City of Columbia, Missouri

Meeting Minutes

City Council

City Hall

Monday, February 2, 2026

7:00 PM

Regular

Council Chamber

701 E. Broadway

Columbia, MO

I. INTRODUCTORY ITEMS

The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri met for a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m.

on Monday, February 2, 2026, in the Council Chamber of the City of Columbia, Missouri.

The Pledge of Allegiance was recited, and the roll was taken with the following results:

Council Member VALERIE CARROLL, Council Member VERA ELWOOD, Council

Member JACQUE SAMPLE, Council Member NICK FOSTER, Council Member DON

WATERMAN, Council Member BETSY PETERS, and Mayor BARBARA BUFFALOE

were present. City Manager De’Carlon Seewood, Deputy City Counselor Becky

Thompson, City Clerk Sheela Amin, and various Department Heads and staff members

were also present.

Mayor Buffaloe explained the January 20, 2026 regular meeting minutes were not yet

completed.

The agenda, including the consent agenda, was approved unanimously by voice vote on a

motion by Mayor Buffaloe and a second by Council Member Waterman

II. SPECIAL ITEMS

SI1-26

Resolution of Appreciation - Carol Rhodes, Assistant City Manager.

Mayor Buffaloe asked Assistant City Manager Carol Rhodes to join her at the podium,

and presented her with a resolution of appreciation signed by the City Council. Assistant

City Manager Carol Rhodes thanked her parents for the values they had instilled in her,

former City Manager Ray Beck, who had initially hired her, and her husband, John, for his

support during her 30-plus year career with the City of Columbia.

III. APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS

None.

IV. SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENT

SPC6-26

Doug Hunt - Request to have Council restore to the Citizens Police Review

Board the powers and duties eliminated by the Council on September 3,

2024.

Doug Hunt, a Fourth Ward resident and a member of the Citizens Police Review Board

(CPRB), stated the CPRB was asking the City Council to reverse an action it had taken

at its September 3, 2024 Council Meeting, which had limited the powers and duties of the

CPRB in a number of ways, including narrowing the range of complaints they could act

upon, eliminating their ability to hear citizen appeals about racially biased policing and

inappropriate searches and seizures, eliminating their authority to comment on police

department policies or the training of officers, and hosting public meetings to discuss

such matters, making it difficult to provide a level of civilian oversight consistent with their

purpose of increasing policing accountability for the community along with increasing

community trust in the police, during a time when increasing police accountability and

community trust was important, explained the changes were made based on the advise

of the City’s legal department and changes in State Law, particularly Section 590.653 of

the Revised Statutes of Missouri, understood other Missouri communities, such as

Ferguson and Kansas City, had continued to make recommendations on policies,

procedures, and training, host public information sessions on law enforcement matters,

and make findings on allegations of misconduct that were outside of the four categories

specified by State Law, and reiterated the request of the CPRB to lift the restrictions

placed by Council action at the September 3, 2024 Council Meeting.

SPC7-26

Sarah Read - Action needed to ensure reliable electric service.

Sarah Read, 3802 Bedford Drive, noted one of the essential functions of government was

to provide for the safety, health, and welfare of its people, felt Council had failed in that

duty ten years ago when it paused the construction of a transmission line along Nifong

Boulevard/Vawter School Road despite it being extensively studied, approved by the

Council and the voters, and on-time and on-budget, explained it had been paused for

political reasons, and without adequate notice to the thousands of voters who had

approved it, full disclosure to the customers whose rates had increased by three percent

to pay for it, and appropriate notice to staff that such drastic action was being

considered, stated that hundreds of thousands in studies had been spent since the

pause with none providing a better alternative and all confirming the need and the route,

pointed out the pause had been costly to the public due to the costs spent on

consultants, the millions in sunk costs, the millions in interest paid on the bonds issued

to build the line without that promise returned, the costs for various work arounds, the

millions in increased construction costs as well as the raised risk and eroded reliability of

the system as had been documented by the reports the City provided to the Northern

Electric Reliability Council in December of every year, with redactions beginning in 2018

and the most recent report in 2025 being closed in its entirety due to the disclosure

impairing the ability to protect the security and safety of persons or property, and urged

the Council to approve and build the transmission line as delaying it further would only

result in increased risks and costs.

SPC8-26

Ashton Buckridge and Allison Calkins - How Vidwest has supported

students at Hickman High School.

Allison Calkins, a freshman at Moberly Area Community College and a founding member

of the Hickman High School Film Club, and Ashton Buckridge, a senior at Hickman High

School and the current President of the Film Club, explained the Hickman Film Club,

which began in October of 2024, was a fifteen member group that focused on storytelling

and provided students with a free space to learn, create films, create stories, and

determine the aspects of filmmaking for which they were most passionate, and would not

exist without Vidwest as they were dependent on Vidwest for equipment rental and

training, stated the Film Club had completed two short films and was working on its third,

had allowed them to make connections with other students and teachers, helped them

socially, and had provided a safe after-school and weekend activity, noted Vidwest had

also helped them personally by allowing them to learn practical filmmaking skills, work on

short films, comedy sketches, live streams, etc., utilize equipment for college application

films, and include that experience on college resumes, and reiterated none of this would

have been possible without Vidwest as the equipment and training was costly.

V. PUBLIC HEARINGS

None.

VI. OLD BUSINESS

B265-25

Amending Chapter 14 of the City Code to add provisions related to the

rights and duties of motorists and pedestrians in major corridor roadways

and intersections.

The bill was given third reading by the City Clerk.

Public Works Director Shane Creech provided a staff report, and he, Police Chief Jill

Schlude, Deputy City Counselor Becky Thompson, and City Manager De’Carlon

Seewood responded to Council questions and comments.

Mayor Buffaloe made a motion to amend B265-25 with Amendment Sheet #1, which

added “Such schedule shall also be posted on the city website by the director of public

works.” to the end of item (c) in Section 1. The motion was seconded by Council Member

Carroll, and approved unanimously by voice vote.

The Council discussed potential changes to Amendment Sheet #2.

