The Mayor led with the Pledge of Allegiance.
Present: Alderman Boyd, Alderman Marshall, Alderman Leahy, Alderman Golfin, Alderman Robertson, Alderman Wynn, Alderman Cross.
City Attorney Murphy, City Clerk/Administrator Seemayer, Zoning Administrator Wolf, Economic Development Director Shelton, City Treasurer Reynders and Executive Secretary Williams.
Absent: Alderwoman Mehler.
CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA OF THE REGULAR BOARD OF ALDERMEN MEETING OF OCTOBER 7, 2002
Mayor Kelly requested a proclamation for the Clean Water Act be added to the agenda. He received it Friday via fax asking if the Board could approve it.
Motion was made by Alderman Golfin, second by Alderman Wynn to amend and approve the Agenda of the Regular Board of Aldermen Meeting of October 7, 2002 by adding a proclamation for the Clean Water Act. Roll call: Alderman Boyd, yes; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.
CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD OF ALDERMEN MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 16, 2002
Motion was made by Alderman Golfin, second by Alderman Marshall to approve and adopt the Minutes of the Regular Board of Aldermen Meeting of September 16, 2002. Roll call: Alderman Boyd, yes; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.
Bids – None
HEARING OF ANY MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST UPON REQUEST OF ANY PERSON PRESENT
Betty Muench – business address - 2818, 2820 and 2828 S. Brentwood came before the Board and said since the City has sent out the RFP for a planned development area it has put her commercial property under a cloud of uncertainty. One of her tenants has notified her they are looking for a new location and one has already moved out. She asked how is she going to be compensated for tenant losses and any future losses.
Mayor Kelly suggested that Mrs. Munch tell her tenants not to leave. If the project does go forward, the developer would have to incur moving and relocation costs for tenants and owners of property. A professional relocation company would be hired to help find a location for any of those businesses.
Mrs. Muench asked if it is possible for the City staff to show her similar agreements of other redevelopments being done in the City.
Mayor Kelly said yes.
Sharon Boshans – 2905 Brazeau came before the Board and said the minutes from the last meeting were just approved which stated that Mayor Kelly said, "from the City’s standpoint if there are that many residents on Brazeau that do not want to entertain selling their properties the project would not go forward". She asked if that meant that the City of Brentwood has withdrawn from negotiations and is terminating the RFP with Mills Properties.
Mayor Kelly said no. Right after Mills Properties was selected as the preferred developer with respect to this project, they met with the developer and went over some of the issues with their site plan. There were some significant issues with the initial plan that would not work, because of flood plain issues within the area of the RFP. They had to come back with a revised site plan. What they came back with was not a site plan that would have been acceptable to the City. The main problem was when they shrunk the project because of the flooding issues; they took out the single family residential housing which is one of the key components that the City wants to see. Mills Properties is working on another site plan to try to accommodate some of the single-family housing and bring that back into the project. At the same time, they did not want to go out and make offers on properties if the project could not go forward from a financial standpoint. Not only would it tie up their funds but also it would tie up the residents if they had offers on their properties. They wanted to wait until they could come back with a plan that would be appealing to the City and financially feasible for them to go forward. They are working on that site plan and hope to have that done within the next few days so they could start contacting residents and business owners about property acquisition within the next few weeks.
The statement he made with respect to the residents was once the offers are made and if the residents do not want to sell, the project will not go forward. At this point, they had already established that the City was going to look at this area and try to move forward. If they cannot make it financially feasible for the residents to move then it is not going to happen. He did some research on his own last month. Since December to June, about 65 homes in Brentwood have sold. Out of those homes, 45 of those were sold for less than $179,000.
Mrs. Boshans said at the last meeting she presented seven petitions. Tonight she is presenting another seven. Has the City been contacted by anyone else?
Mayor Kelly said the only two that have told him they are not willing to sell within the last couple of months have been Mrs. Boshans and the Truss Family. They indicated from the beginning that they did not want to sell their property.
Mrs. Boshans asked what is the specific criteria to terminate all negotiations and the RFP with Mills Properties.
Mayor Kelly said it would take a vote of the Board of Aldermen.
