August 12, 2025 — Meeting Transcript

Good evening, everybody. It's August 12. We're just going to start with our discussion session, which is on neighborhood architectural standards that our director of planning on a crane is going to lead.

Thank you, Mayor. So we're going to go through a quick overview of one of the key results from the comprehensive plan that we are tackling now. Oh, sorry. There we go. Okay, now you're caught up. So we're going over neighborhood standards, which is one of the key results from our comprehensive plan. To get started, I'm going to do a little introduction and then I'll turn it over to our planner. Ryan Hilly to take you through everything, but to give you started the key result that was included in the comprehensive plan is about reviewing our architectural guidelines against character and development patterns of our various neighborhoods. The focus here is really on our single family neighborhoods in our lower density, but really residential neighborhoods to establish appropriate identity standards. Connected to this, there are various other key results that all kind of go back to the theme of aligning with historic character, our development patterns, looking at infill development sizes, etc., And so we wanted to take you through how staff is approaching this key result to give you a little bit inside of our methodology before we go too far down the road so that you guys understand what we're working on and what to expect moving forward. So from the comprehensive plan, we pulled a few elements of what the biggest feedback from our community was. What I'm really going to highlight here is that residents want to preserve community unique character of neighborhoods. It was very clear through the engagement of this process that people are very proud and connected to the neighborhoods that they live in, and they feel like there's something about their neighborhood that is why they've chosen to live there or stay living there. So this is almost like our hypothesis, so to speak, from staff's perspective is that We are assuming that there is, in fact, some element of a unique character for our different neighborhoods. And now we're going to go through the process of figuring out what that is, looking at patterns, evaluating those conditions to try to attach a little bit more of a tangible item to what this feel is that all of our residents were describing in various ways that they engaged with the comprehensive plan process to try to achieve those goals. So we also heard a little bit about, again, maintaining and in reusing those existing structures, there was generally some support or desire for additional opportunities for density and residential development or mixing up the style or the size of the houses from a duplex or two-family. But then when it came down to that neighborhood level, a lot of people resorted back to, well, we really want to protect what we have there right now. So through this, we've created a series of research questions. Ryan's going to take you through our methodology for tackling this, but I really want to put an emphasis on we need to figure out what it means when we're talking about the character of neighborhoods. So right now there's kind of this desire and this feeling from residents to protect uniqueness for their neighborhood, but we don't really know what that uniqueness actually is because we haven't gone through a process of really looking at the development patterns of the neighborhoods. So what we are starting with is determining, first of all, is there even a prevailing character for each neighborhood? Or are a lot of those development patterns that people think about actually more similar in neighborhoods than we might think of? And so to try and define character as staff, this is kind of how we're going about what character means. It's going to influence the feel, the look of your neighborhood. So building form and massing, that's more about the shape, the size. As you walk down the street, does it look large or small? Then we get into materials. That's going a little bit more into the direction of the actual architectural guidelines. What are the architectural design elements of the building? of the structures, the heights, the roof lines. What are the styles? We have some larger categories that Ryan will explain that we use to try and put the styles into a term. And then our garages, are they attached? Are they side entry? Are they detached? How does that driveway influence the feel and the look of the neighborhoods down the street and our density? And then as we get these patterns established, then we start to look at comparing that prevailing character pattern of a neighborhood against our existing regulations, whether those are architectural guidelines, urban design districts, just general residential zoning districts to see if there's any conflicts looking at some of the comprehensive plan goals. So we have the character areas and the comprehensive plan and seeing how those goals relate to our existing regulations. And then also looking at how other communities have balanced their guidelines, because we also heard a lot through this process from residents about wanting to be able to express some of their own personal preferences in design or individuality. And so how can we allow for that flexibility of property owners to improve their properties, but also again, protecting against this larger term of character for the neighborhood? And so I just want to be clear that as we look for a prevailing character, this first round, this is all being done by staff. It's being completed in-house. We haven't hired an architectural firm that is specifically designed to create historic preservation guidelines or do these really in-depth architectural analysis. So we're taking it from a more general perspective. zoning level using some of our background and our experience with urban design and other elements to do this. So the outcome of what the work is that Brian's going to take you through is not going to be a historic district. It's not going to be, you know, detailed preservation ordinance. Right now we're really trying to figure out what prevailing character means for our different neighborhoods and if there are in fact any sort of patterns or commonalities as we look at development there. All right, Ryan.

Alrighty, so one of the items that we'll start with to keep in mind as we're looking at a lot of these neighborhood characteristics is how does the character intersect with possible redevelopment or demolition vulnerability? So these are some maps that you have seen before looking on the left. That is, I would say, like a phase one analysis of what properties might be vulnerable to demolition or redevelopment. This data is probably like a year or so old at this point, but there are properties that have actually since been redeveloped since this data was acquired. And we wanted to take a look and see, okay, are some of these neighborhood characteristics, are there any patterns that align with demo vulnerability? And then we'll see on the right here. Actually, Ana, I can't see that one. Can you clarify? That's

the eighth. Shades of blue mean I don't see a legend.

Sorry, the darker shades of blue on that one on the left are the increased likelihood that a property is going to be demolished and redeveloped. So what we did was we took data from the county, some data that we already had, basically said, what is the value of the land? What is the value of building on the land? How old is that building? Along with a few other variables, put that in, weighted them. And then it punched out this right here and it said, okay, a darker blue, maybe a higher number. That's a property that might have really high land values, but really low value attached to the structure itself.

And then the green is age. So all the green parcels at the time of the comprehensive plan have a house that was constructed before 1946.

And then that one on the bottom right there, that is the character area map that kind of prevails throughout the comprehensive plan. It's not specific to subdivisions, but they are generally areas that have a relationship with each other or areas where folks may identify with a neighborhood. My mouse is not on. There we go. So we're going to need a lot of data to tackle this goal, and that's kind of what we're in the process of doing. So data is going to allow us to understand what these neighborhoods look like and what kind of patterns there may be. So do the existing conditions align with the existing zoning and the existing guidelines? Are we telling people that they need to build something in a way that does not match the character of the area? And are we okay with that? Why or why not? So we have a series of data points that we're using to understand what the neighborhood looks like. And those are some of the items pointed out earlier, like what is the architecture? Where's the garage located, et cetera. And we're using GIS to catalog a lot of this. Some of the information like lot coverage we already have, we can perform an analysis and we can punch out, you know, what is the floor area ratio across the city and some of the items we have to catalog ourselves visually. And so that's a combination of, um, both remote and in-person items. So you can go on something like Google Maps if the image that you're looking at is still relevant, but some items are going to need to be viewed in person. And so we go out and review those items in person. Andso the map that you see in front of you is the tool that we're actually using. This is just one that we built in house where we are able to click on a property and actually identify some aspects about it. So if I click on This property over here, if it loads here, we can see all this different information about the property. That's stuff that we're cataloging here. This is an internal tool that we use. This isn't something that's available to the public, but we can say, okay, I'm going to go in and edit, select the property, and we already have predetermined items that you can just go in and click and run through a block. And that's how we're actually collecting this data. It's not just something that we could use on a browser. It also works on our phone. So it's usable in the field as well. We can jump back to the slide unless anybody has any questions about

it.

So it's a combination of remote and in-person. Luckily enough, Google Street View came through back in March. So there's a lot of relevant areas where we can kind of catalog things remotely, but that's not relevant for everything. So we still need to go in person and actually verify that that's correct. And there's also going to be areas that you can't view remotely. There's a lot of private subdivisions or there's areas where we've had new homes constructed, or maybe there's not a recent Street View image that's relevant that we can get good data from.

So Brian, you guys are going to do this for every single family neighborhood? Like every home?

Every single residential property in the city.

Big undertaking.

And so we do have some early insights. So just to clarify, it's not like we've gotten through a ton of neighborhoods already, primarily looking at the Morelands and then testing Skinker Heights over on the east side. And the preliminary takeaways that these are largely coming from the Morelands because that's the area that I've been working on. is that architecture does not fit into a neat box. Please do not review this data super specifically and critique my architecture selections. I am doing my best. But even if you, like, say you were to take an image of a property in the Morelands, whether it's single family or multifamily, and feed it to an AI and say, what specific box does this fit into? It kind of goes, eh, it doesn't, which is fine. pretty consistent finding. Any of these properties that you're going to look at in this specific neighborhood, they don't fit into a neat box, but there's all around themes. There might be, so you might have a Tudor property that has like elements of Mediterranean in it for whatever reason, which sounds kind of like an interesting mix. But if you look across the entire neighborhood, it's not that crazy. The Moorlands kind of has its its own kind of unique hodgepodge style. Although it doesn't fit neatly into a box, it does have a character, it does have relationship. So not every property might be a Tudor, not that every property is complete colonial Mediterranean, but they do have a relationship to each other built in through the materials. Front yard character is pretty consistent among a variety of properties. You're not having anything that's standing out by any means, like not any random coverage, there's not a building that's sticking out absurdly far. There's pretty consistent setbacks in this area. Finished floor heights have minimal variation. So something that commonly comes up in a neighborhood like Clayton Gardens that sees a lot of new development is these newer homes are sitting up a little bit higher. You might have a two, two and a half story home that's, is sitting on some sort of like a stone foundation or something, whereas it might have a 50s ranch next to it that's pretty flush. In the Morelands neighborhood, both in the single family and multifamily, it's pretty consistent and variation's rather minimal. And then looking at some materials, driveways are one of those things that the architectural review guidelines are pretty specific on. If somebody comes to us and they say, I want to put in an asphalt driveway, well, that's something they can't get administrative approval. They have to go to the architectural review board for approval. throughout the morelands neighborhood pretty much every property is different from one another the asphalt driveways are all over the place i'd say that like well over somewhere between a third and 50 of all driveways you're going to run into are asphalt and there's a surprising amount of ribbon drives those are really really rare throughout the city they've started to pop up a little bit as people are trying to find the tracks yes yeah to clarify yeah ribbon drive is you're going to have Usually it's like a bit of concrete or something with grass on either side or in the middle. Those purely used to be all over the place in the Moorlands, maybe not as prevalent as asphalt, but a lot of them have been filled in. Usually it's two tracks of concrete with like brick in the middle or something, but there is some kind of prevalence that's there. So these early insights are interesting. There's some things that you kind of expected, like pretty much every property has brick on it with a little bit of stone. But then there's some things that are really, really difficult or you don't expect, like why can I not understand what the architecture of this building is? It might be beautiful, but I have no vocabulary to describe it to you. And so the next steps of what this is going to look like. So we're going to continue to collect data. This is going to take a little bit and then we're going to have to for sure verify everything in the field if we collected it remotely. And then we're going be able to observe those patterns largely in GIS. So everything that we're collecting is already being imported into existing data sets And from there, we're connecting that with some data that we've already analyzed. And we'll be able to produce a lot of nice patterns. The way that that's probably going to look visually is you'll be able to look at a heat map and see, okay, where is brick concentrated? Where are Tudor homes concentrated? And you're going to be able to see if there's concentrations, patterns, or anything that stands out that's unique.

Yeah, so we just wanted to provide that quick overview because as we go out and start looking at this data, we just wanted to again reiterate that the key result talks about creating unique guidelines, but we want to make sure that we aren't over-regulating and being prescriptive where it's not necessary. So first, we're going to start with establishing those patterns and As Ryan mentioned with the early insights, the layer part of that vulnerability analysis phase one that Ryan did is when we can layer it against these patterns. So we'll look for some other causation. So the Morelands is an area. That has not seen, especially the both actually the, the multifamily and the single family. They have not seen a high concentration of new construction over the last 20 years, other neighborhoods have. So when we talk about the setback patterns, it's, it's pretty. Um, we would predict that the setbacks would be relatively similar because the buildings were all built around the same time where you start to get those. Some of those variations are in the neighborhoods that have already seen the infill development, so we can kind of use the regulations that we've placed on infill previously to determine whether or not they're protecting some of the pattern. And then areas that haven't been susceptible to that redevelopment, we want to protect them a little bit differently. Yeah, if you have any questions, otherwise this was just intended to be a really quick update so that you knew what we were working on for those standards.