Council Member Sample made a motion to amend B265-25 with an altered version of

Amendment Sheet #2, so item (d)(1) of Section 1 read “No person shall cross a major

corridor roadway at any place except in a crosswalk when such crosswalk is reasonably

accessible and usable. Where there is no crosswalk, a person shall cross only where a

pedestrian-control signal is located. Where there is no crosswalk or pedestrian-control

signal, a person shall cross only at an intersection. Nothing in this subsection shall be

construed to prohibit a pedestrian from crossing at a location other than a crosswalk

when existing curb ramps, intersection geometry, signalization, or sidewalk conditions

render the crosswalk inaccessible or unsafe.” The motion was seconded by Council

Member Peters, and approved unanimously by voice vote.

The Council discussed potential changes to Amendment Sheet #3.

Council Member Sample made a motion to amend Amendment Sheet #3 so it read “No

person shall be located upon a median in a major corridor intersection or on a median

that is less than six (6) feet in width unless in the process of legally crossing a roadway.

Failure of a person to leave the median after two consecutive opportunities to cross the

roadway in a lawful manner is prima facie evidence of a violation of this subsection. This

subsection shall not apply to any person whose disability, mobility limitation, use of

assistive device, accompaniment of a child or service animal, or safety considerations

make compliance impracticable.” The motion was seconded by Council Member Elwood,

and approved unanimously by voice vote.

Mayor Buffaloe made

a motion to amend B265-25 with Amendment Sheet #3, as

amended, which changed item (d)(2) of Section 1 so it read “No person shall be located

upon a median in a major corridor intersection or on a median that is less than six (6) feet

in width unless in the process of legally crossing a roadway. Failure of a person to leave

the median after two consecutive opportunities to cross the roadway in a lawful manner is

prima facie evidence of a violation of this subsection. This subsection shall not apply to

any person whose disability, mobility limitation, use of assistive device, accompaniment

of a child or service animal, or safety considerations make compliance impracticable .”

The motion was seconded by Council Member Peters, and approved unanimously by

voice vote.

The Council discussed Amendment Sheet #4.

Council Member Sample made a motion to amend B265-25 with Amendment Sheet #4,

which changed item (d)(4) of Section 1 so it read “No person, other than an occupant of a

vehicle, shall be upon a major corridor roadway when a continuous, accessible pedestrian

route is available and usable, except to lawfully cross such roadway. A ‘continuous,

accessible pedestrian route’ means a sidewalk or path of travel that complies with the

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), including accessible curb ramps, surface

condition, width, grade, and freedom from obstruction due to construction, weather, or

disrepair.” The motion was seconded by Council Member Peters. After discussion, the

motion was approved unanimously by voice vote.

Council Member Sample made a motion to amend B265-25 with an altered version of

Amendment Sheet #5, which removed distribution conduct under item (b) of Section 1,

eliminated item (d)(6)a. of Section 1, item (d)(6)b. of Section 1, and item (d)(6)c. of

Section 1, and renumbered the new proposed a. to (6) under item (d) of Section 1 and the

new proposed b. to (7) under item (d) of Section 1. The motion was seconded by Mayor

Buffaloe. After discussion, the motion was approved by voice vote with only Council

Member Foster voting no.

Council Member Carroll made a motion to amend B265-25 by adding item (8) under (e),

which read “Any person lawfully operating a cycle as set forth in Article VII of this

chapter.” The motion was seconded by Mayor Buffaloe, and approved unanimously by

voice vote.

Mayor Buffaloe made a motion to amend B265-25 by changing Section 2 so it read “This

ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after July 1, 2026.” The motion was

seconded by Council Member Sample, and approved unanimously by voice vote.

Alejandro Gallardo, a Sixth Ward resident, felt the proposed ordinance was fundamentally

wrong as the City and State had failed to build a roadway system that was safe and

accessible for pedestrians, commented that instead of correcting these problems, they

were trying to restrict and police the activity of pedestrians while abrogating the

responsibility of the City to protect pedestrians, many of whom were the most vulnerable

members of the community, i.e., disabled or poor, and urged the Council to reject this

ill-conceived ordinance and address the longstanding issues with the road network and

infrastructure.

Julie Schupp, 5811 E. Waterfront Drive South, commented that since returning from the

Chamber of Commerce trip to South Carolina last fall, she had been focused on the issue

of homelessness, noted the temporary solutions relied upon here and across the country

were not working, stated the last time this item was discussed, the focus had been on

the technical definitions of infrastructure, enforcement of hypothetical situations, and civil

rights issues instead of the safety risks this ordinance was meant to address, understood

some people were opposed to the proposed ordinance regardless of the language or

intent because they felt it was an attack on the homeless, believed allowing people to

panhandle in the medians was enabling and putting people in directly in harms way,

expressed her support for the proposed ordinance to protect drivers and pedestrians,

voiced her commitment to building long-term solutions that provided people a path to

restore their purpose and rejoin the community, and urged the Council to vote in favor of

the proposed ordinance as well as moving forward with the infrastructure previously

discussed.

Dani Perez stated the proposed ordinance reminded her of the ugly laws that had been

passed in the 1800s and upheld until the 1970s targeting those who loitered, panhandled,

and had disabilities, believed this ordinance was spearheaded by those that had taken

inhumane photos of people passed out on the medians, thought this would be the start of

other legislation, such as banning panhandling and establishing loitering periods, which

would negatively impact those with disabilities, pointed out that people sometimes had to

walk on the streets due to ice, gravel, or rubble on the sidewalk, sit on concrete because

there were not appropriate bus stops, and walk around cars blocking the crosswalk, felt

society valued vehicles over people, suggested they stop arguing about the width of

sidewalks, build the infrastructure to assist pedestrians, and bring back bus shelters

instead of passing ugly laws such as this.