Mrs. Boshans asked if that could be done at this time.
Mayor Kelly said this is the public comment section of the agenda. He suggested Mrs. Boshans discuss it with her aldermen.
Sam Longstreth – owner of Brentwood Plastics – 8734 Suburban Tracks came before the Board and said apparently, one of the reasons the RFP came into being is because of rumors that Wal-Mart wanted to come in and buy the Syms property. He did a little research and got an email from Caroline Bissio who is the real estate manager for Kansas, Missouri, and Illinois for the Wal-Mart Corporation. In the email, it says that she had no knowledge of a RFP on the Syms building in Brentwood, nor has Wal-Mart or any agent acting on their behalf made any offer to purchase or lease the Syms building. It is purely a rumor. In the Mills proposal, Mills Properties say they expect to form an Urban Redevelopment Corporation seeking real estate tax abatement under Chapter 353. Is it Brentwood’s intention to give Mills Properties a Chapter 353 tax abatement.
Mayor Kelly said none of those final negotiations have been agreed to or analyzed at this point. Until they bring a site plan before the Board that would be appropriate and financially feasible, the City will not hire consultants to make that evaluation. At that point, they would request whatever City assistance they wanted and then the City would make that evaluation.
Mr. Longstreth asked if they consider the proposed property to be a blighted area.
Mayor Kelly said he would think it falls under the State Statute as a blighted area.
Mr. Longstreth said he has put over $1 million in his property in the last two years.
Mayor Kelly said the developer would have to pay for those relocations and improvements on Mr. Longstreth’s property to make it worthwhile for him.
Mr. Longstreth said if they got a Chapter 353 they could condemn his property and then go about it that way. That is the way the law reads.
Mayor Kelly said in a redevelopment agreement the developer is given the right of eminent domain. One of the things the City has always controlled is under that redevelopment agreement they have to come back to the City in order to use it. It would have to be at the approval of the Board of Aldermen to proceed with eminent domain.
Mr. Longstreth said he does not want to move. The expense that Mills Properties would have to bare would be exuberant. He has spoken to Phil Barron who said he does not want to sell his property either.
Mayor Kelly said one of the concerns of the developer is that they have some businesses and some property owners that would be very expensive to move.
Alderman Leahy said Mills Properties expects to form an Urban Redevelopment Corporation seeking tax abatement under Chapter 353. They would negotiate that in their deals. Would they use the City’s Chapter 353 or create their own?
Mayor Kelly said any property owner can establish a 353 Corporation, but they could work through the City’s also. For example, Winther Group established their own 353 Corporation for that area. They still come back to the City for the negotiations of the amounts.
Alderman Wynn said it is hard to be in the position that these people are in. In his opinion, many things are going to have to happen before he is willing to see people leave their homes. He does not want to see it go forward if the people do not want it.
Rick Baurer – 2850 Lawndell came before the Board and said at last month’s aldermanic meeting the Mayor mentioned that the City has never used eminent domain to force anybody out of their homes and would not start to do that now. If in fact, the City has not used eminent domain then who gave the 353 Corporation and or the developer the authority to use eminent domain as they did on Rankin.
Mayor Kelly said the City gave them the authority. The issue on Rankin where eminent domain was used on a resident was not an issue of whether they wanted to sell their property it was an issue of how much money they were going to get for their property. The homeowners as a group had come to an agreement with the developer on the amount of money they were getting per foot. This homeowner wanted more.
Mr. Baurer said if that is in fact the City granting that authority then he would think that the statement that the City has never used eminent domain is not a true and accurate statement.
Mayor Kelly said the City has never used eminent domain to force anyone out of their homes. In the Promenade project, there were vacant lots that the City was forced to use eminent domain on. In the process when eminent domain is used, the developer has to show that he has negotiated in good faith with those property owners and that they have made them a fair offer for their property and so forth. At that time, they would have to notify the City that they have tried everything to acquire the property and have to document the fact that they did that. After that, it goes to St. Louis County to eminent domain court. The issue was not that they did not want to sell their property but how much they were getting for their property. In each instance, it was people that wanted more than everybody else. The other times that they have used it with respect to businesses is the businesses requested it be used for tax reasons, so they could use what is called a friendly condemnation.
