% COLA, Creve Coeur to 3% COLA and a 4% merit increase. Webster Groves a 4% COLA, Olivet a 2% COLA and then a step increase. Richmond Heights, you can see a market adjustment depending on the position ranging from two to 7% and Maplewood at four and a half percent. So over the last three years, the city has given a 1% increase, a 2% increase and a 3% increase across the board to all employees. And of course, inflation's run substantially higher than that. So we're in a situation where we've fallen a little bit behind. It's a question.

So when they say it's a market increase, I mean, Why don't they just say it's a 2% raise? I mean, what is the market increase? Because that's the- So they're on a- Reckman Heights has that sort of identified. And what does that mean?

So in this example here, and part of our recommendation is to switch from an open range system that you can see here with a minimum, a midpoint, and a maximum for our non-uniform positions to putting all of our employees on a step plan like we have for uniformed employees currently so for example in richmond heights all of their employees are on a step plan and so when they talk about a market adjustment what that means is the 65 933 here is going to increase two to seven percent depending on the position so you get the initial bump so say this is going up four percent and you also get a step increase so all of these are going to go up four percent and then you're going to move from whatever step you're on so in this case a step one to a step two so that

just

So that 68,000 is gonna turn into 70,000 or so. So they're gonna go from 65,900 to 70,000 on an example like that. And then when we were looking at through the comp study just where we are relative to the market, you can see and like I said, we've slipped 44% of our positions are at 50 to 59% of the market. We have a substantial number of positions, the balance, sorry. that are below that 50% mark. And this is what we're certainly concerned with. And this is the midpoint of our range versus the market out there. And then if you look down below, so again, this is our pay ranges. So 44% is kind of at market, 25%. It's close to market, 24%, really 30%. You're looking at what I would call significantly below. But then down below, when this is ranges, we're talking about incumbents here. So what are employees actually being paid? Because a lot of our employees are short of that midpoint currently. You can see 41% are in line with the market. And then we've got a majority here that are below that 50% mark. So that's where we really need to make up some ground with this particular study. Again, like I said, the findings here, certain positions where we're just really, really struggling, some mechanics, IT engineers, building inspectors, accountants, human resources, And then we have one individual position on here as well. Non-uniformed retirement plan was the other finding on there. It does lag the uniform plan as far as those benefit levels. So at some point in time, that is something we need to look into and potentially address. So our recommendation again is to go from the open range system to a step system we've been hearing this from our employees for some time. Also, if you look at our comparator cities, many of those are on a step plan and we feel we'd be more competitive if we went that direction. Plus, you have the certainty with your employees that every year they're going to advance and pay and actually one day get to the maximum. Where right now, everybody seems to be stuck around the midpoint as they chase. So when you do the market adjustment and you move everything up 2%, and then they get a 2% merit increase, well, they just stayed where they are in that actual range. Nobody actually progresses towards the end. So the step plan would give them that assurance. Okay. So again, 70th percentile, the way we'd need to do this to get everybody at least a 3% increase is to give a 2.5% adjustment to what they're being paid right now and then place them on the next step moving up. So we would need to take them from an open range system and put everybody on a step plan. The average increase in doing that at the 70th percentile comes out to 4.67% for our employees. So again, some people are going to be at 3%. You have other positions that are some of those in-demand positions. where their increase is going to be on the high side of that 5%. So you could have somebody getting a 10%, a 12% bump, depending on what their position might be. And then that plan would have 12 steps with 2.75% between each step. And the reason that's important to know is when you're putting this in, you're really making a commitment to your employees that, hey, every year you're here, you're going to advance another step. So every October 1st, you're going make that jump. That's a commitment on our part to say you're going to get a 2.75% increase. So even if the range doesn't adjust as you make that progression, that's a 2.75 percent bump each year. So that's the recommendation on the 70th percentile. For the 85th percentile, and this is what we would ultimately, we think would be advantageous here. Again, 2.5% COLA before the placement to make sure everybody gets a 3%. The average increase at the 85th percentiles is a 6.29% increase. There would only be 10 steps on this plan instead of 12 because you don't want the maximum to just get totally out of whack with the market. If we went 12 and added two more steps or even one more step on the end, that pay would be substantially higher than what the market's maximum typically would be. But again, 2.75% between each step. This is the part I had updated since the retreat, so you could take a look at this. The numbers have changed a little bit, just so you know. In revenues, there is a one-time increase One-time receipt of some settlement money from charter that we have had segregated for some time. Charter did not appeal to the Supreme Court. That's our money now. So that $675,000 roughly goes into our revenue line and ultimately down to our fund balance. So our fund balance numbers are stronger on here than what you saw at the retreat. That was very good news to get that. But as you can see, to implement the 70th percentile, and it's approximate because we have to negotiate with the police fire unions. And so, you know, they're not included in this. This is all nonrepresented employees. But accounting for an increase for them as well, we think the cost is going to be somewhere around $890,000 to implement the 70% percentile. The 85th percentile all in with all your payroll expenses is about $1.23 million. So we got a difference there of about $350,000 between the two scenarios. The reason we have this projection on here is to kind of show what that does long-term. So at the 70th percentile, you can see going out to 2029, we still project that we're gonna be in a surplus here. So a smaller surplus and you can see it diminishes over time, no matter which number we go with over time. And we talked about this quite a bit. Our expenditures are gonna continue to outpace revenues. Something will need to be done at some point on the revenue side We get there a little bit quicker with the 85th percentile. So you can see here in 2029, we start to run a deficit again, projected to be about $287,000. Any projection more than two years out starts to get really, really fuzzy. You're guessing at that point. But just adding just kind of historical increases to revenue and expense lines. And we incorporated every development we know has been approved and when it's going to hit the property tax rolls and how much sales tax it might generate. There's a lot of detail behind this to get to these numbers. But we're pretty confident going out that with the 70th percentile, we're going to be good at least through 2029. We're good through 2028 on the 85th. What I would say is if you look at the fund balance percentages here, even if we went with the 85th percentile, 50% and the fund balance is our target, we're still well above that even with the 85th. And my thought would be, hey, if we're going to be running a surplus in that type of scenario for these first few years here, let's go ahead and draw that down on the back end. So you don't need to do anything on the revenue side, you know, potentially for eight to 10 years if you build up the surplus on the front and then draw it on the back. So you're still going to be well above that 50% fund balance mark and just kind of bank it right now knowing you're going to have to pay it out later. And that way you can defer the decision on revenue a little bit longer if you'd like. But at some point, that's gonna happen. It's gonna need to occur. But in the meantime, what our recommendation would be is to go with the 85th percentile. Let's solve the retention issue that we have. We think we'll be stronger on recruitment that way. And we do have concerns that if we go in with something lower than that, given the July one cities are doing big increases again, that we're gonna be right back to the middle of the market know pretty quickly here so uh that's our recommendation any direction from the board as far as what to plug in the budget uh that's what we're looking for we're working on the budget right now we had meeting we're having meetings all week uh and that's a big question mark for us personnel is over 70 of the operating funds so um i'll open it up for questions or discussion but hopefully these projections are helpful we've added a year along with the fund balance percentages so

I'm just going to go in order of seniority.

