City of Columbia, Missouri

Meeting Minutes

City Council

Council Chamber

Columbia City Hall

701 E. Broadway

Monday, November 1, 2021

7:00 PM

Regular

I. INTRODUCTORY ITEMS

The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri met for a regular

meeting at approximately 7:00 p.m. on Monday, November 1, 2021, 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 KARL SKALA, Council Member IAN THOMAS, Council

Member MATT PITZER, Council Member BETSY PETERS, Mayor BRIAN

TREECE, Council Member PAT FOWLER, and Council Member

ANDREA WANER were present. City Manager John Glascock, City

Counselor Nancy Thompson, City Clerk Sheela Amin, and various

Department Heads and Staff Members were also present.

Mayor Treece explained the minutes were not yet complete for the July 19,

2021, August 16, September 7, September 20, October 4, and October 18

regular meetings.

Council Member Fowler asked that R170-21, R171-21, and R172-21 be

moved from the consent agenda to new business.

The agenda, including the consent agenda with R170-21, R171-21, and

R172-21 being moved to new business, was approved unanimously by

voice vote on a motion by Mayor Treece and a second by Council Member

Skala.

II. SPECIAL ITEMS

None.

III. APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS

None.

IV. SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENT

SPC60-21

Aida Guhlincozzi - The importance of data transparency and accessibility.

Aída Guhlincozzi spoke.

GUHLINCOZZI:

name is, as

My name is Dr. Aída Guhlincozzi. Okay, so, hello, City Council. My

mentioned, Dr. Aída Guhlincozzi. I’m geographer here in Columbia

from Ward 6, and I've been paying close attention to the ward redistricting

discussions. It’s very important and

to the materials coming out of City Council, given the maps -- and so this is actually

not about redistricting. understand that that's on the agenda. But given -- this is an

example -- given the maps that we've seen from the City GIS office, wanted to

provide an example for what anyone should look for when given map, and this is

for the general public as well as yourselves. I've created -- and these are some of

the questions that know some of the public have had about in regards to these

maps -- and so this is just meant to serve as contrast. I've created several maps

using 2020 census racial and ethnicity data that shade each ward by the number of

white, black, or Latinx people in them. So, this one is the Latinx population, and

the important thing to know about any map is that there are several key items that

anyone looking at map should look for to know more about the map, that are very

I care about a greatly. And I’ve paid attentively

informative and very important for data transparency and accessibility. And so, one

is the projected coordinate system -- wonderful, okay -- is the projected coordinate

system. This is the chosen grid that the cartographer has chosen to use for adjusting

the geographic information from

spherical 3D representation to

flat 2D one.

They're very important. The next is the title. This is an important detail because it

tells you about the map and what the map is. Next is the origin or the north arrow

telling us what direction the map is facing, and it helps the viewer orient

themselves in relation to the map and where they are. Next is the data source. The

data source is very crucial because it tells us where the data came from, and we

need to know that information whenever we are looking at any kind of data

because there's all kinds of details that go into the data and where it comes from

and how it's created. And next is the scale bar. This tells us the ratio of the map

distance to the ground distance, again very important, because that's how we can

relate the map to real world. And then there's the legend, and the legend is crucial

to knowing what different elements on the map mean. The author, and this is very

important -- to know who made the map because they may have reasons for the

cartographic choices they made. It’s me in this case, and I'd always be able to

answer those questions about why

to ensure relevancy to the map itself and our current lives. So you can see all of

these elements throughout the maps that I’ve provided. As mentioned, I've done

other maps on the white population and also the black population by Columbia

ward. encourage you to compare these maps I’ve provided with the wards

redistricting maps and any other future maps that you may see going forward in this

process. hope this is helpful to both the public and City Council as we move

I made the choices I made. And lastly, the date

forward in the redistricting process and any process that may involve spatial data in

the future. Maps are powerful and they can be powerful tools that need to be

crafted carefully and with rigor to ensure transparency and accessibility. No map is

perfect.

can tell you that

have critiques of these own maps of mine that

I made

already, and how --

have ways

would have improved them, and have been given

feedback as well from the public on how to improve them. However, there are

important standards in the public for all public distribution of data in any form,

including maps. And these standards are key to guaranteeing transparency and

access when it comes to the display and distribution of data. So, thank you so much

for your time, and that's it.

SPC61-21

Alexis Stockwell and Malori Chrisman - Sidewalks in Mizzou's Greek Town

in terms of accessibility barriers and a request for a plan of action for their

repair.

Alexis Stockwell spoke.

STOCKWELL:

Hi everyone.

My name is Alexa Stockwell and that is Mallory

Chrisman. We're both students at the University of Missouri and we are here

representing the Panhellenic Association Accessibility Committee. This Committee

increases

accessibility

PHA

and

Greek

Life

through

ensuring

proactive

accommodations are put in place for future member or current members, and we

increase representation of the disabled population in Greek Life. We are here to

discuss accessibility issues evident in Greek Town sidewalks, and to create an

action plan for repairs. Mallory just passed out photos to the council members so

you guys can visualize the issues that we are discussing today, and she'll take

minute to describe them now.

CHRISMAN:

drops off without being marked, areas without curb cuts, where the sidewalk

abruptly ends and there isn't sidewalk or crosswalk at all, and the large cracks and

As you look at these pictures, notice the areas where the sidewalk

holes in the concrete. As college students we rely on sidewalks to get us

everywhere on campus, and we don't think much about it when we are walking

over these flaws in the concrete. However, as

crutches or with physical or visual disability, having curb cuts, and clearly marked

dips in the sidewalk are crucial to get where they need to be safely. When the

sidewalk ends abruptly or does not even have crosswalk, it poses major

accessibility issue. For few years now, this committee has been advocating for

a college student in a wheelchair, on

the City of Columbia to repair these sidewalks. Last year we decided to start this

conversation up again to try to fix this problem, and it fired up the Mizzou Greek

and Columbia community.

Leadership at Mizzou tried to help us as much as they

could, but Greek Town is not their property. It's the City of Columbia’s. We are here

today to personally ask that the City of Columbia assist us with the repair of these

sidewalks.

STOCKWELL:

We recognize that this is a large undertaking and one that might not

seem necessary given the location and the resident status of many of the people

who live there. However, this is an issue that needs to be addressed now. Disability

is an important aspect of diversity. Twenty percent of Americans have some form of

disability. How are we to be inclusive as

community if we are neglecting such

large group within our population?

By repairing the sidewalks, you are showing

that you value the disabled community and that you value the students who have

come to the City and makes the City what it is. Our first request to you is that we

are put in contact with the proper individuals to discuss the sidewalks, and to

create an action plan for their repair. Our second request is that we have an action

plan prepared by the end of the calendar year, so December 31 2021. We want this

plan to include

a timeline for a repair construction that is attainable and able to be

implemented quickly and effectively. This plan could even take advantage of

academic breaks when Greek housing will be empty and streets clear of vehicles.

Our last request is that these repairs happen in

a timely fashion. Ideally, we'd like

all repairs to be complete by the end of 2022, but the sooner the better. You all

have the power to ensure that students with disabilities can access their homes and

that our community becomes

more inclusive place for years to come. So, kind of,

little bit of time for questions,

as we're wrapping up here -- and then if there's

you could ask, but

wheelchair. Her name’s Olivia Holler and she told me “I don't like going through

Greek Town even though live here because the sidewalks are horrible. try to

avoid the area. go up to the hospital and then back around to campus when

leaving or returning to my house.” Help us create living environment that allows

spoke with

member of PHA earlier today. She uses

students, like Olivia, to access and enjoy their homes. Help us repair the sidewalks

now.

TREECE:

Thank you so much for bringing that to our attention. There is

a process for

that, and

wouldn't be surprised someone comes to talk to you after your

presentation tonight.

SPC62-21

Bruce Alspaugh - Broadband Business Planning Task Force.

Bruce Alspaugh spoke.

ALSPAUGH:

on the Magellan Advisors recommendations and appointed the Broadband Business

Planning Task Force to establish collaborative process to bring together important

stakeholders, including the City, the University, the providers, and the general

public, to develop broadband business plan with an eye towards making

affordable and reliable broadband access available throughout the City. It was also

envisioned that the Task Force would rely on consultant to pick up where

Magellan left off, and assist in the development of the business plan. Due to

COVID-19, quorum failures, and other issues, progress has not been as fast as

would like, but we are finally starting to make progress on an RFP for consultant.

You can see draft of that RFP in the meeting materials from our October meeting

Good evening, Mr. Mayor.

In 2019, the City Council followed through

as we continue to solicit input into the development of that RFP. And that goes for

City Council as well, so if you have things you’d like for us to look at least, please let

me know. After our October meeting,

Members about -- asking about another RFP for private providers to deploy,

operate, and maintain broadband internet network that had unexpectedly

appeared on the City website. After reading that RFP, he felt that the rug had been

completely pulled out from under the Task Force by jumping ahead to

implementation before the Task Force had chance to make any recommendations

at all. And frankly, since was not aware that there was another RFP being

developed, didn't know what to tell him. It makes me wonder what meeting

might have missed. It makes me wonder what the public input process was into the

development of RFP. So, the reason appear before you today is to make simple

appeal for better communication between Task Force, staff, City Council, and the

public so that we're all on the same page together. When had chance to read that

RFP, there were three things that stood out. One, first, why the rush to have it in

place by the end of the year? It was such short timeline for applicants to submit

I got a call from one of my fellow Task Force

their bids. You may not receive the quality or quantity of bids that you desire. Also,

due to the fact that the responses will be made public, you might not receive bids

at all from outstanding companies that have business reasons not to have their

name out there. We aren't talking about

about expensive infrastructure that will be in place for decades. So I’m not sure

what difference little additional time would make. It's worth it to take the time to

a bid for paper towels here. We're talking

get it right. I’d be more than happy to serve on an evaluation committee for the

responses to this RFP with an eye towards not just the responses you received, but

the ones you didn’t. By reference, the bids are due on November 9 and our next

task force meeting is November 10. Second,

I didn't know that strategic plan areas

were

strategic plan areas had more to do with community policing, which is completely

outside of our scope. would be happy to have Task Force look into these areas,

priority for broadband infrastructure.

was under the impression that the

but it needs to be explained to us what the connection is with broadband. It would

also be helpful if we had broadband maps that would show us which regions within

those areas are served by which providers. The Task Force has spent

a lot of time

trying to obtain coverage maps, but it's proved difficult because some of the

providers consider their maps to be proprietary information they don't want to

share with their competitors.

My third concern has to do with the ownership of the

fiber. There is sentence in that RFP that reads “all aspects of the service facilities

and appurtenances shall be the responsibility of the contractor and shall be owned

by the contractor.” At least with the IBM deal the City owns the building. If all the

facilities and appurtenances are owned by the contractor, the City could wind up

owning nothing after the contract is complete. This is not consistent with the

Magellan recommendations, which envisioned that the fiber would be owned by

the City and leased to providers to cover the costs of construction and

maintenance, and also provide customers

leasing. The City would be in position of having to pay high prices for -- to use

broadband infrastructure that they helped to finance to put in in the first place if

that happens. So there you have it. few concerns as to how an RFP of this

choice of providers from among those

magnitude could show up on the City website without any opportunity for public

input in the development of the RFP and whether that RFP is even in the best

interest of the City and ordinary citizens.

The Task Force was established by the

City Council, appointed by the City Council to advise the City Council. In other

words, we work for you. I'm asking you to help us to help you by keeping us better

informed. This could be done in

open door or closed door, however you want to do. But perhaps the simplest

solution would be to consider taking it down until you have chance to get public

Task Force that can help

a variety of ways. We could have a joint meeting,

input into the development of that RFP, and you have

you with that. Thank you.

SPC63-21

Brian Page - One man's view on healing from societal hate.

Brian Page spoke and provided a handout.

PAGE:

Good evening, Mayor Treece and Council.

I'm requesting five minutes for

this evening.

Tonight, I’ll be talking again about human behavior. Our behavior

hinges on how our parents and other family members treated us. If we were

nurtured, we use the better, smarter brain, the neocortex, God given brain. But if

we were abused by parents and others, we surrender to the medulla oblongata in

limbic brains. they are the hyper vigilant, obsessive, and fearful aspects about us.

They keep us reactionary instead of our rightful place to be reasoned and

responsive. It’s childhood wounding that has reactionaries convinced that they

can't and won't learn anything from me.

they will not let that happen. strange aspect about human behavior is that if you

learned betrayal as child from your parents and feel superior to any person, place,

To admit that is to admit utter failure, and

or thing you will betray them, because they are fair game. Kind of sobering, isn't it?

When anyone harshly judges another, they skip out on themselves and the other

person. Men are and feel responsible for their actions. Mama's boys don't take

responsibility seriously. They are dangerous and often drunks. If you don't always

like your appearance, then you will really hate the way

exaggerating point sometimes then you'll believe that

look. If you find yourself

I will never stop talking.