Elizabeth Timmerberg – 2925 Hilldale came before the Board and asked the Mayor if he is talking about one person or business that doesn’t want to move or an x amount of people.
Mayor Kelly said the City would not use eminent domain to force people out of their homes.
Alderman Leahy asked if the Board is to the point of that agreement, that they are not going to force that issue, are they doing a disservice to the developer with the idea that they are spending his money to do the studies and so forth. If they have petitions that says the residents are not selling why is the City spending the developer’s money to come back later and tell them sorry this deal is a dead deal.
Mayor Kelly said until those offers are made to the residents, depending on the amount of the offer, they might decide it is a feasible thing to do. It would be a big improvement to the City if they could do this project. He knows it is hard on the residents, but the City has tried to be straightforward since the beginning on how these proceedings would happen.
Alderman Leahy asked what would be the criteria to stop an eminent domain.
Mayor Kelly said for example on Rankin Avenue there were actually three RFPs issued on that area. All of those RFPs were at the request of the residents. The bad press that the City got at that time was the residents wanted a certain amount per square foot but the developer couldn’t afford to pay it and the residents wanted the City to negotiate that price. That was something the City could not do.
John Boshans – 2905 Brazeau came before the Board and said he was reading the Chapter 353 tax abatement, which is part of the Mills proposal. Someone told him that this was a push on the taxes on the 27 acres that he is a part of. Whatever taxes the City collects now from that property they would collect regardless of the tax abatement. According to the State of Missouri during the first ten years of the tax abatement, the property is not subject to real property tax except in the amount of real property tax on the land exclusive of improvements. Right now, the City of Brentwood gets taxes on the improvements on that area. Once Mills Properties buys it from the Urban Development Corporation it is tax on raw land. It says exclusive of improvements.
Mayor Kelly said that might be the way the law is written but that has not been the way the City has negotiated theirs. It is his understanding that if the City and the school district are collecting a certain amount in taxes right now they would continue to collect that amount of money in property taxes. Any new revenue is what is abated.
Mr. Boshans asked if the City would negotiate the entire proposal.
Mayor Kelly said yes. These tools are used to help encourage redevelopment in areas and try to improve areas within the City. According to State Statutes, costs and so forth with the DCM project, they were eligible for a lot more than what the City allowed them through assistance. Those things are the responsibility of the City to make sure that the assistance that you are giving them is something that is not abused.
Mr. Boshans said Brentwood School Board had an article in the paper last week that the assessment value in the City of Brentwood is going down and their tax revenue is going down.
Mayor Kelly said he does not know what article that was but there is no way the assessment in Brentwood has gone down and that the school district taxes are less than they were.
City Clerk/Administrator said reassessment is done every two years. In that off year which is this year, the assessment went up slightly because property is only reassessed every two years, unless there are some types of improvements or reasons. Next year they will be rather large mainly because it is an assessment year.
Mayor Kelly said the school district was very much in favor of the Winther Group project and the tax abatement for two reasons. They are adding 320 apartments to the City and are hoping that the apartment dwelling will have children to attend the school. The other reason is all the personal property taxes that the school district would capture within that project. All those residents that live there are paying property taxes on automobiles. They were very much in favor of that and could see a benefit from giving them abatement to help the project move forward because they would have that increase in personal property taxes to the school district.
Alderman Wynn said it is difficult to set a timeline, but they should keep the residents informed as to how it is going. When the City reaches a point where a decision can be made the Board should come back and do something about it. Living under a cloud is very difficult.
INTRODUCTIONS, READINGS, AND PASSAGE OF BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS
Bill No. 5136 – The Meridian at Brentwood
Mayor Kelly said at the request of the developer they are going to bring another bill before the Board at a future date.
Mayor Kelly asked for a motion to remove Bill No. 5136 from the agenda.
Motion was made by Alderman Wynn, second by Alderman Leahy to remove Bill No. 5136 from the agenda. Roll call: Alderman Boyd, yes; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.
1st and 2nd Readings of Bills
Motion was made by Alderman Golfin, second by Alderman Robertson to give Bills No. 5137, 5138, 5139, 5140 and 5141. Roll call: Alderman Boyd, yes; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.