Does anybody have a quick question? We don't have a ton of time, but we can...

I don't have a question. I just think it's an, it's a project that will be really valued by our community and it's overwhelming, but hopefully exciting too as you look for all this. So defining. Yeah, it's exciting. It's

also very nice that Ryan's such a GIS whiz because he was able to set up that, what did they call it? An experience in Esri. So we can ask for assistance from inspectors or we, you know, Hobie can go out in the field one day to get a break from the front desk or whatever it might be. And all the data will already be correlated. So make it a lot easier for us to analyze later.

And my last comment is it's a feel good that you all are taking this on because I think we all have so much confidence in your ability and your work and your dedication to it. So thank you for doing that, too.

Yeah, great work. And I have one question. I'm curious what how you set the parameters for determining whether something is prevailing. Or will you do something where you'll say, this is happening 30% of the time, 50% of the time? How do you- Right.

That's what we'll start to look at first. We're not mathematicians, so we're not going to say there's a statistically relevant correlation between things. But first, we'll start to for those patterns. And one of the things that we did in the map that Ryan showed Let me just, since the people online can't see this, I just want to

flip over here. I'm just thinking how interesting it'll be to be able to say like, people feel like a neighborhood has a certain character and how close does that align with the data?

Right.

Yeah.

Yeah. And one thing that we are trying to do in order to make the evaluation of their statistics more you know, consistent within a neighborhood as we're trying. Each person kind of has a lead on a neighborhood. So even though I might slightly interpret a building style differently than Ryan, if I do all of the same neighborhood, then we'll have the right patterns. And so we did through some of these with the way that we set this up. There are a few like with the style we together, Ryan, Hobie and I, kind of created nine different style options and we have photos of examples of how each would fit into that category so again that takes a little bit of the risk out of it with using multiple people to fill this out because we know it's going to fit in one of the nine the way that we established it however if you ask a historic preservation architect about these nine categories they would likely have a slightly different interpretation. So that's where I just want to be very transparent that that's not the goal of this. It's to look at higher level patterns. Thank you. Go ahead, Gary.

So I know you referenced urban design districts, and I remember we had a project like a year ago in Old Town where there was a lot of concern about the design of a particular project, and it seemed to me at that time the response was, well, the ARB has some discretion, but this particular site is not within the urban design district. There was one nearby, but it wasn't And so it had less discretion. And I'm just wondering, assuming all of this gets implemented, how does that relate to urban design districts?

Right. That's the whole point to look at it. So first we want to establish if there even is a prevailing character, because if there really isn't a super unique pattern that requires us to to come in and protect it with a very prescriptive code, then there isn't really a need to get so involved with an urban design district. And a lot of the architectural design elements, that's what the urban design districts are really supposed to do, We have a lot of urban design districts that get into the form, the massing, the scale, the feel of buildings, which is important. But that's something regardless of the architectural style that is probably important to every neighborhood. That I think when I talk to a lot of the residents throughout the comprehensive plan process and they kept referring to the character of their neighborhood, a lot of them are referring back to the height difference. the size of the home, the driveway location, those sorts of things which we might be able to more uniformly regulate without urban design districts so that when we use them they're very prescriptive and then we also are creating a pattern of really upholding why those regulations are so unique and prescriptive to that area rather than the large ones. So the whole pattern analysis will help us determine if we even need to go through an urban design process or not for an area.

Thank you. I'm just curious, as I'm listening to this, I'm wondering, is part of our goal here to make sure that a neighborhood doesn't change significantly, that we kind of want to keep it the same if, in fact, there's a reason to keep it the what will be different as a result of implementing all this? Is it our goal to hope that we don't have a neighborhood change radically like some of our neighborhoods have in terms of housing as a result of this? Is that how you're looking at it or how do you look at that?

We're not even looking at that yet. Right now, we're really just trying to establish the patterns because I think for a long time there's As I've mentioned before, there's been always this reference to our unique character. But we don't really know what that means to people, and we don't really understand what it means in terms of our regulations. So right now, we're not even at the level of saying we do or do not want things to change. First, let's figure out what the patterns are in the neighborhood. Then we can decide with that neighborhood, you know, do they want what is important to them? What's important to the Planning Commission? What's important of this board in terms of protecting? And then we'll look at what implementation looks like.

So this is going to be a longer-term process.

It is, so that's kind of why there's a few key results. This is one of the projects that we'll span over into the next year because first we've got to figure out what we're even talking about when we say protect a neighborhood, just like you said, and then we'll figure out what we need to implement for it.

Thank you. Seems like a perfect job for interns to go block by block on stuff. The question I've got is I'm just kind of thinking about other uses you know for all the work you're going to all the work you guys going to put in and i'm just thinking through like i guess my question is what other uses do you see for it i mean i can kind of see things like you know why are people like in morelands people aren't developing you could get some insight as to why maybe they're not based upon pulling some of this data um or like what's working and what's not working in terms of regulations. Clearly, like you said, we have all these regulations for driveways and nobody follows them. So what is some of the other ways that we may use it going forward? Are we going to go out and force on the driveways? Are we going back to folks and say, you screwed up and we need to enforce it? What's the long-term plan for it besides just the...

Yeah, well, with the driveways, people probably... I mean, I won't say everybody, but there is a path for people to get approval to use asphalt driveways. And also, as long as people are just resealing them, we don't make them go and remove it. But aside from that, I think this data will be useful for a lot of different key results that we have. So if we could think about that huge matrix that's at the end of our comprehensive plan We're doing this to inform a handful that we're working on right now, but a lot of this information will be able to help us when we think about longer term housing development goals, population goals. And you know all of these types of things will be able to pull from various elements of this data, once we have it input and. So I think it will be really helpful and and and honestly it's also just something that I think is good for our Community do I can't I can't think of a similar project that we've had where we've really taken the time to inventory. larger neighborhoods like this, aside from probably the process that led to the Clayton Gardens Urban Design District. So it's nice to give all of our neighborhoods a fresh look, even the ones that maybe people don't feel have changed in the last 50 years to look at them. So I think the data will be really valuable for a variety of things that I can't even think of right now. And

I would assume you either have or you will build in some process or as homes are torn down and rebuilt, everything will just be updated, planning process or the process

right

yep okay thank you Anna very much um thank you Ryan for the presentation uh we look forward to hearing about the patterns um great uh so it's a little after seven so we'll get started um if the city clerk could call the roll

Alderwoman Buse. Here. Alderwoman Patel. Here. Alderman Gary Feder.

Alderwoman Buse. Here. Alderwoman Patel. Here. Alderman Fader.

Here.

Aldermen Rick Hummell.

Aldermen Hummel.

Here.

Aldeman Jeffery Yorg. Here. Mayor McAndrew. Here. City Manager David Gipson. Here. City Attorney O'Keefe. Here. Thank you.

Aldeman York. Here. Mayor McAndrew. Here. City Manager Gibson. Here. City Attorney O'Keefe. Here. Thank you.

All right. This is the time in our meeting where if anyone has any public requests and petitions on an item that's not on our agenda, you are welcome to come forward now and address us. Not sure if there's anybody online. All right, so we will get started. The first item on our agenda is an ordinance related to short-term residential regulations. I'll open the public hearing and ask our city manager to present.

Thank you, Mayor. The city's comprehensive plan, Clayton Tomorrow 2040, identifies priorities for increasing vibrancy and activity in downtown and highlights the need to think more creatively about uses and repurposing of vacant office spaces. Following two discussion sessions with the Board of Aldermen and one with the Plan Commission, staff drafted regulations to allow short-term residential rental units in downtown Clayton. The proposed regulations seek to provide an additional use option for properties downtown while managing potential negative impacts of the use through permitting and inspection requirements. The Plan Commission held a public hearing on June 16, 2025 and considered the regulations drafted by staff. The Plan Commission requested some revisions to the regulations and subsequently voted to recommend approval of the revised regulations to the Board of Aldermen on July 7, 2025. Revisions to the city's zoning regulations, building codes, and licensing regulations are required to facilitate short-term rental dwellings. This ordinance does the following things. It adds a definition for short-term dwelling to the zoning code and building code, adds short-term dwelling use as allowed with a conditional use permit, and HDC, which is our high density commercial district, following the existing CUP or conditional use procedures. adds a process for short-term occupancy permit as a subtype of an occupancy permit under the building code, establishes regulations for the location, design, operation, and maintenance of the units, establishes procedures for suspension or revocation of permits, and penalties for violations of the short-term rental regulations. This repeals the current prohibition against short-term rental of dwelling units in Chapter 605 of the City Code and adds a fee for short-term occupancy permits to the fee schedule. Staff recommends that the Board of Aldermen approve the proposed ordinance amending Chapters 405, 500, and 605 of the Clayton Code of Ordinances to address the management of short-term dwelling units in downtown Clayton. We do have our director of planning on a crane here as well this evening, and she can help answer any questions. Thank you.

Great. Thank you. I'll open the discussion. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to address us on this topic or anyone online? No. Are there any further questions or comments from the board, from our board members up here? Yeah.

My only comment is that again, there was, as the report just said there was a need addressed and a very tailored response that has gone through the planning commission input from this board and back here it is a cautious step into this area with the replication abilities and specific spaces being subject to being activated by this so it's impressive work that i think that we still have a lot of control over how this develops and moves forward and i think it'll be a benefit to our downtown Thank you. Anyone else?

I would just note, we got a couple emails. Other people might have gotten more than I did, but that seemed particularly concerned about the potential for increased police activity and it being a drain on our police resources. So I asked Chief Smith about that and he had expressed that he's researched the topic and believes that the way that we've tailored and like really been real specific about the regulations is unlikely to create a disproportionate impact on the department. So I just want to for the folks that sent that in, should they come watch this recording, because they're not here, I don't think, to know that we've addressed that, you know, and our police department is confident in their ability to work with them. Yes, thank

you. My impression is that this is much more about repurposing buildings than it is about vibrancy. It will, I'm sure, add some degree of vibrancy, but that's really not what drives it. We have people... in this ward who always are talking about, you know, why is Clayton changing so much? Whatever happened to those wonderful three-story buildings that you're all tearing down? Well, they're not being torn down, but they're mostly empty because Historically, people who moved into those buildings in 1950 to have an office on the second or third floor, they don't want that space anymore. It doesn't really make any sense. So I think this idea of making, and really just on an experimental basis because this is very limited in terms of where these might go, to create this opportunity for these smaller buildings is exactly a way to preserve those buildings give the owners an opportunity to still have retail on the first floor or some type of commercial but to make an effective use of the second or third floor and not have those spaces be dark so i think that's a real positive and i will say having followed through this ordinance through the plan commission it's really a model example of how you start with a draft and then based on comments from the public comments from the plan commission you really tighten up the ordinance. And so I think there's a lot of things in here that citizens over the last three or four months suggested and that are now embodied in this ordinance. So I think it's a real checklist of a really well-drawn regulatory process that I think will have positive results. So I'm very supportive of it. Thank you.

Thank you.

I've got a couple of questions. I'm in favor of this. I like it, but I am curious. Because it is so specific in certain areas, I'm wondering what the thought process was in putting some of this specificity and particularly the comment about buildings that has to be built before 1955 and be of a certain size. I get that that limits the inventory, but I'm wondering, is there some kind of a... Is it compelling? And if it isn't compelling for some kind of business purpose or governmental purpose, could it stand a higher risk of being challenged? So I'm just wondering how we've thought about that.