Those are examples of projection of

character flaw onto the person you were

judging harshly. Life said to me if you want something good, work for it. Everybody

has to work for what you want even though you may want to steal it. Oppressives

lack maturity, and the males are mama's boys. Men work for what they want, and

what they have and mama's boys believe it should be given to them. I'm thinking of

Josh Hawley out on

meltdown because

limb claiming the absurd. I'm thinking of Fred Parry having

woman, our county health director, enforced facemasks to

sustain our health. There are young kids in Columbia in their 20s, who got COVID,

got over it, and are now showing up with pulmonary embolisms, unable to breathe.

Many of these kids will have to go on social security disability because of

falsehoods and poor judgment impulse control. They were the hope of the future.

Now they’ve become our national regret. Childhood wounding has such

profound

impact on society worldwide. It explains how Jews hate and suppress the

Palestinians, their tribal cousins. It explains white self-justification to suppress the

world while screaming, it's the other guys who are guilty. It’s the Republican

National Committee whose current platform is to cause chaos and destroy

everything that's good in the name of God, the dollar bill. God put me in

situation. seem to be the local human Geiger counter. When walk into

there are many eyes that suddenly glower.

will walk across room and shove, kick, or attempt to make me fall. These are all

Class 4 assaults. God tells me to kick butt defending myself if they break skin.

Otherwise, God and create humor making these oppressives the butt of our jokes.

So far, my favorite prank is to ask jerky boy who's sharing his feminized humor,

strange

a room,

Supposed men in 25 year old bodies

what gonzo Girl Scout troop taught you that joke. My encouragement to anyone

who will listen is to use the Serenity Prayer to pull yourself out of anxiety and into

serenity. When you take self out of self-absorption, there is no need for the old,

habituated intensity.

had to surrender to God in order to find sanity, reclaiming

what parents attempted and failed to emotionally castrate for me. God is my

constant companion, best friend ever, and personal prosecutor, judge, jury, and

jailer. It's

a quirky, great life that I have, and I'm looking forward to reunite with my

honey, Gale Jean Plemmons. Thank you.

SPC64-21

Lillian G. Davis - Traffic, speeding, and child safety.

Lilian Davis spoke.

DAVIS: Good evening, Mr. Mayor.

TREECE: Hi, good evening. Good to see you.

DAVIS: Sorry about my speech.

moments. The first thing want to do is speaking about the speed on the street

where live. see children playing in the street and see people's pets getting --

they run out of the house every now. They break loose and they got run, but hate

like the dickens to see child get ran over. Not too long ago, seen young man

who hit jeep and turned over right across the street from me. And, we need

speed bumps on the street, and that street’s name is Sanford. This is just small

portion of the speed problem. The Worley Street -- I've seen people passing other

vehicles, and person on bicycle, in wheelchair, or on scooter, and I'm not

talking about Bird scooters. I'm talking about three-wheeled one. Will be upon

that person -- their going to die because they hit -- that person's going to be

severely hurt, and if they have health problem, they're going to die. So, I'm asking

Just bear with me. I will probably have a few senior

for speed bumps, and you can check the speed on Worley. It's great. And there's

another place that we have problems with, and that is over on Broadway, East

Broadway at Williams. There's no crosswalk there, and people pull up and they

block the ramp, and they make person in wheelchair that’s handicapped -- they

can't reach the access to the ramp -- to that ramp. They've got it blocked off. And,

think just about covered everything there is to say. Well, except, thank you very

much for your time, and thank you for your patience with me, gentlemen and

ladies. I think I covered it, Pat, pretty well.

TREECE: Thank you very much.

DAVIS: Mr. Mayor, thank you very much for your time you spent here at City Hall.

TREECE: Thank you very much.

V. PUBLIC HEARINGS

PH43-21

Proposed construction of the south parking lot expansion project at the

Columbia Regional Airport.

PH43-21 was read by City Clerk Sheela Amin.

Airport Manager Mike Parks provided a staff report.

PARKS:

Good evening, Mayor and Council, I’m Mike Parks, the Airport Manager.

accordance with

2019 Supplemental Terminal Area Master Plan recommendation

for additional parking at Columbia Regional Airport, staff proposes to expand the

south parking lot, located directly west of the new terminal. The project will

include

new pavement section for an additional 93 standard parking spaces, six

handicap parking spaces, lighting, storm sewers, curb and gutters, and pavement

markings at an estimated cost of $550,715. The project will be funded by

transportation sales tax and enterprise revenue appropriated in FY21. The parking

lot expansion is expected to be completed during the spring of 22, prior to the

opening of the new terminal. An IP meeting was held on October 8, and there were

no comments. If Council concurs with staff’s recommendation -- staff requests

direction to move forward with final plans and specifications for the expansion of

the south parking lot at the airport. Questions?

Mayor Treece opened the public hearing.

Traci Wilson-Kleekamp spoke.

WILSON-KLEEKAMP: Good evening, Tracy Wilson-Kleekamp. Just

just don't know -- are we going to charge for parking in this new parking lot?

TREECE: My thinking is no. There’s no change.

question and

GLASCOCK: We don't plan to this time.

WILSON-KLEEKAMP:

do so little with our public transportation. Last year, we didn’t spend

on public transportation. But, don't understand why we have bad sidewalks, but

I'm hoping we're going to charge for parking because we just

lot of money

we don't charge for parking at the airport. This doesn't make sense to me. So, if

we're charging for money, charging people to park at the airport, then we can spend

things, spend on our public transportation and our sidewalks and have things like

bus shelters. So,

that we have

not tying these pieces together. So that's my concern.

should be paid for, even if it's $5 a day. This is

don't understand why it has to be free, and it just seems to me

strategic plan and we talk about growth and infrastructure, but we're

think, we should -- parking

huge privilege problem to let

people park for free at the airport, but we're making them pay in all kinds of ways

by our bad sidewalks and our poor public transportation system. Thank you.

There being no further comment, Mayor Treece closed the public hearing.

Mayor Treece made a motion to direct staff to proceed with the proposed

construction of the south parking lot expansion project for the Columbia Regional

Airport. The motion was seconded by Council Member Waner and approved

unanimously by voice vote.

VI. OLD BUSINESS

B259-21

Amending Chapter 21 of the City Code relating to the Citizens Police

Review Board.

The bill was given fourth reading by City Clerk Sheela Amin.

City Counselor Nancy Thompson provided a staff report, and the Council

asked questions.

THOMPSON:

We do have an amendment sheet before you with

substitute bill

that was in your packet. There were

significant number of changes that we made

and edits throughout. We just felt like it would be more understandable if we did

an entire substitute bill so that you could read it from top to bottom. One of the

things you asked for was

a bit of an overview of SB26 and what that has done, or

provided for the changes that are being necessitated by SB26. So, I'm going to start

by walking through that briefly, just to hit some of the highlights that affect the

operations of the Citizen Police Review Board and the changes that we're trying to

make to ensure that you continue to have the model of civilian oversight that this

Council put into place

a decade ago. So, in Senate Bill 26, which is now codified

actually -- is Section 590.502 RSMo -- in case you're trying to find it in the statutes.

The law actually applies to any officer who is the subject of an administrative

investigation or questioning, and this is actually the key part, which says that the

officer reasonably believes could lead to disciplinary action or placement on

status that could lead to economic loss. That economic loss applies to any loss,

which includes but is not limited to the loss of overtime accruals, overtime income,

sick leave, accrual sick time, secondary employment, holiday pay, vacation pay. And

why that's important is because that actually makes it apply to circumstances where

an officer might be placed on administrative leave. It's fairly standard for our

department, if there's

critical incident to put an officer on administrative leave,

and we don't consider -- within the City, we don't consider administrative leave to

be disciplinary in nature, but there's certainly the potential when someone's been

placed on administrative leave that they could lose, have an economic loss applied

to overtime. So anyways,

I think just starting off from a definition standpoint, it's a

very inclusive bill as it relates to things that happen with and actions taken with

regard to police officer conduct. And I'm not going to go through every piece of this

that I've put in the memo. I've highlighted all of them with bullet points and

you're able to read those. I'm just trying to get the ones that really impact the

operations of the Citizen Police Review Board. One of the other provisions is that

complaint has to be supported by written statement, which includes the personal

I know

identifying information of the person who files the complaint. That means no

longer can there be action taken on anonymous complaints. In the past, if an

anonymous complaint was received, it was investigated, and, you know, frankly,

the police department is still probably going to do some level of due diligence on

anonymous complaint, but as far as that being

something that can go forward with formal investigation, that's not allowed under

the Police Officer Bill of Rights. The officer may not be questioned by more than

a complaint that is actionable, and

two investigators. That's important because, previously, the Citizen Police Review

Board could question an officer without an officer's consent of the Citizen Police

Review Board as long -- if there have already been two investigators who have

questioned the officer, the officer can't be required to come before the Citizen

Police Review Board and provide

longer something that they can do.

statement. So going forward, that is, that's no

That doesn't mean that they can't some sort of

civilian oversight. It just changes the way civilian oversight is done. Now, it doesn't

apply -- that doesn't apply to any officer who would appear before the Citizen

Police Review Board. Only an officer who, under that first definition that

I read to

you, has reasonable belief that there could be -- the testimony or the

investigation could lead to disciplinary action of that particular officer. The -- then

probably one of the more difficult things and one of the reasons why we really

have to take

the timeframes, but under SB26, the department has 90 days from receipt of

citizen complaint to complete an investigation. There are opportunities for

extensions, and if there is criminal investigation which is occurring at time, the

there is delay during the pendency of the criminal investigation, but complaints

need to be -- once received, they need to be investigated. They need to be

investigated promptly. And then after the determination, the disciplinary

determination, there is 90-day window, second 90-day window when -- during

a look at it, and you've already taken a look at Chapter 19 as relates to

which there is -- the final determination of disciplinary action must be made. That's

the second 90-day window, or what we call the appeal time frame -- is what now is

in Chapter 19. So, what you have before you has that first 90-day window for

investigation of

citizen complaint. So, you -- and then -- plus the two 60-day

extensions. So, what we have tried to do in order to continue to make the Citizen

Police Review Board complaint process meaningful is to put their review in that

first 90-day window plus the two 60-day extensions, so what you're looking at is

the changes that are made have been made so that the police chief makes

preliminary determination on discipline, that's communicated to the citizen and it’s

communicated, well not the disciplinary action -- it’s not communicated to the

citizen, but the preliminary determination on the complaint is as far as whether it's

exonerated, sustained, not sustained, or unfounded -- is communicated to the

citizen, and then the citizen would have

investigatory stage. And honestly, the advantage to that is that the chief would get

the benefit of that review process and citizen review process before making final

right to appeal that during the

decision. Once the chief’s final decision is made, that's when you kick into that

second 90-day period that then becomes the officer’s right of appeal through the

Personnel Advisory Board on the disciplinary action. Then the last item, or major

item, that SB26 did was that SB26 closed all records and proceedings of the CPRB as

it relates to the complaints, or the officer or the officer in the investigation and

discipline. Previously this Council had decided that all -- there would be as much

transparency as possible. All records of the Citizen Police Review Board were open.

All officer investigations as it related to

a complaint were open. And so, once SB26

goes into effect, which was August 28, that rule has changed, and from August 28

forward, those proceedings become closed and the complaint becomes closed.

Now, it is our opinion, and

I think we are in a disagreement, and you're going to this

from, believe, the CPOA -- is that it's our opinion that any complaint that was

pending on August 28 is subject to the rules that the Council had in place prior to

August 28. Any complaint that was pending August 28 and after are subject to SB26

and the closure requirements. So that's written into the substitute bill that you

have in front of you so you see those two different dates.

I think it's in Section 54-1,

21-54.1. That’s my really high overview.

answer them.

If you have any questions, I'd be happy to

FOWLER:

Yes,

recall reading one of the staff reports and it referenced the fact that

complainant,

a citizen complainant, who had previously 30 days to file an appeal,

now is reduced to 10 days. So, how does that fit in with that initial 90 days because,

as understood you and I'm -- this isn't clear to me. So, the citizen files complaint,

the police chief makes preliminary determination, and then notifies the citizen

what that preliminary determination is -- not

citizen has to move quickly, 10 days, correct?

THOMPSON: Very quickly, yes.

final determination. Then the

FOWLER:

Very quickly to then think about all the consequences of their filing an

system that will not allow them to find out or -- mean everything

closed record. And you know, perhaps that helps,

appeal into

that happens then becomes

except that somewhere else in the bill, it says that the identifying information of

the complaining witness is available to the officer that the complaint was leveled

against. I'm having trouble understanding how that's preserving our intent to

provide to the public

path forward when they feel they had been mistreated by

an individual officer.

THOMPSON: Well,

I think, what we're trying to do is make lemonade out of lemons

-- help you preserve that. We can't preserve the model as it exists today with the

current statute in place, given the time frames and the requirements that are out

there. So, just to be totally frank, there is no way to preserve exactly what we have.

We're trying to keep it as meaningful as possible so that the CPRB can provide that

feedback and that citizen oversight.

that point will be will be litigation if they aren’t afforded this kind of process or

procedure at the administrative level if they have cause of action. Certainly that

cause of action, then they would

Unfortunately, the citizen’s only recourse at

would be their only recourse. If they don't have

not have any recourse whatsoever for review.