Derrick Fogle, 409 W. Broadway, spoke against the ordinance due to its impact on

those, like him, who protested at intersections and medians, thanked Council Member

Sample for asking the questions related to protesting, appreciated the clarification made

that bicycles were vehicles for the purposes of this ordinance, wondered if this ordinance

would target him when he practiced his hacky sack skills as some might view it as

disruptive or distracting, believed the homeless would find a way around this ordinance by

crossing the intersections more often, which would likely increase interactions between

cars and pedestrians, did not feel being mean to people or depriving them of things would

modify their behavior to a behavior many wanted as it would likely change behavior to

something that was more dangerous, and reiterated people would find ways to get around

this ordinance.

Kristin, a Fifth Ward resident, wondered if only the Director of Public Works would

designate roadways and intersections as major corridor roadways and intersections, or if

it would instead be a team or committee, why prohibitions (1) and (2) had different

verbiage when it came to a disabled person, and why they removed distribution conduct

as she thought there was still reference to it later in the ordinance, stated her opposition

to the proposed ordinance, noted pedestrian safety, driver safety, and traffic flow were all

legitimate concerns but the proposed ordinance, even as amended, did not actually solve

the safety problems it claimed to address, believed the ordinance only shifted the

responsibility onto pedestrians and individuals using existing public infrastructure, and

pointed out the ordinance did not commit the City to widen unsafe medians, improve

crosswalk visibility, add pedestrian signals, repair broken sidewalks, redesign high speed

corridors, or bring routes to ADA compliance standards.

Ida Fogle, a First Ward resident, urged the Council to vote against this ordinance,

explained in her experiences as a pedestrian, bicyclist, and vehicle driver, the biggest

danger was inattentive or ignorant vehicle drivers, noted she had almost been hit coming

to the meeting tonight as a vehicle had turned left when she had the right of way as a

pedestrian, believed drivers needed to be educated and held accountable, stated she

utilized a median with an improved intersection and crosswalk with flashing lights to and

from work and had been stuck at an intersection until a driver finally realized she had the

right of way, wondered if she would be violating the ordinance when picking up trash at

that and other medians as they tended to collect trash, and felt trying to penalize

pedestrians instead of building better infrastructure and educating drivers would create a

lot of problems.

Bill Dijak, a representative of CoMo Mobile Aid Collective, commented that the homeless

depended upon panhandling for survival, thought the passage of this ordinance would

push people to extremes, felt those who supported this ordinance had lost their sense of

humanity, empathy, and altruism, believed this ordinance would have difficulty in the

courts because the City did not have the data to prove that approaching a stopped vehicle

at a roadway was unsafe nor the number of individuals actually injured when standing on

a median, pointed out the passage of this ordinance would put the City at a significant

financial risk, suggested people deal with their uncomfortable feelings associated with the

homeless, and noted this ordinance would do nothing to address the factors associated

with pedestrian accidents, reducing speed limits or widening medians, and would only

burden pedestrians.

Anthony Willroth, a Boone County resident and Columbia pedestrian, thought they would

all agree that pedestrian safety improvements were needed, which would be addressed

with improved pedestrian infrastructure, not an ordinance that only addressed

enforcement, suggested the Council address pedestrian infrastructure through the CIP or

by going to the vote of the people, felt this ordinance would only create more points of

conflict with law enforcement, not just with the homeless, but with people trying to walk

to work, stop to admire the birds, or protest, and would not necessarily only result in a

citation as it could end with resisting arrest or violence, and believed they should always

assume the worst as that was important when creating good laws.

Shane Lowe, a Fourth Ward resident, pointed out that medians and traveled paths tended

to be neglected as they were not the priority for road crews, explained that during snow

storms, plows created snowbanks along medians and other pedestrian routes, wondered

if shoveling it would be a violation of the ordinance, and suggested an amendment to

allow for the clearing of debris, snow, and other pedestrian obstructions and hazards if

this ordinance was to be approved.

Elizabeth Bridges, 4005 Citation Drive, stated this ordinance was bullying disguised as

public safety or pedestrian safety, and believed her eight year old child said it perfectly

when asked what she should say at the meeting tonight, which was “don’t,” and urged

the Council to not pass this ordinance.

Simon Nachman, a Fifth Ward resident, commented that he was opposed to prolonging

people’s homeless, which this bill would do by issuing citations for asking for money

while on roadway medians, pointed out many were already working jobs and struggling to

survive, believed the proposed ordinance would force them to ask for more money or turn

to crime, noted the homeless would be placed in jails or die on the streets because they

had been pushed away, and stated this bill only made Columbia less safe for homeless

people.

Jim Meyer, 104 Sea Eagle Drive, stated his support of this bill, explained he had

witnessed a number of very unsafe conditions over the years on the medians, provided an

example of a person who was passed out on the edge of a very narrow median at

Stadium and Broadway and would have been severely injured if he had moved his hand or

leg or had rolled over in his unconscious state, believed something needed to be done to

address that situation, felt the First Amendment rights issues had been addressed,

appreciated the open, transparent process tonight when amending the ordinance, and

urged the Council to pass the proposed ordinance as it had been perfected as well as it

could.

Drew Amidei, a Fourth Ward resident and regional organizer for Missouri Jobs with

Justice, which he mentioned because they had been given a Diversity Award last week

due to their commitment to building a Columbia that was welcoming to all as well as for

exemplifying the life and teachings of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., stated the proposed

ordinance targeted already marginalized members of the community, would not make

Columbia safer, and would make Columbia less safe for those marginalized people, and

urged the Council to vote no on this ordinance.

Ada Groharing stated the homeless panhandled for a little change, which allowed the

person providing it to feel better about themselves, similar to the service provided by any

pastor or charity, felt looking down on the homeless as if they were parasites was

fundamentally wrong as they were part of the fabric of America, did not appreciate an

earlier comment about the homeless rejoining society as the homeless survived off of

community connections and took care of each other even when they lacked the

appropriate means, noted the passage of this ordinance would impact the ability of the

homeless to make money to survive, which was essentially genocide, and urged the

Council to not being complicit with a genocidal action in passing this ordinance.