So the one thing that we've consistently stated is that one of the biggest purposes for this is that those property owners are allowed an opportunity to repurpose their structures. So what we're seeing is the highest level of vacancy rates in office buildings tend to be the offices that are that age. There's a lot of Class A office space that's fully occupied here in the city of Clayton, but where we struggle is a lot of the smaller office buildings that are that old. So we were really looking for those opportunities and trying to identify those properties where they're potentially struggling with occupancy. And when you look at our use list that's permitted within the high density commercial district, there just really aren't a lot of options for those particular property owners. So as we heard from one property owner in particular and started to have these conversations, it looked like this was a really good option for those property owners to do something different to add to the vitality of downtown and really generate some revenue for those properties they own.

So I guess what I'm wondering then, you know, maybe the answer is there isn't a building like this. But, you know, what if a building was built in 1960 and otherwise met the criteria? What would be our compelling reason to say, I'm sorry, it wasn't built in the right era if that was the case?

On the specific inventory, do you know where that is?

Uh, I would, I would have to try had any

of that fell into that category. We

did do a list. Um, we needed to, um, evaluate a timeframe where we wanted to start because if we opened it up to too many properties and it's not creating the whole incentive of this is something to save the building. So we looked at the age of buildings. We compared that with their occupancy rates, looking for buildings that have had extended periods of time without occupancy. Looking at the character of those buildings and how they contribute to the street form, because as Alderman Gary Feder mentioned, we're trying to save or rejuvenate some of those older, smaller buildings. And so that worked out well when we compared them to the age. So based on all that analysis, that's how we got to that age limit in 2019. conversations, you know, with staff as we drew this up. We felt that it was, we were comfortable defending that should it come up to a challenge.

did do a list. Um, we needed to, um, evaluate a timeframe where we wanted to start because if we opened it up to too many properties and it's not creating the whole incentive of this is something to save the building. So we looked at the age of buildings. We compared that with their occupancy rates, looking for buildings that have had extended periods of time without occupancy. Looking at the character of those buildings and how they contribute to the street form, because as Alderman Fader mentioned, we're trying to save or rejuvenate some of those older, smaller buildings. And so that worked out well when we compared them to the age. So based on all that analysis, that's how we got to that age limit in 2019. conversations, you know, with staff as we drew this up. We felt that it was, we were comfortable defending that should it come up to a challenge.

Great. In my last question, there's also a requirement in here regarding parking. I think there needs to be at least one spot for every unit. As you contemplate the likely buildings where this could exist, Is there any particular building where this will pose a particular hardship, like it's several blocks away or it's not possible to find a spot? Do we know?

Um, yeah, so out of the buildings that qualify, there's a varying levels of onsite parking attached to those. Um, one parking space for dwelling unit we felt was an appropriate start through the conditional use permit process though, applicants can make their case as to how they will address that parking. And so you could provide a waiver for that. Um, so there are certain locations that don't have any onsite, but would have one, you know, across the street or next door or whatever it might be. So you'd be able to, we'll be able to evaluate that on a case by case basis because It really varied based on the properties we were looking at in terms of what they have on site.

Okay, thank you. A couple questions. So on, because it's C1, it talks about short-term rental dwellings being on a property with four or less total dwelling units. But it doesn't have any larger description of what the overall building looks like. So it could be possible that you could have a five-story building that could have these as long as there's no more than four dwelling units in that building or 10 stories or whatever qualifies.

Yes, that's correct. So it has to be at least a two-story building because these have to be on that second floor or above. But yes, they could have office uses also in the property. They could have... you know, whatever else it might be within their mixed abuses.

Okay. And then on the provision that Alderman Rick Hummell was talking about with the parking, it says, as you alluded to, the parking requirement may be reduced or waived by the board through the CUP process. I'm assuming because that's written in there for seven that none of the rest of this can be overridden by the CUP process? All of this has to be an ordinance change in order for any of this to change?

Okay. And then on the provision that Alderman Hummel was talking about with the parking, it says, as you alluded to, the parking requirement may be reduced or waived by the board through the CUP process. I'm assuming because that's written in there for seven that none of the rest of this can be overridden by the CUP process? All of this has to be an ordinance change in order for any of this to change?

Correct.

which would then put us in the legislative versus administrative discussion when it comes to somebody wanting to challenge it, like Alderman Homer was talking about with 60 versus 55. We would be on stronger legal footing to just say no than if all of this was subject to a more CAP process. So I just wanted to kind of confirm how I was reading this to make sure we weren't. inadvertently opening ourselves up to a much harder way to say no when it comes to when the natural questions start coming of hey can i have five can i have six can i have 1960 like what that looks like so okay thanks great

uh thanks everybody um You know, I do think on I want to commend you and your staff and I do as Gary mentioned, I think it was a great example of getting input from members of the plan Commission members of the public to modify the ordinance from where it started. You know, I think that thinking about vibrancy downtown thinking about creative ways to repurpose buildings certainly aligns with the goals of our master plan. I think it is, of course, very important to consider safety. I am very encouraged by the fact that our police chief has looked at this very thoroughly and feels very comfortable that there's a lot of constraints on it, that it is very restrictive. So I am also in favor of this, and I look forward and certainly hope to see that some of these older buildings will have some occupancy. I'd rather... see lights on in the second and third floors rather than having them be dark 12 months out of the year. So, all right. If there's no other comments from the audience or online, I will close the public hearing. Alderwoman Buse. I'd

like to introduce bill number 7081, amending chapters 405, 500, and 605 of the Clayton City Code. and the planning department fee schedule pertaining to short-term dwellings to be read for the first time by title only. Second.

Any discussion? Mr. City Attorney?

Bill number 7081, first reading. An ordinance amending chapters 405, 500, and 605 of the Clayton City Code and the planning department fees schedule pertaining to short term dwellings.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Alderman Buse?

Move that the board give unanimous consent to consideration for adoption of bill number 7081 on the day of introduction. Second.

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

like to introduce bill number 7081 amending chapters 405, 500, and 605 of the Clayton City Code and the Planning Department fee schedule pertaining to short-term dwellings to be read for the second time by title only.

Second. Any discussion? Mr. City Attorney?

Bill number 7081, second reading and consideration for adoption. An ordinance amending chapters 405, 500, and 605 of the Clayton City Code and the Planning Department fee schedule pertaining to short-term dwellings.

Alderman Buse? Aye. Alderman Patel? Aye. Aldeman Gary Feder?

Alderman Buse? Aye. Alderman Patel? Aye. Aldeman Fader?

Aye.

Aldman Rick Hummell?

Aldman Hummel?

Aye.

Aldoman Jeffery Yorg?

Aldoman York?

Aye.

Mayor McAndrew? Aye. Thank you.

Great, thank you. The next item on our agenda is our consent agenda. Is there any questions or comments?

I'd like to move to approve the consent agenda. Second. Any

discussion? Aye. Alderwoman Patel? Aye. Alderman Gary Feder?

discussion? Aye. Alderwoman Patel? Aye. Alderman Fader?

Aye.

Aldermen Rick Hummell? Aye. Aldeman Jeffery Yorg?

Aldermen Hummel? Aye. Aldeman York?

Aye.

Mayor McAndrew? Aye. Thank you.

Great, the next item on our agenda under the city manager's report is our third quarter financial report.

Yes, so I'll talk about the financial report and really the budget amendment almost together here. So the third quarter, of course, had a... a lot of uncertainty. We had a very big challenge with the tornado on May 16th, which fell in the third quarter of our fiscal year. So you're starting to see a lot of those expenditures show up in this third quarter financial report and also on the budget amendment that's before you this evening. So when you look at the revenue numbers within the financial report, you'll see that things are really tracking where they should. But when you look at some numbers that really pop out as being significantly higher than last year, You'll see that within the general fund expenditures are up $1.9 million at this point this year over where we were last year. If you look at the finance department, finance and administration, you'll see a million dollar jump. And that's because right now we're booking a lot of these things to an account that was set up for finance. So that's why you're seeing some of these conditions within the financial report. And there's a lot of dust to settle still with the tornado expenditures. And we're working through all of that currently. When you get to the budget amendment, you'll see $1.4 million, which was a huge swing and expenditures related to the storm. You'll see that show up there. So we do want to go ahead and book that for the third quarter within this budget amendment. So again, that was $1.4 billion budgeted within the finance department. And that's why you're seeing the big impact within the financial report. We had a slight revenue decrease within the general fund. of $185,000 in the budget amendment. That's due to some permits coming in lower than what we had anticipated previously. Although as we move forward with the additional tornado permits that have been generated, we'll see what direction that heads within the fourth quarter. Going back to expenditures within the general fund, some other minor adjustments for various just purchases we make and some insurance premiums that started on September or July 1st this year rather than October 1st due to a change in our vehicular coverage. Equipment replacement fund, the Capital Improvement Fund and the Bond Construction Fund. Downstairs in accounting, they actually found an error in their interest earnings that they were booking, and they were actually light on the amount that they had in the last report. So you're gonna see a significant increase in all three of those funds, 363,000 within the IRF or Equipment Replacement Fund, an increase of 129,000 in the Capital Fund, and almost 29,000 in the Bond Construction Fund, so we're correcting that through this budget amendment. And then as far as some other projects that have come up that the board has approved recently, you'll see the expenditures in the capital fund here for the streetscape light pole inspection that was recently completed within the central business district. as well as the 10 South Brentwood project, which is the garage deck that's currently underway. The more we open that up, the more we're finding. So you're going to see another contract here probably at the next meeting. I would think the next meeting, the meeting after where we have an engineer going through and doing a structural analysis, we keep finding more damage to that parking deck as we open it up. So if you drive down the alley between the commerce tower and and the backside of 10 South Brentwood, you can see all of the holes in the deck in the various areas they're working on. So that one just keeps growing on us, and we'll continue to update the board as that goes. But within this third quarter budget amendment, we are going to book some of those initial expenditures. So that's kind of where we're at in a nutshell. And again, on the financial report, we kind of have things up in the air a little bit with the tornado expenditures. And it's really skewing the numbers on that side of the ledger. As far as revenue goes, though, there's really nothing too concerning that we've seen other than that slight reduction in permanent revenue through the third quarter. So with that, we do have Karen Dilber here that can answer any questions from our finance department. I'm happy to answer any as well.

Does anybody have any questions on the report? I think additionally, if anybody has any questions on the third quarter budget amendment.

Did you did so the expenses incurred for the tornado recovery? Are they because they were like in the ballpark of more than 5 million is what I remember hearing. Is that right? So we have

total damages that are The initial numbers we put together for FEMA were somewhere in that $5 million range. What's been expended, because what you're looking at here are labor costs, all of the overtime, and then the contractual services. So the grapple trucks and those things that we've been invoiced for are all starting to show up in that financial report. Long term, we're going to have a lot of expenditures associated with overtime. the sidewalk replacement like we have on the agenda this evening, the streetlights. We're going to have tree replanting all over town, a ton of stump removal still to go. So all of those expenditures are coming later. And when we go through the proposed budget for fiscal year 26 on Friday, we're going to be talking about that. But the reimbursement from FEMA is going to lag on a lot of these things. And the thing we're being most careful about right now is making sure that we're following their requirements so that we can get that reimbursement. There may be some larger projects like the streetlight restoration where we may be able to be front-loaded the money before we actually start. So that's something we're working through as well at this point in time. But all of these expenses you're seeing for labor costs that are incurred, for debris removal, all of that, when we submit our information to FEMA here within the next 60 days, all of our projects, I would expect those to be the first reimbursements we receive, although there's quite a lag and those aren't going to come until sometime during the next fiscal year.

Yeah. Okay. Thank you.

I don't have any questions. Thank you.

You've explained the major variances and all the other details well. There's, at least to me, a new piece of information. I just would be helpful to understand what it means. On page 39 under the debt service funds, there's reference to the new special obligation bond. And so what I'm wondering about there is just the comparison of the amended budget and the actual through June. And it's referenced, I don't know, maybe four or five times. And one of the times there's no expense in other cases or no revenue, whatever, I guess it's an expense. So I'm just wondering, tell me what this means. And then what should I expect regarding the the 2025 special obligation bond where there's zero through June, but yet there's 366 down below. So I just don't know what all this means.

