MINUTES OF THE
REGULAR BOARD OF ALDERMEN MEETING
City Hall May 17, 2004
Council Chambers 7:00
p.m.
The Mayor led with the Pledge of
Allegiance.
Present: Alderwoman
Jepsen, Alderman Marshall, Alderman Leahy, Alderman Golfin, Alderman Kramer,
Alderman Robertson, Alderman Wynn, Alderman Cross.
City Attorney
Murphy, City Clerk/Administrator Seemayer, Zoning Administrator Wolf, Economic
Development Director Shelton, Treasurer Reynders and Executive Secretary
Williams.
Absent:None.
CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF
THE AGENDA OF THE REGULAR BOARD OF ALDERMEN MEETING OF MAY 17, 2004
Motion was made by Alderman
Golfin, second by Alderman Robertson to approve and adopt the Agenda of the
Regular Board of Aldermen Meeting of May 17, 2004. Roll call: Alderwoman
Jepsen, yes; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Golfin, yes;
Alderman Kramer, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman
Cross, yes.
CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF
THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD OF ALDERMEN MEETING OF MAY 3, 2004
Alderman Kramer stated that an
insertion was added to page 8 of the minutes regarding a discussion with he and
Jim Lahay. The change has been
reflected in the minutes.
Motion was made by Alderman
Kramer, second by Alderman Golfin to approve and adopt the Minutes of the
Regular Board of Aldermen Meeting of May 3, 2004 as amended. Roll call:
Alderwoman Jepsen, yes; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes;
Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Kramer, 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 – None
INTRODUCTIONS, READINGS, AND
PASSAGE OF BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS
1st and 2nd
Readings of Bills
Motion was made by Alderman
Robertson, second by Alderman Marshall to give Bills No. 5231, 5232, 5233, 5234
and 5235 first and second readings.
Roll call: Alderwoman Jepsen,
yes; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Golfin, yes;
Alderman Kramer, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman
Cross, yes.
Bill No. 5231 – Through Streets
City Attorney Murphy gave Bill
No. 5231, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 14 OF THE REVISED CODE OF ORDINANCES OF
THE CITY OF BRENTWOOD, MISSOURI BY DELETING TWO PARAGRAPHS IN SECTION 14-1030,
SCHEDULE DD OF SAID CHAPTER RELATING TO THROUGH STREETS; 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 Kramer read a synopsis
of Bill No. 5231 into record. This Bill
revises the traffic code by eliminating the stop sign north and south bound on
Melvin at Fawn. The stop sign on Fawn will remain. This Bill was reviewed by the
Public Safety Committee and has been recommended for passage.
Motion was made by Alderman
Robertson, second by Alderman Leahy to approve and adopt Bill No. 5231. Roll call:
Alderwoman Jepsen, yes; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes;
Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Kramer, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman
Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.
The Mayor thereupon declared Bill No. 5231 duly passed and signed same
into approval thereof. Said Bill was
given Ordinance No. 3933.
Bill No.
5232 – Agreement with Children’s Home Society
City Attorney Murphy gave Bill No. 5232, AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BRENTWOOD TO EXECUTE A BUSINESS AGREEMENT WITH THE
CHILDREN’S HOME SOCIETY IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH THE HEALTH INSURANCE PORTABILITY
AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 1996, its first and second readings.
Alderman Kramer read a synopsis of Bill No. 5232 into record. This
Bill adopts legislation that requires compliance with the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, (HIPPA) between the City of
Brentwood and the Children’s Home Society. The Act restricts medical
information from being made available without the individuals consent.
Alderman Leahy stated that the
City would be given information on certain individuals from the Children’s Home
Society as they participate in Brentwood programs. He asked City Attorney Murphy if the City would be liable for
treatment in case of emergencies and does City personnel need to be able to handle
those types of medical conditions.
City Attorney Murphy stated
no. The HIPPA deals with information
and the privacy of that information. It
does not expose any, other than violating the act itself, other exposure.
Mayor Kelly stated the children
that participate have people assisting them.