Ken Rice, 209 Reedsport Ridge, stated he was encouraged by the work of the Council

earlier tonight in actually debating the proposed ordinance and attempting to move it

forward, believed the Council had addressed the issues with the ordinance with their

amendments earlier tonight, noted he did not feel this ordinance was an attack on the

homeless or would negatively impact the disabled, agreed a big problem was adequate

infrastructure, which could not be fixed right away, so this was an interim action that

could help, commented that the issue was not only people blocking access by sleeping

on medians, but also people selling flowers or working for a charity as running in and out

of the traffic lane in between cars was problematic and addressed by this ordinance,

understood this would not fix all of the problems but would help, and urged the Council to

pass the ordinance.

Tanya Heath, a Fourth Ward resident, thanked the Council for their diligence tonight when

discussing the amendments, recalled Fire Chief Brian Schaeffer explaining the unsafe

situation involving the backends of rigs when turning, stated no one wanted to be involved

in an accident with someone at a median as it would be a tragedy that all involved would

carry with them, thought that with the passage of the ordinance, there were better ways

to help those that utilized the medians, such as donating to the Opportunity Campus and

volunteering time to help build resumes, connect people with job opportunities, and serve

humanity, and suggested developing long-term strategies for a better quality of life for all

involved.

Ted Farnen, a Fifth Ward resident, asked Council to focus on the ordinance being voted

on tonight as it was not an attack on homelessness, noted the ordinance said that no

one needed to be on these busy medians except for a pedestrian crossing the street, felt

any other claim was just noise or a rationalization to try to defeat the ordinance,

understood some believed that if the City could not redesign intersections, improve public

transportation, and restrict motorists, this ordinance should not even be considered,

which he thought was foolish, explained they could do both, pointed out some, who were

saying the intersections were unsafe, were okay with people standing in those areas

doing whatever they wanted, commented that other controversial ordinances had been

passed previously, which people now enjoyed, such as the ban on public indoor smoking

and the use of roll carts for trash, and urged the Council to support the proposed

ordinance.

Jeff Stack, a representative of the Mid-Missouri Fellowship of Reconciliation, which was a

peace and social justice group, commended the City on their work the last few years in

terms of the homeless and related facilities as it showed compassion, urged the Council

to vote against this ordinance, felt this was a public relations effort to get unhoused

people, who did not have many choices, out of our midst, suggested utilizing funds for

drug and alcohol treatment instead of research to try to get people off of the medians,

noted he utilized spaces like this to protest issues to reach as many people as possible,

stated people were in the medians out of desperation as it was a way to obtain

assistance during economically challenging times, believed they needed to be kinder to

one another, and asked the Council to vote against this ordinance.

Luke Fennewald, 710 Glenstone Drive, stated he was opposed to this ordinance,

commented that pedestrian safety was not caused by citing pedestrians and came from

pedestrian infrastructure in the place of car infrastructure, felt this ordinance would not

include distribution conduct if the issue was truly about pedestrian safety, noted it was an

anti-panhandling ordinance, and asked the Council if they wanted Columbia to be a

community where the unhoused, who were our most vulnerable, were put at risk.

Bruce Summers, a Third Ward resident, stated he was supportive of this ordinance,

hoped the Council passed it, thought it was madness to allow people to hang out in the

medians, and provided examples of people in the driving lanes near medians where the

incidents could have been tragic had someone not swerved or been paying attention.

Tom Trabue, 4750 N. Booth Lane, a representative of the Columbia Board of Realtors,

explained the Board provided a letter of support to the Council last week, indicating they

felt the ordinance had a balanced approach as it did not restrict legitimate pedestrian

activity and only channeled it to safe designated areas, stated roads and highways were

first and foremost designed for the conveyance of vehicles and the City’s complete

streets policy also made provisions for pedestrian crossings at crosswalks in an orderly

and predictable fashion, commented that the standard and design guides referenced by

the traffic consultant represented the current best practices for a comprehensive roadway

design for vehicles and pedestrians and the ordinance drafted was consistent with the

science outlined in the design guides, understood there were deficiencies in some of the

older roadways in terms of pedestrian accessibility, listed some of the activities

designated to assist in that effort, such as the sidewalk improvement program, the capital

improvement plan, and an evaluation for updating the City’s street standards, but noted

that took time and money, indicated concern with the amendments made with

Amendment Sheet #4 because it watered down the ordinance by essentially allowing any

able-bodied person to walk in the roadway if there was not a perfect sidewalk, asked the

Council to reconsider that amendment, and urged the Council to support the ordinance as

it was one more tool toward the City’s Vision Zero goals and provided clear boundaries

and more predictability in situations were drivers and pedestrians did not necessarily do

the right thing.

Alyce Turner, 1204 Fieldcrest, indicated the difference between this proposed ordinance

and the smoke-free ordinance was that they had worked on the smoke-free ordinance for

three years to make sure people were comfortable with it and there were not court cases

that could overturn it, suggested the Council consider the majority of those who had

spoken tonight, noted she was opposed to the passage of this ordinance until they could

include infrastructure improvements with it, stated she was a protestor and did not feel

now was the time to limit civil liberties with what was going on throughout the country,

expressed concern about this being taken away from the unhoused community, pointed

out this ordinance did not have great community support, and wondered if the four boards

and commissions this was referred to were supportive.

Grace, a Fifth Ward resident, commented that she believed this ordinance would have a

negative impact on the disabled population, the protestors, and the homeless, stated she

questioned whether some of the Council Members actually listened to those that came

forward to speak, and believed the intent of the ordinance needed to be clear otherwise it

was not ready to be passed, and felt they could do better for the community and create

an ordinance that was about infrastructure rather than banning people from public spaces.

