Board of Aldermen

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD OF ALDERMEN MEETING OF TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 2016 AT 200 HIGHLANDS BOULEVARD DRIVE 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor David L. Willson called the Regular Board of Aldermen meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL AND STATEMENT OF QUORUM Roll call showed those present were Alderman Clement, Alderman Stevens, Alderman Hamill, Alderman Ottenad, Alderman Baumann, Alderman Diehl, Mayor Willson and Attorney Gunn. A quorum was present. 3. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES a. Minutes of the Regular Board of Aldermen meeting of Monday, February 1, 2016 Alderman Clement made the motion to approve the Minutes of the Regular Board of Aldermen meeting of Monday, February 1, 2016. The motion was seconded by Alderman Hamill and carried unanimously, without objection. 4. ESTABLISHMENT OF ORDER OF ITEMS ON THE AGENDA Mayor Willson stated the introduction of the new employee for the Parks and Recreation Department and for Manchester Arts will be on March 7, 2016. He also has a presentation to make this evening. There are also four boy scouts in the audience that he will be introducing. Alderman Hamill made the motion to approve the Order of Items on the Agenda as amended. The motion was seconded by Alderman Clement and carried unanimously, with no objections. 5. CONSIDERATION OF PETITIONS AND COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC a. Introduction of new Police Officer Regular Board of Aldermen 02/16/2016 Page 1  Chief Timothy Walsh introduced Police Officer Lindsay Lewis who grew up in Crystal City, and attended Seckmann High School. She was married in September to Jeremy, and they have four children (Elisa, 19), (Ryan, 17), (Landon, 10) and (Grace, 7). Officer Lewis has an Associate’s Degree in Criminal Justice and attended the Jefferson College Law Enforcement Academy. She comes from a law enforcement family. Her brother is a Sergeant in Pevely, Missouri, and her father was a Policeman in Hillsboro, Missouri. b. Liquor License Approval 1. Joey B’s Restaurant Alderman Hamill made the motion to approve the following liquor license. The motion was seconded by Alderman Clement and carried unanimously, without objection. c. Introduction of Boy Scouts Mayor Willson introduced the following Boy Scouts: Steven Mueller, Abdelhamid Osman, David Venkatesan, and Logan Fluharty, from Troop 750 which is sponsored by Wren Hollow Elementary School. The scouts are working on their “Citizenship in the Community” merit badges. d. Comments from the Public Ms. Kerry McBride, 1183 Briarhurst Drive, Manchester, Missouri, asked that there be no parking signs in front of her home. She said she has a child with special needs, and the way the signs are located, they prohibit her child with special needs to be picked up in front of her house, so he has to cross the street. She asked that the sign be moved, or that there be a time limit placed on it. She said that, speaking to the Chief, she understands the problem is only between 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and that would be acceptable. Ms. Jennifer Loeffel, owner of Barloes Development, 14356 Manchester Road, Manchester, Missouri, said she bought two vacant buildings on Manchester Road in 2015, and in total pays almost $24,000 in real estate taxes on those two formally-vacant buildings. She said she reached out to Manchester before placing an offer on the two vacant buildings that she purchased. She stated that she got an e-mail response, dated December 4, 2015, from Erika Kennett, Planning and Zoning Director. She read: “Jennifer, thanks for reaching out to us and bringing your business to the City.” Ms. Loeffel said that in three minutes, she cannot begin to cover the injustice that she has suffered dealing with the City of Manchester staff. She said she has met with Planning and Zoning and the City Administrator, as well as with the Aldermen, to discuss her concerns. She scheduled the meeting with the City Attorney over a week in advance only to be cancelled by Erika Kennett less than 24 hours before that scheduled meeting because she felt it was not necessary to have the meeting. Ms. Loeffel said she was told on February 4 that if she agreed to four conditions that she may be granted general office occupancy in her own building. Ms. Loeffel stated the conditions are to restripe the paved parking lot, confirm in writing that she understands the City will not issue other business licenses for that address, agree that she will not make wine or beer available for consumption by her company, and agree that food trucks will not be located on her property, because apparently all these are violations of City Ordinances. Now, she believes that all can agree that anyone who owns a business understands that you do not stripe a parking lot in winter. While she currently still does have striping on her parking lot, she said she feels that it is not a possibility, and that at this time she is not able to do that. Ms. Loeffel said Regular Board of Aldermen 02/16/2016 Page 2 upon researching the Ordinances further, striping was not one of the requirements. As far as issuing other business licenses, long term, she may want to change the building’s proposed use, and she should be able to follow that process just like any other building owner in Manchester. She said as far as the last two terms she doesn’t understand, nor could she find evidence, that consuming wine or beer in her building was against City Ordinances or