So, you know, I look at these, David and I, I can't help but still think of the fact that these are proposed. And then, you know, we don't know what any of these numbers will be more than like a year out. I mean, sure. You know, we're looking at some pretty close. I mean, even in 28 on 85%, you're talking about difference of 42,596 by the time that comes around but that's close i mean that's we can drop that in in no time in in anything happening

you

know i mean uh you know i mean it's it's a i and believe me you guys are great i i appreciate it i just don't know what i could really count on and what i can rely on when we're talking about these proposed expenditures or revenues gosh um Yeah, I guess it could work out here. But it still looks like it's pretty razor thin in terms of the likelihood of success. So I'm bothered by it only because we're still going to need to go out for a raise. It's going to have to be a raise of taxes. There's no way around it. Somewhere along the way here, if we really think we can keep up. And it's just troublesome. I'm not offering an opinion about whether we do one or the other or go with the 85th percentile. I in my gut I what I I want to i'd love to i'd love, to do the 85th percentile that would be great. But there's a certain amount of reality that may not be attached to that desire so. And I don't think there's anything you can do to help me figure this out and feel more comfortable with it. Yeah, I mean,

on the out years, like I said, you're guessing anything more than two years out. I think what the important thing that this illustrates is, like you said, we're going to have to go out and do something on the revenue side at some point. We can build a surplus and we can defer that decision a little while, but the day is coming when we're going to be able to address the the personnel issues that come along with this, we're going to have to make that decision a year sooner than we would otherwise. And that's really what this is. You can get into the detailed numbers however you want. They can flex a little bit. What this tells me is in 2029, you really start to have that discussion. The 70th, if you're not rolling your – if you're not spending down your surplus or you have that discussion a year sooner if you go with the 85th. You're buying yourself a year.

And it reminds me of when we were talking about adding the six extra firefighters, you know, which I supported 100%. I think it was great, you know. And then I have over the last year and a half heard people kind of growling about why did we do that? You know, because look what happened, you know. We ended up in a deficit. So, yeah, I know you know, and I'm just saying it's a really tough decision for us. Understand.

Bridget, what do you think?

You know, I totally understand Ira's trepidation. I am too. I think we're all kind of somewhat gun shy to spend money given the fact that we're in a deficit right now. But I would ultimately, I think, be supportive of going to the 85th percentile. I think we're talking about ultimately $300,000. And I think we do need to solve our hiring problem. And like you just said, maybe we are going to have to a year earlier, potentially. But like you said too, six years down the line, it could be a totally different ballgame. We just really can't project that far in the future. we have made the decision to have our residents pay for trash. And a lot of that reason was to free up certain money. And we've all said, like you just said, 70% of our fund is to pay for personnel. So I think we need to use some of the money that we are now recouping or at least saving because of the trash contract to help compensate our employees better and to help save or at least help help start to solve our hiring and retention problem right now. So I would be supportive ultimately of going to the 85% to help. I similarly, I think

that

whether it's three years or five years, when we look at a significant change, either through revenue increase or restructuring or something else. Because this doesn't change that that happens, it changes what year it happens. I don't feel like for me, that's the deciding point. I want to be clear that the issue we're running into is that many of these positions, especially the ones that you highlighted are in competition with the private market industry, whatever, not just municipalities. And so when we talk about paying an HR generalist at the 85th percentile, we're talking about the 85th percent of municipal HR generalist compensation, not 85th percentile of HR generalist compensation which would probably be higher. Right?

Probably so. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. I think that's really

it. What are you thinking?

So we asked David to identify problems and bring solutions to us. And so he's told us about a problem that we have with retention. And so what I'm hearing is that a way to help with retention is not only the increase in pay, but changing the culture of our pay mechanism, which is to use the STEP program rather than the merit program. And so I think it's a good solution. What we're looking at here is merely a projection or an illustration. It's not a commitment. That's what David identified as he went through it, but it's helpful to give us that illustration. So we still have the opportunity to reevaluate on an annual basis, whether the staffing levels are correct or whether or not the compensation needs to change. But really what we are doing is making a commitment to change our culture in terms of the program to the step, um, program. So I'm very supportive of that, recognizing that, um, that's going to be something that we need to stick with over the coming years. Um, so, uh, I would, um, I'm in favor of moving forward on that basis.

Yeah, okay. Yeah, I would agree with everything. I just, I think, you know, we are, first of all, what is our targeted reserve level? It's not 70%. You know, it's 50, I think it's 50%. And we are, you know, way above that here. And, you know, if I run into certain citizens and show them this, they'll say, hey, send me a check. because what are you doing with all that money? Also, I think we're playing a bit of catch up too. And I really appreciate your comment about the restructure and the culture, because I think that will really help us in so many ways. But things have been rough for a few years. And so we really need to catch up, not only the competition, but what we've missed all this time that we've been giving minimal increases. So- um i do think that we would you know i know these long-range projections are iffy but i think we need to start looking after we get done with all this planning i think we do need to look maybe this is the next retreat we need to look at long-term our capital needs and we've got some and and our long-term uh revenue streams of what's going to happen because they're going to flatten out and what kind of increased revenue tools are we gonna be needing and what are we gonna use? Because I think we need to plan for that way ahead of time so we can set the stage, educate our population. We have all learned the hard lesson that we can't do it in a couple of months. And so if we know where we're headed, we can start working that into our narrative and our education process and our budgeting as we go forward. So I think that that's something we need to really think about doing after we get this planning behind us. So I would support doing the 85th. What happens if there's a recession?

then we'll have to adjust. And maybe you don't give a market adjustment. You can always free step if something happened and you had to take some kind of drastic measure. I mean,

you

always have that. I mean, as Alderman Rick Hummell said, you're not locked into this. We're going to have to spend this amount every year as exactly as it's laid out here. If something happened like it did with the pandemic, then we adjust just like we went to 1% increases and we cut expenses across the board. Gotcha.

always have that. I mean, as Alderman Hummel said, you're not locked into this. We're going to have to spend this amount every year as exactly as it's laid out here. If something happened like it did with the pandemic, then we adjust just like we went to 1% increases and we cut expenses across the board. Gotcha.