Motion was made by Alderman
Golfin, second by Alderman Marshall to approve and adopt Bill No. 5232. Roll call:
Alderwoman Jepsen, yes; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes;
Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Kramer, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman
Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.
The Mayor thereupon declared Bill
No. 5232 duly passed and signed same into approval thereof. Said Bill was given Ordinance No. 3934.
Bill No. 5233 – Plat for Subdivision
City Attorney Murphy gave Bill
No. 5233, AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A PLAT FOR SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY NUMBERED
9121 PINE AVENUE ENTITLED “PINE ESTATE” AND ESTABLISHING THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF
THIS ORDINANCE, its first and second readings.
Alderman Kramer read a synopsis
of Bill No. 5233 into record. This Bill
approves subdividing 9121 Pine Avenue into two lots. This Bill was reviewed and
approved by the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Alderman Kramer stated that he
and Alderman Cross met with the petitioner before the meeting about Bill No.
5229, which deals with construction requirements for infill housing and his
potential ability to entertain the items mention in Bill No. 5229.
John Suelthaus - President of
Kingbridge Homes/8412 Manchester Road came before the Board and stated that he
looked over the requirements of the new bill for infill construction and is in
full compliance with the requirements, with a few exceptions.
Alderwoman Jepsen stated that she
attended a Planning and Zoning Commission meeting last month and was glad to
hear Mr. Suelthaus say, even though he was not legally bound, that he was
meeting the indentures of the Parkridge subdivision. He has gone the extra mile to get his homes in and she wishes him
success.
Mr. Suelthaus stated that they
would have a meeting for the homeowners on Pine to come and preview the houses
they are planning on building.
Motion was made by Alderman
Kramer, second by Alderman Cross to approve and adopt Bill No. 5233. Roll call:
Alderwoman Jepsen, yes; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes;
Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Kramer, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman
Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.
The Mayor thereupon declared Bill
No. 5233 duly passed and signed same into approval thereof. Said Bill was given Ordinance No. 3935.
Bill No. 5234 – Affirming Validity of Lots 3 and
4
City Attorney Murphy gave Bill
No. 5234, AN ORDINANCE AFFIRMING THE VALIDITY OF LOTS 3 AND 4 OF BLOCKS 8 OF
THE ORIGINAL PLAT OF PARKRIDGE SUBDIVISION FOR PROPERTY NUMBERED 2008 PARKRIDGE
AVENUE AND ESTABLISHING THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE, its first and
second readings.
Alderman Kramer read a synopsis
of Bill No. 5234 into record. This Bill
approves subdividing 2008 Parkridge into two lots. This Bill was reviewed and
approved by the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Alderman Golfin stated that
perhaps they could take advantage of the Architectural Review Committee and
have them meet with this developer.
Mayor Kelly stated that the bill
concerning infill housing deals more with the construction site during
construction. That would not have
anything to do with architectural review.
Alderman Golfin stated that it
seems that one of the issues has been how does the development conform to the
traditional architecture of the neighborhood.
Maybe that would be some additional control in the way they subdivide
the plat and proceed with infill development.
Mayor Kelly stated that one of
the problems with the Architectural Review Board is that they do not have any
guidelines to follow. Zoning Administrator
Wolf has worked up some criteria that the Architectural Review Board could
follow. By setting up some specific
criteria when a building application comes in they can send that application
back to the Architectural Review Board if they have those standards to
follow. He will be recommending the
criteria to the Public Works Committee as well as the Planning and Zoning
Commission.
Motion was made by Alderman
Kramer, second by Alderman Golfin to approve and adopt Bill No. 5234. Roll call:
Alderwoman Jepsen, yes; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes;
Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Kramer, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman
Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.
The Mayor thereupon declared Bill
No. 5234 duly passed and signed same into approval thereof. Said Bill was given Ordinance No. 3936.
Bill No. 5235 – Intergovernmental Cooperation
Agreement
City Attorney Murphy gave Bill
No. 5235, AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL
COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BRENTWOOD AND THE BRENTWOOD/STRASSNER
ROAD TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, its first and second readings.