FOWLER: Over the time that I've been on Council, the conversations that I've had

with members of the community and members of the CPRB are about whether or

not there would be additional resources available to the CPRB where they would

have their own budget. The way this is cutting back on the time options for

complaining citizen feels like the next solution is to have staff and support within

the CPRB to assist members of the community in meeting those deadlines so that

they are not inadvertently left behind when they bring forward a complaint.

THOMPSON: And

would tell you that what you're probably looking at is

determining whether or not you want to totally change the way that your Citizen

Police Review Board operates. That's probably the more long term solution. There

are models out there where civilian oversight is part of the investigation from day

one, and then there are models out there where civilian oversight provides more of

perfunctory review after everything is over and all you're going to do at that point

is hold management accountable. They're really -- we're in this kind of middle

hybrid-type program where we want to provide this civilian oversight and review as

kind of part of the recommendation for the findings of the action after the -- kind of

after the investigation. So long term,

I think based upon what you're talking about,

you would want to review what type of civilian oversight is being provided. Right

now, we're just trying to fit what we're doing as best as possible into the new

structure guided by SB26.

FOWLER: Thank you. I may have another question after we have a public hearing.

David Tyson Smith and Traci Wilson-Kleekamp spoke.

SMITH:

Council for the opportunity to comment about this. You know, there is

there's obviously been lot of talk about Senate Bill 26, and people have been

working on it and it's kind of been headache, but you have to understand there is

citizens police review board statute as well that's in place, and sent letter to

the Council and to the Review Board in this regard. There is review board and

statute that’s already there and it’s existing, and it allows for Citizens Police

Good evening. My name is David Tyson Smith and

just want to thank the

-- know

Review Board. And not only does it allow for it, but it gives it the power to

investigate and to make recommendations regarding discipline. So, Senate Bill 26 --

understand there’s kind of a conflict in a few regards and in manner, but I can tell

you that when Senate Bill 26 was debated and discussed, the review boards were

never talked about. There was no documentation regarding the review boards

when it was dealt with.

when it was debated, discussed, and voted on, and

and don't think the intention was ever to deal with citizens police review boards.

was on the House floor when Senate Bill 26 came up,

didn't -- voted against it, but

That wasn't the intention of Senate Bill 26. The intention of Senate Bill 26 was to

deal with the initial complaints regarding law enforcement. That’s why it came up.

No one talked about the review boards and how it was going to affect them, and

think what happened is that went through, and there was this thought, well wait

minute.

I think the CPOA rushed and said, let's see how we can curtail or weaken or

continue to try to dismantle the review board. But anything that Senate Bill 26 does

that does not give the review board the power to investigate, make findings,

recommend discipline -- if that's allowed, then you're running afoul of the review

board statute. So it's not that we're, you know -- this idea that we have to bow

down to Senate Bill 26 and new statute -- there’s

a review board statute that has to

be obeyed. And this argument from CPOA and read, one of the initial letters and it

said, well you have to do this, this, and this otherwise you're running afoul of the

law. Well, if you do anything that runs afoul of the review board statute then you're

running afoul of the law. So SB26 is not the giant gorilla that's going to dictate

what's going to happen with the review board.

statute. And honestly, realize there are some conflicts between the two, but that

doesn't mean we bend towards Senate Bill 26. lot of this is for the courts they’re

going to have to decide and work out the kinks. But it's not that the CPOA gets to

come in and say, okay, now we're just going to follow Senate Bill 26. You know, one

of the initial letters saw from the CPOA when this thing started talked about the

There is an existing review board

purpose of the review board is for collaboration and communication. That's not the

purpose of the review board, okay. The purpose of the review board is for

accountability and transparency. So, we need to keep that in mind. Those other

things are byproducts. So, and I’ll close, I'm out of time, but

I think there's some

irony here because everyone talks about the CPOA and they talked about trust,

trust, trust, we want trust. Well there’s not going to be trust if you whittle away at

this police review board, so, keep that in mind. There’s

a review board statute that

needs to be honored, and if you deviate from that, and you don't give the review

board the power to investigate -- because you can't investigate if you can't call

officers in front of them, right? If officers can't answer to the review board then

they're not investigating. Then you're running afoul of review board statute.

you.

Thank

THOMAS: So in your opinion, does the bill we have before us run afoul of the

review board statute.

SMITH: think parts of it do.

I mean, I think to say that the review board can’t

question officer -- that’s afoul of the review board statute. They, you know, the

statute says they have the power, the power, to investigate. Well anything you do

that takes away their power is

may be an issue for the courts to hash out, but

come in and dictate what the Council’s going to do in this regard. And

violation of the review board statute. And again, it

don't know that the CPOA gets to

find it very

interesting, just as, just food for thought, that the review board is designed to hold

the police department accountable. Yet, the police department, the CPOA, is

coming in and dictating the terms for that accountability. It's bizarre.

THOMAS: So you feel that municipalities like ours with

review board are in

situation where either we leave things as they are and we run afoul of SB26 or we

make these kinds of changes and we run afoul of the other statute.

SMITH:

think it depends on the changes. You know,

know that there's talk about

deal, although if the time

the time frames. The time frames aren’t that big of

frames are such that you can't do -- the review board can't do their job, then it is

problem that it does run afoul of the statute. Certain minor changes

would have a huge impact on Senate Bill 26.

I don't think

So,

I don't think it's one or the other, but I would say be very careful about taking

away the power of the review board to do its job because that is

is in place.

a statute, and that

WILSON-KLEEKAMP: [Traci Wilson-Kleekamp]

that is very pro police and pro police unions, but we live in

lot trust in policing. And, we have CPOA that doesn't have

record. We don't have trust. There's no trust building going on. This idea that if

someone files complaint because they're treated badly and they have to -- their

understand that we live in

City where there's not

really terrific track

State

name gets to be known, and the officer gets to know -- who's protecting the

citizen? No one. Not the police. So this is - you’re in a hard place. You have to ask

yourself what kind of culture do we have in our police department, and are we

going to bend to the state or are we going to do the things we really say we believe

in our strategic plan and all these different reports that say we believe in equity

and all that other kind of stuff. But when the State does something demonic, we

just can't wait to change everything to step to that. That's fine. At the end of the

day, what I'm hearing is the police department’s not really interested in trust. At

least the police union isn't. They're interested in power and being in control no

matter what, even when there’s no threat. There's no threat to them. They carry

guns and they can take lives all the time, anytime. The citizens are the ones who

are in danger. It's on you. I've already decided. We've been working on this, Race

Matters Friends, since 2015, trying to get the Council to understand that we need

different kind of policing, and don't think it's worked. And I've kind of moved to

the other side. I've decided that the policing as we know it just needs to go away.

And we may need to have different kind of Citizens Police Review Board. I’m cool

with that, but if this is what the Council bends to because you're going to bend to

this demonic stuff that's going on at the State. That’s twisted.

The Council asked further questions and made comments.

TREECE: Counselor, who initiated Bill 259. Did CPOA or did the legal department do

that?

THOMPSON: What do you mean? Bill 259 --

TREECE: Who felt we had to harmonize our local ordinance to comply with Senate

Bill 26?

THOMPSON: Oh, I'm sorry, Bill 259 is the title of this bill. The law department did.

We did.

TREECE:

So, and

looked at Chapter 590.653 RSMo. That’s the enabling legislation

for civilian review boards. We had one before this bill took effect in 2000, and it

does say the board shall have the power to receive, investigate, make findings,

recommend disciplinary action. What Senate Bill 26 did though was -- provide clear

days, calendar days, that those efforts had to occur. Is that correct?

THOMPSON:

That's correct. I would say that I think the enabling statutes for civilian

oversight are permissive. They're not necessarily mandatory. It gives powers, but it

doesn't -- then we have Senate Bill 26 come in and --

TREECE: -- take away those powers.

THOMPSON:

civilian oversight. Now, does it mean that next legislative session they can't go in

and remedy that, but right now we're sitting here with bill that did not exclude

-- Take away those powers. It chips away and it did not exclude

that, and the penalties for the City if we were to run afoul of SB 26 as it’s currently

enacted are pretty significant.

TREECE: And what would those penalties be?

THOMPSON:

statute is how SB 26 is written.

the court may award the officer the costs of bringing the suit plus attorney fees,

and anytime you're in this kind of litigation, it's all about the attorney fees. It's

The officer is -- it voids any action taken if we’re in violation of the

keep calling it SB 26. It’s actually 590.502. And then

pretty significant risk for the City to take without

statute.

specific exclusion into the

TREECE:

2021 when the bill took effect, and if we don't pass, -- so help me understand why

we would bifurcate that process. understand the complaint was filed prior to the

So, most of my concern is on how we treat complaints prior to August 28,

bill becoming effective, but we haven't released those internal affairs records. The

statute then changes and says we can't release them. So, why would we carve those

out, if you will, and treat one group of complaint differently than a different group?

THOMPSON. So, what the statute actually says is that all records compiled as

result of any investigation -- and this is the important language -- subject to the

provisions of this section shall be held confidential and shall not be subject to

disclosure. So all records compiled as the result of any investigation subject to the

provisions of this section shall be held confidential. I don't believe that you can --

TREECE: -- shall become confidential.

THOMPSON: Pardon me.

TREECE: Shall become confidential.

THOMPSON: Shall be held confidential. And so,

were compiled as result of an investigation prior to the effective date of this

statute are covered under the statute. So, we will have an answer that believe.,

don't believe that records that

but for right now, we believe that we should separate out and make it abundantly

clear that things that were prior to August 28 would be open, anything past August

28, would be held confidential. Otherwise,

I think what you do is you use run the

risk of turning back the dial on the transparency that the Council had prior to August

28 for the Citizen Police Review Board.

TREECE:

So, the City as a defendant in that officer's lawsuit in the in the request for

declaratory judgment.

THOMPSON: Correct.

TREECE:

I'm a little hesitant to change ordinance while there’s an issue at hand at

the circuit court.

THOMPSON: Currently our ordinance calls for open -- the records all to be open.

We're required to open any records related to an investigation.

TREECE: But, we haven't opened them yet.

THOMPSON: Yes, you have. The current Chapter 21 has affirmatively opened those

records as it sits in existence today. As

a matter of fact, there was litigation on that

particular issue when the Citizen Police Review Board was formed, and at that point

in time, the court ruled that it didn't just open the records at the time that the

Council made an affirmative statement and didn't just open the records at that

time. It retroactively applied that particular provision.

TREECE:

hate to ask this question when we're not in closed session for legal

purposes, but if we do not -- if this Council does not pass these changes tonight,

what prevents that litigating officer from amending the complaint to sue the City

for not being in compliance with Senate Bill 26 and pursuing attorney’s fees?

THOMPSON: We’re in compliance.

TREECE:

For him, but maybe not for another? So, okay, so maybe there's another --

at some point, we're not in compliance for the next officer that comes along. That's

a problem, right?

THOMPSON:

knowing what we're trying to deal with.

FOWLER: So, since there's already

wouldn't want to answer

hypothetical question like that without

discussion going on in circuit court, Boone

County Circuit Court -- there's been an action filed?

THOMPSON: Yes.

FOWLER: There’s reference to that in the staff report. I’m not sure the order in

which I'm going to suggest this, but given what Representative Smith said about the

viability of the Citizens Police Review Board statute,

think

would feel better

about this conversation if we similarly had tried to -- out were all of us can watch

and look at -- if we had tried to harmonize that statute with what changes we're

making right now to Chapter 21. And

things read and all the confusion

tonight's hearing, did not pull that statute.

and would suspect other members of Council similarly and the public haven't

know you know what that says, but in all the

I tried to sort out in my head in preparing for

I did not look at it and harmonize that,

done that, but I'm also wondering if there's some way that, given that there is

pending litigation, whether it's declaratory judgment or otherwise, if there isn't

some way for us to determine whether or not --

don't know in

counterclaim or an

conflict

ask or whatever -- what proper venue is -- about the -- when you have

between Senate Bill 26 and the statute that establishes citizen review board, how

will the courts come down on that because at some point yes, it's going to have to

be -- I mean you have a conflict of laws passed by the same body at different times.

THOMPSON:

don't think that that's something that

can answer definitively for

you. will tell you that we don't believe that the request for declaratory judgment

is bad for anybody. We really think it brings clarity to how the law is applied to the

records that we have. Currently, the records that -- kind of when we're in no man's

land and then going forward -- but we really believe that it's -- it will -- it gives an

opportunity to have the court take

look at it, listen to the concerns on both sides,

and reach definitive answer. We feel like if we can’t -- otherwise we're in

win situation -- because we really feel like we need to support the citizen request,

but at the same time, we understand that this law that went into effect that does

have an impact on our existing city code. So we don't look at -- we don't actually

look at that as

bad thing. If that can -- and so we just really want to have enough

good good decision one

clarity so that going forward that the court can make

way or the other.

FOWLER: And

who brought that suit is litigating is the applicability of Senate Bill 26 restrictions on

matter that was filed prior to the effectiveness of that statute. Is it possible that --

I'm going to ask very specifically -- for us to -- in counterclaim or an answer -- to

understand that from the point of view that we're -- what the officer

bring up the fact that we also feel that this action is going to run us afoul of the

statute that establishes the Citizens Police Review Board and see if they want to

include any of that in the discussion?