Bill No. 5137 – Agreement with Information Technologies, Inc.
City Attorney Murphy gave Bill No. 5137, AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND THE CHIEF OF POLICE TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT FOR THE USE OF SOFTWARE AND RELEASE AND INDEMNIFICATION ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF BRENTWOOD, MISSOURI, WITH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 10430 BAUR BOULEVARD, ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 63132, its first and second readings.
Alderman Robertson said the Public Safety Committee has reviewed the bill and recommends approval by the full Board.
Alderman Leahy said on page 5 of the bill, Section c, is the covenant that would basically establish that this new system could interfere with the 911 program itself and that the City does take on that possibility. They are doing what they can to make sure that the software works efficiently and does not interfere with the 911 system. They are asking that the City not hold them responsible for a program glitch that would probably shut down 911 temporarily.
Mayor Kelly said the software that is being used is something that is very vital to the police department. In many instances, you get businesses that have those disclaimers. They have been using this software and they have not had that problem.
Motion was made by Alderman Robertson, second by Alderman Marshall to approve and adopt Bill No. 5137. Roll call: Alderman Boyd, yes; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.
The Mayor thereupon declared Bill No. 5137 duly passed and signed same into approval thereof. Said Bill was given Ordinance No. 3842.
Bill No. 5138 – Parking Space for the Physically Disabled
City Attorney Murphy gave Bill No. 5138, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 14 OF THE REVISED CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF BRENTWOOD, MISSOURI BY ADDING A NEW PARAGRAPH TO SECTION 14-1004, SCHEDULE D, RELATING TO A RESERVED SPACE FOR THE PARKING OF VEHICLES BY THE PHYSICALLY DISABLED AT 9020 MORITZ; PROVIDING FOR THE CURRENT MAINTENANCE OF THIS CODE; PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, its first and second readings.
Alderman Leahy said by invoking this would the City have to revoke this if the ownership of the property changes.
City Clerk/Administrator Seemayer said they look at them every year. They have to continually submit to the City their certificate.
Mayor Kelly said the bill is for a physically disabled parking space at a residence, so the resident has a place to park.
Motion was made by Alderman Cross, second by Alderman Marshall to approve and adopt Bill No. 5138. Roll call: Alderman Boyd, yes; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.
The Mayor thereupon declared Bill No. 5138 duly passed and signed same into approval thereof. Said Bill was given Ordinance No. 3843.
Bill No. 5139 – Police and Firemen’s Pension Plan
City Attorney Murphy gave Bill No. 5139, AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE AMENDMENT OF THE THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED CITY OF BRENTWOOD POLICE AND FIREMEN’S PENSION PLAN; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL CONFLICTING ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE, its first and second readings.
Alderman Leahy said the section that they are looking at is 2.14. What specifically changed from that wording to this one? Is it the dollar level that is being improved?
Mayor Kelly said he is not sure. He would think that it is probably keeping in line with the State Statute on the pension fund.
City Clerk/Administrator Seemayer said he is not aware of this one. They come from the Police and Firemen’s legal counsel.
Mayor Kelly said he does not see any reason why this bill has to be passed tonight. If clarification is needed it can be placed on hold.
Motion was made by Alderman Leahy, second by Alderman Wynn to place Bill No. 5139 on hold for clarification. Roll call: Alderman Boyd, yes; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.
City Administrator Seemayer said he was able to get an answer from Assistant Chief Kurtz clarifying the change to the Police and Firemen’s Pension Plan. The change has to do with an IRS required amendment. Any compensation that would ever exceed $150,000 shall not be calculated in terms of their pension benefit. No salaries of the police and firefighters are anywhere near that. That is the IRS regulations for their plan.
Motion was made by Alderman Leahy, second by Alderman Robertson to remove Bill No. 5139 from hold. All in favor, none opposed.
Motion was made by Alderman Robertson, second by Alderman Boyd to approve and adopt Bill No. 5139. Roll call: Alderman Boyd, yes; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.
The Mayor thereupon declared Bill No. 5139 duly passed and signed same into approval thereof. Said Bill was given Ordinance No. 3846.
