City of Columbia, Missouri  
Meeting Minutes  
City Council  
Council Chamber  
Columbia City Hall  
701 E. Broadway  
Monday, December 6, 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, December 6, 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 MATT PITZER, Council Member BETSY PETERS, Mayor  
BRIAN TREECE, Council Member PAT FOWLER, Council Member  
ANDREA WANER, Council Member KARL SKALA, and Council Member  
IAN THOMAS were present. City Manager John Glascock, City Counselor  
Nancy Thompson, City Clerk Sheela Amin, and various Department Heads  
and Staff Members were also present.  
The July 19, 2021 regular council meeting minutes were approved  
unanimously on a motion by Mayor Treece and a second by Council  
Member Skala.  
Mayor Treece explained the minutes were not yet complete for the August  
16, September 7, September 20, October 4, October 18, November 1, and  
the November 15 regular meetings.  
The agenda, including the consent agenda, was approved unanimously by  
voice vote on a motion by Mayor Treece and a second by Council Member  
Skala.  
II. SPECIAL ITEMS  
SI19-21  
Columbia Bicentennial Presentation.  
David Lineberry spoke.  
LINEBERRY: Well, thank you, Mr. Mayor, and Members of the Council. It's great to  
see you this evening. This is the final month of our bicentennial year, and I'd  
wanted to take just  
a few moments, brief moments, to try to put a little bow on this  
work. First of all, I'd like to express my thanks and the thanks of the entire Task  
Force to the Mayor and all the Members of the Council for the opportunity to serve  
on the Task Force and to help the City observe this bicentennial. And I'd like to  
thank my colleagues on the Task Force for the opportunity they gave me to serve  
leadership role in that function. joined the Task Force late as member of the  
history sub-workgroup and great deal of work had already been done. You had  
a
I
a
a
already in fact reviewed and given tentative approval to  
Councilperson Fowler had been key to the early work of the committee, and my  
predecessor as leader, Brent Gardner, had also done great deal of work. And  
a
park master plan.  
a
a
Brent, though he could not maintain his position as chairman, went on to the leader  
of the initiative behind the You Don’t Say project with KBIA, which has brought  
regional and national recognition to the City and its progressive approach to  
discussing minority experiences in Columbia's history. And  
acknowledge the excellent work of Deb Shields, an early co-chair of the Task Force,  
who then went on to single handedly guide the CID’s project on Gateway Plaza,  
and that is wonderful asset to the community. In addition to the Task Force, we  
worked hand in hand and in hand in glove with just really few of your excellent  
City employees and want you to know that and to know specifically whom. We  
I
also want to  
a
a
a
I
were capably assisted in everything by Amy Schneider and Megan McConachie of  
Convention and Visitors Bureau, by Mike Griggs and Mike Snider of the Parks and  
Recreation Department, by the City Manager, and by Sarah Dresser and the Office  
of Cultural Affairs. We touched many, many offices and they helped us, but those  
were the ones who really helped us make things possible all year long. We had  
three organizing principles, Inclusion, Celebration, and Legacy, and we executed in  
all three of those areas. And  
put on, but more importantly,  
backgrounds and all abilities in all kinds of activities throughout the year. And  
these things not to point out what the Task Force has done. say these things to  
point out what you have made possible, and just really appreciate that and I'm  
thankful for that on behalf of the Task Force and on behalf of the City. We only have  
one bicentennial. And it was burdened by external issues, and you really  
I
saw many of you enjoying some of the events that we  
saw many, many Columbians of all ages, and all  
say  
I
I
I
I
facilitated the Task Force efforts to do everything they could within those  
strictures. We are not quite finished. The park project continues. The fundraising  
for the park project continues.  
the excellent service the City and Task Force have received from Mr. Chris Kelly,  
who joined our effort after the Task Force was full and brought his experience as  
career foundations and development officer at MU and with family foundation in  
I would be remiss without reminding you of our --  
a
a
the region to the fundraising task. When others would provide only bids for  
services, Chris came and provided his expertise for free, and he has garnered  
multiple six figures worth of in-kind and cash pledges and donations toward the  
park project. So that has been an extraordinary, extraordinary gift.  
continues. You can see the progress in the park, but you can't see  
That effort  
bridge there  
a
yet, and so that continues, and those opportunities to give continue. We also  
continue until the end of the year to pursue of the 200 Trees Project and the portal  
is open through Parks and Rec if you or  
a
group of your friends would like to  
public location maintained  
sponsor tree or group of trees. Those are placed on a  
a
a
by city staff, and though I’d like to say that a lot of the legacies we created will last a  
long time, I’m not real confident there are going to be too many that last as long as  
those trees will last, so  
I urge people to participate in that. And finally to go to our  
website, again, COMO200.com, where we still maintain the Tell Us Your Story portal  
to collect the narratives of the histories of individuals, families, organizations,  
churches in the town, and the town's impact on them, and  
there so far from city council people. And will tell you, as  
looking back at the city's 50th anniversary or 100th anniversary or 150th anniversary  
-- if had handful of accounts from council persons of that day talking about  
themselves -- why were they serving, what did they believe in, what had they seen  
the community become or change in their time -- that would have been huge,  
I
see  
a
dearth of accounts  
I
a
historian, if were  
I
I
a
a
huge asset to myself and to other citizens studying the history of the City so  
I urge  
you to go do there and do that. In appreciation for all these things that you’ve done  
and more for your service, we have made arrangements for some item to  
acknowledge that, and we've gotten these from  
a regional artist, who was at one  
time an employee the CVB. Her name is Ashley Fishback and she is an artist in  
stained glass. And, so we have one of these for the Mayor and also one for every  
one of you looks like exactly like this. That is the emblem of Bicentennial in stained  
glass for each of you to enjoy. Information about the artist is in the box. So with  
that, I’ll just draw my comments to  
that I would -- I’d be glad to entertain from Members of the Council. All right then.  
TREECE: Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the City Council and grateful community,  
want to thank you and convey my appreciation to the great work of the  
Bicentennial Commission. You know, as former chair of the Historic Preservation  
a close. Are there any questions or comments  
a
I just  
a
Commission -- you have another former chair of the Historic Preservation  
Commission -- it was quite an honor to preside over the City’s Bicentennial. You  
helped it come alive and tell that story.  
inclusion and sharing all of our history, and making sure we had events that were  
accessible to people that really told story. could not be more proud of the You  
Don't Say series on KBIA, clever double entendre that reflects both things that  
people don't know about Columbia, you don't say, and things that we rarely talk  
about, you just don’t say. And, think the stories that were told through that series  
from trusted messengers, think, is legacy of the bicentennial that think are  
going to be great treasure trove, if you will, in the future. I'm grateful for your  
time. tell all of our board and commission members, but, especially, think it's  
I
am grateful for your commitment to  
a
I
a
I
I
a
I
a
I
I
true of yours, I want you to look back at your year on this and be proud of what you  
accomplished, and you should be very proud of everything you accomplished.  
LINEBERRY: Thank you very much.  
SKALA:  
that we have all experienced in terms of COVID and so on.  
celebration. The amount of work that you folks have done and the gratitude that  
you’ve given to some of the folks by name is well worth it. will look up your  
website and maybe take up your offer of to contribute. This is something that -- it  
only comes around once every once in while in long time. So, very much  
I
just want to express my appreciation, certainly in view of the difficulties  
It was worthy  
a
I
a
a
appreciate all of your work and the work of the group that you were with. Thank  
you very much.  
LINEBERRY: Thank you sir.  
SI20-21  
Update on the Recommendations of the Mayor's Task Force on  
Community Violence.  
Public Health and Human Services Director Stephanie Browning provided  
a staff report, and the Council asked questions to which the staff  
responded.  
BROWNING: Good evening, brief update.  
I thought it was kind of important to have  
some discussion, as we’re thinking about the ARPA funding and how to move ahead  
and using that funds for community violence, to just kind of go back and revisit  
where we’ve been -- some of the challenges, successes that we’ve had, so we can  
think ahead.  
So, just for background, the Task Force was established in August of  
2013. They -- you can see their charge was to evaluate available resources and  
recommend ways that the City government and citizens themselves can cooperate  
to decrease violent crime. We had two council members that co-chaired it, and the  
list of Task Force members is there for you. The Task Force was established in  
response to concerns about, not only violence, but particularly in our youth, and so  
youth was  
recommendations back to Council by November 15, 2014. Their methods included  
researching evidence-based approaches to reducing violence. They had  
a
focus of that initial group. So, they needed to provide the  
presentations and public testimony at their meetings. They held three public  
forms, capturing concerns of both parents, youth, and community, and as provided  
in the council resolution, the Task Force disbanded when the report was  
completed.  
So, in thinking about their work, I’ve had people ask me -- is it still  
it’s seven years old. And so, one of the things in the report  
relevant? Is it timely  
-
was they pointed out local conditions -- they had 12 consensus points -- so drugs  
and alcohol, major contributing factors, negative perception of the police by the  
community, lack of economic opportunity that contributes to lack of hope,  
for adult basic education, they noted that almost all perpetrators had no job skills,  
there was lack of early childhood education, they recognized that gangs existed in  
Columbia, but were not sure how to know how much of factor they were, they  
a
need  
a
a
noted that most perpetrators are men in their twenties, they noted that most  
homicides are conflicts between people who know each other, they talked about  
antisocial attitudes around respect and justice as being  
a
major factor, they also  
talked about instilling in our children pro-societal attitudes and values as well as an  
ability to obtain basic educational skills, and they also noted as their twelfth point  
that  
history. So  
points still accurate today?  
a
majority of violent offenders have  
think that's one of the things as we think ahead -- are those consensus  
think they probably still hold true seven years later.  
a
previous and often extensive criminal  
I
I
They found four pillars that they felt could reduce violence. The first pillar is  
prevention. The second was intervention. The third was enforcement. And the  
fourth was reentry. And in their report, they touched on all of those.  
So for  
prevention, the big thing that they talked about was that we have lot of good  
a
programs around parenting skills, early childhood education, job training, but they  
felt that there needed to be greater coordination and awareness of the programs,  
and that thread continued throughout the report. Some of their recommendations  
included things like approaching violence as  
a
public health issue. They wanted to  
see research on violence interruption programs, like Cure Violence, more support  
for parenting in early childhood programs, more focus on job training. They wanted  
to see more community connections and tools to help people connect to services.  
They wanted to establish -- they wanted to make sure that our processes for social  
services funding were fair and equitable. They focused on Columbia Public Schools  
and youth programming. They wanted to see support and an increase in  
neighborhood watch programs, and they wanted to have an annual forum each year  
that talked about crime, social issues, and discrimination in the community. So in  
looking at prevention -- okay, so before  
I go into this, every year -- so in 2014, the  
report came out, and 2015, 17, 19 and 20, City staff, our department included, was  
asked what had we done to help contribute to this issue in the community. And last  
year Gina Pate, our City fellow, produced  
with all of you that was probably 130-some pages long. So, I'm not going to go back  
and hit every single thing that's happened since 2014, but want to hit few  
a
document that  
I
believe was shared  
I
a
highlights. So, in prevention, we have our CARES program. We still continue to have  
that. They have 100 trainees annually. That is down. We used to have 200. We also  
used to have the CARE Art Gallery, and budget cuts reduced that funding, but we  
still have 100 trainees each year. We have our Healthy Families America Home  
Visitation Program that's new since we got that funding -- or since the community  
violence report -- and that's  
the community through home visiting. It's an evidence-based program. We have  
our -- we just had grant for Brighter Beginnings, also home visiting collaboration.  
a program that reaches families, high risk families, in  
a
a
It is really working across all the local providers. So it's that coordination piece --  
working with all the local providers that are doing these services to make sure  
people get in at the right time at the right place to the right agency. We've seen an  
increase in housing vouchers for chronically homeless. Municipal Court has made  
some changes. We have  
a
new upward -- Boone County has an Upward Mobility  
Grant that is designed to reduce racial and ethnic inequities and support upward  
mobility from poverty. We’re one of eight counties in the country to have this  
grant, and they should have an action plan by June. Also in prevention -- so positive  
youth engagement -- Columbia Police has the Explorers and they’ve created like  
career path development, Boone County Community Services hosted Youth  
Violence Prevention Summit, and the Children's Services Commission has put out  
a
a
a
$750,000 RFP for youth violence prevention work, which we should hear something  
soon. We also have Community Scholars in the community. We host interns in the  
summer, Parks and Rec sports, you know, sports and recreational opportunities. In  
terms of community engagement, we’ve had  
Institute, and recently, just this last month, Source Summit was held. Dr. Lester  
Woods -- haven't had chance to talk to him, but it was really to focus on social  
and economic justice issues, and know that there's lot of interest in this topic  
a lot of work with the Inclusive Impact  
I
a
I
a
with that group -- so more to learn. In intervention, they talked about need for  
youth facilities and to train people to provide safe places, trusted people to turn to,  
and engaging community building programs that appeal to youth. Some of the  
things that they called out -- create  
a
youth community cultural center, family  
access center, implement violence interrupters program, increase the number of  
a
available mentors in the community, increase CPS’s work to identify and help at  
risk students, they wanted school resources officers in the middle and high schools,  
and they wanted CPS to focus on minimizing the impacts that happen when kids  
have to transfer from school to school because of, usually, unstable housing and  
other crises. So here's some of the progress since that time -- with the Children's  
Services Fund, we now have the Family Access Center for Excellence. Boys and Girls  
Club did  
have new City sports facilities. Some of that has freed up some of the programming  
at the Armory because we now have the Fieldhouse. The Police Chief, believe,  
will be bringing to you new school resource officer agreement sometime this  
month, think. And we now have mental health screening for all children in Boone  
County schools two times year, and that's important. We have our African  
a huge expansion with the teen center, a recording studio, and a gym. We  
I
a
I
a
American Heritage Trail, we have success grants for higher education and  
community caretaking, and again Boone County Children’s Services funding not  
only covered the Family Access Center and the mental health screening, but it has  
brought in millions of dollars for expanded programming for infants, early  
childhood in schools, youth family support and treatment. Enforcement -- so in this  
one, in this section or this pillar -- the Task Force talked  
a lot about trust between  
the community and local law enforcement. They thought that at the time, CPD was  
headed in the right direction, but they thought that more work was needed to be  
done. They wanted to not only see more community policing, but greater cultural  
competency training. So in the enforcement area, you can see the City Manager,  
the Chief of Police, and the NAACP consult on policing issues.  
Committee has been formed to address disparities. There's  
independent disparity analysis by an MU research team. We now have  
A
Vehicle Stops  
been some  
CPD staff  
a
member,  
I
believe it's an officer, certified in inclusion and diversity. CPD officers  
trip with  
have been going through cultural competency training. They made  
a
community members to the National Civil Rights Museum. Of course, they -- we've  
had lots of demonstrations and so they feel like they've been focusing on  
protecting people's rights to assemble. And we now have processes where there's  
public participation and policy development. In the area of community policing,  
we've  
had  
a
leadership  
and  
organizational  
change.  
Their  
performance  
and  
promotions are now based on community policing goals. Officers are assigned and  
accountable to beats as the resources allow. They're more engaging with residents,  
businesses, and groups. We have the Boone County Stepping Up Initiative that's  
new since this time, and that is  
a
nationwide initiative that Boone County  
governments have very involved in along with others from the City to reduce the  
number of individuals with behavioral health challenges in the justice system. In  
terms of CPD staffing, their officers -- they were at 163 in 2014. It's grown to 187 for  
this year, but they also now staff airport security, park rangers, and metered  
parking. They do use community policing as  
a
factor for their promotions and  
succession planning. The CPD Foundation -- one of the things in the report was that  
there should be more community appreciation of our officers, so CPD Foundation  
sponsors some annual employee awards. And it is  
a
profession that's experiencing  
think the  
recruitment and retention challenges. Reentry -- so one of the things  
I
group is worried about is people returning to Columbia, offenders returning to  
Columbia, with violent history or at high risk for future problems, and so they  
wanted  
a
higher level of accountability for our highest risk offenders. So, they  
City level reentry supervision  
wanted to identify high risk offenders, create  
a
program, require high risk offenders to attend and complete the Pathway to  
Change program, and to engage City staff in the Boone County Offender Transition  
Network. So, in the progress here, the City does partner -- we now have the ROC,  
which we didn't have -- the Reentry Opportunity Center. We partnered with the  
ROC. It's  
a one-stop shop for people that have been recently released from jail or  
prison and those under supervision in the criminal justice system. The group, the  
Boone County Offender Transition Network, has transitioned -- is now called the  
Central Missouri Recovery Coalition, and the City does partner with that. It's  
coordinated network of community based services and supports. The one thing that  
was called for in the report was City level reentry supervision program, and that's  
something that the City does not have express authority to do. Finally, in the report  
-- think this is really important -- since the Task Force recognizes that violence  
reduction is not one-time fix, and that the pursuit of the recommendations given  
in this report will require accountability from government leaders, educational  
institutions, local nonprofits, local businesses, and citizens. And so think -- my  
point -- when read that, thought, it isn't just City problem. It's community  
problem, and we have to have solutions together. So when was doing -- putting  
this together -- my working title was Stephanie's thoughts -- my thoughts entirely.  
One of the things think that we really missed the ball on in 2014, after the report  
came out -- so we did not dedicate person to coordinate across City departments  
with County government, with the educational institutions and the nonprofits. We  
just did not put the resources there, and so, think that that's something moving  
ahead, that really needs to be considered. It has to have somebody that can really  
focus on that work. believe it has to have strong equity focus in anything we do  
with meaningful community engagement, continued emphasis on employment,  
affordable housing, and basic needs. We have to focus on reducing poverty. We  
have lot of new grassroots organizations that are coming up, and it's hard to be  
a
a
I
a
I
I
I
a
a
I
I
a
I
I
a
a
a
new organization coming up when you're in  
a
community that has so many  
powerful nonprofits. We need capacity building for them. We need to continue to  
focus on safe spaces, places, and activities for youth. Of course, policy  
development is always important to address systems issues and that's an area  
where you have great impact, and again, to continue to local resource coordination.  
So, this is where  
tonight, but sure would like to have some continuing conversations. When this  
Task Force was put together, the focus was youth. Many of our recent shootings,  
they're not youth. They're adults. So is our scope community violence in big way?  
Do we want to consider things around it? Okay, if we talk about it as public health  
issue, what that means is that we look closely at data, we say okay, what's  
happening -- you diagnose problem. It's not just shootings. You look at where, you  
I sort of need some input from you and I don't necessarily expect it  
I
a
a
a
look at all that data, and then you figure out what are the strategies that are going  
to make the greatest impact. So, do we want to include things like domestic  
violence, child abuse, sexual violence, in addition, to gun violence. You have to  
consider the trauma that results from violence. And it’s that trauma and those  
adverse effects that affect people's physical and behavioral health, often for life,  
and especially when it's trauma in children. And so, one,  
what are we looking at when we do this -- what kind of violence? Community  
violence prevention is an allowable expense for ARPA. need to know, are there  
I think we need to define,  
I
specific program areas you would like to work on? There were four pillars. Do you  
want to work on prevention and intervention because that's really broad in that  
report? We know that there's many grassroots organizations committed to doing  
important work, and it's essential that we recognize that work that they want to do  
and that we find meaningful ways to partner, and so one of my questions -- how do  
we use this fund, this funding, to increase their capacity and meet the really strict  
requirements that come with ARPA? The accountability requirements --  
I
read the  
32 page Treasury note today. It's strict. And finally, how do we leverage our  
available resources to have transformational change, and how do we sustain  
because this ARPA funding isn't forever? So those are thoughts and -- that  
merit future discussion. It doesn't necessarily have to be tonight, but it's something  
really welcome because don't know how we move forward without having some  
I think  
I
I
basic questions answered. So happy to take any questions.  