Alderman Kramer read a synopsis
of Bill No. 5235 into record. This Bill
allows the Mayor to enter into an intergovernmental cooperation agreement with
the Strassner Road Transportation Development District for the purpose of
collecting the one-half cent transportation sales tax. The City will receive
one percent of the collected amount to offset the expenses related to the
bookkeeping.
Mayor Kelly stated the first
Strassner Road TDD meeting was held this past week. The agreement was adopted by the TDD board. The City will be the office for collection
of the TDD tax and will get 1% as its fee to cover costs in doing that.
Alderman Leahy stated page 3 of
the indenture Exhibit C is cited, which is the indenture itself. That document has yet to be provided. He asked what side of Strassner Road would
properties need to be acquired on.
Mayor Kelly stated that Strassner
Road is not changing at all.
Economic Development Director
Shelton came before the Board and stated that the TDD that is being
contemplated would not impact that. The
TDD would not pay for any work through that area of the Court.
Alderman Leahy asked how does the
Kenilworth Tax Increment Financing become part of this TDD.
Economic Development Director
Shelton stated that the Kenilworth TDD is already a transporation development
district, just as the City of Brentwood and the County, so it has to be
included.
Alderman Leahy stated that the
City will collect a 1% operating administration fee which is basically,
according to page 7, $2,500 a month which is $30,000 a year. Is that 1% they are looking at versus the
$300,000 in actual TIF money that would come into the general revenue.
Shannon Creighton – Gilmore &
Bell came before the Board and stated that the 1% is based on total
collections. The $2,500 a month is
actually administrative cost for the district.
That goes to any additional cost unrelated to the collection of tax.
Alderman Leahy asked if he is
correct in that the TDD has no actual time limit.
Ms. Creighton said yes. They are not permitted to repeal the tax
until the TDD obligations are paid off.
In no circumstance will the TDD extend past 40 years.
Alderman Leahy stated that is not
established in this document, unless it is a state statute provision.
Ms. Creighton stated the voters
approved a tax for 25 years.
Alderman Leahy asked if they need
to spell that out in the intergovernmental agreement.
Ms. Creighton said no. This provision restates what the state
statute says, which states that the TDD sales tax can not be repealed until the
TDD obligations are paid. They believe
they will be paid off within the 25 years.
Alderwoman Jepsen stated that on
page 7, section 4.2 states, . . . the moneys deposited into the TDD sales tax
trust fund . . . She asked if bonds are sold to finance those.
Mayor Kelly stated that the bonds
would be sold around the middle of June for the amount somewhere between $8.4
and $8.6 million. The funds go to pay
for the Metro link bridge, which is probably $6.5 million. They have allocated
$400,000 for the improvements in front of the Promenade on Eager Road. They have improvements at Wrenwood entering
Brentwood Forest and also exiting the park trails and funding the new bridge
over the creek to tie those trails together.
If additional funds are left over after those projects are paid for they
could use those funds to help relocate the public works facility. If funds are available they could also use
those funds to contribute the $300,000 for the improvements to the intersection
of Hanley and Manchester. Because of
the way the language was stated with St. Louis County who is a partner in this,
the funds could be used on Hanley Road.
The bonds would be issued and the projects would then be funded. The sales tax is collected, put into a
special account and payments are made.
Ms. Creighton stated that the
money is transferred to the bond trustee every 15th of the month.
Alderwoman Jepsen asked if the 2%
are paid off with the bonds or does it go into the sales tax pool.
City Administrator Seemayer
stated that the City does not receive that.
Anybody that pays sales tax, that pays it within the first ten days of
the month, is allowed to take a 2% credit.
Alderman Leahy asked when does
the tax take effect and when and who notifies the businesses in order to adjust
the tax rate.
Mayor Kelly stated City staff is
working on that and it will take effect July 1st. The TDD is a ½ cent sales tax. A ¼ cent goes to the TDD. The other ¼ cent is used to pay back the
TIFs in the area sooner. The Promenade
will benefit from the ¼ cent sales tax to help pay them down sooner.
Alderman Leahy asked when would
the indenture agreements be written up identifying the projects.
