JULY 6, 1998

    The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri, met for a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Monday, July 6, 1998, in the Council Chamber of the City of Columbia, Missouri.  The roll was taken with the following results:  Council members CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, and JANKU were present.

    The minutes of the regular meeting of June 15, 1998, were approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Ms. Coble and a second by Mr. Campbell.

    Mayor Hindman noted that R145-98 would be added under New Business.
    The agenda, as amended, including the Consent Agenda, was approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Campbell and a second by Mr. Janku.

1.    Presentation to David Wollersheim - National Service Award
    Mayor Hindman presented David Wollersheim with a plaque from the American Public Power Association, a national award given to a citizen who has made an outstanding contribution to their community as well as to the industry of municipally owned utilities.  Mayor Hindman introduced Mr. Wollersheim and explained that he has been a member of the Water and Light Advisory Board for the past 24 years, many of those years as Chair.  He also noted that Mr. Wollersheim was an active participant in four bond issues relating to capital improvements for the utility.
    Mr. Wollersheim said that a very large part of the credit for the award goes to the other members of the Water and Light Advisory Board.  He said Columbia is very fortunate to have Dick Malon as its Water and Light Director.  He thanked the City for giving him the opportunity to serve the community for 24 years.


B157-98     Amending Chapter 29 of the City code to establish an historic preservation overlay district.
    The bill was given third reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this issue had been tabled from the June 1, 1998, meeting, and numerous changes had been proposed, primarily by the apartment owners.
    Mr. Coffman made the motion to amend B157-98 per the first page (1-14) of the amendment sheet, excluding number five, (e)(5).   The motion was seconded by Mr. Campbell.
    Given the fact that many of the items included in the amendment deal with the issues of notice and protection of minority interests, Mr. Janku said he spoke to Mr. Boeckmann about how this ordinance would be integrated into the existing zoning ordinances.  Mr. Boeckmann said amendment procedures would apply to the initial formation of the district.  He explained that when establishing an historic district or a landmark, one goes through the zoning process.  An historic preservation district is essentially an overlay zone they would be placed on property.  A public hearing notice 15 days before the meeting is required, both before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, giving those affected by the district the right to protest such a designation.  Mr. Boeckmann said 30% of the homeowners would be needed to protest, either 30% in the area to be included in the district or within lines drawn 185 feet from the district.  Mr. Janku understood a two-thirds vote of the Council is required to establish an historic preservation district.
    Mr. Coffman asked if the protest petition would have to be submitted at the time the application is made to the Historic Preservation Commission.  Mr. Boeckmann said it would be at the time it reaches Planning and Zoning.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Debbie Sheals, Chairperson of the Historic Preservation Exploratory Committee, felt Mr. Coffman's amendment to be acceptable and added that it is representative of a very good compromise.  As of one month ago, the Committee felt all differences could be worked out with the apartment owners, but they could not agree on the exclusionary district language.  The more it was worked on, the more tangled it became.  She said Mr. Coffman's version gives a clear compromise, and she stressed that the ordinance is based on what was obtained from the Planning and Zoning Commission, which included two years of work by the Exploratory Committee and City staff review.  Ms. Sheals regrets the Committee could not please the apartment owners with the exclusionary district, but she had done some research and could not find it in any preservation ordinance.  Ms. Sheals said the Historic Preservation Office thought it was really an unusual request, and she felt it would go against what the Committee spent two years working on.  She noted the Committee had originally agreed to the exclusionary district, but the more thought given to it, the harder it was to accept.
    Mr. Kruse understood the 60% petition provision was generous compared to other communities that have historic preservation ordinances.  Ms. Sheals said it was generous.  She had done a phone survey and found that most communities leave it totally to the discretion of the Council.  If after the fact 30% of the affected residents oppose the district, then it has to be an override, but mostly she said it is left to the Council.  Ms. Sheals said the City of Lawrence starts at 20%, a sliding scale.  She noted that many cities do less than a majority approval and few go over 60%.
    David Rogers, an attorney with offices at 813 E. Walnut, spoke on behalf of the Columbia Apartment Owners Association.  He said up until last Tuesday, they felt they would be in total agreement to the proposed ordinance, but the exclusionary district became a stumbling point at the last moment.  Mr. Rogers said with Mr. Coffman's amendment, there are a number of things that make this a better ordinance.  Without the exclusionary district, Mr. Rogers said there could be the situation of minority interests being trampled by means of how a district is drawn.
    Ben Londeree, 2601 Chapel Wood Terrace, President of the Columbia Apartment Association, explained that he does not own any property that would appear to lie in a potential historic preservation district.  Overall, Dr. Londeree felt it is an excellent document that contains some checks and balances to prevent wholesale trampling of property rights by overly aggressive neighborhood groups.  He understood the point of contention seems to be the exclusionary districts -- the ability for well-defined areas of opposing property owners to opt out of the preservation district if certain conditions were met.  Dr. Londeree explained that he had delivered packets to the Council yesterday containing some charts.  Using the overhead, he displayed the charts which depicted the Association's concerns about supporters being able to force their controls over a well-defined opposing area.  He said the Apartment Association had proposed exclusionary districts to level the playing field.  His point is that it boils down to a boundary issue.  Through mediation of the two groups, boundaries to the historic district might be established that are fair to most property owners and lead to cooperation rather than an all out war between the opposing groups.  Dr. Londeree is hopeful the Council would see fit to include some protections from such power grabs.  He said a procedure was worked out between a representative of the Dispute Resolutions Center at the University, Deb Sheals, and himself.
    Janet Hammen, 1416 Wilson, spoke on behalf of the East Campus Neighborhood Association, who supports the ordinance and the amendment.  She said part of their neighborhood had become a National Historic District and that the natural progression had been to obtain the City's help in establishing historic preservation.  Although the East Campus Association has taken the lead, Ms. Hammen noted this is a proposal that will benefit the entire City.  The Neighborhood Association felt Mr. Coffman's proposal to be reasonable, and the exclusionary district has the potential to completely do away with any kind of historic district.  Ms. Hammen added that defining the boundaries of a historic district will be part of the process of setting up a local district so people will not be excluded.  Anyone owning property will be included in setting up boundaries and possible stipulations that would come into play.
    Mr. Janku asked what type of tax credits would be available in historic districts.  Ms. Hammen said currently in the National Historic District there is a 20% federal tax credit available, and a 25% state tax credit available when a local district comes in.  She said there are other incentives that can be offered.
    Osmund Overby, 1118 W. Rollins, explained that he has been a member of the Exploratory Committee for the last two years.  As a professor of art history and archeology, he pointed out that he has been deeply involved in historic preservation for 40 years in many different parts of the country, and for over 30 years he has been teaching historic preservation to the students at the University of Missouri.  From that broad perspective, Dr. Overby assured the Council that this is an awfully good ordinance.  He said historic preservation districts are not new and experimental -- the first historic preservation ordinance in this country was created in 1931 in Charleston, and there have been thousands of them throughout the country since, and dozens in Missouri.
    Renee Hulshoff, 1411 Bouchelle, urged the Council to support the ordinance with Mr. Coffman's proposed amendment.  She thought the amendment was sound and a good piece of conservative legislation that will preserve what cannot be replaced.
    Bonnie Bourne, 1506 University, a member of the Exploratory Committee, spoke in favor of the ordinance as she felt it would help preserve Columbia's rich history.  She noted that approximately 38 communities in Missouri have local historic ordinances.
    Dan Fischboch, 402 Himalayas, pointed out that once rights are taken away, they cannot be given back.
    Matt Harline, 301 McNab, commended Debbie Sheals for her efforts in working on this issue.  He said the Council has supported the notion of walkable, mixed use, moderate density communities.  Mr. Harline said such districts do not necessarily have to be created because they already exist in Columbia and need only to be preserved.
    Greg Olson, 217 W. Broadway, Curator of the Boone County Historical Society, said that several members of the Society had been involved in putting this ordinance together.  He could not speak for all members of the Society, but several were present and are in support of the ordinance.   They thought it would be a great step in preserving what already exists in Columbia.
    Clyde Wilson, 1719 University, spoke in favor of the ordinance with the amendment, but thought the strongest bargaining tool was lost when it was decided to accept the 60% majority for the establishment of a district.  He asked the Council to leave it out of the amendment.
    Mark Stephenson, offices at 4th & Broadway in a building that was built in 1906.  He referred the Council to a section in the document prepared by the Apartment Association dealing with mediation, page 6, subsection (5).  He asked the Council to support the recommendation.  Mr. Stephenson said he thought change and the planning process were things that should be preserved.  When a person buys an R-3 zoned piece of property with an intent to develop it, he did not think the City should jerk the rug out from under their feet.
    When refurbishing a piece of property, Mrs. Crockett asked if an apartment owner is entitled to the same 25% tax credit an individual property owner would receive.  Mr. Stephenson said he personally did not because of alternative minimum tax calculation problems.
    Mr. Coffman asked if it was true that the federal tax credit is only applicable to landlords or commercial owners of property.  Mr. Stephenson said he did not know.
    Peter Bartok, a landlord with offices at 909 Park Avenue, said they appreciated having input into the issue, but felt they had not had enough input.  He thought the ordinance had the potential for causing some negative conditions in the market place like increased rents and increased property valuations.  In his neighborhoods (East Campus, Benton Stephens, and the downtown area), Mr. Bartok said valuations have increased twofold in the last five years.  He said this ordinance has the potential to result in a massive down zoning.  Mr. Bartok is hopeful meetings can continue after passage of the ordinance so that some of the Apartment Association's input could be incorporated or at least discussed.
    Mr. Janku asked how this ordinance would increase property values.  Mr. Bartok referred to supply and demand -- people will pay whatever it takes to live in a neighborhood they want to be in.  His opinion was that the supply would be restricted by the ordinance.
    Linda Rootes, 807 N. Eighth Street, said she had worked for a long time on stabilizing the central city.  She has purchased several homes and has watched homes sell.  She said the lower priced homes are the ones that are not ready for homeowners, and a certain amount of investment has to be made to these structures.  She said Mr. Bartok's comments about houses being priced out of the range of homeowners is not a true situation, but these buildings may be priced out of the range of cash flow landlords who are looking to buy a cheap house.  Ms. Rootes explained that rent prices in her neighborhood and in the central city are set by the federal government through the Section 8 Policy.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Coffman said just as Debbie Sheals has put a lot of energy and dedication into this ordinance, the Apartment Association has made considerable positive input into the version he proposed, and in particular, Ben Londeree has put a lot of very positive effort into it.  He pointed out that many resident owners who would support an historic preservation ordinance have the vast majority of their savings in their home, and what happens around their homes affects their savings and their economic well being.  He said it has to be a balance between those who like to have the tax breaks and improve their home and their neighborhood, and others who would like to speculate and maybe do other things with the property.  Mr. Coffman noted that his amendment did not have the mediation language in it, but it could possibly be added later.  He felt the exclusionary language was untested and complicated the ordinance too much, and thought a good balance would be achieved with just the percentage.  He said if the Council appoints some good, moderate individuals with knowledge of property and renovation, the City would get common sense restrictions that do not go too far and trample over people's rights.  He saw the potential for this ordinance to bring neighborhoods together.
    Mr. Janku thought there are a number of protections in place, both in this ordinance and in the existing zoning ordinance, to protect those who are concerned about their property being improperly placed in the district.  Regarding the exclusionary district, he said the way it was drafted it could have potentially excluded certain historic properties from eligibility for tax credits, which helps make preservation financially possible.  In addition, it would have made it impossible even for a landmark property to qualify for designation.  He said the Commission will require a very mixed group of people and would have the authority to prepare procedural regulations.  Mr. Janku thought that could include some form of mediation.
    Mr. Campbell said he had trouble with the exclusionary district because it seemed to give differential rights or powers to people who might be located on the borders versus those who might be located in the central part of the area.  He thought everybody should be treated separately.  Mr. Campbell said most of the major ordinances need fine tuning after it is determined where the holes are.  He is concerned that the City may have made the hurdles very high on this ordinance, making it very difficult for the zones to be established.  Mr. Campbell said the Council may need to come back and reassess some of the requirements.
    The motion to amend, made by Mr. Coffman, seconded by Mr. Janku, was approved by voice vote.
    B157-98, as amended, was read with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, COBLE, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  ABSTAINING:  HINDMAN.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