TREECE: So, I’ll -- thank you for the recap, and  
I
think it's very informative. I was one  
of the people that were asking, well, is that 2014 report still relevant, and it's good  
to see some of the priorities that were identified and the steps that we've taken  
and the steps --  
Stephanie's thoughts. I'll add three more to that, if you will. And with respect to  
youth crime, you know, that was really part of the function on this. appreciate the  
comment that you made about school resource officers. understand the Chief’s  
going to bring us back proposed contract for four in the high schools, but, you  
know, from parents and teachers and school resource officers talk to -- mean, it's  
middle school where you choose, you know, whether you go the good way or the  
bad way. And would suggest that, or would recommend that Council consider  
I
think you're on the right track with your last two pages of  
I
I
a
I
I
I
I
jumpstarting that contract with the School District -- that we add maybe four more  
school resource officers at the middle school, maybe even floating into the  
elementary school one day  
a
week, to help identify kids that have  
a
parent picking  
I mean, all of  
them up at the end of the day or do they have  
a
winter coat or not.  
those indicators of that -- this child, we just need to keep an eye on him or her as  
they grow into that system. And so would suggest that. The other thing that you  
didn't mention there and was direct outcome of this was Ban the Box. This  
I
a
Council, not this -- the previous Council adopted  
employers, you know, may have otherwise automatically disqualified  
involved individual from even getting past that next stage of the interview process.  
There's program in St. Louis operated under St. Louis University called the  
a
Ban the Box that, you know, that  
a
justice  
a
Workforce Academy. They now have over 150 employers that participate in this  
program for justice involved individuals. They may be on probation and parole,  
they may have just had an arrest, they may have, you know, had  
a municipal --  
whatever it may be. That helps job train those individuals, connect them with  
employers, and, frankly, in today's labor market with today's labor shortages, we  
should have  
a
lot of participants from the employer side on this. But we just don't  
job. We continue with some type of job coaches  
stop when we connect them with  
a
that work not just with that justice involved individual, but with the employer  
about how to motivate that person, what to say, and what not to say, how do we  
make sure that person has the means to get to the job on time, what do you wear to  
that job, how do you act, you know, what type of shift or work place is best for you  
with your skills. And then  
a third issue that I think that you briefly hit on there that  
we had better job of is that Offender Reentry Program. The common denominator  
a
over the last three shootings have all been the individuals -- and you can Google  
this -- have had some type of prior arrest, if not incarceration. And, what, in  
addition to that job Workforce Academy, what peer counseling do we need from  
people, you know, at ROC, at other offender reentry programs, that we can, you  
know, keep them out of falling back into that situation or that environment or that  
home life or that gang life or whatever it may be that causing them to recidivate?  
So those are the three things that I would add.  
SKALA:  
Just a few comments. You asked for some suggestions, perhaps. I look back  
on some of this and think about the Violence Task Force, which was ably  
represented on this body by Laura Nauser and Mike Trapp. Man, that occurred in  
2014. It was also August of 2014 that Ferguson happened, and subsequent to that  
lots of -- there was  
report, rightly highlighted, prevention, intervention, enforcement, and reentry,  
and think recently, very recently, forwarded to you and the City Council some of  
the conversation that was occurring at the National League of Cities at the last  
summit that occurred very recently in November. There was report that was  
a lots of introspection and looking back and so on. That that 2014  
I
I
a
generated by -- with the cooperation of the Race, Equity and Leadership Council  
and lots of other groups, primarily, the federal advocacy groups that NLC  
represents. It was called reimagining public safety,  
reinforced lot of the pillars that we had in this community on  
you will, for some of our other -- the issues that were going on. And to address the  
Mayor's point about is this outdated or not, or should we update it. think that  
document, which is really pretty extensive -- it's about 40 page document --  
a
toolkit for cities and towns. It  
a
a
parochial level, if  
I
a
reinforces some of those approaches, but modernizes it to some degree and  
addresses some of the issues that we are dealing with or have dealt with in this  
community, most recently, particularly in the downtown area, which is which is  
getting all the notoriety. That report emphasizes engagement, restructuring, and  
balance. That’s the whole reimagining thing, not the defund the police, but to  
reimagine the whole idea. So,  
I
guess what I'm -- the question  
I wanted to ask you  
was, you see this -- one of the failures that we have and  
I
agree with you absolutely  
-- one of the failures was there was no single leader to coordinate some of this  
between the County and the City and the School District and so on. Do you see any  
or does the office -- in the last budget we appointed  
a
diversity, equity, and  
inclusion officer and an assistant, two person office -- do you see some of that  
a
responsibility falling to that group or is this totally separate -- that it requires  
another -- a different kind of leadership, not just specifically that particular office?  
BROWNING:  
I mean, obviously, not knowing who's going to be in it and what their  
expectations are -- I think it's a really good place for it.  
SKALA: Yeah.  
BROWNING: Yeah. I mean, because this - these issues are around equity.  
SKALA: Of course, and this will be the responsibility of the new city manager, when  
that city manager is appointed, and  
I
think that's going to be  
a
momentous  
appointment. So was just wondering if you see that that's  
I
a
reasonable home for  
some of that activity.  
THOMAS: Yeah, thanks Stephanie for doing  
a
deep dive on what the Task Force  
certainly agree, it was  
mean, maybe we didn’t -- just didn't have resources to put somebody in  
charge of implementing those recommendations and working across jurisdictions  
to do that. But now we have lot of funds that we could do that with. There's the  
recommended and what has happened since then. And  
mistake,  
I
a
I
a
equity officer that's in the budget that will be appointed sometime early next year  
as well as other ARPA funds that could be used for several years for that position,  
so  
What  
the Violence Interrupters Program --  
I
think that given that this is such  
recall from the presentation of the report and the kind of early discussion --  
lot of people had lot of hope for that.  
a critical issue that would be well warranted.  
I
a
a
People really from the community being, you know, on the ground, in community,  
in contact with -- particularly in very underserved neighborhoods where violent  
situations sometimes erupt and being able to interrupt those situations. And we  
did do  
community leaders, very engaged.  
that program. heard anecdotally it was going -- it was quite successful, but do you  
have any more information about that?  
BROWNING: don’t. mean, we worked -- our department worked with Glenn and  
Judy, when they would have some -- identify someone with resource needs -- we  
would try and connect them with some social service organizations. And don't  
know how successful it was because lot of the times when we'd get those  
a
small pilot program in about 2015-16 -- hired two part time staff who were  
I
never saw any kind of report or summary of  
I
I
I
I
a
referrals, when we would call people back, people would say that they were not --  
that they didn't need them. So, you know, that was again -- they worked pretty  
closely with the city manager so, I don't, I don't know what the results of that were.  
THOMAS: Based on sort of more recent research and reports and so on, is that  
program that -- a type of program that you feel has promise, still?  
a
BROWNING:  
think that there's some mixed results out there. Some things cite that there is  
evidence that it is good, and then there's some other things that think are going to  
need some more study about, like some mixed results based on just on the study  
I think -- Geoff's here, he can also speak to this, but I think that it has --  
I
I
methodology.  
St. Louis has  
a
program now -- they've got  
a
Cure Violence Program.  
met last week with  
It is within an organization called Employment Connection.  
I
the Moms Demand Action Group, and they're going to be very helpful in identifying  
programs, similar kinds of programs, whether it's Cure Violence or others, that are  
being implemented in communities more our size, because when you think of St.  
Louis City, and its size, and then you think of Columbia -- you know, like, is it  
scalable? It needs some research, but in the Employment Connections program --  
it's  
a huge, huge nonprofit -- and the Cure Violence is one piece. They do all these  
wraparound different services and mental health and employment training, and --  
so it’s -- that is one piece of a very large organization, but Geoff may have --  
JONES: [Police Chief Geoff Jones] So, I'm talking about programs that do that  
interruption and we've had these conversations for months, if not years, at this  
point. It has been very difficult to find anything that has shown consistent success.  
A
lot of the more recent literature that has come out on those programs shows  
mixed results at best. What will say is that most of those studies occur in larger  
metropolitan areas, and of course, Columbia is much smaller. So, think there's an  
opportunity to work and find the thing what works for us. would caution you in  
finding something that is canned and thinking that we can just implement  
program based on someone else's success or failure because it could go either way.  
think there needs to be more research. To that end, did reach out this past week  
to our benchmark cities asking what types of programs are out there and if any of  
them are participating. don't have responses back, but can forward those when  
I
I
I
a
I
I
I
I
I
get them. So, I'd be -- I'm curious as to what we might find with other jurisdictions  
that are similar in size and makeup.  
THOMAS: Alright, thanks, Geoff.  
PETERS:  
might want to consider whether we want, like  
months report, something that keeps this at the top of our of our thinking versus,  
you know, sort of falling back. liked Karl's question about coordinator for this  
program, and think we probably need one, and would not expect it to be one of  
or two equity officers. would really think we’d need someone who -- that’s their  
I
would say, again, thank you Stephanie for the information, and  
I think we  
a
monthly report or every two  
I
a
I
I
I
focus, that's what they do. It's not part of their job. It's their job to see what we  
need to do with the schools and are our school resource officers being as effective  
as we expect them to be, and do we, you know -- where are we with our offenders  
that are out of prison and getting them to jobs and getting them the support they  
need so they don’t end up in problems and that kind of stuff. So, you know,  
I think  
the two programs that you recommended and our coordinator are the first three  
things we should look at, but we also need to really keep looking at this and seeing  
what else we need to do and getting reports on what we have done. So those are  
my thoughts.  
WANER:  
So, I have a question for Stephanie. So, in a lot of the recap that you  
provided, it seems like the County really understood the assignment. Like they  
showed up and they were doing these things, and -- how do we be more like the  
County? Is it the mental health tax, the children's stuff? Is it political fortitude? Like  
what's the -- where’s the difference lie between what the County has been able to  
accomplish?  
BROWNING: Well, definitely, the Children's Services Tax has helped  
it's brought an infusion of major resources. And it started -- it did not start till about  
2015 or 2016, so -- and the Family Access Center opened. But, mean, also with lot  
of justice work that the County has been receiving grant funding on -- lot of it is  
a
lot because  
I
a
a
Commissioner Thompson, you know, and that's an area of interest for her and --  
that she feels very passionate about and so she has been able to get on the  
National Association of Counties on some different committees and it's really  
helped to attract some funding into Boone County.  
FOWLER:  
I have a couple of questions for Stephanie and perhaps the Chief. But, do  
school resource officers have to be officers? Could we not put caring adults with  
training into our schools who could be there as their liaison to do that work, to  
identify children that might be in in danger of having  
a neglect issue or they're in a  
situation that needs to be remedied so they don't -- we don't start that ball rolling  
with lifelong trauma.  
BROWNING: That part I'd have to ask Geoff about. But one thing with the Children's  
-- the mental health screening that's being done twice  
a
year --  
I
mean, that's  
significant. Right? So that is -- so what we really need is to connect -- how do we  
connect the screening results and identifying kids who are at risk, and then what?  
And, you know, like  
I said, this is coming up pretty quick, so, I mean, I need to do a  
lot more discussion with Columbia Public Schools and all the other districts and  
how they're -- what they're doing with that, and Geoff may have --  
JONES:  
with CPS. When  
SRO in schools, we changed our MOU so that we were not being used as  
tool. You'd have to see that MOU and can forward you copy of that. You really  
have to define the role of the SRO and decide whether you want police officer  
I
think it's really about defining roles. We've tried to do that with an MOU  
first came, and we were having discussion when we did have  
discipline  
I
a
a
I
a
a
there, someone else that takes on the responsibility as you mentioned, or both. It  
just -- it really depends on how the role is defined.  
FOWLER: I’m -- this might be another question for Stephanie too --  
you’re both going to go back and forth, but I'm sort of struck by this idea that  
school that has, don't know, 1,200 kids can be appropriately resourced with  
single individual. Now,  
longer as many guidance counselors in  
school. So, this -- I'm troubled by the idea that --  
I
know that  
a
a
I
I
know that there's guidance counselors but there's no  
school as there was when was in high  
mean, not only do we have  
a
I
I
a
problem to address at the youth level, but we also have an adult problem with  
community violence, which Stephanie identified. And when we're trying to solve,  
or get to the root of problems by just putting  
keep track of everything that's going on --  
a
single person who couldn't possibly  
mean, you probably hit the most  
I
noticeable cases you can see and try and do something about. And my other  
comment on that is -- when we're talking about grassroots organizations, there's  
lot of people in this town and there's lot of people of color in this town that had  
a
a
been working for free for years to try and improve the conditions in their  
community. And the funding processes that the City currently offers denies them  
funding because they have to have the resources up front to pay their staff and  
then be reimbursed later. And so it's an extension of the credit problem that  
communities of color are already experiencing. So what  
you go through this process, and hope that you and  
conversations about this, is that we find different model.  
I want to stress to you as  
I
I
can have subsequent  
If we’re going to ask  
a
members of the community, trusted members of the community, to help us in this  
work -- that we pay them fairly, that we make sure we pay them ahead of time so  
that they can do the work without having to put their own personal lives and their  
family lives under stress, and that we take  
a long look at how we currently fund  
not-for-profit services that are trying to address gaps in our community, whether  
it's between black people and brown people or regardless of who. The fact that we  
are denying the very trusted people who could probably do this work effectively  
and perhaps even more effectively because of the way we distribute funds.  
BROWNING:  
building. The City’s process for social service funding, the children's services  
process, United Way -- they all use common application and form, and you know  
I
absolutely agree. That's why  
I
said we need to focus on capacity  
a
that that is born out of, really, the public demand for accountability with taxpayer  
funds, right? And so, these systems are set up whe  
III. APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS  
None.  
IV. SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENT  
SPC69-21  
Steve Callis - Environmental concerns.  
Steve Callis spoke.  
CALLIS: Good evening. I'm Steve Callis and  
I live at 6304 West Normandy Lane. I'm  
the State Coordinator for International Compost Awareness Week. There's been  
great deal of discussion lately about the environment in general, and methane  
emissions in particular. wanted to offer some updated information on those topics  
tonight. Methane is greenhouse gas that is up to 80 times as damaging as carbon  
dioxide when considered over 20 year time frame. Organic waste, primarily food  
waste, generates methane as it decomposes in the landfill. The EPA has estimated  
for number of years that 20 percent of the methane generated in landfills escapes  
to the atmosphere. More recently, research conducted in California by NASA and  
a
I
a
a
a
a
private firm utilizing advanced technology indicates that some landfills about two  
to six times the EPA estimates. During the recent COP26 Conference, the Global  
Alliance of Organic Recycling Associations issued  
a
call to increase recycling of  
organic waste back to the soil. Also, during that COP26, the United States signed on  
to the global methane pledge, which aims to reduce the overall amount of  
methane produced and released to the atmosphere. The Sierra Club and other  
organizations have long recommended diverting organic waste from landfills to  
prevent methane being produced in the first place. Doing that would fall in line  
with global, national, and local priorities, such as the Climate Action and Adaptation  
Plan. Locally, the 2019 report from the City's consultant, Burns and McDonnell,  
reported that food waste makes up to -- makes up 17.8% of the total solid waste  
stream. Half that food waste comes from commercial sources, and the other half  
from residential sources. Ideally, each household would compost their own organic  
waste at home. The City provides composting workshops to encourage this, but  
annually over 15,000 tons of residential food waste still ends up in the landfill.  
Columbia landfill allows food waste to be dropped off at the landfill composting  
facility, but this isn't  
a
convenient option for most. In 2019, Columbia passed an  
ordinance allowing private contractors to be licensed to collect commercial food  
waste to be composted. City Code still makes it illegal for anyone but the City to  
collect residential food waste, but the City isn't able to offer residential curbside  
food scrap collection due to ongoing staffing issues. The only remaining option is to  
allow private contractors to be licensed to provide that service. No tax dollars  
would be involved, but there would likely be  
a fee to the customers. Now there's  
been some discussion regarding the possibility that licensing private contractors to  
provide this service would cost jobs within the solid waste utility, but with those  
current staffing issues,  
I
don't think that's likely to happen. Some have complained  
that trucks collecting residential food waste would cause additional wear and tear  
on residential streets. This type of service will be provided using smaller trucks,  
smaller than garbage trucks, with less wear and tear on the streets. Still others have  
suggested that these collections would require the infamous roll carts. Residential  
food scrap collection would be accomplished by providing five gallon pails to the  
individual customer with those being swapped out every week. Pick up an empty  
pail and leave  
empty pail.  
a
clean -- I'm sorry -- pick up  
a
full pail and leave behind  
a
clean  
There's been some concern  
about the reduction in  
methane  
production, reducing the amount of electricity produced by burning landfill gas in  
the generators. It would take several years for this to become noticeable because  
there's already  
time this does occur, the City should be able to make up for that shortfall, with  
other less polluting forms of renewable energy. Columbia needs to take  
a
great deal of organic waste decomposing in the landfill. By the  
a
leadership role in reducing the global methane problem. Failure to do so will only  
exacerbate an already intolerable situation. The time to act is now so strongly urge  
I
the Council to direct the City Manager to develop an ordinance with input from  
interested parties that will allow private contractors to be licensed to provide  
residential curbside food scrap collection. Thank you for your time.  
SPC70-21  
Rose Metro - Following through with commitments made by Council on  
11/15 to implement a community violence intervention program.  
Rose Metro spoke.  
METRO:  
Action for Gun Sense in America,  
reducing gun violence in all forms. On November 15, many people including Traci  
Wilson-Kleekamp from Race Matters Friends, Rebecca Shaw from COMO for  
Progress, and Kristin Bowen for Moms Demand Action urged the City to use ARP  
funds to implement community based violence Intervention Program. Council  
Rose Metro, 206 South Garth Ave., speaking on behalf of Moms Demand  
a
nonpartisan grassroots organization dedicated to  
a
expressed support and planned to gather stakeholder input, yet no timeline was  
laid out and the leader designated. It doesn't seem to have progressed. There  
absolutely should be community engagement on  
seems unequipped to do so with current staffing. Moreover, as we heard, the  
Mayor's Task Force on Community Violence already expressed support for  
a
range of issues, but the City  
a
sustained fully funded intervention program in 2014, which was not implemented.  
Missouri has the highest rate of gun homicide among Black people in the entire  
nation, and Columbia is part of that. It is past time to act. I'll offer some ideas on  
how.  