Ms. Creighton stated that the
indenture is written. The TDD is the
one that enters into the indenture with the bond trustee. The bonds are not obligations of the City
they are obligations of the district.
The indenture will not be before this board. The project description that is included in the indenture is the
same project description that is included in the petition.
Motion was made by Alderman
Cross, second by Alderman Marshall to approve and adopt Bill No. 5235. Roll call:
Alderwoman Jepsen, yes; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes;
Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Kramer, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman
Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.
The Mayor thereupon declared Bill
No. 5235 duly passed and signed same into approval thereof. Said Bill was given
Ordinance No. 3937.
Resolution No. 908 – MSD
Mayor Kelly stated that
Resolution No. 908 is to support MSD’s program for buying out properties in the
flood way. There are two pieces of
properties in Hanley Industrial Court that are for sale and MSD is working with
them. The two pieces of properties are
the Aquarium and Lawlor’s Construction.
Alderwoman Jepsen stated that
City Administrator Seemayer and Economic Development Director Shelton explained
that once MSD buy the property, it is deeded back to the City and would be used
as park property. Is there any sort of
mechanism in place that would flood proof some of the buildings and keep them
as viable producers for the tax base.
Economic Development Director
Shelton stated that the study identifies the cost to flood proof. If the cost to flood proof and the number of
frequencies of damages exceeds a certain amount they say it is not cost
effective and they will not flood proof in the flood way. They will do flood proofing as part of this
program. There are properties that they
would flood proof but they have to be in the flood plain, outside of the flood
way which is much worse. This is a
program to flood proof in the flood plain and remove in the flood way.
Alderwoman Jepsen stated that
there are a lot of properties indicated on the map and rather than see them all
go, with the school district clamoring for every property tax dollar they can
get, it just seems that something else might be tried to keep the properties
viable and keep them producing the taxes.
Mayor Kelly stated that a lot of
areas indicated on the map are not areas that they could afford to buy
out. The City could wait for something
like that to happen but whether it is going to happen or not is another
story. There are certain areas that you
are not going to be able to fix.
Alderman Golfin stated that in
flood ways and flood plains the buyout of property and especially for park
areas is by far the preferred solution.
Any type of flood proofing you could do by mechanical means or even
structural means is ultimately going to be structured to some failure in
time.
Alderman Marshall stated that
most of the people that bought property down there bought it knowing that it
flooded. He has a problem with fixing
something that was bought at a much more depressed price, fixing it so they get
the benefit. That would increase the
value of the property considerably.
Alderman Robertson asked what is
the condition they will leave it in.
Will they remove the structure and any hard surfaces?
Economic Development Director
Shelton stated that they would work with the City and if funds were available
they would probably prepare the area.
If funds were not available they would probably want the City’s
cooperation to prepare it.
Alderman Robertson asked what is
the size of the property.
Economic Development Director
Shelton stated that they did not measure total square footage of those
particular properties. That would be up to MSD. They would have to complete an appraisal.
Alderman Marshall asked if the
properties that are flooding have to obtain flood insurance.
Mayor Kelly stated yes.
Alderman Marshall asked if they
refuse the buyout are they excluded from the insurance. Does it have any impact on flood insurance
as a City?
Economic Development Director
Shelton stated that he does not believe they would be excluded. They are still entitled to flood
insurance. It has no impact on the
City’s insurance.
Alderman Golfin asked if MSD has
the final discretion in doing the buyout.
Mayor Kelly stated yes.
City Administrator Seemayer
stated that this is a voluntary program.
The offer is made and no one is forced to leave.
Alderwoman Jepsen asked what is
the difference between a resolution and an ordinance and why is the MSD buyout
program coming in resolution form.
City Attorney Murphy stated that
a resolution is a statement of policy and an ordinance is an enactment of
legislation. This is not enacting
legislation; it is stating a policy of the City. It will remain the policy of the City until there is some
affirmative action to repeal it.
Motion was made by Alderman
Leahy, second by Alderman Golfin to approve and adopt Resolution No. 908. Alderwoman Jepsen, yes; Alderman Marshall,
yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Kramer, yes; Alderman
Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.