THOMPSON:

Review Board authority is just that. It establishes enabling authority, but each

jurisdiction that has review board sets their own set of rules within the

I think that's a different set of facts at this point. And the Citizen Police

parameters of that statute. So it's really not

statute.

mandatory statute. It's permissive

FOWLER: Except that now our statute that we worked so hard to establish, not me

personally, but Representative Smith and other members of the community that

I'm familiar with -- work so hard to establish, is now being undermined and swept

aside by that, and so

I just am wondering what's the proper venue for looking at

that before we then adopt changes that further erode what our predecessor council

and our earlier citizens worked so hard to establish.

THOMPSON: That’s something we're going to have to take a look at.

SKALA:

correct me if I’m wrong -- it's

the ordinance that we have, right? And

significantly increase the risk if we delayed this to the extent that we found out

just had

question.

think that what we're doing now appears to me, and

way of minimizing the risk by harmonizing SB 26 and

guess the question that have is -- would it

what some of the legal determinations are as

determination?

result of the ongoing legal

THOMPSON: If we were to delay this, we would basically need to stop utilizing the

Citizen Police Review Board for any type of review activity because their processes

are not in conformance with state law so we would have to hit

what they're doing going forward. You know, think -- it's just kind of my off the

cuff answer. can take deeper look at it if you choose not to do anything but

would -- think that we’re to that point of -- we have an effective date of August 28

a pause button on

and we have to figure out how to operate in those parameters. And they -- because

you have very specific city code sections set forth on how they operate, we'd have

to see if there are parts of that we continue to utilize but --

SKALA:

So your advice would be to proceed to harmonize those two documents

and then look back and modify the Citizen Police Review Board ordinance at that

time.

THOMPSON: Yes, yes. If we have things that are not working or that need to be

improved to do that, maybe as Step B.

FOWLER: So, if we do that -- if we accept the changes that you and your staff have

brought to us tonight, we have taken away the power of the Citizens Police Review

Board to investigate if the police department in responding to

citizen complaint

mean, you

begins an investigation process and then that uses up the ability of --

can't subject the officer to questioning. We've taken away the power of the Citizens

Police Review Board to investigate.

THOMPSON: Not completely. What you have taken -- what you are not allowing

them to do is investigate the subject officer.

They can continue to do an

investigation. They can continue to do review. What they can't do is subject the

subject officer to any questioning because Senate Bill 26 limits that to two

investigators, and your -- you have the potential for your Citizen Police Review

Board to be considered to be

officers can’t be questioned or --

third investigator. But that doesn't mean other

FOWLER: Because they're not subject to the complaint and they're not at risk or

perceived to be at risk. But they can't -- but our Citizens Police Review Board can’t

have access to the information that is determined from the two investigating

officers.

THOMPSON: No they can.

FOWLER: So that information -- the police report of whomever the police puts in as

an investigator role with that officer -- that transcript of that will to come to the

Citizens Police Review Board -- they will be able to access that?

THOMPSON: Yes, they have access to that. And they’re required to hold it

confidential. They're required to meet in closed session, but they definitely have

access to that because they're part of that investigation. They just don't have to

right to question the officer. They cannot question the officer, the subject officer.

FOWLER: And do they have the right to call in other officers who may have been

bystanders and present at the time in question them, or does the officer or the

police department had an ability to withhold their appearance.

THOMPSON: Provided that the officer, any officer they're trying to question does

not this reasonable belief that they would be subject to some sort of loss, then

they can call those officers in.

FOWLER: The reasonable being of being subjected to some loss -- very interesting

language. Yes, thank you, Nancy.

PITZER: So your opinion is that our bill 259 is in compliance with the civilian review

board statute, correct?

THOMPSON: Yes

PITZER:

Is it --

are our police board regulations as expansive as they can be in

compliance with Senate Bill 26 and with the civilian review board statute?

THOMPSON: Yes, at this point in time, without any kind of determination that

would exclude out civilian oversight from SB 26, they are. We've gone as far as we

can go using our model. Now, we could change the model at some time in the

future but, given our existing model of civilian oversight, yes.

PITZER: And what’s your -- your position on complaints before August 28 is what?

THOMPSON: Open

PITZER: Are they open or closed?

THOMPSON: Open.

PITZER: They’re open. And any complaints between August 28 and today would

have been in violation of Senate Bill 26?

THOMPSON: No, they'd be closed.

PITZER: What about any investigations that are conducted in that period?

THOMPSON: We would have to take

look at when the complaint came in, what

part of the investigation occurred.

we would take a look at that.

can't draw bright line rule for you tonight, but

PITZER: And the civilian review board has not instigated any or had any complaints

brought to them since August 28?

THOMPSON: I don't know the answer to that.

AMIN: We've received complaints through our office that we’ve forwarded on.

THOMPSON: Okay.

PITZER: So, what regulatory regimen would those be handled under?

THOMPSON: I’d have to look at

- I would have to actually look at each one of those

individually. I can't answer that for you this evening.

PITZER: Okay.

THOMPSON: Mayor,

correct if you choose to adopt amendment sheet. There is

page 11 -- at the very top of page 11 where a -- the words prior to need to be struck.

It has to do with the August 28 date. We say that -- provision subsection says, “for

any complaint filed against police officer on or after prior to August 28” -- so that

do have one small typographical error that we would need to

typographical error on

prior to just didn't get struck when we did it.

TREECE: What does everyone think about the August 28 open and closed dilemma?

FOWLER: As far as honoring that is a prior practice that is still valid?

TREECE: What’s your interpretation of that?

FOWLER: Well,

jurisdictions and

lawyer.

hold an inactive license to practice law in three

would be in agreement

do take continuing legal education. So,

that complaints filed before August 28 are subject to the earlier rules and practices.

TREECE: We haven’t released them.

FOWLER:

processes of how we move things along. It's about when the complaint is filed.

TREECE: You have concerns -- since this is matter under advisement at the court --

do you have any concern about changing the ordinance in the middle of that?

FOWLER: have different -- have concerns about changing the ordinance until we

have clear guidance from the courts, not only about that. understand that could go

different way, although think that the counsel’s interpretation is accurate of

that. But have hesitation about the fact that don't think we’ve done as careful

look at the statute that enables the Citizens Police Review Board process to go

forward, and I’d be interested on when and if court of competent jurisdiction in

don't --

think it's about the filing date. It's not about our internal

Missouri is going to undertake to look at Senate Bill 26 as it’s now been codified

against the Citizens Police Review Board statute as it's been codified, and look at

the conflicts inherent there and determine whether or not -- which ones will be

valid and which ones will be struck down.

TREECE: Yeah, but that could take years if you’re looking at --

FOWLER:

would very much like to have

actions of our police department so we can build trust among ourselves. There is

understand, but

look at it from the perspective of -- our community

process in place that brings accountability to the

great willingness to heal that divide, and one of the tools we have is the Citizens

Police Review Board process.

PITZER: So, Ms. Thompson’s,

passing this ordinance, right? And you're -- are you concerned about that risk?

FOWLER: I’m concerned about lot of risks, but I'm also concerned about the bigger

picture as well. And so if the city is comfortable that they -- in taking that position

and it is now gone to circuit -- Boone County Circuit Court -- and don't know what

the timetable is for that decision, but think that how well that goes may or may

not put some wind under people's wings at looking at the bigger picture, whether

it's our jurisdiction or another jurisdiction. So, am struggling with that. I'm not sure

I think, point is that we're at risk, if we -- without

how I'm going to vote on this, but I'm comfortable with the fact that we are

pursuing that matter. We've been brought into Boone County Circuit Court on that

matter, and that we’re pursuing it.

PITZER: That’s just on this specific point about the August 28 date.

FOWLER: Yes, it is, yeah. Well you know, when you think you have

a statute that

runs afoul of what's important to what you believe in, part of the legal process is

chipping away at that one bite at

operates.

a time. That's just the way our judicial system

TREECE:

think failing to pass this tonight puts the City at risk of fines and attorneys’

think it prohibits the CPRB from anything until we

fees for future complainants.

get to the solution. But more importantly, it puts staff in the position of having to

determine -- do they violate the state law or do they violate the city ordinance?

And that's not fair.

FOWLER: I think there’s two state laws Mayor.

TREECE: Yeah, and enabling legislation is not -- doesn’t provide any time limits or

anything like that that our local ordinance did.

SKALA:

Just a comment. I just see this as another one of those issues, a very

difficult issue, because it involves the courts as well -- as it involves the

relationship between the state and our municipalities. This is another one of those

dilemmas on the horns of pre-emption. It’s kind of what it amounts to, and that

that theme keeps popping up, and we have to react to it. But

mean, at this point,

don't think --

think I'm inclined to agree that --as much as don't like the idea,

think we need to mitigate some of this risk and then go back and adjust so that the

original protections of the Police Review Board -- was around when it was first

proposed -- are significant for the population, for our residents and our

constituents.

PETERS:

what we do.

city attorney and maybe CPOA have worked to try and address this issue in

relationship to the state statute. think it would be reasonable to go forward and

pass this. Having said that, and listening to Representative Smith’s comment that,

you know, there is citizens police review board acknowledgment in this bill, then

Having watched this and not being

lawyer,

mean, we're at risk no matter

mean you can get sued no matter what, so

think, in good faith, our

we probably need to -- after this is passed -- look at that and see how we can make

sure that our review board is as robust as it can be and make sure that it does

protect the citizens’ rights. This is all just very murky.

Mayor Treece made a motion to amend B259-21 per the amendment sheet

including removing “prior to” on page 11, which would correct the typographical

error pointed out by City Counselor Nancy Thompson. The motion was seconded

by Council Member Skala and approved unanimously by voice vote.

B259-21, as amended, was given fifth reading by the City Clerk with the vote

recorded as follows: VOTING YES: SKALA, THOMAS, PITZER, PETERS, TREECE,

FOWLER, WANER. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as

follows:

B284-21

Approving the Final Plat of “Forest Hills, Plat No. 2” located on the south

side of Geyser Boulevard and west of Lake of the Woods Road;

authorizing a performance contract (Case No. 125-2021).

The bill was given third reading by City Clerk Sheela Amin.

Community Development Director Tim Teddy provided a staff report, and

the Council asked questions.

TEDDY:

returns to Council's agenda. October 4, it was removed from consent, and Council

will recall that there was group of concerned residents of the Edgewater

community to the south of this location. Especially concerned about the joining of

new public street that would be built as part of Forest Hills that would join North

Waterfront, which is street in in that community, which is part of the

Good evening, Tim Teddy, Community Development Director, and this item

unincorporated Boone County. This is -- this tract, just to recap, is 11.4 acres. There's

37 lots contained within the plat. It's the second phase of Forest Hills. And once

again, it was tabled. Highlighted there at the lower right -- this would be the

southeast region on the plat -- is where the concern is. The staff of both the City

and County have required this developer to actually physically join what's called

Sugar Maple Street with North Waterfront, an existing public street, but of course,

that that North Waterfront/Edgewater community has not had any connections to

its street system, probably since its inception, about 40 years ago. And just getting

right to the matter -- what the developer has proposed to do is place these blocks.

And you can see they've already been placed. These are normally part of retaining

wall systems, but they would be used as

a physical barrier, a temporary barrier until

such time as the infrastructure of this Forest Hills Plat 2 is completed. Our view of

temporary barriers was that there was in the original preliminary plat of subdivision

requirement that a temporary barrier be placed to traffic to and from these two

subdivisions until such time as Geyser Boulevard then known as Rice Road was

completed to Lake of the Woods, and that's been done so we think the developer’s

obligation has been met.

involvement back when the preliminary plat was being considered -- there's some

involvement of the Boone County Commission that made statement that they

would support having temporary gate till 75 percent of this subdivision was built

out or Rice Road, as it was called then, was completed to the Lake of the Woods,

whichever is the last to occur. So, recognizing that, think this developer is willing

to leave those blocks in place. However, there will come time when, at least

However,

recognizing

that

there

was

also

some

according to the plans that we've approved, where that would be opened -- that

connection there. And this has been noted on -- these are construction drawings so

these are not part of the council materials typically -- but this is showing the

physical joining of Sugar Maple to East Waterfront, at that curve there. It's the first

bend of that road as it sweeps along the north property line that’s shared between

these two tracts. And they've added

until the infrastructure is complete. And that's all

understand there are some residents that want to present material to you as well.

SKALA: Just question, Mr. Teddy. Has there been any -- are you aware of any

note that that barrier would remain in place

have on this matter.

discussions or has there been any further discussion about the potential in the

future for some sort of keyed gate entry?

TEDDY:

now, and

-- what we call emergency access only, so

would be locking system that would be accessible just to those emergency

know that's what residents of the Edgewater community have requested

understand that would be as permanent measure to just simply have it

knox-box would be in place and that

services if and when needed.

SKALA: Right, that's their position?