I
and other Moms leaders met with Public Health and Human Services staff  
last week and I'll share ideas that emerged. First, there are multiple evidence  
based programs with documented results, not only Cure Violence, but also  
Advanced Peace, and those mixed results that Chief Jones referred to come in  
when those programs are not fully funded and sustained. Nothing like them has  
ever been implemented in Columbia. Councilperson Thomas noted that Glenn and  
Judy did anti-violence outreach, and while acknowledging their important work,  
this would be  
a
comprehensive program with an entire team of outreach workers  
and built in evaluation. Also, we have the money. Given that St. Louis spent $7  
million on Cure Violence over three years and Kansas City underfunded its Aim for  
Peace program at $500,000, it's clear that our investment should be in the millions  
and last years. ARP funds could cover that substantial investment that would allow  
us to reap long term benefits while  
contribute to the false narrative that these programs don't work. It can be done in  
city Columbia’s size. Nina Hampton will discuss Kalamazoo, Michigan, which is  
smaller than Columbia. They just made million dollar investment with ARP funds  
a
one time under investment would only  
a
a
in gun violence prevention. These programs could be more successful in small cities  
because there can be greater coverage. So, the data and supportive of Cure  
Violence that Kristin shared previously is compelling, but to work as intended,  
street outreach program needs to be supported by broader social safety net. Job  
opportunities, access to mental health and substance abuse counseling. The City  
grip toolkit that Councilperson Waner mentioned last meeting provides  
complementary strategies tailored to city of our size, including tracking gun  
violence, offering violence reduction fellowships, using multi-discipline homicide  
and shooting incident reviews, hospital based intervention etc. In other words,  
violence intervention program could be the linchpin in broader strategy of  
treating gun violence as public health emergency. Instead of merely reacting to  
a
a
a
a
a
a
gun violence, through policing, we should be proactively preventing it by providing  
opportunities and diffusing conflicts. This could save money and reduce the burden  
on police in the long term. So, what happens next, the City put’s out an RFP, an  
organization such as Power House or Love Columbia or FACE or CMAC could make  
a
professional service agreement with the City. This organization would host the  
program, which would train outreach workers, our academic community, including  
Mizzou’s  
Peace  
Studies  
program  
or  
MU  
Healthcare  
might  
support  
evaluation.  
Outreach workers would come from communities most impacted by gun violence,  
who understand its root causes and have the legitimacy to intervene. We have so  
many people with those skills, not just community leaders already known to us, but  
ordinary people whose names we may not know -- people who go to Vibez Lounge,  
people who have lost loved ones to gun violence. These people may be critical of  
Police or City leaders. They may have truths to share that would make people in  
this room uncomfortable, but they have so much wisdom. We just need to  
empower them to use that wisdom to keep us all safer. And obviously that's not  
me. I'm  
a white woman, not a survivor of gun violence, and my organization started  
focused on mass shootings. For years, we did not respond effectively to the  
intersection of racism and gun violence, and while we're gradually diversifying,  
leaders like me are still learning from those most impacted and building  
partnerships. After Kristin spoke last time, City Council members and other  
speakers thanked Moms Demand Action. They did not thank Traci, Rebecca, Roy  
Lovelady, December Harmon, or the other people who have been advocating for  
similar initiatives for years.  
I
don't think it was intentional, but it did cause pain,  
national organization, do so  
coalition, including the people wearing orange here tonight. So, declare  
a public health emergency, commit to spending millions in ARP funds  
and am sorry for that. So, although I'm speaking for  
I
a
I
as part of  
a
gun violence  
over several years on community violence intervention, put out an RFP to  
implement Cure Violence, Advance Peace, or similar program as so as the new  
a
city manager is in office, along with identifying other initiatives required to support  
it. Thanks so much.  
SPC71-21  
Susan Renee Carter - Action for taking responsibility and showing  
accountability.  
Susan Carter spoke.  
CARTER:  
Susan Renee Carter.  
I
live at 2105 Hillsborough Drive. Comment  
I
would  
like to start out with -- it doesn't really have to do with what  
I
was going to speak  
about, although it does -- is that in the past, I've spoken to you about the research  
surrounding use of resource officers in schools, and if you read the research, you  
will find that there's no evidence supporting the fact that it helps situations. Some  
of the things that were suggested by Pat have  
a lot more clout when it comes to  
helping young people in the school system. If you put police officers in the school,  
all you do is end up with more children being incarcerated, and ending up in prison  
as adults. So, I'll start with that. And then, I'd also like to mention when you were  
going over how money had been spent for youth and jobs --  
I want to point out the  
CARE program has been around for long time. That program targets youth that are  
a
at risk. That's the primary concern of that program. Over the course of time, the  
dealings I've had with CARE is that 30 percent of those youth that were going  
through the CARE program to do  
a work experience ended up being hired by the  
employer that supported that person in that job. And if that doesn't affect your  
thoughts about how outcomes happen and that you should be fully funding that --  
my understanding is that you now pay those youth’s sub-minimum wage. Is that  
true? Is -- was that change that you made because of your budget? That's my  
a
understanding. If you read the research about what happens to children at risk that  
are paid below minimum wage and what that does to their self-esteem and their  
view of themselves and their worth as workers, you will see that the outcomes are  
not good. So those are two things I'd like to advise you about on the discussion  
about where you're going with some of your programs because they’re not going to  
reduce crime in your City if you don't do them right. And so, it brings me back to  
why  
November 14 downtown officer involved shooting,  
press briefing went to and the council meeting  
disappointed me in how the City is handling these situations. At the briefing, it  
ended up -- felt like lot of blame was placed on the Vibez owner and I've since  
seen that in the media. It continues to come up that the shootings occurred at the  
Vibez when in fact it didn't. There are lot of other businesses around there, and  
want to help you focus on the fact that if something like that happened at Walmart,  
and someone was in the parking lot and there was shooting. Even though you can  
I
came up here to talk -- is about responsibility and accountability. After the  
was very concerned at the  
went to. Both of those instances  
I
I
I
I
a
a
I
a
go in Walmart and you can get liquor any time of the day or night, you can go back  
out into the parking lot and you can drink it, and then you can re-enter the building  
of  
a shooting occurs in the parking lot. I don't think we would be saying we were  
going to be laser focused on them. So, we need careful not to be involved in what’s  
known as dog whistle politics, where we create instances and views of certain  
people or certain races of people around incidents that happen in our community.  
I've felt like at the council meeting last time it was business as usual. We talked  
about sewers, we talked about traffic calming, we talked about land acquisition,  
but we didn't talk about the events that had occurred in the City even though we're  
saying we're  
a
City in crisis until the members of the Council, you know -- the  
conversation. So  
participants came to the podium and engaged the Council in  
a
I
would like to see our Council be more accountable. I'd like to see them to be more  
engaged when there's really a problem with our City. Thank you.  
SPC72-21  
Karen Sicheneder - Community input for Broadband Taskforce and  
future-proofing infrastructure.  
Karen Sicheneder spoke.  
SICHENEDER: Hi, so, I'm here to piggyback on the discussion that we had in the work  
session today on broadband and the existing Task Force that is in place around this  
issue, and  
discovering in the quest for this information. Now  
the Missouri Democratic Party State Committee, and part of our platform is internet  
access as public utility, and there's reason for that. We had lot of discussions  
I
wanted to bring up some of the things that  
I have been uncovering and  
I
represent Senate District 19 on  
a
a
a
today around gaining access to the maps that are held by the privately owned  
internet service providers in order to figure out where the City can lay  
infrastructure.  
What we need is for the City to invest in  
can then lease out to private internet service providers, or further down the line,  
we can have city owned ISP, and there's couple of different reasons for this. We  
I
would challenge and  
I
would argue we don't need those maps.  
a
citywide fiber infrastructure that the City  
a
a
have several different equity points when it comes to this infrastructure. We have  
an equity point of neighborhoods that don't have internet access at all. There is no  
infrastructure  
getting  
it  
out  
into  
those  
neighborhoods.  
We  
also  
have  
neighborhoods that simply have aging infrastructure. These infrastructures in place  
are most often privately owned, and there's little to no incentive for these  
privately owned companies to go in and replace that infrastructure where we end  
up having situations like what Susan Maze has, where she has internet access but  
it's terrible because the infrastructure needs to be replaced. And then we also have  
the additional equity issue of the cost of internet, and quite frankly, there's not  
whole heck of lot that the City would be able to do about the cost if the City  
doesn’t own the infrastructure. If the City owns the infrastructure and then they  
can actually put forward City-owned internet service provider, the City would  
have the opportunity to be able to provide those services at cost that would be  
a
a
a
a
much more equitable to communities that need that. Because of all of these issues,  
trying to figure out what these privately held internet service providers already  
have doesn't matter.  
I don't care that they already have the infrastructure in place.  
They can sell that at whatever cost they need. We would still have the opportunity  
as the City to be able to have this for lease to new or existing internet service  
providers, thus creating some actual free market competition. Up until recently,  
a
lot of the issues that people were seeing across the board were the internet service  
providers were working together to divvy up the city so that there wasn't really any  
competition and then they could fix rates at whatever they wanted them to be at.  
And this became an issue, as neighborhoods like mine, only had access to one  
internet service provider. We didn’t have an option. Even though there's multiple  
companies in town,  
infrastructure is there, but it's privately owned, and  
that option. I want the option to be able to shop around. I want to be able to go to a  
different internet service provider if what they're giving me isn't working. want to  
be able to get rates that are actually competitive. really can't afford my internet  
access -- really can’t afford it. It’s too much for what actually use. And in addition  
to that, don't really have the option of rolling back my services because they don’t  
build that into the plan because they don't have to -- because there's no  
competition. So, want us to seriously consider looking at what the other cities  
around Missouri have done, and gave you some packets today that goes over what  
has happened in Springfield, Missouri. They have actually taken out loan for the  
$120 million that was necessary for them to lay their own infrastructure, and then,  
in addition, they created contract with CenturyLink where they are recouping  
those costs at about $17 million year, which means it will take them about 10  
years to pay it off. So even if we can't get access to grants that are out there, which  
we would need consultant in place in order to gain access to those grants, we  
I
only have access to one internet service provider. The  
I
can't shop around. don't have  
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
a
a
a
a
could still pay for this on  
utilities. We could get  
a
loan and we could pay for this on  
a loan from our own  
a
lower interest loan from power and light to lay the  
infrastructure and then repay ourselves for what would essentially end up being  
cash cow for the City that also creates equity in internet service. Thank you.  
a
SPC73-21  
Nina Hampton - Community gun violence, a public health issue.  
Nina Hampton spoke.  
HAMPTON:  
Pointe Lane in Columbia, Missouri. I’m delivering this comment written by my  
friend, Ruth Friar, who also lives in Columbia. It's titled Gun Violence Public  
Good evening, Council. My name is Nina Hampton.  
I
live at 202 Bay  
a
Health Issue. My friend Ruth lived in Columbia from 1975 to 1990. She move to  
Kalamazoo, Michigan, and returned to Columbia in 2018. She describes Kalamazoo  
downtown as  
a
pedestrian mall much like Broadway. It stretches the entire length  
of downtown. Public safety officers patrol the downtown area on foot and bicycle  
and horseback. On the end, the mall is anchored by the bus train station and the  
Kalamazoo Gospel Mission, temporary shelter that includes resources for the  
unhoused. block from the Mission is community health center. Across the  
street, converted multi- story hotel that provides permanent subsidized housing.  
a
A
a
a
The mall itself is about six blocks long. At the opposite end is an accessible rapid  
mental health substance abuse treatment center. Around the corner from the  
treatment center,  
parole office --  
a
a
bakery and chocolatier called Confections with Convictions, the  
block further Michigan employment and rehabilitation services.  
Individuals in need can literally access all the services by walking in one end of the  
mall to another. The paper gave you has data comparing Columbia and Kalamazoo  
that might be of interest. Kalamazoo is little over half the size of Columbia, and  
funds more for public health than Columbia. On the surface, the City recognizes  
improving public health welfare is part of community public health strategy. The  
other appears to fund police at the expense of public health. few weeks ago, we  
had another traumatizing event in our community. Four people were injured and  
man was killed. It was characterized as mass casualty incident to accurately --  
I
a
a
A
a
a
inaccurately characterize it as such caused additional trauma. To blame R’velle Fair  
for the violence that visited his club’s door is completely unacceptable.  
Paraphrasing, Ibram X. Kendi, “to be Black is to be constantly rendered the  
problem. The problem is not black people. It is much more accurate to identify our  
unresponsive  
community's current and collective mass casualties.” Kalamazoo has acknowledged  
that decreasing community violence requires focus on inequity. They have  
embraced creating vibrant community deeply invested in public health equity to  
ameliorate the root causes of violence to intentionally make services visible and  
accessible. For Kalamazoo, race is not proxy for poverty, disadvantage, or  
systems  
of  
government  
as  
the  
problematic  
perpetrators  
of  
our  
a
a
a
disparity. Instead there are identifiable public health issues. All forms of violence  
are more frequent when access to health care and trauma informed public health  
resources are limited. When citizens see opportunity as limited, government  
unresponsive, police not as guardians -- when they live in areas for danger is  
concentrated, if the environment is routinely hostile, when owning and obtaining  
weapon is seen as logical way to stay safe, acting violently becomes violent  
presentation strategy. These acts of violence represent response to trauma,  
a
a
a
a
poverty, disadvantage, and disparity -- all public health issues. We are serious  
about community -- if we are serious about community violence, then it starts with  
conversations about public health, period. Local government systems must operate  
in openness and transparency, trust, and use the data available to make decisions  
to assign resources were they are most needed. This is why our City needs to work  
in collaboration with County to direct our public health department to provide the  
resources and to take action that coordinates expanded efforts to access  
community violence at its source.  
Our community has individuals and groups ready  
to step up and help. In 2014, the Mayor's Task Force on Violence set aside funds and  
made  
specific  
immediate  
recommendations  
to  
interpret  
have  
community  
not been  
--  
interrupt  
community  
violence.  
These  
recommendations  
implemented.  
Rodney March of Rock the Community requested CARES funding to continue and  
expand known successful violence interruption strategies already being used  
within our community. The request was not funded until the second round.  
Shaunda Hamilton, mother of victim of gun violence, started her own organization  
to interrupt community violence. Why aren't these two programs and others like  
them being elevated and fully funding as functional interrupters of community  
violence that they are? We're serious about -- if we are serious about addressing  
a
a
gun violence in our community, we must name it as  
it is -- as if our lives depend on it because they do. Thank you.  
a public health emergency that  
SPC74-21  
Adam Saunders - Requesting surplus funds for community food security.  
Adam Saunders spoke.  
SAUNDERS:  
bit about the history, the last six years of this public-private partnership, and  
of what was vacant Clary-Shy Community Park.  
looking at this and getting the team together of what could be and how can we  
address food security, and we’ve created big onion, lot of layers to it that touch  
on food security, but well beyond that, think, relevant to our discussion earlier  
today in the big picture. So quick background, this is public private partnership --  
started back in 2015. It’s come long way. Columbia Parks and Rec has been the key  
interface that we've had with the City, been great to work with, to put together this  
open 10 acres into something very unique. It’s more than park. It has deep roots in  
Good evening.  
I
appreciate the opportunity to share with you all  
a
little  
a
view  
a
I
remember with Mike Griggs  
a
a
I
a
a
a
a
service to the community. And we've been able to work through this timeline over  
the last few quick years. Looking at the numbers, to date, we've raised over $5.9  
million dollars. If you look at the numbers, about three-quarters of that is from  
private sources so big thank you to all the donors who’ve leaned into this and  
supported it, and thank you to the City and the federal and state and the County.  
Note that the City, to date, has made up about 14 percent of the investment in this  
park beyond the land itself and some staff time, and this is kind of the crux of the  
issue that we're proposing -- is there is surplus funds in the current fiscal year and  
request for help to lean into this and help balance the load as we look forward at  
the last step of this project. Here’s quick view of what we have today -- the big  
MU Healthcare pavilion, the wings are funded, those are slated to be built next  
winter as well as big urban farm, teaching facilities, schoolhouse facility, barn  
and greenhouse, stormwater -- lot has come together in the last few quick years.  
a
a
a
a
a
And what's miss -- the last piece that we're looking at -- the last big piece is the  
Welcome Center, right there on main plaza. It has three main functions, and the key  
anchor of it is the teaching kitchen, right there in the middle that'll really elevate  
the capacity to teach nutrition and farm literacy and food literacy and everybody  
eats, and so that's something that all people can relate to. Within this space -- also  
a
resource center to help people engage in gardening and cooking in flexible  
a
programming space that can function year round, no matter the weather -- so this  
building really adds significantly to the capacity of the organizations that use that,  
Columbia Center for Agriculture, Columbia’s Farmers Market, but also creates  
capacity for broader collaborations that are in the works. So I'm going to dive  
through the layers of the onion real quick. Columbia Farmers market -- voted best  
market in the nation this year. It has  
a rural tie -- the 50 mile radius that reaches out  
to 80 vendors throughout mid-Missouri, so not just -- it provides access to food, but  
livelihoods to the region. We broke records this year -- the Farmers Market did at  
attendance and matching for SNAP and WIC resources -- it adds -- it improves the  
access and affordability of food. There's been  
a
lot of innovation -- there's  
a
produce prescription pilot program with Compass Health, just up the road. It’s an  
interface between food and health care. Families with diarrheal related diseases  
can get prescribed fresh produce at the market. All the food that we grow at the  
site is donated to the Food Bank. We're on track to donate over 35,000 pounds this  
year. That number will increase as our gardens mature and expand. This site also is  
a
launching pad of programming throughout the community.  
Opportunity Gardens  
is  
a
home  
gardening  
mentoring  
program  
where  
we  
go  
into  
low  
income  
neighborhoods and garden with participants -- we start with what do you like to  
eat, let's grow that -- and we got about 100 families in that program any given year  
for the last many, many years. We also take care of orchards and gardens around  
town, like the Kilgore’s garden with Nora Stewart as  
a
main beneficiary of that  
food. We had over 20,000 interactions with CPS schools for our Farm to School  
program, and are anticipated to expand now that we're in our new space and  
further -- the capacity there is grown. We’ve gotten more into therapy gardens,  
with the VA Hospital, Phoenix Rehab Center, Welcome Home Patriot Place --  
gardening ties into therapy. And then finally -- last program is the Henry Kirkland  
Black Farmers Scholarship we started last year, which provides startup funding for  
black farmers to start  
a business or expand their business. So it's a lot there. I don’t  
mean to dumptruck you with too much information, but all that, very modestly, is  
being programmed out of this one schoolhouse trailer that’s temporary, capital T,  
temporary office on our site, and ultimately, we would like to expand that to -- the  
office space in this Welcome Center to provide  
a much better, more inviting public  
face to provide an on ramp for participates to get involved. As our capacity  
increases with this building that we'll be able -- we’ll be able to serve more people  
in this big onion will continue to grow. So,  
update and appreciate your help to get us this far.  
I appreciate the opportunity to share an  
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS  
PH48-21  
Proposed construction of Fire Station #10 to be located north of and west  
of St. Charles Road, at the bend with the intersection of E. Richland Road.  
PH48-21 was read by the City Clerk.  
Acting Public Works Director Shane Creech and Fire Chief Andy Woody  
provided a staff report.  
