October 14, 2025 — Meeting Transcript

Good evening, everybody. It is Tuesday, October 14th, and we're here for our Board of Aldermen meeting. If the city clerk could call the roll. Alderwoman Buse?

Here. Alderwoman Patel? Here. Alderman Gary Feder?

Here. Alderwoman Patel? Here. Alderman Fader?

Here.

Aldermen Rick Hummell?

Aldermen Hummel?

Here.

Aldeman Jeffery Yorg?

Aldeman York?

Here.

Aldewoman Waldman? Here. Mayor McAndrew? Here. All right, this is the time, and I'm sorry, Anna Krane? Oh. Here. And Kevin O'Keefe? Here. Thank you.

Aldewoman Waldman? Here. Mayor McAndrew? Here. All right, this is the time, and I'm sorry, Anna Crane? Oh. Here. And Kevin O'Keefe? Here. Thank you.

Um, this is the time in our meeting where if there's any public requests and petitions, I don't see anybody in chambers. That's not a staff. Um, is there anybody online? Um, great. Um, so we will move forward with the first item on our agenda, which has a lot consolidation plat and, um, I will open the public hearing and request proof of publication.

Great. This is a lot consolidation plat for 505 and 10 South Hanley Road. It's a public hearing and subsequent ordinance to consider approving a subdivision plat for the consolidation of two lots to create one. Each lot is zone C1 and developed with a commercial building and service parking. The lots are now under common ownership, and the proposed consolidation would facilitate construction of an addition to connect the two buildings. The new lot would total just over 16,000 square feet. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the lot consolidation at their meeting on October 6th, and staff recommend approval of the proposed ordinance.

Thank you, Anna. I'll open the discussion. Does anybody have any questions or comments?

I'll just share that this came before the Planning Commission last week and was very well received. This is where the dental office goes back and there's a parking lot in the old dry cleaner was behind there and they're expanding it into the dental office. The one hitch was the architecture review board with some of the materials and looking more at what might be the best materials to use for the site, but as far as the lock consolidation, it seemed like it was very well supported. Thank you. Appreciate

that. So I was just going to ask, it's going to be still used by the dental office and just expanded into a larger dental office. Basically they're expanding.

Yes. It'll all be a dental office. Yes. Great.

Thank you. And Susan, it sounded like they were still going to be amenable to using that lot for parking in the evenings. Wasn't that a discussion? Yeah, that came up as well. People use that a lot for the restaurants in

the area. Correct. Yeah, after business hours, that's something that they're very much open to. And there was no change in the footprint as far as permeable surfaces and water in the surrounding neighborhoods. So it all seemed pretty straightforward.

I got nothing.

I don't have any issues with the consolidation. I just have a general question about lot consolidation, though. When we do something like this, does it have any impact going forward on parking requirements for either of the buildings that might not otherwise be there? Or is that something that's just unique to this district? It doesn't apply. Can you help me with that?

Sure. So the consolidation plat doesn't have any impact on the parking regulations. That's based on the use and the density. So in this case, under the existing structure and existing parking, if the use that's replacing that existing use, so in this case, the dental office is expanding to where the dry cleaner was located. So if our parking code felt that the new use would create more parking demand under the code, then they might have to provide additional spaces depending on what scope of work they're doing to either expand or enhance the property. In this case, the scope that they're doing for the new use, the dentist to expand, won't trigger a requirement for any additional parking beyond what is already provided between the two properties.

Okay, great. Thank you. So are they keeping the building? Are they refacing the building? Or are they actually tearing the building down and put a new building up?

They're keeping the building and refacing and actually joining them together. So it's one building. And the parking, the old dental office only had street parking. So actually having that lot as part of the building, I think, addressed the parking as well. But yes, they're keeping that. And that was one question because they're putting, and I'm sure Ana can say this better than I can, but they're putting different facades on to match the brick and the coloring. And there was a question on the quality of the materials and longevity and things like that for the neighborhood. And that's why it was continued as far as the Architectural Review Board approval and coming back next time with approvals on that. But yes, keeping the buildings.

Okay, thanks.

I have no questions.

Thank you. Alderman Buse. And there is no and there's nobody online either.

Nobody.

Ms. Randolph, your hand was raised with raise, would you like to speak? Go ahead. Oh, you're muted. Maybe can you unmute yourself? She's the owner of Nettie's. So she's probably

on the line for that. Got it. Okay.

Sorry about

that. I don't know. I just raised my hand because you asked if anyone was online and I'm not sure. Yes. No, don't worry about it. Okay. Yeah. No, don' worry about it for now. Okay. Thank you.

Okay.