TEDDY: That's the discussion, yeah. Now the County order that

referred to -- of

course, that's an old county commission -- that's back in 2006.

considered by either County staff or the County Commission -- that I'm aware.

SKALA: Thank you.

I don't think it's been

PETERS: Can I just ask why they need to be connected.

TEDDY: Well, it's the principle that, you know, they are public streets. We do intend

public streets to be used, and one of the advantages of joining public streets is you

get circulation between places. To the argument that there'd be an excess of traffic,

would not see an advantage to everyone that lives off of Geyser or lives off of this

subdivision’s streets to really make regular use of that connection because it is

longer in terms of distance with the turns, even if they're going southeast. think

those lots and there's about half dozen -- eight lots if you count the corners on

Sugar Maple. There might be some advantage for residents of those lots to travel

south on North Waterford Drive to exit onto Lake of the Woods if they're headed in

south direction on Lake of the Woods, but otherwise Geyser go straight east. You

know, it's meant to collect the traffic from both north and south in that subdivision.

So that's why. Deliveries, emergency services -- they can avail themselves to the

connections.

PETERS: So is it emergency services? See, I'm still at

be connected. Is it for emergency services or as is it --

a loss as to why those need to

TEDDY: Well, it’s planning principle. We do it. It's not often that you have phases

that are 40 years apart, but that's what we have here. We have an old settled

community that has had open space around it, hasn't had development off this

north side. It's had developments of the northwest, but not connecting to it. So

normally, it's

more timely process, but you know that -- this was first discussed in

variety of reasons -- it was different developer originally. They got

2006, and for

their preliminary plan approved, they got the Phase 1 approved almost seven years

later, and then that didn't move forward immediately. The present developer came

in, and now they're actively pursuing development of the whole tract.

PETERS: And Waterford -- is that

couldn't find it when I was there.

narrow street or areasonably wide street?

TEDDY: Twenty-six feet was the figure that has been stated in the comments that

we've received. Ours is 28 feet for a residential street.

PETERS: Okay, and they’re the county?

TEDDY: Yes.

PETERS: All right, thanks.

PITZER:

couple of questions, Mr. Teddy.

So those temporary barriers that you

showed, are they on the City side or the County side of that line?

TEDDY: I believe that's on the County side, sir.

PITZER: The proposed, you know, temporary gate that was on the plans from 2006 or

whenever -- that was on the City side or the County side?

TEDDY: That would have been on the County side, although it was noted as

requirement on the City's approval. So it was on the City's approved plan. There's

note indicating

the Woods. Yeah, if

was an earlier attempt to build it out partway to the east, and we had folks from

City neighborhood to the north Kelsey, believe, Redwing -- those streets. They

gate to be installed, again, if Rice Road is not extended to Lake of

may, we had similar situation with that same tract. There

were concerned that traffic heading east on Rice was going to use their streets as an

outlet to Lake of the Woods. So, the Council expressed that, kind of that same

concern, about the neighborhoods that Forest Hills is interconnected with to the

north, and building the street all the way to Lake of the Woods resolved that

because, again, it's

a straight shot to that road and then Lake of the Woods itself is

straight too, so it's fairly direct travel.

PITZER: And what is the final plat say about this temporary gate?

TEDDY: The final plat does not say anything about it. They’re proposing to amend

the construction drawings. Again, the way the staff reviewed the record of

subdivision approvals, they didn't feel that there was any more obligation to put

gate in so there was no date on final plans.

PITZER: Right, I'm just trying to figure out what our role is versus what

would be in deciding whether that gate stays or goes.

a County role

SKALA: Just one other question, and that is -- this kind of reminds me -- maybe you

can refresh my memory or perhaps you may not remember this either -- but know

when the Links development was established, if you will, there was initially

supposed to have been connection between Lillian and Clark Lane, actually, and

there was some discussion, neighborhood discussion and so on -- so, it's my

neighborhood actually -- about

happened there -- was to close off some of that supposed traffic, but is that in any

way -- mean, is that the kind of thing that we're talking about here with this

gate or

temporary gate. In fact, that's what

discussion with --

TEDDY: Yeah, and I think that’s on the north side of Clark Lane, is that correct?

SKALA: Yes, that’s correct.

TEDDY: It was done, kind of on the west side of the development?

SKALA: Yeah.

TEDDY: Yeah, and there's that, and, of course, there's

difference in land use

intensity there between the multi-family and the single family that's on that street

leading into it. So that's an example within our jurisdiction, and then maybe

on point example is -- it's called -- Raccoon Ridge is the street, but there's

long

street coming off of New Haven, and near the new Cedar Ridge school, there's

actually gate, and that was actually requested by the County that that remain

emergency access only, so folks couldn't use the Woodlands, think, might be the

name of the subdivision, unincorporated Boone County. They couldn't use their

street as main route to school, which, admittedly, is big traffic generator so that

lot of trips, probably both from within and outside the

would have drawn

neighborhood.

SKALA: In your opinion, that one between Lillian and Clark was really driven by

discussion about multi-family versus single family?

TEDDY: Yeah,

I think so. That's where we’ve had them. The Timberhill gate would be

another example, where it's multi-family and low density residential. You know,

again, we've -- we're always in the position of recommending that the streets

extend, but residents, sometimes, have other ideas, and if there are concerns

managing traffic, you know --

SKALA: Yeah, there was an extension, for example, of Cass when Indian Hills was

connected to the Meadowlands, and that is Rice Road, well now it’s Geyser

Boulevard, but there was that connector as well, and quite

about it.

bit of controversy

Karen Turner, David Strumpf, Susie Barr, Penny Thiel, and Don Cameron

spoke.

TREECE:

tonight as well.

TURNER: [Karen Turner] Thank you for hearing us tonight. Edgewater has four

associations that are around the lake. It's county road that's beautiful. It has many

curves and goes around two private lakes, and it's not meant to have arterial traffic

on there. Due to the affordability in this area, there are lot of 55-plus residents

that live out there, and most of these people think this is their forever home. So,

we're looking at new approach on this. As you can tell on this road, there -- it's

curved and there's bus coming. You see the sun shining in the driver's eyes, and

you see walker standing next to the bus and you see one that is way up ahead

where the proposed connection is. And in the second picture, you see walker

standing right where the proposed connection is, and car that is banked into the

other lane where the bus would be coming. This is huge safety concern. It

I did have an email [inaudible] from Karen Turner, and I think Karen's here

happens all the time due to people trying to go around walkers, other cars that are

parked on the road, etc. And there's five of these curves that people have to

negotiate. And this is what happens -- this is right where the proposed road

connection is supposed to be going in, and by doing that, it also blocks people from

being able to get in and out, by doing that. And where Sugar Maple is, if somebody

was to be flying through there, they would be in and up in that person's front yard

there. Here's another curve where people have taken out an electrical box, and it's

right next to somebody's house. Again, it's dangerous for people that aren't used to

this road. And people that park on this

are. Geyser has bike lanes, it has sidewalks, it’s wider. Waterfront is not. Besides

road safety concerns, there's personal concerns of criminal activity. Rice Road was

- this -- it just shows how narrow these roads

changed because of the perception of the road, and just in the last two months,

there's been 37 police calls to Geyser Boulevard, two of which were shootings in

that area. The Edegewater pays monthly dues -- it's unlike other neighborhoods --

they pay monthly dues for these amenities, the pool, the lakes, everything. And

when you have traffic coming in from Geyser Boulevard, these people think that

they can use the lake, the pools, and when they're confronted --

I mean - these --

this lake is around people's backyard, so people are actually fishing in people's

backyards. And, you know, how would you feel if somebody was in your backyard,

you know, just standing there? It's not safe. They become more confrontational

when you tell them to leave. This person was actually fishing in my backyard, and

they ended up cutting through the proposed area for the -- to Geyser Boulevard.

This road construction is also doing

a number on both of our lakes. It's hard for us to

treat our lakes because of the algae, and, you know, the water runoff. And, this

picture shows that four years ago, this is what our lake looked like, and this is what

it looks like today. It's more than just combining two neighborhoods like he had

mentioned. Like with Kelsey, Kelsey is also part of going straight on to Sugar Maple.

So that street connects to Sugar Maple, which then connects here. So, it's not like

another neighborhood. We pay our association dues, and quite

a lot. I mean, some

of these are -- these people are on retirement and things like that, and there's -- at

least for the condos and townhouses, that’s $240 a month that you're paying for

these amenities that other people can just then come and use, and be in your

backyard, and you have to confront them every time. It's not easy. So there have

been many factors that have changed over the years from when this agreement was

first made that just do not work today. They need to be reconsidered for the good

and safety of the residents, not just the developers. We've come together as

multiple homeowners associations to ask that you take

a step back, reevaluate that

we have the right -- that we hope that you do the right thing and not complete this

road, and put in the knox-box and gate permanently instead of temporarily -- of

which was already supposed to be there at this stage of development. I'm speaking

for

lot of members in our association that are here and also listening on our live

can save time for you. There

feed. So, I'm -- appreciate the little extra time so that

may be one or two people that may want to say something, but we appreciate your

time and your consideration in this. It’s very important to our residents that are

55-plus.

TREECE: Ms. Turner, how would you -- so what do you want us to do tonight?

mean, tend to agree with you. Do you want us to defeat the plat, mean, table it

again? I don't know what our options are.

TURNER: We just definitely do not want the road to come through there. It’s

dangerous curve. It's very dangerous curve. And, you know, even at night, there's

no lights on that street. So it ends up where people can't see what's coming in

inclement weather -- all the curves, there are six curves on that road. So, basically,

what we're trying to do is just to keep that from coming through to the

neighborhood to keep for road safety, for personal safety for people that live

there. There's

and this has just been one nice area that has been able to -- it has one way in and

one way out, and, therefore, it deters lot of criminal activity because it's not an

a lot of criminal activity that goes on in that northeast side of town,

easy out. Having this extra street that people can get onto really quick increases

that activity.

STRUMPF: I’m David Strumpf.

I was here at the last meeting, and I want to make it

pretty quick. The safety issue is the ultimate concern. It’s not about people’s

amenities, it’s not about lifestyle, and living. The points that have been made that

I’ve heard twice now about it’s not going to be

totally disagree with that. think people will line up on Geyser, not see

onto Lake of the Woods. They will take this little shortcut and they’ll bottleneck

through this tiny street. also, personally believe, having listened to this twice,

problem, it won’t increase traffic,

way to get

that there is an intentional misrepresentation of the differences of these streets

and the safety, and Karen’s picture showed that very clearly. You take into account

the 26 verses 28 foot reference, the point that these streets don’t have bike lanes,

they don’t have sidewalks, there is no safety, there is no lighting. It’s not being

represented clearly what the difference in the impact of having that street cut

through. So, I just think you guys may want to think about why that might be.

BARR: My name is Susie Barr and

road almost every day, and with the road being so narrow, whenever

meeting me, will step completely off the road for my safety. And when we first

moved out there 28 years ago, we were also told that nobody can build road

across the dam that was down in the end of Waterfront Drive and nobody could

have lived out there for 28 years.

do walk that

car is

come in from the south or the west, and

guess now that has changed. But anyway,

from my safety and

road.

a lot of other people's, I do not want to see more traffic on that

TREECE:

DNR?

Karen, is Waterfront the dam? Do you know if that dam is permitted by

TURNER:

am not positive since they're both private lakes. That’d probably be a

question for Dan Hagen. But there are two dams, one for the small lake and one for

the larger lake.

TREECE: And Waterfront is on top of that dam, is that correct?

TURNER:

It comes up to that dam. So, where the last cul-de-sac is on the road is

where the dam starts. Which then, that dam connects the north and south

Waterfront or Waters Edge and Waterfront.

TREECE: Alright, thank you.

SKALA: You know, it is in the Third Ward. I’ve lived in the Meadowlands for 25 years.

My son used to fish in that lake actually, and the lake is dammed because of

Hominy Branch.

lakes possible.

mean that’s -- it was the damming of that river that made those

guess, you known, this is -- I’ve always been an advocate for

connectivity to the extent that we can. That kind of coincides with some of the

philosophy that the Planning and Zoning had and the department has. On the other

hand,

think this is

perfect opportunity or

a perfect case for an argument -- that

you could make the argument that --

would prefer to see some sort of lock and key

temporary system that would allow emergency vehicles, if they needed to do that,

but at the same time would mitigate the problems that may be associated with the

potential for cut-through traffic.

this in this area. It's always been --

the name of Clark Lane -- was so that the developer could sell some of the homes,

and think they’ve been pretty successful at that despite the fact that there's still

good deal of traffic from outside the City at Demerit Drive area, through, now

mean, obviously, crime is an issue on this -- in

mean that was one of the reasons for changing

Geyser Boulevard, and then all the way to Rice Road, all the way into town. So, I'm

torn between that philosophy that makes lot of sense, but there have been some

exceptions, and think those exceptions also make some sense. So that is -- it is

been very persuasive to me to try and want to see something that would allow the

kind of emergency exits that’s necessary and yet protect some

neighborhoods so that's just my two cents for right now.

the

TURNER: Having the 55 --

I mean it's really been a growing community, and it's

close knit community in the fact that, you know, people use this as their main

source of exercise out there. You know, it -- additional traffic would be very hard.