State Statutes. She said that she had even called State Liquor Control who assured her that, in fact, if she is not selling alcohol, she could consume in her property without a liquor license. If this is a violation of City Ordinances, she did not locate that in the Ordinances listed on the website. Ms. Loeffel stated that, lastly, she does not control food trucks or any other business in Manchester, and she doesn’t handle anyone else’s business licenses or permits; therefore, she does not know why she would be held responsible for what other businesses choose to do in Manchester, or anywhere else for that matter. The City of Manchester’s officials have made several assumptions as to what her intended use of her property is, and have gone so far as to tell her what she can and cannot post on Facebook, as well as her website. She said the Director of Planning and Zoning does not have the discretionary authority to determine what her business can post online. Ms. Loeffel said that additionally, allegations were made against her business by the City to the Fire Department which resulted in the immediate revoking of her occupancy permit, and then a follow-up visit by the Fire Marshall and Chief, which resulted in no violations once again, and of course, her occupancy was immediately reinstated. The fact that the Director of Planning and Zoning is insinuating to other City officials that she is conducting illegal or unsafe practices is inappropriate, insulting and does not follow within the perimeters of her authority. She said she clearly conforms to the required Code and has been verified twice by the Fire Department to conform to the permitted proposed use, she is still being held to a different standard than other business owners in Manchester. She said it is offensive, and while issuing business licenses is one of the ministerial duties of the City, her application has been purposely and unnecessarily delayed, which has caused loss of income to her business and added stress to her family, as well as her clients’ lives. Ms. Loeffel stated that she notified the City that she would be attending this Aldermen meeting, and she was told that while they cannot keep her from attending, it would not accomplish anything. She said she disagreed, because four hours before this meeting, she received, out of the blue, after almost two weeks of no response, a call letting her know that her occupancy permit was approved and ready to be picked up. Upon picking it up, she found additional conditions that were issued and have been placed exclusively to her business. Ms. Loeffel said the Director of Planning and Zoning continues to place discretionary conditions on her business, and in doing so, holds her to a different standard than other general offices and businesses in Manchester. Ms. Caitlin Brand, 8387 Pleasant Valley Drive, Cedar Hill, Missouri, said she wants to make sure the City of Manchester supports local businesses and women in businesses. She has grown up around this area, and as far as she can remember the coolest thing of coming to Manchester was all the little “Mom and Pop shops” over the town. She said she hopes that while City of Manchester has grown, that it is still in support of small businesses. They are sure to have a positive impact on the Community. Ms. Ketrill Blanton, 801 Second Street, Manchester, Missouri, owner of Back-on-the-Rack consignment boutique, said her business is newly moved to Manchester. She said her friend, Jennifer, told her about the property, knowing that she was desiring to move to a bigger space. She immediately began researching the process to move her business to Manchester, and after using the Regular Board of Aldermen 02/16/2016 Page 3 City’s website she was surprised to discover it was of little use. She said there were no links, forms, downloads or procedures that readily detailed the process to move her business. There was very little documentation, so she assumed the process was short. She stopped by City Hall in early January to pick up a license application so she could receive an inspection and permit. She was given an application and asked brief questions about her business and told to fill out the application and come back. When she did, she assumed she would turn it in and begin the process. She said she was shocked when one of the City workers said: “I remember you. I have been meaning to call you for a few days, as your business requires a Special Use Permit, and that can take up to 90 days for approval.” Ms. Blanton said she was given a stack of paperwork, listing approved special uses and unapproved businesses, along with paperwork for the long and costly process ahead. She was disheartened at this new part of the process, after all, how can a City whose very definition is a “City of Progress” not have this information easily available on its own website? How could a “City of Progress” not be forthcoming with such information immediately? How could their employees seem to take such joy in making a short simple process into a long and arduous one? She said she has been misled about filling out her application, told incorrect information about the Code of Ordinances and purposely and unnecessarily delayed in the progress. She said she watched as the City tried to hold the landlord to a higher standard; she said this was bullish and bordering on discriminatory. She said she questions if it is that their businesses are small and do not generate the taxes as a Culver’s or a Quik Trip that is driving this agenda. She said she wonders if men are treated with disrespect and disdain