Resolution No. 909 – Moratorium
Mayor Kelly stated that
Resolution No. 909 was introduced at the last meeting. Mayor Kelly read the Resolution into
record. It is attached to the
minutes. The Resolution would place a
moratorium on City issued RFPs until the completion of the City’s Comprehensive
Master Plan. RFPs would only be
considered if initiated by the property owners or in specific areas already
approved for development.
Mayor Kelly stated he brought the
resolution up because it is important to encourage participation in the
Comprehensive Plan as they go through the process and to calm some of the
misinformation and information that’s circulating that areas of the City are up
for redevelopment and that there are secret plans taking place in order to
redevelop parts of the City. Any future
redevelopment or improvements need to come out of the Comprehensive Plan. There is nothing wrong with the City taking
a step back and saying they do not have to look at this and do not have to
worry about that until the Comprehensive Plan is completed. It will encourage people to participate and
have an open mind as they go through that process over the next year to year
and a half.
Alderman Wynn stated that for
quite some time now he has had people approach him with the same fear that the
Mayor is talking about. This will be
very good in helping to give them some time to let the people know they are not
just rushing out and taking up all the land for development.
Alderman Leahy stated that he
would like to make an amendment to the Resolution. He would like to make a motion that they amend the Resolution to
remove the words “until such time as the City’s Comprehensive Plan update is
completed and approved” in the resolution title and in section 1. He asked to establish that the City of
Brentwood would not go out for RFPs without the written permission and
agreement of the property owners at any time in the future.
Alderman Marshall stated he was
under the impression that the Comprehensive Plan was the voice of the
people. That is the guide they need to
follow. He does not think they should
make any changes until that plan is in place.
Alderman Leahy stated as the
resolution is currently written upon that document being approved this
resolution would become ended. He would
like to change it so that it goes perpetual; as long as the properties owners of
record are in writing that they approve the City going out for an RFP?
Alderman Marshall asked that it
be kept as is, wait and see what the Comprehensive Plan says. He does not like making blind decisions.
Alderman Golfin suggested
referring the resolution to the Ways and Means Committee for full discussion
where everyone can bring up their concerns about it and then bring it back to
the Board. It is very
comprehensive. The fact that they would
never do something, no matter what it is, is like never say never. It precludes the judicious legislation by
this Board for an indefinite period of time.
Mayor Kelly asked that the Board
entertain it tonight. He understands
Alderman Leahy’s concerns. Over the
period of the next year or so as they go through the Comprehensive Plan process
if that is something the Board wants to initiate they could always add it. One of the concerns with saying that the
City would never issue an RFP without written consent of the residents is
getting into issues of how many property owners are you talking about. If a developer comes in and gets 50% of a
property and brings a proposal to the City which the City is required to put
out an RFP for then what is going to be the process then.
Alderman Wynn stated that the
Mayor has brought it up and it is now public.
It should be decided on. He
thinks a lot of people would be glad to hear you are going to do it for a year
to year and a half. He wonders what it
would be if they started backing up on it and taking it apart. It is a resolution, which does not carry the
weight of an ordinance.
Alderman Kramer stated that he
concurs with Alderman Golfin. In
section 1 there is a question about the percentage of property owners that may
or may not come into play. In a
nutshell this is taking the opportunity for evaluation out of their hands and
out of whoever may become elected next April and perhaps the election after
that. He does not have any problem with
being critical with development, developers or RFPs. Some folks may know that he was the only member of the Planning
and Zoning Commission that voted no on the request by the petitioner for the
West Community Credit Union. Through
some great deal of machinations with the developer and the neighborhood and a
number of conversations that took place, things change with petition. The developer and the neighbors gave a
little bit and eventually the neighborhood appeared to be an affirmation of
that proposal. With Resolution No. 909,
they would be foregoing the opportunity for the same type of critical
evaluation as each opportunity may or may not arise to do what is or is not in
the best interest of the entire City.
He does not want to take that choice away from this group, himself or the
next class of aldermen. Who know what
they think may or may not happen in terms of future development and those
opportunities and what the Comprehensive Plan may or may not say? They do not know exactly what the facts are
going to be. They have a very well
thought out Comprehensive Plan, though showing some age admittedly from the
fall of 1991. They do have a little
known potentially by some book of recommended amendments to that plan from CDG,
which took place in the fall of 1995.