R144-98     Providing staff support for the Community/Recreation Center Committee.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mayor Hindman noted that he had appointed a Committee to look into the possibility of a recreation center for the City of Columbia.  This Committee would be examining what such a center should contain and any possible affiliations with YMCA's if appropriate.  Mayor Hindman introduced the Co-chairs of the Committee, Naomi Cupp and Greg Steinhoff.
    Naomi Cupp explained that she is very excited about the possibility of developing a recreational center.  She said the Mayor had put together a wonderful group of people who are also excited about it.  She and Mr. Steinhoff have been approached by many people who are happy the issue is being discussed again.
    Greg Steinhoff thanked Mayor Hindman for allowing him to work with this tremendous committee.  He said they would ultimately have in front of the Council a very informational report that will pull together many different opinions resulting in a fine recreational facility.
    Mr. Beck explained that this resolution authorizes the City staff to provide some resources to the Committee regarding travel and staff support.
    The vote on R144-98 was recorded as follows;  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

B182-98     Authorizing water main crossing construction project on Vawter School Road, Old Millcreek Road and
                   Scott Boulevard.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that the City staff would be working with the Boone County Highway Department to provide for the placement of a water line under the road prior to its completion.  The estimated cost is approximately $8,000, which would come out of the Water and Light Utility Account.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
 B182-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B186-98     Establishing permanent M-C zoning on property located south of Maguire Boulevard in the Concorde
                   Office and Industrial Plaza.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that the City staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of this zoning request.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
 B186-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B187-98     Establishing permanent A-1 zoning on property located along both sides of new Haven Road, east of US
                   Highway 63.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this is a series of permanent zoning requests on recently annexed property owned by the University.  He noted this is one of the larger tracts, containing 1,465 acres.  Again, both the staff and the Commission recommended
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
 B187-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B188-98     Establishing permanent A-1 zoning on property located along both sides of Sinclair Road, south of
                   Southampton Drive.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this tract consists of approximately 488 acres and it is being recommended for permanent agricultural zoning by both the staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Kruse asked about the A-1 zoning in this location.  Mr. Beck thought it was more or less a hold type zoning, and is not aware of any proposed plans for the site.  Mr. Kruse asked if the University could develop the property any way they want to, regardless of the zoning.  Mr. Beck thought generally the University tried to follow zoning, but technically he guessed they could do what they wanted.
    B188-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