CREECH: Shane Creech, Interim Director of Public Works. The Fire Chief is with me  
tonight and will discuss in greater detail the need for an additional fire station in  
this area.  
itself. It is common for Public Works to assist the Fire Department with property  
acquisition, plan development, and the construction processes due to staff  
I will concentrate my portion of the staff report specifically to this site  
expertise in those areas. This site consists of two tracts, totaling 10.76 acres, at the  
intersection of St. Charles Road and Richland Road. Due to the topography of the  
site, both tracts are necessary to balance grading and construct the fire station. This  
additional area will have the added bonus of assisting with intersection  
improvements when traffic impacts require that. The fire station will be designed  
in such  
a way to ensure that it meets the needs of the Columbia Fire Department at  
the time of construction and into the future following intersection improvements.  
Please note that currently there is not an intersection improvement project  
funded. However, due to recent development proposal history in this area, it's  
anticipated to be under consideration with the next capital improvement sales tax  
set for renewal in 2025. An interested parties meeting was held on October 27. Five  
property owners in the area attended. One property owner was opposed to the fire  
station being located so close to their residence. While one of the property owners  
needed for acquisition was amenable to the acquisition, however, her contract  
deed purchasers were not. The ordinance to acquire the property is also on the  
agenda tonight which is not typical. Staff will obviously only move forward with  
that based on the results of this public hearing. This was done by request of the  
contract deed purchasers to accelerate the process where possible should council  
decide to move forward. will now turn it over to the Fire Chief to discuss the need  
for fire station in this area of town and provide to some background on the  
I
a
property search.  
WOODY: Thank you, and thank you for having me tonight. This is apparently going  
to be pretty difficult to see -- basically the area in east central Columbia falls  
outside of our benchmark response times. Some fall out of the radius of the fire  
station as well. As you know, the search for land began before  
I
was here, in  
earnest years ago -- three or more, and there are very few places in the east side of  
the city of Columbia that we’ve not explored. We have to be careful, however, that  
the fire station is placed in  
a
location that enhances the effectiveness of our  
department now and not only to help us in the future -- that it's not something that  
we are waiting to grow into. The fire crews that cover this area of the City now are  
among some of the busiest in the City including the downtown crews and the Fire  
Station 5 on Ballanger Lane. The first response area of  
square miles. Some of ours are little bit bigger than that. You all have addressed  
that, and we appreciate it. We're working through some of that now. But obviously,  
as we locate that station, that 5 or 6 miles -- you'll see on the map in just minute --  
a fire station is roughly 5, 6, 7  
a
a
it moves with the building so getting the -- finding the right piece of ground is  
important. So placing that facility in the proper location is critical because these are  
fifty year infrastructure pieces for the City. So what we did was we altered our land  
search -- rather than just driving and looking and -- to really include some good --  
the use of technology. So, by placing essentially  
different locations that we have been looking, we were able to then objectively  
look and review the information to help us find location that’s the most impactful  
a mock firehouse in some of the  
a
for the community. We're able to be visible, available, and present in the locations  
that were needed. We want to make sure that our limited resources that you bless  
us with are properly placed and that delayed response times aren’t limited by  
ensuring first the fire apparatus approximate to the customers. So you can see in  
some of this mapping --  
some of the places where we've looked for -- at fire stations -- this is Stadium and  
63 - again, these are these are going to be difficult to see. apologize for that. What  
we’re -- the areas that we’re looking at are the area of west of 63, south of the 70,  
north or Broadway. That kind of gives you corridor there, so east of 63, south of 70,  
I say you can -- we’ll see if I can change the slides -- so  
I
a
north of Broadway. We need that fire station to cover south of Interstate -- of I-70,  
and ideally, it comes even all the -- across the highway to cover Conley/Trimble  
corridor there as well, again to relieve those downtown crews. So, as we look at  
land, you can kind of see again --  
I don’t know what handouts you have there -- this  
is Stadium and 63. This doesn’t cover to 70 and it doesn’t cover east of the city  
limits. Although there is property there, again, this is something that just wasn't  
going to work  
I don’t think for the City. We also looked at Elk Park Drive. We made  
some progress down Elk Park Drive, and that's actually how this ended up being fire  
station 10 and the other one that's already being built is Fire Station 11 is because  
of Elk Park Drive. This ended up falling through -- it ends up though that it, you  
know -- it is  
a little far south and east to cover what we really need this fire station  
cover to anyway. There was some land at Rolling Hills Road and WW Highway,  
Broadway. Again, too far south and east -- you can see we don’t hit 70. We don't  
cover some of the subdivisions that out there now that are too far from the fire  
station now, whick really led us again, technology-wise, back to the East St. Charles  
Road location, which is where we have found this property now, and that’s really  
what lead us to this -- was the information from joint communications to allow us  
to place these facilities in different areas in the east side of town. So really, it  
meets the needs of the City best now and moving into the future. fire station in  
A
this location is estimated to respond to approximately 1,500 calls annually. It’s  
needed now and will be needed later.  
Mayor Treece opened the public hearing.  
Roy Myers and Natalie Kerkmann spoke.  
MYERS: Roy Myers, I’m the owner of the land that you’re wanting to acquire. Really  
didn’t want to sell it.  
locations that would be better suited, preferably Rolling Hills and Richland --  
there’s corner piece there that’d be perfect. The trees there are very old and tey'll  
be really hard to replace. Yeah, know you guys plant back new ones, but it’s kind  
of hard to get trees that are already mature and already 200-400 years old. haven’t  
I
haven’t been offered anything, and  
I
think there’s other  
a
I
I
been offered anything for my land and would like to know what’s, you know --  
seems like a pretty violent act to eminent domain.  
TREECE:  
price?  
’m not going to negotiate with you up here. Are you willing to sell it at a  
MYERS: Yes.  
TREECE: Yeah, Okay. Of course, yeah, I’m sorry you got this point without being  
asked. Anything you’d like to add?  
KERKMANN: Yes. My name is Natalie Kerkmann. I, just -- it was just  
bad day when you wake up and you've made plans, you know -- we were going to  
build on the land and have tiny houses and possibly duplexes. mean, we can build  
a shock. That's a  
I
duplexes, or rent it out, you know, to people that come down for Mizzou games,  
that have people going to the hospitals right there on Keene Street -- it’s, you  
know, five minutes away from downtown.  
of us have, in Columbia, and we looked  
We've lived here for over 20 years, both  
long time to try and find, you know, the  
a
perfect land, and this just seemed like, you know, we finally had the whole plan  
coming into place, and it’s like now, we don't have  
even know that this was something that was possible.  
a backup plan and we didn't  
MYERS: And when  
they couldn't have told me then, you know, it's been  
building permit or electric or light pole. And it just seems like it was kind of  
stonewalled, you know, and denied my, you know, the use for which I’d brought  
I
was trying to get electric on the property,  
I didn't know why  
a
year that I've been denied  
a
a
the property, to be able to use it.  
going to do now, so.  
I haven't been able to go and figure out what I'm  
TREECE: Alright, okay. Well thank you for coming tonight and visiting with us.  
There being no further comment, Mayor Treece closed the public hearing.  
The Council asked questions and made comments.  
PETERS: What is the plan for this land? Have we -- we’ve not negotiated  
him? Are we looking into that?  
a price with  
GLASCOCK: The process is the public hearing first, and then you, as  
tell us whether to proceed with plans and specifications, and then we will do  
there’s an ordinance to acquire, believe, on this agenda as well, at which time we  
a
Council, will  
a
--  
I
would then do an appraisal of the property and start negotiating with the property  
owner about the price.  
PETERS: Okay, so.  
GLASCOCK: It comes after the public hearing.  
PETERS: Okay, so public hearing, and then  
a
a discuss -- and then to see how much  
this land is worth and discuss selling, perhaps, buying it from the --  
GLASCOCK: Yes.  
PETERS: Okay, thank you.  
SKALA: Yeah, the majority of this service area falls in the Third Ward. St. Charles  
Road -- there is  
years ago, about 10 or 12 years ago -- being improved and so on, This search for  
fire station location has been going on for good long period of time too. There  
was more or less prime location at Keene Street and St. Charles Road, or near St.  
Charles Road, but probably wasn’t adequate, and the owner was not interested in  
selling it either, and we've heard little bit about the history of the search for some  
of these areas that seem to fit the public safety nature of this fire station. This  
seems to be -- I mean, -- lot of this hinges on the negotiation for the sale of the  
property for someone who is -- has just been told that the City has found viable  
sight for fire station that serves the public interest, and I'll be interested to follow  
a bit of a history for St. Charles being on the CIP plan, many, many  
a
a
a
a
a
I
a
a
a
what that negotiation is. My inclination, because of the location and because of the  
long standing need, and the kind of the torturous search for this piece of property,  
is to support the City Council moving ahead with plans and specifications, but you  
know, the devil is always in the details, and I'm very sympathetic to the property  
owner as well, and  
I
think they need to get their value out of this property,  
certainly. But seems to fit the bill for what is required for not only the  
developments that’s happened at Old Hawthorne, but also this area -- the St.  
Charles and that Richland Road area in terms of the traffic flow, and the potential  
for  
a
traffic circle here,  
I
think, could straighten out some of the danger -- the  
don't know when we're ever going to  
dangerous traffic issues that exist right now.  
I
get to the point where we can deal with some of the improvement issues in St.  
Charles Road. Some of those monies were taken many years ago to create the  
bridges that happened at the -- over the creek actually for the commercial area that  
happened  
a
little bit south of there.  
At any rate, I'm prepared to support this, but  
I’ll be closely following negotiations with regard to whether  
for the property.  
a
fair price is offered  
FOWLER: So,  
be out in the hallway.  
explanation as to how they come to  
were notified that the City was interested in acquiring their property.  
comfort in anything that they said -- that they were now in position where having  
I
would like an explanation.  
hope that they're still here.  
public meeting and when it was that they  
did not find  
I
don't see that the property -- they must  
I
I
can't see them, but I'd like an  
a
I
a
tried to develop their own land, they now have the city wanting to purchase it.  
you help me understand that, somebody?  
Can  
CREECH: Sure, they are the contract deed purchasers of the piece of property, so  
they don't -- the owner of record, and somebody, hopefully, Nancy or somebody  
could better explain contract deed purchaser -- but we reached out to the property  
owner. And,  
I believe, she reached out to the contract deed purchasers and invited  
them to the public hearing.  
FOWLER: So, how long have they been the contract deed purchasers? They’ve had  
this as an option to purchase this land for some time?  
THOMPSON: So,  
I
would tell you that we have looked in the land records, and there  
contract for deed. So, we're not entirely sure. This is kind of  
is no record of  
a
anecdotal coming from the property owner. That’s something that will have to be  
sorted out as we go forward. At this point in time, we don't have clarity because we  
have not seen any paperwork on that particular issue. The actual property owner --  
I
don’t have it in front of me -- but the property owner that’s listed in the land  
records is different.  
FOWLER: And you've had conversation with the property owner?  
CREECH: Yes.  
FOWLER: So,  
I see that -- I'm sorry I don’t remember your name. Can you help us  
understand what the context is of this?  
KERKMANN:  
paperwork.  
I
actually have copies of the contract for deed and all of the  
don't know why it didn’t get filed. I've -- notified them as was  
I
I
I
supposed to -- it’s in the contract that we were going to purchase the land and it  
was lease to own. We’ve been making the payments on the land to Melissa Furlow,  
that’s who the owner is, and we're in close contact with her all the time. We've paid  
on it for an entire year. We also have paid the property taxes for the past two years  
-- it will be two years -- we just paid for this full year. So,  
I don't know why these  
copies didn’t actually get put on file. guess it's because once we make the balloon  
I
payment, the entire amount, then they would -- it would be in our name  
completely, if that makes sense.  
FOWLER: It does. So, you have an expectation of purchasing this land, and then this  
transaction with the property owner of records is interfering with that. Where --  
I
guess now there's an even more complex issue there about how you're  
compensated for the fact that you’ve been putting money into paying for this land  
only to find out that there's an offer to sell it to somebody else.  
KERKMANN: Correct.  
FOWLER: Oh dear, I’m so sorry.  
KERKMANN: Thank you. That’s nice to hear  
FOWLER: That sounds like a terrible set of circumstances.  
KERKMANN: Yeah, it is.  
best interest and they need  
wasn’t quite right. mean, we really didn't know anything about it that -- and so,  
I
mean, we understand that it's for the City's, you know,  
a
fire station. It’s just the way that it all went about --  
I
then we got -- actually, Melissa got the letter and she texted it to me -- about the  
meeting, the informational meeting for the parties. So that was really kind of like,  
you know, wow, like we don’t matter, they don’t care. Like who knew about this,  
why didn’t anybody say anything? And we even asked, do they want all of it or  
could we keep part of it at least, and they said they had phase one and two for all of  
it, and showed us the pictures and stuff, and it’s just really hard. We’ve worked on  
that land for two years -- just me and my fiancé. Homeless people were living  
there. You could even see past the road.  
we've spent thousands of dollars on renting equipment, like skid loaders and stuff  
to clean the whole area -- it looks like park now. mean, it's like -- it was  
completely overgrown with trees, there was mattresses, there was hypodermic  
needles. mean, we had to pick up all that, and take loads of trash -- just as two by  
I mean, we've cut down the dead trees,  
a
I
I
ourselves -- and everybody that lived around the area was so happy to see that, and  
we've met them all and they all wanted to know our plans and they were all excited  
about it and they were so happy developments weren’t going to be built there. And  
so we even kind of made friends with everybody in the neighborhood and they  
always stopped by to see how things were going. So it's just  
a lot of attachment,  
sentimental attachment, you know, our plans. And yeah, we want to help out, so  
we just to be compensated so that we can go purchase land somewhere else,  
guess, and start over there.  
I
THOMAS: Yeah, thanks. So,  
another pitch for public infrastructure expansion fees for these types of projects.  
This is going to cost just over $3 million. assume that's the land acquisition and the  
I want to just talk about another aspect of this and make  
I
building construction combined there, and it's clearly needed. Columbia is  
a
growing city. This is fire station #10. We have about 50,000 households. So, it seems  
that serve about 5,000 households with each fire station, and we're going to have  
5,000 households in  
a
decade or two, and we're going to need to keep doing this.  
public infrastructure  
So, it would seem very logical and fair if we simply required  
a
expansion fee from every new home that we permit construction of -- of about --  
$600 would do it -- because that would build up with the 5,000 households to create  
the funds for the next fire station. And then, we should also,  
I
believe, apply that  
one-time  
same principle to all of our other services and utilities that have  
a
infrastructure component as well as an ongoing an operations and service process.  
Thanks that’s all.  
Council Member Peters made a motion to proceed with the plans and  
specifications for proposed Fire Station #10. The motion was seconded by  
Council Member Skala.  
SKALA:  
I just want to comment that -- once again, I just want to make sure that  
some of us will be following this closely in terms of compensation as this moves  
forward.  
TREECE: This is inelegant at best, and I’m surprised it got to this level. And if we do  
move forward on it, I'm inclined to pull B378-21 off until there's some more fact  
finding.  
I don't feel -- there's clearly an issue between the lessor and the property  
owner. I don't know what it is. I'm not sure the City needs to be in the middle of it.  
don't want to authorize eminent domain and interrupt that relationship.  
I
FOWLER: I’m going to vote no on this for that same reason. I’m --  
I don't -- I'm trying  
to sort out in my head all the circumstances here, and understanding that it’s  
between the parties and it doesn't directly involve the City, but I'm really  
uncomfortable with this under these circumstances.  
PETERS: Well,  
delineate this and sort it out. I mean, rather than just --  
year. Why hasn’t this paperwork been put in place? What compensation does the  
current property owner need to pay these folks if they need -- mean, I'm not sure  
how to sort it out, but don't know that want to say let’s abandon this piece of  
property, and I'm not how we can ask the City to go forward without having  
motion -- you know, without some direction from the Council saying we need to  
I
guess  
I
would have  
a
question as to how we can move forward to  
I
mean they've had this for  
a
I
I
I
a
move forward and look at how we acquire this property. So,  
suggestions but I --  
I mean, I'm open to  
TREECE: My -- the only way -- look  
I can -- I’ll support the motion to proceed with  
the proposed construction at the location, but I'm not inclined to vote -- you know  
B378-21 is the actual authorizing the acquisition of property either by negotiation or  
eminent domain, and I'm not inclined to give staff the authority to do that at this  
point because I this was a surprise to me and I don’t like surprises.  
SKALA: That’s not required, is it?  
I mean, that you're authorizing eminent domain to  
-- you are authorizing the plans to proceed with the negotiation.  
TREECE: The lady’s motion is to proceed with plans and construction. Inherent in  
that there’s  
a
separate agenda item and the Acting Director made  
a
comment that  
it's unusual to have that authorization on the same agenda.  
GLASCOCK: It is, but we were requested by the property owner to do that.  
that’s why it's there.  
I
mean,  
PITZER: The same property owner? There are two property owners listed.  
GLASCOCK: The original property owner, the one that’s of record.  
PETERS: The one that has leased this property out it sounds to someone else and  
has some other -- yeah, I can see that.  
SKALA: Just  
a clarification -- point of order -- and that is what we're talking about  
right now -- the motion that was on the table and the second has to do with the  
proceed with plans and specifications, and there is  
--  
a separate issue with respect to  
TREECE:  
On the consent agenda is B378-21, which authorizes the acquisition of  
property, and the ordinance is crafted by negotiation or eminent domain.  
PETERS: You guys have any suggestions?  
TREECE: -- and eminent domain is not  
It's just forced negotiation.  
a taking -- it still -- we still have to pay for it.  
SKALA: Usually a last resort.  
PETERS: And,  
I mean, I'm not in favor of that, but I think we -- I mean, I don't know  
really what to do I guess even though it's my motion.  
PITZER: No, I agree. I mean something unusual is going on.  
SKALA: That's the predicament I'm in as well.  
TREECE: I’m happy to have staff take the next step on this, but I'm not inclined to --  
you all vote how you want on B378-21, but I'm going to object to it on the consent  
agenda.  
SKALA: I agree with you.  
THOMAS: Yeah,  
I was just going to say, it seems like a lack of transparency at the  
very least by the property owner to have been negotiating with the City and  
allowing it to get to this stage, but not informing their --  
the question of what a lease contract is -- go ahead John.  
PETERS: Yeah, we could use some clarification.  
I don't even understand  
GLASCOCK: Well,  
record.  
I
can't negotiate with anybody except the property owner of  
THOMAS: I realize that.  
GLASCOCK: So there's no way for me to negotiate with the people that spoke  
tonights  
PITZER: And if we're being --  
I mean, the City is rarely the low bidder here right. So,  
once the property owner -- I’m totally speculating here -- once they knew the City  
was interested, you know, they knew there's -- maybe there's an opportunity for  
larger check.  
a
THOMAS: Right, but, they may have reneged on an agreement with the other  
people, which isn’t necessarily our business, but --  
TREECE: Not our business.  
THOMAS: I’m trying to figure out what happened.  
PETERS: Yeah, except from an ethics standpoint or morality standpoint it seems  
like.  
