City Council - Regular Meeting

I'm going to call the meeting to order. Would everyone please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Roll call, please.

Mayor Gibbons. Here. Councilmember Arnold. Here. Councilmember Burkett. Here. Councilmember Jack Sadek. Here. Councilmember Lavender. Here. Councilmember McLean. Here. Councilmember Schaefer.

Good. We are going to start with a presentation tonight.

And Julie, is Julie here? Julie, come on up to the podium.

Julie Gottlinghorst is the city's representative to the St. Louis County Council. University of Missouri Extension. Thank you, Julie, for all the work you do. So the reason Julie is here is that we have, I have a proclamation because we are joining the Missouri Good Neighbor Week, which is coming up. It's actually September 28th through October 4th. And Julie's going to take this proclamation. I'll read a little bit of it. Whereas strong neighborhoods are the foundation of thriving communities and connecting neighbors help create safer, healthier, and more welcoming and more resilient places to live. We could use a little of that right now, right? Whereas acts of neighboring build friendships, strengthen trust, encourage civic engagement, and create communities where people feel connected, supported, and valued. Whereas simple acts of neighboring such as introducing yourself, checking on a neighbor, sharing a meal, lending a helping hand, or welcoming a new resident can have a lasting impact on individuals, families, and neighborhoods. Whereas strong neighbors, develop relationships that support emergency preparedness, inspire local leadership, enhance quality of life, and help communities flourish. You know what? I'm going to read it all because I think it's so important. We need to do this for our community. Whereas every resident has the opportunity to make a positive difference by extending kindness, building relationships, and fostering a spirit of belonging where they live. And whereas Missouri's County Extension Consuls and the University of Missouri Extension documented more than 42,000 acts of neighboring during Missouri Good Neighbor Week in 2025, demonstrating the extraordinary generosity and community spirit found across our state. Now, I hereby, Liz Gibbons, Mayor of the City of Kirkwood, on behalf of the Kirkwood City Council, do hereby encourage all residents to reach out to their neighbors, perform acts of kindness, strengthen neighborhood connections, share stories of neighboring, and recognize those who make our community more welcoming and caring. and a connected place and do hereby proclaim September 28th through October 4th, 2026 as Missouri Good Neighbor Week in the city of Kirkwood. Julie, if you'll take that back. Thank you. And I want to encourage you also, MissouriGoodNeighborWeek.com. If you have someone that you could nominate for a good neighbor, this would be where you would go. And I had the pleasure of nominating one of my neighbors, Diana Gray, you know, the Grays that own Grapevine Wines. Every year in my neighborhood, we elect a block head. and they are the block captain for the year. It's pretty fun. And they always put the block party together and all that. Well, this last year, one of the things that she did was do a walking tour of everyone's backyard. Because we're never in backyards, right? It was so much fun. And then we got to go have some grapevine wine afterwards, too. So if you can think of something that you're going to do or you see a neighbor do, please go to MissouriGoodNeighborWeek.com and nominate Kirkwoodians for this award. Thank you. Okay, I think we have one more presentation here tonight. The Green Tree Committee does their annual visit to Kirkwood City Council.

Be careful of the cords.

Be careful of the cords down there, guys. Thank you. The presentation. Oh, sweet.

Do we look through them like?

Oh, beautiful shirt this year. This is sweet.

All right. Thank you.

Thanks. You're the liaison here. Hey. Hi.

It's a double grande. Okay. Excellent. Good job. Double grandness. Love it.

Yay. Lindy.

Okay. My name is Andrew Stream, and I'm the chairman of the Green Tree Committee this year. We are super excited to kick off Green Tree 2026. And keeping with tradition, we love coming to formally invite the city council, the mayor, as well as all the citizens of Kirkwood. The theme this year, appropriately, given the 250th birthday of America, is Green Tree Celebrates America's 250th. And I thought it would be appropriate instead of just explaining what we have going on a green tree. I'm going to briefly read you the declaration of green tree, which is. Typically, I wouldn't read, but realized in trying to memorize how they talked 250 years ago, I never would have gotten through it. So. This is the declaration of Greentree to Mayor Liz Gibbons and the members of the Kirkwood City Council. When in the course of Kirkwood events, it becomes necessary for one festival to dissolve the bonds of an ordinary weekend and to assume among the powers of the calendar that separate the joyful station to which the laws of tradition and 65 years of good barbecue entitle it, A decent respect to the opinions of this council requires that the chairman should declare the causes which impale this invitation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all festivals are not created equal, that Kirkwood Park is endowed by its founders with certain unalienable ingredients, a Motown review, a parade, a Folklife Village, and a plate of barbecue worth waiting in line for. And that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of a frosty root beer. We hold further that whenever any weekend becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter it, laying its foundation and organizing its powers in such form as shall seem most likely to affect their happiness. Prudence to dictate that a festival 65 years established should not be changed for light and transient causes. Let facts be submitted to the candid council. It hath, on Friday the 18th at 7 o'clock, conveyed a fabulous Motown review in the Lions Amphitheater that the people might dance in the name of liberty and staged beside a kid's dog show in a canine frisbee contest. It hath on Saturday the 19th at 10 o'clock in the morning summoned forth a parade marching from Kirkwood High School by way of Doherty Ferry Road, Peak, Kirkwood Road, and Argonne to these very grounds that all citizens, great and small, might review it from the reviewing stand. It hath raised upon its main stage Falling Fences, Mattie Schell, Nick Gussman and the Coyotes, and Dylan Triplett as Saturday Entertainment. Colonel Ford, Matt the Rattlesnake, Lush Band, and the Mighty Pines are on Sunday. It hath established a kid's zone of knockerball, pony rides, and foam cannons, and hath called forth an election of Kirkwood's cutest babies. its outcome decided most democratically by the weight of spare change cast in its favor. It hath appointed a folk life village of artists, blacksmiths, and basket weavers, and in honor of this nation's 250th year, secured a personal appearance of General George Washington himself. It hath opened its many arts and crafts booths and its wine garden, and set upon its tables chicken and dumplings, ham and beans, and root beer, self-evidently superior. We therefore, the chairman and the committee of Green Tree, appealing to the Supreme Judge of Goodweather for our rectitude of our intentions, do in the name and by the authority of the good people of Kirkwood solemnly publish and declare that the Green Tree Festival is and of right ought to be open and free to all. From Friday, September 18th through Sunday, September 20th at Kirkwood Park. And for the support of this declaration with a firm reliance on the good weather of the late September, we mutually pledge to Mayor Gibbons and to this council, our wine garden, our root beer, and our sacred honor, and do cordially, respectfully, and enthusiastically invite you to join. Thank you.

Thank you.

Awesome. Thank you, guys. We'll see everybody at green tree.

Great job.

Thank you.

That was awesome.

Okay. Let's see.

Now we are going to be moving to public hearing. The at this time, the console will recess to conduct a public hearing regarding establishing the property tax rates for the city of Kirkwood. Do you wish to enter in the exhibits into the record?

Yes, Mayor. For purposes of this public hearing, we wish to introduce Exhibit 1, which is an affidavit of publication showing that the ad was placed in the St. Louis County Inn on August 14, 2026. Exhibit 2, which is the affidavit of publication showing that the ad was placed in the Webster Kirkwood Times on August 14, 2026. And Exhibit 3, which is the Code of Ordinances for the City of Kirkwood.

Thank you. Mr. Lamb, who will present the issue to City Council?

Tonight, it will be Finance Director Mary Sprung will be presenting this. Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. Just to give a little bit of background, reassessments are done by St. Louis County every odd year. So with this being 2026, this is not a reassessment year. And as such, as you can see by the numbers in your packet, you'll notice that the assessments have not gone up by very much this year. Assessed value for residential is at 19% and commercial is 32% of appraised value. That's the calculation. The process of calculating the proposed property tax rates allows taxing authorities to capture revenue at the same level as the previous year, plus it allows for an increase in CPI, or Consumer Price Index. And that Consumer Price Index for this year is 2.7%. Um, all proposed property tax rates are calculated and reviewed by Missouri State Auditor's Office before they are finally approved. And the city does levy property taxes for police and fire pension parks and general government services. In addition, Kirkwood Special Business District levies a commercial property tax. Residential assessments increased 1%. And commercial assessments also increased 1%. And personal property increased 3%. And these are the preliminary assessments. It is subject still to Board of Equalization. And those figures, the revised figures, will come to me around September 12th. And then we will possibly have a substitute bill before the second reading, which will be September 17th. So these are all preliminary numbers at this point. And subject to change. So as it stands now, based on these preliminary figures, the residential proposed rate, tax rate, is $40.1 per $100 of assessed value. The proposed property tax levy would be approximately, to give you an idea, would be approximately $380 for a home valued at $500,000. The commercial proposed tax rate is 51.6 cents per $100 of assessed valuation. So that would be for the same commercial property valued at 500,000 would be $830. Personal property proposed tax rate for the city is 72 cents per $100 of assessed valuation. SBD or Special Business District commercial assessments increased 6%. That commercial proposed tax rate is 39.1 cents per $100 of assessed value. These proposed tax rates would result in a revenue increase of $55,520, or approximately 1% for the city, and it would be approximately $5,140, or 3% for the special business district. So, does anybody have any questions? Oh, I do.

I do. And I jumped into the legislation that we're voting on tonight. Is that okay? Because to ask these questions about the tax rates. Okay, because otherwise you won't have a reference point. So this year was not a reassessment year, but last year was, and we were concerned about the impact of the senior tax of the assessed freeze. Have you been able to look into what that impact was last year or this year?

well last year the impact um that number for the city was approximately 54 000 and change um the effect on the i'll go ahead into the library the library i believe it was i think i have it actually right here i think it was 25 000 but i think i got it right here 25 144 dollars So for the city, that was approximately 1.5%, I think it was. So it was very minimal. I do not have those figures because right now, seniors have to apply for that annually or reapply for that. I know that there's legislation right now, I believe it's been introduced to make that a permanent fix. But right now they still have to do that annually. So there's no telling at this point or estimating what the effect for the tax rate will be this year.