I'll introduce

bill. I'll post a public hearing. Sorry, now you can hear me. I'll introduce bill number 7101, approving a lot consolidation plat for 50510 South Hanley Road to be read for the first time by title only. Second.

Any discussion? Mr. City Attorney?

Bill number 7101, first reading an ordinance approving, providing for the approval of a plan to consolidate certain property known as 500 and 510 South Hanley Road in the city of Clayton, Missouri.

All those in favor?

Aye. Any opposed? Other women abused? I move that the board give unanimous consent to consideration for adoption of Bill number 7101 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 introduce Bill number 7101, approving a law consolidation plat for 50510 South Hanley Road to be read for the second time by title only. Second. Any discussion?

Mr. City Attorney?

Bill number 7101, second reading and consideration for adoption. An ordinance providing for the approval of a plat to consolidate certain property known as 500 and 510 South Hanley Road in the city of Clayton, Missouri.

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

Alderman Boos? Aye. Alderman Patel? Aye. Aldeman Fader?

Aye.

Alderman Rick Hummell?

Alderman Hummel?

Aye.

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

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

Great, so the next item on our agenda is the consent agenda. Hopefully everybody saw that there is a revised meeting date. One of the discussion dates was Juneteenth, so that's just got moved to June 12th, the Friday before. Does anybody have any other? Yes, Alderman Fahey. Just

to point out that I occasionally do read the minutes. I did find a typo and I forgot to call June, but as long as we're doing this, And the section that dealt with new pilots, it's page 15 of the minutes where Mark Elbrecht addressed the board. And in the third line where it says were, W-E-R-E, it should be where, W-H-E-R. Other than that, the minutes were wonderful. Thank you. That's a

lawyer. Anybody else? Alderwoman Buse. Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, go ahead. I'm sorry.

I move that the board approve the consent agenda. Second.

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

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

Aye.

Aldermen Rick Hummell.

Aldermen Hummel.

Aye.

Aldeman Jeffery Yorg.

Aldeman York.

Aye.

Aldewoman Waldman. Aye. Mayor McAndrew. Aye. Thank you.

Elizabeth, hopefully you can hear me. I just want to let you know that we approved the liquor license for Nettie's Pizza. That was kind of part of our consent agenda, so there wasn't any discussion about it, so you are good to go.

Yeah. I heard they might be opening in about two weeks. That's exciting. We always have. That's great.

All right, we'll move into our city manager report, which the first item is an easement agreement with MSD.

Yes, this is an ordinance to approve multiple agreements with Metropolitan Sewer District. As part of the planned renovation and expansion of the Clayton Municipal Maintenance Facility, the city requires the execution of multiple agreements with MSD, including a storm sewer easement agreement, a sanitary sewer agreement, a BMP maintenance agreement, and an encroachment agreement. The overall purpose of these agreements is to formalize the necessary land rights needed for the municipal renovation project ensuring that the newer sewer infrastructure and stormwater management facilities can be perpetually maintained and regulated. Staff recommend approval of the ordinance authorizing the execution of four agreements with MSD. Also here tonight is our Director of Public Works, Matt Malik, if there are any questions.

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

No? Yeah. I just have one.

Yep.

I might as well make Matt stand up and come up with one. Just for due diligence, if nothing else, I'm assuming there's – we don't really have a lot of say on where these go in order for us to build the public works garage the way we want to.

Basically, yes. A majority of these easements are really rectifying items that are already in place and capturing them. I'd say 75% of these lines are already in place, but were just never captured by easements whenever the facility was originally constructed. And the encroachment agreement itself is because the site is so tight, we have limited areas. So the things we're putting on top of the encroachment areas, excuse me, can be moved if need be for sewer maintenance. But whenever you build anything on top of an existing easement, they require the encroachment agreement. But part of it's rectifying and capturing existing lines that are already running through the site.

So there's some stuff that's already there. It's not like you're building new stuff and 75% ish of the cases.

Right. We're relocating part of the sanitary sewer, which is new, but the storm is capturing what's already there, and so is half of the sanitary sewers. Okay. Do you have any reason why it wasn't captured before? I would just, based on the age of the facility and whenever they came through there, portions of it could have been constructed before MSD was even chartered. Gotcha. Fair enough. Thank you.

Alderman Buse. I introduce bill number 7102, approving easement agreements with Metropolitan Sewer District related to renovations expansion of the Clayton Municipal Maintenance Facility to be read for the first time by title only. Second. Any discussion?

Mr. City Attorney?

Bill number 7102, first reading, an ordinance approving multiple agreements with Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District related to the Clayton Municipal Maintenance Facility Project 8300 Shaw Park.