SKALA: But  
I think your position is probably the -- at least the temporary solution to  
this issue is that is -- we are interested in the property and there is some  
negotiation that can occur, but for anything serious happens in terms of any kind of  
eminent domain, then we need to take a deep breath.  
PETERS: Yeah, so maybe we need to pull that the bill about the eminent domain off  
the consent agenda even though -- I don’t know if that’s --  
TREECE: You can’t do that, but when she calls the roll, Mr. Pitzer who votes first can  
say yes on all bills and resolutions except for B378-21, for which  
his -- I'm just saying -- if he's going to set the tone.  
I vote no, if that’s  
The motion made by Council Member Peters and seconded by Council Member  
Skala to proceed with the plans and specifications for proposed Fire Station #10  
was approved by voice vote with only Council Member Fowler voting no.  
VI. OLD BUSINESS  
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 fourth reading by the City Clerk.  
Community Development Director Tim Teddy provided a staff report.  
TEDDY: This item has been tabled twice. It is going to have to be tabled again  
because you don't have  
a finished revised plat as yet. The reason for that is -- it was  
tabled November 1. If you recall, the applicants were not present on that date.  
We’ve since met with them and talked with them, and they lost their surveyor so  
that individual will need to be replaced so they need  
a little more time to redraw  
the plat but, I'll show you what is being done. And in terms of the construction  
plans, it was Council's direction that these two streets, Sugar Maple and North  
Waterford Drive, which is within the Edgewood Waters Edge communities -- that  
those not join. So the area that is encircled there -- you can see  
a line -- that's  
something I've put in there just to indicate that what they intended to do is take  
a
lot known as Lot 179 -- that’s common area that’s used for drainage infrastructure  
purposes -- they will extend that across what is now shown as right-of-way. So  
they'll make approximately 60 feet or so of that street into  
the street will dead end at that point. And this was shown last time -- these blocks.  
Those still exist. There's been couple of what are called Type 3 barriers that have  
been added. Those are the construction fence sections that have the diagonal  
orange and white stripes so those are present now. So as indicated here, the  
developer will change the plat to eliminate the right-of-away connection and the  
street connection, so Sugar Maple will be dead end street within this subdivision.  
It won't be long dead end so it'll still meet emergency turnaround standards in  
conjunction with the intersecting street called Royale Plum. And this is just  
sketch plan that their design professional put together that shows the expansion of  
that Lot 179 so there'll be drainage way across there. And then this shows in  
a green space lot, and  
a
-
a
a
a
a
a
little more detail how they intend to grade that. You can see where the street dead  
ends. And, just to indicate with the cursor, it will dead end here. This is the  
property boundary down here, and then this would be  
Formerly, there was going to be street and there was going to be underground  
piping, so drainage, you know -- pipe drainage replaced with overland drainage  
there within swale. There will be little bit of berm also so there will be  
physical barrier to movement, even if someone was of mind to cross the grassed  
area. That's all have to offer for you tonight. We put in our memo table to  
a drainage way here acroos.  
a
a
a
a
a
a
I
February. In talking to the applicant, they think they could have the plat prepared  
earlier. They are here tonight.  
Christina Luebbert and Karen Turner spoke.  
LUEBBERT: My name is Christina Luebbert with Luebbert Engineering. I’m also -- we  
didn’t-- Gene Basinger passed away  
a few weeks ago so he is not going to be able to  
sign the revision of this plat. Another surveyor in our office, Ron Lueck, has agreed  
to review all of Gene’s work and help me make these changes to the plat so that we  
can go ahead and proceed with having it revised. Our plan would be to actually do  
that revision in the next couple of days. Ron goes south for the winter so I’m  
beating  
a
time deadline with him. And we would want to see this put on the  
consent agenda assuming that you like this proposed compromise -- this -- we got  
guidance from Mr. Glascock on this. This was kind of the direction he suggested that  
we go -- it’s the least amount of change to the plat. It's the least amount of change  
to the infrastructure plans and the least amount of effect to how this development  
would go forward while still compromising what the neighbors are looking for,  
which is no direct connection between the subdivisions. It does also allow, if we  
need to -- for instance, if the water department wants to make  
a
back feed  
connection into the water system, you know, this allows the utility connection so  
that, you know, we're not preventing that from going through there if needed, and  
we’ll have to -- we haven't had water plans drawn up because they won’t draw  
them up until  
I have a -- at least an idea that this is how the plat’s going to look  
when it’s done. So, we've been moving ahead with construction -- west of the  
creek is nearly complete. So we are really trying to get this put to bed and know  
that we have taken everything that you've given us under advisement and made  
a
sincere effort to appease everybody. So we would want to see this move forward  
as soon as possible. We would -- of course I'm sure the staff would need to go back  
through and recheck it when we do  
a
resubmittal, but it should be pretty  
straightforward with this just one minor change. You have any additional questions  
about what we’re proposing?  
TREECE: I’m not sure it can be placed on the consent agenda if you are amending  
the plat. It may have to go back on old business so I’m not prepared to make that  
representation to you.  
LUEBBERT: We would just want it as soon as possible on the next available agenda  
then.  
TREECE: Very good.  
SKALA: Yeah, that's the question  
recommendation that if there were  
I
had.  
I
just --  
I
wondered -- there was  
a
a
tabling motion to be considered it would be  
sometime in February, and you're suggesting --  
LUEBBERT: We would be prefer it not be that late because we're going to try to get  
our revisions to staff this week, and we would like to see in on  
because we want to keep this moving forward.  
TREECE: I would too. I’d to get rid of this.  
a sooner agenda  
LUEBBERT: So would we.  
LUEBBERT: And the owners are here and Ron Lueck is here if you have  
question for either of them.  
a specific  
TREECE: Sounds good. Thank you for being here. It makes it easier.  
TREECE: Are you good with this?  
TURNER: [Karen Turner] I’m --  
I
think we’re good with this, and we appreciate  
everybody’s help, the engineers, the developers --  
AMIN: Can you state your name, just for the record for the public.  
TREECE: Karen Turner.  
TREECE:  
I think this is a good solution. I know it’s not ideal, but I think it's a great  
compromise.  
Mayor Treece made a motion to table B284-21 to the December 20, 2021 Council  
Meeting. The motion was seconded by Council Member Skala and approved  
unanimously by voice vote.  
VII. CONSENT AGENDA  
The following bills were given second reading and the resolutions were  
read by the City Clerk.  
B373-21  
B374-21  
Reimposing a sales tax of one-eighth of one percent for the purpose of  
providing funding for local parks.  
Voluntary annexation of property located on the east side of Bearfield Road  
and north of Woodhaven Road (4000 S. Bearfield Road); establishing  
permanent M-OF (Mixed-use Office) zoning (Case No. 304-2021).  
B375-21  
B376-21  
Approving the PD Plan Major Revision for “Sonic of Columbia, Hyde Park”  
located on the east side of Buttonwood Drive and south of Nifong  
Boulevard (3700 Buttonwood Drive); approving a statement of intent (Case  
No. 214-2021).  
Vacating a utility easement on Lot 1A within the Alpha Phi Subdivision  
Replat located on the east side of Providence Road (900 Providence  
Road) (Case No. 79-2021).  
B377-21  
B378-21  
Vacating a utility easement on Lots 3 and 4 within Woodrail - Plat No. 6  
located on the east side of Westcreek Circle (Case No. 297-2021).  
Authorizing the acquisition of property for the proposed construction of Fire  
Station #10 to be located north of and west of St. Charles Road, at the  
bend with the intersection of E. Richland Road.  
B379-21  
B380-21  
Authorizing a program services contract with the Missouri Department of  
Health and Senior Services for the overdose data to action program.  
Authorizing an equitable sharing agreement and certification with the U.S.  
Department of Justice and U.S. Department of the Treasury detailing FY  
2021 receipts and expenditures of shared funds by the Police Department.  
B381-21  
Authorizing a memorandum of understanding with The Curators of the  
University of Missouri, on behalf of University of Missouri Healthcare, for  
medical support of law enforcement operations through the development of  
a Tactical EMS Program.  
B382-21  
B383-21  
B384-21  
B385-21  
B386-21  
B387-21  
Authorizing a contract with the Missouri Department of Transportation -  
Highway Safety and Traffic Division for acceptance of a grant for a DWI  
traffic enforcement unit.  
Authorizing a contract with the Missouri Department of Transportation -  
Highway Safety and Traffic Division for acceptance of a grant for DWI  
enforcement relating to sobriety checkpoints and saturation patrols.  
Authorizing a contract with the Missouri Department of Transportation -  
Highway Safety and Traffic Division for acceptance of a grant for dedicated  
enforcement of hazardous moving violations.  
Authorizing a contract with the Missouri Department of Transportation -  
Highway Safety and Traffic Division for acceptance of a grant to conduct  
special traffic enforcement of hazardous moving violations.  
Authorizing a contract with the Missouri Department of Transportation -  
Highway Safety and Traffic Division for acceptance of a youth alcohol  
enforcement grant to conduct compliance checks.  
Authorizing a first amendment to PCS antenna agreement and  
memorandum of first amendment to PCS antenna agreement with  
T-Mobile USA Tower LLC for the lease of City-owned property located at  
1400 Ballenger Lane (Fire Station No. 5).  
R185-21  
R186-21  
R187-21  
Setting a public hearing: proposed installation of traffic calming devices on  
Bray Avenue between Fairview Road and Bray Court.  
Setting a public hearing: proposed construction of sanitary sewer  
rehabilitation project #9 in the Business Loop 70 and downtown areas.  
Setting a public hearing: proposed design and construction of an  
automated debris removal system at the Wastewater Treatment Plant -  
Wetlands Treatment Unit #3; providing for construction of the proposed  
improvement using a design/build contract.  
R188-21  
R189-21  
Authorizing a contract with the Central Missouri Humane Society for 2022  
animal control and municipal shelter services.  
Authorizing a first amendment to the agency receipt/agent authorization  
contract with GunBusters, LLC for the destruction of firearms seized by or  
surrendered to the Police Department.  
R190-21  
Approving a project (within the meaning of Chapter 349, Revised Statutes  
of Missouri) of The Industrial Development Authority of Boone County,  
Missouri for Freedom House I Apartments, to be located in the City of  
Columbia, Missouri.  
The bills were given third reading and the resolutions read by the City Clerk with  
the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: PITZER, PETERS (except for B378-21  
on which she voted no), TREECE (except for B378-21 on which he voted no),  
FOWLER (except for B378-21 on which she voted no), WANER (except for B378-21  
on which she voted no), SKALA (except for B378-21 on which he voted no),  
THOMAS (except for B378-21 on which he voted no). VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bills  
declared enacted, except for B378-21, which was defeated, and resolutions  
declared adopted, reading as follows:  
VIII. NEW BUSINESS  
None.  
IX. INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING  
The following bills were introduced by the Mayor unless otherwise  
indicated, and all were given first reading.  
B388-21  
Granting a waiver and design adjustment relating to the proposed Final  
Plat of Hardy Plat 1 for sidewalk construction on the north side of Highway  
KK (5971 S. Highway KK); setting forth a condition for payment in lieu of  
sidewalk construction (Case No. 318-2021).  
B389-21  
B390-21  
B391-21  
Approving the Final Plat of “Hardy Plat 1” located on the north side of  
Highway KK and approximately 3,200 feet west of Scott Boulevard (5971  
S. Highway KK) (Case No. 318-2021).  
Authorizing reconstruction of the pavement, curb, gutter, sidewalk and  
driveway approaches along Walnut Street between College Avenue and  
Old Highway 63 North; calling for bids through the Purchasing Division.  
Authorizing a right of use license permit with Missouri Alpha Chapter of Pi  
Beta Phi House Corporation for the installation, maintenance and  
operation of parking spaces and landscaping within a portion of the  
rights-of-way on the north side of Rollins Street and the alleyway behind  
511 Rollins Street.  
B392-21  
Authorizing application to the United States Department of Transportation  
Federal Aviation Administration and the Missouri Department of  
Transportation for airport capital assistance grants in 2022.  
B393-21  
B394-21  
Authorizing a program services contract with the Missouri Department of  
Health and Senior Services for maternal child health services.  
Authorizing a program services contract with the Missouri Department of  
Health and Senior Services for epidemiology and laboratory capacity  
enhancing detection expansion services for the provision or  
implementation of COVID-19 response activities; amending the FY 2022  
Annual Budget by appropriating funds.  
B395-21  
Amending the FY 2022 Annual Budget by appropriating funds for expenses  
associated with the overdose data to action program services contract with  
the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services.  
B396-21  
B397-21  
Amending the FY 2022 Annual Budget by appropriating funds for the Fire  
Department’s bay heater maintenance and replacement project.  
Authorizing an agreement with Boone County, Missouri, on behalf of its  
Office of Emergency Management, for the installation of an emergency  
siren and supporting infrastructure in Louisville Park.  
B398-21  
Approving the Final Plat of “Concorde Office & Industrial Plaza Plat 12-A”  
located on the east side of Maguire Boulevard and approximately 0.7 miles  
south of Stadium Boulevard; authorizing performance contracts (Case No.  
302-2021).  
X. REPORTS  
REP91-21  
RubinBrown LLC Utility Billing Audit Scope of Work.  
Finance Director Matthew Lue introduced Rick Feldt of RubinBrown, and  
they were available for questions. Maria Oropallo, Chair of the Finance  
Advisory and Audit Committee spoke, and the Council asked questions  
and discussed the report.  
LUE: Mayor, members of the City Council, Rick Feldt from RubinBrown is here  
tonight to discuss the proposed scope of the utility billing audit. And then if you  
have any questions after that, I’m here to answer whatever.  
TREECE:  
want to add?  
FELDT: No. I’m happy to answer any questions.  
TREECE: Have you -- also see Maria Oropallo here with Finance Audit and Advisory  
chance to communicate -- do you like this? Do you  
I noticed -- I know you’ve been here all night, Mr. Feldt -- anything you  
I
Committee. Have you had  
want to say anything on this?  
a
OROPALLO: Thank you, Chair of the Finance and Audit Committee. One of the  
features of what we expected from performance audit -- management audit -- is  
whether the processes and procedures meet Council objectives. As Mr. Skala often  
states, the devil is in the details. While the areas look like -- we’re looking at tasks  
what they are actually going to tell us is build story, and the story is -- will speak  
clearly to the Council’s stated objectives in the Strategic Plan about equity. The  
Finance and Audit Committee spent lot of time during our discussions talking  
a
-
-
a
a
about how do these processes affect our residents, and Rick captured everything  
that we brought up with this list. So again, you’re looking at something that says  
customer billing cycles  
. That's going to tell us something that we might or might  
not change, but it's going to tell us something, so  
really pleased with the -- this plan. Thank you.  
I think the Committee -- we were  
FOWLER:  
to the same issue, but we identified in conversation with the Finance and Audit  
Committee hardship that we put on our residents regarding billing cycles, and  
just want to make sure that this audit includes some assessment of that and to see  
I have a comment. I just want to make sure, and I think Maria is referring  
a
I
whether or not we can find  
residents.  
a
path forward to alleviate that hardship on our  
FELDT:  
Yes, we did talk about that with the Finance and Audit Committee. Also,  
with the -- we also talked with the Water and Light Board also. But we are going to  
review the billing cycles and compare that to some of our other -- some other  
public sector clients that we have and make some recommendations, if, you know,  
possible  
FOWLER: Thank you.  
PITZER: What’s the order when you bring this back? When you have findings, what's  
the order that you are going to go through -- come to us first or the committee first?  
FELDT: Well, what  
talking with --  
I
would do, or what we were thinking about doing, you know,  
doing the audit, talking with management, getting the  
recommendations to the Finance and Audit Committee and the Water and Light  
Board, get their feedback, and then when everybody is in agreement bring that to  
the City Council -- the report. So we’ll vet all the recommendations with the  
appropriate parties before we bring it -- the draft report back to the City Council.  
PITZER: Right, yeah, there was  
a
questions last time, about like  
a
working audit  
document is closed document, but then once it's presented in an open meeting  
a
then -- there's there was some nuance to that.  
was just the order in which things happened mattered.  
I don’t think it was a big deal, but it  
FELDT:  
I mean, yeah, the order can be any order that you want. Generally, it's best --  
that’s within the ordinances and regulations but we’re happy to do it whatever way  
the City wants to do it. You looked puzzled or have a question?  
PITZER:  
I think we should see it or it should be available to us before it is available  
through a public records request. That makes sense?  
FELDT: Yes, that makes sense, and I would agree with that, yeah.  
TREECE: Alright,  
let's proceed.  
I think the scope is good, and I think the price is great. I think it --  
FELDT: Thank you.  
TREECE: Thanks for being here, it’s helpful.  
REP92-21  
Request for Proposals for Public Access Channel and Community Access  
Center.  
Cultural Affairs Manager Sarah Dresser provided a staff report, and the  
Council asked questions to which staff responded.  
DRESSER: Sarah Dresser, Manager for the Office of Cultural Affairs. We are bringing  
a
draft request for proposal for Council input for either nonprofit or other  
governmental agencies to operate public access channel and community assess  
center. After your November 1 meeting and not renewing the contract with  
Vidwest, that put us back to going back to redraft an RFP. And will just kind of hit  
some of the highlights of this draft document. The scope of services is substantially  
a
I
similar to the past. However, in our RFP that has been drafted, an organization  
could propose either doing public access channel or another broadcast format that  
could be presented as an option. Some of the other some scope services would be  
similar, like operating community access center, providing training, maintenance  
of equipment that has been provided by the City, as well as some additional  
services provided to other community organizations. In addition, resulting  
a
a
a
contract award would be for $35,000 and renewed for two additional years. And  
then the thought would be that every three years, we would reopen the RFP  
process. So,  
I
also have Cale Turner with Purchasing here tonight if there's any  
specific questions about the RFP process, and I'm happy to take any questions as  
well.  
TREECE: So I like the -- structuring the payment with the five or six deliverables,  
DRESSER: Right. So that would be an additional adjustment to  
a future contract --  
would be more specific payment schedule based on different performance  
a
measures that are met throughout the term of each year's contract. So that would  
also be an update that we would plan to make.  
TREECE: To me that helps reinforce that the City is buying services for  
access channel. We're not subsidizing wedding videos and other really nice things  
that taxpayers don’t pay for. This is public access channel with clear public  
a
public  
a
benefits, public service announcements, whatever it may be. So,  
good addition.  
I
think that's  
a
PETERS:  
with is that they cannot access the cable channel to have this on, and  
understand -- maybe just haven’t read your RFP correctly -- but what is that we are  
asking a new company or Vidwest to be able to step up and do?  
I
really just have  
a
question. You know, what Vidwest ran into problems  
I
don't  
I
DRESSER: So, that would still be an option that could be presented, but we also kind  
of opened it up as well, if an alternative form of broadcast is something that could  
be maybe better achieved from  
a particular group -- that would be something that  
we in this draft are saying would consider in lieu of using the cable access channel  
- some other broadcast format that they would propose.  
-
PETERS: Do you have any examples?  
DRESSER:  
I
think there's various streaming services that are available, so again, that  
know that's been talked about -- as kind of public media's  
would be --  
I
transforming, that’s been brought up in conversations, so, yeah, we would be open  
to considering that.  