I'll have to check with our finance director when it actually comes.

So, first of all, my first question is, what is this telling us? I'm assuming it's telling us perhaps interest income on this special obligation bond. What's revenue from a bond in that first-

What page, Your Honor?

Page 39. Okay.

Thank

you.

Under expenditures- We show it twice. We show it once as an expenditure, and then we show it as an other financing use. And under the other financing uses, we're showing an expenditure of $366,000 for the regular expense line. It shows 242 in the amended budget, but nothing spent yet. Is that a payment that will happen in the fourth quarter potentially of this year?

I see the 366. I'm trying to find the 242. Oh, there I see.

Yeah, two lines above it.

That's the revenue in the amended budget, the 242.067. It's

also an expense. This is 242.068.

That's the only question I have. I just want to be able to understand what is this telling me? I'm just not sure.

I thought I had this on. The other financing sources and uses are usually transfers within funds, so I'm going to look and see what those are.

Alderman Jeffery Yorg, did you have any questions?

Alderman York, did you have any questions?

Yeah, just a couple while Karen's looking at that. Sir David, you mentioned we've found this error from the budget inquiry in injury for a bunch of interests, like I would assume, given that it's all an increase, that it had to be booked from somewhere. So was the money not booked at all or was it pulled out of a different fund? Because if it's increasing all the funds, presumably there would be a decrease in something.

It was just what she used to estimate for the fiscal year.

Interest income? Because it's stated here as an increase due to error in budget entry. So you're saying she just budgeted it incorrectly? Yes. Okay.

Her calculator was incorrect and she realized it. So she wanted to do the entry to reflect what she anticipates, well, what we anticipate that it's going to be through the end of the fiscal year. So we're not throwing it on the fourth quarter budget amendment.

Gotcha.

Okay.

For the tornado, and maybe this is what your kind of long-term plan is, but is there – Would it make sense to have a whole separate, I'm going to call it a temporary tornado fund where all the expenses flow out of it and the revenue flows into it to just show the netting? I know in some cases you have to throw it in the finance administration bucket to just get it done, but it'd be nice to be able to see these are all the expenses we incurred. this is all the money we're going to be as the money flows in so that we can, especially when we get the budget time, we can start looking at like, okay, what's really a deficit and what really is tornado related. Because right. It's a difference from an operation discussion to a one-time catastrophe concession. So whether that is formally setting up a new fund or whether that is an informal kind of breakout that we could see, I think would be helpful to put the little more context in

that. And that accounting really is going to happen separately too, because we're going to be paying those expenditures using fund balance. Um, so we're going to tracking certainly the expenditures on that side, but, but yeah, we can do that with, with

revenue. at least for me it'd be nice to be able to say oh okay we have a transfer from the general fund into this tornado fund to pay the expenses you see the expenses and then as the revenue starts coming in it'll you know obviously be recorded as a revenue exactly not for nothing else i mean i don't know if it needs to be in the audit as much as it is just so that we can just see the fun the money flow so we'll track all of that for you

so for your uh for informational purposes the 366 292 excuse me, is bond issuance costs. And the 242.068 is debt service interest.

So that hasn't been incurred yet? Is the actual zero?

The debt service interest, hang

on. You're known as an expenditure?

Yes. That's the budget. The expense hasn't been incurled through June yet. It's the amended budget. So the 242068 is what the budget is. The 366492 has been incurred.

So presumably when we issued the bonds, we haven't incurred interest up to June, which is when this blocked. So we know we've got to pay it, but we haven't actually paid yet. Whereas the issuance cost came out at the top of the proceeds. But

we had interest income apparently up on the upper line there. 2025 SO bond revenue of $97,000. And then we had whatever the 374 is. That must be a transfer. So my recollection is we issued the bonds before June.

March, yes.

Yeah. So we should have had – if we issued the bonds, we incurred interest expense. Now maybe we weren't – I don't know. Maybe it's not set up to pay it. So on a cash basis, maybe not. But –

Anyway, it would just be – We'll pull the information. That's fine. We may only be paying the bonds twice a year. So we may not – depending on how – I don't know what the P&I schedule says, but we may not have actually – we may have incurred if we haven't been paid yet. I understand. Yeah.

Okay. Anybody else?

Yeah. The offset is what I want to figure out on the revenue expense.

um jeff i think that's a great suggestion though with just so we can visually see for a tornado fund i think that'll be helpful

i think and i think our residents may some of them may be curious to be like oh how much did it actually cost the city to do everything and how's the money getting reimbursed so

um great anybody else

I'd like to introduce bill number 7082, approving the fiscal year 2025 third quarter budget amendment to be read for the first time by title only. Second.

Any discussion? Mr. City Attorney?

Bill number 7082, first reading, an ordinance amending the fiscal year 2025 budget and appropriating funds pursuant thereto.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Aye.

I move that the board give unanimous consent to consideration for adoption of bill number 7082 on the day of its introduction. Second.

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

like to introduce bill number 7082, approving the fiscal year 2025 third quarter budget amendment to be read for the second time by title only. Second.

Any discussion? Mr. City Attorney?

Bill number 7082, second reading and consideration for adoption. An ordinance amending the fiscal year 2025 budget and appropriating funds pursuant thereto.

Alderman Buse? Aye. Alderman Patel? Aye. Aldermen Gary Feder?

Alderman Buse? Aye. Alderman Patel? Aye. Aldermen Fader?

Aye.

Aldeman Rick Hummell?

Aldeman Hummel?

Aye.

Aldemann Jeffery Yorg?

Aldemann York?

Aye.

Mayor McAndrew? Aye. Thank you.

Okay, great. The next item on our agenda is a construction contract for the Central Business District. Mr. City Manager?

Yes, the Public Works Department is requesting approval of a construction contract for the federally funded Central Business District Phase 2 resurfacing project with Vernon Jones Construction. This project includes mill and asphalt overlay on portions of Brentwood, South Central, Beamiston, Carondelet, and Merrimack. replacement of curb ramps for ADA compliance, updates to select pedestrian facilities for ADA compliance, brick paver crosswalks and pavement markings and signage. This will complete the downtown mill and overlay projects along with all of the brick inlay sidewalks. So the streets where you still see the older asphalt, it's more pink in color. All of those will be redone with this particular project and we'll close the larger project out overall. We received four bids which were open on July 30th for this project. And then Vernon Jones Construction submitted the lowest responsive responsible base bid plus add alternate A in the amount of 1.8 $1,898,637.80. The final engineer's estimate for this work was just under $1.7 million. So this is about $200,000 more than we had anticipated. Add alternate A includes removal and replacement of traffic signal detector loops and pavement, which are maintained by St. Louis County. And then we always price these things out. So if the county wants to change those signal detection loops when we do our project, that price is established. So we're going to present that cost to the county, which is $31,695. In addition to the contract amount, we are requesting authorization to approve change orders. This is our contingency amount for the project, which is 5% or $95,000. And we use that to cover expenditures that or unknown at this time and to correct unknown site issues that become apparent during the project. Accounting for required material testing services during construction, the total anticipated costs for this project is expected to be approximately $107,000 higher than projected when the budget was prepared. However, the Capital Improvement Fund has adequate funds for this project and staff anticipate savings with other projects to offset this expense. The city expects to receive federal reimbursement of $800,000 for the project And we recommend approval of the ordinance authorizing a contract with Vernon Jones in the amount of $1,898,637.50 plus a contingency of $95,000 for the CBD Phase 2 resurfacing project. And Director of Public Works Matt Malek is here this evening if you have any questions about the project itself.

Thank you. I'll open the discussion. Does anybody have any comments or questions for David or Matt?

I just have one comment to make because I know I'm in the minority here with the jokes made about the pink surfaces of our streets and quite honestly with the heat island effects, the darker we go on our street surfacing and as we lost canopy with the tornado, I just ask that we be aware going forward that the lighter colors we can use on our streets and everything else we do in the city will definitely benefit our city in many ways. So I am in support of this project but You know, the pink wasn't so bad. Thank you.

No, thank you. I'm just curious about the timing of this project, especially as it relates to upcoming events in the city.

So we will develop a schedule once we have a contract awarded. The contractor will have 365 days for completion of the project. My anticipation would be that the curb ramp work would take place this fall with paving taking place in the spring. We will finalize that with the contractor. It's going to be a lot to probably squeeze that all in before temperatures dip below this fall, but we would avoid whenever we give these contracts to the contractor and in our pre-construction meeting, we make them aware of different activities we have in the city that close streets down.

So like the art fair and other festivals. And then since there's federal money involved, I'm assuming that the federal government can't take any of this money away, that this is money we can count on?

I've never known that to happen unless you do something to violate it. It's always been there and available, but it is a reimbursement program.

Yeah. I just met our federal government was trying to change the rules. It seemed like to me. So I just want to make sure that wasn't this program was subject to that. I've not

heard of that happening

with this. Thank you.

On that question, Matt, when, how does, how does the reimbursement normally work? Like projects done, we would file for it. We'd get it next summer, next

fall. No, Right. We accrue, I'm sorry, we submit requests along the way. We can submit one monthly, anywhere from one to six months intervals. We make the payments, submit the request for reimbursement and receive them. Typically on a project like this, we would receive about four reimbursements throughout the project as we make the requests.

Okay. So if the federal government starts changing its mind, there's a chance we'll get some of this before they change their mind. We would

submit reimbursement requests along the way. In fact, MoDOT will reach out to you if it's been a few months and say, hey, reminder, get your reimbursements in because they want to distribute the money as well. So the money flows

through MoDOT and then flows down this? Okay. Would MoDOT backstop that if the federal government pulls it?

I don't believe so.

It's just a pass-through, okay. And I think you said this, David, but this is already in the budget, so this is not anything other than $107,000. That's over. Okay. Okay,

thanks. And there's a portion of the project was carried over into 26.

We anticipated, as we saw prices continue to increase from when this was originally planned, we anticipated some of this increase in the budget for next year. That's why it's only not the full delta. It's only the 107 extra. And

we won't need to approve a budget amendment for that because we've already got money in the capital fund. That's correct. We

have enough to cover this year, the 107,000 that we didn't anticipate and then the money will appropriate for fiscal year 26 we'll cover the rest of the project great

thanks thank you

thanks matt anybody else

okay i'd like to introduce bill number 7083 approving the contract with burn and jones construction incorporated doing business as bernard jones construction for the central business district phase two resurfacing project to be read for the first time by title only second any discussion

mr city attorney

Bill number 7083, first reading an ordinance approving a contract with Byrne and Jones Construction Incorporated for the CBD phase two resurfacing project.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

I move that the board give unanimous consent to consideration for adoption of bill number 7083 on the day of its introduction. Second. All those in

favor?

Aye.

Opposed? Let the minutes reflect that the board has given unanimous consent.

I'll introduce bill number 7083, approving a contract with Byrne and Jones Construction Incorporated, doing businesses Byrne and Jonas Construction for the Central Business District phase two resurfacing project to be read for the second time by title only. Second.

Discussion? Mr. City Attorney.

Bill number 7083, second reading and consideration for adoption. An ordinance approving a contract with Burland Jones Construction Incorporated for the CBD Phase 2 resurfacing project.

Alderman Buse? Aye. Alderman Patel? Aye. Aldeman Gary Feder?

Alderman Buse? Aye. Alderman Patel? Aye. Aldeman Fader?

Aye.

Alderman Rick Hummell?

Alderman Hummel?

Aye.

Aldermen Jeffery Yorg? Aye. Mayor McAndrew? Aye. Thank you.

Aldermen York? Aye. Mayor McAndrew? Aye. Thank you.