All those in favor? Aye. Any

opposed? I move that the board give unanimous consent to consideration for adoption of bill number 7102 on the day of its introduction.

Second. All those in Any opposed? Let the minutes reflect that the board is giving unanimous consent.

I introduce bill number 7102, approving easement agreements with the Metropolitan Sewer District related to renovations and expansion of the Clayton Municipal Maintenance Facility to be read for the second time by title only.

Second.

Any discussion?

Mr. City Attorney?

Bill number 7102 second reading in consideration for adoption. An ordinance approving multiple agreements with Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District related to the Clayton Municipal Maintenance Facility project at 8300 Shaw Park.

Alderwoman Buse. Aye. Alderwoman Patel. Aye. Alderman Gary Feder. Aye. Aldermen Rick Hummell.

Alderwoman Buse. Aye. Alderwoman Patel. Aye. Alderman Fader. Aye. Aldermen Hummel.

Aye.

Aldeman Jeffery Yorg. Aye. Aldewoman Waldman. Aye. Mayor McAndrew. Aye. Thank you.

Aldeman York. Aye. Aldewoman Waldman. Aye. Mayor McAndrew. Aye. Thank you.

All right, the next item on the agenda is an art donation that will be located in Anderson Park.

Yes. So the Clayton Community Foundation has received an offer for a donation of public art entitled Haram Pastor, which translates as three shepherds. Anderson Park was decided to be an ideal location for the artwork due to its expansive acreage, but also as a strategic asset that will help shape the identity and robust amenities of the park. CCF will negotiate the long-term loan for the artwork and or physical acquisition. The Parks and Recreation Committee and the Public Art Advisory Committee have recommended approval of the donation and the proposed placement. Staff recommend approval of the installation of the public art in Anderson Park, as well as CCF's management of the donation and installation in coordination with Parks and Recreational staff. Also here tonight is our Director of Parks and Recreations, Tony Searing, if you have any questions.

you uh open the discussion does anybody have any questions or comments

yeah i'll just say that this did come before the art advisory committee and it's it's a pretty awesome piece and i'm sure tony can elaborate on that and also the location where it is as you come into the dog part it's just it's just an open area and it really softens it kind of brings it together and again i think there's a lot of excitement around that coming the only um The only concern people had is people knowing that this was actually Clayton and not Ledoux. So aside from that, it's a really great donation that we've secured. And thank you to Parks and Rec and everyone involved in doing that.

It was hard to find much about the artist online. And I feel like people at the PAC are very informed on artists. Did anybody talk about that? Where he's from?

He's Hungarian. Okay. Yeah. 1900s um trying to remember that the funny part of it is uh well personally my husband's from budapest his mother is and so we actually went over there last year for the first time forever And I'm pretty darn sure we saw the, there's three, this is one of three of the same cast. And it's in the public art, public, a public art park in Budapest. And I'm pretty sure we saw it or also I'm just imagining that. And then, so when I saw this come up and the Hungarian artists and everything else, so it's, it's quite large. It's on a metal, it's on a marble slab. And again, it's, but there wasn't a lot of talk about the artist. Tony, do you have anything else to add to that? I think they think there's one on the East Coast and the one in Hungary and the one here for that

particular piece. Correct. That's what I understand as well. There really wasn't a lot of information out there about him. He did painting and sculptures, and he did a lot of terracotta work originally. So yeah, but this is bronze and their Hollywood.

And the only other thing I know about him is the Hungarian artists at that time did a lot of these pastoral um outdoors type type work of community

yeah like agriculture um with like a farming emphasis and then so the the base is that all part of it or do we create our own base and

we will have to have a concrete base poured um and again the ccf is it will incur all the expenses for that

thank you and they're also paying attention to how to maintain the The greener you're at, I had to mow the lawn and everything

else around to make sure that could be easily done. Yeah. So the mowers won't go right up next to it. And yeah. And then it'll be placed as you're heading, if you go down into the park right here, right before that first parking space. So again, it'll be a nice entryway into the park and it should be even visible from Clayton Road.

And I know there's a sign just because Susan's comment about it being led to, I mean, we have a nice sign that says Anderson park, but does it, does it say city of Clayton on that sign? No, no. That was a concern. It's apparently it says

it right over here somewhere, but people were like, yeah, but people might think this. Yeah.

That was

not that it matters, but

right. No, that is the only park sign that we have. That's different from our other ones at the behest of the donor.

Got

it. Okay. Thank you. Yeah.

No further comment. We talked about this at Parks and Rec, and it was supported. I think it's great.

I reviewed the graphic with Louie at my house, and although he knows nothing about shepherds, he did like the pieces, and so I think

Excellent.