as they are. Ms. Blanton stated today she was issued a citation from the City of Manchester on the direct order of the City Administrator and Planning and Zoning Director for operating her business against its intended license. She explained that she had not operated her business, had no sales, and had not generated any revenue, but that did not matter. She was told her violation was due to displaying and having price tags on items that she was not yet authorized to sell. She asked how she could be fined for items in the store ready and waiting to sell once the Special Use Permit is approved? She asked how many other businesses are held to this standard? She said that as small business owners, they expect to be bullied by big stores, corporations, online retailers and the rest. They know there is a fight for “Mom and Pop” stores, as women, they must work ten times harder, and bash their heads against the “good old boy network”, and work harder to stay there. She said their network is far and wide, and they touch everybody they know. Ms. Joan Cosas, 303 Coventry Lane, Manchester, Missouri, said she is in support of Jennifer Loeffel and Ketrill Blanton. She said as a fellow woman in business, she was very dismayed to hear that her City appears to be making it difficult for them to open and operate their businesses. She said she was at the meeting in support of the businesses, and is asking the Board for support. She said that Back-on-the-Rack is Ms. Blanton’s business, and it is a clothing resale shop. She said Ms. Loeffel’s business is a co-working business where women can come and network together. She said she would love to see both businesses in operation. City Attorney Patrick Gunn said the property that these ladies have described this evening consists of two buildings with a small free-standing-garage-type structure. One of the buildings is 2,000 square feet which is located at 801 Second Street. The other building is 2,999 square feet and located at 14356 Manchester Road. There is a relatively small parking lot between the two buildings that can only accommodate approximately 14 parked vehicles. He said this parking lot straddles the two lots, and that the City has, as an accommodation, considered it as being under some kind of shared parking agreement. He said the parking lot is in some state of disrepair, and required to be Regular Board of Aldermen 02/16/2016 Page 4 striped, because if it is not restriped, we can almost be certain that they will not be able to get 14 vehicles on the lot for parking. City Attorney Gunn stated the 2,000 square foot building was proposed to be used for a consignment shop for the sale of used wearing apparel. However, this use is not a permitted use in the Planned Business District Regulations of the City’s Zoning Ordinance. He said when the proposed tenant for this building was advised of that fact, the use was changed to sale of antique furniture. The sale of antiques is a permitted use in the Planned Business District. The name of the business is “Back-on-the Rack”, and as a result, the City was alert to the fact that it was being advertised as “the sale of used wearing apparel”, which again, is not permitted. Attorney Gunn advised that the City did accommodate the tenant for the purpose of: 1. Obtaining the occupancy permit for the purpose of the sale of antiques. 2. For processing an application for a Special Use Permit, which would then be subject to granted approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and approval by the Board of Aldermen to make the use a permitted use. 3. For this 2,000 square foot retail use, 10 of the 14 parking spaces are required. Attorney Gunn stated the 2,999 square foot building was initially proposed to be used for a co-working space, and he notes this evening that one of the comments made suggested that it is, in fact, the intended use as a co-working space. This involves rental opportunities for those seeking daily, weekly, or monthly office space. Ms. Loeffel, on one of her posts on the Internet (her social media) compared the use to a coffee shop, such as Starbucks, with more people, but less noise and distraction. Obviously, the rental rates were dependent on the amount of usage by the particular tenant. This use is also not permitted by the Planned Business District regulations. Through Staff’s examination of news reports and social media, it became clear that this proposed use would require many, many more spots than available, many more than the four parking spaces left on the lot, remembering that the retail space requires 10 of 14 spaces, with only four for use by Ms. Loeffel’s intended business. Attorney Gunn said that in some literature and public announcements of Ms. Loeffel’s, dating back to December, 2015, there were references to having as many as 80 people on the property at any one time. Ms. Loeffel was apprised of City Staff’s concerns, and in reaction to those concerns, a second occupancy permit application was filed to resolve those concerns, but it was not significantly different than the first attempt and did not resolve any of the staff’s concerns. Around this time, West County Fire and EMS was brought into the discussion as a result of its need to inspect the property for fire and safety hazards, and it agreed with the City’s concerns, but for slightly different reasons. He said that in one e-mail from West County Fire, there was a specific mention of the changing description of the proposed nature of the use of the building. He said this has been a bit of a moving target since January 25 of this year. Attorney