Matt Jenne, the Chair-Elect for the Columbia Chamber of Commerce, voiced support for

the ordinance, as amended, on behalf of the thousands of people represented by the

Columbia Chamber of Commerce, stated the ordinance was fundamentally about safety,

including not only pedestrians and motorists but also the customers and employees who

kept Columbia’s economy moving, felt this ordinance was about ensuring the City’s major

corridors, which served as the economic corridors, were safe, efficient, and welcoming for

all who traveled on them as it would otherwise affect the local economy, commented that

the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation had conducted studies that consistently

showed safe and efficient infrastructure as among the top three factors when choosing to

relocate or expand, noted this ordinance designated high traffic, high speed areas, such

as the commercial corridor along Stadium Boulevard, Providence Road, and Broadway,

as zones where pedestrian and vehicle interactions should be limited to lawful crossings

and clearly marked intersections, believed the citizens of Columbia should do what it

could for the least among them, but that did not include allowing people to stand in the

middle of a road for hours at a time, understood this ordinance would provide the police

with a tool to get people to a safer location, such as the Opportunity Campus to help

them get back on their feet, emphasized this ordinance was about protecting people as

well as supporting businesses to promote a healthy, vibrant economy, urged the Council

to pass this ordinance and continue to foster a business climate that was built on a

foundation of safety and common sense, and asked those in support to stand.

Bry Mink, a Fourth Ward resident, commented that the opponents had laid out very clear,

intelligent, and concise reasons to oppose the ordinance from

a legal, moral, and

practical ground, and noted he was opposed to the ordinance, even with the

amendments, which he did not feel had any impact.

Rachel, a Sixth Ward resident, pointed out this ordinance was about people standing on

medians, not standing in the middle of the road as that was already illegal, noted some

medians were called pedestrian refuge islands for people to stand on in order to be safe,

felt the ordinance created an additional danger to pedestrians by pressuring people to

cross too soon so they were not cited, expressed concern that this ordinance would

prohibit protests on porkchop intersections, which was

a serious First Amendment

violation, stated that banning peaceful protests under the guise of public safety was

problematic regardless of intention, asked the Council to vote against the ordinance and

to not be swayed by social media or people coming to Columbia from out of town,

requesting that they turn against the most vulnerable community members, and

suggested they do what was right for the community.

Margaret McConnell, a Second Ward resident, commented that it might be unfair to say

this ordinance targeted the homeless, but it clearly targeted panhandlers as it would

make the interaction between someone standing on the median and someone in the car

illegal, felt this ordinance, if passed, would be challenged in court, noted many speakers

had indicated they would continue with protests or aid people, so citations would be

issued, stated the homeless were involved because many of them panhandled as their

only way to survive, emphasized the data did not support the ordinance, believed that if

the Council would be bullies if they passed the ordinance knowing it would not hold up in

court and would hurt people trying to survive by panhandling, and felt the same about

those with the Columbia Chamber of Commerce and Columbia Board of Realtors in

support of the ordinance.

Renee Carter,

a representative of Race Matters, Friends, stated they opposed the

ordinance for equity reasons, understood the City was on a 50-year plan for fixing

dangerous intersections, crosswalks, medians, bike paths, and sidewalks while MoDOT

could not address infrastructure safety either because they were busy spending money

on highways, but the City was still considering an ordinance that would ticket the most

vulnerable community members to attempt to solve the problem, commented that the

panhandlers would go to jail because they would not be able to afford paying the ticket

due to the City’s neglect to not fix the infrastructure issues, believed this ordinance would

criminalize people under the guise of safety when there was not any proof indicating

panhandlers had been injured, noted the City would also force wheelchair users and

pedestrians into unsafe conditions by not enforcing the ordinances it already had with

regard to keeping sidewalks and crosswalks cleared, felt this ordinance targeted

panhandlers and the homeless, suggested they spend time determining how they could

improve the infrastructure issues, and recommended everyone read Killed by a Traffic

Engineer by Wes Marshall as traffic engineers were addressing traffic movement, not

pedestrian safety.

Susan Hart, 3719 Bray Court, expressed concern regarding comments indicating one

could not be compassionate to all citizens in the community and support this ordinance,

explained for three months during the year she participated in Saturday Café with her faith

community at Room at the Inn, was part of a group that served dinner on the first Sunday

night of each month, and assisted behind the scenes with the Opportunity Center while

still being supportive of this ordinance as it was amended this evening, believed they

needed a balance between safety and accessibility, which this ordinance provided, noted

she had driven through some of the intersections that would be affected by this ordinance

many times since January 1 and saw the near misses, stated the ordinance was needed

because safety had not been built into medians as they had been for buildings because it

had not been anticipated that individuals would occupy them, and felt the Council should

pass the ordinance with the amendments tonight and discuss the infrastructure work

needed in future meetings.

Jordan Struble, a Sixth Ward resident, commented that regardless of the intent of the

ordinance, it punished the behavior of those who were likely homeless versus the average

pedestrian, emphasized that the most effective means of protecting pedestrians and

preventing accidents was to build accessible and safe infrastructure, and stated he

opposed this ordinance because the effect would be the prosecution of those who were

homeless, not the safety of people trying to walk around the City, which he did often and

was hard.

Carrie Gartner, the Executive Director of the Business Loop CID, stated the Loop CID

Board was in favor of this ordinance as they saw the near misses and dangerous

conditions every day, noted they had seen drivers trying to help in compassionate but

misguided ways, such as stopping their cars in moving traffic and rolling down their

windows prompting someone to dart into traffic to collect money, which created the

perfect conditions for a pedestrian involved crash or rear-end crash, commented that a

safety audit of the Business Loop had found that pedestrians were less willing to cross at

crosswalks if someone was standing in the median, explained they had observed

Hickman High School students using the crosswalk at Providence but not at the

Business Loop to get to McDonald’s in order to avoid a person standing on that median

or in that crosswalk, which was a safety concern because they did not want students

darting into traffic, believed medians should be a safe place for pedestrians to stop if the

signal changed, particularly if they moved a bit slower or had a disability, but that could

not be done if the median was already occupied, recognized there were people in the City

who needed help and many nonprofits and government agencies were working hard to

provide safe and reliable assistance, some of which were located on the Business Loop,

such as the Food Bank and the Opportunity Campus, agreed the best way to make

things safe for everyone was through infrastructure but the cost for improvements on the

Business Loop alone was $20-$30 million so unless there was a secret infrastructure

fund they could tap into, there was not an immediate solution, emphasized they needed

something now to keep the students, pedestrians, and people on the Business Loop and

in the rest of City safe, and urged the Council to pass the ordinance.