So because just anecdotally, I know last year with the reassessment, many of us saw some huge spikes. But again, because we were based on the previous year, just I guess we it's going to be hard to ever really know what that impact's been because we don't know what we lost based on the reassessment year. So, OK. And then these are all still well below our voter approved max. which, again, even though many of them are flat, we do have, due to the Hancock, if you want to talk a little bit, we have voter approved at higher levels, but those do get rolled back. And for example, the The Kirkwood Public Parks, which in your future, this legislation is 10.3 cents for each for residential in our voter approved max is 20 cents. Correct. But over the years, we've had to roll it back based on not capitalizing on increased assessed values.

Right. The Hancock Amendment limits you. Like I said earlier, the only way that you can increase is if by the CPI index or if you annex in other property. So it limits you to the same amount of revenue, basically, from the prior year. So that there's not a...

windfall of revenue or if the voters approved a tax increase that would be correct recalculated in in terms of what you could collect versus the rollback piece correct okay and then i i pulled legislation from last year and um the which one is it i'm trying to figure out um it looks like the general service tax rate. We've got it at 25 cents. And last year, it looks like it was at 26.2. Is that being rolled back this year? Or did we change that from last year's?

That's just the way that it calculates. I mean, that's the formula. So we didn't roll it back. That's the limit based on the formula.

but it's decreased from what we had last year. And the same with the business district who has a rather high max of 85 cents, they're at 39.1, but last year they were at 40.4. So because of the calculations, the amount per has reduced, but we're still the revenue. And that's all based on the formula and the revenue. So whether it's the same or a little bit less, we still are getting a little bit more.

Right. And there is an inverse relationship between assessed valuation and the tax rate. So when your assessed valuation goes up, your tax rate will go down to make sure that that revenue stays equal, basically.

So another year to the senior assessed CAP, you know, at some point we may know what that impact really has been. Right. Not just for us, for the school district and others, but right now it's nominal as best you can tell.

Right. I mean, it was last year anyway, so. Okay, great. Thank you.

Any more questions? We'll move to public comments. Have there been any cards completed to speak? Mayor and council?

Mayor and council, there have been no comment cards for the public hearings.

OK, very good. Thank you. Any last comments? OK, hearing no further discussion, this public hearing is now closed. The bill will be on tonight's agenda under new business for first reading consideration. Okay, now we're going into our second public hearing. At this time, the council will recess to conduct a public hearing regarding establishing the property tax rate for the Kirkwood Municipal Library. And I see our librarian is here too. Ms. Mullis, who will present, or do you have wish to enter exhibits into the record?

Yes, Mayor, for the record. First, Exhibit 1 is an affidavit of publication showing that the ad was placed in the St. Louis County Inn on August 14, 2026. Exhibit two is the affidavit of publication showing that the ad was placed in the Webster Kirkwood Times on August 14th, 2026. And exhibit three is the code of ordinances for the city of Kirkwood.

Thank you. Mr. Lamb, who will present this?

Finance Director Mary Sprung.

Okay, so same thing, but for the library. Okay. So the only unique thing about the library, um, is the library district taxing district boundaries are not quite the same as city of Kirkwood. So that does explain the difference between the assessed values and percentages between Kirkwood and Kirkwood library. Um, so I just wanted to point that fact out. And, um, The residential assessments for the library decreased, actually, less than 1%. The commercial decreased as well. while personal property tax increased. Oh no, it stayed the same, I'm sorry. And then the personal property tax increased. No, it did. I'm sorry, I'm looking at the wrong thing. So let me start over. So the residential assessments decreased less than 1%, commercial assessed value decreased 4%, while personal property increased 6%. So like I said, those percentages are just slightly different than Kirkwood's. The residential proposed property tax rate is 18.8%. I mean, 18.8 cents per $100 of assessed value. The commercial proposed tax rate is 25.5 cents per $100. And the personal property tax rate is 35.5 cents. And again, these are all estimated rates subject to change. These proposed tax rates as they stand now will result in a revenue increase of approximately $21,635 or 1%. The property tax levy for library is both for operations and debt service for the Kirkwood Library. So it covers both. And I believe the related debt issue is due to end in like 2033. So within the next few years, within the next decade.

So anybody have any questions?

One quick one.

Yes.

What's the difference of the district? Is the library district larger or smaller than Kirkwood proper? Do we smaller, slightly smaller?

Why don't we introduce our librarian? Krista, come up and just introduce yourself and say a few things about our library.

Hi, everybody. I'm Krista Van Herway. I'm the director of Kirkwood Public Library. The library district is smaller because it was set in 1965. And post-1965, the city of Kirkwood annexed some property there. So they are not technically in the Kirkwood Public Library District. They're in St. Louis County District, but they have all their rights and everything as any residential person, but we don't get their taxes. That explains the difference in the districts. Everything was set in Missouri in 1965 for libraries, unless you've done something to add. Okay. Any questions about that? All right. Thank you for all your support. We appreciate it very much. Come to the library, read more. Thank you.

Very good. I do have a question. Do you know how much of the tax rate is tied to the debt, the limited time frame on this? Eight cents. Eight cents. Do you remember when that expires? Yes. I think, well, I have a note that it's 2032 slash 2033, but I'm... Is that part of this 18.8 cents under the residential, or is that hitting each one of your categories?

The one that says library temp...

I don't Okay, but not in the legislation.

Um, it might not. It's it's on this report that I have.

It's okay. That report. Yeah, does that total up? I guess. Yeah.

Because I broke it out between library and the one that says library temp. So the library temp is the debt service portion.

And do both of those get rolled back a little bit? So even on your debt part, because last year it looked like we were, not that it's a lot, 18.9 and now you got an 18.8. So you're subject to some rollback, well, some adjustments based on it. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, Mary. Are there any more questions from council? We'll move to public comments. Jessica, has anyone filled out a card to speak?

No, Mayor, there are no comments at this time.

Very good, thank you. Hearing no further discussion, this public hearing is now closed. This bill will also be on tonight's agenda under new business for first reading consideration.

Now we're going to go into public comments. Public comments, three-minute limit per person. The public comments portion of the meeting is an opportunity for the city council to listen to comments from citizens. It is not a question and answer session, and the city council will not respond to comments or answer questions during this period. The mayor may refer any matter brought up to the city council to the chief administrative officer or city clerk if action is needed. Thank you.

Jessica, has anyone filled out a card to make a comment this evening? Yes, Mayor, we do have a few comment cards. The first one is Rich Etskorn.

Good evening. Rich Etskorn, 271 McCullough Avenue. I'm a fourth-generation Kirkwoodian, class of 1977 at Kirkwood High School. Raised my family here, and I've been here for 54 years. I'm hearing some very, very concerning things about the way the city is being run recently. I've always thought of Kirkwood as a very well-run city. I always used to brag about how well-run this city was. But if these things that I'm hearing have any credence, and I tend to believe they do, they need to be investigated deeply, they need to be investigated broadly, and the transparency necessary to bring back what I would call the credibility of the city of Kirkwood is very important here. The issues that I'm hearing, and the first one was my career in commercial real estate, was what I believe is a vast overpaying for the property on Leffingwell. Information that I've heard, The information that I've leaned by looking into it a little bit says we probably paid twice what it was worth. The second issue is that the current public works site is being negotiated with a developer with the intention of possibly putting tax abatements on that property. Kirkwood is a great place to live. People want to live here. I'm not sure that having a one-on-one discussion with a developer and giving tax abatements is in the best interest of the city. What I would think you'd want to do is a proper marketing of that property, using professionals in the business of selling pieces of real estate to get the best value for the city. And given that Kirkwood is a desirable place to live, I cannot figure out why any tax abatements or tax credits or whatever you want to call them would be given out for someone to develop that piece of property. I don't understand that. And then the other thing I'm hearing, the third thing I'm hearing is that funds are being moved around. Now, whether that's legitimate, whether that's proper, I don't know, but I think that the council and all the people that work for the city need to come very, very clearly and cleanly on why funds appear to be moving from places like the electric department and the parks department to other aspects of the city operations. Maybe perfectly fine, but it just doesn't feel right. So I think that the credibility is on the line here and then think that the, uh, the city needs to do a good job of coming clean about all this stuff and getting it out to the public.

I'm hearing a lot of different things.