He suggested a yes vote on this. Can I ask Tony just a quick, as long as we have you up, can you give us like a minute's worth of how the park, how this dog park is doing these days?

It's not doing as well as it had been in the past. We, when the new dog park was, or when the new fence was was reinstalled after the MSD project. The slats are just a little bit wider than they had been previously, which is allowing for smaller dogs to perhaps get through those slats. So one of the things we're challenged with is that it is a floodplain. So what we did is we put some windscreen fencing that the water can go through on one side of the dog park to try to help alleviate that issue. of the dogs sneaking out. So we did have our annual Bow Wow barbecue down at the dog park. At the end of September, we had staff that came out there, they could renew memberships while we were there. And we're actually going to make a big push for that this year. So people know of the enhancement that we made to the fence. So and that should meet the MSD requirement, because water would still be able to flow through that.

Thank you.

You're

welcome. Yes.

Gary, I don't recall that we talked about this at CCF at all. I

don't either.

Okay. So not that that matters, but I'm more just curious about the history of this, given that it's an existing piece and how did it come to be offered to CCF? Where is it now? And why was it decided to go where it's going? I'm just interested in that.

It's in a personal residence right now, and that resident is moving. She does not live in Clayton, but it's in a home. She is moving away from that home into, I believe, into a high-rise in Clayton, which is why she wanted to donate it to the city of Clayton. And I can't speak to why it wasn't talked about at CCF, but we did look at all of our parks, and we felt like this was a really good place fit for this park because it is a larger piece, it would really overwhelm some of our smaller parks. And we felt like we already had several pieces of artwork in Shaw Park. So we felt like this could be a great place to really start to activate Anderson Park as well too.

So, and I'm curious, I'm not familiar with all of our public art, but the ones I'm thinking of are generally elevated on a pedestal that I'm thinking of. These are right on the ground where small kids could climb on it. And so are we contemplating anything, whether it's from a care or liability standpoint regarding that issue?

One of the things that we talked about in specifically with the mowers right up next to that was maybe putting like a landscaping bed around it, maybe ivy, maybe annuals, perennials, so that it isn't so attractive for people to climb on it. But we also have the elephant on a tricycle that's next to the treetop playground at the north end of Shaw Park. That is not on a pedestal as well. So I think it depends on the piece of art. But this obviously was designed for and currently sits like right on the ground on that slab. Okay, thank you.

I wouldn't say that there's, I mean, we don't go to the dog park as much because my dog has some anxiety issues that she's dealing with. But I don't, there aren't a lot of kids that play in that green space either. People really stay in the dog area. That has been my perception.

Right. No, I would agree. Yeah.

And it's set back from the dog park. It's not right up against anything.

For several reasons. Yeah. So that it's not an attractive nuisance for dogs as well. So yes. Yeah.

So I'm concerned about, I want to think through, it says all insurance liability maintenance will be paid by the donor. So if it's a loan, I get that. But if it's a gifted, like how do we know the donor is going to keep doing that? What kind of liability do we take on if the donor stops? Or for that matter, what do we take on a CCF goes away at some point?

Really, probably what we would take on is the annual maintenance and care, which we already do an annual. We have an annual maintenance agreement for the other pieces of art that are in the park that are not insured and sponsored by CCF. So it would roll into that as well.

Do we have all those insured then? Is that how that... So this would just roll up under our... whatever our insurance is because correct to rick's point i'm a little looking not concerned but given where it sits kids can climb on it frankly it's just isolated enough it could be you know spray painted whatever like i'm just thinking through like what liability we take on once we take it especially if the donor decides again donor or ccf is unable to pass its way or whatever and

It's my understanding that the donor would not be interested in having this piece back because she would not have a place for it in her new residence. So I believe it is a permanent gift, but I can work through the details of that with Alex Elmstead. But the other part of putting it in Anderson Park is that we are looking at doing a fruit orchard in Anderson Park. So we also want to activate that park as well with more amenities and not just the dog park. So I think the more people that are there and have eyes on what's happening down there, the better.

No, and that makes sense. I think to the extent that Alex can work through some of this negotiation with the donor to cover some of that, and it's in writing, I think... And if they're not, they're not. It's just good to know.

Sure. Yeah, I believe it's intended to be a permanent donation.

Okay, thanks.