Gunn stated it should also be brought out that notices were disseminated by Ms. Loeffel to the public that she has acknowledged this evening that wine and beer would be provided free of charge to tenants, which is not lawful, nor can there be food trucks on the property. Attorney Gunn said Ms. Loeffel has again confirmed this evening that food trucks would be on the property, however, those food trucks are not allowed as a proposed use by the Zoning Regulations of the City. He said that giving liquor away is considered a sale under the Statutes and Ordinances of Manchester. Regular Board of Aldermen 02/16/2016 Page 5  Attorney Gunn stated that additional promotions of sponsors was to be held touting Manchester Road’s high traffic count. There are no provisions in Manchester’s Code for sponsorship signage. He said that City Staff advised Ms. Loeffel that the new business which was now seeking an occupancy permit for her consulting business, which is her third application for an occupancy permit, was allowed under the Planned Business District regulations as a general office provided that: 1. This was limited to a single tenant occupying what had been requested, 400 square feet of the building. 2. The parking lot would need to be restriped to make certain to maximize the number of spaces that are available to visitors. 3. No alcohol is to be sold or given away free from the property. 4. Food trucks would not be allowed on the property. Attorney Gunn said that in response, a fourth request for an occupancy permit was then filed, seeking to use the building as a single-tenant-use with up to 1,600 square feet of the building’s 2,999 square feet being devoted to use of single tenant, which we believe to be Ms. Loeffel’s consulting firm, together with the previously-itemized conditions. He said that request was consistent with Zoning Regulations for the Planned Business District, both as to use and the number of parking spaces that remained, and that application was approved today. Attorney Gunn said it was not in reaction to any suggestion that Ms. Loeffel or anyone else would be at the Board meeting. It was processed because it complied with the Zoning Regulations and it was approved. Attorney Gunn stated because only four parking spaces would be available for Ms. Loeffel’s use of the building for her consulting business, and even assuming that there may be two or three additional spaces available for her use for her business, the original intended use, multiple tenants, with as many as 80 people on the property at one time, would have in City Staff’s considered opinion, caused a high probability for serious traffic and parking concerns and would have simply over taxed the building as it is currently proposed to be used. He said at no time has Ms. Loeffel’s use been treated casually or indifferently or unprofessionally by Director Kennett, or her staff, or himself. Attorney Gunn stated there was a meeting that was scheduled, Director Kennett and he did meet in advance of that scheduled meeting, and it was determined that it wouldn’t be productive to have a meeting at that time, because the existing use which had been seen in multiple social media releases, and in fact, in a news release that appeared, he believes on Fox 2 or Channel 4, which suggested a vastly larger use of this property. Therefore, it was felt it would be appropriate that meeting was cancelled because there was nothing the City Staff could do to solve that problem with the parking. The Fire District, as we understand it, has approved the permit that was withdrawn, because there has been a commitment, as we understand it, made that there would only be a single tenant, and that is the Fire District’s position that there can only be a single tenant, there cannot be other people in there using it on a daily, weekly or monthly basis. The simple truth is that the use which was originally intended and was recently changed was not recognized by the Zoning Regulations of the City, and would have clear potential for significant problems. He said that in terms for going forward, the City would encourage, now that the occupancy has been approved for the use at 1,600 square feet of the building by a single occupant, that be allowed to proceed. Attorney Gunn said that as far as Ms. Loeffel’s comments on striping the parking lot, weather permitting, we do think that needs to be done because we all know that if the stripes are not visible to the parking visitors, they will most likely take more space than they need, which could Regular Board of Aldermen 02/16/2016 Page 6 create a problem for parking which will be adverse to both of these uses. We expect that because the occupancy permit requires this, there will be no giving or selling of liquor on the property and no food trucks on the property. The suggestion made this evening, “we can’t stop people from coming with food trucks”, that is not how this was presented; this was presented that those food trucks were going to be invited. This information was not provided to the City, but publicly seen in the social media. It was also presented that there would be liquor available for people using the space. That is when the City felt it needed to be particularly cautious to make sure this business did not overflow onto Manchester Road or the adjoining street. Ms. Loeffel stated she made it clear that she bought the properties on December 21, and all the news media was done prior to that. She said she made it clear that when speaking to the Director of Planning and Zoning on December 4, that she knew what the intended use