Good evening, mayor, council, Joe Roser, six, five, four Evans. I've lived here all my life, 60 plus years, and I'm concerned about the R5 multifamily rezoning on North Kirkwood Road. We have a remodeling company that there's issues with the BMP, can't dig basements, maybe eight foot or less. but this developer wants to dig a 24-foot in-ground parking garage 24 feet down. So, where is all that water going to go? Explain that to me. Affordable housing with the BMP that you are adding $20,000 to $30,000 to this new, proposal that's going to input the people that are going to buy these homes, and I'm going back and forth on BMP and the project on North Kirkwood Road, but whoever buys those units on North Kirkwood Road, they're not going to have kids. They're going to be retirees. You want affordable housing in Kirkwood, okay? So Children can be raised in Kirkwood like I was. I went to Pittman, Knifer, and the high school. I wouldn't trade it for nothing. Not a thing. I love Kirkwood. But these young families, they can't afford to move into Kirkwood and send their kids to public schools and it's just going to hurt our community. We need affordable housing and I just don't understand why commercial property MSD will let them dig 24 feet down for a garage and residential building house water table, eight foot deep. Oh, it's too deep. Some pumps, you know, whatever this ordinance does, it's not going to help the water. The infrastructure is a problem. But I appreciate your time. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Joe. Nelda Carlisle Gray.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council members. My name is Nelda Carlisle Gray. I've been a resident for 39 years. I live in Briar Hill Farm condominiums, and I wanted to address the same issue of these first three parts of changing the zoning to multifamily. As living in a condominium, I have firsthand experience. First of all, we have underground parking. And I don't know, we've never had any problems with it. I've lived in two of the condominium places, so I don't know how it's built or the structure. I'm not an engineer. But... Right now 80% of the homes in Kirkwood are single-family homes and this condos would increase the diversity of housing that we would have in Kirkwood here. I moved here when my son was in junior high so it condos are a place where kids can live and I grew through empty nester, and then my husband had Parkinson's, and we were able to stay in the condo because we didn't have the outdoor work to do, and he didn't have to go to a facility. And now I'm a widow and with my wonderful cat, and it's just a right-sized place for me. I'm very active in the community. I'm going to be at the Kirkwood Green Tree Festival manning a table. We formed a community within our condo, During COVID, I had meetings we meet once a week, and we're still meeting once a week. And we're just formed a wonderful community. So these condos are not cold and impersonal. Everybody has their own style of house. At the Briar Hill Farm, you can drive up Ballast Road. You hardly even know there's condos there. It's a wonderful wooded community. So each one is different, and we need more diversity of housing in Kirkwood and more attainable housing in Kirkwood. Thank you.

Thank you. Randy McMahon.

Hello, I'm Randy McMahon. I've been living in Kirkwood for five years, six years. And my issue or grievances or whatever you want to call them was I feel like the City of Kirkwood is involved with too many enterprises with the electric and the water and running the town. And then also, you know, buying properties and, you know, having to sell properties and flipping your maintenance department to another area where it's already looking beautiful, which you have now. So I don't know, that's for y'all to decide, but I just felt like it's, Waste of extra energy of time when you've already got a beautiful maintenance center already. The other thing is Big Bend and Guyer Road, where you have a lot of problems with traffic, deaths even. But I'm glad they stopped the painting. They were going to do some painting there or something. Maybe they did. I don't know. But we really need to have another right-hand turn lane right there going down Guyer that stays... a turning lane instead of two lanes to continue down from west to east on Big Bend. So we need a turning lane there. I think you could have done it. It's going to be very difficult with all the power lines there. Maybe you could put some effort into that. I think that would help a lot of congestion because that's really a very busy intersection and Uh, part of it is being rushed to beat the traffic light there, which I can understand that people are probably trying to do. I know I've done it myself, trying to get, but anyways, that was, uh, a couple of things that I wanted to say. And, uh, one other thing was, I guess we own property down at the Merrimack river. which I think could be utilized for, instead of the baseball parks being grown over into weeds, just seems to me that you could, I don't know, maybe there's an insurance reason, I don't know, but you could do like farm plots or something for vegetable, grow vegetables for the community or for the city, for other communities, where I know a lot of people love doing that stuff for hobbies. I mean, they already talking about doing flowers to everybody, whatever, you know, so everybody likes to have food too. So that would be a great idea that it's a lowlands and a lot of water and almost would maintain itself. That is all. Thank you.

Thank you. Perfect timing. Greg Marishen.

Good evening. Greg Marishin, 468 North Clay Avenue. Mayor and members of council, I'm a Kirkwood resident, and I'm here because I'm concerned about the financial direction of our city and how that direction may be affecting development decisions. I don't claim to be a municipal financial expert, but I can read Kirkwood's financial statements. And at the end of the fiscal year 2025, Kirkwood reported $64.5 million in outstanding certificates of participation principle, not interest. $64.5 million. Some of these obligations extend over a decade into the future. And COPs aren't the only thing concerning residents. We recently learned that Kirkwood's electric capital expenditure went approximately $15 million over budget, requiring money from other departments. These aren't small numbers and they're occurring while residents are watching increasingly aggressive development and multifamily proposals throughout Kirkwood. I'm not standing here claiming that our debt caused these developments, but I'm asking whether our financial position is influencing them because residents deserve an answer to that question. I'm concerned density being pursued Because Council believes it is genuinely the best long-term vision for Kirkwood? Or does Kirkwood increasingly need additional revenue that comes with development to support the financial commitment we've already made? If the answer is that finances have nothing to do with it, then please show us. Show residents what a proposed multifamily development will generate in revenue. Show us what it will cost in additional infrastructure and city services. Show us any tax incentives being provided. and show us why increasing density is better for the residents of Kirkwood who already live here. I love Kirkwood. I've been here for five years. I'm raising my family of five here. I don't want to see us permanently alter the character of this community because of financial decisions that have been made that cannot be undone. Building law, Buildings last for generations, debt can last for decades, and poor financial decisions ultimately get paid for by residents. Before we approve more density, I believe residents deserve a clear accounting of where we stand financially and why development is necessary. Development should serve Kirkwood. Kirkwood should not serve the development. Thank you.

Thank you. There are no further comments? Good, thank you. We will now move to the consent agenda. May I have a motion, please?

Motion. Second.

Is there any discussion? All in favor of the consent agenda, say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, nay. Consent agenda carries. We now move to unfinished business. Bill 11136A.

Mayor and Council, Bill 11136A, an ordinance granting a special use permit for outdoor use and outdoor dining at 132 East Monroe Avenue, Suite A, Ivy on Monroe, subject to certain conditions.

Thank you. Are there any questions or comments on the bill?

Yes. Do you want a motion first?

You can make a motion, and then you can state why, and then we need a second, and then we can go into discussion.

All right, happy to do that. I have a motion, Mayor.

Okay.

I'd like to change the ordinance for time on Sunday instead of it opening.

If you'll state what? Section and subsection. Happy to.

This is on section one, number three, and number four, both be included in the same motion that just changes 7 a.m. to 10 a.m. It's only for Sunday outside music.

I get that.

Okay. Discussion on the motion?

Wait a second. Yes. Section 1, subsection 3 has outdoor dining on Sunday from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. And you're suggesting that that be changed? 10 a.m.?

No, thank you. No, just number four. So not subsection three, just subsection four. Thank you, Council Member McLean.

You're welcome, Councilwoman.

Okay, any more discussion?

Is there, what's the reasoning?

The public hearing, the comments that we heard from citizens around that area were concerned about music on Sunday morning at seven. That's the basis. It was several different people that just were wondering why music at 7 a.m. on Sunday morning. So it's just trying to accommodate the citizens that live right there, that the music starts at 10. Outside, outside, inside, 7 a.m. Thank you.

Any more discussion? All in favor of the motion, say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Okay, the motion carries. Now we are back to Bill 11136A. We'll add another A on that.

Oh, AA? Uh-huh.

Okay. Is there any discussion, any further discussion? All in favor say aye.

Do a roll call. A roll call. All right. Mayor Gibbons? Yes. Council Member Arnold?

Yes.

Council Member Burkett?

Yes.

Council Member Jack Sedeck? Yes. Council Member Lavender? Yes. Council Member McLean? Yes. Council Member Schaefer?

Yes.

Very good.

The bill carries. Bill 11137.

Mayor and Council, Bill 11137 is an ordinance granting a special use permit for an indoor amusement facility, Arcade, at 118 North Kirkwood Road, subject to certain conditions.

Are there any questions or comments on Bill 11137?

Roll call. Mayor Gibbons. Yes. Council Member Arnold. Yes. Council Member Burkett. Yes. Council Member Jack Sedeck. Yes. Council Member Lavender. Yes. Council Member McLean. Yes. Council Member Schaefer.

Yes.

The bill carries. Bill 11138A.

Mayor and Council, Bill 11138A, an ordinance amending Chapter 4.5, bicycles by deleting in its entirety and inserting a new Chapter 4.5, bicycles, electric bicycles, motorized bicycles, electric alternative vehicles, motorized alternative vehicles, and non-motorized alternative vehicles.

Are there any questions or comments on Bill 11138A?

Roll call, please. Mayor Gibbons? Yes. Council Member Arnold? Yes. Council Member Burkett? Yes. Council Member Jaxetic? Yes. Council Member Lavender? Yes. Council Member McLean? Yes. Council Member Schaffer?

Yes.

The bill carries. Bill 11139.

Mayor and Council, Bill 11139 is an ordinance amending the fiscal year 2026-2027 budget. Are there any discussion or comments?

We'll call, please. Oh, you got to wave them a little higher.

Where's the Statue of Liberty lady? I need some light over here.

Got it back there for you, Gina.

Just a follow-up. I did have questions. I did send to Darren about the 301 capital accounts and the specifics on that, and I did get the spreadsheet this morning and do have questions, but I'll follow up with him. I do think some detail on these 301s and what they're tied to and what departments would provide some greater clarity as we look at this, especially as he's now starting to have them move from one account to another so we know where things started in landing. And again, if you look in the budget book, the The detailed line item numbers are not in there in the capital. So I think having more detail for the council going forward in the residents will be very helpful. So I did get a spreadsheet, have some questions. I'll follow up with him and then hopefully we'll be able to kind of share, you know, send it on to you all as well.

Anybody else? Roll call. Mayor Gibbons? Yes. Councilmember Arnold? Yes. Councilmember Burkett? Yes. Councilmember Jaxetic? Yes. Councilmember Lavender? Yes. Councilmember McLean?

Yes.

Councilmember Schaefer?

Yes.

The bill has passed final reading.

Bill 11140.