And certainly we're seasoned in that now. And the hope obviously is that we will get more people to apply, but like you said, David, our HR manager did not leave to go to Richmond Heights. She left to, you know, go into the private sector. So,

you know,

hopefully though the step and the increases will, you know, get more applications and so we'll just have to wait and see

i think i think you know this is this is a good way to go

and so we will start to build the budget around this particular scenario if for some reason as we're going through this process we see something that makes us uncomfortable or we feel like there could be an issue long term then i'll certainly bring that back to the board so this allows us to go ahead and move forward and build the budget around that and i'll keep you posted but i appreciate the the direction the feedback and the support so thank you

thank you we want to support our folks that's for sure

absolutely thank you

okay um all righty and that's everything you have there right

that's correct

so all right well now we could go ahead and start our seven o'clock meeting um we're already broadcasting okay um shall we let everyone in all Or leave them out there. What do you

think? Lock the door, no. Hi, how are you doing? Okay. Okay, we're ready to start

our seven o'clock meeting. So will the city clerk please call the roll?

Alderman Berkowitz.

Here.

Alderwoman McAndrew. Here. Alderman Buse. Alderwoman Patel. Here. Aldermen Gary Feder. Alderman Rick Hummell. Here. Mayor Harris. Here. City Manager David Gipson. Here. City Attorney O'Keefe. Here.

Alderwoman McAndrew. Here. Alderman Buse. Alderwoman Patel. Here. Aldermen Fader. Alderman Hummel. Here. Mayor Harris. Here. City Manager Gibson. Here. City Attorney O'Keefe. Here.

Okay, great. So now is the time in our meeting for public requests and petitions. and that is if there's something that you wish to talk to us about that is not on our agenda tonight, this is your moment. And I know that there is, and I just want to welcome everybody. We haven't had this many people in the room for a long time, so it's really great. I know that you probably have someone that's going to speak for you, so If you have something you want to talk to us about, come on up to the podium, say your name and address, and

make your case. And make sure it's green. Is that thing

green? Push the button, and then everyone will be able to hear you.

There.

Is that good? Yeah. That's pretty good.

Okay. I'm Mary Kay. I identify as a swimmer, and I wanted to tell you about our swim community. And I'm a grateful member of the swim community in Clayton. I've had the honor to be the recipient of a great deal of kindness, care and optimism from my fellow swimmers. On St. Bats Day 2018, I suffered a left hemorrhagic bleed while swimming. Karen Herbig director of aquatics at the center was quickly by my side and several doctor friends and um so some people said oh it's a terrible place to have a stroke but I thought it's a great place because I wasn't home alone I was surrounded with wonderful people and um COVID was a wild turn few of us will forget. September, we lined up dutifully at safe distances and got lanes. My motivation was 75% seeing my friends and 25% challenging my body with cold. But I knew deep down I was there because my friends were there. I had missed them. I asked myself, would I have come if it were just me? My friends keep me going. That September, it was like Mayberry RFD are certainly cheers. You want to go where everybody knows your name. And as far as community, there's a definition I really like. A community is a group of people who share an identity forming a narrative. This means a group of people, who share a story that is so important to them, that it defines an aspect of who they are. Swimming as the great leveler, caps, goggles, a suit which should have been retired last year. We're just swimmers. COVID gave us an appreciation for one another, our sport. Clayton has the resources to be one of the happiest, healthiest communities in our state. We count ourselves as citizens and are devoted to fostering the health and happiness of our city. Thank you.

All right, are there others that would like to address us? Hi,

I'm Andy Canfield. I live at 76 Arundel Place. So a group of swimmers this year heard that the pool would be closing earlier than in past years and approached Clayton staff with two requests to be considered. One was to give residents access to a few lanes starting in the morning rather than rent out the entire pool to a swim team. This is the best time and actually the safest time to swim to avoid sun exposure. The second request was to keep the pool open as we have had in past years, as in the fall as weather permits. But we were really met with indifference and even contempt. In the last call, we were actually called elitist by the Parks and Recreation Board for asking for these two things. But the group continued to come up with productive ideas that might lower costs, staff lifeguards. We have a bunch of volunteers that were willing to do it and potentially bring in more revenue. It seems as though the swimming program and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee is not interested in meeting the needs of the swimming community. And we'd like to find ways to have more access to this amazing facility that we have in Clayton. Swimming is crucial for our health and wellness, especially for people with back and joint problems. And we're really hoping that we don't cut back on the health and wellness of this community.

Thank you. Anyone else? I'm Mary Noelle

George. I have been fortunate enough to be able to- Can you give us your address too, just for the record? Your address? Your address? 9345 Sonora Avenue. Thank you. I am a board certified dermatologist, a physician, and also have been in the past a competitive swimmer. I've been fortunate enough to take advantage of Clayton Shaw Park facilities and amenities since the age of nine. When I started swimming competitively for Clayton Shaw Park, then transitioned to diving. So I dove with the Clayton Diving Alliance and then went back into the world of swimming late onset in my teenage years to swim for Terry and Patty DeForest with Clayton Shaw Park again. And that launched a lifelong passion of mine into the I still travel a lot for work and for pleasure. And everywhere I go, I try to swim in the public municipal pools in different cities and across not only the U.S., but in other places around the world. And I have to tell you that what we're sitting on here is a beautiful goldmine. We have an amazing recreational swimming facility that I would hope that not only the Clayton community, but St. Louis community in general, can take advantage of and continue to take advantage of, not just during the summer months, but even beyond what is defined as summer from Memorial Day to Labor Day, traditionally. I reached out to a pool where I did get to swim, fortunately, in Scottsdale, Arizona, to see the cost of what it costs to maintain their open water outdoor lap swimming pool, which they keep up in all year long. And extrapolating the data, their pool is quite a bit larger, 500,000 gallons, but extrapolating the data cost from what they estimate their cost to be to what Clayton Shaw Park should be was significant. very different than the numbers that we've been presented with by Clayton. Just pool chemicals alone per week, the Scottsdale pool, extrapolating that data would cost us $614.50, which is a tenth the cost of what Clayton estimates or tells us that the cost of the chemicals are at the facility. So I just wonder how we arrived, how Clayton arrived at the numbers since it's not, it doesn't add up to me. But again, I don't know much about swimming pool maintenance and I do unfortunately have the numbers from the Scottsdale pool for electric gas pool heaters, trash facilities, chemicals, labor. and the totals per week are quite a bit off. So I just would like to just say, I really appreciate the ability to swim in a beautiful facility and also being a dermatologist. Sun safety is what I preach to all of my patients every day. And our ability to swim and seek the shade is critical for many of us. So we dive into the first lane because it's the shadiest spot and having time so we can swim in the shade be it early in the morning or late in the afternoon, evening and later time hours is really critical for skin health to reduce the risk of skin cancer. So please do what you can. I really just would hope that we can keep the facility open because what you have here, what you're sitting on again is a treasure and really should be celebrated and promoted rather than closed early. So I wish we could continue what we've been able to enjoy in the past years and keep it open for not only the Clayton residents, but the St. Louis residents