Some of the development that has taken place since 1991 has borrowed
from both of those ideas, some has not.
Each request for proposals was carefully considered by the Aldermen with
the facts in hand at the time before the issuance. Therefore since the budgeting for a Comprehensive Plan seemingly
only becomes available once or maybe twice in a decade, it is unrealistic to
say that they can’t do a critical evaluation as aldermen or are not skilled
enough to do a critical evaluation during the interim between those plans.
Mayor Kelly stated that this
resolution is only saying that the City will not initiate the RFPs, meaning
that the City is not going to designate an area of the City and say now they
want to go out for an RFP to see if there is a developer interested. If property owners come to the City and say
that they want to do something that is a completely different story. What he is trying to say to the residents of
Brentwood and the business owners is that the City is not going to initiate
that. He does not think it is going to
tie their hands. Right now there are no
areas that the City is considering redeveloping. It would be wrong for them to do that now until the
Comprehensive Plan is completed.
Alderman Golfin stated that it is
obvious they need some full discussion on this. He does not want to take a position against the resolution. He sees what the objective is and thinks it
is good. However it will take some good
examination before they commit to it.
There are a lot of inferences that he does not like. He wonders for instance, what kind of
message does it send to good and valid developers that they really want to work
and cooperate with. What would they
have in Brentwood if they did not have good cooperation with some developers
that are doing good things? Are they
going to succumb to the charge, and he does not know that it is a charge, that
what they have done in Brentwood is not good.
He does not like that concept of this resolution. What they have done in Brentwood is
good. The inferences that they have
taken residential property all over the place, is not true. They have correctly redeveloped areas that
were not at their best land use. He can
see that they require some education, information and correction of false
information that is out there, but he will not support the resolution this
evening without further discussion.
Alderman Leahy stated that he is
in the same position as Alderman Golfin.
His request is per the public comment sessions that they have had prior
to the current RFP that they voted on two weeks ago. It is his understanding that only two property owners were ever
consulted on the second release of the RFP and one of which was not even in the
boundary of the information that has been brought to the Board. He is asking that it be in writing to the
members of the Board, that they know that when they go out for an RFP they
actually have the support of the people coming forward because they have some
written documentation. At present he is
not aware that any written documentation exists for the Kenilworth group, Evans
Place group or for the RFP put out for the southwest Brentwood area. This is why he is asking for the resolution
to be changed so that they make sure they get it in writing and document that
they do have the support of the neighborhood, residents, or businesses. He is in the position of having in front of
him a resolution he would love to support but can not in the form that it is
in.
Mayor Kelly stated that the
Rankin area development was petitioned by the residents. There was also request from Kenilworth for
that RFP. It was almost 100 of the 120
property owners in Evans Place that petitioned the City. The request from Rankin area is in writing. The other ones would have been where they
came up to the Board meetings.
Economic Development Director
Shelton stated that for the Kenilworth redevelopment you could probably go back
and check the minutes. Meeting after
meeting the residents came and said move it forward.
Mayor Kelly stated that with
respect to notification with the current RFP, all of those properties were
notified that the RFP was going out.
They met with two of the property owners of the owner occupied
properties. Every property owner that
was included in the RFP area that they could find, because some of them are
hidden corporations, was notified.
Alderwoman Jepsen stated that in
the form the resolution is in she agrees that it should not be passed
tonight. She asked what is the emphasis
behind this. There are those that would
say because the Comprehensive Plan Committee first started meeting in May of
2003, literally a year ago, the second RFP for the Hanley Industrial Court was
put out in October. The Comprehensive
Plan Committee was already meeting. The
RFP went out. What is the major event
that now they are closing the barn door.
It would seem the cows are already out wandering around the
highway. Why was this announced at the
end of the last meeting when they started the ball rolling on Hanley Industrial
Court at the beginning of the meeting?