Eugene Elkin,

a Second Ward resident, stated he was opposed to this ordinance,

suggested infrastructure be built to allow a person to stand on safely, asked for empathy

and to do what was right, and commented that the jails could not accommodate more

people as they were already full.

Alec Martirez, a First Ward resident, echoed the comments of those that felt the bill was

clearly not about pedestrian safety as it would cite pedestrians more often, especially

those that were disabled, believed it was about the criminalization of homelessness and

putting the most vulnerable members of the community in harm’s way more than they

were now, and asked that the Council vote against it.

Dave Griggs, 11 Lemmon Drive, commented that 90 percent of the problems in Columbia

involved Missouri roads, i.e., roads constructed and maintained by MoDOT, who did not

have the money for infrastructure changes either, understood widening the median might

be a great idea but that would likely result in the widening of right-of-way to accommodate

traffic, and stated his support for the proposed ordinance as it would make the streets

safer for everyone.

Matthew Schacht, a Benton Stephens neighborhood resident, stated it was heartening to

see the Council work through the problems with this ordinance and to allow everyone to

be heard, understood 50 percent of the people in the room would feel the wrong decision

was made, regardless of the final decision, suggested the City communicate with video

evidence on how the ordinance was being enforced if it was passed and how the City

would continue to try to address safety if it was not passed, noted he sympathized with

the business owners as well as the pedestrians and homeless advocates, commented

that he did not feel anyone was in the wrong, and reiterated the need to communicate to

build a bridge between both sides as they were stronger when they were able to work

together.

Mike Burden, a representative of Local Motion, commented that there had been a lot of

discussion because they were talking about complex, longstanding societal issues that

did not have easy solutions, believed pedestrian safety involved the safety of all road

users, i.e., pedestrians, cyclists, drivers, and bus riders, noted the engineer that had

spoken earlier was correct in saying that the movement of automobiles had been

prioritized over pedestrians since the 1930s, felt they could prioritize people and the

movement of people, but it would take investments and would not be easy or happen right

away, stated if he were to write a pedestrian safety ordinance, it would prioritize the rights

of their most vulnerable road users, those who were increasingly impacted by injuries and

deaths in our state and nation, pointed out the medians were not large enough for a

person or people to be there for any period of time, suggested reviewing the standards of

refuge islands as well as many other pieces of infrastructure as 30 percent of Americans

were non-drivers for a variety of reasons and could make our community and economy

stronger with safe, reliable, and dignified options, asked the Council to think about the

intent of this proposed ordinance, what actions would enforcement inspire, and whether

that was their desire, hoped this would be the start of a continuing discussion on how to

truly make the City work for everyone, not just those with vehicles, and urged the Council

to vote no on this ordinance.

Pat Fowler, a North Central Columbia neighborhood resident, commented that the City

could not provide the unhoused adequate access to toilets, showers, laundry, storage

space, overnight indoor space, etc. for the number of unsheltered they had, noted the

unhoused used the money collected at medians for a modest hotel room if there was a

vacancy, medications, durable medical equipment, etc., agreed Columbia had built a

comprehensive continuum of care with years of government grants and funds that were

now disappearing, but it only provided for a portion of their needs as assistance was not

immediate, stated they would be denying people of their basic human right of being able

to do their best for themselves with the passage of this ordinance while they waited for

other services to come into being, and wondered why this was even being considered.

Matthew Struckhoff, a Fourth Ward resident, stated he was usually encouraged when

Columbia took efforts to improve the safety of non-automobile users but was not

encouraged by this ordinance as it was unlikely to improve pedestrian safety due to the

limited evidence of median occupancy causing or even contributing to accidents, did not

feel the research commissioned by the City supported the ordinance, believed this

ordnance would place additional expectations of enforcement by the Columbia Police

Department to police its citizenry versus providing services to those in need, pointed out

that regardless of intent, the unhoused, specifically panhandlers, would be adversely

affected by the passage of this ordinance, and urged the Council to vote against the

proposed ordinance.

Catherine Armbrust,

a Second Ward resident, wondered why they bothered when

Columbia seemed to move forward with tentative and fearful steps, failed to push past

unfounded fears that did not reflect the research, and was swayed dollars or those who

could function successfully with a traditional capitalistic structure, stated they bothered

because most wanted Columbia to be progressive, understood the intent of ordinances

such as this were about power, control, keeping poverty out of sight, and potentially

suppressing protest, noted homelessness, poverty, and panhandling would not disappear

or be solved by this ordinance, believed instances of someone who was passed out on a

median or dancing in traffic should be addressed on an individual basis as an emergency,

felt someone sitting or standing on a median was not a safety issue, pointed out that

nothing had been done to address safety on Clark Lane after her friend had been struck

and died as a pedestrian there in December of 2022, urged the Council to vote no on this

ordinance as it would not create a safer space for pedestrians, and questioned if the City

wanted its tax dollars spent on legal fees as she believed the City would be sued if the

ordinance was passed.

Alex Bohannon, a Benton Stephens neighborhood resident, encouraged the Council to

vote no on this ordinance, understood the Bicycle/Pedestrian Commission, the

Disabilities Commission, and the Commission on Human Rights were either opposed to

the passage of the ordinance or had concerns with it, wondered why the Council would

consider voting tonight when there were still so many questions, some with not great

answers, and when enforcement would not begin until July, suggested looking at motorist

enforcement, such as speeding and distracted driving, before pedestrian enforcement,

emphasized that there were not any documented examples of people in medians causing

accidents, and recommended that the Council either vote no or table this item.

Keith Clayton, a Boone County resident, expressed disgust with the process and the

idea of this being a safety ordinance, and commented that this was about fining people

they found undesirable instead of helping them.