PETERS: Okay, thank you.  
THOMAS: Yeah, thanks for bringing this back Sarah. First of all, just sort of an  
observation --  
I
thought really the terminology we were talking about was  
a public  
access channel and  
a
community media center where people come in and use  
equipment to develop media. I've not heard the term community access center but,  
it’s probably not a --  
DRESSER: And that would be part of the scope of services is  
center. So I might have failed to word how it was written in the RFP.  
a community access  
THOMAS: Okay, well never mind that.  
structured payment schedule upon delivery of, you know, pieces of  
work. Do just want to check and think you kind of addressed this, the third  
I
do have  
a
few questions.  
I
also like the  
a
scope of  
I
installment requires three continual months of channel programming -- so that  
wouldn’t have to be through fiber cable? It could be through internet streaming if  
whatever organization gets the contract is not able to get  
the broadband provider?  
a fiber connection from  
DRESSER: Right, so that was just kind of  
a
template example of how something  
would be structured so should, for example, the use of the cable access and PEG  
not be what we go forward with, that would maybe be altered to fit what, you  
know, vender we would go with -- if that makes sense.  
THOMAS:  
Okay  
perfect,  
and  
then,  
under  
additional  
services  
for  
community  
organizations, the RFP asks for complimentary membership for the community  
organizations who are funded by the City, and is that the cultural arts program grant  
recipients?  
DRESSER: Right, that’s traditionally what it’s been in the past -- is our 20-30 arts  
organizations that receive funding  
complimentary memberships to us as well.  
from  
our  
office  
have  
been  
given  
the  
THOMAS: Yeah, just want to sort of do the math, and if there’s 30 of those  
organizations and they all you know take up the maximum amount of their  
membership, that $35,000 that's being awarded to the contractor will only go just  
over  
a
$1000 per organization, and not do any of the other things that we want the  
just think the expectation shouldn't be that  
contract to do. So, you know, maybe --  
I
every organization can have live streamed events all the time and things like that.  
And then the final question -- in the sample agreement, it says that payment of  
funds are conditional upon certification that services and videos produced,  
broadcast, and streamed are done in  
with Disabilities Act and 28 CFR Part 35, which  
legislation. If the contractor is using Mediacom cable or Youtube internet  
streaming, and their delivery is not compliant -- mean does this mean, for  
a
manner that complies with the Americans  
I
assume is some other federal  
I
example, that every program has to have a sign language interpreter?  
DRESSLER: You might be able to answer better, Nancy, I think it --  
THOMPSON: When it comes to programming that goes -- that we produce for cable  
access, it does have to be accessible, so it would have to have all the accessibilities  
feature whether or not -- it doesn't have to have  
would need close captioning or something else that would that would allow that to  
happen. So, when your and when your streaming, the same way -- because  
a sign language interpreter, but it  
-
they’re producing public comment that's being purchased with public funds.  
THOMAS: And is the ability to comply with that all with the producer of the  
programming or does it also depend at least some extent on the platform that's  
used, such as Mediacom’s cable channel.  
THOMPSON: We wouldn’t dictate to them how it has to be done. It’s just when the  
final product gets done, that’s what has to be done. So their providers don’t  
necessarily, you know -- they can purchase -- the contractor can purchase from  
whomever they need to purchase from, but the end product has to be accessible,  
and their facilities have to be accessible if they’re offering their facilities to the  
public and using the funds.  
THOMAS: Yeah, great. Alright, that's all my questions. Thank you.  
PITZER: Yeah, my question is about the two one-year renewals that you’re  
proposing?  
So, how would those -- would those renewals be triggered if they met  
all of the metrics or what?  
DRESSER: That was my understanding with just consulting with the Law Department  
-- is that that would the plan is that -- you know, they’re fulfilling their contractual  
obligations, they would be set up for the next term.  
PITZER: Right, okay. And then, some of those were like setting up the service the  
first year, so would they roll into, you know -- would they still apply for the  
following years?  
DRESSER: Yeah, that's  
a good question. I think it would be assumed that they have  
met that if it was kind of carried over from like that first initial signing.  
PITZER: Right, okay. Yeah, so  
I
guess my comment would be that it probably is  
beneficial to everybody involved if this body wasn’t deliberating the renewable of  
the contract every year at budget time.  
TREECE: We would only deliberate the appropriation necessary to fund it.  
REP93-21  
Capital Improvement Project (CIP) Process.  
Finance Director Lue provided a staff report, and the Council asked  
questions to which staff responded.  
LUE: So staff would just like some guidance from Council to develop goals and  
outcomes for the meeting that we will have regarding the CIP. This will be like  
a
workshop that we will have with Council, and we just needed  
guidance to see what the outcomes are that you would all want.  
a
little bit of  
FOWLER: Mr. Lue, I'm really excited about the idea that we could have  
improvement project workshop and that it's -- I’m disappointed that it’s only  
annual, but understand staff has other things to do than constantly revisit for CIP  
a
capital  
I
with us. Is this something that would also be open to members of the public? Are  
they considered to be a target audience for that workshop or is it just Council.  
LUE:  
I think this will be a Council -- this will be for Council, and then once we go  
thought the CIP process, those would be the things that would involve the  
community.  
FOWLER: So, and they’ll get to attend though. It will be an open meeting.  
LUE: Yes.  
FOWLER: So, as far as how that would be put together,  
not to get too excited when it assigns location to something in one of your  
reports, rather than -- but would like us to, when we’re going through that  
I have learned -- thank you --  
a
I
workshop, identify which ward is benefitted by the project because there’s some  
ambiguity in our understanding of that. And so, whether or not the workshop goes  
through ward by ward and says okay in the First Ward, there are these things, or in  
the Second Ward there are these things -- but it would be really helpful because we  
are faced with questions often about equity between the wards and  
I
would like us  
to have as much conversation so that we can either shine  
equitable or shine a light that we’re not being equitable.  
a light that we’re being  
THOMAS: Something  
capital improvement project was identified as either  
expansion project, meaning it's expanding the capacity of one of our systems to  
accommodate larger number of customers than before verses maintenance or  
replacement project, which is equally as much needed, but doesn't actually expand  
the capacity of the system because think there's logic to paying for those  
I
think would be very helpful going forward would be if every  
a
public infrastructure  
a
a
I
a
different types of projects in different ways. And if that was laid out, then it would  
be possible to do the analysis on how much we’re spending on expansion projects  
versus maintenance and replacement.  
LUE: So, theoretically, maintenance and replacement would not be in the CIP in this  
form. Those things are operating expenses that would happen through the  
operating budget. Some of the larger projects though could end up on CIP.  
THOMAS: Yeah,  
maintenance and replacement and don’t expand capacity, and there are some that  
combine both of those. And believe they should be -- it should be estimated what  
I
mean, there are definitely projects on the CIP that are  
I
percentage of the project cost is for expansion and what percentage is for  
maintenance and replacement.  
SKALA: Just  
a question. I certainly want to endorse Mr. Fowler’s suggestion that this  
be broken out in terms of wards. We do have this issue with ward equity. That’s  
always hot topic. -- generally speaking, we do get the reports for some of the CIP  
improvements and so on, and they are, if I’m not mistaken, broken out generally  
a
I
along those lines, but  
very much appreciated.  
I think a little bit more attention to detail for that would be  
PETERS:  
I would just like to know, sort of what is currently being done -- like what's  
been finished, what's currently being done, and then what's the future? You know,  
somehow or another, sort of split that up so we have some idea of where we've  
been what we've done with our current maybe CIP money, and that, you know,  
what we're in the middle of and then what we're hoping to do before this comes up  
again.  
PITZER:  
I
guess  
I
don’t see this as  
a
discussion of like individual projects and an  
was thinking of this more of like how  
update on where we are on specific projects.  
I
the CIP process comes together -- you know, what you do with it, what -- how it  
relates with the budget, you know, that kind of more like -- overarching discussion  
about what it is and what we can glean from it. You know, all the other things --  
some of them start to get pretty tricky and dicey.  
funding sources too and, you know, stuff that’s voter approved, and,  
you can get down rabbit hole pretty quick. So, was looking at it more of like an  
I
mean, you can start talking about  
I
mean, it’s --  
a
I
overview on how it comes together, what you use it for, how it relates to our  
budget, things like that.  
LUE: Okay, one thing,  
will be one time like an annual CIP workshop that we have with you all, but we  
will be presenting, like -- it’s in the plans to present some sort of quarterly report  
I think, to sort of keep in mind with this process, is this -- this  
a
a
to you to kind of let -- update you on these things as well because that was one of  
the recommendations from the audit.  
PETERS: So now,  
I guess I need some clarity. I was thinking we were looking at  
specific projects, but from what you're saying, you would -- could you elaborate on  
what you were anticipating with this?  
PITZER: Well,  
I thought is came from, you know, not only the audit, but also we had  
some discussion at the last budget hearings about what exactly the CIP -- you know,  
how stuff got on there, how -- what it meant once was on there, how that  
translated to the budget because there would be things for like the 2022 CIP project  
that were not in the budget because they'd already been funded some other way or  
something like that. And there was --  
I know we had questions kind of like -- what  
is the CIP really and what are we using it for and -- because there’s stuff that isn’t  
on the CIP that gets done, and why isn't it on the CIP and how does that get --  
happen? So, that's where I thought this whole idea came from.  
PETERS: And  
it.  
I don’t object to that. I just didn't hadn't thought of or don’t remember  
LUE: What I'm hearing basically is that we need some sort of overarching discussion  
that would identify few pieces of the CIP and then maybe for your part, Ms.  
a
Peters, that we would do that on the quarterly basis to kind of break down those  
pieces that you want to see.  
PETERS: That would be fine and that does include the ward -- what ward we’re  
talking about.  
LUE: Yes.  
PETERS: We can always do this a second time this year if we have to.  
LUE: Yeah.  
PETERS:  
I mean, you know, like if we -- the first one is overarching and then the  
second one we’re still --  
LUE: Yeah, that’s fine as well.  
TREECE: And the realty is Director Lue and his department do  
everything they do is a continuous improvement.  
LUE: I appreciate that.  
a
great job, and  
PETERS: At least it continuously informs us of what’s going on.  
TREECE: Correct.  
PETERS: So it much more helpful.  
TREECE: Right.  
PETERS: Yeah, I agree.  
REP94-21  
Closure of the Uncovered Floors of the Fifth and Walnut Street and the  
Short Street Municipal Parking Structures During the Winter Months.  
Acting Public Works Director Shane Creech provided a staff report, and  
the Council asked questions to which staff responded.  
TREECE: I get the sense this was done before you became Acting Director.  
CREECH: Yes, this is  
a yearly report of practice since 2017. We just want to close the  
top floor of both the Short Street and Fifth and Walnut garage to help us prioritize  
snow removal during the winter months. Use of the garages are such that we don't  
anticipate any parking demand issues.  
TREECE: But  
I
heard during the downtown hotel discussion that our garages were  
100 percent full, and we couldn’t accommodate any more cars.  
CREECH: Now there could be parking permits that would -- might not be somebody  
in the spot, but with the permits and the public parking they could have been full.  
That’s possible, I suppose.  
TREECE: But there’s adequate capacity now to move all the demand below the  
uncovered portions without impacting --  
CREECH: The Fifth and Walnut garage -- the top floor is currently closed while we  
wait to take care of some things there.  
On the Short Street garage, there's just a  
couple reserved places -- spots, and what parking staff tells me is that there's  
capacity to do this.  
TREECE: And then what about the Tiger Hotel garage there? They lease the entire  
top floor.  
CREECH: That one we don’t do this.  
TREECE: That’s their problem.  
CREECH: Yup.  
FOWLER: Can  
I just ask the obvious question, may I ask? So, the reason why you  
close the top floors is because you don’t want to be up there removing snow, and  
instead you want your equipment down on streets working on your priority routes?  
Is that correct?  
CREECH: Correct.  
FOWLER: Okay.  
CREECH: Staffing issue.  
FOWLER: Sure. Even though it’s pretty exciting to watch the snow come over the  
edge of parking garage.  
Street garage is at the University, and we watched them clear the top floor all the  
time. So, but can understand why you'd rather not do that and have your  
I used to work right across the street from whatever the Hitt  
I
equipment out on the road instead.  
CREECH: And, we can always open it back up if we saw utilization such that we  
needed to. There’s no reason why we couldn’t do that.  
TREECE: Thank you.  
REP95-21  
Downtown Community Improvement District (CID) Board of Directors -  
Annual Membership and Membership Change Due to a Resignation.  
Mayor Treece commented.  
TREECE:  
The Downtown CID Board of Directors has submitted two -- one proposed  
vacancy and then proposed slate of  
candidate for an unexpired term due to  
a
a
candidates for the new terms ending in 2025, and per their bylaws, I'm rejecting  
that slate, and returning it back to the Downtown CID so that they can submit an  
alternate slate, and so we have  
choose from.  
a choice of -- so that I have a choice of candidates to  
REP96-21  
REP97-21  
Business Loop Community Improvement District - End of Fiscal Year  
Report.  
Mayor Treece commented and asked if there were any questions.  
TREECE: Business Loop CID has submitted their end of fiscal year report. Any  
questions, or comments? I don’t see Dr. Gardner here.  
Final Integrated Electric Resource and Master Plan and Task Force  
Reports.  
Jay Hasheider, Chair of the Integrated Electric Resource and Master Plan  
Task Force, spoke, and the Council asked questions and discussed the  
report.  
TREECE:  
Chair.  
This has been three years in the making.  
see Tom Jensen, the Chair of Water and Light Advisory Board, here.  
see Robin Wenneker, Dick Parker. Who am missing? Anybody else on  
know you have waded through  
consultant. like the way you  
I
see Jay Hashieder here, the  
I
I
see  
Kim Fallis.  
I
I
the -- oh, thank you, sorry. Thank you all so much.  
lot of heavy data and information and managed  
I
a
a
I
portrayed the information.  
one, and don't know how much council wants to do at this point.  
at minimum we probably want to have work session with staff to consider their  
implementation of this process in terms of demand load, load shedding. I've got  
some pet questions we can ask them now or later, but Jay, don’t know if there’s  
anything you want to add, and then know Tom and Kim and Robin and Dick and  
others are here as well. I want to be respectful of you being here.  
HASHIEDER: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. want to just address three things. First I’d like  
to talk about the Task Force. First of all, my name is Jay Hashieder. I’m Chair of the  
Integrated Electric Resource Master Plan Task Force. And I’d like to talk about our  
I
like the reference to the minority report if there was  
I
I
would suggest  
a
a
I
I
I
group and then I'd also like to explain just briefly the -- how the reports work  
together. And then I’d like to talk about the process that we’re -- we’ve been in and  
are going forward with. First of all, the Task Force --  
think you hear lot of great commendations about people and the work that they  
do, but just want to underscore the work that this group has done. As you  
I just want to provide kudos. I  
a
I
mentioned, three years in the making, we’ve had 16 different -- 16 or more  
different people volunteering to participate. Five of them, as you point out, are  
here tonight, besides myself, and it's just been  
a
real experience to see the  
dedication that these people have brought to our meetings, the passion for the  
importance of the subject matter that we’re dealing with, and also the willingness  
for everybody to listen to other people and have the conversations that help craft  
something that is representative of the group as  
a
whole, and not just some single  
want to  
voices. So, it’s been an honor to service as their Chair. And then secondly,  
I
explain -- you have gotten three reports tonight. Two of them come from Siemens,  
and they are addressing the Integrated Resource and then the Master Plan in two  
separate studies. And then along with that, you've gotten the IRP report -- the  
IERMP report -- and  
I just want to point out that our report is meant to just provide  
highlights of what we think are the highlights in these other two documents. Some  
observations, some findings, and then perspectives on some select topics that are  
germane to the issues that we have in front of us, and specifics -- the new  
generation sources, the value of solar, advanced metering infrastructure, the  
master planning, which of course deals with all the infrastructure of how we're  
delivering our electricity throughout the distribution system, the assessment of our  
transmission options, the capital projects that encompass all the financing that this  
going to take, and then the non-wires alternatives. So, those are the specific  
highlights and perspectives that we put into our report that we will hope that you  
can read along with the Siemens report, and then, hopefully, make some -- give  
you some guidance, advice on how to then direct the city in these endeavors.  
Lastly, I'd like to talk about the process. This has been  
the standpoint that very few, if any other task force, have been so intimately  
involved in not only choosing the contractor for study like this, and -- but also  
working with the contractor and the staff, and in the process that we've had to,  
guess, invent and figure out how to accomplish certain things because trying to  
make group, like diverse group like ours, along with the staff in developing  
report, both from the consultants and from us has been unique. So, we are feeling  
our way through this process. We’re not sure where we’re we’re not sure what’s  
a very unique process, from  
a
I
a
a
a
-
next. At the end of three years, we have spent something on the order of -- the City  
has spent something on the -- $800,000 for the contractor. According to my  
calculations, it’s roughly about $100,000 worth of staff time and volunteer time in  
these meetings that  
looking at is going to end up spending in the neighborhood of  
the next 20 years so it's pretty important. And then you might even add the  
I
was talking about. And the study itself -- the work that we're  
a
billion dollars over  
importance that this is about climate change as well -- dealing very intimately with  
how much the City is going to produce in terms of greenhouse gases in these next  
20 years. So it's  
a
very important piece of work, and for it to be left to the end of  
a
meeting as the final thing of  
a
long agenda seems to be not exactly what we were  
expecting. And so, I'm not sure how the Council envisions going forward. But at this  
point, we feel that we have done the work that you’ve asked us to do in our  
mission statement, and we're going to move on to the third part of this which is the  
cost of service and rate design. And our next meeting is scheduled in late January to  
accomplish that. And so with all -- with that,  
I
certainly would entertain any  
questions that you have, and we certainly have some experts here tonight -- some  
authors on the different subjects to answer.  
FOWLER: So, thanks Jay and to the members of the Task Force.  
I counted how many  
meetings you had, and if add in the two meetings that you’ve appeared before us,  
that’s at least 56 meetings that you’ve had over three years, and I'm very grateful  
for the amount of time you’ve each invested in that. So,  
the time of use demand charges -- the future of time of use demand charges that  
are mentioned in your summary report, and know that that’s also topic of other  
utilities because pay the utility bills at my employer, which is -- uses different  
I sort of a narrowed in on  
I
a
I
a
provider, and they’re sending us literature hoping we’ll adopt that as well. So, what  
concerns me about that going forward is -- as you know, we have at least 14,000  
households that are burdened by the cost of their housing -- low income families,  
and in lots of reasons, they end up in housing that is not energy efficient, and so  
a
time of use demand charges may affect them disproportionally if we aren’t  
successful in making energy efficiency improvements to those housing units. And  
while that’s not our problem per say, it’s  
success with in the past. Back when there was lots of federal money for  
weatherization, we didn’t have high number of landlords taking advantage of that  
in their rental property. So, wonder if you have any guidance for us -- when know  
there wasn’t component to this that talked about demand side management or  
energy efficiency, and that you recommend that we undertake and have different  
study for that -- but do you have any guidance for us on how we might go about -- as  
we look at those new technologies and if we go into -- to the extent that  
understand this automated metering system that you can read from afar, which  
would then enable us to go into time of use demand rate structure -- do you have  
a
problem that we haven’t had much  
a
I
I
a
a
I
a
any suggestions for us on where we might go looking for better strategies for  
energy efficiency so we can try and get ahead of the fact that we -- at least I can see  
a
disproportionate impact on our low-income families as we move along the  
technology line for the delivery of electric.  