Can I add, Jeff? When I was, I think, the pro bono lawyer for CCF in the past, we always had on all the art pieces a separate agreement I would usually do the first draft, send it over to Kevin for the city perspective. And I can say the bottom line always was that CCF would do everything it could to have zero liability, zero, because for exactly the reason you said, never really was going to be a good target for any future actions. It was basically... ccf there were three-party agreements ccf the city and the donor and invariably the city it became city's responsibility because the reality was ccf wasn't going to be the guarantor of any of this stuff so it basically transferred any interest it had over to the city and but again it varied from from donation to donation and i have no idea what document is in place with reference to these pieces so i

think it was remiss in um Not mentioning thank you to CCF when I saw you sitting there. But that did come up at the meeting. I don't remember the exact conversation, but whether it would be a loan or a gift, but that CCF was going to work on the agreement which they've done in the past to make sure all those types of issues were addressed. Eyes dotted, teeth crossed.

I like the idea of the art. I'm just thinking through if it's going to be... If it defaults to the city's responsibility, I just want to make sure we're all kind of aware that like that's, we're taking that on. And if it's not, great, let's pass it off to CCF or the donor, whomever. I just wanted to kind of clarify. So thank you. Thanks, Gary.

Without wishing to prolong this any more than necessary. First of all, the city is protected by sovereign immunity from most tort claims. One exception is if there is a dangerous condition on public property. And if that art piece is there and is dangerous, it doesn't matter whether we own it. We permit it to be placed there. Who owns it? Anyone injured would look to all potential parties for coverage. And it would be covered by the city's blanket insurance coverage over all city facilities and buildings. I don't think it would make a meaningful difference to the underwriting of the city's insurance coverage.

I think it's a great piece. I think it is a really great way to activate that entrance to the park. I think it addition to that entrance. I guess the other thing I wish we could get Clayton, you know, on that, that park entrance, I think that would be something we should do just so that it isn't confused with Ladew, especially if we want to, you know, amplify the usage of it. So

that's something we can look into. Definitely.

Yes. All the women abuse. with sincere appreciation to our donor as well um i moved to approve resolution uh 2025-28 approving a request from the clayton community foundation to install donated artwork sculptures at anderson park second

any discussion all those in favor all right any opposed great um Even though David's not here, there was a question him and June were talking about. We have meetings scheduled the Tuesday of Thanksgiving week. We also have a meeting scheduled December 23rd. Is everybody I mean amenable to perhaps canceling those that will lightly that will probably make our other meetings that month, a little heavier. But if everybody's all right with that presumably you know I mean David is looking out so he knows kind of what's coming so is everybody

okay with that. I mean, I'll be here because the kids have school, but I'd love to not. But yeah, I'm fine canceling.

Yeah.

What did you say?

Yeah. I mean, I think if something comes up, we'll have to do something. Okay. Great. Thanks. That is the end of our agenda. We can go around kind of quickly if anybody has anything to report from committees or commissions they've been at.

Not much, because I think we just covered the two of mine. The Arts Advisory Council had met last week, and prior to that, it was the Planning Commission, and that was the dry cleaning, the lot consolidation with the big items there. Just two quick things to add is with Sustainability Commission, I was aware that AMRA and UE gives free house energy audits, and so I finally called to get our 1921 house energy audited, which is quite a problem when you've got that which is all masonry. And then you've got the addition that was put on in 1985, which sounds new, but it was really interesting cutting a number of windows and how to do certain things with the house. So, and it's free and they gave me free light bulbs and a new power cord and everything else. So if you want that, go ahead and call Ameren and it'll give you an energy house audit. The other thing we were just back from visiting my daughter in Denver and we went to two amazing street markets where they One was in a small town outside of Denver, and one was right in the city center. Very, very different, and both closing those streets worked beautifully, and the people came out in the strollers and the all-ages, and activating streets like that in those two very different environments is a really exciting thing. So I hope we keep focusing on looking at how to best do that here. Finally, the Cool Cities event is next week on Tuesday, the 21st, 10 a.m. at Beyond Housing. And again, it's urban trees and native plants and community resiliency. So hopefully some of us can go.