John Shinn, a Third Ward resident, stated the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

(MUTCD) never intended for medians to be a permanent refuge or long-term refuge, noted

it was meant to be a transverse place, a temporary place of refuge, encouraged the

Council to pass this ordinance as it was better than anything they had now, expressed

concern with people and dogs being in the medians in extreme weather conditions,

reiterated that medians were designed for someone to use when waiting for the light to

cross as well as for the placement of traffic control devices, and emphasized that he felt

this was

a safety issue and did not intentionally target the homeless or those

panhandling as money could still be exchanged on the sidewalk, in parking lots, etc.

Justin Sills, a resident of student housing in the Grindstone area, believed laws should be

based on a solid foundation of facts and compassion, and felt the proposed ordinance

failed on both accounts.

The Council asked questions and made comments.

B265-25, as amended, was given fourth reading by the City Clerk with the vote

recorded as follows: VOTING YES: SAMPLE, FOSTER, WATERMAN, PETERS,

BUFFALOE. VOTING NO: CARROLL, ELWOOD. Bill declared enacted, reading as

follows:

recess was called at 11:24 p.m., and the Council returned to the meeting at

approximately 11:30 p.m.

VII. CONSENT AGENDA

The following bills were given second reading and the resolutions were read by the City

Clerk.

B17-26

B18-26

Amending Chapter 7 of the City Code as it relates to emergency

management organization.

Vacating a drainage easement adjacent to Lots 194 and 195 within Forest

Hills, Plat No. 3 located at 5724 Black Gum Court; accepting a grant of

easement for utility and drainage purposes from New Standard Homes,

LLC; directing the City Clerk to have the ordinance and conveyance

recorded.

B19-26

Authorizing construction of the Rice Road Private Common Collector

Elimination Project (PCCE) #43 sanitary sewer improvement project;

calling for bids through the Purchasing Division or authorizing a contract for

the work using a term and supply contract.

B20-26

B21-26

Authorizing expanded HIV testing program services and business

associate agreements with Morgan County Health Center.

Authorizing Amendment No. 1 to the contract with the Missouri Department

of Health and Senior Services for public health emergency preparedness

program services.

B22-26

B23-26

Authorizing a memorandum of agreement with the Missouri National Guard

Adjutant General for the use of the Northeast Regional Park for a training

event.

Authorizing an airport aid agreement with the Missouri Highways and

Transportation Commission for air service promotion; amending the FY

2026 Annual Budget by appropriating funds in the amount of $350,000.00.

R16-26

R17-26

Setting a public hearing: proposed construction of the Quail Drive - Phase

2 stormwater improvement project.

Setting a public hearing: consider approval of a revised plan for basketball

court improvements associated with Phase II construction at Douglass

Park.

R18-26

R19-26

Setting a public hearing: proposed annexation of property located on the

southeast corner of Highway WW and El Chaparral Avenue (1020 S. El

Chaparral Avenue) (Case #73-2026).

Authorizing application to the United States Department of Transportation

for a Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development (BUILD) grant

associated with the replacement of a stormwater culvert on Proctor Drive.

R20-26

R21-26

R22-26

Authorizing an agreement with Boys & Girls Clubs of the Columbia Area

associated with the Teen Connection Project program services.

Authorizing a CDBG-CV agreement with Love Columbia for homebuyer

education and fair housing counseling services.

Authorizing a second amendment to the facility usage agreement with

Mortgage Research Center, LLC, d/b/a Veterans United Home Loans, for

the use of the Northeast Regional Park located at 5212 N. Oakland Gravel

Road.

R23-26

R24-26

Authorizing Aviation Project Consultant Supplemental Agreement No. 2

with Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc. for additional

construction services associated with the west parking lot resurfacing

project at the Columbia Regional Airport.

Authorizing a letter of agreement with Columbia, Missouri FAA Contract

Tower (COU FCT) and Springfield Approach (Mizzou Sector) associated

with the Surface Area Notices to Airmen (NOTAMs) and NOTAM

Management System (NMS) notification procedures at the Columbia

Regional Airport.

R25-26

R26-26

Authorizing an agreement with Columbia Mall L.L.C. for the 2026 “Tons of

Trucks” event.

Authorizing investment of police and fire pension funds in securities

managed by KKR Private Equity Conglomerate LLC; authorizing execution

of any agreements as are necessary for completion of those investments.

R27-26

Expressing support for the Missouri Highways and Transportation

Commission’s Improve I-70: Rocheport to Columbia Project 4A (Missouri

River Bridge at Rocheport to Route B); authorizing staff to proceed with

associated corridor construction enhancements.

The bills were given third reading and the resolutions were read by the City

Clerk with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CARROLL (except for

R26-26 on which she voted no), ELWOOD (except for R26-26 on which she voted

no), SAMPLE, FOSTER, WATERMAN, PETERS, BUFFALOE. VOTING NO: NO ONE.

Bills declared enacted and resolutions declared adopted, reading as follows:

VIII. NEW BUSINESS

None.

IX. INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING

The following bills were introduced by the Mayor unless otherwise indicated, and all were

given first reading.

B24-26

B25-26

Amending Chapter 14 of the City Code as it relates to the definition of a

pedestrian; making gender-neutral grammatical edits.

Authorizing an annexation agreement with Nabil and Dana Beaini for

contiguous property located on the east side of Gans Creek Road;

directing the City Clerk to have the agreement recorded (Case #44-2026).

B26-26

B27-26

B28-26

B29-26

B30-26

Approving the Final Plat of "Providence Walkway, Plat No. 1B" located on

the east side of Trinity Place and north of Boone Drive (308 Trinity Place);

authorizing a performance contract (Case #41-2026).

Approving the Final Plat of “Centerstate South Plat 1” located on the north

side of Clark Lane and west of US Highway 63; authorizing a performance

contract (Case No. 315-2025).

Authorizing a memorandum of understanding with the Missouri Department

of Health and Senior Services for wastewater surveillance program

services.

Accepting conveyances for sewer, utility, drainage, and temporary

construction purposes; accepting Stormwater Management/BMP Facilities

Covenants; directing the City Clerk to have the conveyances recorded.

Authorizing a memorandum of understanding with the Missouri State

Highway Patrol for the transmission, storage, and use of criminal justice

data.

B31-26

B32-26

Authorizing a memorandum of understanding with the Missouri National

Guard associated with a joint counterdrug program.