Like Susie was saying,

times a day so.

I mean, she does this -- she walks this every day multiple

THIEL: My name is Penny Thiel and

I live at 5920 Waterfront Drive North. And, I

really thank you very much in listening. It is the most important thing to me. I've

been there for 16 years, and now

road. Thank you for your consideration.

I will not go out and walk by myself. Traffic on that

CAMERON: Good evening folks. My name is Don Cameron.

Drive area. I’ve lived there since June. Now if you all recall, we had

June, and my house flooded. do believe contributory to that flooding process was

live at the Waterfront

big flood in

the additional four drains from up of the north area that drain into our lake, plus

the one on the east side of us across Lake of the Woods Road that drain into our

lake. We all -- well not all of us, but --

I live in the lower land, lower levels there,

and it just inundated us. Homeowner Association is kind of lukewarm about

remedies as it pertains to pursuing any type of construction or reconstruction of

that area.

understand that the cost factor is negating that, but when

I -- I moved

here in 2001 to Columbia, and

settled out there at Zinnia Drive on the northwest

side of town when it was

Westwind Drive. He put up

new addition, and there was an old fellow over on

berm as soon as that addition started going in, and it

effectively shut off the traffic to his Westwind side of the road.

that the berm is still in place as his legal tenure ran out there, but it was effective at

doing that for while. And so don't see that the emergency vehicle issue is an

issue at all, be as how we all have the same road service. mean, is it shortcut to

come from Boone Hospital down Rice Road and then turn south of the lake, you

know, before you get to the Lake of the Woods? don't know. don’t think it cuts

any time off, or any more convenience for any of the emergency vehicles, police

vehicles, fire vehicles, ambulances that we see, and we see constant flow of

I do not believe

traffic down Waterfront Drive anyway. It doesn't matter if it's day, night. We have

that that huge apartment complex that sits at west end of the lake, and those kids

are in and out of there all day and all night. It's just --

I don't see what the benefit

would be to put in that road from Geyser down to Waterfront. Thank you’ll folks

very much for your time.

The Council asked further questions and made comments.

TREECE:

don’t know how we can amend their plat, but I'd like to see Sugar Maple

hammerhead or cul-de-sac, maybe even get another lot out

truncated either as

of there, and just leave the two separate neighborhoods. They've all got unique

characteristics. It doesn't look like Waterfront would comply with city street

standards anyway -- would be my thought.

THOMAS: Yeah, well, it's

a sad irony that everybody hates traffic, and yet it seems

to be really hard to build an entire community consensus that we should be

redesigning our community to be really accessible by walking and biking and public

transit, which would just resolve most of the issues people have with traffic. But

we have set

meeting of

well-intentioned

a few precedents recently. I think one was just at the last council

acknowledging,

recognizing

desire

that

for

planning

professions,

you

know,

and valuable

connectivity,

but without

inducing

additional traffic because there's no question -- as you build more road capacity,

more road connections, people are going to drive more. VMT per capita is going to

go up. So, what

I would probably like to see here would be a bicycle/pedestrian

connection between the two neighborhoods as well as the emergency vehicle

access connection. And there are now --

probably approved half a dozen of those at least.

think just in the last several years, we’ve

would put in one of the,

PETERS:

would somewhat agree with Mr. Thomas.

whatever they call these, the knox-box gates that would allow emergency access if

need be, have wings probably from the -- which you already see out there now --

those blocks. What we've found at other places -- if you’ve got

got gate, unless you've got lot of big trees on either side of that, people are

going to go around that gate. So you need to have some kind of -- something that

only allows pedestrians or bicycles, something that's only few feet wide versus

big enough for small car. But would think that we should just do that to separate

a road and you've

these two. I'm not sure how to do that, as you point out Mayor, but that's what

would do.

SKALA: Yeah, that too is kind of the dilemma.

mean,

concur with my two

colleagues here that some sort of separation to allow emergency vehicles and yet

cut down on some of the cut-through traffic and all the rest, and even allow bicycle

connectivity -- that kind of thing.

think in this particular --

live about two blocks

away from here, two or three blocks, and like

occasionally go out there and go fishing but --

mentioned, my son used to

TREECE: You owe them some monthly fees.

SKALA: Maybe

do. We pay monthly fees, by the way too, in the homeowners

association -- in our Meadowland Homeowners Association. But nonetheless -- and

I'm not sure -- it's -- you can't really tell people exactly what to do with their

development, but

some of the folks have offered. So,

something akin to a solution to that problem gets accomplished.

PITZER: So I'll go back to what said last time, when we talked about this, and that's

the fact that 15 years ago there were -- three homeowners associations

unanimously supported the gate and knox-box temporarily restricting access until

the development was built out, until Rice Road was extended. And, don't like the

idea of going back on 15 year old precedent, 15 year old agreement that was

think they probably get

sense of the Council in terms of what

hope that message gets out there and

unanimously agreed to, and then undoing that because when the reality hits,

there's disagreement about it. So, it's easier -- because -- for me to say. It's not in

my ward or near my ward. But also the idea that we're going to restrict and divide

neighborhoods because we don't like, you know, what's on one side of the

neighborhood or on one side of development from the other side, is also,

I think,

not good precedent in terms of building connection, building neighborhoods,

building community.

TREECE: So, what would you like to do? Defeat it? Table it?

PETERS: What are our options, Ms. Thompson?

SKALA:

I guess, it might make some sense to table this to a date certain to give an

opportunity for some feedback to see if we can come to some potential solution

that might accommodate folks. I think there might be a reasonable thing to do.

TREECE: Is someone from the applicant here?

GLASCOCK: Don’t see anyone.

TREECE: Open to a motion.

PETERS: Do we want to make a motion to postpone this for a month?

Council Member Skala made a motion to table B284-21 to the December

6, 2021 Council Meeting.

GLASCOCK: Question, what am

tabling this?

supposed to accomplish in the month that we're

TREECE: You’re not supposed to do anything. I’m hoping -- this plat is going to be

defeated in its current form.

GLASCOCK: Yes.

do?

I understand that, but I want -- is there something that we need to

TREECE:

I hoping someone is listening to divine the will of Council to come back

with a plat that can be passed.

GLASCOCK: Okay.

The motion made by Council Member Skala to table B284-21 to the December 6,

2021 Council Meeting was seconded by Council Member Peters, and approved by

voice vote with only Council Member Pitzer voting no.

B333-21

Rezoning property located on the south side of Southampton Drive and

west of Executive Drive from District M-OF (Mixed-use Office) to District

M-N (Mixed-use Neighborhood) (Case No. 256-2021).

The bill was given second reading by City Clerk Sheela Amin.

Community Development Director Tim Teddy provided a staff report, and

the Council asked questions.

TEDDY: This is

rezoning on one of several tracts that the Planning and Zoning

Commission considered and made recommendations on to you, and there were 11

locations in the Corporate Lake altogether. Ten of the 11 were approved -- were

recommended for approval unanimously by our Planning and Zoning Commission,

however, this one was known as tract 11 did not get the Commission’s majority

recommendation. In fact, it was -- in its original form defeated unanimously by the

Commission, or recommend for defeat unanimously, and we now had an amended

application on this piece. And, located at the southwest corner of Southampton

Drive and Executive Drive. About two-thirds of the property is zoned M-N,

mixed-use neighborhood. That's considered

allows retail and personal services as well as office, housing. And then just slightly

less than half-acre is zoned M-OF, mixed-use office. It’s really just kind of

transitional commercial district. It

remnant piece there on the west side of it. So, the request has been amended

down by the applicant. Originally, they wanted what’s called mixed-use corridor for

this parcel with the announced intention of doing

gas station/convenience store

on that. And you can see the location is directly south of the high school ballfield

and track, Rock Bridge High School, there. This is the overall zoning map showing

what was presented by this applicant. They’re mainly resolving split zonings. That

was the main objective. They have individual development sites that have two

zoning classifications, so they made each of those one or the other, and so you can

see on the color-coded map what those categories were. There were

examples, within Corporate Lake, that were recommended for approval of the M-C

designation, where the split zoning was already showing fairly substantial amount

couple of

of those lots M-C. And this is an overview from the air, and again, the big blog just

kind of shows you that sort of master zoning, rezoning application. So, I’m going to

go back to this tract 11. So it’s the shaded one that you see there, and it's adjacent

zoning categories, M-N and M-OF. Originally, the application was to convert all that

to more intense use, M-C zoning. M-C would have allowed the gas

station/convenience store use as of right. So it’d just be building process if that

zoning -- building permit process -- if that zoning was granted. In M-N, that same

use can only be considered as conditional use, which means it really repeats the

process. It repeats those steps that the rezoning goes through. And the specific use

has to be examined for it’s appropriate for the specific site. There would be

a large pond that’s an amenity for this development. And it does have those two

Planning and Zoning hearing on it if it came back, and then an opportunity for

persons to be notified and speak their mind about that planned use. So, the M-C

recommended with no votes for denial. The Commission also made

a motion on an

alternative recommendation to make to Council, and that would this idea of taking

that 0.47 acres that’s zoned office and just unify with the rest of this tract 11, which

by the way is known as lot 10, but I’m going to go with tract 11. We just use the tract

numbers for purposes of organizing the zoning, but all of that lot would then be

unified as an M-N, so you’d have about an acre and

a half in that M-N category. That

motion, however, was inconclusive 4 in favor, 4 against. I’m happy to answer any

questions the Council might have.

PITZER:

Yeah, Mr. Teddy, so there was some reference in the comments in the

traffic study that would need to be performed when and if that lot is

minutes to

developed. So, what’s the trigger for a traffic study in this case?

TEDDY: Well, I’ve said it before. In our code, we actually have

a threshold spelled

out, and so the city traffic engineer would look at the proposed use and may

determine that because of the trip generation -- if it’s 100 trips at peak hour, which

could mean

that automatically triggers the need for

traffic engineer will ask for one shy of that threshold if there are known issues with

traffic circulation in an area. So, don’t if that would apply here. It is very busy

intersection. There’s lot going on with the high school, with the frontage roads.

morning hour or it could be an afternoon hour depending on the use

traffic analysis. Now, in some cases, the

Corporate Lake is still building out so there’d probably be some requests for some

background data projection of what some of these other uses would contribute,

planned uses would contribute, as they come online. And, I'm speaking of zonings

where the zoning’s already in place for office development or multi-family

development, what have you. So, they’d go through that exercise, and then they’d

look at the traffic study and that would determine access locations, whether or not

some kind of mitigating measures like turn lanes in the street are needed, that kind

of thing.

PITZER: So there's, you know, often some backups and congestion there because

you’ve got -- because that has been one of the main entrances into Rock Bridge

High School there on the other side of Southampton, almost directly across from

Executive. So in mornings and afternoons, you’ve got backups and you’ve got

people trying to turn left, you’ve got teenagers trying to make awkward turning

movements, and it’s generally inefficient. So, would that be included in the scope

of any traffic study for this area?

TEDDY: Yeah,

think existing conditions --

mean, they usually baseline what the

existing traffic movements are. They diagram it. They look at where the vehicles

are coming from and when, you know. So, and then they overlay on the existing

conditions what the generated traffic would be, and then they look at it -- you

know, kind of a post build scenario. What are you going to get?

PITZER: Right, and in the minutes, Mr. Zenner had

reference to this traffic study,

and he said that it likely would result in some type of traffic management

improvements needing to be made at Executive and Southampton. So, that would

involve the turn lanes, some sort of -- what else might it include?

TEDDY: Well, and I'm just speaking hypothetically, because

traffic engineer about what's going on here and what the thoughts are about would

roundabout or something like be needed -- would channelization of turn lanes be

needed, you know, so someone could make an easier right turn out of there. Is

there -- are there safety measures, crossings -- think that might have been

Southampton -- so maybe something in there

haven’t conferred the

mentioned. Folks crossing on foot

too.

PITZER: Alright, and I'm not sure if there’s anybody from Public Works here, but

couple years ago, asked them to kind of mock up what it would look like if the high

school, you know, squared that exit off to align with Executive Drive. Right, so you

have essentially 4-way intersection there, and you would have some sort of traffic

management stop sign, improved pedestrian crossings, etc. And, you know, the City

would participate in the City’s part, but the rest of it’s on the CPS property. So, at

the time, was told that CPS wasn’t interested in funding that. Do you know if there

have been any other discussions about, you know, squaring that off, Tim?

TEDDY: No, but know what you’re talking about. The concept would be

points intersection instead of jog there. mean it’s not street, but it is

access island of their front parking lot there. So, yeah,

four

busy

think the idea is that drivers

making turns can see one another across the road and that makes it

orderly.

a little more

PITZER: Again, is that something that could be looked at in this traffic study for that?

TEDDY: Well again, yeah, I’d think as

a possible conflict point, and then if folks are

being creative, they could approach the school again.