Thanks. Awesome. We had a word coffee in Ward one at Captain Elementary. Thanks to the school district for letting us use their space. And June for organizing it for us, we had a good attendance about 10 people or so I don't know it's pretty typical. For when we do this, the main topics that we talked about were tornado response and recovery, the Charter amendment and upcoming town hall the. I think the overwhelming response or what we heard from people. From my perspective was that they were just still having a lot of like positive feelings about the city's response to the tornado. We didn't have anybody actually who was really complaining about anything related to it, which is always nice. So appreciation for the staff and everything. Um, the only other, the things that came up were, um, some people have been seeing coyotes and, um, I didn't suggest that we would do anything about that. I don't think that there is anything for us to do, but if, yeah, I mean, it's, yeah. Uh, uh, I'm just glad we don't have a lot of deer, like the other rest of the county. Um, and some, um, The conversation, and of course Matt left, but about people driving the wrong way on one-way streets. I don't personally see this very much. They were saying sort of like the DeMunn area and then over like St. Rita and stuff like that where we have the one-ways. But one of the things that I was thinking is we could just kind of review, so I'll send a note to Matt too about like what's our, have we reviewed lately like what our signage is or like are there things we could put actually on the street that would be a little more obvious. There seemed to be a mixture, but a general belief that it's often happening because people don't seem to realize it, as opposed to that they're being disruptive, dangerous drivers. Not a big deal. Yeah. As often seems to happen, a lot of the topics, there was a lot of conversation about the school district. And that's always challenging because obviously we aren't the school district and we don't have any authority over them. So we talked about that. But we did have a member of the school board who lives in our ward who was there and was able to talk a little bit, but also did not dominate the meeting. So it worked out well. It was a great, great session. Yeah.

I was going to say there's still a yard sign talking about the coffee at DeMunn and Y-Down.

I took it down tonight. Oh, you did? Because I

was saying you could put up, we could cover it up to have it be for the town hall now.

Yeah, well, I've got them in my car so we can keep reusing them. Yeah.

Can I add, you mentioned that Matt was gone and he's actually at Oak Knoll Park because we've been trying to get the dark sky certification for the park. And the person who's handling it left and somebody else is doing it and they don't like the way we shield our lights. And so Matt's there taking pictures of... showing that the light does actually still go down and we're not polluting upwards. And so he's out there with different cameras because of those cameras we tried didn't work. So thank you to Matt. Yes, well, that's good. I was

actually hoping he had gone home to kind of rest and relax. Not quite yet. No, he's out working for the city. Out working, yeah. Alderman Bader?

Davis Place had its annual meeting. Kami and I were there with members of the police department to report on things. They had about 20 people in that sort of outdoor forum behind Merrimack School. So most of the people then went immediately from there to their homes. chiropractor due to the very hard concrete seats but um but anyway so that was that was uh it was a good evening then by the way the polo annual meeting is coming up i think early in november i think they're going to choose an indoor location which would probably be wise um i don't know if it's been mentioned at the plan commission meeting i think it was the last one david schlafly was getting his conditional use permit for his short-term rental um which I think is exciting because he said both to me before the meeting, but then to the whole commission that he's really interested in some type of entertainment on the first floor of that building at Merrimack and Forsyth. He didn't exactly say jazz club, but seemed like something very similar to that. And so, Anyway, and he seemed very excited about it. He went someplace visiting his daughter in Kansas City or somewhere, saw something, loved it, wants to bring it here. So anyway, I thought that was pretty neat. Yeah. Taylor Park, if it hasn't been mentioned, was the Ward 3 block party. I think it was very successful. That park really lends itself well because it's kind of a big circle and people were able to walk around. And I think it seemed to have a good crowd. I left early because I was going to a program for Focus St. Louis. And while crossing the street, I ran into Myron, who was there, who was also In the Focus St. Louis program, it's the 50th anniversary of the Leadership St. Louis program. 45 years of women in leadership. What program were you in, Myron? You were a different person. It was a very nice turnout. It was at the New Commerce Bank facility at their tower with the big open area. It was a lovely facility. The last thing I might mention is we seem to have almost... if not weekly, monthly meetings of the Municipal League going over the legislative session that's coming up in January. I think the reason they do this is because they asked their membership in November essentially to approve the priorities of what they want their lobbyists to really be working on uh, in the coming session or mostly what to defend against in the coming session. So if I didn't mention it last time, just so you know, the municipal league, um, has, has members from a variety of different cities. See if I can find my list here. Um, Just so you know, it's not, of course, all the 80 cities we have, but just on this committee alone, we have representatives from Clayton, obviously, Manchester, Ferguson, Frontenac, Clarkson Valley, Crestwood, Northwoods, Belnor, Webster Groves, Glendale, Manchester. The mayor there is the chairman, DePere and Baldwin. So it's a very broad spectrum of communities throughout the area. The priorities, which they listed, and I won't go through them again because I did the last meeting, but the biggest one, of course, is anything dealing with property tax or sales tax, constant concerns that Jeff City is somehow trying to, in any way it can, to change The formulas for property tax or sales tax, very concerned because it has a rural bent of trying to protect its citizens. And so there are a lot of concerns. There's the usual concern about tax. of tax on groceries. The people who are at the meeting today, lobbyists, people think that that's still not going anywhere. It hasn't gotten out of the house in the last two sessions. But the impact of that alone, if it were ever to be eliminated, they project statewide $1.3 billion would be lost And just looking at some of the proposals for property tax restructuring, it's even a larger amount. We're talking billions of dollars. And so it's very important, I think, that the league be very forthright and continue to work on these things. One thing that might be interesting, because it's come up in the Equity Commission, and I would mention is the whole operation of our municipal courts still dating back to some legislation post-Ferguson. And one of the things that's come out of that, I think we know, is that essentially whereas in the past a municipal court could issue a warrant for various kinds of traffic infractions, which of course we have lots of in Clayton because we have many people coming into the business area. That's essentially been outlawed. You can't issue a warrant for almost any kind of what is considered a minor traffic infraction. But what they are really dealing with now is is that if you get a ticket, for example, for failure to have a license plate, you don't show up on the day of court. There is no actual penalty at that point. You can't issue a warrant, and there's no such thing as a failure-to-appear warrant. And so what they are trying to do is modify this legislation to create essentially a new case infraction for which you could issue a warrant, and that is failure to appear because many of the municipal courts are finding that they are basically kind of toothless in dealing with any of these kinds of infractions because there's a big limit on what the fine could be. You have no ability to issue a warrant. There clearly was, in the past, there was a problem with way too many bench warrants being issued. But now you're at a point where essentially you have no warrants whatsoever. I know Steve Strum, our judge, is coming to the Equity Commission, I think, next month to talk about his court. But anyway, it's an interesting topic. and one that they are working on. So there are other issues that they're looking at. But the meeting of the entire board, I think, is a week from Thursday. And I think generally speaking, once this committee has sort of made its recommendations, there are like five or six priorities of things that the municipal league would like to work on. There are, of course, hundreds of things you could work on, but five or six they want to work on. And it's generally approved at that meeting. But I'm going to be out of town, but it's a week from Thursday at Richmond Heights at City Hall, I think, or at one of their facilities in Richmond Heights is going to be the meeting of the Municipal League. And this is one of the things they'll take up. And that was more than three minutes, I know, but forgive me.

