City of Columbia, Missouri  
Meeting Minutes  
Planning and Zoning Commission  
Conference Rooms  
Thursday, May 19, 2022  
5:30 PM  
Work Session  
Columbia City Hall  
701 E. Broadway  
8 -  
Tootie Burns, Sara Loe, Joy Rushing, Michael MacMann, Valerie Carroll, Sharon  
Geuea Jones, Robbin Kimbell and Peggy Placier  
1 - Anthony Stanton  
Meeting agenda adopted unanimously.  
Adopt agenda as submitted  
May 5, 2022 Work Session  
April 21, 2022 work session minutes adopted as presented.  
Adopted minutes as submitted  
A. FY23 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Memo  
Mr. Zenner introduced the topic. He recapped that the Commission had heard  
presentations and asked questions of the staff from each City Department  
responsible for programming CIP projects at the May 5 work session meeting. The  
CIP presentations contained projects from Public Works, Parks and Recreation,  
Sanitary Sewer, Stormwater Utility, and Water & Light. There were no Solid Waste  
CIP projects for the FY23 CIP.  
Mr. Zenner provided a draft letter on the overhead screen based upon previous  
years’ letters for the Commission to revise to reflect their thoughts on the current  
CIP. Mr. Zenner walked through potential language for the letter from his notes of  
the discussion that the Commission had at the May 5 meeting.  
The Commission noted they would like the Solid Waste Utility Staff to attend next  
year even if there were no projects as they were interested in solid waste’s work  
program. They asked that the project section criteria, and a list of all project that  
were considered (including those that weren’t ultimately selected) prior to the  
presentations. They would like to have increased transparency on the selection  
process and how projects were selected and moved up and down in the CIP  
timeline. There was discussion on what was asked for last year in their letter and  
how they could better clarify what they would like to be provided within future CIP  
reviews so as to make a more informed recommendation to the Council.  
There was clarification that the Commission was required to review the CIP. There  
was discussion on how the Commission could best be helpful in making  
recommendations on projects and selection processes to the Council and how the  
Council saw the Commission’s role in the review process. The role of other  
stakeholder input and how it impacted projects was also desired to be more  
upfront and clear. The Commission desired to make meaningful recommendations.  
There was also discussion on how the Columbia Imagined Comprehensive Plan was  
being used in project selection and how to better tighten the transparency pipeline  
of community input and project funding and timing.  
Commissioner’s also discussed how the CIP dashboard was designed and used. The  
Commission desired to have a full database/spreadsheet of project listings as was  
provided in previous years. It was noted that the CIP dashboard could be exported  
to a table.  
The Commission desired to see broadband internet featured more prominently in  
the CIP and thought it should become a “Enterprise” service of the City. This was an  
element of the Comp Plan. There was frustration that the Broadband Task Force had  
not produced a report before being disbanded. This was an oversight of the CIP.  
The role of ballot initiatives in CIP programming was also discussed.  
Commissioner’s expressed the need for better alignment between the Comp. Plan,  
land use planning, and the CIP. Commissioner’s acknowledged that they have  
insight into the immediate and upcoming impacts of growth and changing  
development patterns and view their review of the CIP as an opportunity for  
sharing that insight in order to be more proactive instead of reactive with CIP  
projects and programming.  
The Commission discussed ways to make the presentation and question  
component with the departments more productive. The discussion component was  
generally more productive than the presentations over the project listings. If the  
list was provided ahead of time, there would be more time for the discussion of  
why and how projects were needed, funded, or chosen. The Commission said they  
could give better feedback when they were asking more specific questions.  
The Commission revised and re-worded the draft letter to reflect the format they  
would like to receive information in future CIP reviews. They voted unanimous to  
include a statement regarding the City’s role in the provision of Broadband  
initiatives. There was wordsmithing to the correspondence to make this point as  
well as others (see attached letter).  
Mr. Zenner said he would send out the final draft of the letter to the  
Commissioners Friday morning for review. He noted that Commissioners could  
respond to the draft by the end of Friday after which he would share comments  
with the Chair. Mr. Zenner stated that the goal was to send the letter to the  
Finance Department on Monday so that it could be included in the budget retreat  
packet that the Council would have at the end of the following week.  
B. Short-term Rental Snapshot Update  
This item will be discussed at the next meeting (June 9) as the Commission was  
unable to address the topic due to time constraints.  
VI. NEXT MEETING DATE - June 9, 2022 @ 5:30 pm (tentative)  
Meeting adjourned approximately 7:00 pm  
Motion to adjourn