(A)             Oakland swimming pool renovation.
    Item A was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this issue was tabled from the June 1,1998, meeting.  He noted that it has been discussed informally at several public work sessions, including the Council retreat.  Prior to that, the Council had asked the staff to put together some alternatives.  The staff and Commission recommendation was to renovate the pool dividing it into two areas; a family recreation type area with zero depth entry, and then another area the same depth as what presently exists.
    Mr. Beck reported that adequate funding has been set aside to renovate the pool, including a grant that was approved by the Missouri Department of Natural Resources.  A request has been sent asking for an extension of the grant.  A reply is expected by the end of July.
    One of the issues before the Council, besides funding for anything other than what is shown on the plan, involves the timing of the project.  The plan had been to begin work right after this swimming season in order to have the pool ready by June of next year.  Mr. Beck said staff is concerned that if some of the major work could not begin this fall, the pool will not be ready for opening next year.  He said the Council had looked at providing funding for a separate shallow pool to be used as a family recreation area.  Another option being considered is to renovate the existing pool and add family recreation areas at a later date.  He said that comes to $350,000, although $40,000 would not be used to renovate the smaller wading pool area.  Mr. Beck said that would still leave $310,000 to do both, renovate the existing 50 meter pool and add the zero depth pool as a separate area.  He said the final plans and specifications have not been completed until the Council gives direction to the consultant.  After that, the bid process can begin.
    Mr. Janku understood that the cost figures do not include basic renovation for the zero entry.  Mr. Hood said the figures provided the Council were for renovating the existing pool and would not include a zero depth entry.  He explained that staff provided seven options to the Council at the retreat.  He said option one proposes to restore the pool, as is.  That cost estimate is $446,000, and would not include a zero depth entry.  Option three would restore the 50 meter pool and construct a family play pool adjacent to it.  With the current funding in place, in addition to the funding requested in the FY99 budget ($125,000), Mr. Hood said the City is approximately $300,000 short of doing the two pools.  The memo also indicated a large water slide add option, which is another $100,000.  If everything is done that is shown on the drawing, the City would be $400,000 short.
    Ms. Coble asked whether the existing wading pool is in as great a need for repair and if that could possibly save some money.  Mr. Hood said the existing wading pool is one of the highest needs to be addressed.  He said it is patched together right now.
    Mayor Hindman understood the recommended plan would cost about $490,000 -- to divide the pool.  Mr. Hood said the estimate for that particular plan, without the items indicated as being future, is $490,000 including the landscaping.  He said there currently is $470,000 available, and they believe by doing the landscaping in-house they could bring that option within budget.  Mayor Hindman understood option three, restoring the 50 meter pool and providing the family pool, would be about $900,000.  Mr. Hood said that is correct.
    Mr. Kruse asked about the family play area under option three compared to the family play zero depth area under the original proposal from the staff.  Mr. Hood said they were very similar, but option three might be slightly smaller.
    Mr. Janku asked about the outcome of the meeting with Finance Department regarding any parks revenues that might be available.  Mr. Beck said it is thought there is about $134,000 in Parks & Recreation capital funds currently in place.  It is thought that about $125,000 would be collected in users fees this next fiscal year.
    Mr. Beck said the question is whether or not the Council wants to commit all of that capital to this project.  He said staff has looked into what other items might be forthcoming.  One high priority is a concession stand at the southwest recreation area estimated at $60,000.  He explained that would help the sales there, which benefits the capital fund.
    Mr. Janku said he had just found out that there is about $100,000 in monies left in Parks and Recreation for ADA compliance.  He would like to make sure that whatever is done with this pool that it is as accessible as possible.
    Mrs. Crockett asked if the 50 meter pool is used to capacity during the summer.  Mr. Hood said there are days when the pool is very full.  Regarding capacity, he said it is at capacity on certain days and at certain times.  Mrs. Crockett asked how many days.  Mr. Hood said he did not have that figure with him, but it depends a lot on the weather conditions.  Mrs. Crockett asked if the 50 meter pool is divided in half, what does staff propose to do with all those people.  Mr. Hood said it is believed that dividing the pool would actually offer the opportunity to increase capacity because the amount of shallow water area will be increased, which is particularly beneficial for younger people who do not want to be in water over their heads.
    Mr. Coffman asked which of the options could be phased in over a two or three year period.  Mr. Beck said he was looking at the possibility of getting the major pool renovation underway now, and take alternate bids to determine if funding would be left over from the basic pool renovation for the family area.  Then, staff could look toward a second grant and try to defer the family area until next spring.  He noted there is the potential the pool will not be finished by next summer.  Mr. Beck is not sure if any of the options could be two or three phase plans.
    Mr. Hood said in discussions with the consultant, they were focusing primarily on the first three options.  He had not directly asked about the other options.  The consultant did feel it might be possible to bid the project to restore the 50 meter pool first so it could be open next June, and then if construction is authorized on a family pool, the existing pool could be opened while continuing construction on the other pool. Mr. Hood thought that might work with any of the three options.
    Mayor Hindman asked if it would be more expensive to do the project in phases.  Mr. Hood said it would depend on whether it was all bid as one package.  He said if the City just bids the restoration of the 50 meter pool and then waited a year until funding is available to bid the addition of the family play pool, he thought the cost would go up.  He said if it is bid as an alternate and it is determined funding is available, Mr. Hood felt that would probably get the City the best price.
    Ms. Coble asked about using Council contingency funds to pay for the shortcomings of option three.  Mr. Kruse pointed out that the money not spent each year goes back into the general fund to be rebudgeted.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Diane Hughey, 1712 Skylane, is President of Oakland Manor Neighborhood Association, located just west of Oakland Park.  She had spoken with people who swim at the pool and could not find anyone who thought cutting the pool in half was a good idea.  She thought everyone would think option one to be the best approach.  Ms. Hughey said one issue that has come to light is that the Swim Club seems to get more benefit than what they are paying for.  She is hopeful that could be rectified.
    Mitchell Hughey, 1712 Skylane, a grade school student, said that he had learned to swim at Oakland and is hopeful he could continue to use the pool as is.
    Carol Koenig, 1468 El Chaparral, said it would be very nice to have the pool updated and expanded.  She said if the pool were to be cut in half, the ability to give swimming lessons would be much more difficult.  She also felt that Columbia businesses would be willing to add to "the pot" if need be in order to keep the pool in good condition.
    Phylos Sandison, 1312 Westview Terrace, President of the Columbia Swim Club, said he spoke with the governing body of competitive swimming, and they had sent him a number of articles.  He had read that the most important thing is the area surrounding the pool, not the pool itself.  Mr. Sandison also found the zero depth entry is very important because people who are physically challenged need the pool for the exercise, not for the play.  He noted that one option would not permit getting to the exercise area from the zero depth entry area.
    Regarding private funds, Mr. Campbell asked Mr. Sandison to elaborate on the Swim Club possibly taking a role in funding.  Mr. Sandison said the Swim Club has put in a request to a local organization for funds, but they have not heard back as of yet.  He said they have solicited names from businesses in the area, and it is felt there is a lot of interest in keeping the pool as is.  He is hopeful these same businesses would be willing to donate money.  Mr. Sandison said he is not a fundraiser and he would have to talk to someone that knows more about it.  He said the Club is ready to start at any given juncture at the Council's direction.  He noted that option three adds another 3,000 square feet of water, which is substantially more water in comparison to the original proposal.
    Mrs. Crockett asked how many dollars the Swim Club could commit to the project.  Mr. Sandison said he really did not know, but the Club would try very hard to raise some funds.  In addition, he knew there were certain club members who would be willing to donate money.  It was ascertained that the Swim Club is comprised of about 100 families.
    Jennifer Burchard, 1109 Pheasant Run, spoke in favor of retaining the 50 meter pool.
    Mrs. Crockett asked what the cost would be for the Swim Club to build a 50 meter pool, similar to the existing one.  Mr. Hood said he believed that cost was estimated to be about $1.6 million.
    Cheryl Teakotte, 1806 S. Fairview Road, said there was a need today for children and family to be together, and she saw swimming as the sport that does that.  She said instead of spending money out of town, she thought it made much more sense to have our own facility between St. Louis and Kansas City.  Ms. Teakotte stated it would bring enjoyment to lots of people and could be a money maker for the City.  She explained that although the Swim Club is small, there are probably 300 people who would be willing to work on the project to help cut costs.  Ms. Teakotte said the Club could sponsor swim meets and bring the revenue to Columbia.
    Mrs. Crockett asked what the proposal would be for the regular clientele when the Swim Club is hosting a meet.  Mrs. Teakotte said there are other facilities that could be used for those one or two days.  She said it never seemed to be a problem at other meets they have gone to.
    Because the Swim Club only represents 5.7% of the pool users, Mrs. Crockett is concerned that there are problems associated with keeping the 50 meter pool without a dollar commitment from the Club.  She said once the pool is divided in half, it would be too late.
    Rick Bohon, 2004 Woodhollow, said the team had not met to address the fundraising issue so he cannot commit to a dollar figure.  He asked Mrs. Crockett if she had a figure in mind.  Mrs. Crockett said she did not, she was waiting to hear the Club's answer.  She stated in order for the City to do what is needed, it would take an additional $300,000 that the City does not have.  She said the Council had been told that by cutting the pool in half, there would actually be more usage by the general public than there is today.  Dr. Bohon said the City would not only be keeping the 50 meter pool for the Swim Club, but for swimming lessons as well.  He said if the pool is cut in half, there could only be half of the number of lessons available for the general public.  He saw that as a problem.
    Mr. Campbell asked how long it would take the Swim Club to at least arrive at a figure that could be used.  Dr. Bohon said they could have a meeting this week and get some feedback from the Club.
    Phylos Sandison said the Swim Club's revenue was probably not as great a percentage as some of the other pieces they are seeing that apply to that pool.  He said the Council also has to consider the expense size.  He pointed out that when the Swim Club is using the pool, there is not one lifeguard in the pool and nothing is open.  Mr. Sandison said the pool is not in use and fees collected from the Swim Club is pure profit for the Parks and Recreation Department.  Secondly, without knowing what the project was going to look like (what specifically the Council is planning for), fundraising would be difficult because people will not know what they are being asked to give for.
    Nancy Sandison, 1312 Westview Terrace, said the deficit being talked about is for one plan only.  She said if the Council looked into another plan, like extending the arm that comes out on the right side of the pool to the little pool, a ton of money could be saved.  She asked that other options be examined.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Beck said the next step would be to notify the consultant as to which option final plans and specifications need to be prepared.
    Mr. Janku asked if alternates were something that could be requested from the consultant.  Mr. Beck thought an estimated cost of the alternatives to be considered is needed -- without preparing detailed plans and specifications.  He said the cost for detailed plans and specifications is a costly portion of the project -- six to seven percent.  If the Council requests alternate bids, detailed plans and specifications would have to be prepared.
    Mr. Campbell asked if one of the alternatives is similar to the one the last speaker eluded to.  Mr. Hood said it was not one of the alternatives staff asked the consultant to price.  He said in the first meeting with the consulting engineer, that had been discussed, but he felt the proposal identified as option three was preferable to expanding the existing pool.  The consultant had some technical reasons for promoting this option, but Mr. Hood could not recall what that was.
    Mayor Hindman pointed out that staff has said that there are certain objectives associated with a community pool.  Identified as the most single objective was the instructional swim.  Recreational swimming, because it appeals by far to the largest population, was second.  Lastly was the competitive swim.  Mayor Hindman said the zero depth pool is far more satisfactory for the instructional swim and for the recreational swim.  If the City retained the 50 meter pool, it would really be for the competitive swimmers.  Mayor Hindman noted the pool could still be utilized by the Swim Club if it is divided.  He explained that most communities have 25 meter pools.  Mayor Hindman spoke to a pool guru in Chicago, the area representative for the National Recreation and Parks Association, about the situation in Columbia.  This individual had said that this issue comes up quite a bit, and that almost all of the pools built in the 70's were being rebuilt.  Mayor Hindman stated he was told that in Chicago, all outdoor 50 meter pools had been eliminated and were being changed to the zero depth entry type of pool, and the trend is to build family aquatic centers.  He had also talked to a man in Mt. Prospect, Illinois where they had a 50 meter pool, and it had been changed it to a wave pool and it is extraordinarily successful.  Mayor Hindman said saving the 50 meter pool would be done largely for the benefit of the competitive swimmer.
    Mr. Campbell said a city the size of Columbia has a very diverse population and needs a zero depth entry pool.  However, there is also the need for other types of pools as well.  As a growing city, Mr. Campbell thought there is a need for competitive swimming and for the longer pool.  Mr. Campbell said he would be reluctant to suggest that the Council not place substantial emphasis on maintaining what already exists and adding to it.  It would certainly stretch the budget, and that is why he is trying to find resources for additional funding.  Mr. Campbell thought that a combination pool would meet many different needs.
    Mr. Janku noted that Twin Lakes is zero depth entry, but it is not a pool.  He said a lot of people are very uncomfortable using it.  He thought it is very important to preserve the zero entry option in the pool.  He would like to see some alternate bids and options.  Mr. Janku felt strongly that there needed to be a family play area at Oakland in the long term because it is a fast growing area of the City.  He said maybe the project should be phased and a separate pool could be built at a later time.  Mr. Janku wanted to see funding sources identified, including private contributions from the community, not just from the Swim Club.
    Ms. Coble said there is a long tradition in Columbia to phase in projects when it pertains to the parks and railways.  She noted that is one way to get things done after a commitment has been made.  She said if staff would investigate what monies are already available in the City budget which have not been spent and for which there may not be a purpose at this point, all those funds could be pulled together so option three could be selected.
    As the father of a baby, Mr. Coffman said going out to Little Mates Cove is a wonderful experience.  He said it is a great facility and something like it is needed on the north end of town.  Because the 50 meter pools are becoming scarce, he felt that only made Oakland Pool a more precious thing that he would like to save.  He thought there should be a high quality baby pool as well as a high quality competitive area.  Mr. Coffman said he wanted it all and thought if it took two or three years to get it, that would be satisfactory.
    Mr. Kruse agreed that they needed to figure out a way to phase things in so we can have it all.  As a person who has done a lot of fundraising in the private sector, Mr. Kruse offered to meet with the Swim Club and any other organization that would want to work with them to help develop a plan to raise some money.
    Mr. Janku made the motion that the staff be directed to ask the consultant to prepare plans and specifications that would allow proceeding with renovation of the existing 50 meter pool that would incorporate a zero depth entry area.  And as part of the project, either as an alternate bid to be done in the first or second phase, a family play area be included.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Kruse.
    Mayor Hindman said he was confused about the timing situation.  Mr. Beck said staff needed to work with the consultant and the state to make sure the City does not lose the grant.  He said it would be the staff's job to work with the consultant and DNR to meet the goals of the Council.  He said if the goal is to preserve the 50 meter pool and the family area, they would try to bring back something to the Council on the alternative and direct the consultant to work on detailed plans for the 50 meter pool.
    Mr. Janku said he wanted detailed plans on the zero depth as part of the plans for the 50 meter pool renovation.
    The motion made by Mr. Janku, seconded by Mr. Kruse, was approved unanimously by voice vote.