Bill 11140 is an ordinance changing the zoning of various properties to R5 multifamily residential district, including 1000 North Kirkwood Road, B3 to R5, 110 East Maple Avenue, R4 to R5, 114 East Maple Avenue, R4 to R5, 115 East Sarah Avenue, R4 to R5, and 119 East Sarah Avenue, R4 to R5, being in approximately 1.88 acre site on the east side of the North Kirkwood Road and directing such change in the zoning district map.

All right. Do I have a motion and a second to accept Bill 11140 for first reading approval?

Motion.

second okay um good let me get where i'm going um i would say here somewhere that um i am strongly in favor of passing this tonight and if i could find my notes that i could tell you um all the reasons why Sorry. What an eyesore we have looked at in my lifetime. I mean, I can't remember any other time that it, well, I don't want to say too much because I know that Mrs. Offenberg is here and I don't, but in the most recent years, it's looked, that property has looked pretty bad. And what's going to come is going to have 40% uh of the of the lot will be covered sixty percent will be green right now ninety percent of the um offenberg properties and there's multiple are are covered um the property borders homes and i know council member lavender lives right there but i do on the east side there are homes on the east there are homes on the south on the west side there's homes on the on the west so it's it's already a neighborhood and these will be additional homes and the way that the builder and i know um he's here and the architect's here and the way he showed us the one rendering on sarah where sarah starting up at taylor has Sidewalk, sidewalk, sidewalk, sidewalk, coming from the single-family homes. And then we get to the condos, and they're going to be walk-up condos with sidewalk, sidewalk, sidewalk. It is going to fit the neighborhood. And it was two stories with a third story set back. And it can't be any higher than a single-family home at 35 feet. If this area is such a good... area for retail why do we have a total access that's been closed for i don't know how long and been for sale for so long nobody's going in there and that's a nice building i mean it could be a restaurant it could be a shop it could be all kinds of things but nobody's going in there so this area i don't think it's really prone to retail um i already mentioned that The land is unsightly, overgrown. Honeysuckle graffiti is now on it. There was a concern by the neighbors, and I heard it pretty strongly last week or last meeting about guest parking because we know Sarah and Maple, those streets are parked because they're only one side. This project is going to have parking in the two semicircles that they showed us as well as parking in the garages for guests. So that's taken care of. They're going to put a fountain in the middle of each of the semicircles. What a great way to come into Kirkwood. We all love the fountain that's right back here behind us. And when it's not on, I notice it significantly. So what a way to welcome people into Kirkwood with this fountain, these fountains. The property sales tax right now is about 194K a year. With this improvement, it would be about 720 or more. So it would be, I'm sorry, it would be 720 total. So it'd be about half a million more in sales tax for our city. design of the walk-ins. Planning and zoning voted 8 to 1 in favor of this. Right now, the B3 is zoned to encourage commercial services and retail facilities that serve customers traveling on major streets. So it would In my opinion, many things that could go in there that would be retail would have far more traffic than what these condos would have. I think it's a good project. I think it's the entrance into Kirkwood and would be a great welcoming for people coming into Kirkwood.

Okay, got it. If I may, yes, that is my neighborhood. I look out on trees growing in gutters, on the ex-thrifty rental car. My neighbors are five to one in favor of this project. I had somebody, so my concerns are traffic, and one of my neighbors recently said when the dealership was there, there was a lot of traffic, and cars raced up and down Sarah and Mabel. So in a small way, and not to belittle traffic's an issue and a concern that I have, there used to be more traffic in this area with the dealership that was there. Of course, we're worried about water. The difference with digging a 24-foot basement here or parking is they have to qualify under MSD and connect water to sewage systems versus a home has to self-contain its own water. So it's a different structure. It's a different entity. I believe our Envision 2035, which was created... Amy, 15, 20 years ago, or envisioned 2035, 10 years ago, for a 20-year project, talked about increasing density. So this is not a knee-jerk reaction to the last year of unexpected large growth. challenges that we are currently facing. When I first heard of the zoning, I contacted a couple of friends who are realtors. My vision would be duplexes, because I would like attainable homes. I'd like more affordable homes. I thought that would go in the neighborhood. And guess what? The realtors I knew found zero builders to put that in, because the cost benefit isn't there for a builder. The setbacks, I think, will be substantial in that area. The concept that was presented to us sounds as if they plan to fit into the neighborhood. I would like more attainability. I would love for our builder and architect to consider taking a couple of your units. My back of the napkin accounts are that your units may be 1,500 plus square feet. I'd love to see you cut a couple of those in half and charge a little bit less for a couple of them. So we have four and $500,000 units instead of 700 to a million dollar units. That would be my fantasy, but you know what? I don't have the money to buy it. I don't have the money to build it. I don't have the experience to. So my ideals are not realistic in today's environment. And so for a lot of reasons, I think this is good for Kirkwood. I think it is part of our long-term vision for Kirkwood. And right now, those lots have been empty. for at least 12 years. Offenburg, I believe, has parked some cars on some of the lots. I walk up to Fresh Thyme a lot, and so sometimes I've seen cars parked there, and right now there hasn't been anything for a good year to two years on any of those lots.

And, you know, there was some comments about density in Kirkwood. Kirkwood in the 70s, early 70s, was 31,000 residents. So we're at 29, I think maybe almost 29 now, so. Thank you. From Burkett.

so yeah i uh one of the things that i mentioned the last time this came up and was concerned about i did some research and just on this particular bill uh 110 east maple is a parking lot it's been a parking lot seems like for a very long time That property, I believe, has been owned by Access Properties at least since 2012, the records I could find. 114 East Maple, it's a rental, it's a home. I don't know if it's currently rented or not, but when I did a search on what rent was going for in that area for that house, anywhere from $2,500 to $3,100 a month. I just want to sit with that for a moment, that that is a lot of rent for a small house. So they're getting, even when we talk about attainable rents, we're still talking about very high rents. 115 East Sarah is a parking lot and 119 East Sarah is an empty lot. And that's the way they've been for a long time. So I just want to note, I know people are concerned that we're giving up R4 for R5, but the reality is the reason they're bringing these properties together is they've been owned by the same people for a very long time and that they've owned these different pieces and are selling their private property. I just wanted to let people know that I did look into that to make sure what that was going on for that.

Very good. Any additional comments?

I'll just speak briefly. This one's been tough. A lot of these are. I'm not sure that I'm not of the opinion that I think B3 is the long term fix for that property. I'm not opposed to multifamily zoning on those corners of Kirkwood Road. I think in a lot of ways that would make some sense. I have two main issues. And the first is it's not just on the corners. We're pushing further into neighborhoods on both sides of Kirkwood Road, and that concerns me, given the nature of our community. The second thing, and I think the biggest hurdle for me is This property as soon as we rezone it. It does not come back to Council, and if you were here for the public hearing you heard a lot of questions and concerns about things like stormwater traffic. You know there's going to be a traffic study done but it's going to be after the zoning is done. And so, none of that information. and kind of a final check will come before council. And that bothers me because ultimately, if something on this project goes awry, the seven of us are the ones that will get the heat from it. And so not being able to have a final check on that And being able to make sure that, you know, the entries in the exits are, uh, you know, good for the neighborhood, um, and good for the kids crossing the street and all those things. Um, that's that's my real hang up and at this point in the process. I can't add an amendment and require that that come back as site plan under our code. And so our choice is to resume this and seed all of that say in the process, or or vote it down. Those are the two options that we have. um i wish that there was a third way here um but but with the choices that i'm presented i'm not comfortable um given the concerns and the questions that i have um at rezoning this and saying uh you know we'll we'll see it after it's done i i still believe that this council should have the ability to make sure that the residents concerns are dealt with uh at final site plan approve approval and so um i'll be voting no tonight

Any additional questions?

I'd just like to add, thank you for your comments. I also wanted to add, Council doesn't get to come back and look at what the design is when we get finished with it. I look at the James and I'm appalled myself, but that's just me. That's our entrance into town. I understand that You know, Offenburg didn't do anything down there for years, and I understand that, you know, things change down there. But in a rush to just do something here that we don't get to see in the final phases and we get to have any say, I think, again, we were elected – to look at the final draft that's coming in front of us. Just because what this developer brought to us doesn't mean that that's the end result, what it's going to look like on any of the properties here when they get finished. So for my end, I'm going to vote no against it only because we don't get a final say at this, our final bite at the apple. And I think we should at console level. And that's my end of it. So thank you.

I just wanted to ask Jonathan how we got to this. I mean, if something doesn't change, this council, I guess, will never vote for something. So how did... Sure.

So how the process for site plan review? Yes. Sure. So I'll try to keep it brief, but... WHEN THE CODE WAS REVIEWED PRIOR TO 2021, ALL SITE PLAN REVIEW WENT THROUGH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS A RECOMMENDATION AND THEN TO CITY COUNCIL. swear to, things have fluctuated over time, over decades, and who gets final say and who doesn't. It's gone back and forth. Prior to 2019, again, Planning and Zoning Commission would make recommendations for all site plans, and they would come to City Council. In 2019, we went through a comprehensive review, which included a subcommittee of councilmembers, Planning Zoning Commission members of general residents, and one of the tasks that was given to the consultant and to staff in that was to look at ways of making our process more efficient and more, you know, predictable and so in site plan review, it's considered a ministerial task. It is a more of a check the box review under the state statute and one of the things that they looked at, we looked at in 2019 and that code was what can we do to make things predictable, make sure our codes are tightened up, our landscaping code, we're comfortable with it. Our lighting code all those things are good so that people who own property Know what the city expects they can apply for that and then they would know that they can build this according to the rules. So that request was made from the council and that committee went through public comment, went through a large process to go through. And so at that point when it was amended, again, we had COVID in there, so there was a little delay. A lot of the work was done 2019, 2020 leading up to COVID. It was put on hold for about a year and then it was brought back up and we had public hearings again to refresh everything. But at that point, it's when it changed from, so what we're talking about is permitted uses Separate from special uses that are a higher level of scrutiny, special uses still come back. So we established a minor site plan and a major site plan at that time. Minor site plan for permitted uses, again, vested right in a property, you can do this, versus special uses. So special uses still come back to council. Mixed uses still come back to council. Mixed use development still comes back to council because they require a development plan and a final site plan. So again, that was just the direction that was determined through that public process at that time. That's how we got here. Does that answer your question?