Bill No. 5140 – Amendment to the Redevelopment Project for Hanley/Eager TIF
City Attorney Murphy gave Bill No. 5140, AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT FOR THE HANLEY/EAGER TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (TIF) REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, its first and second readings.
Mark Grimm – Gilmore and Bell came before the Board and said the original redevelopment plan for this project area was adopted in 2000 and a redevelopment agreement was entered into with DCM in December 2000. Several months ago DCM proposed a reconfiguration of the project. That is described in the materials that are attached to Bill No. 5140. There was a question at the time as to whether that constituted a change that would require a new public hearing before the TIF Commission. Their firm and City staff thought the appropriate thing to do was to go back before the TIF Commission and have a new public hearing with respect to the changes in the redevelopment project which was done about a month ago. Bill No. 5140 approves the amendment to the redevelopment project that was presented to the TIF Commission and received the affirmative vote of the TIF Commission members.
Bill No. 5141 addresses the redevelopment agreement that had been entered into between the City and DCM. DCM subsequently assigned its rights to a limited liability company called Eager Road Associates. Because the amount of TIF assistance being requested was different given the reconfiguration of the project that is primarily what the amendments to the redevelopment agreement are intended to address. He outlined the amendments in the summary distributed to the Board.
The concept site plan has changed such that when you talk about Phase I, that consists of Buildings 1,2, and 3 as shown on the site plan. Phase II consists of building 4 on the site plan. The original construction schedule would provide for completion of Phase I no later than June 2003 and completion of phase II no later than April 2005. Obviously, this project has been delayed for economic reasons. The amended agreement would provide for substantial completion of Phase I no later than November of 2003 and Phase II in July of 2006. The original agreement contained a performance guarantee such that if the developer did not meet the time frames for construction specified in the original agreement; the developer would make certain payments to the City. The dollar amounts remain the same but have been reversed to reflect the different levels of TIF assistance for each phase. The original agreement provided for $19.6 million in TIF assistance allocated $14.7 million for Phase I and $4.9 million for Phase II. The amended agreement still provides for $19.6 million for TIF assistance but allocated $8 million for Phase I and $11.6 million for Phase II. The agreement provides for cancellation of $2 million of the Phase I TIF notes if building 4 is not constructed in the time frame set forth in the agreement. The original agreement provided for an interest rate on the TIF notes, if the notes were taxable a rate of prime and if the notes were tax exempt it would be 2%. At the time that the original redevelopment agreement was entered into less than two years ago, the prime rate was 9.5%. Now the prime rate is 4.75%, which has presented some financing difficulties because lenders are not lending at that prime rate for projects of this nature. The amended agreement would provide that the TIF notes would bare interest at the greater of 8% of prime if the TIF notes were taxable and prime minus 1½ if the notes were tax exempt.
The original agreement provided for the creation of a transportation development district, as does this agreement. This agreement clarifies that the first $230,000 of annual revenues from the TDD sales tax would go to make payments on the TIF obligations and that the amount over and above that $230,000 annual figure would go to make payments on obligations issued by the transportation development district. The last change was the option and right of first refusal, which provides that if the developer didn’t perform the City would have an assignable option to go in and acquire the property from the developer without having to go through condemnation. This agreement expands on that and provides for a right of first offer such that if the developer offers the property to a third party, the developer would first have to offer the property at that price to the City.
Alderman Leahy asked if the transportation development district would include everything along Eager and Hanley Roads.
Mr. Grimm said it would be the DCM site at the corner of Hanley and Eager Roads. It would not include the Dierbergs project to the west or Home Depot to the south.
Alderman Leahy said his dilemma is being on the east side of Hanley Road they transfer over into Richmond Heights, the road is being improved at this point at that intersection. They get the benefit of this improvement as a courtesy of the City of Brentwood and the developer.
Mr. Grimm said theoretically if improvements are made slightly outside the boundaries of the district but benefit the district those can still be paid for by the district.
Alderman Leahy asked if there is a time element that the TIF and TDD bonds need to be covered in order to accomplish this task.