as long as possible. Thank you. My name

is Todd Thomason, 81-17 University Drive. About 45 years ago, growing up in Western Kentucky, the first time I came to St. Louis was in Clayton. And coincidentally, I swam at Shaw Park Pool. I was probably about 10 years old I then swam here even during college years. And when my wife and I decided to move to Clayton or St. Louis, I said it would be pretty cool to be able to walk to the pool, the same pool I swam at when I was about 10 years old. I'm also a real estate developer. I've moved mostly on from Clayton, mainly focusing at Kentucky Lake. So I can tell you we'll probably unfortunately leave the nice town that y'all built in about four years, move to Florida. Maybe we'll keep a place here in Clayton. I hope so. But one of my main criteria when we moved to Florida is that I can also walk to a pool that I can swim at literally almost every day of the year. I've had the great fortune to perhaps like some of y'all serve on some committees, I was on, I think the center of Clayton board for three or two or three terms whatever the term limit was. I know we did it for free. I'm assuming that y'all did it for do this for free I'm not sure about that. But congratulations on getting Emerson to come out here. That's a very big deal for the region, for the community. And I know it's very tough, you know, financial decisions. I'm a CFO of a company that the employees own. We own 66 helicopters. including one in St. Louis. So finances are very important. Mary Noel laid that out. But I think there are certain intangibles, especially from a real estate perspective, when people decide to locate to an area, a very nice area like Clayton, And I can't think of a better area. If we leave at some point, I'll be sorry to have that happen. We use the public school system. I know that we spend, our kids did, a lot of money at that. Maybe it's $25,000 per student or so. But I know a lot of us when it comes time to raise taxes, for instance, my appraisal, I think went up 15%. So I assume my tax bill will go up 15%. I don't appeal it. I just go ahead and pay it nicely. The trash service, I'm sure we'll still have it. We got to pay for it. But I think these small things that some of the previous people have also mentioned health, welfare, the ability to be able to want to locate in our city, which does keep up property values come into play. And on the margin, I don't think it's a lot of money that we're talking about. I go back several years ago, I think working with Patty DeForest, I've worked with Tony a lot. I respect them. Patty's retired. But we had about $250,000 raised to put a pool heater in. And this is maybe a decade or so ago. It didn't happen. Patty supported it. But I think there are a lot of things that the Board of Aldermen you know, can do to try to continue helping the community do the nice job, Michelle, that you and others continue to do.

Thank you. I'm David

Schlafly. I live at 2 Upper Dromera, and I have two commercial buildings in Clayton. I have been swimming in Clayton my entire adult life. I will be brief. We have the individual desire, we have our group desire, and then we have our civic desire. And civically speaking, I have responsibilities in my life to keep companies here or to try to raise money for our institutions. And what we do as a civic, what we do to keep The smallest things that keep the chain links together, that keep these people in the room with us is a leadership role. And I'm so grateful that you're here tonight listening to us and that we're here with you. The Stroud Park Pool is the blue water harbor of Clayton. What does it mean to come to a long pool versus going down to the Clayton Center and swimming in a shorter pool? I have access to a club pool, Lifetime, others. I'm here in Clayton every day swimming in the long pool. It's an entirely different experience. It's rare. And the predecessors did something beautiful with this architecture and colonial style architecture, the layout, the north and south. It was so impressively prescient for them to put this beautiful pool in as blue water. So I'm very grateful for you all taking patience with us tonight to listen to our story.

Thank you. Thanks. Who's next?

Well, thank you, everybody. Thank you for your time tonight. Dr. Denise Wilfley, who's a WashU researcher and one of our swimmers, emailed me today and she said, so do you think it's more likely the Cardinals can turn it around or we get access to Shaw in September? Fair question. I do want to say this has been an issue since January when the city voted to end the Shaw pool season on Labor Day, a departure from the previous 15 or so years when we had outdoor swimming through September. One concern that our group had was that we were not consulted on or informed of this year's new pool schedule. I also discovered this weekend that there are many families who are dismayed to learn that the rec swim schedule has been cut back starting August the 7th, two weeks earlier than 2022. It was decided recently that for there to be September swimming in Clayton at Shaw, the swimmers themselves would have to pay for the city's $39,500 in costs. The city proposed a possible fee schedule between $300 and $800 per swimmer for 25 extra days of swimming. Even at $300, those fees would have been the highest in the nation. Our group was surveyed and found that unaffordable. We offer to become trained, certified, and hired as lifeguards, which we're still willing to do. But it's difficult for us to each spend $280 for lifeguard training if we aren't guaranteed that there will be late season swimming. And I did talk to one of the managers at the pool on Sunday who said that with 70 lifeguards in the Clayton system this year, she does not see how we would not have enough guards to oversee lap swimming in September. The Surgeon General has issued an advisory on loneliness. It's a pandemic in the United States, he says. As Mary Kay said, for many in our area, the Shaw pool is a healthy cheers bar. We also know the importance of exercise. That's why more than 420 people, Clayton residents, workers and swimmers, have signed our petition asking that you not cut the pool hours. At this point, I suggest the city commit to keeping our pool open for two weeks post-Labor Day and charge us, the swimmers, $10 to $12 per visit. The cost to Clayton would be about $19,000 minus the swimming fees that we would pay. That would mark a compromise for both sides in 2023. Meanwhile, I also think we do need a blue ribbon panel to start working next month on the future possibilities of this pool. And we are all ready to, many of us are ready to sit on such a panel. That I think would be in line with our great city of Clayton's comprehensive plan, which calls for the city to support physical activity and healthy lifestyles. And thank you so much for your time.

Charlie, just for the record, we all know who you are, but say your name and your address. I'm

sorry. Charlie Brennan, 405 Carswold.

Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank

you. Anyone else that wants to address us?

My name is Beth Storr and I live at 405 Carswold. First of all, I want to thank you all elected officials and staff for what you do for Clayton and its residents. I appreciate all the time you give and stand here a bit contrite and embarrassed to admit that I really have not followed matters in Clayton much above the surface. As it became apparent that the issue around extended swimming season was really about the money, I took a look at the 2023 proposed Clayton budget. I think many residents of Clayton likely think the city will be flush now that trash costs have been shifted to the residents. But the conversation around the contraction of the swimming pool hours and the inability to fund extended hours looks different. It looks like the city will struggle with slow growing revenues and escalating expenses in the coming years. This is a concern if services and amenities continue to decline while taxes and other costs rise, especially as other cities like Brentwood and De Pere continue to expand parks and other amenities. I know you all are looking closely at the budget. My ask here tonight is to bring the community in early and often to these discussions and ahead of the decisions. As we saw with the swimming situation, there are a lot of good ideas and folks with a lot of expertise willing to help. But it's very hard to do and a lot more work for everyone once the decision has been made. I know you all share meeting information on the website, but with the magnitude of the apparent fiscal challenges, I would ask that you expand the ways you reach out. Flag meetings for constituents to attend. Send out specific agendas to be discussed at coffees. Ask for ideas and solution. Expand and advertise broadly the opportunities to serve on advisory committees. The community at large bears the impact of the decisions. So please make sure to bring us in and along as tough decisions are made. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone else? So say your name

and address, please.