PITZER: And that traffic study would have to be done before

issued? Is that right -- if the zoning is approved?

a building permit was

TEDDY: If the zoning is approved and they come in with something that requires

conditional use, yeah, they may do it as part of that. Or they may if they do

something that doesn’t require conditional use. The statement was that they

wanted to do convenience store/gas station so I’m just repeating what’s been

said in the record, but things can happen. mean, time can go by and plans can

think we’d look at what the traffic generation

change so, either of those scenarios,

behavior of the use is.

PITZER: So something could happen without

clear on your answer.

traffic study being done? I’m not

TEDDY: Oh, okay. Well, yeah, if you did something that’s very low trip generation, it

may not require that.

PITZER: Okay, that’s what I’ve got.

PETERS: So, they’re asking to go -- to have this whole tract be M-N for mixed-use

neighborhood. Is that correct?

TEDDY: Yeah.

PETERS: And that would require --

I think you’ve already said this, but I’m a little

confused -- and that would require them to come back if they actually wanted to

put a gas station and convenience store in there?

TEDDY: That’s right, anything automotive,

These are things that are listed under the district that are noted as not permitted as

of right. They’re category called conditional use, and that means it’s going to

car wash is in the same category, so.

really be at the discretion of the Council. And, you would get

a report on whether

or not it’s considered appropriate for that site. Traffic would be part of the analysis

I’m sure with something of high turnover, like a gas station.

PETERS: Thank you.

Jay Gebhardt spoke.

GEBHARDT: Good evening. My name is Jay Gebhardt, offices at 3401 Broadway

Business Park Court. I'm really here to answer questions.

Lewis has abandon his idea of c-store here, and yes, that’s way we’ve changed our

request to M-N. And, he is fully aware of -- we would have to hire traffic engineer

to -- just about for any development he would want to propose on this. like your

idea about aligning the driveways with Executive Drive, and the way understand it

I do want to state that Mr.

works is -- if the traffic study comes back and suggests that as an improvement,

then the developer would have to pay for it with permission from CPS to be on

their property and change their property. So, we’re fully prepared to address those

issues.

I got Julie Nolfo with Lockmueller Group out of St. Louis engaged in this so

that we can move forward with it. But if any other questions -- the request has

been changed to M-N to match the rest of the -- or the bulk of the lot there -- and

the lots to the west are proposed to M-N and on the consent agenda further on.

TREECE: Why did Planning and Zoning tie vote on the motion for M-N?

GEBHARDT: They were concerned about the ability of having like

c-store there,

just the store without the gas sales. think their concerns were cigarettes and

liquor and things like that across from the school. So, some of the commissioners

really wanted to downzone the whole thing to M-LF so that that can’t occur, but it

can occur next door to us. It can occur south of this. So, it’s -- we feel like that

wasn't a valid concern, and so we've asked for the M-N.

The Council made comments.

PTIZER: Yeah,

think I'm generally okay with the M-N designation here.

mean, it's

do think

kind of consistent with what else is going on all around it, you know, but

that it's important to look at this idea of what to do with the traffic there because it

is just bad turn access in and out of the high school there. So, think that there is

possibility for some improvement. You know, collaboration between us and the

schools and the developer. If they -- if the zoning were approved and if they move

forward with it, there's an opportunity, you know, really iron out, you know, traffic

flow in that particular section.

B333-21 was given third reading by the City Clerk with the vote recorded as

follows: VOTING YES: SKALA, THOMAS, PITZER, PETERS, TREECE, FOWLER,

WANER. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

VII. CONSENT AGENDA

The following bills were given second reading and the resolutions were

read by City Clerk Sheela Amin.

B329-21

B330-21

Voluntary annexation of property located on the south side of I-70 Drive

Southeast and west of St. Charles Road; establishing permanent District

M-C (Mixed-use Corridor) zoning (Case No. 271-2021).

Rezoning property located on the west side of John Garry Drive and north

of Cedar Lake Drive from District M-OF (Mixed-use Office) to District

R-MF (Multi-family Residential) (Case No. 256-2021).

B331-21

B332-21

B334-21

Rezoning property located on the west side of Commercial Drive and

property located on the south side of Cedar Lake Drive from District M-N

(Mixed-use Neighborhood) to District M-C (Mixed-use Corridor) (Case No.

256-2021).

Rezoning property located on the east and west sides of Executive Drive,

the east side of John Garry Drive, and the south side of Southampton Drive

from District M-OF (Mixed-use Office) and District PD (Planned District) to

District M-N (Mixed-use Neighborhood) (Case No. 256-2021).

Granting design adjustments relating to the proposed Arbor Falls PD Plan

No. 4 located on the south side of Pergola Drive and west of Talco Drive to

allow a longer cul-de-sac length, a longer block distance, and private

residential streets to deviate from required design specifications,

right-of-way dedication and street widths (Case No. 140-2021).

B335-21

B336-21

B337-21

B338-21

Approving “Arbor Falls PD Plan No. 4” located on the south side of Pergola

Drive and west of Talco Drive; approving a revised statement of intent

(Case No. 140-2021).

Granting the issuance of a conditional use permit to White Oak Investment

Properties, LLC to allow a “bar” use on property located at 504 Fay Street

in an IG (Industrial) zoning district (Case No. 274-2021).

Authorizing construction of Fire Station #11 to be located north of the

intersection of Scott Boulevard and State Route K; calling for bids through

the Purchasing Division.

Authorizing Amendment No. 1 to the agreement for professional

engineering services with Allstate Consultants, LLC for additional materials

testing services during construction of the Discovery Parkway extension

project.

B339-21

Authorizing construction of the Landfill Fuel Station improvement project

located at 5700 Peabody Road to include the installation of two (2) diesel

fuel dispensers and metal canopy with lights, concrete pavement, storm

water inlet and piping, and upgrades to the mechanical and electrical

systems and existing control and fuel monitoring equipment; calling for bids

through the Purchasing Division.

B340-21

B341-21

Authorizing the acquisition of an easement for construction of the

Lakeshore Drive and Edgewood Avenue PCCE #23 sanitary sewer

improvement project.

Authorizing an agreement with SuperSonic Transportation, LLC for the

reimbursement of eligible project costs under the Missouri Department of

Natural Resources Air Pollution Control Program Volkswagen Trust

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Program for the construction of a

Direct Current Fast Charging (DCFC) station on Creekwood Parkway.

B342-21

B343-21

Accepting conveyances for temporary construction and sewer purposes;

accepting Stormwater Management/BMP Facilities Covenants.

Accepting conveyances for electric utility and underground electric utility

purposes.

B344-21

Authorizing a first amendment to tower co-location agreement and

memorandum of first amendment to tower co-location agreement with

Cellco Partnership, d/b/a Verizon Wireless, for the lease of City-owned

property located at 1808 Parkside Drive (Solid Waste Utility - Storage and

Mulch Site).

B345-21

B346-21

Authorizing a program services contract with the Missouri Department of

Health and Senior Services for WIC local agency nutrition services.

Authorizing Amendment No. 1 to the program services contract with the

Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services for the COVID-19 and

Adult Vaccination Supplemental project.

B347-21

B348-21

Authorizing Amendment No. 2 to the program services contract with the

Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services for public health

emergency preparedness services.

Authorizing Amendment No. 2 to the program services contract with the

Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services for HIV prevention

services.

B349-21

B350-21

R168-21

R169-21

Authorizing an agreement with Columbia School District No. 93 for teen

outreach program services.

Amending Chapter 27 of the City Code to establish an electric standby and

supplemental service rate for industrial customers.

Setting a public hearing: proposed replacement of a sanitary sewer under

U.S. Highway 63 and south of I-70.

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

east side of Bearfield Road and north of Woodhaven Road (4000 S.

Bearfield Road) (Case No. 7-2022).

R173-21

Authorizing an agreement with Green Valley Rifle & Pistol Club, Inc. to

provide the Columbia Police Department access and use of a range facility

for training purposes.

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

Amin with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: SKALA, THOMAS, PITZER,

PETERS, TREECE, FOWLER, WANER. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bills declared

enacted and resolutions declared adopted, reading as follows:

VIII. NEW BUSINESS

R174-21

Accepting the performance of VidWest under contract dated October 11,

2019 and relieving VidWest of any further contract obligations.

The resolution was read by City Clerk Sheela Amin.

Cultural Affairs Manager Sarah Dresser provided a staff report, and the

Council asked questions.

THOMAS: This is really my resolution, but I’d welcome for Sarah to say a few words.

DRESSER:

Hello, Sarah Dresser, Manager for the Office of Cultural Affairs. There are

-- this is the first resolution under new business for the contract with VidWest,

nonprofit. Basically, from the agreement that was entered into in October of 2019,

and after everything that has occurred over the last two years, this would accept

the performance that they were able to complete under that contract for services

fulfilled, and we would not require them to fulfill any other additional items under

that original contract that was entered into. I’m happy to answer questions about

this particular item.

THOMAS: Yeah, so, there's

which had been read in R174-21 would relieve -- would accept the performance and

relieve VidWest of any further expectations. number -- fair amount of language

that put in this was omitted so I’d like to read that aloud. At the top of this

resolution, R174-21, “Whereas, in response to an RFP for community media services

issued by the City, the City and VidWest executed contract for the provision of

services, which included operating public access channel and community media

center on October 11, 2019; and whereas VidWest asked Mediacom to install fiber

connection to 1600 Business Loop 70 East immediately after taking occupancy in

January 2020 and paid fee of $7,670 to Mediacom immediately after receiving

quote in June 2021, and yet fiber has still not been installed, thereby making it

impossible for VidWest to have public access cable channel; and whereas, the City

of Columbia declared state of emergency on March 16, 2020, finding that proactive

and extraordinary measures were necessary to prevent community spread of the

COVID 19 virus and issued stay at home order on March 25 2020, requiring all

residents to stay at home, except for special allowances; and whereas VidWest

a pair of resolutions here. As Sarah said, the first one,

continued to fulfill many aspects of scope of services, including operating

Community Media Center, providing video equipment rental and training

and

relevant skills, and pioneering new technology by developing livestream rigs with

which VidWest has provided public access programming via the internet; and

whereas VidWest has been unable to fulfill all of the terms of the contract for

services, specifically operating

public access cable channel, because of

Mediacom’s failure to install the fiber connection; now therefore, be it resolved by

the City Council that we will accept their performance and relieve them of further

obligations.” So,

I would also like to just thank John for quite recently reaching out

to Mediacom and asking them why they have not yet installed the fiber connection

to 1600 Business Loop East and applying

us an update on that situation?

a little pressure to them. John, can you give

GLASCOCK: Well,

haven't heard back. We got something back from Mediacom

got

saying that, you know, the City submitted their plans or whatever, and

responded back from our staff saying we’re waiting on them to pay for their permit.

So that's where we're at. I haven't heard back from them since then.

PITZER:

have

question for Mr. Glascock. Do you often reach out to private

companies and ask them if they've installed service to individual properties?

GLASCOCK: No, I have not.

TREECE: Mr. Glascock, have we ever voided an agreement and continued to pay

contractor for the City for services they did not provide, in your 17 years with the

City?

GLASCOCK: Not to my knowledge.

PETERS: Can

I just ask -- so VidWest gave or had a contract with Mediacom for $7,00

to put this in and Mediacom has not fulfilled their requirement, their obligation? Is

that correct?

THOMAS: That’s my understanding. Matt’s here. Matt can talk to that.

Matt Schacht, Jordan Lundy, Aaron Phillips, Jonathan Asher, Chris

Mooney, Richard Harris, Chelsea Myers, Megan Casady, and Tyree

Byndom spoke.

SCHACHT: Hi there. My name is Matt Schacht, 1617 Windsor Street, the VidWest

President of the Board. I’ve spoken to you

there's actually two bills here, or two resolutions that are connected. One is to

dissolve the 2019 contract because of impossibility of performance. That's legal

contract and there's an element of the contract that

legal defense to say that you do not require that person

few times. Like Ian Thomas said,

doctrine that says there's

cannot be performed. It is

to fulfill the contract. It's just good business because you can't hold somebody to do

something they can't do. The second resolution is to then enter into new contract

with VidWest. respect and recognize that this is really unusual situation. It's not

one that we thought we would be in either when we signed the contract and 2019.