Thank you, John.

So the only meeting I had was the one that Becky talked about, which was our Ward 1 coffee, and she did a good job summarizing that. I would just share a couple of other observations I had from the meeting. Perhaps this happens in your wards as well, but we have a number of representatives from the City of St. Louis that will attend our meetings because the neighborhood associations frequently cross those lines. And so some of their observations regarding the whole one-way streets affect both residents, of course. One of the other observations that... Inside that meeting, but just in general throughout our ward, people I think are, many people are very interested in this meeting on the 27th, anxious to learn more not only about the tornado recovery, but more specifically what we're going to do on Y-Down and what those renderings or plans might hold. One of the residents from the city wanted to make sure that we were going to share whatever it is we decide with the city of St. Louis in hopes that the city would continue buy into that plan or somehow, so it didn't look drastically different. And I'd share that information with David and I know his intent is at least to share it with the city of St. Louis. It was interesting, one resident expressed concern about our charter amendment regarding removing the city manager from the plan commission because she believed that he had wonderful expertise and was worried that putting an uninformed resident would be dangerous. So I just thought that was an interesting observation. And then the other thing that I noticed, and I noticed it as I drove to the meeting tonight, And that is, at least at the time I got here, all the streetlights were out from Hanley to Bemiston. And so throughout our ward, especially on Wydown, there are a lot of streetlights that are out. And so there's concerns of safety for many people and then what to do walking at night. So I know Becky tried to solve the problem by getting them a helmet with a flashlight or something like that. But seriously, the streetlight situation is an issue. And I know it's a complex and complicated and expensive one to fix. And so it's going to get worse during the winter months. And I know we're not going to get there. So it's just making sure that we have the presence of our police force just to assure people. And I know they're doing it, but I just want to emphasize that. Yeah.

Yeah, you know, and that is something that I know David and I have talked about because it is really dark. I mean, my husband bikes to work along Y down all the time and it's, you know, I mean he goes, you know, but it is it's a real issue and I think I think I'm sure David will be prepared to talk about it or respond to it at the meeting but we're just going to have to tell me it could be. nine or 12 months before we really see lights, like full lights along there again. I mean, Anna might know as well, but I think there's, I think just preparing people for the fact that it's going to take a while.