Great. The next item on the agenda is a contract for, I guess, the beginning of restoration of some of our sidewalks and curbs.

Yes, this is the first restoration contract that the board has seen. The Public Works Department is requesting approval of construction contract with Kingsland Concrete Contractor for the restoration of damaged sidewalk and pavement sections throughout the city resulting from trees and utilities which were damaged during the May 16th, 2025 tornado. Three responsive responsible bids were opened on July 28th, 2025 and Kingsland Concrete submitted the lowest responsive responsible base bid in the amount of $290,000 uh, eight, $290,867. Excuse me. Uh, there was an ad alternate with that. We did not accept. It was very, very expensive. It would have added an additional rock base, um, within those, those sidewalk sections, especially, uh, uh, near the trees so that in the future, if you had large trees, they would be potentially less prone to pulling up the sidewalks. If the tree were to fall, uh, this is something that one, uh, adjacent city has experimented with a little bit. We don't know what the long-term viability or effectiveness of this would be, but it is quite pricey to add that particular treatment. So we decided to decline that ad alternate. So the total project again was $290,867 for that base bid. We are recommending approval of the construction contract for that base bid amount In addition, we are requesting a 5% contingency, which is $14,500. We are going to seek reimbursement from FEMA for this particular expenditure. The work is planned to begin as soon as possible and should be substantially complete this calendar year, so by the year end. We should have over 200 slabs replaced here in the city. We are going to prioritize those areas near schools or heavily traveled pedestrian areas, so we want to get those done first. We do have some sidewalk slabs missing adjacent to a few of the elementary schools in particular, and those would be the ones that we would target for the first replacement. We recommend that the Board of Aldermen approve the ordinance authorizing a contract with Kingsland Concrete Contractor LLC in the amount of $290,867 plus a contingency of $14,500 totaling $305,367 for the sidewalk and pavement disaster restoration project. that is what we're calling it and this will be again included in all of our fema um documentation we've bid this according to all of their standards so we should be good there uh and so we look forward to getting this going and i know the public you know is looking forward to it as well uh matt malik's here again if you have any questions about the work that we'll we will be undertaking

great thank you uh i'll open the discussion does anybody have any questions or comments about this project

I have one comment. It does not have to really go to the substance of the contract and the work that will be done, and I understand that this is FEMA-related federal government terms and everything else. The one thing I would ask as a city is on page 104 of our document, GC22, at least where we have the definitions on there, one of the terms used in here is unauthorized alien. There's a lot of... Awareness these days that words matter and how we classify people, and we may need to, in the contract, use that term unauthorized alien, but I would hope that at least in our definition, at 16.1.10, unauthorized alien can be a person who does not have the legal right. We can change alien there to a person on behalf of the city and recognizing the dignity of whomever that might be.

Are you proposing an amendment? And are we allowed to change that language?

Where is that? I'm sorry. On page 104.

Yeah, page

104. We cite the federal definition for unauthorized alien. Here you go.

Right here. I realize we may have our hands bound as far as using the term later in the document, but as we define it, I would ask that we consider making that slight change.

That may be a federal definition that's going to be able to

change. 16.2.6? No, 16.2. First of all. 16.1.10.

We don't have the authority to change the U.S. code, which is where the definition comes from. I believe the term is defining both words. So they are first an alien, that is to say, not a citizen of the United States and unauthorized. So I believe both words are relevant as used in the contract.

So do we have the ability to change it or we do not under FEMA and federal definitions?

I would not recommend changing it, again, because it is referring to an existing definition in this federal statute.

To be clear, Kevin, what you're saying is the term alien is presumably defined to say anybody who isn't a U.S. citizen, and then the definition was on the say that You're not a citizen who's also here...

Unauthorized.

Unauthorized, okay.

So I don't think, because I don't think we are, you know, we aren't talking, yeah. I mean, Susan, I really, I mean, I appreciate you really bringing that up, but I think it's because we're citing something that's coming from the U.S. rather than, you know, rather than using the term alien, I guess, in a contract that we're creating, so...

Yeah, so this isn't standard contract language that we use or have used in the past. This is adapting the federal language.

We have this in a number of our contracts, yes, because this is in the federal code that deals with, I'm looking at this section right now, unlawful employment of aliens, and this is exactly how they define it in there. So this is very, very standard language meeting the federal requirements for who you're hiring for the work.

Because again, rightly or wrongly, the federal government defines anybody who isn't a citizen as an alien.

This says it is unlawful for a person or other entity to hire blah, blah, blah, an alien. So I mean, they're They draw a really hard line in their definition between person and entity and an alien. And citizen, basically

non-citizen. So alien sort of equals non-citizen,

but can you talk about like why it's in this contract, but it wasn't in the prior one? I think that's what I want to understand is like, what's, how do we decide what types of language we include? And I mean, this contract is five times bigger than the one we just approved. and has a whole bunch of other provisions, but they're both like construction projects on streets and sidewalks. So what causes this one to be so

different? Yeah, Matt, if you could. The CBD resurfacing project is going to have a whole other layer.

Yeah, and I think this section... I apologize. I think it's just the section of the contract that we included with the CBD resurfacing. We included the city contractor agreement, which... it did not appear to attach the general conditions which are typically in the contract and to my knowledge so it's also in that contract it's just the general conditions were not attached and they don't always get attached because a lot of times it's uh the general conditions of the contract along with some specifications which add a lot of pages To my knowledge, it's part of the federal E-Verify program for worker eligibility. And I think that is usually a requirement from the state, especially whenever there's federal funding involved. And by default, I think it's been included in all of our contracts to make sure we're compliant whenever we might have that funding.

State law requires that for all contracts in excess of $5,000.

I understand that. Requires E-Verify.

Yes, ma'am.

Yes. But does it require the use of the language?

For public entities entering into contracts over 5,000.

Yeah. But there is that distinction. The E-Verify is one thing and then having to use that language. It sounds like that this is what we need to use for this contract because it's what the government has given us. excessively we'd be aware going forward that um words do matter there's an there's a reason that language is chosen and we can avoid it whenever we can

thanks susan i don't have any you know

i think my only question is on terms of fema reimbursement i think in the beginning we talked about potentially 87 percent reimbursement um And then more recently, I think David earlier in the evening talked about 85%. This talks about 80%. Is this just based on does that potential reimbursement just vary depending? 75 will be FEMA. And then the state

is typically between 5 and 10.

But again, it varies a little bit depending on the circumstance. Correct. Okay. Thank you.

I'm pleased that we want to get on this right away, and I'm sure our residents will as well. I guess I'm just concerned in our prioritization And I'm glad you're looking at the schools first. I know, especially along Y down, there are a number of exposed areas where sidewalks are damaged and they're still adjacent to a disrupted stump and or utilities that are underneath. And so the last thing I'd want to see is replace a sidewalk and then tear it up again because we have to remove the stump later. So I'm just wondering and hopeful that we're going to coordinate that so that we don't have to do it twice.

Yes, absolutely.

Great. Thank you. I'm happy that we're certainly getting going on this project. If there's nothing else, Elder Woman Buse. I'd

like to introduce Bill No. 7084, approving a contract with Kingsland Concrete Contractor LLC for the construction of the sidewalk and pavement disaster restoration to be read for the first time by title only. Second.

Any discussion? Mr. City Attorney.

Bill under 7084 First Reading, an ordinance approving a contract with Kingsland Concrete Contractor LLC for the construction of the sidewalk and pavement disaster restoration fiscal year 25 project.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

I'd like to move that the board give unanimous consent. consideration for adoption of bill number 7084 on the day of its introduction second

all those in favor

aye

aye any opposed let the minutes reflect that the board has given unanimous consent i'd

like to introduce bill number 7084 approving a contract with kingsland concrete contractor llc for the construction of the sidewalk and pavement disaster restoration To be read for the second time by title only. Second.

Any discussion? Mr. City Attorney.

Bill number 7084, second reading in consideration for adoption. An ordinance approving a contract with Kingsland Concrete Contractor LLC for the construction of the sidewalk and pavement disaster restoration fiscal year 25 project.

Alderwoman Buse. Aye. Alderwoman Patel. Aye. Alderman Gary Feder.

Alderwoman Buse. Aye. Alderwoman Patel. Aye. Alderman Fader.

Aye.

Aldermen Rick Hummell.

Aldermen Hummel.

Aye.

Alderman Jeffery Yorg.

Alderman York.

Aye.

Mayor McAndrew. Aye. Thank you.

The next item on the agenda is a contract for the Shaw Park Livable Community Master Plan Project.

Yes, on March 11th, 2025, an RFQ or request for qualifications was issued for professional design services related to Clayton's livable community master plan project in Shaw Park. This is the former ice rink site. Eight proposals were received and evaluated based on professional reputation, demonstrated qualifications, team member qualifications and experience, knowledge of Clayton and the region, and past record of performance. After a thorough review and interview process, the Lamar Johnson Collaborative Incorporated was selected due to their strong qualifications and relevant experience. The city's owner representative Navigate Building Solutions managed the selection process to ensure alignment with the city's project goals and budget. services provided by lamar johnson collaborative team under this contract include include discovery and data collection pre-design and conceptual planning schematic design design development construction documentation bidding and also construction administration The fee negotiated by Navigate and the City for this contract is $646,900, which includes $10,000 in reimbursable expenses. The design portion of the project will be paid using funds from the general fund balance. Design is planned to take place over the next 12 months, with construction bidding planned immediately following in the fall of 2026. Staff recommends approval of the ordinance, approving the authorizing I'm sorry, the contract with Lamar Johnson Collaborative in the amount of $646,900 plus a 5% contingency of $32,345 for the Livable Community Master Plan Project in Shaw Park. And I did get one question in advance of the meeting from Alderman Gary Feder. relative to the construction administration line that was in the RFPA and also in the contract. Page 161 of the packet really outlines what that is, and this is where the architect is with you really throughout the construction phase of the project. So doing things like addressing change order and sketching those up and designing change orders as those may happen. If there are requests for information and those are going to come in from contractors from time to time, this is the fee that you're paying the architect to respond to those requests for information. Pre-construction conference, they're going to be at our weekly meetings. So it's that portion of the project for them. The one thing I wanted to be very clear on is the construction administration is not to be confused with what Navigate will be doing as the construction manager or the city's owner rep as we go through this process. This is simply the architect working through the construction process and doing those various tasks, so I just wanted to make that clarification with that we can take any other questions you have.

Yes, on March 11th, 2025, an RFQ or request for qualifications was issued for professional design services related to Clayton's livable community master plan project in Shaw Park. This is the former ice rink site. Eight proposals were received and evaluated based on professional reputation, demonstrated qualifications, team member qualifications and experience, knowledge of Clayton and the region, and past record of performance. After a thorough review and interview process, the Lamar Johnson Collaborative Incorporated was selected due to their strong qualifications and relevant experience. The city's owner representative Navigate Building Solutions managed the selection process to ensure alignment with the city's project goals and budget. services provided by lamar johnson collaborative team under this contract include include discovery and data collection pre-design and conceptual planning schematic design design development construction documentation bidding and also construction administration The fee negotiated by Navigate and the City for this contract is $646,900, which includes $10,000 in reimbursable expenses. The design portion of the project will be paid using funds from the general fund balance. Design is planned to take place over the next 12 months, with construction bidding planned immediately following in the fall of 2026. Staff recommends approval of the ordinance, approving the authorizing I'm sorry, the contract with Lamar Johnson Collaborative in the amount of $646,900 plus a 5% contingency of $32,345 for the Livable Community Master Plan Project in Shaw Park. And I did get one question in advance of the meeting from Alderman Fader. relative to the construction administration line that was in the RFPA and also in the contract. Page 161 of the packet really outlines what that is, and this is where the architect is with you really throughout the construction phase of the project. So doing things like addressing change order and sketching those up and designing change orders as those may happen. If there are requests for information and those are going to come in from contractors from time to time, this is the fee that you're paying the architect to respond to those requests for information. Pre-construction conference, they're going to be at our weekly meetings. So it's that portion of the project for them. The one thing I wanted to be very clear on is the construction administration is not to be confused with what Navigate will be doing as the construction manager or the city's owner rep as we go through this process. This is simply the architect working through the construction process and doing those various tasks, so I just wanted to make that clarification with that we can take any other questions you have.

i'll open the discussion, are there any questions or comments from the audience or from the board.