Mr. Grimm said the agreement did not change just because the project has been delayed. There is a statutory limit of 23 years from the date that the plan was originally approved in 2000. The original agreement shortened that up to provide for a maximum of 15 years.
Alderman Boyd said he noticed in the terms both the Phase I TIF notes and the Phase II TIF notes have a completion of Phase I and II of 15 years or December 18th 2023 and they are different phases. That was part of the original agreement and was still within the clock period. Even though the TIF phases start at different times, do they care if the end cap is the same.
Mr. Grimm said statutorily there is a 23-year clock. All TIF obligations that are issued have stated maturity of 23 years from the date that the original project was approved. This is one project area with a single clock even though it is phased by the developer.
Alderman Golfin said on the TDD changes indicated what was the reason for providing this first $230,000 annual revenues where previously it was not.
Mr. Grimm said the Dierbergs project provided that all of the revenues from the TDD would flow through to pay for obligations that were issued by the TDD. The City is trying to get the TIF obligations paid off as quickly as possible. The Mayor and staff wanted to capture the TDD revenues to pay for the TIF obligations. The negotiated point was that $230,000.
Alderman Golfin asked what is the total cost of this project. Is the amended cost any different than the original total cost?
Alan Skop said both phases are within $1 million.
Mayor Kelly said one of the key things that the City felt was important with respect to the second phase of this project is the office building at Hanley Road and what they had hoped would be an office or a hotel at Brentwood Boulevard. When the first initial RFP was put out for that Eager Road redevelopment area as a whole, it was for that entire area. No developer thought that they could bite off and do that large of a project. That is when the Promenade project evolved.
Alderman Leahy said it is his understanding that if Phase II does not happen and the City has to invoke right of first refusal there is a defined formula as to what that property once reverted could be sold for. Would it be whatever the current market rate is that day.
Mr. Grimm said there are two components. The one is the option to acquire, which is basically for acquisition costs, plus improvements, plus carry costs. One option would be for the City to exercise its option. The second alternative is to proceed under the right of first offer. If they decided they cannot get the project done they are going to put the Phase II property on the market for sale, then they would offer that property first to the City of Brentwood at the intended market price. Before they could sell it to anyone at a lower price, they would have to come back and make a new offer to the City of Brentwood at the new lower price.
Motion was made by Alderman Boyd, second by Alderman Marshall to approve and adopt Bill No. 5140. Roll call: Alderman Boyd, yes; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.
The Mayor thereupon declared Bill No. 5140 duly passed and signed same into approval thereof. Said Bill was given Ordinance No. 3844.
Bill No. 5141 – Second Amendment to Redevelopment Agreement
City Attorney Murphy gave Bill No. 5141, AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A SECOND AMENDMENT TO AND RESTATEMENT OF REDEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BRENTWOOD AND EAGER ROAD ASSOCIATES, L.L.C., its first and second readings.
Motion was made by Alderman Boyd, second by Alderman Golfin to approve and adopt Bill No. 5141. Roll call: Alderman Boyd, yes; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, abstain; Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.
The Mayor thereupon declared Bill No. 5141 duly passed and signed same into approval thereof. Said Bill was given Ordinance No. 3845.
Resolution No. 884 – Authorizing Funding to Create a TDD Along the Manchester Road Corridor
Mayor Kelly said this resolution is to start the process of creating a TDD along the Manchester Road corridor. Brentwood would be committed to $11,000 towards working to inform the public along that corridor exactly what the TDD is, how the funds would be used and why it is essential for them to use that TDD to capture those matching funds to get the State to make the improvements to Manchester Road.
Alderman Golfin asked what municipalities have come on board with this so far.
Mr. Shelton said Kirkwood and Warson Woods passed a resolution.
Alderman Golfin asked what would be the consequence if one of the other cities does not come on board.
Mayor Kelly said initially this was something that the City of Brentwood applied for to start the process. East/West Gateway wanted the other municipalities to join Brentwood. If one of the municipalities pulled out potentially they could continue with the project by just leaving that municipality out.
Economic Development Director Shelton said if voters approve the TDD portion, a municipality could not pull out until the bonds are complete.
Alderman Leahy asked if the $11,000 was included in the budget for this year.