Mayor Kelly stated it was brought
up under Resolutions at the last meeting because it is in resolution form. The reason for the RFP on Hanley Industrial
Court was as much of a protection from the City’s standpoint because they knew
that developers were looking at that area and in order to let the developing
public know that they were not interested in big boxed development and that if
developers were looking at that area in Hanley Industrial Court that they were
looking for a different type of development.
What the City is focusing on now is more mixed-use development with a
residential component, which is what the RFP said. From the City’s standpoint, what the Board discussed back then
was that to a certain extent the RFP was as much of a defensive thing instead
of just waiting for developers to come in get control of property and then come
to the City with something that they don’t want. His goal is to let the residents and the business owners know
that Pat Kelly does not have a secret plan to redevelop Hanley Industrial Court. He does not have any plans to redevelop
anything in Brentwood. They want to
encourage people to come out and work on the Comprehensive Plan. It will also encourage the Board to make
sure the Comprehensive Plan is done.
The resolution makes a statement to the residents that the City is going
to focus on the Comprehensive Plan as they move forward and not be focused on
redeveloping areas in the City of Brentwood.
Alderman Golfin stated that he is
in perfect agreement with the intent of the resolution. He does not think they have written it to
consider all the questions that have been raised. He is not inferring that it should be more restrictive or less
restrictive. It needs studying. He will vote against it but hope that it
will come back from the Ways and Means Committee so they could review it again
more thoroughly rather than push it through.
Motion was made Alderman Wynn,
second by Alderman Marshall to approve and adopt Resolution No. 909. Roll call:
Alderwoman Jepsen, no; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, no;
Alderman Golfin, no; Alderman Kramer, no; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman
Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.
Since the vote is tied at four
for the resolution and four against the resolution, the Mayor voted yes to
break the tie vote.
Resolution No. 909 passes.
ACCOUNTS AGAINST THE CITY
Motion was made by Alderman
Marshall, second by Alderman Robertson to approve the revised warrant list
dated May 17th. All in favor
none opposed.
Alderman Leahy stated there was a
listing of $6,900 to Development Strategies for services rendered. He asked for an explanation.
City Administrator Seemayer
stated that the $6,900 is for work they are doing on the analysis of the
proposed development within Hanley Industrial Court. Those funds are reimbursed to the City by the developer in the
funding agreement. They pay Development Strategies but they receive the money
through MLP.
Alderman Leahy asked if this is a
partial billing for that effort.
City Administrator Seemayer
responded yes.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES AND
DEPARTMENT HEADS:
Mayor’s Report
Mayor Kelly stated an executive
session would be held following the regular meeting on real estate and
personnel matters.
Mayor Kelly stated that Coffee
with the Mayor would be held on May 28th at 9:00 a.m.
Mayor Kelly stated that it was
brought to his attention the weekend before last and then confirmed last
Tuesday when he met with the Mayor of Rock Hill that they are considering
farming out their police and fire department in order to help their financial
situation. They would like the City of
Brentwood to submit a proposal. They
want the City’s proposal by tomorrow for their Board meeting. The only reason the City would consider
taking over their police is that the City does have a five-year contract with
them to do their dispatching. If they
are going to contract with St. Louis County to do their policing, he is sure
they are not going to pay the City to do their dispatching because that would
be done through St. Louis County, would mean that the City would have to
terminate the three employees that were hired to work for Brentwood to take on
the added duties of their dispatch services.
That is a five-year contract and they are not even a year into the
contract yet.
Mayor Kelly stated that he will
attend their meeting tomorrow night and convey to them that the City would
entertain something but could not make a presentation by tomorrow evening at
their Board of Aldermen meeting.
Mayor Kelly announced the annual
charity golf tournament coming up on June 18th at Paradise Valley
Country Club. The recipients this year
will be Brentwood Congregational Early Childhood Center, Brentwood Foundation
and St. Mary Magdalen Athletic Association.
Mayor Kelly stated committee
appointment list was at everyone’s places.
Alderman Leahy requested to serve
on the Ways and Means Committee.
Mayor Kelly stated that would be
fine.