HASHEIDER: You’ve targeted subject area that has some overlap between the  
a
work that we’ve done and what we’re going to be doing. The time of use rates is  
something that’s in our meetings up ahead. The other side of that is the gap that  
has occurred in this study, which was expected to see some reports about demand  
side management and energy efficiency programming that could be added, and it  
was not complete. It very much just wasn’t -- was left undone. And so, it points out  
a
deficiency in this study that we point out in our report. But  
I think the very central  
target of your question is how do we as community make the rental units more  
a
efficient -- by what means do we do that and how do we prevent that from then  
leveraging higher rents to the people that are living in those housing -- those  
houses, and  
question. It is  
nibble around the edges on it, but basically it’s  
incentives. And, so think that codes are certainly outside the purview of our  
think that the possibility of incentives and some other creative programs could  
I
honestly don't know that we will be able to answer that particular  
conundrum and think there are some things that you can do to  
combination of codes and  
but  
a
I
a
I
-
I
potentially come out of an efficiency study, which could be done as  
this one.  
a follow up to  
FOWLER:  
I
don’t want us to fall on the path of incorporating more technology in  
just see that that's going to be big  
appreciate your reference to -- because it is  
how we deliver and regulate electric services.  
I
a
gap that’s going to get wider, and  
about codes and incentives. Thank you.  
I
THOMAS: So yes, thanks all of you for all of the work that you’ve done, and  
I
agree,  
we can't just look at this report now and move on. So,  
should have a work session.  
I think I heard you say we  
TREECE: Yeah, I’d like to have staff come back with their response, and frankly,  
implementation plan on this because it does have significant budget impacts.  
think we need, as Council, to discuss whether we’re doing the AMI, you know,  
smart meters. I’ve got some transmission line questions that I want staff’s --  
THOMAS: And think it would be good if we could do that quite soon, whilst this is  
I
a
I
hot and have the Task Force -- and could we get the consultant, Siemens, at least on  
a video call so that we can ask them questions, and --  
HASHEIDER: This is one of the process,  
I guess, difficulties -- is that as a Task Force,  
we are assisting staff with the consultant, and it was not in our domain to manage  
the contract with the consultant, and to be quite specific, we were told not to talk  
to the consultant. And, can see why that was said -- because 16 different people  
calling consultant is not good idea. However, it does limit our ability to make  
I
a
a
sure that certain things get done, and from that standpoint, anything going forward,  
obviously, would have to be staff that would deal with the consultant.  
THOMAS: And  
I was really directing that question to staff -- when we have this work  
session, in addition to the Task Force and the staff, that we could have the  
consultant participate.  
TREECE: So, yeah, can we do that at some point?  
GLASCOCK: Absolutely.  
TREECE: The -- and  
I think we, as a Council, decided that the cost of service study  
would be spearheaded by the Water and Light Advisory Board.  
THOMAS: It sounds to me like the Task Force still has momentum for that.  
TREECE: This Task Force is dissolved when they submit this final report.  
THOMAS: But that was a piece of their scope of work that --  
TREECE: No, when they submitted their interim report to us, the cost of service  
study was always predicated upon the Electric Resource Master Plan Report, and so  
now we have to go price out, but before we can do that, we have to hear staff’s  
response to how it gets implemented.  
THOMAS: And  
I
don’t think we’re talking about  
thought we were asking them to look  
public infrastructure expansion fee or a  
a cost of service study of the type  
that professional industry consultant does.  
a
I
into the specific issue as to whether  
system equity fee --  
a
TREECE: No that’s something else. That may have been what you asking, but that’s  
something else. No, this is -- those are two separate things. We have to price out  
what -- which --  
HASHEIDER:  
mission statement with the Task Force, and we began this whole endeavor  
assuming that we were going to do all three of those things. think that there is  
some confusion right now amongst the Task Force on whether -- which of these  
directions that we should be going. know that there are the Water and Light Board  
members, who are there regardless, and then there are the ad hoc members who  
have voting rights, but are just there for the Task Force purposes. And have asked,  
there is, think, five different members that are not associated with the Water and  
Light Board -- can’t speak for all of them, but know that there’s significant  
number of them that chose to participate so that they could become part of this  
next -- complete this job with the rates and the cost of service. So know they  
I
do want to point out,  
I
mean, that those were mentioned in our  
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
would have some interest to participate in the future, but of course, it is Council  
that makes that decision. We have submitted this report as the Integrated Master  
Plan Report, and so,  
I
think that it would be very good from our standpoint  
obviously, to have direction from Council on how you would like for us to proceed.  
don’t know if you want to decide that tonight.  
I
TREECE:  
legislation that created you says the Task Force shall be dissolved upon submission  
of its final report. So, think you're going to -- you're going to lose members.  
I
don’t know that there’s  
a
decision to be made.  
I
mean, the enabling  
I
I
mean, this has gone on for three years, and it seems reasonable that the Water and  
Light Advisory Board, of which you’re -- you’re on it and five -- that the Board has  
participated in this process -- do that cost of service study as the Board’s appointed  
-- as the Council’s appointed advisory board.  
HASHEIDER: Okay, it is the Council’s - we’re at the Council’s discretion.  
THOMAS: Well, I’d like to hear if other members of Council feel that since the Task  
Force clearly wants to do this, is planning to do this, whether we should ask them to  
do it. I'd like to --  
HASHEIDER: I do want to say that --  
TREECE: I'd like to hear from other Task Force members, but maybe  
from Council first.  
I want to hear  
PITZER: Yeah,  
members coming tonight, but I'm not sure that  
either. And Mr. Hasheider,  
everybody’s work and appreciate the 56 meetings, if not more meetings than that.  
And attended couple of them, and know that they were for the most part, not  
very short meetings either, and so, yeah, think, you know, in my reading of the  
legislation, think it’s clear that the Task Force, you know, is dissolved. And it's not  
like you’re going away. mean, the Water and Light Advisory Board is like half of  
I
don’t know that  
I
want to hear --  
I
appreciate all the other Task Force  
I
want to hear from all of them  
I
appreciate your comments, and  
I
appreciate  
I
I
a
I
I
I
I
the Task Force, and, you know, they would be the ones continuing on with work  
and so that continuity is right there. And we actually had trouble, if you’ll  
remember when we had some resignations from the Task Force, replacing those  
positions, and you know, we were able to do it under the premise of -- well, we’re  
so close to being done, let's just figure out  
positions filled until this final report is completed. So,  
that’s the way that we should go, and really this is  
a
way to make sure we have those  
think -- I’m certain that  
minor point. mean, we’re  
I
a
I
spending -- in terms of the amount of time that we're discussing this, we're  
spending way too much time talking about this specific point, and we really should  
be talking about what we're going to be doing next, which  
with work session, and having some staff ideas upon implementation.  
I’ve got several ideas and there were lot of good points that I’ve pulled out of  
your report that would be priorities of mine in terms of moving forward, and  
assume that everybody else has their own priorities as well. So, think that having  
I
agree is moving forward  
a
I
mean,  
a
I
I
that discussion would help us sort of coalesce around some of those key points  
from the report and really give the staff some priorities to work on in terms of  
moving ahead.  
SKALA: Yeah, to kind of build on that framework that you're suggesting,  
obviously, everyone here is very appreciative of all the work that went into the  
three years of study, the 56 meetings, and the countless hours, and the volunteer  
hours, and so on. think it is -- we are -- should be looking forward to some input  
certainly from the staff in terms of the work session -- would also like to see, not  
to broaden this out to too great degree, but to include as well the Climate and  
I think that -  
-
I
I
a
Environment Commission with respect to some of the integration of some of the  
work that you’ve done and some of the conversations that I've had, even in terms  
of setting deadlines, perhaps changing some of our targets and so on and so forth.  
I
think that would be important to the work of the work session as well along with  
staff input. So I’d just like to add that to that -- the body of work that we have with  
respect to the work session and encourage you to continue on in the vein that you  
were suggesting -- that is to take on these other issues that you see going forward  
with respect to the work that needs to be done. But I tend to agree with the Mayor,  
as well, and that is that these reports were submitted and we ought to move on and  
try and integrate this information into the work session and move on.  
TREECE: Thank you, thank you very much, and  
know -- can't remember Kim, are you still on Water and Light Advisory Board or  
you just cycled off? Robin, you’re still on, among other things, right? And so,  
appreciate the double duty that this has taken, the institutional memory that you  
now have afforded this, and think that Water and Light Advisory Board can pick up  
I know this isn’t the last word. And I  
I
-
I
I
the next phase of this as -- with the resources that they need.  
REP98-21  
Amendment to the FY22 Annual Budget - Intra-Departmental Transfer of  
Funds.  
Mayor Treece asked if there were any questions, and there were none.  
XI. GENERAL COMMENTS BY PUBLIC, COUNCIL AND STAFF  
Dee Dokken, Adam Saunders, and Eugene Elkin spoke, and the Council  
discussed various topics.  
DOKKEN: Hi, I'm Dee Dokken.  
I live at 804 Again Street, and October 4, Dr. Weaver  
presented  
requested that there be  
overlay that would be applied to property as it’s annexed into the Columbia in that  
area. She also presented petitions asking for plan that was signed by over 2,000  
people as well as 450 electronic signatures we had on an online petition. These  
were all collected just in couple of months last summer. There seemed to be  
consensus on the Council to consider resolution to do this. Then October 18, the  
Council heard request by the Canton Estates developer to waive the one year  
a
description of the sensitive area around Gans Creek Wild Area, and  
a
Task Force appointed that would work on zoning  
a
a
a
a
a
a
waiting period to resubmit his R-1 annexation proposal, which was denied. And  
then concerns were raised that the County should be -- had to be involved with this  
issue and  
a
discussion that maybe that discussion could happen at an upcoming  
While the work session occurred November 15, but of course there  
work session.  
was no time for discussion for planning and there were only two commissioners  
present, think. Since then, think Justin Aldred, the Southern District  
Commissioner has said that the County doesn't need to be involved in this, and  
hopefully -- hope that they will be doing larger planning project in the coming  
year, but they aren’t necessary for this issue of an overlay. It's only as something  
would come into the City that it would be that the overlay would be used. So,  
what I’m wanting is -- has there been any developments or any change in what the  
I
I
I
a
-
Council thinks about this process?  
process to be started. Thank you.  
We're just waiting to hear -- waiting for this  
SAUNDERS:  
the opportunity to speak earlier and today to use this forum to discuss this project,  
and over the last many months, I’ve had chance to talk to all of you individually  
and through email and such, and it seems like there’s lot of interest in using  
surplus funds, and we are at shovel-ready spot with this building, and so guess  
it's like, you know -- is this something that we want to do? You know, if so, like,  
what's our next step? And so we stand ready to support whatever -- if it’s  
Hello, again, Adam Saunders. Just wanted to say thank you again for  
a
a
a
I
something you want to do, happy to continue to brainstorm and figure out how we  
can grow this big onion in our town. So, if there are any questions, we’ll be here  
now or through the Council discussion.  
TREECE: I have some questions for you and I’ll ask you later, off-line.  
SAUNDERS: Okay, thank you.  
ELKIN: Eugene Elkin, 3406 Rangeline. Has the list of the $25 million from the  
government -- has that been put out or communicated?  
You’ll said over the next  
several weeks, we would all hear what organizations might have received part of  
the $25 million.  
TREECE: No one said that.  
PETERS: No, and we haven’t done it. No one has said that.  
THOMAS: One RFP has been developed for part of it.  
ELKIN: We will eventually have a list?  
PETERS: No.  
TREECE: We have not made any decisions.  
ELKIN: Okay, just wondering where it was at.  
I
heard the discussion about utilities,  
possibly the water, correct? Water is going up? Is that a yes?  
TREECE: here’s a state imposed fee that we’re required to collect.  
ELKIN: Okay, Boone Electric has -- now that’s under electric rates. They’ve come up  
with something called EV. They have  
the 24 hours of usage. don’t know that that has any bearing on water side, but  
electricity -- asked for them to do that years ago, and they finally are just now  
a
system of three different rates throughout  
I
I
getting around to it. If you choose to abuse your usage of your utilities, you have to  
pay for it, and that’s how some people become conscious of low-income persons.  
They will watch very closely if the TV and the radio and all these other instruments  
are playing at the same time -- there’s  
a pretty good chance you’re going to pay for  
all that extra utilities -- something to think about. The second day of November, at  
about 12 noon my trailer court was sold. Apparently the ownership of Colonial  
Village is also the same owner as ours. We will be seeing  
a $30 per month increase  
January 1. This is not good news. This is some of the figures that’s been talked  
about here tonight. Those that poor, on fixed income -- you take the $30 and you  
take gas prices and you take food prices and we’re all aware that things are going  
up, but are the poor going to choose to eat or freeze -- what is it they’re going to  
choose? And, it’s not  
a good thought. We do know that Medicare is going to up in  
the range of $170 plus. Even though they say we’re getting this huge increase in  
social security, it will be taken away from us by way of the increase being very large  
on the Medicare side. My point is, as we go about trying to solve issues in the City  
-
-
most recently, was given figure of $600 -- something at the Public Health  
I
a
Department that worked with people of low income -- it was spoken by Mr. Hollis,  
possibly the last meeting, that persons would no longer just get $200, they would  
be given $600. Well, when checking into that,  
you all to find out what makes one person get this and another one get that. And  
thank you very much, because am one of those on fixed income, and don’t want  
to use the $600 if it’s earmarked, but why not have it there for those that go slightly  
I am not eligible. So, I would like for  
I
I
I
over. If it’s only $200 I get, it ought to at least be  
you.  
a fair shake on everybody. Thank  
SKALA:  
There obviously -- in some of the discussions, there was not  
in the County dealing with some of the protective nature of the discussion.  
unfortunately, was gone. It was one of the few times, missed meetings, but it was  
on the 18th when we had that discussion, and we kind of left that discussion with  
sensitive areas and forming group to take look at that and potential overlays and  
so on. So I’m not sure what the consensus of the Council entirely was about that,  
but without the cooperation of the County, think it’s up to the City to safe guard  
some of those areas that we have that are very sensitive. But I’m even more  
concerned about the west area plan, which has been kind of languishing for great  
I
just have one issue. It goes to some of what Ms. Dokken was talking about.  
great deal of interest  
I,  
a
I
a
a
I
a
deal of time, and it’s getting to be critical, now that we’re eyeing Perche Creek and  
so on and so forth. And I don’t know -- I guess I’ll lean on the staff to the extent to  
find out where we may be in terms of finding out what we can do about  
a very vital  
plan that -- mean we haven’t had any plans since the last northeast area subplan,  
I
and I think it’s a -- that’s a very important one that we need to follow up on and find  
out what’s going on.  
PETERS:  
I
have --  
I
spoke with Ms. Thompson this afternoon about what the  
potential would be to deal with sort of the Gans Creek area. You know, if it stays in  
the County, then it’s zoned County. If it comes into the City then we need to  
address how it would be zoned and what would be appropriate to look at. So, we’re  
investigating whether there are different zoning options or not, and if there are,  
what would be appropriate. And also, we need talk to -- or  
I guess since you’re  
here, you know, what chances do you all have to getting funding to expand Rock  
Quarry Memorial State Park as opposed to relying upon City to do this. So those are  
just some of the thoughts we’ve had.  
to come up with an official overlay. I'm not sure what we could do or not do about  
that. So, we're sort of investing that at the moment. So, just wanted to let you  
I don’t know about getting a group together  
I
know where we were with that. And you're right, the County is not particularly  
interested in getting involved. They figure if it’s County, it’s County. If it’s City, it's  
City so that’s where we are.  
FOWLER: So, even though we didn’t have  
a
chance to talk with the County  
representatives at our joint work session. We talked about the tax -- the ballot  
issue -- have they indicated they’re not interested in discussing with us how to  
protect the wild area as part of -- when did they do that?  
PETERS: The last time I saw the Southern Boone County Commissioner.  
FOWLER: Was that --  
I
mean, have we -- they’ve formally told us they’re not  
interested in collaborating with us on some kind of --  
PETERS:  
I
mean, we had  
a
I
conversation about it.  
I didn’t ask him to like -- I’m not  
sure how we --  
already said.  
I
mean,  
talked to him about doing it, and he was like -- what  
I
FOWLER: So, while you’re -- and  
I
appreciate that you’re looking into options there  
-
-
can we then bring this back next time and talk about it because, you know,  
eventually, that one year from whenever they first submitted their plans is going to  
come up again, and this is an incredibly valuable natural asset to protect. So, can we  
have some kind --  
I don’t know whether it’s a report or in what capacity we discuss  
it again at the end of the next meeting to make sure we stay on top of this? And if  
we can move and form a group, and do an overlay that we can get underway?  
PETERS: Sounds fine to me. I’m not quite sure how to go about that, Ms. Fowler, but  
I’m happy --  
PITZER: What are we going to discuss at the next meeting that we can’t discuss  
now?  
PETERS: Well hopefully we’ll have more information as to whether there’s other  
zoning options.  
TREECE:  
I
mean, are we suggesting annexing and zoning property without the  
owner’s consent.  
PETERS: No, we’re not, but that was one of the things to look at.  
THOMPSON:  
circumstances to do -- take some zoning actions within one mile outside the city  
limits, kind of on that protect the border. don’t know if that exists in this particular  
I might be able to shed some light. There is the ability of cities in some  
I
situation. If it is an option, it’s going to take additional research, but that would be  
the maximum that would be allowable under state law, if that option does in fact  
exist. It is not -- I’m not saying it does, I’m not saying it doesn’t. It’s  
we can investigate. Absent that, there’s absolutely no authority for the City to take  
any zoning action outside of its city limits. That’s the one exception that is  
possibility under state law. So, past a mile, you absolutely have zero authority.  
a potential that  
a
PETERS: And,  
talked to Nancy about this this afternoon, and she was like, well, let me see what  
can find out. So, that’s the extent of that. And don’t know what we can do for any  
I did not mean to throw you under the bus, and I feel like I did. I just  
I
I
overlay legally, as Mayor Treece points out, you known, to limit people’s right to  
use their property.  
THOMAS: And Nancy, it’s not legal to create zoning restrictions on land outside the  
City which would only go into effect if and when it becomes annexed into the City.  
That’s not a legal pathway.  
THOMPSON: That’s correct. You cannot do that. You’re dealing with people’s  
property rights outside of your city limits over which you have absolutely no  
authority.  
THOMAS: But it would only come into effect when it comes into the City, so --  
THOMPSON: But you’re still determining property rights of property that’s located  
outside your city limits. So, you can’t make something go into effect prospectively  
and be binding upon either city councils or persons over which you have no  
jurisdiction. There is no jurisdiction over land outside of your city limits boundaries.  
THOMAS: How is it different from the fact that when land is annexed into the City,  
the owners of that land have to start paying property taxes to the City? They know  
in advance, when they get annexed, they now start paying property taxes -- why  
would that be different.  