was, which was the co-working space, and she made it clear after her purchase within the first week. She didn’t fill out her application for occupancy until that first week. She had several conversations as soon as she filled out the application; it was accurate for her business doing consulting, which she has had since 2004. She had never misled the City nor stated that she was going continue to do a co-working space after she was told that was not going to happen within the City. She said as far as the parking and the way that you have configured the parking was based on what you told us, she only occupies 1,000 square foot of the building, she was told to put 2,000 square foot by the City Staff as well as she was told to put 3,000 even though her building is only 2,916, she was told to round up, even though clearly she can only use 1,600 foot. She said they had several misleading things when they filled out the applications. 6. REPORTS FROM THE MAYOR a. Mayoral Report Mayor Willson reported on February 4, he attended the ground breaking for Lafayette Industries in Berkeley. They were awarded a $25,000 grant, and they are putting in a new addition on their building, which will add 85 new jobs, with intent that with both buildings, they will be able to have 500 people in the two buildings; on February 5, Manchester hosted the 5th First Coffee, and in attendance was Alderman Clement, Alderman Ottenad, Alderman Stevens, City Administrator Hixson, and he attended; it was one of the biggest ever attended. Alderman Clement stated the event was sponsored by the West County Chamber and the theme was Manchester Arts. It was nice to show the space and the gallery. It was a good meeting. Mayor Willson said the First Coffees go from 7:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.; Manchester had people remaining until 9:30 a.m. looking at the art and talking about the Manchester Arts. Mayor Willson reported on February 11, he attended the senior staff meeting. The Barrett’s School got an award for being a “Master School”. Christ Prince of Peace School was awarded “Spotlight School” from the private sector for the private schools. He said the City interacts with both Barrett’s School and Christ Prince of Peace. Mayor Willson thanked the gentlemen who plowed streets during the recent event. Mayor Willson presented Alderman Rich Baumann with his “Certified Municipal Official” award from the Missouri Governance Institute which is sponsored by the Missouri Municipal League. Mayor Willson said that Alderman Baumann was appointed originally to the Board of Regular Board of Aldermen 02/16/2016 Page 7 Adjustment before he was elected as an alderman. He commented that Alderman Baumann is probably the youngest alderman to get this award, and he completed all the requirements in record time of eight months. 7. REPORTS FROM THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR a. List of Paid Bills (Warrant dates of February 1 – February 13, 2016) There were no questions. 8. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES a. Planning and Zoning Commission Alderman Clement stated the Planning & Zoning did not meet last week; but there is an agenda for next Monday night. b. Manchester Arts Alderman Stevens said Alderman Clement went to a luncheon at the Governor’s Mansion. It was by special invitation. It was hosted by Missouri Arts Council and we were the only community arts program that was represented and invited. The Director of the Missouri Art’s Council was impressed with what Manchester Arts has done and the programs offered to their community in such a short amount of time. She advised that there is a brochure at the back of the room with upcoming performances, in a variety of places, for Manchester Arts. 9. ACTION ON OLD BILLS a. There were none. 10. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BILLS a. RESOLUTION APPROVING SUBMISSION OF GRANT APPLICATION FOR ENFORCEMENT OF DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED VIOLATIONS Alderman Clement read Proposed Resolution # 16-0551, entitled: “A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUBMISSION OF AN APPLICATION FOR A HIGHWAY SAFETY TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT GRANT FROM THE MISSOURI HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FOR FUNDING IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED FIVE THOUSAND FIVE DOLLARS ($5,005.00) FOR ENFORCEMENT OF DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED VIOLATIONS IN THE CITY OF MANCHESTER.”, by title only. Alderman Clement made the motion to approve Resolution # 16-0551. The motion was seconded by Alderman Ottenad and carried unanimously, without objection. b. RESOLUTION APPROVING SUBMISSION OF GRANT APPLICATION FOR ENFORCEMENT OF HAZARDOUS MOVING VIOLATIONS Alderman Ottenad read Proposed Resolution # 16-0552, entitled: “A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUBMISSION OF AN APPLICATION FOR A HIGHWAY SAFETY Regular Board of Aldermen 02/16/2016 Page 8 TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT GRANT FROM THE MISSOURI HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FOR FUNDING IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED FIVE THOUSAND FIVE DOLLARS ($5,005.00) FOR ENFORCEMENT OF HAZARDOUS MOVING VIOLATIONS IN THE CITY OF MANCHESTER”, by title only. Alderman Ottenad made the motion to approve Resolution # 16-0552. The motion was seconded by Alderman Clement and carried unanimously, without objection. c. RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT BID FOR 2016 FIREWORKS DISPLAY Alderman Baumann read