My question to David, I think he's clarified. I was a little concerned that we just made clear that these are not two firms who are potentially doing services that duplicate one another. And I think it was clear to me, hopefully to everyone, that these really are separate services and warrants, you know, separate contracts with these two

companies.

Yeah, just it would be helpful if we could lay out big picture contracts how this will roll out, especially gearing to the, should we anticipate that we have a very specific plan that they're looking at and they're going to bid something and then bring it back to us with options? Or help me understand what this process will look like and over what timeframe.

Page 166. If you go to page 166 of the packet, you'll see the owner's program for the project. And so this is really where we're stating what the scope is of work for the architect. So what we're looking for when we replace the ice rink site. So you can see in there an event lawn or surface with shade structures. It's flexible for year-round activities and includes the ability to accommodate a temporary ice sheet. So that's one thing that we've talked about. A small building to accommodate restrooms and flexible use space. So concessions, those types of things. New pickleball courts on the site, potential new sports courts. So as we go through this process that there's room left over, say there's private funding that may become available, something like that to add sports features to the site. That would be something that would be designed overall site improvements, which includes elimination of tennis court number 10 and also the century garden. So we are going to use that particular area for this purpose. So we'll have to do something with the sculpture that's located at the century garden. We'll figure that out later. And then the streetscape along Brentwood and ADA related to the site and accessing the site. All of those things will be addressed through this design process. We are going to continue to use that steering committee that made this selection and really talk through the concepts early on to guide this process. And then there's going to be checkpoints with the Parks and Recreation Commission, also the Board of Aldermen along the way, And there are provisions in this contract as well for community engagement. So we are going to go to the public and make sure that we're on track with these potential designs. So this is going to be a long process. You know, it's going to take a full 12 months to design this out. But their job is going to be to hit the marks with that particular scope and provide those particular features within that site. And the board and Parks and Rec and the community are definitely going to have opportunity to weigh in on what this looks like.

Good. So they've been given a very specific charge, and I appreciate how it's all outlined here, but I wanted to make sure that we have the opportunity for it to be iterative. And so it sounds like that's the

case. Thank you. And just to draw your attention on page 167 as well, another thing that was specifically defined in here, just if you're worried about cost creep or anything. We did have them specify a total program budget of $7 million here. So they understand kind of what the cap is at this point in time, given the funding mix that we've discussed.

David, just in terms of like the architect's responsibility, I know we talked about that they would, as we talk about private funding, I didn't see a lot of discussion in here as to whether they would accompany some group of people to go to, you know, Any sort of potential private donors? Is that identified? I'm not sure

that they listed it specifically. I know that they do list a number of public engagement sessions and I'd have to look through here to find that exact number, but it would be incorporated into that.

Okay. So you're under, I mean, you are under the impression that they know that we hope that they will accompany us.

And Tony has been, Tony's had more conversations than I have with, with LJC through this process and with navigate, um,

You know, once there's actually some sort of design that we can potentially present to some private donors, that they would potentially be in attendance at some of those meetings? Yes.

Yeah, they will. And they know that CCF will be reaching out for donors for this project. And so they know that they would have a rendering that we could present to potential donors and if they would need to be involved, they're prepared to do that.

Okay, great.

So I'm glad we're moving forward on the project. The only thing I would reiterate kind of what we talked about during the retreat, which is I'm all for getting this project done, but I'm glad to see that there's a termination provision in here because I'm still concerned about what our budget will look like depending on the light poles, depending on some of the other stuff that we have the ability to say, this is great. We're going to put it on the shelf for the moment until we have a better sense of what we actually get reimbursed in FEMA and what we don't and what the light poles are and some of those other like costs we've talked about, which I would hope we would know a year from now, but I'm glad we're moving forward with it. I just, again, kind of reiterating that conversation, which I'm glad if we need to terminate this as in, we don't need them for construction administration, we can do that. if we have to shelve this for a couple of years. Otherwise, I'm glad we're going forward with it to see what it comes out to

be. Page 188 has a good breakdown too of how these expenses are incurred along the way. So you'll see 25% is really on the back end. So after the design process is done and you're moving forward, that's 25% of your expense is the bidding process and construction. So construction documents are 40%. If we got to design development, all of a sudden this looked like a $9 million project and you didn't want to move forward, for the construction drawings or anything after, you will have only spent 35% of this contract. We've also structured the contract with Navigate Building Solutions to happen in phases where we're paying $99,000 for the pre-construction process. And then the remainder is actually for the construction phase. So if we decide not to move forward with construction, that contract would stop. It's got a cap at that point. And then again, on page 188, you can see where these expenses break down. So we can definitely put the brakes on it and not incur the full amount of either contract.

Okay. And I appreciate you guys building that in because as much as I want to get it built, and I hope we can, I just want to be thoughtful of, as we all were about what some of the unexpected stuff is, because it's right. It's ultimately all going to come out of the general fund. So thank you.

And the only addition to that too, and I think that, um, I think I read it this way, but it's a long document. Uh, If they design this and we need to modify, scale it back, we've got the flexibility to work with them to get that done as well.

Absolutely.

Versus just shelving it.

Right. I think they... Most of these firms would prefer that you go through, even if it's a project that's been rolled back some, than absolutely stopping it. Because as you can see, a lot of what they're paid is through that construction phase and developing those construction drawings. So they'll typically help you see it to the end, even if your budget rolls back. And presumably we

own these designs, right? That's correct. Yeah, got it. Okay. Not that I'm saying we'd move. Again, if this becomes a five-year delay, I want to make sure that we at least have something. Got it.

Thank you. If there's not anything else, Alderman Bios. Oh, yep.

I was just going to say, I think it's worth noting, just sort of for the record, it's been alluded to, but it's worth reminding everyone that there were like eight firms that competed for this project. It committed... went from eight to four, and then each of the four was interviewed extensively. And they were all impressive performances in presentations. So I feel confident that this is, I think, the best of the group to carry out this project. So I feel very comfortable. And I think we did talk to them when they were all interviewed about their ability to provide people who could go out and help with private fundraising. And I think that tends to be part of their teams is they have people who are sort of accustomed to that sort of public relations aspect of the project. So feel good about that as well.

Great. Thank you for those comments.

Alderman Buse. I'd like to introduce bill number 7085, approving a contract with Lamar Johnson Collaborative for Livable Community Master Plan Project in Shaw Park to be read for the first time by title only. Second.

Any discussion? Mr. City Attorney.

Bill number 7085, first reading. An ordinance approving a contract with the Lamar Johnson Collaborative for Professional Design Services related to the Livable Community Master Plan Project in Shaw Park.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? Alderwoman Buse?

I move that the board give unanimous consent to consideration for adoption of bill number 7085 on the day of its introduction. Second.

All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Let the minutes reflect that the board has given unanimous consent.

I'd like to introduce bill number 7085, approving a contract with Lamar Johnson Collaborative for Livable Community Master Plan Project in Shaw Park to be read for the second time by title only. Second.

Any discussion? Mr. City Attorney.

Bill number 7085, second reading and consideration for adoption. An ordinance approving a contract for the Lamar Johnson Collaborate for Professional Design Services related to the Livable Community Master Planned Project in Shaw Park.

Alderwoman Buse. Aye. Alderwoman Patel. Aye. Alderman Gary Feder.

Alderwoman Buse. Aye. Alderwoman Patel. Aye. Alderman Fader.

Aye.

Aldermen Rick Hummell.

Aldermen Hummel.

Aye.

Aldeman Jeffery Yorg.

Aldeman York.

Aye.

Mayor McAndrew. Aye.

Great, thank you. The last item on our agenda is a charter amendment for the November election.

Yes, the Clayton City Charter provides that amendments to the charter may be proposed by the Board of Aldermen and that any amendment approved by a majority of qualified electors voting thereon shall become a part of the charter at the time and under the conditions fixed in the amendment. The Clayton Board of Aldermens has had several discussions on potential amendments to the charter that would update procedures, clarify certain provisions and use gender neutral language. To that end, the attached ordinance proposes an amendment to the charter and calls for an election on November 5th, 2025 for the electorate to consider several such changes. Notable charter revisions include the following, removing all gender specific references and change the name Board of Aldermen to City Council. Secondly, it would remove several sections related to specific departments, boards and commissions and provides that such departments, boards and commission shall be established or amended by ordinance rather than the charter. This includes provisions related to the fire department, police department, library board, parks and recreation, director of finance, director of public works, plan commission, police and fireman's retirement fund and municipal court. And the one thing I would say about that is If this is to pass this evening, we'll go to work on putting ordinances together so that the charter is approved by voters that we can implement those ordinances right away so that we address all of those issues within our municipal code. And really doing this allows a couple of things. First, a lot more flexibility so that if we wanna make a change down the road, rather than having to go to voters and have them approve a relatively minor amendment to the charter, we can do that legislatively by ordinance. And secondly, it makes it much easier if we find opportunities within these boards, within these particular departments to consolidate or collaborate specific functions with other cities, then we could do so again by ordinance rather than having to get a charter modification. So it would be much easier for us to collaborate with our partner cities in a number of areas. So Just wanted to explain that a little bit further for the public. Next, it specifies that the Mayor and City Council term limits relate to consecutive full terms. It clarifies provisions related to compensation for the Mayor and City council members. It updates and streamlines provisions related to purchasing and public improvements. And staff recommends that the Board of Aldermen consider the ordinance to amend the charter and submit the amendments to the voters on November 5th, 2025. Finally, I would point out that there is one change from the ordinance that you saw before to what's before you this evening. Our city attorney had the election board take a look at what we had prepared and they wanted to change the yes, no portion of the proposition. So that has changed from the initial version to what you see this evening, but they have verified as far as the number of words that were in good shape, even though it's more than 50. And then finally, they did state that they would take any copies of the charter that we wanted to provide and post those at polling places so that anybody that wanted to look through the full charter changes, the red line versions, they could do so at the polling place. In addition to that, if the board approves this ordinance, then we will make that public on our website. And we're going to communicate that that information is available for anybody that wants to inspect it. So with that, I'll answer any questions you have.

Thank you. I'll open the discussion. We can just go around. Everyone may have comments or any questions

about... I have a pretty quick question on page 212. It was Section 1, Departments, Boards, and Commissions. When it says that there shall be administrative departments and boards as established by the city, is that by you, David, or by the city manager? Is that... I think it says city council or otherwise prescribed by law. Go on down. Oh, by city council. Very good. Okay. Just hadn't read it thoroughly enough. Hard with the red line. This is a lot of work. Thank you for doing this so thoroughly. And that's all I have for right now.

Great. I just have a few things I want to clarify where I think we might be actually making changes. And I want to make sure I understand if we are. So first you mentioned, I think what one of my questions was, was whether we already have ordinances for boards and commissions and things that are in the charter today that And so it sounds like I believe what you said is that if we pass this, the staff will go to work to prepare the ordinances that would be required to meet like what we're hoping to do going forward, what we do do today, etc.

That's correct. So, for instance, municipal court would be one where we're taking out a lot of provisions here and we need to reestablish those within the code of ordinances. We have others like Parks and Recreation Commission and the Plan Commission, where we have a set of rules, powers and duties composition that are established within the charter, and then another set of responsibilities that are shown within the code of ordinance. This way we can go ahead and put all of that in one place, which is much easier as well.

I think that's great.

A lot clearer.