THOMPSON: That happens by operation of law. That is -- that’s just by operation of  
law. Once you come into the city limits, all of the rights and benefits and  
obligations of being a resident --  
THOMAS: Well, if we were to pass an ordinance like this, wouldn’t that be  
operation of law?  
THOMPSON: No, you cannot determine people’s property rights outside of your city  
limits. That is beyond your authority as a City Council to do that.  
THOMAS: Okay, well I will take your word for that.  
THOMPSON: It’s a pretty - it’s a very -- I’m very solid on that legal principal.  
DOKKEN: Another option would be just to work on more zoning options in the UDC  
UDC amendment, so that when something came in, there would be that option  
that, oh, this is conservation zoned area where there is, you know, not very much  
-- impervious surface limit and extreme buffering, etc.  
THOMAS: mean, we still have the option to, you know, decide on what zoning we  
-
-
a
a
I
would allow when property comes in  
SKALA: That’s right.  
THOMAS: I mean that always exists at the time of annexation.  
DOKKEN: And right now, there’s just R-1 or open space. There’s not -- nothing in  
between.  
THOMAS: So your recommendation is we develop  
be applied in this situation.  
a new zoning category that could  
PETERS: The other option would just be not to bring it into the City and leave it in  
the County.  
THOMAS: Uh huh, which is what has happened so far.  
THOMAS: So this is related --  
I
mean, addressing your call, Karl, for -- try to get some  
southeast area plan. And really,  
progress on the west area plan. this is part of  
a
I
think it would be an excellent planning practice if we could do these kind of plans  
all the way around Columbia at those margins, and include all of those  
stakeholders. As  
I
understand it, the hold-up is planning staff capacity to be able to  
would  
manage those processes, which are quite, you know, labor intensive. So,  
I
like to suggest that we invest some of our general funds surplus into doing sort of  
comprehensive perimeter planning process or series of area plans by hiring  
additional planning staff to manage those processes. If the County doesn’t want to  
a
a
participate,  
I
guess we can’t force them to, but it would certainly be very helpful if  
hope we can develop process for spending some of that general fund  
number of years. And want to just,  
again, state my support for completing the welcome center at the Agriculture Park  
as Adam has talked to us couple of times tonight. think that is really  
appropriate and beneficial use of these funds, but does anybody want to, you  
know, push for work session or process -- we have, think, $20 or $30 million  
dollars in that general fund surplus. think it makes sense to invest it in the  
we could.  
I
a
surplus, or planning how to spend it over  
a
I
a
I
a
a
a
I
I
community in some of the priorities. Shouldn’t we be, you know, moving ahead  
with that?  
TREECE: Thoughts?  
SKALA: Just  
a
thought, and that is that we have been talking about, on several  
occasions that one of the -- it was in the context of ARPA funding discussions that  
we also talked about the disposition of some of the surplus funds, and how to --  
what to do with those and how to consider that, and  
for work session to focus on just what those guidelines are, whether we’ve  
exceeded them and whether to use them for various purposes. I’m not necessarily  
pigeonholing it into any one particular purpose. mean there are lots of good uses  
for these kinds of things, but think that’s use, that would be useful work  
session as well -- to take on the issue of the surplus funds to the exist to which --  
THOMAS: Well, should we ask the City Manager to schedule work session?  
I think that would be fair game  
a
I
I
a
a
a
I know  
we’re kind of booked up through January and that the City Manager will be gone by  
February, but I think we could get it on the calendar anyway.  
TREECE:  
I
would prefer  
a
less elastic discussion about the surplus funds until we  
higher  
reach consensus for the first half of the American Rescue Plan funds. That’s  
a
priority, there -- everyone says we’re wasting time on urgent needs, and I’m not  
going to buy the nice stuff until we buy the stuff we have to have.  
PETERS: And I would agree. I would rather --  
TREECE: You want spend some of that ARPA money tonight? We can talk about the  
surplus money next.  
THOMAS: Well, we are waiting,  
waiting --  
I
guess, it’s  
a
staff capacity issue because we’re  
TREECE: No, it’s not. We’re waiting on staff capacity for the second $12.5 million.  
We have the first $12.5 million dollars in hand. We can direct staff to proceed on  
that any day.  
THOMAS: Well, it was my understanding we had asked staff to organize  
robust community engagement process that a lot of the other cities have done.  
a kind of  
TREECE: We can spend it on community violence, we can spend it on mental health,  
we can spend it on the homeless, we can spend it on work force development --  
lots of needs out there. We hear them every day. We get criticized in the paper  
every day, and every meeting we wait. I’m happy to make a motion right now.  
THOMAS: What would your motion be?  
TREECE: Let’s proceed with a behavioral crisis center.  
THOMAS:  
about  
I
think we have done that, Brian. That’s what we did at  
a work session  
a
month or two ago, and since then, Steve Hollis, has produced an RFP for the  
homeless services center, and  
the street as they say, John?  
I don’t know -- has that been issued yet? Is that on  
GLASCOCK: There’s one out. I don’t know if that’s the exact one.  
FOWLER: That’s the $75,000 planning.  
GLASCOCK: That’s the planning one, I believe.  
THOMAS: Oh, okay. Well,  
RFPs for those very projects, so, whilst they’re working on that, we can -- and then  
the other part, the second half, thought we asked the staff to -- and particularly  
I thought we had directed the City Manager to develop  
I
the Health and Human Services Department because they have the greatest  
aptitude for this work -- to design that kind of highly engaged community process  
working with the people most impacted by economic inequality, and we are  
waiting for that to happen. That’s why  
And whilst all this -- that is happening,  
I
said,  
I think it’s a staffing capacity issue.  
I
don’t see why we can’t start discussing the  
general fund surplus as well, and start identifying what those priorities should be.  
TREECE: What does everyone else think?  
SKALA: I was not suggesting that we disperse funds necessarily.  
THOMAS: Well, I wasn’t either.  
SKALA:  
I
was suggesting that we have  
a
work --  
because we’ve been taking about  
this for  
a good period of time -- that we ought to at least discuss what the  
guidelines are, how much the surplus funds are, and what the potential is, and we  
don’t necessarily have to do any of that, before the disposition of the APRA fund,  
the first traunch of ARPA funding, which was kind of deferred to Stephanie  
Browning and the staff and so on, so  
elastic, but don’t think there has to be any knee jerk reaction to spending any of  
these monies, but do think we need to have that conversation at least to reassure  
I
don’t know exactly what you meant by  
I
I
the public that we’re mindful of it.  
PITZER: Well, when Ms. Waner brought this up  
a
couple of months ago, my  
suggestion was to wait until we got the numbers for the end of fiscal year 21, which  
would probably be somewhere around now-ish so that’s, you know, one starting  
point -- at least we know what the numbers are.  
THOMAS: So do we have consensus to schedule  
surplus in February say?  
a work session on the general fund  
PETERS:  
million of the ARPA funds.  
conversation today, but we have an RFP out for the opportunity campus or  
I
guess I’d like to be  
a
little clearer as to what we’re doing with the $12  
I
really -- don’t want to go backwards on this  
I
homeless shelter or whatever.  
resources.  
I don’t think we have an RFP out for mental health  
THOMAS: We don’t.  
FOWLER: So, my understanding, was -- and it was the first meeting in October --  
during the work session, we talked about those four areas, and then Mr. Glascock  
said that Stephanie would reach back to us and talk with us in anticipation of her  
preparing  
get it -- but she is the person that has the widest depth of knowledge on  
engaging our community on these very issues. These are all public health issues,  
with the exception of work force development. So, am -- and think the last email  
a series of RFP’s, so, she obviously is -- she has a full workload every day -  
-
I
I
I
correspondence we got from her was she would be reaching out to Council in  
January because she was tasked with the community violence update -- and they  
got the $75,000 planning grant out, and that’s what’s out on the street now, which  
we hope that will get utilized for the opportunity center by the folks that have  
already been working on it so hard. But that was my understanding of where we are  
with that, and so, we are -- we’re ready to go when Stephanie has the block of time  
to engage with us and then work -- move forward with those RFPs.  
TREECE: My understanding is that we directed staff to move forward with the RFPs,  
and the Director of Health was working with us for the community engagement on  
the second round of funding.  
FOWLER: No, that was not my understanding.  
THOMAS: I think she’s involved in both halves pretty heavily.  
FOWLER: No, that was not my understanding.  
PETERS: Maybe we should ask our City Manager what we are actually doing because  
it seems that we really ought to address using the first half of the ARPA funds and  
then we need to do --  
TREECE:  
I
recall having  
a
work session where  
a
majority of council reached  
consensus to direct the City Manager to move forward with the homeless RFP,  
behavioral crisis RFP, a work force development RFP, and a --  
THOMAS: Violence, community violence.  
a
TREECE: Probably community violence.  
THOMAS: And three of those four are Stephanie’s domain, which is why --  
GLASCOCK: And the Mayor’s right.  
TREECE: And then, we would move forward with  
for the second $12.5 million.  
a
community engagement process  
THOMAS: Which is also Stephanie’s domain.  
GLASCOCK: Yep.  
THOMAS: That’s why it’s  
about that. But the general funds, you know, it might be as simple as us agreeing as  
Council -- if we have $30 million dollars currently surplus that we decide to spend  
that down, $5 million year for the next 6 years during the budget process, and  
a staff capacity issue, and I’m not sure what we can do  
a
a
then we can start thinking about how we want to spend the $5 million for fiscal 23.  
GLASCOCK: Well, you’re going to start budget discussions sometime in January.  
PETERS: And, one of the things we’re also having to consider is staff salaries.  
WANER: Right.  
PETERS: I mean, there’s supposed to be an entire --  
THOMAS: Yeah, I mean, that can be on the table as well.  
TREECE: Is there  
a
consensus to have  
a
work session in February?  
I
think Mr. Pitzer  
makes a good point -- let’s see where we end up.  
FOWLER: Yes, February would be great  
WANER: This was supposed to be  
so the first thing -- I’ll go with my good thing first.  
Gold Bar and Plush last week. believe CPD met with them at one point, and  
Pat did as well. It was really great meeting. had -- it was wonderful opportunity  
to get to know two business owners, but also, they are really trying to be more  
proactive in community building efforts, and so just wanted to shout that out --  
that met with them. think they’re doing really good job in trying to engage with  
the community more and kind of build up that community, you know, resilience.  
a
light agenda so  
I
came with  
a
list.  
I waited. Okay,  
I
met with Adrian and Kim of the  
think  
I
I
a
I
a
I
I
I
a
WANER: The other things that  
I
had --  
I
was going to mention the -- how do we  
job as lobbyist -- he’s  
move forward to support the CCUA because Adam needs  
a
a
going to keep coming here every month until we do something, so I’m glad that  
we’re going to continue to talk about that.  
WANER:  
but it’s been almost  
pay-as-you-throw. I’m so sorry --  
that I’m getting calls from are families that can’t afford it and can’t find the trash  
bags. That’s the discussion right now. don’t if other folks are having the same  
I
don’t know if you all are also getting all of these phone calls and emails,  
year that we’ve had the trash program -- the  
know -- I’m going to keep bringing it up. The folks  
a
I
I
issues, but they can’t track down bags.  
I don’t know if that has to do with the fact  
that it’s December and we’re going to have new vouchers and things in January, but  
it seems to be that we’re having some supply and demand issues with those, which  
is creating  
a
hardship on  
a
lot of folks but specifically on low income families.  
We’ve got figure something out.  
GLASCOCK: Can you tell me where they’re going please?  
WANER: Yeah, Moser’s was one. Hyvee was one, and Gerbes was one. Those are the  
ones I’ve heard about this week.  
GLASCOCK: Okay. Thank you.  
WANER:  
I don’t know if that’s the same for other folks, but those are the phone  
calls that I’m getting.  
solutions, can it?  
I mean, how do we address this. It can’t be just one off  
PETERS: Well, there’s a few things. Well --  
WANER: I know, it’s a gross conversation. Nobody wants to have it.  
PETERS: No, you know,  
in my neighborhood, just because of the scattered trash, but at one point we were  
hoping that we would get citizens initiative to put the roll carts back on the ballot,  
I live in the East Campus. It’s a daily to weekly conversation  
a
and I have to say, I have not followed up with that group.  
WANER: I have. I have info on that.  
PETERS: Oh, excellent. Then, what’s your info?  
WANER: The info is that they have reached the number of signatures that they  
need, but they want to get extra so that if any of those are invalidated that they  
have, you know,  
a margin of error, but I think what makes it difficult is it’s based off  
of certain percentage of turnout at the last at-large election, which will change in  
a
April, so then the numbers potentially can change as to how many signatures they  
need. So relying on that as our fallback and are failsafe of we’re going to do -- wait  
for that -- I have a problem with that.  
PETERS: Well, the thing is that,  
they get it in by the end of January, then they are going off the last general election  
numbers that they needed. So then, they should hopefully have enough, and if  
they have enough, then we can put it back on the ballot, and that was just what the  
last Council had wanted to do. mean we could always vote to put it back on the  
ballot or we could vote to bring -- mean, we could bring it back for discussion.  
mean, roll carts are just another way of pay-as-you-throw system. It depends how  
I would say that it’s the first part of December, and if  
I
I
a
I
a
big your roll cart is, but it certainly takes care of a lot of the trash problems.  
WANER: Yep, I agree with you.  
PETERS:  
I don’t know if we want to do that, or if we want to give them another  
month and see if by the end of January they’ve got enough signatures.  
know. But that would be my current -- that’s my current hope, I guess.  
I
don’t  
WANER: I’m comfortable with them being aware that there’s  
a time line by which  
these same numbers are still accurate. Is that December 31st, Sheela -- that the  
percentage of turnout of the at-large election -- what they would need on -- the  
number of signatures they would need on a citizens petition?  
AMIN: Based off my memory, all the Charter says is that it’s based off the last  
mayoral, council member at-large election.  
WANER: Not necessarily that calendar year.  
AMIN: No, so, there -- that would be an interpretation issue depending on -- at this  
point they can’t make the April election because of time to review -- submission,  
time to review, get on -- in front of you, notify the County Clerk -- so the earliest  
would be August.  
PETERS: And, so if they got their signatures in, like, by the end of January, would  
that be enough time to review the signatures and get on the August ballot?  
AMIN: We have thirty days to review them so potentially, but  
is they’ve got stale signatures. They’ve been doing this for over a year.  
WANER: Right.  
I
tell you my concern  
PETERS: Well, that’s why the need the extra signatures.  
AMIN: They probably need a lot of extra.  
WANER: And that’s my concern -- is that continues to be the failsafe that we’re  
talking about -- is waiting for the citizens petition. commend them for their  
I
efforts, and I’m grateful for that. I’m concerned that it’s going to continue to be the  
point.  
PETERS:  
I mean, the other option would be to bring it back as a resolution or  
whatever for Council if we have four people that are agreeable to do that.  
THOMAS: At the same time.  
PETERS: Yeah, at the same time.  
THOMAS: Because some people have jumped back and forth across the fence. We  
could have done this a year ago.  
PETERS: Yeah, well.  
WANER: I wasn’t here.  
THOMAS: It was before your time.  
SKALA: In addition to this,  
different. The numbers that  
I
mean -- talking trash here. My numbers were  
a little bit  
I
got is they were still bit short, but that may or may  
a
not be the case, so may be right, but that means that it get -- if that in fact happens  
and they satisfy that requirement, and it gets put on the ballot, of course, then it  
has to pass, right?  
necessarily, because even though  
be. It was defeated by significant margin in 2015 or 2016, whenever it was, and roll  
carts although solve -- they obviously solve some problems, create others, and we  
many have to have some sort of hybrid system, not the least of which is $12  
million -- at last count -- $12 million price tag to convert. So, mean, we’ll do what  
the folks want, but I’m just not sure what this deadline and when this is all going to  
happen. There are some issues -- agree with you that I’ve heard as well -- about  
availability issues in particular in some stores, and yet when talk to Mr. Sorrell, in  
I
mean, and that’s not  
a -- I don’t think that’s a done deal,  
I
think the issue is probably closer than it used to  
a
a
I
I
I
some cases in following up on this, some of it is misinformation as to where to get  
these -- where to get the vouchers filled and so on -- that some folks don’t  
understand that they have to go up to the admin desk to get some of these things,  
because they don’t have them in the aisles. They’re just not available in general,  
but  
that we have to solve with Waste Zero.  
PETERS: guess the other option would just be to -- get  
I
do think there are some supply issues, and  
I
think that’s  
a
legitimate problem  
I
a different trash service to  
do the trash versus the City.  
WANER: So, privatize.  
PETERS: Privatize it.  
SKALA: [Inaudible] change the Charter -- that would require another referendum.  
PETERS: It would change the Charter? In our Charter is says we do trash?  
SKALA: Isn’t there  
private.  
a
proscription --  
I
thought there was -- you could not have  
a
PITZER: It’s an ordinance. We could change it.  
THOMPSON: That’s electric. You’re thinking electric.  
SKALA: Oh, is that what I’m thinking?  
PITZER: You’d need two readings to change the ordinance.  
PETERS: So, is this something we could keep thinking about.  
I
don’t think we’re  
going to solve it tonight.  
WANER: Oh, no, and  
I
didn’t anticipate us solving it tonight. What  
I
wanted to do  
was continue the conversation, especially because it’s been  
going to keep being that pain that says it’s been six months, let’s check in.  
PETERS: That’s okay, check in.  
a
year, right? So I’m  
WANER:  
some sort of creative solution.  
may not be the answer, and that’s fine, but we cannot keep going how we are.  
I
would like us to keep having the conversation and trying to come up with  
I
know that’s it -- roll carts are hot topic and that  
a
WANER: And then my last thing, and then I’ll let you all go home, I’m so sorry. I’ve  
received lot of phone calls about -- concerns about panhandlers in the  
community. know that Nancy, you tried so hard to give me the best definition of  
a
I
the jurisdictional issues that take place with enforcing panhandling laws and things  
like that. I’m curious if we know other communities do to navigate the issues of  
panhandling in multijurisdictional areas.  
issue, for some folks it’s the unhoused population might be aggressive with them,  
don’t know -- it hasn’t happened to me specifically, so  
that’s a continued theme of feedback that I receive from the Second Ward.  
I
know that -- for some folks it’s  
a
trash  
I
I
wanted to bring that up as  
PITZER:  
Very briefly, because we’re talking about scheduling  
a
lot of things tonight.  
So I’m going to be gone the meeting of February 21. I’d very much like to participate  
in discussion about the integrated resource plan and the discussion about surplus  
funds.  
a
PETERS: Okay, so I guess we won’t be doing that on February 21.  
TREECE: Thanks.  
PITZER: If that becomes a problem, let me know -- talking about scheduling  
PETERS: You’re done, you don’t care.  
GLASCOCK: I’ll pass it along.  
PETERS: Well you do that - but go ahead and schedule it not on that day.  
TREECE: Anything you want to have discussed while you’re gone?  
GLASCOCK: Roll carts.  
XII. ADJOURNMENT  
Mayor Treece adjourned the meeting without objection at 10:40 p.m.