My name is Courtney Demery. I live at 4222 Delmar Boulevard. Yeah, sure. I just hate public speaking.

So thank you for listening to us. To piggyback on the last speaker, adding in stakeholder involvement is one of the best ways that you can minimize risk. That's something that was heavily taught in the program that I recently graduated from at Webster University studying in environmental management and sustainability. So, although Shaw Park Aquatic Center is not an overarching concern, we do wish to present options that make the outdoor pool more energy efficient and environmentally friendly. Utilities and chemical costs were defined as outrageous expenses in the Shaw Park Aquatic And because of this, we have presented ways to help minimize this in the future. This would require some upfront costs yet long-term savings. Some of these options include investments in a variable speed pump, a pool cover, an AOP system, LED lighting, and automatic sensors. And they're all critical towards making efficiencies and cutting costs long-term. Additionally, there's other ways that funds can be brought to the Shaw Park Aquatic Center, such as introducing outdoor Pilates, yoga, strength training, a dinner series around the pool or the pool grounds in collaboration with local businesses and individuals. Additional programs can also be added to the seasonal offerings and bring about more funding if desirable. It is worth mentioning that Mr. David Gipson has been given a project proposal from our group earlier this year, where we put together a rather extensive document that presented a lot of these facts. And as others have mentioned, we've got really a great deal of pushback from the committee meetings and have pretty much been berated, which is beyond me. Either way, I think it's worth listening to what we have to say. And we've presented some really great ideas to help the budgetary constraints within the city of Clayton. Most of us actually don't even reside in the city, but we're still willing to help because we care that much. Thank you.

So thank you for listening to us. To piggyback on the last speaker, adding in stakeholder involvement is one of the best ways that you can minimize risk. That's something that was heavily taught in the program that I recently graduated from at Webster University studying in environmental management and sustainability. So, although Shaw Park Aquatic Center is not an overarching concern, we do wish to present options that make the outdoor pool more energy efficient and environmentally friendly. Utilities and chemical costs were defined as outrageous expenses in the Shaw Park Aquatic And because of this, we have presented ways to help minimize this in the future. This would require some upfront costs yet long-term savings. Some of these options include investments in a variable speed pump, a pool cover, an AOP system, LED lighting, and automatic sensors. And they're all critical towards making efficiencies and cutting costs long-term. Additionally, there's other ways that funds can be brought to the Shaw Park Aquatic Center, such as introducing outdoor Pilates, yoga, strength training, a dinner series around the pool or the pool grounds in collaboration with local businesses and individuals. Additional programs can also be added to the seasonal offerings and bring about more funding if desirable. It is worth mentioning that Mr. David Gibson has been given a project proposal from our group earlier this year, where we put together a rather extensive document that presented a lot of these facts. And as others have mentioned, we've got really a great deal of pushback from the committee meetings and have pretty much been berated, which is beyond me. Either way, I think it's worth listening to what we have to say. And we've presented some really great ideas to help the budgetary constraints within the city of Clayton. Most of us actually don't even reside in the city, but we're still willing to help because we care that much. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else?

Don't actually live in Clayton. I live in Maplewood, but I work in Clayton for the Clayton School District and my son attends Clayton High School. We are both members at the Center of Clayton and at the Outdoor Pool. I just wanted to come up real quick, remind everybody, I'm sure. You all know the Parks and Recreation Department mission statement is to improve the quality of life for the citizens through the provision of comprehensive leisure services and recreational opportunities to individuals of all ages and abilities and interests in a safe and healthy, pleasant environment. This is very important to me. Recently, I've been in Jeff City fighting against Bill's SB 39 and 49. 39 recently passed, as some of you may know, which will limit my son's opportunity to swim on the swim team in high school. I feel a few more weeks at our outdoor pool would not just be a good opportunity for him just to continue to swim and be ready for water polo, which is thankfully a co-ed sport. But it'd be good for other community members who might not have access like myself. Thank you.

And could you state your name and address, please? Kyle

Andrews, Maplewood, Missouri, 7337 Gayola Place.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor Harris. Thank

you, Boyle. Are there others that would like to address us?

Okay. All right. Well, I think, you know, well, this was not on our agenda tonight, but we are very happy to hear your concerns always. Um, we welcome people coming to our meetings. And as I said, it's really nice to see so many, uh, for a change. I think, you I'll just say, I'll just make a couple of comments and what we will do is take this under consideration and get back to you. I think that would be advisable, but a couple of things just to say, you know, obviously Clayton takes quality of life very seriously. And somebody said that we have a pool that's a situation over at our pool. That's way up, you know, heads and shoulders above other cities. We, we have kept that going for years. 50 years. We plan to keep it going for another 50. We have 11 parks and a center of Clayton. I don't think too many cities can match that or even come close. So I just want to put it in perspective that I know that this has been difficult, but we do provide a lot for quality of life and health and wellness, and we will continue to. I know you appreciate that We've had a tough few years on our budget situation. We are emerging out of that, thanks to the help of our residents who will now pay for their own trash. So again, we want to give everything to everybody. We want to make everybody happy. I'm particularly guilty of this, but sometimes it doesn't work out. We will take your ideas under consideration very seriously And we will get back to you very shortly with what we think we can do. I mean, one thing I do want to stress is that I think everybody up here really wants to examine this for the next fiscal year and figure out a way to do something that's better for everybody in the community, not just this group. So I think we can end it there unless anybody else is has to, really wants to make a comment. I'd like to just, yeah. Okay, thank you all very, very much for coming and for your time and efforts. You're welcome to stay for the rest of our meeting. It might not be as interesting as what we've all just been talking about, but you're welcome to stay. Thank you very

much. It's not. All right. We're ready to start our seven o'clock meeting, we could close the doors and

Great. All right. The first thing on our agenda is our consent agenda. So if I could have, unless there's any discussion about it, well, actually not the first thing. How about approving the minutes? So it's in the consent agenda. Sorry, sorry, sorry. Better put my glasses on. Yeah. So if we could have a motion to approve the consent agenda, please.

Did we do the minutes? It's

in the consent agendas.

It's in there. All right. Okay. I move to approve the consent agenda with the items listed.

Second. Any discussion? All right. City Clerk?

Alderman Berkowitz? Aye. Alderman McAndrew? Aye. Alderwoman Patel?

Aye.

Aldermen Rick Hummell? Aye. Mayor Harris? Aye. Thank you.

Aldermen Hummel? Aye. Mayor Harris? Aye. Thank you.

All right, we're ready for the city manager's report. And the first thing is the Bonham parking garage lease.