B183-98     Confirming the contract for the construction of sidewalks along sections of Berrywood Drive, Worley
                   Street and Business Loop 70.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that six bids had been received on the sidewalk work, and Aplex, Inc. is being recommended at $79,170.50.
    B183-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B184-98     Confirming the contract for reconstruction and rehabilitation of the Eighth & Cherry parking structure.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that eight bids had been received for this project.  United HRB is being recommended for this major project.  He said staff would like to see alternate number two which would include $63,000 for the removal and replacement of the existing roof as part of this project.  Mr. Beck said the bid for the office space ($79,000) would not be awarded.
    Mr. Janku pointed out that all of the City's parking structures are paid for by user fees (those who park in the garages, plug meters, and pay fines).
    Mr. Campbell pointed out that this was Phase III, the last of the long term parking plan in existence for at least five years.
    B184-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B189-98     Approving a replat of lot 5 of Stephens First Addition; granting a variance to the subdivision regulations
                   regarding additional right-of-way for Brighton Street.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this replat would provide for one R-3 lot and a waiver.  He said denial was being recommended because the property owner refuses to dedicate the additional 3.8 feet of right-of-way.
    Richard Lowe, owner of the lot at 1509 Brighton, said he did not feel that he should donate 3.8 feet of right-of-way. He said the property west of his was subdivided, and this individual was not required to donate the right-of-way.  Mr. Lowe said if he donates the footage, it would put the building line right through his house.  He said when he is ready to build on the property, he would have to go to the Board of Adjustment for a variance which may or may not be granted.  Mr. Lowe proposed that he give the City a 3.8 feet street easement.  He said that would give the City the same rights that would be established if he were to donate the right-of-way, but would eliminate any problems he would have in the future if he had to go before the Board of Adjustment.
    Ron Lueck, surveyor with Marshall Engineering, displayed a drawing showing Mr. Lowe's lot which was surveyed in 1962.  He said he had received a conditional granting of the variance that had been requested.  The condition had been that the 3.8 feet of right-of-way be donated, and they are proposing to do so by means of a street easement.  He said that would allow Mr. Lowe to retain ownership of the land and keep his house in compliance with the zoning regulations.
    Mayor Hindman said he always thought a street right-of-way is basically an easement.  Mr. Boeckmann said that is essentially true, and he did not know that there would be much of a distinction.  Mr. Lueck interjected that right-of-way indicates ownership by the City, and the easement would indicate ownership yet by Mr. Lowe.  Mr. Boeckmann responded the City does not own right-of-way -- it does not own the fee title to it.
    Mr. Patterson said when the City obtains a street easement on a plat, it is a dedicated right-of-way for street purposes and the City does not own the underlying property.  He did not think this would serve any purpose other than just not showing it on the plat, which staff felt to be a valuable tool to have recorded.  He pointed out that the City is already agreeing to waive a 15 foot right-of-way that would have been required for a full 25 foot half width.  He said staff did not think the 3.8 feet was unreasonable.
    By virtue of platting the property, Mr. Hancock said there would be a variance situation come up at one time or the other - street width or a variance to building toward the front property line of the house.
    Mr. Patterson saw no advantage in trying to do this by a separate instrument when the City has a plat process where it would be consistent with what had been required on other portions of the street.
    Ms. Coble understood the issue as granting a variance and allowing the easement would permit the City usage of a 20 foot roadway.  The distinction can be made between that and the right-of-way which gives up property ownership, but causes a potential problem for the property owner, given the 25 foot setback which is not in existence if the City goes solely easement.  She asked why one 25 foot setback is no problem with an easement but it is different when it is identified as right-of-way.  Mr. Lueck said when the City obtains right-of-way, then the setback of the property is established from the new right-of-way line.  He reported that 25 foot setback line would be through Mr. Lowe's house.  Mr. Lueck said there is no objection to giving the property up if the 25 foot setback could be maintained where it is currently located.
    Mr. Patterson said in his opinion, if it is a street easement for street purposes, that is the street right-of-way and it is where the City would measure the setback from.
    Mr. Boeckmann said it is a distinction without a difference.  He guessed one could argue that a street easement might be less than a right-of-way.  With a right-of-way, he said you automatically have the ability to place all sorts of utilities in it and it could be argued that a street easement might be something less than that.
    Mr. Beck said the setback has always been measured from the street right-of-way line, a street easement.  He said if the land was deeded, it would be different from a right-of-way.  He said nobody was asking the property owner to deed any ground as far as he could tell.  Regarding Mr. Lowe's concerns about going to the Board of Adjustment, Mr. Beck said he assumed this was looked at by the staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission before they made their decision that he could give 3.8 feet.  Mr. Patterson said that was correct.  Mr. Beck asked if Mr. Lowe would have to go to the Board of Adjustment.  Mr. Patterson said he would not have to go to the Board of Adjustment unless something were to occur that would expand the non-conformance of the setback.  He said that would only occur if Mr. Lowe were to add on to the building or tear it down and rebuild.  Mr. Lowe said he was planning to build a duplex on the lot.
    B189-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COBLE.  VOTING NO:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, JANKU.  Bill defeated.