Proposed Resolution # 16-0553, entitled: “A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID OF ARC PYROTECHNICS, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF SEVENTEEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($17,500.00) FOR ALL LABOR, EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS NECESSARY FOR THE 2016 FOURTH OF JULY FIREWORKS DISPLAY, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR OF THE CITY OF MANCHESTER TO ISSUE A PURCHASE ORDER THEREFOR, by title only. Alderman Clement asked if this was a new company. Director of Parks and Recreation Eileen Collins answered that although it was a new company, their staffing is not all new. There is a guarantee of full refund if the City is not happy with the display. She is not sure at this time if any other municipality is using them yet. Alderman Ottenad why we only had one company respond. Director Collins answered she reached out to Gateway and J & M, and they both received the bid packet also. J & M said they wanted to stay on the bid list. Alderman Ottenad asked who we used last year. Director Collins stated that Extreme Pyrotechnics did last year’s fireworks, and they have separated. She said the City is paying the same price as last year, which was $17,500, with the shells as stipulated on the bid specifications. Alderman Baumann made the motion to approve Resolution # 16-0553. The motion was seconded by Alderman Clement and carried unanimously, without objection. d. RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT BID FOR 2016 POOL MANAGEMENT OPERATIONS Alderman Diehl read Proposed Resolution # 16-0554, entitled: “A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID OF LIFEGUARDS UNLIMITED, INC. IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($170,000.00) FOR ALL LABOR, MATERIALS, TOOLS AND EXPENDABLE EQUIPMENT NECESSARY FOR THE MANAGEMENT AND OPERATION OF THE MANCHESTER AQUATIC CENTER IN 2016 AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR OF THE CITY OF MANCHESTER TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT THEREFOR”, by title only. Alderman Diehl made the motion to approve Resolution #16-0554. The motion was seconded by Alderman Clement and carried unanimously, without objection. Regular Board of Aldermen 02/16/2016 Page 9  e. BILL AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES RELATING TO CERTAIN ANIMALS Alderman Stevens introduced Bill # 16-2250, entitled: “AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 205.130(A) OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES RELATING TO THE CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN ANIMALS AS ‘DANGEROUS ANIMALS’”, by title only. Alderman Clement asked what prompted this. Attorney Gunn stated this is in response to the lawsuit that was filed by a lady against the City, because she received a citation for having a dangerous animal. She filed a lawsuit to challenge the Ordinance. This Ordinance makes very few changes to our existing Code provisions, but it does eliminate some language, which he agreed, was not the best language in the world. He said what is being done is cleaning up the Ordinance a little bit. The City has been told if they enact it, the lawsuit will be dismissed. He said the changes are not significant and do not dilute the impact of the Ordinance; it is still viable and does permit control of animals considered to be dangerous. Nothing further at time. 11. MISCELLANEOUS a. Comments from the Public Ms. Lorilee Cummings, 466 Doral Drive, St. Louis, Missouri, a real estate agent, said it is disappointing hearing arguments about parking spaces, and serving someone a glass of wine. The business in the back will never have more than two or three parking spaces used at one time. There will never be 80 people at one time for the networking. The business woman’s working is the largest growing networking group in the entire St. Louis Area, adding seven to ten new members a week. The proposed business is a “think tank for women” which is so important in today’s day and age. She encouraged the City to look past that and not turn down businesses. She said this will go past this meeting. 12. EXECUTIVE SESSION a. Closed Meeting pursuant to Section 610.021 (2) of the Revised Statutes of the State of Missouri pertaining to the lease, purchase or sale of real estate by a public governmental body where public knowledge of the transaction might adversely affect the legal consideration therefore. Alderman Hamill made the motion to go into Closed Meeting pursuant to Section 610.021 (2) of the Revised Statutes of the State of Missouri pertaining to the lease, purchase or sale of real estate by a public governmental body where public knowledge of the transaction might adversely affect the legal consideration therefore. The motion was seconded by Alderman Clement. A poll of the Board showed: Alderman Hamill – aye Alderman Diehl – aye Alderman Baumann – aye Regular Board of Aldermen 02/16/2016 Page 10  Alderman Ottenad – aye Alderman Clement – aye Alderman Stevens – aye 13. ADJOURNMENT At 8:30 p.m., after the executive session, there being no further business, Alderman Hamill made the motion to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Alderman Diehl and carried unanimously, without objection. The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Ruth E. Baker, MMC/MPCC City Clerk Note: This is a journal of the Board of Aldermen meeting held February 16, 2016 (summary); not a verbatim transcript. If a recording of the meeting is desired, please contact City Hall. Regular Board of Aldermen 02/16/2016 Page 11