Yes, thank you, Mayor. Revived capital development, and we have them in the building this evening, has reached a tentative agreement to purchase two properties located at 121 and 111 South Merrimack Avenue owned by St. Louis County. Revive Capital Development, or RCD, their plan is to develop a mixed-use project on the site with primary focus on rental residential units. The proposed development includes partially demolishing 121 South Merrimack Avenue and utilize the remaining building for residential and some commercial purposes. Additionally, RCD intends to construct a residential tower on the 111 South Merrimac Avenue site. Because the existing structure at 121 South Merrimack and the anticipated new structure at 111 South Merrimac do not have sufficient on-street parking spaces, off-street parking space as it should read to accommodate RCD's desired development. RCD seeks to lease 200 parking spaces from the city which are available within the Bonham Garage adjacent to the west side of the development site. Entering into a lease to provide the parking necessary for the proposed development is a condition precedent to RCD closing on the purchase of the properties. St. Louis parking, the operator of the garage on behalf of the city has confirmed that allocating 200 spaces to revive capital development to their proposed development will not impact the garages operations. Since December of 2022, staff and legal counsel have been working closely with RCD to establish the following key terms. The lease will cover 200 parking spaces. During the first 36 months of the lease, RCD will not use any of the parking spaces nor be required to pay for them. From months 36 to 60, RCD will lease parking spaces as needed based on the findings of the parking study which will consider the occupancy of apartments and other uses. Starting from month 61, RCD will be obligated to lease all 200 spaces until the end of the lease term. The lease term will extend until 2075 and align with the expiration of the parking lease agreement with Clayton-on-the-Park for the same garage. The rental costs for the parking spaces will be determined by the market with the city utilizing a third party vendor to establish fair market rates. And finally, the lease is contingent upon the continued use prescribed by the zoning for 121 and 111 South Merrimack as adopted by the city after application by the developer. Staff recommends that the Board of Aldermen approve the ordinance. There is a revised copy of the ordinance in front of you this evening that has a few corrections to it. All of those are minor in nature and nothing there really affects the terms that I just covered. So with that, I'll entertain questions. And like I said, we do have the developer here. I don't know if they wanted to make a comment or not.

Oh, yeah, I'll open the discussion. Would you guys like to address the board for any reason or? No, you're good. Okay. All right. So again, do we have anybody

in our online audience? Couple people all staff. Okay.

All

I don't have any. Believe it or not.

Are you sick?

I'm feeling well, thank

you, but I don't have many

comments. Bridget, anything? I don't have comments or questions either. Becky, anything for

you? Well, I think I am curious about the questions that Alderman Vader submitted. He had a couple of comments that we got in the revision that I don't think have been addressed. So in the interest of Clarifying those items one is questioning, I think the actual like definition of the term additional county spaces, can we do we understand what that means. page seven.

But when I address them generically, first of all, I appreciate Alderman Gary Feder's proofreading. It's been very helpful. And particularly the varying names for the garage. The Brentwood Garage was named by the county long before the property between it and Brentwood Boulevard was developed. So it has become the Bonham Garage because that's the point of access. But all the documents that were developed, including the city's acquisition of ownership and leases out, refer to the facility as the Brentwood Garage. So hence the nomenclature in the ordinance and the lease. With respect to the specific wording items, we have redlined – unfortunately, you only have – every other page of the memorandum ordinance and lease in the material at least that I

But when I address them generically, first of all, I appreciate Alderman Fader's proofreading. It's been very helpful. And particularly the varying names for the garage. The Brentwood Garage was named by the county long before the property between it and Brentwood Boulevard was developed. So it has become the Bonham Garage because that's the point of access. But all the documents that were developed, including the city's acquisition of ownership and leases out, refer to the facility as the Brentwood Garage. So hence the nomenclature in the ordinance and the lease. With respect to the specific wording items, we have redlined – unfortunately, you only have – every other page of the memorandum ordinance and lease in the material at least that I

see.

But we have redlined, we have had discussions with the developer. We are working through the observations that he made. We do not believe, and I don't believe the developer believes any of these are substantive, but we also don't want to get them wrong. So we are looking, the language in the approval ordinance authorizes execution of a lease in substantial conformity to the exhibit. And we don't believe any of these terminologies or rules. you know, lack of a second parenthesis and that sort of thing, which Mr. Gary Feder pointed out, we will correct those before an execution draft. But both sides want to be sure that if we're tinkering with some of the titles in the document, we want to make sure we've got them accurate. So we will adjust those without any change, substantive change. They are being addressed, in other words.

But we have redlined, we have had discussions with the developer. We are working through the observations that he made. We do not believe, and I don't believe the developer believes any of these are substantive, but we also don't want to get them wrong. So we are looking, the language in the approval ordinance authorizes execution of a lease in substantial conformity to the exhibit. And we don't believe any of these terminologies or rules. you know, lack of a second parenthesis and that sort of thing, which Mr. Fader pointed out, we will correct those before an execution draft. But both sides want to be sure that if we're tinkering with some of the titles in the document, we want to make sure we've got them accurate. So we will adjust those without any change, substantive change. They are being addressed, in other words.

Thank you. I have no further questions or comments.

I am unclear here with regard to timing and binding. Have the underlying parcels that will benefit from this, have they been purchased? Do you own them?

Hi,

good afternoon. My name is Michael Knight on behalf of Revive Capital Development. So the Parcels are under contract, and we will be closing next month. Obviously, a condition of that closing is having this agreement in place first. Okay.

So the intent is for you to be bound by this when it's executed. You wouldn't execute this until you know that you've also purchased the other properties.

I mean, we will enter into an agreement upon an effective date of the document. This is the only thing that's holding up that closing of that. Right. I just wanted to make sure that you weren't going to have this. Is that mic green? Is your

mic on?

yeah i pushed the button it's green

okay make sure screen sorry thank you for me pull it a little closer just wanted to make sure from a timing standpoint that you if for whatever reason didn't close on the properties you weren't still going to be bound under this lease so that's not a scenario

yeah we have to own the property too so they will be in alignment that's what i want to make sure okay

all right um if there's no other discussion thank you very much um very exciting that this property is going to be developed. Thank you for all your

time and all your help over the last several months in getting this to the finish line. Appreciate it.

Very good. Okay. All right. Let's see. I'll quit babbling and have a motion. Introducing. Sorry.

Thank you. My question would be, how do I relate to this amended document as opposed to, is it still considered the same bill number 6978? Yes, sir. Thank you.

You could just use the terminology on the agenda.

Okay. I'd like to introduce bill number 6977 to approve the bottom parking garage lease between the city and the revived capital development LLC to be read for the first time by title only.

Second. Any discussion? Mr. City Attorney.

Bill number 6978, first reading. An ordinance approving a long-term lease with revived capital development LLC for parking spaces in the Clayton Garage on Bonham Avenue and actions related thereto.

All those in favor? Aye.