B191-98     Authorizing an agreement with Boone County to enable City to provide funding for Community Needs
                   Assessment; appropriating and transferring funds.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that the City's contribution toward this program would be $15,000.
    Ms. Coble said Columbia is trying to determine what health and human service needs are in the community.  She said when this agreement was brought up several years ago, she had brought forth criticisms in terms of the design and methodology being used to determine what the unmet needs are in the community.  She was disappointed to see the same proposal before the Council again.
    Ms. Coble stated it is proposed that $15,000 be spent to find out what is needed in terms of unmet needs in this community, and not one of the points of methodology or proposals in the community needs assessment actually comes in contact with a consumer.  She said the proposal calls for conducting surveys and data collection of people who are privileged to the extent that they have telephones.  She noted there was no provision made for talking to those who would be at the lowest socio-economic status of this community.  She found it particularly objectionable that $10,000 would be spent to conduct four focus group sessions.  Ms. Coble stated the people who will give input are social service providers, health service providers, decision makers, and elected officials.  This is not the group of consumers that should be targeted, nor is that expertise reflected in the steering committee.  She said these are all well-respected individuals in the community, but none of whom represent a consumer of social services.  She noted that those who represent social services agencies represent the administrative provision of service, not the direct services.   Ms. Coble found the other provision in relying on the compass, the United Way survey instrument, to be objectionable.  She did not believe it gets to needs in the community to the extent that the City should be paying $15,000.  She felt another discriminatory measure was to arrange a town meeting focus group to obtain information on unmet human services needs.  She did not think people who are not recruited through an advocacy group, or some other type of direct social services provider, are likely to attend a town meeting -- especially if there are no provisions made for transportation or child care.
    Ms. Coble reported in regards to the external funding chart outlining that when this survey was conducted in 1994-95, this community was able to negotiate an additional $6 million in funds she found to be a specious argument at best -- the majority of these are state and federal funds.  She noted that she was in the room when they did the budget processes on them.  Ms. Coble explained it was not because of any facts or figures that were generated from this report that lead the General Assembly to pass the measures providing for the federal emergency shelter grants to come to this community, nor to set-up the Caring Communities funding process, etc.  Ms. Coble said it is no doubt helpful to have local data, but again, she did not think it is the most reliable data that could be obtained.  She did not believe it would lead to $6 million in additional funding.  It would be a wonderful thing to find out what the unmet community needs are for health and human services, but Ms. Coble did not think this was the approach to use.
    Mr. Campbell said he was supportive of much of what Ms. Coble had said.  He had been working on a survey this afternoon with one of his students, and the student's estimate had been that about 50% of the people in public housing and other low income housing do not have telephones.  He noted these people would be excluded from such a survey.  Mr. Campbell said while he thought we needed a community needs survey, he had more than a little concern about the methodology being proposed.  He would like to see the program continued, and thought it is a very good effort.  Mr. Campbell preferred that the proposal be modified, and asked Mr. Steinhaus if some of the aforementioned comments could be taken into account.
    Mr. Steinhaus thought that is possible.  He gave the same proposal to the Council that is given to the other funding sources, and he was sure part of the funding proposal included door-to-door interviews to canvass particular areas that are targeted where it is known people do not have phones, in particular public housing, although he is unable to find it written into the proposal.  He felt there has been a very serious effort to reach the consumers, and that has been a focus of the discussions of the steering committee from the very beginning.  He noted they are over-sampling in a number of areas to ensure representation from different minority groups is obtained.  Mr. Steinhaus reported they would also be using a tagging system with the interviews so the responses can be connected to census tracts to relate that information to generate benchmarks that would be identified to specific Caring Communities Site Councils and Neighborhood Site Councils.  This information can then be disseminated so that different neighborhood organizations in the community and throughout Boone County can use the data as well.  Mr. Steinhaus said he is not the technical expert on this.  His role on the steering committee has been limited to the funding subcommittee to ensure that the City is represented at the table in the works that are going on in the rest of the community in order to establish community benchmarks to mobilize community resources, to address needs, and to develop information that is useful to our funders as well as community decision makers.
    Mr. Campbell asked how the budget for this proposal had been determined.  He asked about the $10,000 for four focus group meetings.  He remembered that five or so years ago there was an instance where this same question came up, and a graduate student took it on for $2,500 and did a wonderful job of it.  Mr. Steinhaus replied that the budget for that was developed by the technical resource committee.  Mr. Campbell asked if it would be put out on a bid basis.  Ms. Coble said it was a single source procurement.  Mr. Steinhaus said that was correct, it was not being bid out.  He said it would be a contract between the County and the University.  The University would subcontract with Horizon Research Services and the Department of Health to conduct some of the data collection.  Mr. Campbell noted that he thought one of the technical resource committee members has a conflict of interest.  Mr. Steinhaus was not sure about that.
    Ms. Coble suggested tabling the issue in order to get some more information.
    Mr. Campbell asked where the committee was right now in the process.  Mr. Steinhaus said the data collection has already started.
    Mayor Hindman asked if the committee had just been counting on this program being funded.  Mr. Steinhaus said the funding subcommittee was looking at securing support from a variety of sources that would meet the needs of the survey that is being conducted.  The contract currently has been written to consist of two phases.  He said funding has essentially been secured to move forward with Phase 1, and there are hopes of securing the additional funding for the completion of Phase 2.  He said they have had verbal commitment from the Missouri Hospital Association for $50,000.  The model, both of the Community Partnership and of the Boone County Health Report Card Project (which sprang from both of the two previous assessments that had been conducted three years ago), has been touted across the state.  Mr. Steinhaus said that is the reason the committee has attracted additional funding.  He knew there are certain fundings like the Emergency Shelter Grant that they probably would have gotten without that previous community needs assessment; however, one of the reasons Columbia was chosen for the Community Partnership and Caring Communities Funding, as well as the additional funding, was because of their coordinated efforts in the community to try to determine needs and develop a coordinated community planning process for the delivery of health and human services.
    Mr. Campbell made the motion that B191-98 be tabled to August 3, 1998, and that Mr. Steinhaus be asked to come back with additional information.
    Regarding the phone survey, Mr. Janku said there are 131 items lasting 30 to 45 minutes.  From a laypersons perspective, he could not see people spending that much time on the phone.  He said he would like to see some idea about a degree of validity -- that people are willing to participate and that it would get a good cross section.
    Mr. Campbell noted that he limits his students to 15 minute phone interviews.  Mr. Steinhaus said the last time they conducted the survey the average interview had lasted 15 to 20 minutes.  He said it uses a skip pattern so that if the individual does not have any children in the home, it will skip to other sections.  He said people will not be answering every question on the survey.  Mr. Steinhaus reported when the survey was conducted three years ago, they achieved a 95% response rate in Boone County.
    Mr. Steinhaus suggested that the Council discuss this proposal at a pre-Council meeting, and he would invite some of the members from the technical assistance committee and other members of the steering committee to answer any questions.  Ms. Coble said that would be fine.
    The motion to table B191-98, made by Mr. Campbell, was seconded by Ms. Coble and approved unanimously by voice vote.

B192-98     Authorizing an agreement with Missouri Department of Health for Core Public Health Services;
                   appropriating funds.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this is an annual renewal of the agreement with the Missouri Department of Health.
    B192-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows;  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

R131-98     Approving preliminary plat No. 2 of West Pointe Subdivision.
    Mayor Hindman noted that a request for withdrawal had been received on this preliminary plat.

    The following bills were given second reading and the resolutions were read by the Clerk.

B180-98     Accepting conveyances for electric and utility purposes.
B181-98     Accepting conveyances for water and utility purposes.
B185-98     Amending Chapter 8 of the City Code to expand the boundary of the Fourth Ward.
B190-98     Approving a final plat of Ewing Industrial park, Plat 3.
B193-98     Allowing copper wire to be buried in a sewer easement; authorizing a waiver of claim and indemnity
                   agreement at 2300 Business Loop 70 East.
R133-98     Setting a public hearing: repair and stabilization of a section of the streambank of Bear Creek between
                   Garth Avenue and Creasy Springs Road.
R134-98     Setting a public hearing: improvements at the intersections of Nifong and Bethel and Nifong and
R135-98     Setting a public hearing: construction of sidewalks and sidewalk ramps along a portion of West Ash
R136-98     Authorizing an amendment to the agreement with Larkin Associates Consulting Engineers, Inc.
R137-98     Authorizing a grant application to the Missouri Department of Transportation for planning funds.
R138-98     Authorizing an agreement with the Missouri Department of health for sexually transmitted disease
                   clinical services.