Amending the FY 2026 Annual Budget by appropriating funds in the

amount of $776,230.18 for facility modifications to the Sanford-Kimpton

Building and installation of office furniture.

B33-26

B34-26

Amending the FY 2026 Annual Budget by appropriating funds in the

amount of $50,000.00 associated with maintenance repairs to the Eighth

and Walnut (Plaza) municipal parking garage.

Amending the FY 2026 Annual Budget by appropriating funds in the

amount of $400,000.00 associated with improvements to the south parking

lot at the Columbia Regional Airport.

B35-26

B36-26

Approving a revised plan for basketball court improvements associated

with Phase II construction at Douglass Park.

Authorizing agreements, promissory notes, and deeds of trusts with

Housing Authority of the City of Columbia, Missouri and Providence

Walkway Housing Development Group, LP associated with the Providence

Walkway development project; directing the City Clerk to record certain

documents.

X. REPORTS

REP9-26

Homelessness Report.

Public Health and Human Services Director Rebecca Roesslet provided a staff report, and

responded to Council questions and comments.

Mayor Buffaloe made

a motion to authorize staff to proceed with a homelessness

strategic planning process, which might include issuing an RFP for facilitation services .

The motion was seconded by Council Member Foster, and approved unanimously by

voice vote.

REP10-26

Citizens Police Review Board 2025 Annual Report.

Special Projects Manager Stephanie Brown provided

Council questions and comments.

a staff report, and respond to

REP11-26

REP12-26

Columbia Historic Preservation Plan Update.

Community Development Director Clint Smith provided a staff report.

North 763 Community Improvement District (CID) - End of Fiscal Year (FY

2025) Report.

Mayor Buffaloe understood this report was provided as required by state statute.

XI. GENERAL COMMENTS BY PUBLIC, COUNCIL AND STAFF

Eugene Elkin, a Second Ward resident, expressed concern for the homeless, especially

with regard to the passage of B265-25, as amended, earlier tonight, and noted some

people did not like crowds, chose to stay outdoors, and would not conform or follow rules.

Renee Carter, a representative of Race Matters, Friends, commented that people had not

been hit while on the median, but instead had been hit crossing a street that had a

median with regard to the median data, noted that when Race Matters, Friends, had a

bail fund, they had bailed out hundreds of people whose address had been Wilkes

Boulevard, believed the same situation was happening now, and pointed out that people

who were ticketed and did not have money stayed in jail if no one was able to bail them

out.

Catherine Armbrust,

a representative of the CoMo Mobile Aid Collective, expressed

disappointment with the vote tonight, stated she was grateful the City had decided to

invest in a strategic plan with regard to homelessness as it was the job of the city and

community to come together in that regard, pointed out there was not a cure for

homelessness and that the Opportunity Campus was not a utopian space as it would not

provide everyone with a place to go because not everyone could or would want to be in

that environment due to mental health and other reasons, suggested they be realistic

because the homeless numbers would continue to rise due to what was happening

nationally, and asked that they move forward with empathy and love as these were

humans with their own stories, experiences, and dreams.

John Shinn, a Third Ward resident, stated he believed the Council had made the right

decision on the median ordinance, expressed appreciation for the vote by Council two

weeks ago on the Ashford Place development, felt the City should have addressed the

situation with the park in 2017 before the site had been subdivided because the

parameters of the statement of intent and development agreement could not be

reasonably applied now, noted he would be in contact with the Council and Law

Department about that issue, and hoped fire and police personnel would receive a raise

this year as he believed they were underpaid.

The Council and staff discussed various topics to include the move of the Risk

Management Division from the Finance Department to the Law Department in October

2024.

Council Member Carroll made a motion asking for a report outlining the decision-making

process with regard to the Risk Management Division, i.e., the merits of moving it along

with an evaluation of other risk management programs in peer cities, such as Springfield,

Florissant, Maryland Heights, Cape Girardeau, Ann Arbor, Urbana-Champaign, Iowa City,

and Lawrence. The motion was seconded by Council Member Sample. After discussion,

the motion was defeated by voice vote with only Council Member Carroll, Council Member

Elwood, and Council Member Sample voting yes, and with Council Member Foster,

Council Member Waterman, Council Member Peters, and Mayor Buffaloe voting no.

The Council and staff continued to discuss various topics to include considering the

Springfield, Missouri approach of accepting public comment at the meeting at which

legislation was first read versus the meeting at which the vote would take place as it

would provide them time to deliberate and further communicate with constituents so they

felt they were heard prior to voting, understanding public comment had been received on

the median ordinance in November, which had led to a robust work session, the

amendments discussed and made tonight, and people still feeling they had not been

heard, the fact the City could provide input but understanding MoDOT had the ultimate

speed limit decisions on MoDOT roads while also considering the design of streets in

terms speeds and enforcement, the need for traffic enforcement, the results of the citizen

survey indicating that by and large, people thought Columbia was a good or great place to

live and work, which they were reminded of with the various events this past week, such

as the kick-off for CoMo Restaurant Week, the Kinney Point ribbon cutting, which was a

model of the kind of housing that could be built beyond what the Columbia Housing

Authority had done, the longstanding Columbia Values Diversity Celebration, which

allowed them to celebrate the diversity they had while acknowledging that there was more

work to be done, the Black Business Expo to support minority and women entrepreneurs,

and the Fire Recruit Graduation, thanking any staff involved in bringing Nordstrom Rack to

Columbia, the fact they would be discussing the transmission line this Monday in the

Council Chamber at 6 p.m., the attendance of Mayor Buffaloe at the U.S. Conference of

Mayors Winter Meeting last week whereby she was helping to advocate for the support of

cities at the federal level, the fact all communities were dealing with so many of the same

complex issues, acknowledging Columbia was investing in things related to housing,

homelessness, and pedestrian infrastructure but was not necessarily able to

communicate that adequately, and again thanking Assistant City Manager Carol Rhodes

for her 31 years of service to the City.

XII. ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned without objection at 12:29 a.m.