I move that the board give unanimous consent to consideration for adoption of bill number 6978 on the day of its introduction.

Second. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Let the minutes reflect. The board is given unanimous consent. I'd

like to introduce bill number 6978 to approve the bond and parking garage lease between the city and revive capital development LLC to be read for the second time by title only.

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

Bill number 6978, second reading and consideration for adoption. An ordinance approving a long-term lease with a revived capital development LLC for parking spaces in the Clayton Garage on Bonham Avenue. And actions related thereto.

Roll call. Alderman Berkowitz?

Aye. Alderman McAndrew?

Aye.

Alderwoman Patel? Aye. Aldermen Rick Hummell?

Alderwoman Patel? Aye. Aldermen Hummel?

Aye.

Mayor Harris?

Aye. Thank you. Okay, next, the Joint Fire Training Center.

Yes, for your consideration is an intergovernmental agreement with the cities of Brentwood and Richmond Heights to create a joint commission for the purpose of leasing property and construct and operate a facility for fire department training. The creation of the commission must be approved by all three cities before any further action can be taken. Once created, the commission will request the Board of Aldermen ratify the commission's bylaws and the property lease agreement for the training site. The City of Brentwood passed an ordinance adopting this Intergovernmental Agreement on May 31, 2023. The City of Richmond Heights adopted a previous version of an Intergovernmental Agreement, on May 1, but will be voting on the attached version on June 20. Staff recommends that the Board of Aldermen approve the attached ordinance authorizing the City to enter into an Intergovernmental agreement with the Cities of Brentwood and Richmond Heights to create a Joint Commission that will own and operate a fire training center for its member municipalities. And we do have Chief Jason Hildebrandt here this evening who's been leading this effort for our fire departments and doing a great job.

Thank you. Chief, do you want to address us in any way? You don't have to, I'm just... Okay. All right. I'll open the discussion and go around and see if there's any comments or questions, Ira.

I don't have any questions.

No questions or

comments?

No.

Thank you.

Anything new on the property location and its availability? Is it same status as it was before?

As far as we know, yes.

As far as we know, I mean, it is still available. But we are under somewhat of a timeline to continue to keep moving forward on securing the lease. Creating the commission tonight is the first step. Then we can bring back the commission bylaws and the property lease agreement at a subsequent meeting. Great. Thank

you.

Thank you. All right, I don't see any other comments or questions. So Alderman Berkowitz.

I'd like to introduce number 6979, approving an intergovernmental agreement with the cities of Brentwood and Richmond Heights for Joint Fire Department Training Center Commission to be read for the first time by title only.

Second. Any discussion? City Attorney.

Bill number 6979, first reading an ordinance authorizing an intergovernmental agreement with the cities of Brentwood and Richmond Heights to create a commission for fire department training services.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? All right, Alderman Berkowitz. I

move that the board give unanimous consent to consideration for adoption of bill number 6979 on the day of its introduction.

Second. All those in favour?

Aye. Any

oppose? Okay, let the minutes reflect. The board has given unanimous consent.

I'd like to introduce bill number 6979, approving an intergovernmental agreement with the cities of Brentwood and Richmond Heights for a joint fire department training center commission to be read for the second time by title only.

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

Bill number 6979, second reading and consideration for adoption an ordinance authorizing an intergovernmental agreement with the cities of Brentwood and Richmond Heights to create a commission for fire department training services.

Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderwoman McAndrew. Aye. Alderman Patel. Aye. Aldermen Rick Hummell. Aye. Mayor Harris. Aye. Thank

Alderman Berkowitz. Aye. Alderwoman McAndrew. Aye. Alderman Patel. Aye. Aldermen Hummel. Aye. Mayor Harris. Aye. Thank

you. Guys, We want you to be safe. So hopefully this will move forward with speed. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay. I think that concludes our business. Yes. And you guys, what was for dinner tonight?

Ribs. Ribs? Oh, okay. All right.

All right, thank you. Thanks a lot. So we can go around. And this is one of our shortest meetings that I've ever been to in my 15 years. We would make it even shorter because Ira is not here for the roundtable. So Bridget, you want to start us

off? Sure. I had, we had a plan commission last week. It was a longer meeting than this one. There was just lots of, I mean, there was, there was lots of just stuff on it, you know, additions, new decks, you know, people tearing down houses and anyways, but obviously the big one was the presentation on the PUD at Merrimack and Pershing. I thought that it ultimately had passed if you didn't hear so it will come to us, maybe I don't know the next meeting. Yes, our next meeting. So, yeah, so I guess I would welcome anybody to talk to me about that ahead of time I think it would be helpful, you know, to hear the thoughts of the plan commission who um really uh followed staff recommendations on the points um i will say um i know that it's kind of a sticking point um the architectural points um but it is a very attractive building and the plan commission all the members of the plan commission actually thought it deserved more points than the staff got for its architecture and style so I think also, I will just say that I feel like the developer kind of did kind of what the community engagement, what we kind of hope for and really responded to the community's concerns and really like change the building really based on their concerns. So they really did a great job. They had multiple meetings with the condominium buildings in the area. So, and I think, you know, really no one spoke Against the project, I think we got one email from a resident who lived down the street who was against it, who felt we needed like a entertainment complex or something so which not sure that

kind of get them on our energy.

So, but I mean nobody know resident and spoke against it at the at the meeting so yeah

thanks wonderful.

Like anything.

Do you want to let Ira go? I don't think I'm going to steal his thunder on anything, but he can go ahead. No,

you're good. I reported on two things, I guess. We had a Parks and Rec Commission meeting. The only thing on the agenda was the swimmers. And we prepared that assuming there would be, you know, a lot of input from the community. Unlike tonight's display, we ended up having no input from the community. We had absolutely nobody speaking. Chair was very clear at the very beginning, said anyone who has anything to say about what's on the agenda, and there was only one item on the agenda, that was the swimmers, and they did not speak. There were about eight participants that were on the Zoom, but we did not hear from them at all. um uh so other than that it was a fairly quick meeting we went through the proposal uh at the time and um other than that i can't remember anything else that happened so i think that was it

very good

no that was it

all right okay becky now it's your turn

Okay. I feel like you said you had two things. I did have two

things. Sorry. Oh, it's okay. There was a wine festival at the Ritz on Saturday night, I think it was.

Yeah.

And I did attend and it was well attended. It was well attended. This is definitely an event we need to make sure continues on. I think it was a lot of reasons for that. It was not only well attended, it was well integrated. um the music was excellent i'm surprised at how late it went anybody i don't know if you made any comments about that i think it went till after 10

oh 10

just a 10 it closed down um i think that some of our our literature said it was going to go until 8 30 there was i got something in there that said 8 30 Anyway, they had the, I guess, the Motown review from 8 to 10 or something. So that was pretty clear. Anyway, it was well done, beautifully done. The food trucks... I heard a lot of complaints about very long, long waiting times to get food at the food trucks. That was a big, that was a downside. And also a long waiting time to get wine at some of the places that were, the kiosks that were doing the wine. So, but other than that, if we can speed that up, we'd make it even better. So great event.