Yes, I think it does. Can this property become another car dealer?

So the property... The property that we're on now, the Northeast property staff had documented that, in our opinion, the use had ceased and abandoned. So they're legally nonconforming. And so we gave an opinion that the Northeast property would have to get a special use permit if it were to have a dealership. However, the Western property, I believe somebody mentioned it earlier, the Western property has been used for storage of inventory somewhat previously. recently, and then we all know Thrifty was used until very recently, and our code of vehicle sales and rental is one use. So in my opinion, the western and southern of these three could have a dealership on them. Again, that would be subject to maybe a little more research, but that's my knowledge, based on my knowledge to now, and then the northeastern quadrant would have to apply for a special use permit.

I know we've talked about this via email, but if we were to ask that this particular project come back to us for review so that we can approve it or disapprove it.

Sure.

Sarah's involved with this too.

Yeah, yeah. The developer is here. Yeah, I'll defer to the city attorney as well. But right, so it's mentioned it's not in our code to do that currently. My understanding after getting legal advice on this topic is that it seems that the city could require that. And so if that is what you all want to do as a condition on this ordinance, I believe, I don't know, Ms. Mullen, do you want to?

Agree that you could attach a condition. There's also just one thing to note about the current status of the distinction between a minor site plan and a major site plan. There is an opportunity for the director to exercise discretion with regard to a particular plan if it presents certain conditions. concerns concerns for the general welfare and recommend that it be treated instead as a major site plan so that's existing that discretion would have to be exercised of course without a plan in front of the director you can't say how that would be handled but currently that's an option in the existing code so somebody on this council could make a motion that it comes back to us how would you as a condition of this, as a condition, they're two separate issues. So what's in the existing code is discretion that staff, the director can exercise. If you were to pass, you could, however, pass a condition to this rezoning that would require the plan to come back in front of you. That would be, now, I can give you more advice on that, but...

Add a subsection to the ordinance to require that it go through the major site plan.

Correct. Let me let Councilmember McLean.

Well, a couple thoughts. I like we were going with that potential amendment, I think, but I'm not sure what we would have to come back in front of us and if we could just say yay or nay on that particular thing. But stepping back a little bit, I liked what the developer presented to us. I thought it was a good development. I liked it. The problem is there's no assurance this is going to happen. That's what we're discussing. um but my bigger concern is not so much this parcel but the 2.13 acres and the 0.89 acres that are going to be developed at a later point in time he may get through with this one and say this just isn't my cup of tea it's i'm not going to make any money and try to try to sell it to another party or come back to the council and say, I need this zone for something different because I'm not making money on this. I paid too much money for it and it's costing me too much. So I need more units. That's my biggest concern with all this. And so for that reason, I'm going to vote no, just because there's too much here that's uncertain going down the road in my mind. Again, I go back to what he presented last week or two weeks ago. I liked what he presented. I liked his concept.

But it's empty now.

But we can't be forced into voting on something because it's empty. Because we don't like the way it looks now. What do we want in the, and this is for the council in general and Kirkle, what do we want there in the future obviously we don't want it to look like it is now but as jonathan said is this the best use for that property um and we i don't think um myself i don't want to see james's right there this project was not a james right but it's not to say the next project couldn't be or what if he gets into the due diligence and says i can't make any money on this city i need this our zone so i can build a james then we're stuck um and that's my concern

I just want to, this appears to be a Hail Mary pass because we think it's going to be defeated. And I'm really concerned that we're trying to negotiate, like maybe we could change ordinances and the process and do something different to squeak this through. I mean, there's something very unpleasant about that to me. And, you know, planning and zoning did their job understanding that they were only looking at rezoning the residents who came to those meetings were told we're only talking rezoning you don't get to have real information about what may go in there all along the process we have and we've been lectured on this it's a rezoning vote not a site plan vote not a maybe they'll do this vote And to try to change this now, I'm really concerned. I say let's vote, and if there's something we can work on together to alleviate some of these concerns going forward, let's do it in a different fashion. But trying to fix it tonight, somewhat disconcerting to me and it must be because we're afraid of taking the vote I don't think that's true I think we're trying to come up with a way of being able to for it to come back to us but I wish we had it it doesn't become a car dealership or a

Well, I don't think we want a car dealership there.

I mean, you know, it's again, we had opportunities to maybe have this conversation before tonight, but I can't vote on something that maybe legal counsel can say to us later. It really can happen or can't. We can change our ordinance. I mean, I don't know. This is disconcerting to me.

May I ask a couple more questions of Jonathan?

Yeah.

see if I can remember. So right now, we're zoned commercial.

So it's a mixture, the larger portion. So this site specifically has a mixture. So the majority is B3, which is commercial.

Let's just stay with the majority that's B3. So tomorrow, somebody could come in and say, I want to put in storage spaces. Because that would be commercial. Self-storage. Yeah.

Self-storage is a special use.

But self-storage is zoned to go into B3. It might have to get a special use permit.

That's a rough example, to be honest, because there's a lot of caveats we put on self-storage.

A car wash? Can a car wash come in and go in there?

With a special use, they could apply for a special use permit. So another business could go in there.

Businesses that could come in that are zoned that don't have to come before council can just go through the entire process. I'm sorry.

That's right. Go ahead. Retail, restaurant, office, personal and commercial service, so salons, spas, massage, gym, physical fitness, studios.

All of that could come in now, and this council would never hear anything about it. That's right. And you have multiple rules of what they're going to have to meet to build if we rezone. Correct. So you already have rules in place. that they'll have to comply with. And then this still goes to architectural review. Is that correct? That's correct. Architectural review gets to decide on what it looks like. That's correct. Or have a part of that process.

So it's their decision. They have to approve the exterior architectural design has to be approved for multifamily by ARB.

there's probably not anybody in this room, let alone in Kirkwood that doesn't understand opinions about the James. And so I'm going to guess that this would never look like the James. Now that might be a risky bet, but you know, so, all right. So there are rules in place. This is a development on the, It would be a use on land that's been vacant for 10 plus years. Yes, Thrifty has been off and on for the last several years, off for six months now, nine months. I don't know if there are any other bids. I don't know if this bid has locked in the potential to buy this land. I appreciate that they might change their mind and something else happens, but are we not Still worse off now? This isn't rushed. This is somebody who's gone through the appropriate process of coming before us and going to PNZ. I went on a site visit to see what was there. I don't think anything about this has been rushed. This has been a normal process, yes? it it's gone through our normal process yeah i haven't been here long but it seems like a normal process i guess so being rushed that counselor just said it was talking about is is there a way of bringing it back to us and apparently there is and so and i'm happy if that's a rushed portion of what's happening tonight that we take more consideration if that's a

Because there's a breaker. People here that say they want to see it and they're kind of like, no, because they can't see it. So if there's a way that we can see what it is and reject it if we don't like it. So, Sarah?

Well, and to be clear, I think what was being asked is if a condition is added to require it go through our major site plan process, that is referring it back, that is referring would then go through all the procedure of our major site plan it's not just saying council is going to look at one thing that then major site plan we treat it as a special use it goes through planning and zoning and all that subcommittee on site meeting it would come back through you all i think that's what's being contemplated just to be clear um and and i also believe If it's a condition of the zoning, it doesn't matter who develops it. For any development to happen there, they would have to have their approval through the major site plan process.

Okay. So there's your question. If it turns out to be a laundromat or whatever, we would be able to see that as well.

If it's rezoned R5, it would be multifamily.

If you turn down this zoning, then all of the items, all of the businesses that you listed could come in and go in there without counsel, other than knowing it's being asked for. We don't have any say in that matter.

Yeah.

Do we know how long this property has been up for sale?

I don't know. I'm here four to six months is what I'm hearing.

Maybe an inch or so more than six months.

The cars that were parked there, they came from Glendale, Chrysler, and they brought them down because they needed space up there.

I know. I perused them. I checked to see if they had purchase prices on them. Yeah, I don't know.

Got it. Just wanted to make sure we all knew what vehicles were there.

Well, Darren did this.

They're choking or something.

I'm sure. That's getting talked about. Yeah.

Can I ask a question? This is just a procedural thing. I mean, since apparently there's a fear that it's not going to pass, and say tonight it fails, and if there's an epiphany between now and the next vote, could one of those that voted in the majority bring it back to the floor for reconsideration? So that would give those who might have some thoughts time to share that. And again, since we don't really know the vote count, even though apparently we might, there is the option. Again, if somebody comes up with some whatever, it could be brought forward in two weeks at our next meeting.

Apparently, Jonathan has the discretion Now. be able to have it come back to the council.

Can you do that again, John? Not with regard to rezoning. I mean, again, when he's presented with a site plan, there is discretion under certain factors, and I don't have the code in front of me right now, but when there are certain factors that can be referred to the major site plan review process. That's part of the existing code, but that is because there isn't a plan in front of anyone. Right.

i would love to see all these potential could be would be opportunities okay well let's let john jonathan speak we haven't had time to look at any of these variables that are now being thrown out there what are you going to say if the council wants to ensure that they see this i would recommend that you do this motion and not rely on the discretion of my position to be honest um

There are, you know, it is a proposal that is meeting our density requirements, which is a third of the down. I mean, there's, they're checking a lot of boxes. Again, as, as our city attorney said, I have not seen a plan yet. They have not provided a site plan, but I would, I would ask that you not, this is going to sound bad, but I would not rely on my discretion. If that is your end goal. I think I just got rid of my own job.