    The bills were given third reading and the resolutions were read with the vote recorded as follows:   VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU.   VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bills declared enacted and resolutions declared adopted, reading as follows:
R139-98     Authorizing a grant application to Boone County for funding for the improvements to the Oakland
                   Gravel Road and Scott Boulevard projects.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    In the case of Oakland Gravel Road, Mr. Beck said the City would share the cost on a 50/50 basis, and the request is for $580,500.  Regarding Scott Boulevard, he said the City's share would be $300,000 (25% of the project cost).
    The vote on R139-98 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R140-98     Approving a preliminary plat of Highland Ridge, Phase 3.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that the staff as well as the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of this preliminary plat.
    Chris Korschgen, 6200 Schuster Road, explained that his property (25 acres) adjoins the entire west boundary of the subject tract.  Mr. Korschgen said he also owns a little strip along the south side.  He spoke to Mr. Bondra in the Planning Department about a utility easement that would exist between Lots 303 and 304 on the plat.  Mr. Bondra called the engineering firm to see if it could be platted in.  He said they also had discussions with Bob Walters, and Highlands Realty had no objections to the easement; although, it was requested that the easement not go through the trees on the boundary line between Lots 303 and 304, but rather go on the north side of the tree line.  For future consideration, Mr. Korschgen said he would be looking for sewer, natural gas, and cable television easements along the tree line.
    Mrs. Crockett asked Mr. Korschgen if he was wanting to be annexed at some point.  Mr. Korschgen said most likely because he is right on the edge of the City limits.
    Mr. Hancock said that easements are typically granted on final plats, and when a final plat is submitted on this property, perhaps something could be worked out with the adjoining property if they feel it would be beneficial to try to obtain an easement.  He said staff would keep it in mind and work on it at the time of final platting.
    The vote on R140-98 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:
R141-98     Authorizing an agreement with the University of Missouri for the Senior Games and Show-Me State
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that each year the City has been a primary sponsor of the Show-Me State Games.  He said it is primarily supported with in-kind services -- providing ball diamonds and that sort of thing.  The Convention & Visitors Bureau budgets $15,000 toward the games.  Mr. Beck stated this resolution would authorize the staff to provide similar support this year.
    The vote on R141-98 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R142-98     Authorizing the Boone County Fair Board to use parking lots at Ninth & Ash and Armory in connection
                   with the Boone County Fair Parade.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said the Council would be approving the use of the parking lots by the Fair Board.  He said the Police Department will handle the parade.
    The vote on R142-98 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R143-98     Authorizing an agreement with the Memorial Day Weekend - Salute to Veterans Corporation.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Coffman said he did not want to suggest that the Council make changes in the contract; however, he would like to propose an amendment that would be a statement of the Council's expectation.  He read the following statement which he said would be in the ordinance itself, not part of the contract:  "It is expected that the Memorial Day Weekend - Salute to Veterans Corporation will respect the First Amendment Rights of those who congregate on the airport grounds during the air show."  Mr. Coffman's thought was that whatever might occur at the air show, and whether or not it would be within the bounds of the First Amendment, would ultimately be decided by a court and it probably would not be the best endeavor for the Council to attempt to draw boundaries regarding such.
    Mr. Coffman made a motion to amend R143-98 per his above statement.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Kruse.
    Annette Sanders, 730 Idlewood Court, spokesperson representing the Salute to Veterans Corporation, said for the last eight years they have contracted with the City to utilize the tarmac at the Columbia Regional Airport for the Salute to Veterans Air Show.  She said there are approximately 117 individuals present tonight in support of the Council's approval of the contract for 1999 as it was originally presented with no amendments.  Ms. Sanders reiterated the points she made at the June 1, 1998, meeting.  She explained there are only three ways in and out of the tarmac, and any of the groups wanting to solicit petitions for signatures could have positioned their members right outside the three entrances and had complete, unhindered access to every person attending the air show.  She said there is no freedom of speech issue here and there is no reason to change the contract or add any language to the ordinance.
    Mr. Coffman asked who pays for the various aircraft and equipment present as part of the performance.  He also asked about the fuel.  Ms. Sanders said the Corporation raises all of the private funds that are used to pay for the items Mr. Coffman made reference to.  Mr. Coffman asked who was involved in the security and crowd control and how these individuals are paid.  Ms. Sanders said the Highway Patrol, the Boone County Sheriff's Office, and the City of Columbia Police Department supply the security, and the cost for these individuals is worked into each of those entity's operating budgets -- as would be true for every major event.
    Norman Benedict, 3113 Shoreside Drive, a Salute to Veterans volunteer since its inception in 1989, read parts of letters received since the 1998 celebration concluded.  He said these participants support the fine program, and state clearly just what Salute to Veterans means to them and how grateful they are to the people of Columbia for making it happen.
    Jean Madden, 1111 Doral, explained that he is the voice of the airport and is in charge of crowd control.  He said keeping things moving is often difficult and he could not imagine what it would be like if they had anyone come out and espouse any cause.  He said if the Corporation opened the gate and made it an opportunity for people to espouse causes, good or bad, they would have a real mess.
    Mr. Coffman asked if someone came to the air show wearing a t-shirt with a message on it, if this person would be asked to take the shirt off.  Mr. Madden said he would not do that.  Mr. Coffman said his point was that there has to be a line drawn, and it is not always a clear line.
    Dale Deerhoff, an attorney representing the Salute to Veterans Corporation, spoke in defense of the First Amendment rights of the organization, as well as its 3,000 volunteers and the thousands of people who congregate every Memorial Day for this observance.  He stated that the Supreme Court has held that the private organizer of a public event on public property has a First Amendment right to choose the content of its message.  He said that right includes the right to exclude from participation persons imparting a message the event organizers do not wish to convey.  He said the rights to free speech includes the right not to speak on certain subjects.  He cited more case law of the same nature.  He pointed out that the Supreme Court has recognized that face to face solicitation is especially intrusive.  He listed a number of large, public events where people are not permitted to solicit for donations or support.  Mr. Deerhoff said the statement Mr. Coffman suggested adding was a wonderful statement of principle, but if it has any significance at all, it will apply to all events.
    Mr. Coffman asked about the various recruiters.  Mr. Deerhoff said as he understood it that is a condition for the Defense Department to supply the Thunderbirds, Blue Angels, etc.  He said those groups do not come unless the military recruiters can be there.  Mr. Coffman said because it is required by contract did not make it relevant.  Ms. Sanders said it is very relevant.  The Department of Defense requires not only that the Corporation provide tarmac space to recruiters, but that they give them prime space and all amenities in order to acquire the assets of the Department of Defense.  She said aircraft are assets -- no aircraft, no air show.  Ms. Sanders said the recruiters are restricted to static display tents that are very clearly labeled, they are not out shaking hands or stopping people trying to get them to sign up to serve.
    Dick Starks, Kansas City, explained that he flies 1916 World War I replica aircraft and that he is a member of the Dawn Patrol.  He has been flying his plane in air shows for 12 years -- from Oshkosh, Wisconsin to Wichita, Kansas.  He had been honored and privileged to display his aircraft at the Salute to Veterans for the last four years.  Mr. Starks is hopeful the event would be allowed to continue as it has in the past because of its uniqueness.  He said it is the only air show he knows of devoted entirely to honoring our Veterans.  He noted other shows charge enormous entrance fees, and there are always people present promoting their own causes.  Mr. Starks noted that he writes for Kit Planes magazine, the second largest aviation magazine in the country.  This year, Mr. Stark's managing editor attended the show.  He stated the September issue of the magazine contains a four column editorial praising the Columbia air show.  He read an excerpt from the article.
    Jim Coy, an 18 year resident of Columbia, is the current Commander of the 7227th Medical Reserve Unit, and staff physician at the University of Missouri Hospital and the Truman VA Hospital.  He has also served as the Chairman of the Airborne Veterans Committee for the Salute to Veterans Corporation since its inception.  He reflected on what Memorial Day means to him and his family and read various quotes.  He asked that the contract not be changed.
    Jo Sapp, 1025 Hickory Hill Drive, said she was no stranger or enemy of the military.  She probably would have enjoyed the air show tremendously had she been allowed to stay.  Ms. Sapp explained that she had been escorted from the air show by a uniformed Columbia Police Officer.  When the officer escorted her out, he had been very nice and had taken her to an area populated by smokers.  She believes the right to petition the government to be fundamental to our system, and while she respects the right of private businesses to limit access to their property, she had no idea that an event that was free and open to the public and held at a City owned airport would be off limits for a fundamental principle of democracy -- petition initiative, especially when the event is a celebration of those who died to defend American democracy.  She found this to be ironic and appalling.  Ms. Sapp read aloud the staff's legal opinion as it relates to public property and public forums.  She interpreted that to mean that it lies within the City's power to designate the air show, and similar events held in Columbia, as sharing the same First Amendment protections as traditional public forums such as streets and sidewalks.
    Eleanore Wickersham, 4920 Forum Boulevard, said she was also not against veterans.  She listed family members who have served in the military and asked that their sacrifices not be allowed to be in vain.  She asked the Council to not give away the freedoms that they, and millions of others have fought for.  As a petitioner, Ms. Wickersham explained that she travels to six cities in the Ninth District, often with the League of Women Voters.  She said they had gone to events on public property organized by private corporations, but only here in Columbia had they encountered a problem.  She understood there are many other air shows that have political activity at them and that Columbia is the exception.  Ms. Wickersham asked why should the people in Columbia have less freedom than their neighbors.
    Bill Wickersham, 4920 Forum Boulevard, said he is a member of the Columbia Interfaith Peace Alliance, and currently serves as vice-president of Mid-Missouri Veterans for Peace.  He is a retired federal employee who served as a regular US Army enlisted man, and is a graduate of the US Army Infantry School in Fort Benning, Georgia.  Since in some ways the patriotism of some folks on his side of the issue has been impugned, he wanted the Council to know that he works very closely and helped found an organization in Washington, D.C. called the Center for Defense Information.  He explained this is an organization of former general officers, admirals, and other high ranking military who have a different sense, in some ways, of patriotism.  He said one of the areas they have been interested in is air shows.  Mr. Wickersham requested that the City Council reject the City Manager's recommendation that the Memorial Day Weekend Air Show be deemed a temporary private forum.  He said the major funding for the program comes from public dollars allocated to the US Air Force and other military services.  He noted that Pentagon figures cited in 1997 indicated that the operating costs for a B-1 bomber were $16,972 per hour.  On the training issue, the Center for Defense Information seriously challenges an air show as the best place for training.  In addition to those costs, Mr. Wickersham said public funds are used for personnel, transportation, bands for public entertainment, dog care, and a variety of other activities for a recreational and ceremonial event to which the general public has been invited.  His point is that the air show is a public event which should ensure First Amendment rights for all individuals and organizations who wish to circulate petitions in an orderly and unobtrusive manner.  He asked that all contracts be amended in such a way that they ensure the freedoms guaranteed by the constitution.