Yeah, thank you. There's a question on Section 5 vacancies. They're moving the provision that says, except if a vacancy occurs within 120 days, does removing that actually give us the option to either do it at that time or sooner? Yeah. I was trying to figure out the significance of removing that clause.

The purpose of removing that clause was to accommodate the timing for conducting elections. According to this, if someone resigned from office two weeks before a municipal election, we would have to call an election for that day. So it's an unworkable process. dictate as it is anything within 120 days has the special election has to be held on the municipal election day as currently written so what we're saying is there will be a special election and we can hold that on any day that we determine without being tied to the municipal election day especially since there are limits on when you can certify for the election for an election

yeah Okay. Thanks. It would appear that I know we're going to be, I think we already have, we already have some ordinances about the municipal court and judge. And obviously, as you alluded to, we'll be reviewing those. Well, I guess one of the things I'm thinking about is whether by things that I guess we will have to consider is whether we are talking about taking the requirements that are in the Charter and putting them in that ordinance right so like by altering it, the way we have today we're removing the residency requirement. I. might be okay with that. Like, I don't, I'm open to doing that, but it would be, the point is it would be up to us then to establish it by ordinance and we could choose to do that or not, right? I just want to make sure that we're clear about-

Yes, the judge is one item that- The judge and provisional judge are definitely going to be addressed in ordinances. An early version of this charter amendment actually removed the residency requirement and changed the term from two years to three years, which was something the board had discussed on verification. So when we... bring an ordinance to the board of aldermen to consider that particular ordinance will have the residency requirement taken out right and we'll change the term from two years to three years

okay

we will make some of those changes but we will you know keep some of the general language about all of the language about how that appointment is made so we are going to incorporate the past discussions though

right The other thing I was curious about was like removing and maybe it's because it's a subsection of something else for finance, like we're removing that it says that there'll be like a public hearing where we review the budget. Is that Is that another example of something we would be switching to an ordinance or like, do we believe that that's redundant with the requirements that we already have under?

Yeah, we can, we can operate. We can move that into the ordinance under that particular section. There are other places where the budget's brought up, so I do think that's a redundant requirement as well. If you look at the city manager's responsibilities, it talks about regular financial reports like we did one this evening. It talks about when I have to present the proposed budget to the board of Alderman, those types of things. So we'll go through and clean all that up to make sure that it's not all redundant, but we will keep the requirement for a public hearing, which I believe is also a state law requirement. Yeah. I mean, we're

all going to be meeting and talking about anything means it's public unless it's one of the few items that we

are posting the notice for.

So we're not taking away a public hearing on the budget. We were saying it's a waste of letters to have it in the charter.

Correct.

Yeah. Yeah. I believe that is all that I have. Thank you.

I think I saw all eight versions of this document at one point, so I think the document looks very good and I appreciate David's efforts and Kevin and Most of all, June's efforts, I think, in producing all of these documents. But I think the document that's in front of us addresses all the things we want to address. And once we adopt the ordinances, hopefully after the charter is approved, we'll be all caught up in much better shape than we are today. So thank you. Thank you.

I have to confess that I focused on the email versions of the charter amendment rather than this one, and so I was a little surprised about the rather significant changes of what we're removing from here. And I appreciate that you identified all the reasons for that in the beginning, but what I'm trying to remember is whether or not we discussed as a group what whether this is something that was an important thing for us to do, that is significantly modify the charter and change it to ordinance. And what I'm looking for there is more, how do I explain this to our citizens? What's our compelling reason for making this change?

I think it would be exactly what we've laid out before. The fact that you... deal with a lot of these things legislatively already. A lot of these things as they become outdated become very difficult to change because we don't bring charter amendments to the residents on a regular basis. I would say it's not uncommon to regulate the things that we're pulling out of the charter within a municipal code. We just happen to have a charter that's loaded with every type of provision, you know, they could ever think of at the outset. Um, so what we're trying to do is put more of that in the hands of the legislators here and make it easier to make adjustments as we move forward. So given the discussions that we've had on things like collaboration and trying to reach out to our neighbors to consolidate functions or whatever it is, there are certain areas within the charter where it would make that extremely difficult. Um, given the provisions that we have. So to maximize that flexibility and give the Board of Aldermen the authority to change things as needed, as time progresses, that's the biggest advantage. So as we went through here, we were really trying to cut the charter back to those key things that you typically see within a charter, which is the mayor and the board of aldermen and their duties and responsibilities, the city manager's duties and responsibilities, general provisions that you will have a court, you'll have these other things. But the details of that court take care of all that by ordinance. So that was the mindset. You know, the more we opened this up and went through it, the more we realized, hey, there's a lot of stuff within this charter that could and should be codified versus being held within the charter. So that's how this came to be as we worked through it.

So I appreciate that, and that makes sense to me. I guess what I'm thinking through this is that it does create a bit of an expectation that we will make an earnest effort to consider evolving these departments as we go forward with other communities. Otherwise, why would we do all of this? So I think that's important. And then the other thing that just comes to mind is that As I recall, when we went through all this, there were a handful of things or a couple handful of things that we really wanted to get done. And now, while the substance may be the same, the actual number of words and things that are changing are far more significant. I just wouldn't want that to adversely affect our ability to have this successfully implemented at the polls. So I don't know that it's anything really to worry about, but that's just a gut reaction as I'm absorbing all of this.

Absolutely. If you look at the number of changes that are actually of substance in here, it's not that many. All the redlining that you're seeing is that switch where we're taking things out and putting those within the code of ordinances. So the number of real changes that people will see in the end are really minimal here.

Thank you. Two things. One I kind of already talked to David about, and probably that's a shock to any of you, is I asked how much it would cost to change all the branding from Board of Aldermen to City Council. Apparently it doesn't sound like a whole lot. I think David quoted probably $1,000 or so, but I wanted to be thoughtful if we were taking on a million-dollar

cost. I know.

Those name tags, yes. Business cards. The name tag I keep losing, so this will be a replacement. The bigger thing I had, and we kind of talked about it, but I would kind of hit it a bit or to the point, is like, I get why we're doing it all. It all makes sense to me. But I think for a lot of voters who aren't going to pay attention until the day of, if this is hanging at the voting direction and they see all this red and say, you're getting rid of my judge, you're getting my police, getting my fire, like, no. So I think it's... Good governance to do it this way, but I think we need to be very thoughtful and take advantage of the educational part of a campaign. I'm not sure what this would look like yet, and I don't want to spend a ton of money on it necessarily, but if we post it to the website, making sure we have a very clear description as to these things are going to be ordinances. We are not getting rid of these departments because I'm just – I'm just afraid on an awful election like that you're going to have people just see all the red, to Rick's point, and then just vote no out of whatever. And again, I mean maybe that's an educational communication piece that we can do through our online systems and CityView. I want to make sure that we have some sort of – educational campaign that isn't necessarily mailing stuff out that's costing a lot of money, but enough that we're hopefully dissuading people's concerns about the amount of red ink that's here.

Yeah, I mean, if we do our jobs, residents are looking at this for the first time. Typically, your people that are going to go to the polls to vote on a charter issue, which may be the only thing on the ballot, are going to take a look at it in advance. But our job is to get that in their hands and not just the charter amendment itself, but a top sheet on it that really explains what's there and why we're Yeah, no, and that makes sense.

I'm just saying given that we're mid-August and the city view is probably almost already done, for example, I would guess. I'm just raising out like I'm not sure what that would look like, but I would love to have a longer conversation to make sure we're covering as much as we can. We're

going to have to get on it right away. Okay.

Yeah, but Jeff, I think that's a good point. I mean, and I, you know, I did talk to David too about making sure because, you know, you can present all the red line changes on our website, but, you know, it's difficult to get through all that, you know, people don't have a lot of time. So some sort of, you know, summary of what this means, you know, what the reasons for it are, I think will be, you know, very important. So, yep. I just want to say that I want to especially, I want to thank Alderman Gary Feder, Kevin and our city attorney, Kevin and David. A lot of work went into this. I think it's, again, really important to do to allow some flexibility. You know, our charter was created many, many, many years ago. A lot of it's pretty outdated. So I think it's really going to provide us with, again, more flexibility going forward. Certainly the ability, as David said, to collaborate with other cities, which I think is very significant. So is there any members of the audience that have any? Yep. Sir, would you like to come up?

Yeah, but Jeff, I think that's a good point. I mean, and I, you know, I did talk to David too about making sure because, you know, you can present all the red line changes on our website, but, you know, it's difficult to get through all that, you know, people don't have a lot of time. So some sort of, you know, summary of what this means, you know, what the reasons for it are, I think will be, you know, very important. So, yep. I just want to say that I want to especially, I want to thank Alderman Fader, Kevin and our city attorney, Kevin and David. A lot of work went into this. I think it's, again, really important to do to allow some flexibility. You know, our charter was created many, many, many years ago. A lot of it's pretty outdated. So I think it's really going to provide us with, again, more flexibility going forward. Certainly the ability, as David said, to collaborate with other cities, which I think is very significant. So is there any members of the audience that have any? Yep. Sir, would you like to come up?

I think your points are well taken. I mean, I think I understand totally why why we want to do this.

I'm sorry, is the mic on? Is it green?

Yes, it is. Oh, great. I just

wanted to make sure.

This makes totally a lot of sense, but I think this is one where given some consideration to maybe some type of a forum with the voters or some type of a place where voters can go and get some understanding. As I realize this is an off-year election, I realize there's only going to be a certain number of people that are going to be interested in something like this, but I think This type of a change, although needed, is going to maybe need something more than just a mailer that shows up two weeks before the election. So I support what you fellows are saying 100%. And I

appreciate those are great comments. And I think, yeah, I know that communication is very important. Right. Thank you. Thank you. Any other comments,

questions from the audience? When was the last time our charter was amended? Was it 93? That was the date referenced.

It had been in about 2003, I think, for the purpose of adding clear authority to impose a gross receipts tax on telecommunication activities. I think that was the last time.

I think I recall that 92 or 93 was a prior amendment.

Yeah, that's the one that did a lot of stuff related to term, like it's referenced throughout the document. So I wasn't sure if there had been any. Thank you.

Thank you. Alderman Buse.

I'll introduce Bill No. 7086, approving the proposed amendments to the city charter and calling for submission to the voters for the November 4, 2025 election. To be read for the first time by title only. Second.

Any discussion? Mr. City Attorney.

Bill number 7086, first reading. An ordinance proposing amendments to the city charter of the city of Clayton, Missouri, changing the name of the Board of Aldermen to City Council and adopting other gender-neutral language, updating and simplifying administrative and procedural provisions, clarifying term limits, vacancy elections, and compensation procedures for elected officials, and calling for submission to the voters of the city of a proposition relating to the adoption of such amendments.

All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Alderwoman Buse?

I move that the board give unanimous consent to consideration for adoption of bill number 7086 on the day of its introduction.

Second. All those in favor.

Aye.

Opposed? Let the minutes reflect that the board has given unanimous consent.

Introduce bill number 7086, approving the proposed amendments to the city charter and calling for submission to the voters for the November 4, 2025 election to be read for the second time by title only.

Second. Any discussion? Mr. City Attorney?

Bill number 7086, second reading and consideration for adoption. An ordinance proposing amendments to the city changing the name of the Board of Aldermen to City Council, and adopting other gender-neutral language, updating and simplifying administrative and procedural provisions, clarifying term limits, vacancy elections, and compensation procedures for elected officials, and calling for submission to the voters of the city of a proposition relating to the adoption of such amendments.

Alderwoman Buse. Aye. Alderwoman Patel. Aye. Alderman Gary Feder.

Alderwoman Buse. Aye. Alderwoman Patel. Aye. Alderman Fader.

Aye.

Aldermen Rick Hummell.

Aldermen Hummel.

Aye.

Alderman Jeffery Yorg. Aye. Mayor McAndrew.

Alderman York. Aye. Mayor McAndrew.