Present a motion. Sorry. Sorry, Jonathan. I'm getting you. I'm sorry. I'm getting you. So we can present a motion that says it has to come back to council. Yes, based on. I'm asking the same thing. Okay.

All right. There are amendments that can be put onto this that says that.

Yeah. Mayor, rather than doing that tonight, I would rather have a motion to continue this so that you can then present. Do you have time to work on an amendment to this and present it maybe beforehand so that we have a chance to all evaluate it and ask questions?

Mm-hmm.

Get it so that everyone feels a little better?

We can always count on you. Excellent legal mind. Thank you. Okay, so to continue it, what do I do?

We need a motion.

Oh, a motion.

Mr. McLean has to do that.

Motion to continue it to September 17th.

Okay.

Second that.

Any other discussion?

I would just say that if that's what we're going to do, And I think we're in a gray area here because I don't want to talk about legal advice, but my understanding is this is not as clear-cut as it's being presented. And so, you know, I just don't know that that's why I said there's no third way because I'm not sure that I'm convinced that... Maybe there is.

Maybe there is a third way.

Based on the emails that I received today, it does not appear to me that

Thank you. Okay. Any more comments? Okay. All in favor of the motion to continue, say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Nay.

Arnold and Jack said it, correct?

right oh i guess we have to keep going i kind of got so um all right um i want to announce mayor that this bill has been continued okay so so bill 11140 has been uh we've already passed this so we we cannot suspend robert's rule yeah at this point it can be on the next bill we can't

Hold on. We have to, let's open the next bill. We have to then, during we open that, we can make a motion in a second to suspend Robert's rule of order. And then you can call them up.

Okay. Did you hear that? We're going to make, okay. I'm sorry, where was I on this one? Okay. Bill 11141.

Mayor and Council, Bill 11141 is an ordinance changing the zoning from B3 Highway Business District to R5 Multifamily Residential District on the property known 960 North Kirkwood Road being an approximately .89 acre site on the east side of the North Kirkwood Road and directing such change in the zoning district map.

Okay. Do I have a motion and a second to accept Bill 11141? So moved. um i'm good may i need a second oh say second whoresome yeah whoresome second thank you um okay i would like to suspend robert's rules of order and allow the applicant to come up that you that is i need a second second okay vote on that okay all in favor of robert's rules of orders being suspended say aye Aye. Opposed, nay. OK. All right. Yes, please come on up.

Thanks, Tyler. Good evening. Tyler Stevens, Core 10 Architecture. Very briefly here, I appreciate all the discussion and all this. I know that there has been concern that I would get up here and say anything. But I would essentially lie to you all. I'm happy to swear in. They do that at other municipalities, not at Kirkwood, but for some reason. But I want to tell you that We talked with Jonathan early on about this and the process, and I knew that this was going to be an issue. This is not us trying to be shady or hide things from you and say we don't want to bring it back. That's just the way the Kirkwood rules are. So I tried to go on my reputation by presenting something to you last time to show you. And I know that there's concern that I could show you one thing and we could do something totally different. I'm just putting my reputation up here as an architect who has done a lot of work in Kirkwood. You can see my buildings all over town. And continue, I want to continue that relationship. I don't want to do something that you guys think is terrible. So that may not count for anything, but I just wanted to say that. I speak my word, and I mean when I showed you things. There's concern we make it look like the James. We can't. The zoning wouldn't allow it. That's the whole point of going to this zone, is that it forces our hand to do something that's acceptable. Thank you.

Thank you, Tyler. Okay. Okay, we're back to Bill 11141, open for discussion. Any comments? I think we probably want a motion to continue this. You want it to fall with the new matter? Council Member McClain?

Motion to continue Bill 11141 to September 17th, 2026. Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you. Any more comments? All in favor of the motion, say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay.

Nay.

Okay, the motion carries. So now we are on to Bill 11142, which again is this same thing.

Mayor and Council, Bill 11142 is an ordinance changing the zoning of various properties to R5 multifamily residential district, including 1001 North Kirkwood Road, B3 to R5, 1015 North Kirkwood Road, B3 to R5, 102 West Maple Avenue, B3 to R5, 106 West Maple. Avenue B3 to R5, 119 West Sarah Avenue R4 to R5, and 123 West Sarah Avenue R4 to R5, being an approximately 2.13 acre site on the west side of North Kirkwood Road and directing such change in the zoning district map.

Do I have a motion and a second? Motion. Second. Thank you. Do I have a motion to continue?

Motion that we continue Bill 111142 to September 17, 2026, 7 PM. Second.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, nay. OK, the bill carries for continuing. All right, Bill 11143.

Mayor and Council, Bill 11143, an ordinance fixing and establishing the rate of taxation to be levied upon all real estate and certain tangible personal property in the City of Kirkwood, County of St. Louis, State of Missouri for the year 2026 for the maintenance of the Kirkwood Public Parks, for the Police and Firemen's Pension Fund, for General Government Services, and for businesses in the Special Business District.

Do I have a motion and a second to accept Bill 111343? Motion. Second.

Thank you.

Are there any questions, comments? All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Nay. The bill carries. Bill 1114, three ones and two fours.

Bill 11144.

Very good.

Mayor and council is an ordinance fixing and establishing the rate of taxation to be levied upon all real estate and certain tangible personal property in the city of Kirkwood County of St. Louis, state of Missouri for the year 2026 for the operation and maintenance of the municipal library district of Kirkwood.

Do I have a motion and a second? Thank you. Second. Thank you. Are there any questions or comments? All in favor of first reading approval, say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. The bill has passed first reading approval. Bill 11145.

Mayor and Council, Bill 11145 is an ordinance amending the fiscal year 2026-2027 budget for the Parks and Recreation Department.

Do I have a motion and a second?

Motion. Okay. Are there any questions or comments? Since Kyle is here, can Kyle come up and explain what he wants to do so he's not given something to do?

Let him get up and stretch. Thank you.

Sorry to keep you here so long.

That's all right. We're trying to buy a new sound system that we use at a lot of our big events, our outdoor events. And we have these giant speakers and a big board and they let us project a long way. And this device that we've had for, I think, 30 years, maybe a little bit more, is broken. And we're in need of a new one. And so we have to, we, this wasn't planned. So we have to amend the budget to allow that. And we have some money left over or available, not necessarily left over, but we have a money available. I guess.

Building inside.

Yeah. And building inside improvements under the pool repairs. And if you want me to go through that, I can. Yeah. The 2027 budget has $87,000 in it, and we reappropriated $177,000 into that budget line. So we had $264,000 to do pool repairs. So far this year, we've only spent $26,000. We do have an estimated $88,000 in pool repairs that will be coming to you later this year. We will have then an estimated $149,000 remaining for pool repairs, and we're gonna ask that we transfer this $11,500 or so, I can't remember the exact number that's in there, for the sound system, which would leave us with $138,000 to continue to do any pool repairs required this fiscal year.

You're gonna be using it for Motown review?

No, it's not for that, no.

Mayor, I appreciate that he told us it's irreparable. And it seems like he's done his due diligence to find us the $11,531 to pay for it.

Any other comments or questions? I have just a quick comment. Again, thank you for, you know, I've seen you do this with the park board where you have an unexpected expense and you really look through your budget and figure out where you can move money. And again, it's nice to have you bring this to council similarly where you have unanticipated expenses and you really do look at your line items and figure out. where you might have the ability to cover it. So greatly appreciated. And I like your due diligence overseeing your budget.

Sure. Thank you. You're welcome.

Yeah, it was worth sticking around for.

It always is. Okay.

All right. All in favor of first reading approval of Bill 11145, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. The bill has passed first reading approval. Resolution 81-2026.

Mayor and Council, Resolution 81-2026 is a resolution amending the contract with Gallagher Benefit Services to add temporary payroll and benefit reconciliation services in an amount not to exceed $75,000 and authorizing and directing the mayor to enter into an amended contract.

Do I have a motion and a second to accept Resolution 81-2026 as read? Motion. Second. Thank you. Comments? Mary, so last meeting, we moved the money to have it available for you for this contract, and now we're approving the contract, correct? Right, and earlier this...

Was the second reading for that moving of the money.

Yes. Okay. Correct. And have they started?

No, we're waiting on the moving of the money and then amending the contract. And then as soon as that gets done, we're going to start.

Okay. Like tomorrow? No, next week on Monday. Okay.

Monday? Okay. Good. Closed next Monday. Yes. Thank you. Tuesday. It could start Monday, though, if you really.

So hopefully that is going to really help your department. Yes. Things up to speed and what have you. Okay. Good. What other questions, comments? Roll call, please.

Mayor Gibbons? Yes. Council Member Arnold? Yes. Council Member Burkett? Yes. Council Member Jack Sedeck? Yes. Council Member Lavender? Yes. Council Member McLean? Yes. Council Member Schaefer?

Yes.

The resolution has passed, Resolution 82-2026.

Mayor and Council, Resolution 82-2026 is a resolution accepting the proposal of IT Design Consulting LLC for IT Support Services for the MIS Department in the amount not to exceed $50,000 for the remainder of fiscal year 2027 and authorizing and directing the Mayor to enter into a five-year agreement with future years funding contingent upon budgetary approval.

Thank you. May I have a motion? Motion. Thank you. Are there any comments or questions? Yes, Council Member Schaffer.

Could our IT person come speak to me for a minute? Come on, Kevin. Just to you? Get up to.

Council Member Schaffer, just to you or to all of us? May not listen. Can we listen?