    David Sapp, 1025 Hickory Hill, said they did not want to shut down the event.  He would be speaking before the Council regardless of whether this incident occurred at an art fair, a downtown event, etc.  Mr. Sapp said he was simply opposed to any further erosion of the rights of free speech.  He said since this issue had come up, he realized that places for public access are rapidly diminishing, and thus the right to petition the government is being taken away.  He also stressed his belief that the air show is a public event. He asked the Council to treat it as such.
    Kay Callison, 600 Crestland, felt this is an issue that has to do with City policy applicable to art fairs, Earth Day, and other similar events.  As she reads the City's opinion about a private forum, she said if she were to go to Earth Day as a private citizen wearing a "nuke the whales" t-shirt, she could be thrown out.  Ms. Callison explained that dress can be a speech issue and has gone all the way to the Supreme Court.  She is not comfortable with that and did not want such a public policy.  Ms. Callison said if the people at the air show do not think they are violating the free speech rights now, then what objections would any group have to stipulating this language in their contract.
    Ewell Blank, 3209 Crawford, President of the Veterans for Peace, thanked the organizers of the Salute to Veterans Air Show.  However, in trying to do better and bigger things each year, he thought the Corporation has gone beyond some of the things necessary for the air show.  He wanted the air show to be made a celebration of life as well as of military, and asked that a way be found to make the celebration one that is truly about life and liberty.
    John Murray, 911 Edgewood, President of the Board of the Missouri Chapter of the ACLU, spoke in support of Mr. Coffman's amendment.  He did not believe the ACLU supported the particular petition drive that was going around, but did and do support the right of the people on public property to circulate a petition and to speak.  He was concerned about the suppression of free speech.  He asked the Council to support Mr. Coffman's amendment.
    Mr. Coffman said he did not feel that this issue was about whether or not Veterans deserve to be honored, as there is no question about it.  He had no particular stake in the petition that lead up to this controversy, in fact, he has some First Amendment concerns about the petition's objectives.  Mr. Coffman reported this issue is about the right to petition the government, which is explicit in the First Amendment, and he is most worried about the increasing erosion of access to this type of activity.  Mr. Coffman believed the air show to be a public/private partnership because many of both entities are working together, which is a good thing except it creates a real ambiguous area as far as what the Constitution applies to.  He found it disturbing that in Columbia we cannot find a way to honor veterans and honor the constitution, for whom most of these veterans fought.  He urged the organizers to respect as much free speech as they believe is possible without disrupting the event.
    Mr. Janku thought the Council should consider the general context of how these types of decisions are made relating to access of public facilities.  He explained there is a whole range of activities from sporting events to very religious or political activities, and he did not recall the Council getting involved in those things as far as stipulating who should be allowed to participate in the activities.  Mr. Janku said the Council gives very little scrutiny to the events, other than considering traffic or businesses being impacted adversely.
    Mr. Kruse asked if Mr. Janku was saying that the Council should not allow the organizers to petition at these events.  Mr. Janku thought the organizers should have control over their own event.  He said there might be some other type of activity that somebody would like to perform as part of the First Amendment.  Mr. Janku said petitioning is only one small aspect of the First Amendment, and he is concerned that the Council would become the arbiter of things.  Mr. Kruse agreed and said he did not want the Council to adopt this role.  He felt that if an event is on public property, people should have the right to speak freely.
    Mr. Campbell said he has organized some large meetings open to the public and held on public property.  He recently thought to himself had somebody come in and started petitioning about something that was definitely away from the principal purpose of that gathering, what would he have done.  Candidly speaking, Mr. Campbell would have asked them to leave.  On the other hand, he said freedom of speech is a very precious thing and he is sure that everyone present respects it.  Mr. Campbell said he respected the City attorney's position on the issue.
    Mr. Janku said as the amendment really does not affect the contract that has been in place for years, what was the purpose of it.  Mrs. Crockett said it would do nothing.  Mr. Janku did not feel that the organizers should be made to feel like they are going to be forced to open up the tarmac, and lead the petitioners to feel like they are going to be let in, unless that was what was actually going to happen.  He thought if that is the intent, and is in fact what the Council would be doing, it should be expressly stated.  Mr. Coffman said in his mind the amendment outlines that the Council has a concern about it, but recognizes that the extent to which people attending the air show have First Amendment rights, it will be interpreted by someone else -- the court.
    Mr. Campbell said it should be understood that it would not be part of the contract, only a statement on the resolution itself.
 Given the information the Council received on case law regarding the airport being public or private, Ms. Coble is concerned that there is no meaning in the statement.  Mr. Coffman said that is when it is used for airport purposes, but in this case, he felt it is being used for something much like a fair.
    Mrs. Crockett said if she went out to the airport tomorrow morning, as a private citizen or a City Council member, she could not get on the tarmac unless she was boarding a plane.  She said that limited her to the use of the tarmac.  When the Salute to Veterans Corporation takes over the tarmac, she felt they have the control of it.  She said this year, the focus of attention is on a group of about eight petitioners, but over the years the Salute to Veterans Corporation has had hundreds of groups that want to come out and be on the tarmac.  Mrs. Crockett said if the Corporation allows access to one group, they would have to let every organization on the tarmac.  She asked how could spectators enjoy the air show if they were continuously dodging all of these groups.  Mrs. Crockett wanted to see the air show left as is, and any of the other groups can do their thing in the parking lot.
    Mayor Hindman did not see the Council getting in the middle of this conflict.  He thought the City should have a policy that public property will be made available on a reasonable basis for people to conduct their own matters.  He said it would be up to these organizations to follow the law.  Mayor Hindman did not think it is the Council's place to start redefining the law or to set special provisions.  In this case, Mayor Hindman said the Salute to Veterans Corporation has organized an air show for a good number of years very successfully.  They have developed a number of very specific policies that they follow very carefully.  He would rather see the organization be more liberal with letting people in, but that is still the way it has been done.  Mayor Hindman thought the opportunity should be made available to allow public activity on the City's property with the understanding that it is up to the organizer's to follow the law.  Regarding the amendment, Mayor Hindman said the contract itself has provisions that the Salute to Veterans Corporation must follow all applicable laws, and he did not feel it was up to the Council to make a separate expression pertaining to First Amendment rights.
    Regarding the amendment, Mr. Kruse said it would not be part of the contract and he saw it as being similar to a policy resolution, a sense of the Council.  He could see, and has seen first hand, both sides of this issue.
    Ms. Coble felt it would be incorrect of the Council to pass something that has no effect.  From the information this evening, she is not clear on what the interpretation would be regarding the First Amendment rights.  She said from what the Council has heard from lawyers on both sides, those who seek to petition inside the fence would have a First Amendment right to do so, whereas those escorting them to the outside of the fence would have a First Amendment to do so also.  Mr. Coffman asked what the problem was if the language was ineffectual.  Ms. Coble asked whey the Council would add the language if it was ineffectual.  She suggested that the organization engage in discussions beforehand to lay out where activities would be located and allowed throughout the event.  Mr. Coffman said he felt the language might provide some measure of protection in a law suit if the City were made a defendant.
    The motion to amend R143-98, made by Mr. Coffman, seconded by Mr. Kruse, was defeated.
    The vote on R143-98 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  COFFMAN.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R145-98     Amending infrastructure cost agreement with developer of Forum Chapel Plaza.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said this issue had been discussed earlier at the pre-Council meeting -- the situation on Forum Boulevard and the payment to the City of the roadway costs for the extra lanes that were to be constructed in conjunction with the development at the corner of Forum and Chapel Hill Road.  The question is whether or not the Council should authorize the staff to negotiate a revised agreement with the developer of the property.  Mr. Beck said the Council considered the $128,000 vs. the $153,000 reimbursement in regards to the timely payment back to the City for the cost of the street.  He said there are several lots remaining to be sold in the area.
    Mr. Patterson explained that $153,000 was the cost for the right turn lane based on the actual measured quantities during construction.  The estimate of $128,000 was based on quantities provided by the developer's engineers as far as the estimated items to be constructed, in accordance with the agreement.  The agreement is very specific about who would pay for what on the improvements.  He said the developer feels that $128,000 was what was agreed to and that was what he should be required to pay.  Mr. Patterson reported the developer has offered a single lump sum payment of $128,000, rather than making payments over a period of nine years.  He noted that the developer's attorney was present to answer any questions regarding the issue.
    Craig VanMatre, attorney for the developer of Limerick Heights, said his client originally thought this project would cost him about $90,000, and he was going to give up some valuable real estate for a right turn lane for which he would not be reimbursed.  He said the developer planned to repay the City incrementally pending the sale of the ten lots.  In the meantime, four lots have been sold while waiting for the numbers to come in.  The cost of the project had been determined just a couple of weeks ago, and another lot is coming up for sale on July 15.  Mr. VanMatre said he persuaded his client into using most of the proceeds from the sale of that lot to pay the City off in full to be finished with the reimbursement on a compromise basis.  This had been based mathematically on the contract Mr. VanMatre personally drafted that the correct figure would be $153,000.  He said the $128,000 would represent a $25,000 savings, which is attributable to a mistake made by the developer's engineer in estimating the correct dollar amount.  He said if it is not done this way, the money will get stretched out over the sale of the rest of the lots.  He thought there was some risk that the other lots will not sell for awhile.
    Mr. Janku understood that this would be accelerating the payment for a lesser amount.  Mr. VanMatre said that is correct.
    Mrs. Crockett asked if there were other contracts out on any of the remaining lots.  Mr. VanMatre replied there were not.  He said the back lots are zoned O-1 and have substantial restrictions on them because of the agreement with the neighbors regarding substantial buffering.
    Mayor Hindman said there were questions like the present value of money and various other issues that the Council is unable to deal with.  He asked if the Council could authorize the staff to negotiate in the best interest of the City.  Mr. Boeckmann said the Council could authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract amendment similar to Exhibit A, but instruct him to negotiate on the dollar amount.
    Mrs. Crockett asked if any money had been set aside from the first four lots that were sold.  Mr. VanMatre said there was no lien on the property and he did not handle the closings.  He said that is why he wants to get this straightened out, so he can get a lien recorded.  He is going to record a deed of trust in favor of the City reflecting the lien of $153,000 before the lot sale closes so the City would be assured that his client would adhere to the contract he originally signed.  Mr. VanMatre gave his word he would get that done before July 15 -- that the City would have a mortgage on the property to secure the $153,000.  Mrs. Crockett asked how many others the developer is financially obligated to.  Mr. VanMatre said that was a point, but there was plenty of equity there, theoretically, to cover the $153,000.  He said the City would just have to wait the nine years to get the money.  Mr. VanMatre acknowledged there should have been some money withheld on the past lot sales, but it did not happen.
    Mr. Boeckmann asked about the status of the deed of trust.  Mr. VanMatre said it was expected to come Federal Express today, but it did not arrive yet.  He said it was being signed by the people out in California and he was promised they would send it out today.  He was hopeful he would have it tomorrow.  He said that would happen before the 15th.  Mr. VanMatre said he had his client's signature on it, just not the trustees.
    It was decided that the staff would negotiate in the best interest of the City.
    The vote on R145-98 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