Mayor Kelly said no it would be a new expenditure.
Alderman Marshall said the $11,000 is based on a cost sharing formula. If one of the other municipalities drop out and they come back and say it is going to cost x amount of dollars more, would the Board have to come back and vote on it again.
Mayor Kelly said they might have to increase the amount. Part of their fee was also based on the area that they had to cover as well.
Motion was made by Alderman Golfin, second by Alderman Wynn to approve and adopt Resolution No. 884. Roll call: Alderman Boyd, yes; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.
Proclamation – Clean Water Act
Motion was made by Alderman Boyd, second by Alderman Robertson to approve the proclamation supporting the Clean Water Act. All in favor, none opposed.
ACCOUNTS AGAINST THE CITY
Motion was made by Alderman Golfin, second by Alderman Cross to approve the warrant list dated October 7, 2002. All in favor, none opposed.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES AND DEPARTMENT HEADS:
Mayor Kelly thanked the residents who attended Brentwood Days. He also thanked the staff who did a fantastic job. It turned out to be another great celebration.
Mayor Kelly said the open house for the new police facility was held and about 75 to 100 residents stopped by to look at it. He thinks they were impressed with what they saw.
Mayor Kelly said at the request of Alderman Cross, he is asking that she be appointed to the Public Safety Committee.
The Mayor asked the Board if they were in favor of appointing Alderman Cross to the Public Safety Committee. All was in favor.
Public Safety Committee – No further report
Public Works Committee – No report
City Engineer – No report
Parks – No report
Zoning Administrator – No report
Ways and Means Committee – No report
Planning and Zoning – No report
City Attorney – No report
City Clerk/Administrator – No report
Director of Economic Development – No report
Excise Commissioner – No report
Library – No report
Alderman Boyd said on September 26th the Municipal League started their season at the new Chesterfield City Hall. There was a presentation from some of our neighboring communities on intermunicipal collaboration and service consolidation. The city managers of Maplewood, Clayton and Richmond Heights talked about their joint dispatching, parks and recreation and parking enforcement with further efforts under study. The Municipal League passed four resolutions. The first was a resolution supporting constitutional amendment #1 to grant home rule status to the City of St. Louis which is a statewide constitutional amendment on the ballot in November. They passed a resolution in opposition to constitutional amendment #2, which would grant collective bargaining rights to firefighters, EMT, dispatchers and potentially other municipal employees. They passed a resolution in support of constitutional amendment #4 to allow joint municipal utility contracts. They passed a resolution in support of proposition "A" which is a cigarette tax increase of .55 cent per pack and an additional 20% tax on the manufacturer’s invoice for other tobacco products. Those funds would generate about $342.6 million for the State that would be used for healthy communities and health care initiatives.
He encouraged everyone to participate in the legislative breakfast scheduled for November 16th at 9:00 a.m. with the Junior League.
Waste Management Commission – No report
Stormwater Management – No further report
Communication – No further report
Fire Department Expansion
Mayor Kelly said the fire department has been meeting with the architects and are moving along with drawings, etc. Their next meeting is on Wednesday at 4:00 p.m. at City Hall.
Housing and Accounting Department
City Clerk/Administrator Seemayer said within the next few weeks there would be some transitional moves in City Hall with the vacation of the police department. The housing and accounting departments will move where the police used to be.
Insurance Committee – No report
Alderman Leahy said in the daily police reports that they receive from the Chief shows another problem with the drinking establishment Double D Lounge.
Mayor Kelly suggested Alderman Leahy check with Excise Commissioner Clements to see if the police department has notified him. He pointed out that it was not Double D Lounge that the Board discussed a few months ago. It was Tony D Lounge.
Donna Hayden – owner of Double D Lounge stated that the incident in question was an anonymous telephone call on the evening of September 14 at approximately 1:35 a.m. They were cleaning up after closing and an officer came in. She has spoken to Chief Karabas about his reaction towards them being their and his reaction towards her. That was resolved with Chief Karabas. There was not a problem.
Motion was made by Alderman Marshall, second by Alderman Golfin to adjourn the meeting at 8:45 p.m. All in favor, none opposed.