No. I see what we're asking for here. So I just got another broad question. Does any of this help us with cyber for electric or for our water? Because we're hearing all this stuff about getting hacked. Are we covered as a city, since you're our IT guy, help me out here to understand.

This particular resolution has zero to do with cybersecurity specifically. Okay. The company that this references are the ones who installed our current firewall.

Okay.

They are the ones who support first level support for us. They're well versed in security. We have not isolated the SCADA systems for the water and electric as industry has recommended. It was the department's electric and water at the time decided they didn't want to expend that money to do that. So they've been isolated as much as they can be. So we feel fairly good about it, but it could be better.

But you say that they, which would be the water department, and they being the electric department, haven't spent any money on the cybersecurity side?

Not that I am aware of. Okay. They haven't done anything through my department. I got you.

Member Schaffer, I hate to cut you off, but that's not actually part of what you're approving tonight.

I got it.

I was just chatting with the mayor. I think we're going to add it as a work session topic. It's not uncommon that maybe once a year or every other year, I reminded the mayor that that topic has come to work sessions before for the city to answer any questions you guys have. So I think we're going to throw it as a work session topic. I think it would be a good idea to have that, if you don't mind.

nope okay okay any questions about this resolution i do kevin yeah it's this is a very small budget for what the rates are for this kind of work and how much work do they actually do on a weekly basis? Because if you divide this out by 52 weeks, it's really small. So being in technology, I'm telling you, this was like, oh, that's really small. So is it just a break-fix type situation?

It's special circumstances. Much of... what we will spend with them, in the future will be project related. So they will be external to the $50,000.

So you guys do the day-to-day break fix?

We're the first response.

You're first here. This is if you get into extra project work or something breaks and needs to be fixed and you guys don't have capacity.

Yeah, there's probably about eight or nine different applications that they help us with that they're, A lot better versed in than what we are.

And this is all network.

Yeah.

This is all at the network level. So it's when we're on the Wi-Fi here, we're on the, do they take care of the phone systems too?

No, they do not.

That's separate. That's separate. Okay. So this is when you're on the Wi-Fi. If you happen to have Ethernet, that's the core pieces that they're probably helping with.

It's more for like firewall rules that we need to have changed or if we have file restores from our backups that we need, we call them and put in a ticket and they take care of it so we can go on about our business and do other things. Thank you. Yeah, it's not a daily thing that they're working on.

Anybody else? Roll call, please. Mayor Gibbons? Yes. Council Member Arnold?

Yes.

Council Member Burkett? Yes. Council Member Jack Sedeck? Yes. Council Member Lavender? Yes. Council Member McLean?

Yes.

Council Member Schaefer?

Yes.

Resolution has passed. Resolution 83-2026.

Mayor and Council, Resolution 83-2026 is a resolution accepting the single-source quote of Covenant Technology Partners, LLC, for Microsoft 365 and SharePoint support and training services for the MIS Department, authorizing an initial contract amount not to exceed $25,000 for the remainder of fiscal year 2027, with the option to renew annually thereafter for up to four consecutive 12-month terms and an amount not to exceed $42,000 per year contingent upon budgetary approval and authorizing and directing the mayor to enter into a contract.

Do I have a motion and a second to accept Resolution 83-2026? Motion. Second. Thank you. Are there any comments or questions?

I have a challenge with this one. It's not that much. I did reach out to Kevin and then Rachel also gave me some information. One of the sentences in the last page of the packet, it will allow for consistent end product resulting in increased traceability for the MIS department correlating into a reduction in long-term maintenance A way to translate that is building a clear, verifiable, historical record of how documents, data, and requirements change and who changed them. So providing a digital trail, correlating into a reduction of long-term is preventing severe, costly, complex technical issues from building up in our system over time. All of that stuff sounds very appropriate that the city does. I'm just not sure why we're paying an outside vendor to do it. It occurs to me that that's something that should be done in-house. So that's my challenge with this cost at this time.

Yeah, again, These companies go to training, they get lots and lots of experience with these applications that we just don't have the time or the resources to do. There's two of us in IT for the networking and the PCs for 340 some odd users. So we rely on these outside vendors to help us with A lot of the heavy lifting. We're in the process of moving to Office 365. They're the ones who are doing the migration initially. Once we're have everyone moved over. We're going to need some training internally as to how to support this, make changes, add people, delete people, move people down the line.

And that's not part of the process of having bought the system.

The process of migrating is just moving all of our users and all of our data from our on-premise servers to the cloud.

Right, and I might have been misinformed or just didn't quite realize what I was hearing. You have two people that manage 330 employees in IT.

Yes, we have one other person who is primarily his responsibility is the Tyler ERP system. That's his focus. But for office email, PCs, printers, networking, and all of that, it's primarily Pam and myself.

Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor.

Yes, Kevin. So it's 25,000 for the rest of this year. Correct. Generally spend 40. And that's kind of what you're ballparking for the next several contractors. Can you is the migration the reason why we didn't need the full 40 this year? Like, why are we? spending a partial amount this year, but we need the full amount the next few.

Primarily, yes. The main focus of this vendor this year has been the migration, which we started April, May-ish. So yeah, we haven't done a whole lot of other type of work And we haven't had to have a lot of support with the current systems because we're moving away from them. So we've had a couple of issues. Lori's one of them. Jessica's another one. Jonathan's another one. We've been pushing them back because we don't want to spend a lot of money trying to fix something that we're leaving. Yeah. But yeah, exactly. Yeah. Thanks.

So just to clarify, this is a vendor who has traditionally for many years supported us on our Microsoft products. Oh, absolutely. Yes. And part of this is because we're going to a new version of what we use normally. So this is just, and so my question is the, the 42,000, is that an incremental on top of what we typically have already contracted with them?

No, no, no.

This will be replacing.

That would be it, yeah.

So they're only, okay.

Historically, we've done in the neighborhood of $36,000 to $40,000.

Which is not a lot.

No. Again, we try to do most of the stuff ourselves if we can.

Any more comments? Roll call.

Mayor Gibbons? Yes. Council Member Arnold? Yes. Council Member Burkett? Yes. Council Member Jack Sadek? Yes. Council Member Lavender? Yes. Council Member McLean?

Yes.

Council Member Schaffer?

Yes.

Resolution 83-2026 has passed. Resolution 84-2026.

Mayor and Council Resolution 84-2026 is a resolution accepting the bid of Bomarito Ford in the amount of $69,779.80 pursuant to the State of Missouri-Missouri Buys Cooperative Contract for the purchase of a 2027 Ford Transit 250 cargo van with upfitting for the Police Department and authorizing and directing the Director of Procurement to issue a purchase order.

Do I have a motion and a second?

motion second thank you any comments yes um Darren you you might be and maybe I'm missing it it sounds like to me this was not unexpected uh it can't start you have to jump start the current one well I yes that's what I read as well okay so I did not see it in the capital it's actually been budgeted for the last three years but it keeps getting cut at the end of the year and it's to the point now where

It won't start. Take it out of the city for fear I hit a bump, it's going to fall apart.

Are you getting pretty good at jump-starting it, though?

I stopped jump-starting it. And I asked the garage, and they're out of duct tape and bubble gum.

So you're not even using the vehicle right now at all?

If I have to, I will, but we've got to jump-start it. Yeah, the party's over.

Any more comments? Does that mean we'll defer one of the other rolling stock that we were planning to purchase? Do we know? I think this was budgeted.

It was in the budget. Sorry, I misunderstood you.

It just hasn't been appropriated yet.

Why have we put it off?

It always seemed to get cut. In the budgetary process or in the approval process? I think in the budgetary process. And this year it survived the budget.

Yeah, from what I understand, this year it survived the budget and made it cut in the previous years.

Okay, all right, understood. I want to ask our resident expert over here on the budget, Gina. It's good. I was going to say, I looked at it, too, and I was like, wait a minute. You're saying it's not budgeted, or where is it budgeted? And I see account number 30102050, blah, blah, blah. Yeah.

And so my question was, it just wasn't called out in kind of the capital plan that they've laid out for the next five years. So maybe it's because it had gotten cut in previous years. So that would be why it was not included.

This is also some of my concerns. about the 301 accounts and knowing what's really in there so that we have a clearer picture of when these individual, or some way of knowing that this is really in there, because there's a lot of buckets that just might, that it might be in. So again, some clarity going forward on what's in the capital. What what we've seen happen over the years since some of us have been on, you know, a couple of years is these things get delayed and delayed, and you know they're in the budget year after year, and they don't ever come to fruition. And then we go, you know. So he's finally hit, you know, they don't start. I just, it's finally got the lottery and it's going to actually potentially get purchased.

So on page 241 of the book under FY 26, 27, there's three fleet vehicles listed. Is this the 2012 one? there's like a 2012 patrol vehicle, 2016 patrol vehicle, 2015 patrol vehicle that are listed for the 205 that were allocated.

No, those were, those are just patrol vehicles. This is going to be the new evidence van. Okay. It's going to take the place of what is now our evidence van.

That was my question. Yeah.

Okay. Any more questions?

Roll call, please. Mayor Gibbons? Yes. Council Member Arnold? Yes. Council Member Burkett?

Yes.

Council Member Jack Sedeck? Yes. Council Member Lavender? Yes. Council Member McLean?

Yes.

Council Member Schaefer? Yes.

The resolution has passed. Resolution 85-2026.

Mayor and Council, Resolution 85-2026 is a resolution accepting the single source proposal of the Larson Group in the not to exceed amount of 45,000 for parts and services for the Peterbilt refuse trucks on an as-needed basis and as budget allows, and authorizing and directing the Director of Procurement to issue a purchase order.