I almost brought it up again because, I mean, I noticed even coming here at 645 and it's not really deep in winter yet but it's getting dark and it's not safe like um and so I know that the permanent repairs have a long timeline and I understand there aren't great temporary options um but I I would just really love to know we've done everything we can to figure out like are there temporary options like even if they're not going to be quite as good i mean i don't expect them to light as well as the permanent option but would they be better i just it's i mean it gets so dark so early in the winter i mean kids are going to be like going home from school activities still and it's gonna be pitch black

In particular, just by the schools, whether it's the university or by Y down or St. Michael St. George or all the schools. Um, I just even driving here at dusk, there was a bicyclist that cut across the street. Didn't have a light on barely could see them pedestrians, uh, jaywalking. And so not criticizing what they're doing, but it's hard to see. And so I don't want to have an accident occur first.

I don't have much, um, Most of my meetings haven't met this week. Susan and I did meet with a couple folks from the school board for coffee, and it was good to – again, continue the dialogue but also get an update on what their current thinking is vis-a-vis both the athletic place, the individual school boards. My sense is as they've started to see more numbers, some of that thinking is – not changed, but they've refined kind of what they they're going to list as kind of priority one versus other priorities. So it'll be curious what continues to kind of come out of that. Um, but it was a good hour long discussion with them. So, you know, I think Susan, I mean, I don't want to speak for Susan, but I walked away having a better sense of kind of what the, what their current thinking is. So that's all I got.

Um, really it was just, uh, had a parks and rec meeting, uh, last Monday. Um, Director Tony Serring did a great job just reviewing the community survey results. Bottom line, the residents have a very positive perception of Clayton, which I think is great. And the satisfaction is much higher in Clayton than in other surrounding communities. So kudos to us for that. And then on a more important note, we're putting together, Tony's going to put together a task force to help figure out the proper protocol for our refs and our rec league members about hate speech. And that's being said during some of our rec league games. So that's something that is going to be addressed today. very soon, which is great. And then, yeah, the Ward 3 block party that was last Thursday was great. You know, the feedback, everyone had nothing but positive things to say about it. I think the location was maybe a newer one for block parties. And so I think that a lot of residents that kind of live around there that might not travel down, you know, to the Hanley House or, you know, things like that were all there and just really excited that we had an event there. So that's all I have.

I'll just say we had another shop park design meeting which Gary was that so that's that's proceeding they gave us some kind of. Like ideas like a little firmer ideas and we kind of gave them feedback and then we're meeting pretty quickly again in a few weeks, so that project is proceeding um. on a it's great the person from navigates would be good at keeping things on schedule which is wonderful um i met with a great a very cute group of fourth grade girls girl scout troop a captain that was fun um they have to meet with like a government leader as to get a certain badge and then they actually have to do a community project in order to get this certain badge i can't remember what the name of it was um but that was fun it was it was neat to meet with them um We had a Metro Mayor's Lunch. Thank you to June for figuring out where to have that within the budget. We had it at Peel. There were some police chiefs there, since Al's here, who just have real concerns about Senate Bill 5 because we've got this, you know, juveniles, I think as everybody knows, are committing a lot more crimes. They're stealing cars. They have guns. They're much more likely to have guns than they used to be. and 87% of them really get immediately released. So there's just no, that's why we just have constant recidivism. I mean, there's just no ability to prevent them from doing this. I think less than 1% are getting, I'm not suggesting they should be tried as adults, but less than 1% of them are actually getting certified to be charged as adults for crimes. So the police just really kind of, and I think everybody's recognizing that crime from the city is coming into the county. There's a lot more, I think there's a lot more crime in St. Charles than perhaps there had been in the past. So we talked a lot about that.

Can you say anything more about what Senate Bill 5 does? Is it

I think, I mean, I think the idea is that I don't know it very well. But, you know, I think just they're just really advocating more juvenile reform. I mean, I don't think they're suggesting that we should, you know, Lock more juveniles up, but just trying to deal with the fact and I think it might be a little bit of like what Gary was talking about. There's just so much serious crime being committed by juveniles right now and then they get they literally get immediately released and steal another crime three or four car three or four hours later. So yeah, so it's

That is, by the way, one of the other. Right.

I'm sure that was one of the big items.

Yeah.

Yeah. That keeps coming up. But yeah. So and then Ward 3 Block Party was great. And then I was also at City Coffee had their 30th anniversary celebration. um this past saturday so that was great um and gallardo was just so appreciative of the proclamation that june um created um it was just it was she was just overwhelmed with the kindness of it all so um so that was great very exciting they had a really great brass band that played for a couple of hours so it was a lot of fun so

um that is it anna do you have anything to report Nothing to report. All right, great. June, anything?

Groundbreaking ceremony for the municipal maintenance facility is the 27th.

Okay, so a lot going on on the 27th. Yeah, great. Motion to adjourn? I move that we adjourn.

Second.

All those in favor? Aye. Anybody opposed? Great.

Too quick.