Yeah, very good.

Yeah. That's great. I wanted to talk about two things. So I wasn't the only one. Some of us attended the Muni League of Metro St. Louis dinner a couple weeks ago, installing our mayor as president of the league. So that was nice. I appreciate that you do that, that you serve our community in that capacity and that you encourage us to be active in it too. So that was a good experience. And then I had the joy of attending my first equity commission meeting. So that was great. I'm excited to be a liaison to that group. And I do have a few things to report from that. There was a recommendation on commemorating the Philippine village, which is coming through the mayor's commemorative landscape task force. So we'll hear about that at the appropriate point in the process. I like

it.

Very much so. Yeah, yeah. We had a discussion on the survey results you'll remember that two years ago in this year our survey included some questions that were targeted at getting some like community pulse on diversity and inclusion and things like that, and The main follow like discussion topic there was recognizing that that's a survey of residents, and that we might evaluate ourselves differently than folks who visit us or who don't live here, and that we to reach non-resident audiences and ask some of these questions. And so some of the ideas we talked about were like parks and rec surveys, tabling at events, like customer satisfaction scores that the police department or other departments that interact with the public. So I thought that was a good thing for us to think about. Some members of the Commission are meeting with folks from Webster groves their mayor and other folks from that community about things that they're doing around housing. Specifically Community land trusts and other potentially related ways to get to look at having like more affordable and accessible housing. Um, and then one thing I want to just appreciate is the, um, there was a number of members of the commission have been able to do ride alongs with the police department. Um, and some of the discussion around that, uh, centered on, um, unhoused people in Clayton and how like, um, just like what that situation is and how our police department interacts with folks who are here and are unhoused and how they talk about them and try to support them. And I really appreciated Chief's um discussion of folks like and you know using the term unhoused which is like seen as a more respectful way to talk about people um a clear acknowledgement that it is not illegal to exist in public or not have housing um and that and the efforts that they go to to actually support people right to offer resources to actually try to connect them with their families And not just by asking them, but by like doing some investigative work and things like that. So I just I really appreciated that and wanted to highlight it because I know I think folks we hear from constituents on that sometimes and to keep those things in mind. Thank you.

Becky, I'll just stand that just a second because I hear about it a lot in Gary and I do. And the chief does a wonderful job of explaining to our residents that, I mean, I just, yes. So chief, you do, he does a great job because it comes to us a lot because people who live inside of downtown are really on the periphery. It's, there's just an increasing number of unhoused people And it's

like uncomfortable. I guess not. I get it. And

I also see too in the new development at Merrimack and Pershing as part of their PUD year, as part of their points, they have proposed two units, not just one. So yes. So I just thought I'd lay that out there. That's three.

Thank you. And just to add to that, I'm sure everybody's aware, but if you're not and spread the word, St. Louis County has a division that deals with unhoused people and that's who we try to steer people to a lot of the time. So if we don't have a health department, we don't have those kinds of resources, but St. Louis County right down the street does have that. So that's something for people to know. Yeah, great.

Great. During the last couple of weeks there have been two executive committee meetings of the Clayton Community Foundation, and ostensibly the agenda was to hire or retain a professional fundraising firm in order to assist with the fundraising for the Commons project. At the end of the day, after both of those meetings, that decision was deemed to be premature. And there were a number of questions. And the questions also have, they're looking for some clarity from the Board of Aldermen. So on our agenda for June 27th, the discussion of the Commons project, my understanding it will be added to our agenda. The type of questions were the kind where maybe the executive committee wasn't necessarily well informed or all on the same page. So there were things like, where does this project fit when we're getting ready to do the livable community master plan? Is it from a timing standpoint? What could change? How much exactly are we being asked to raise? Is it just even though there's a potential range for the project, but And that's a large number and for some people that was deemed to be a new development in terms of the sheer size. And then a lack of clarity about whether or not foundation was to be responsible for raising money for an operational endowment as well which would clearly um increase the uh the money needed to uh for fundraising so anyway i just wanted to give a little bit of an insight in terms of the types of things likely to be discussed at our next meeting um And I think everyone's aware, but then June 29th, we've got a meeting coming up with WashU and Concordia for the community, which will be held at Clayton High School. So, which affects our ward. So that's all I've got.

Very good. And I can just comment that there will be a follow-up meeting before the 20, before our alderman meeting about some of those questions to try to answer the questions because it is, I think, sort of a disconnect of not understanding those things. So we'll try to clear that up as much as we can. Yeah. Did you have something you were going to say? You

mean there'll be another, like CCF, that they're going to be meeting further?

There's a different meeting for us. There's a small meeting with David, Tony, myself, and some CCF executive members just to try to answer some of these questions right now, but sooner than our meeting yet. But we can still talk about all of them at our meeting as well if we want to.

I did want to echo Bridget's comments with respect to the chief and his concerted effort to treat the situation as humanely as possible. And we have a lot to be proud of with this police department that we have, and especially with this chief. And I'm just thankful every day that he's with us and that we got him. So thank you, sir.

Yeah. Ditto. Ditto. All right. Well, not too much from me. I will just say, I do want to thank everyone again, even those who are not here for coming to the mini league annual meeting. It was long and I really appreciate your guys' patience and support there. And I do hope that you'll go to more membership meetings and learn more about that group because I think they really are doing a great job of, you know, stopping a lot of, harmful legislation and promoting good legislation and also bringing cities together to collaborate so also working to fight crime uh and support that so um it was really exciting to do the emerson ribbon cutting uh I don't know if you saw a little bit of the video where the ribbon was cut. Everybody was jumping up and down, including me and hugging each other. So it's a really big, happy moment. Um, I know, I know. And that's something I have thought about and thought about beforehand, but, um, you know, I think their reasons for moving were, uh, you know, explained in there in the, the, uh, CEO's remarks. And those are, on YouTube. If you want to listen, I cannot eloquently repeat them. I'm sorry. But, but I think they have some good reasons and they did leave part of the company in Ferguson. So I think we're, if they're going to move anyway, come to Clayton. We will welcome them. It really, it really fills out the Forsyth Point office building And everybody there is obviously was super excited about that.

Three full floors.

It's really three, like three and a half floors or more. It's almost four. I mean, yeah, it's, it's three full and then two split floors. So I don't know if that makes four or just something like that. Uh, yeah, it'S, it's exciting. Um, the wine and music festival was awesome and we're, we may be outgrowing our space, but we'll deal with that. Uh, and, uh, That is, I mean, that's all I have. Thank you. Thank you guys very much. So we can take a motion to adjourn.

Motion to adjourn.

Second. Aye. I love that. All those in favor. Aye. Okay.