    The following bills were introduced by the Mayor, unless otherwise indicated, and all were given first reading:

B194-98     Authorizing the repair and stabilization of a section of the streambank of Bear Creek between Garth
                   Avenue and Creasy Springs Road; appropriating funds.
B195-98     Amending Chapter 14 of the Code to make Buttonwood Drive, south of Nifong Boulevard, a one-way
B196-98     Appropriating funds for the rehabilitation of the north cargo apron at Columbia Regional Airport.
B197-98     Amending Chapter 22 of the Code to add a new section pertaining to deferred tax bills for sanitary
                   sewer projects.
B198-98     Authorizing the installation of pedestrian safety improvements at the intersection of Tenth Street and
                   Rogers Street by City employees.
B199-98     Calling for bids to construct sidewalks along West Broadway and along Smiley Lane.
B200-98     Confirming contract for the construction of a water main along Clark Lane.
B201-98     Vacating utility easements and street right-of-way for an unbuilt portion of Beach Point Drive;
                   accepting conveyances.
B202-98     Rezoning property located on the northeast corner of Austin Avenue and Grand Avenue from C-1 to
B203-98     Amending Chapter 29 of the Code to allow day care centers and similar establishments in District R-2
                   as conditional uses.
B204-98     Approving the final plat of Meadowlands Subdivision, Plat No. 15, a major subdivision.
B205-98     Approving a replat of lot 243 of West Pointe, Plat 1-B-1.
B206-98     Appropriating funds for memorial trees and benches.
B207-98     Appropriating funds for public health and corrections nursing services.
B208-98     Amending the FY 1998 pay plan to change the pay grade and titles of three positions in the Parks and
                   Recreation Department.
B209-98     Authorizing a settlement agreement with Richard C. and Nan B. Erickson: accepting conveyance.
B210-98     Authorizing right of use permit to allow Union Electric to install and maintain a gas main across Rebel
                   Hills substation property.
B211-98     Accepting conveyance for water utility purposes from the National Benevolent Association of the
                   Christian Churches.
B212-98     Authorizing an agreement with Sprint Spectrum, L.P. to lease space on the Walnut Street water tower
                   for PCS antennas.
B213-98     Establishing October 1, 1998, as effective date of the solid waste utility fee increases.

(A)     Transfer of Funds Request.
    Report accepted.


    Mr. Janku said a recent publication outlined Columbia's cost of living and showed the City's utilities at about 16% below the national average.  He credited the Water and Light Department.
    Mr. Janku explained that he had received a letter from the Housing Authority asking about the possibility of a reduced speed limit on Elleta Boulevard.  He referred the letter to the staff for their recommendation.
    Ms. Coble had a request that if the 30 mph speed limit on the newly repaved Clinton Street could not be changed, if a "Caution, Children At Play" sign could be installed.  She said Clinton is a very convenient shortcut off of Broadway and cars move through quickly.
    Ms. Coble said an issue has been raised about people being tax billed for street repairs and then others bring large commercial trucks on these newly constructed roads.  She asked what the residents were to do who have just paid for the tax billed street resurfacing.  A particular question had been raised dealing with Hope Place.
    Ms. Coble said she had been getting calls about Third Avenue.  She said it is in really bad shape and asked if repairs were being delayed until the completion of the storm water project.  Mr. Patterson said that is correct.
    Ms. Coble said there is a sidewalk that is heavily traveled at Paquin and Hitt where there is a support wall that is crumbling and people have to walk out in the street.  Mr. Campbell said that wall belongs to the University, and he saw representatives surveying the area.  It was suggested that someone check with the University about it.
    Ms. Coble congratulated Chief Botsford and the members of his department who serve in the Specialized Domestic Violence Unit on the innovative project relating to a domestic violence warrant sweep through the City and the County.  She said her office has been receiving calls from around the state wanting more information as the project is an effective crime prevention intervention tool.  It also serves as a very clear message to the public about the City's stance toward violence against those in a family.  She thanked the police department for their work.
    Mrs. Crockett said she had received a call from the Indian Hills Neighborhood Association requesting another shelter house in the park, in addition to some playground equipment adjacent to the shelter.  She noted residents are using their park more and more.  Mr. Beck said that would be the capital fund that had been discussed earlier.  Mr. Janku noted that this neighborhood would also be eligible for CDBG funding.  Mrs. Crockett said the Neighborhood would like to have a written response as to the City's intentions.
    The meeting adjourned at 12:55 a.m.
                                                                                                Respectfully submitted,

                                                                                                Penny St. Romaine
                                                                                                City Clerk