Motion was made by Alderman
Kramer, second by Alderman Golfin to adopt the amended committee appointment list. All in favor none opposed.
Mayor Kelly thanked Greg Reynders
for bringing the article that was in the business section of the paper this
weekend. He would like to recognize
Christine Bierman owner of Brentwood based Colt Safety Fire and Rescue. The article stated that Christine Bierman is
one of five women entrepreneurs nationally who will be honored next week by the
Small Business Administration.
Christine Bierman Colt’s founder and Chief Executive were chosen for
outstanding achievement in business.
She will be recognized by the SBA on Thursday in Orlando Florida. Mayor Kelly congratulated Christine
Bierman. She works very hard. She was a big supporter of the Manchester
Road TDD when they were going through that process and has been involved with
the Brentwood Economic Council for a number of years.
Public Safety Committee
Alderman Robertson stated that he
would like to present an honor that Brentwood Fire Department has earned for
the depth of its training and expertise.
He would ask that everybody recognize the accomplishments of the fire
department and how excellent they really are.
This certifies that they have completed 304 hours of non-compensated
special training beyond their normal requirements. It was presented by the
Greater St. Louis Area Fire Chief’s Association.
Public Works Committee
Alderman Wynn stated that the
committees have changed and he is no longer on the Public Works Committee. Out of the seven terms he has served as
alderman most of them were spent with the Public Works Committee. It has been a delightful time working with
Zoning Administrator Wolf, Superintendent Nahmensen, Former Director of Parks
and Rec. deJong, City Administrator Seemayer and others that came in. It is wonderful to see the work they have
accomplished. The way they have taken
care of the streets in snow and everything that has been asked of them. It has been a privilege and he enjoyed his
time there.
City Engineer – No report
Parks – No report
Zoning Administrator – No
report
Ways and
Means Committee – No report
Planning and Zoning – No report
City Attorney
City Attorney Murphy stated that he is happy to report that the Lennox
Group has dismissed their appeal in the case involving a denial of zoning
issue.
City Clerk/Administrator – No report
Director
of Economic Development
Economic Development Director Shelton reminded the Board that Metro
would be having a bus tour of the Metro link construction for public
officials. If you would like to attend
both of them are going to be in the morning.
The next meeting for the Comprehensive Plan Committee will be held on
June 23rd.
Excise Commissioner – No report
Library – No report
Municipal League – No report
Waste Management Commission
Alderman Golfin stated that the City municipal services are doing very
well. He had a conversation with City
Administrator Seemayer and informed him that residents are now requesting 65
and 95-gallon containers for their recycle goods. The City will have more recycle than it has garbage and that is a
big plus.
Storm Water Management – No report
Communication – No report
Insurance Committee – No report
Historical Society – No report
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None
NEW BUSINESS
Mayor Kelly stated that they sent out notices to all the businesses on
Manchester Road regarding a meeting on Thursday at 1:30 p.m. to talk about the
future of the TDD for Manchester Road.
On a disappointing note they received a fax from Kirkwood last week that
they no longer want to participate in any future TDD for Manchester Road. They decided that they could not overcome
the negative information that was put out there.
There will be a Ward 3 meeting Tuesday, May 25th 7:00 p.m.
at City Hall.
Recess
Motion was made by Alderman Kramer, second by Alderman Robertson to
recess the meeting at 8:19 p.m. for executive session. All in favor none opposed.
Executive
Session
Motion was made by Alderman Leahy, second by Alderman Marshall to enter
executive session on a real estate and personnel matters at 8:30 p.m. All in favor none opposed.
After discussion, motion was made by Alderman Marshall, second by
Alderman Robertson to return to open session at 8:52 p.m. All in favor none opposed.
Motion was made by Alderman Leahy, second by Alderman Golfin to place
an ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 3912 on the next meeting agenda. Roll call:
Alderwoman Jepsen, yes; Alderman Marshall, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes;
Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Kramer, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman
Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, no.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion was made by Alderman Wynn, second by Alderman Leahy to adjourn
the meeting at 9:02 p.m. All in favor
none opposed.
Pat Kelly, Mayor
Attest:
Chris Seemayer, City Clerk