Do I have a motion and a second? Second. Thank you. Are there any comments or questions?

single source because we have peter built we can't go out and use anybody else's parts oh which is close to the next one of those just freight liners for the next one exactly yep proprietary stuff some other needs other than peter needs to build it to yes

I noticed that budgeted amount for this is $30,000, and the request is for $45,000. Email I got back from Chris is that he had an initial budget set at $350,000, has slightly less than $200,000 left over. And the overall budget currently has a balance of $587,000. So he feels the $15,000 that the resolution for that's over the budgeted amount is well within what he's capable of covering.

Okay.

Thank you.

Anything else? Roll call, please.

Mayor Gibbons? Yes. Councilmember Arnold? Yes. Councilmember Burkett? Yes. Councilmember Jack Sedeck? Yes. Councilmember Lavender? Yes. Councilmember McLean? Yes. Councilmember Schaefer? Yes.

The motion has passed. Resolution 86-2026.

Mayor and Council, Resolution 86-2026 is a resolution accepting the single-source proposal of truck centers and the not-to-exceed amount of $40,000 for parts and services for Freightliner chassis trucks on an as-needed basis and as budget allows, and authorizing and directing the Director of Procurement to issue a purchase order.

Do I have a motion and a second to accept resolution? Okay, thank you.

Second.

Thank you. Are there any comments?

Question.

Yes.

So maybe this is you, Darren. I'll try. Okay, good. So it says parts and services. So do we not do in-house ourselves, or is this some specialty that we need to get it to them?

I would say it's a combination. I think we do stuff in-house. Well, sure, I know. And then we do that. But, yes, there's some stuff that needs to be done for repairs out of our purview, or it's within something special for a freight liner.

Right, I get it.

Okay.

I have a quick question. Do some of these, you know, I know we contract out for vehicles from other municipalities. Is some of this to cover some of those parts?

Not to my knowledge. Okay. I'll verify with Chris, but not to my knowledge.

Okay. So you think this is for Kirkwood parts? Correct.

Roll call, please. Mayor Gibbons? Yes. Council Member Arnold? Yes. Council Member Burkett? Yes. Council Member Jack Sedeck? Yes. Council Member Lavender? Yes. Council Member McLean?

Yes.

Council Member Schaefer?

Yes.

The resolution has passed.

Okay, we are now moving into council reports. Something I meant to report at the beginning of the meeting and we got up here kind of right in the nick of time, but just to go over the fact that the electric audit and RFP was issued for that, we received eight responses Council members Arnold, Lavender, and Burkett are going through the responses and meeting with potential auditors to make a final list, and they will make a recommendation of affirm to the full council. Consideration of residents' concerns will certainly be taken, and there'll be more to follow on this procedure as we go forward. Second thing is the Greenbrier litigation. Kirkwood lost the summary judgment, meaning Greenbrier won, permitting the use of pickleball courts. Kirkwood filed a motion to reconsider with the judge and we lost again. After losing twice, counsel voted due to the increased litigation costs to appeal. And unfortunately we lost the appeal as well. So the city then, what? Oh, sorry.

Okay, here you tell.

That'd be good. Our lawyer can do that a little better than I. Yes.

On the Greenbrier litigation, there was a summary judgment entered on one of six counts that were a part of the lawsuit. It was found in favor of Greenbrier on that one count permitting setting aside some of the requirements that were in the special use permit applying to the pickleball courts. We asked the court to reconsider. The judge stuck with the original decision on that one count. The city determined that it would not appeal that account, taking into consideration the cost of doing so. And in exchange for that, Maureen Breyer dismissed all the other pending counts of the litigation, some of which had other remedies, including potential damages that were attached to it.

Mm-hmm, mm-hmm, yeah. so it was costly um and we're we're sorry for the residents that live right there at the courts but we felt that going forward with more cost was not in the best interest of the rest of kirkwood so And then I do have a piece of good news, which is great. Just today, I received a letter that Kirkwood has our grant request for the Transportation Improvement Program has been accepted by EastWest Gateway, and we are going to get new Argonne Drive. And I believe that goes from Taylor to Geyer.

I believe that's the scope.

And that'll be the street, sidewalks, and bike lanes. So that is... That's huge. That's huge. That's exciting news. Okay, and now I want to talk about articles that have been written about Kirkwood and have errors in them. The first one that is very disturbing, the utility treated like a slush fund. The term slush fund is reserve of money used for illicit purposes. Our profit on our electric has been used for decades, absolute decades, for services for this city, for streets, for sidewalks, for all kinds of things. That's what it's been used for. And to have this come out, with this terminology on the headline was very, very detrimental to our city. Some people ask, why do we have, I think maybe you asked that, Randy, why do we have our own utilities? And we've had them for years. And for years and years and years, we've always paid less than Missouri American, less than Ameren. and still had a profit, but we could provide services to the city. Okay, well. We do have certificates of participation. That part is true. And our electric department that started this all down this road is they overspent their budget. We do know that in upgrading the infrastructure. But we just need to make sure that things are presented properly. In that same article, it said we were floating the idea of raising fees in parks. Have we ever talked about that? No, we do raise fees periodically when they need to be raised, like yearly for price index and all that kind of thing. It also said that council members have been discussing selling our electric department. Have we ever discussed that? We have not discussed that. So that is inaccurate. Now, a good reporter would come to our communications director with the article and find out what's incorrect in it. Because you don't want to be putting things out that are wrong. I know you don't. So Jessica is always available to be able to review and let you know what things are right and what things are wrong. There was an article about our parks department. And it said that council members voted to buy a $12.5 million building they hoped to turn into their home, and they borrowed that money from Public Works. And that's not true. $7 million was borrowed. The principal was returned through the cops, and the interest is being paid back. So this made it sound like something it wasn't. Lastly, or not lastly, I've got a couple things. There was another where it was told that to build the KPAC, the department had to take out a $13 million loan. Not true, that's not what was said. It was a $3 million loan from Electric. Over the next five years, We're gonna buy equipment from KPAC and begin a $250,000 upgrade to the Meacham Park Memorial Playground. Not true. That will be a grant from the county, and only if we get it will the Meacham Park Playground be upgraded and if we're awarded that. So those are just a few there's a couple more on here too, but just to ask that we get things correct. And we're happy to make sure that they're correct. Other council member reports.

I'd like to report on PNZ. Drones are coming to a council meeting near you soon. And then just completely slightly different. Hands on Kirkwood. The Kirkwood Baptist Church has had a single day voluntary activity. This is their 20th year. It's October 3rd. They're looking for people to volunteer, but they have a free clothing program. shop in the mornings. Everybody is welcome. They send too many clothing to save a lot at the end. There's a car check. There's a food drive. Many of you may know yellow bags that show up on your doors. Most of the volunteer activity stays in Kirkwood. It's Kirkwoodians volunteering for Kirkwoodians. So everybody's welcome to come participate on October 3rd.

Other council reports? I will just make a comment. I have not been able to attend Park Board and Urban Forestry as I am recovering, but from their minutes and agendas, they are working hard and doing great things and, you know, great committees, both of them. And I'm sorry I missed their meetings, but hopefully we'll jump in here soon. Well, we wish you well on the continued recovery.

It's been rough.

Sorry, Jim.

But I'm enjoying sitting over here. Officer report?

I do have a few things, just mostly HR stuff. We are in the, we've about halfway through on our first round interviews for assistant chief administrative officer. We had, I think, over 20 applications I think are qualified. Well, I don't wanna say all qualified, but over 20 applications. So we're hoping to go ahead and have second round interviews with that in a week or two. We have reopened the electric director position. I think Temerius has been busy trying to go ahead and get that, try to get some, I guess, new breath into that application and trying to market that out. We've gotten some leads on some other areas where people that we hope might be interested in looking at the position. And then finally, we just opened up the human resource generalist position. Uh, this is HR has been, you know, having some, uh, you know, problems with trying to just keep up with all of the demand to Mary's just came in. Molly's only been part time. So like I said, we're trying to fill those spots and get those positions filled as fast as possible. Get good people in, don't rush it, but still try to do as best we can. And then finally, I'd just like to say, there's always, since I've been here, this is probably the most popular generator that I've ever heard people talk about. Most of the time, the emergency management directors and fire chiefs get excited about generators. Kirkwood, a lot of people get, but that's okay. But the generator that I think that was originally that we purchased, I guess, 18 months to two years ago for KPAC in our after action report that we had with as a result of the last power outage that also caused some issues with our SCADA system and our water. In that report, it was brought up that we don't have another source of power down there to go ahead and help with that. So the idea, one of the electric department people said, why don't we consider using that generator for another source of power down there? So we are looking into going ahead and doing that. The next step is to go ahead and try to see what the installation costs would be. They've also checked the specs to make sure to see if it is, if it's not too much. I think that's part of the fear is that it might be too much for what they need down there, but they're looking into that to make sure. So just letting you know that it was probably – several things that we took away from our after action report of uh the last power outage and water problem that we had so that's all i have great thank you uh city and uh attorney report nothing thank you

City Clerk report. Yes, Your Honor. I have a few things to report on. First, I'll report on last night's Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. The following action was taken by a vote of 7-0. The Commission recommended approval of a special use permit application for outdoor use for a drone delivery facility at the Walmart store at 1202 South Kirkwood Road. A public hearing will be scheduled for that. By a vote of six to one, the commission recommended approval of a major site plan for a multifamily development at 345 South Fillmore Avenue. A public hearing will also be scheduled for that. And talking about scheduled upcoming public hearings, September 17th, 2026, you'll have before you a request for a staff-initiated zoning code text amendment regarding the correlated color temperature of lighting for sports fields. And speaking of new positions, just FYI, our new fire marshal, Peter Jordan, was sworn in this week. So he will be coming before you for a quick introduction at your next work session like we did with Tamarius. So September 10th, we'll bring him here to introduce him to all of you. Thank you.

That's all I have.