Aye. Great. We have come to the end of our agenda. We'd like to go around and talk about if there's any notable things that have happened in the last couple weeks or any reports on any commissions.

I can be really quick. Jeff and I had our word to coffee. I'm happy to say that we didn't hear any complaints or concerns about our city. Great. We didn't hear anything. We had a great time catching up, but we did hold the coffee. No one joined? No. Okay.

So, yeah. We were there. June sat on the whole thing as the administrator.

So I guess because people can call us on the streets and everything else, I will take it as a good sign. the uh the other thing i wanted to bring up was the the art fair unveiling was uh was very enjoyable it was a very nice evening we had discussed with um sarah using this came from the sustainability committee using the water monster that we have there to cut back on the use of plastic you know single-use bottles and because they're contracted vendors that was not something that they want to want the city to provide this year, but it's certainly something to put in motion earlier next year. And the only other thing I wanted to bring up was on, as I ran around today doing various things on St. Louis public radio was quite a discussion on the demographics and the decline and the impact it's going to have on our municipalities. If anyone can pull that up, it was insightful. It's disturbing. We've heard it all before. Um, But we do have to be aware of our population and where we might be going.

Thank you. Thanks. Parks and Rec had no quorum I missed. We canceled the equity meeting or was there one I missed? We'll talk about it. Thursday. Thursday has been canceled. Yeah, the one coming up has been canceled. The thing I just wanted to talk about was on Monday night, there was a gathering called Standing Together, a gathering for healing and hope hosted by Kol Rana, the congregation nearby. The rabbi there, Noah Arno, hosted and there were folks there from Our Lady of Lourdes and Refresh Community Church, neighboring faith communities. Our mayor spoke and Captain Thuit, as well as the special agent in charge of the FBI in St. Louis, Chris Crocker. Danny Cohn from the Jewish Federation, and Rabbi Amy Gary Feder. And it was a really great program I was, I was really fascinated. Glad that I went, there was a relative diversity in the room in terms of folks who are members of that congregation or others and residents of Clayton and other communities and a good number of people. Rabbi Arno encouraged us all to meet two people we didn't know before we left, which was, I thought just really great. I appreciated that. And there was a lot of appreciation voiced for our Clayton Police and Fire Department response, as well as Mayor McAndrew's response to city support. So, just want to say that one of the things that I reflected on and shared as it relates to this is that earlier this year we had some of us had the opportunity to go to the Jewish Federation of St. Louis for a report on the greater St. Louis area. Jewish community study, which was a really significant study done on the broader Jewish community in our region and did a lot of things to highlight kind of the diversity of the community. But one of the things that I remember really standing out was the statistic that over half of Jewish adults say that they actually avoid the activities they engage in out of fears of anti-Semitism. And so unfortunately, I feel like what happened was, you know, an example of why that fear is rooted in something real. And I'm just proud of Clayton, of our staff and mayor for the response and how the community in general has come together. So

Thank you. Thanks. Parks and Rec had no quorum I missed. We canceled the equity meeting or was there one I missed? We'll talk about it. Thursday. Thursday has been canceled. Yeah, the one coming up has been canceled. The thing I just wanted to talk about was on Monday night, there was a gathering called Standing Together, a gathering for healing and hope hosted by Kol Rana, the congregation nearby. The rabbi there, Noah Arno, hosted and there were folks there from Our Lady of Lourdes and Refresh Community Church, neighboring faith communities. Our mayor spoke and Captain Thuit, as well as the special agent in charge of the FBI in St. Louis, Chris Crocker. Danny Cohn from the Jewish Federation, and Rabbi Amy Fader. And it was a really great program I was, I was really fascinated. Glad that I went, there was a relative diversity in the room in terms of folks who are members of that congregation or others and residents of Clayton and other communities and a good number of people. Rabbi Arno encouraged us all to meet two people we didn't know before we left, which was, I thought just really great. I appreciated that. And there was a lot of appreciation voiced for our Clayton Police and Fire Department response, as well as Mayor McAndrew's response to city support. So, just want to say that one of the things that I reflected on and shared as it relates to this is that earlier this year we had some of us had the opportunity to go to the Jewish Federation of St. Louis for a report on the greater St. Louis area. Jewish community study, which was a really significant study done on the broader Jewish community in our region and did a lot of things to highlight kind of the diversity of the community. But one of the things that I remember really standing out was the statistic that over half of Jewish adults say that they actually avoid the activities they engage in out of fears of anti-Semitism. And so unfortunately, I feel like what happened was, you know, an example of why that fear is rooted in something real. And I'm just proud of Clayton, of our staff and mayor for the response and how the community in general has come together. So

Well, I certainly think, unfortunately, the major thing that happened in the last two weeks was this arson attack on Westmoreland. I think as was just discussed, you know, it was a very moving service yesterday at Colrena and was very inspirational there. It sort of ties in with other things that we've been talking about in the community at the Equity Commission. We've been trying to talk to the school district about programs that it is pursuing relating to anti-Semitism. I know our chair is here in the back of the room, and while I think the school district may, on its own initiative, have adopted some programs in the last couple of weeks and will continue to, I'd least like to think that the Equity Commission talking to Dr. Poole and to others in the school district had an impact. And so hopefully that will bring about some positive things. Rick and I attended the CCF meeting, which immediately preceded the Art Fair program. So we were kind of running between meetings. But at CCF, there was discussion and a lot of enthusiasm from some of the folks who were there about the plans for Y-Down, the idea of having some concepts for people to look at. And then hopefully coming up with some kind of program that the city can pursue almost certainly probably with private help because those are not reimbursable through FEMA expenses and, but I think there's some real energy there, especially in the areas directly surrounding the worst of the destruction to help raise funds in a way that CCF really has not done in the past, which is much more individual type of giving as opposed to corporate giving. So it's an interesting challenge for CCF. And I think people there are excited about and would like us to get it going as soon as we can. But again, they understand there's a process and We will have those alternatives, and people will look at them. We'll try to come up with a program, and then CCF can try to work with us to try to raise the necessary funds. Art Fair program was great. It's always good to be back at Hush, and I don't have to work there anymore. But they are beautiful offices. It looks

different than it used to, Gary.

I don't think the art fair reveal will ever want to be anyplace else other than those offices. So all that was very positive. We continue, and I know the city's addressing it in our area, to hear more questions about the vaping store on Clayton Road. But I know the staff is committed to continuing to look at that, and we've told residents that In September, hopefully we'll have some further suggestions about how to deal with that situation. So I think those are the highlights for me. Thank you.

Thank you.

Great. I would just piggyback on Gary's comments regarding CCF that they did identify a number of things they want to work on, but clearly Y-Down was the one that had the most enthusiasm. They are prepared to be supportive with Shaw Park, but obviously it's early on that. And then finally, the one that they're trying to be focused on, but I don't know that it generates the same level of enthusiasm is Hanley House. And so the next meeting will be September 18th. And that's their, I guess, founders program and big fall event. We had a non-uniformed employee retirement fund meeting yesterday. I'm pleased to report that as of July 31st, we hit a new record high of $26 million. And so that's the highest it's ever been. And so more importantly, we continue to achieve at a rate higher than our actuarial rate, which means that we're in, well, we're not 100% funded. We are achieving our goals. And so that's a good thing. On Friday, we do have a CRSWC meeting. And so I just wanted to give you a couple of highlights because on September 3rd, we'll have our joint meeting with the school board. And so there's two major things I'd draw your attention to on Friday's agenda. One, we will be hearing from Opera Theater St. Louis. I know that they met with the school district on Friday and Nisha had told me that there wasn't really a lot that the school district on its own could do regarding parking lot usage, which is what they're going to address. It's really more a CRSWC topic. They did provide us some very general information to say that they're contemplating building an 800-850 seat theater and that they have 250 spaces on site, but they think they need more parking at least during their season. And their season is from May 1st to July 15th. And so they're going to try to make the case that this would not interfere with the intense use of our parking facilities. Of course, the devil in the details is, well, what happens when they lease it out to other people and how does that potentially affect us and how do we write that? And so everything is very, very general at this point. So there's more to learn. I suspect we want to be supportive of trying to make this happen, but we need to understand exactly what the implications are. The second thing that we'll be looking at is as a commission approving the fiscal year 26 budget, which then will go to the collective board on September 3rd. Right now, the fiscal year 25, the budget we approved was for a deficit of $442,000. The 26th budget would be a deficit of $491,000. We do think, though, that our deficit won't be that bad for 25, but that's in part, as I mentioned last time, to some openings we had in personnel, so it might be half that deficit. Anyway, the point is the trend is that it's getting more negative as we go forward. And I just think it's important that we have consensus with our partner on how we want to go about addressing that deficit, whether it's increasing fees or revenues or whether we're increasing our subsidy as we go forward So those are my reports.

It tends to be typical as being the last one. Most people have covered most of my stuff, but I it's actually more of a question for, for David, because obviously I've been gone for June or July. How did the ward two neighborhood block party go? I'd ask Gary, but I don't know. Tony probably knows maybe.

I heard that attendance was a little light that day. It was very, very, very hot. So I didn't,

I was out of town. So unfortunately

I didn't make it

either. I meant to ask her and I just forgot since we're talking about

it as well. And Deb Grossman that went and from the conversation we heard there because they always have a sustainability table. it was very light attendance on a very hot day so

okay one one thing that we are talking about internally is is potentially moving these block parties to the fall um and looking at October dates for these now if we're to do that for the upcoming fiscal year that means we're having them again uh within the next couple of months here so we need to talk about that that's something we'll talk about when we we get to budget and that sort of thing but that was definitely an observation that we had uh two of these at least uh ward one and ward two that were very very hot days so it was it was hard to get people there thanks that's all i got

contrast to that um after the reveal i forgot to mention we did walk over to the chapman plaza concert which is because we're in clayton there's so much vibrancy and so many things going on and that was that was wonderful with people sitting around on the hill and listening to the music and everything else so you know versus the neighborhood parties which maybe we have to work on the weather a little more um That was another great asset in our city.

Thanks. Great. Thanks, everybody. I would just mention we did have a uniform pension fund meeting yesterday and it also has reached an all-time high of just i think it was i have 64 million dollars obviously it wasn't on the dot but it was around there so also an all-time so that was great um the reveal was also wonderful the hush offices i think it was so well attended i'm sure a lot of people just wanted to get into that building um and see what it looked like But that was great. I also want to mention, too, that we had a wonderful assistant city manager for many, many years who has left us. She is now, as everybody knows, the city manager out in Frontenac. So we had a goodbye party with all of the employees that I missed because I was out of town, but then there was a gathering that many of you were at last week. So just a shout-out to Andrea. I think we'll all really miss her. I think she did a great job, but I know she'll do a wonderful job in Frontenac, so... And then lastly, thank you for your comments, Becky and Gary. It was a real honor to be present at Colerina yesterday evening. It certainly, the events of last week touched me more significantly since it was on my block. But yes, it was, as both of you mentioned, a wonderful event to be at, and I was very happy to be there. So David, do you have any final comments or?

Happy birthday, Mary.

Oh,

thank you. Thank you. Yeah.

Is it actually today? Actually. Oh, happy birthday. David's it's David's son's birthday too today. Oh, I actually have a lot of birthday buddies. Like I was listing like five or six people that I know with my birthday. So yeah.

And you got to get out of here to go celebrate with everyone.

Well, you know, so I just asked him to share it. It's my mother-in-law's birthday too. So the kids were at my mother, my in-laws house. So I just said, just shave me, just save me a piece of cake. So yeah. And then I think we'll see almost everybody on Friday. Okay.

Oh, I will miss Friday. And just so you all know, it's my day jobs, two-day leadership team off-site. It's really not negotiable. So thank you for understanding. And I will follow up and watch the recording. Thank you. Yeah.

Great. Motion to adjourn?

I move to adjourn. Second.

All those in favor? Aye.