We had plan for opening community media center in the summer of 2020, and

think we all had lot of plans for 2020 that didn't work out. think to VidWest’s

credit, we have stayed in communication with the City every step of the way. One

point, just counted my inbox emails to and from the City, and was sending an

average of two and half emails per week for 109 weeks to City staff. And it was

everything from how we're managing the contract, how we're redistributing funds,

the things we're trying to do to be COVID safe, attempted -- attempts at reopening

media center, and then being shut down, and then trying to reopen again, how

we were going to do classes with school children, what would livestreams rigs

mean, new technology that people weren't super familiar with, and this was the

early days of Zoom for lot of folks. At this point, think you're all pretty familiar

with it. So we have tried to be on the forefront. We've taken our responsibilities as

community media center very seriously, and we’ve done everything within our

power to be responsible stewards of that power. As far as know, there are no

other organizations at this time that can fill the gap that VidWest does, so if you

choose not to renew contract with us, there's very good chance that what you're

deciding is to not have community media, at least in terms of

center, anymore in Columbia. Thank you.

a community media

LUNDY: Hello councilmembers. Thank you for your time. My name is Jordan Lundy.

live at 5651 Tyler Drive, 65202. moved to Columbia in 2005, and started my career

as freelance video guy. do cameras, do tech work, do all that stuff. plug all

the wires in so that things can work and things can be seen. I’ve recently -- I've had

opportunities to move somewhere else. love Columbia. love Columbia and what

it does and what it is. Recently started working with VidWest, and was brought

on to fulfill that community space, to build out the studio so we could get back to

what CAT-TV was doing. worked with Matt on this. He pulled me in because he

knows my brain works different than lot of people and can get that stuff

working, but COVID hit and as with everywhere else, things got weird, things got

different, and we've all been shoved into that Zoom world. So what we built out

was

a livestream rack, a bunch of gear that we can plug in in different places, and

we can show what's going on. We've already helped Access Arts. We've already

helped the Columbia Center for Urban Agriculture. We've helped the State

Historical Society livestream the bicentennial. We are filling

and of supporting Missouri in telling the stories that are Missouri stories.

here in Columbia. My kids are in school here. Everything's great. With my line of

work, this is what do. help share stories, and so your support for helping VidWest

keep the doors open and the lights on means a lot. Thank you.

PHILLIPS: Hello, My name is Aaron Phillips. spoke, believe, in August at the

space of education

love it

August city council meeting about the things that I've been involved in with

VidWest and CAT and building out the new space. I've worked with Jordan Lundy

and Matt on numerous things.

don't think Jordan said, but he’s been like

projectionist with True False. He was very humble in his, like, skill level and, like,

what he's involved in in the community. He's pretty on up there. Anyways,

there's many things I've been involved in with VidWest and many reasons why

feel like the doors should be open and kept open with this, and also just the idea of

what community center -- media center is. Like, how that can affect the

community in terms of stories from the community being told. friend of mine,

Jordan Smith -- he sent me this. He's been suffering from laryngitis the last few

days, so he was not able to be here tonight, and he said you can use my name if you

happen to read it. He sent me

a statement, “tell them I’m a teacher at Battle High

and focus on serving underrepresented students. VidWest helped us serve this

population.” He says “VidWest studios has had an impact on me in multiple ways,

but I'd like to speak on

ago.” believe this was about three or four weeks ago. “I help run

school program, recording studio, out of CPS schools called Dark Room Records.

We record young artists trying to learn the expensive and often unattainable

experience of recording in professional studio environment. We had band

particular example that occurred only

few short weeks

free after

interested in recording some original music, but simply put, we currently don't

have the space to record larger groups of artists like those in our CPS school

buildings. We also host student interns to learn the trade of audio engineering.

Within hours of reaching out to the VidWest

team, we had a full weekend arranged

to record this band at their roomy studio space. Not only that, we were provided

professional equipment and resources to make our music sound as professional as

possible. The space is welcoming and, as

to explore media arts and simply cannot afford the costs of

environment. This particular band walked away with four recorded songs and

quickly learned. vital to those who want

typical professional

renewed sense of artistic inspiration, all for minimal cost, and our student interns

clocked hours of vital learning that they simply wouldn't get as quickly in our typical

building studios. While

love what Dark Room Records does with CPS,

I found this

resource in the VidWest studios to be

valuable asset to bring art, creativity, and

even career paths to young people we work with. Please consider supporting this

venture because we need more of this the world today. Please consider supporting

VidWest. I believe it will vary greatly and enrich our community. Thank you.”

ASHER: Hi, my name is Jonathan Asher.

spoken with you guys before. Columbia is fantastic. It's got all the things we want.

It's got the Center for Urban Agriculture, who have volunteered for their Harvest

live at 313 North William Street. I've

Hootenanny for many years now. I’ve volunteered for Roots and Blues, volunteered

for Peddlers Jamboree, and the True False Film Fest, of course, because we all love

that,

assume. Anyway, so this most recent year at True False,

I was also -- I was on

the photo team, which

normally am, but was also on the Build Team, and that

was -- they asked me, hey, do you want to help on the Build Team? And I'm like,

yeah, and I'm like, this will be convenient because in this very building I've already

got --

other tools. They're already in there because

photo studio for VidWest up and running. And

brought my own circular saw and

band saw and

was helping work on getting the

was like, yeah, that's super

a table saw and a lot of

convenient. I've already got my tools here. So build team was fantastic. So having

the camaraderie of that spirit of people getting together and actually making

something that you get while volunteering at these very special events is there at

VidWest all the time as long as there's someone there because, you know, there's

no paid staff so they can't be there all the time. But

studio manager, and I've had lot of great exchanges with people just wanting to

know how to use the equipment that they just got, that they have promised to

photograph wedding with the next weekend or some other, you know, some

I volunteer there as the photo

other situation that they're like how does this even -- how does this all work

together? And it's fun. And then, the thing I've been putting off forever is learning

to edit video, but I'm in the right spot because these are all -- they're all too

humble. There's

going to say having

entertainment economy is valuable.

go to physical places and we bring physical props and we make art and we take

pictures, but also, at the end of the day, I'm selling digital version of it. Short films

-- how many kids want to be stars on YouTube? How many -- when was in at MU

lot of really fantastic filmmakers. So before

space where people make these digital things for the digital

make and sell digital files for living. Sure we

I run out of time, I'm

studying mechanical engineering ten years ago, how many other young engineers

wanted to be -- like they grow up watching Mythbusters and see -- hear stories

about doing special effects for industrial light and magic, and be like that is what

engineering is going to be, or the things that they do at Disney. How many people

who are currently students at Stephens College studying fashion design are

watching Bridgerton or Drunk History, which

like, will do wardrobe will do period specific wardrobe for those shows or films?

And they're learning these skills in school right now, and they feel like it might just

have to be foregone conclusion that they have to move away as soon as they

graduate because there's not even single studio to do small, you know, small

production in. This -- earlier today, spoke with professor at the University of

Missouri -- so spoke with professor at the University of Missouri who told me

that they had to double the size of their -- let me see -- jotted it this down so

wouldn't get the words wrong, and now, haven't got it here. Give me just one

second. So, here it is, film studies program. They doubled the amount of film

production courses this past year because there is lot of interest in film

production. One of the professors pointing out that there is only three cameras for

every 40 students in their program is, like, oh well, if you want access to cinema

camera, just go to VidWest. One of the people who’s setting up show for CAT-TV

at VidWest is both employed by MU and is film studies student at MU, and they

have their friends who are volunteers, helping them make their show, borrowing

the saws have, as volunteer, in the studio, because that's how committed we

are. Because the people who make short films -- it's incredibly hard to do. don't

I also hear is very popular, and being

know how it gets pulled together. I've gotten to do behind the scenes photos for

two short films recently. One of them is -- both of them had maybe 15-20 people on

the set. All of them -- there's hair and makeup, there's wardrobe, there's the script

assistant, there’s

a slate -- they're all doing things. It's hard work and it's long, long,

grueling days. One of them -- everyone on the staff was paid money. The other one

-- no people were paid money -- long days. The two directors got to speak to each

other about which hotels they were putting up their actors and actresses. Yeah, so

to wrap it up, you know, the need is there. So, I guess that's all I've got.

TREECE: How many of you -- raise your hand if you agree with what this person said.

[About nine people raised their hand.]

MOONEY: [Chris Mooney] I’m going to bring up socio economics. Two terms, barrier

to entry and equity. So,

community is near impossible. If it was not for VidWest,

film, would not believe it would be possible for me to be in film.

want to be very clear, barrier to entry to film without

would not only not be in

want to make

that very clear. And also equity -- if you can't afford to be in film because the

[inaudible] are too expensive or we don't fund this, we are telling the community

that we do not believe in equity -- that we want

a high barrier to entry thing to be

available only to people who can afford that. That is what we're saying at the city

council, if you do not support community media. Also, we're going to talk about

Mediacom barrier to entry and equity. VidWest cannot get another ISP because the

infrastructure in that area only supports Mediacom fiber. So I’m going to be very

clear, there's no other options except Mediacom. Also it's not public access because

in order to get

public access channel through Mediacom you have to purchase

their cable package. So, I’m going to be very clear about this -- not only does

VidWest not another option to get fiber except Mediacom, but the community

would have to purchase

package from Mediacom -- again equity. If you can't

afford to purchase the package from Mediacom -- they get the public channel, you

don't get it. So we're not supporting community access by holding this up. We're

only enabling Mediacom to promote dis-equity and still keep barrier to entry.

TREECE: Thanks, could I have your name again for the record.

MOONEY: My name is Chris.

TREECE: Chris, your last name please.

MOONEY: Mooney and 1708 Sun Court, Columbia, Missouri is my address. And

want to tell you what I’m doing at VidWest, what I've done at VidWest. First of all,

groom who could not afford videographer for their

Let me -- equity and barrier to entry -- they could not afford

there was

wedding.

bride and

videographer for the wedding, which should be the best day of their life.

them will do this for you for free because

We shoot for the Law School. We shoot for the State Historical Society. They need

to get their budgets every year, you know, money is tight. VidWest comes in and

provides affordable ways to get their livestream out. recently had camera

told

I had the resources of VidWest to do it.

operating at the Veterans Advocacy Symposium at the Law School. I'm going to be

camera operating at the State Historical Society. Again, the rates that they're

getting, because VidWest offers the lower rates, is affordable to get these

livestreams out for these important things. I'm producing

actually mentioned me specifically. I'm film production student at the University

of Missouri. got -- brought in fifteen people to start show VidWest. All these

people working together -- building set, shooting the cameras.

bunch of actors -- that's 15 people. People don't realize there’s

film. Someone can't just go get

team. They need connections, and if they don't have access to community

want to get back --

equity, barrier to entry. If you don't have the connections and the money, you

cannot get into film. want to be very clear about that. And so if we do not support

this, believe that we are not supporting equity and we are not supporting barrier

a show -- Jonathan Asher

got

whole

team required

about

need

a camera and produce good work. They

media, how are they going to get those connections? Again,

to entry. Thank you.

HARRIS: Thank you for the opportunity. Hi, my name is Richard Harris.

I live at 5803

Red Wing Drive. I'm

originally from here she retired.

degree in Dallas, Texas, where I'm originally from, and

Real Songs Music, which is Diane Warren company. She's

VidWest. Oh, well, they found me, and what found from these youngsters was this

-- that they are diverse and great group of kids who are on the verge of doing

something wonderful for this community. want to be part of it. So I'm here

recent transplant from Los Angeles, California. My wife is

did not. am recording engineer. got my

worked in Los Angeles at

songwriter. found

speaking in their behalf. Give them the opportunity to make Columbia great in this

medium because they will.

MYERS: Hello, my name is Chelsea Myers. I'm going to speak to

of what VidWest does for this community than what you've heard before, even

though all of the comments made thus far. run company called Tiny Attic

Productions. was told in college that could not start media company here in

a different element

Missouri, especially being

get over five emails

locally. People looking for films to either tell the story of their lives, the story of

loved one's life, the story of their business, how they got started, what they're

woman.

I did it, and we've been going ten years strong.

a week about new commissions that they need for film gigs

doing here, why Missouri is important, and

send those on to the VidWest. Vidwest take takes care of those people.

take care of them. If

cannot take all of those messages.

cannot

didn't have VidWest, I’d just have to tell these people, no,

you don't have the money to get your story told. You're not going to get your film

made. So please allow VidWest to continue in supporting this community where

people like me who run

a company that should be able to support this community,

but we can't take all of the asks from our friends, or family, or neighbors. Allow

VidWest to do that. Thank you.

CASADY:

you for hearing from all of my colleagues and community members on the subject.

have brief summary of what I'd like to say. Creative expression is the ultimate

form of healing and brings people together, from good times and bad times, which

we've all experienced recently, would venture to say. I've been involved with

Yes, my name is Megan Casady, 1641 Highridge Circle. First of all, thank

VidWest since, really, its inception 2016. And since then, it's been focused on

cultivating an inclusive environment for future leaders, serving as the link to

Columbia, Missouri and surrounding areas, indie the film industry. If the Columbia

City Council decides not to continue funding this program, it would be

a loud and

clear signal to our community that this Council does not care about the arts

community, plainly put. It would strip away necessary resources for creative

expression and deeper community connection to

filmmakers, Missourians, artists, what have you. That's all, thank you.

BYNDOM: My name is Tyree Byndom. live in Second Ward.

address because I've had death threats before. I've been in Columbia for about 40

diverse collection of students,

I don’t give my

years.

worked with KOPN for about 20. During that whole time,

I always supported

CAT-TV.

think came up here and spoke one time and sacrificed myself in front of

the City when

asked for $4 million for social equity in all. So asked for $50,000 for

CAT-TV.

because

think that was back November in 2015. After that I left to go to Dallas

had death threats. But the reason that I’m here is just to share

DLC in capacity of really trying

budget for that board, but also to push to have focus with minority

business. You know there are six downtown. Out of 15,000 businesses, we got

about 300. But one of the things that found was, as transition as an individual

who's been doing news -- got over 10 million reach on my social media every

a brief

story. I've been serving for the last two years on

to help get