County Council - Regular Meeting

Just this one.

We only need four, right? Yeah. Yeah, for a work session. It could just be you and whoever you want.

There.

And there she is. Hello, man. Right on time. 5.59. Uh-oh.

All right, good evening everybody welcome to the Monday July 8th work session that we have tonight. We're going to talk about short-term rental which is a bill that got introduced A couple weeks ago we had done a work session on this once already, but it seems that for whatever reason to fly under the radar of a lot of people who all of a sudden when we were talking about passing this bill a couple weeks ago that will I didn't I didn't catch this so got a lot of people's attention and we started getting a lot of different comments. I'm assuming that everybody got emails from different groups They get sent to us. I know at least one of them was earlier today from realtors and John Bennett said one. I think somebody else sent another one so wanted to start off with just kind of opening up for comments. From the council in see what thoughts are on possible amendments that we want to put on this or the any changes. after reading. Thoughts from folks and having the couple who was here a couple of weeks ago expressed concerns.

I could start you get that much my only. Suggestion was that and I know I I talked about this a little while back, but grandfathering and everybody that has current short-term rentals. I don't want to put anyone in an economic disadvantage by telling them they have to sell something that they've invested in. And I did get a call from somebody that has been working on investing in short-term rentals and have really made some some outstanding improvements to the lot so I just don't think we I want to be in a position to hurt anyone economically I want to just put some limits and controls from from this point forward so that's my comment.

Anybody else's thoughts on grandfathering in existing short term.

Can you pull that microphone. I would.

hope that we would grandfather rentals because these folks are doing it so do the business. And we're making it harder for you know people who bought these things fixed them up. I got to say I don't like this ordinance, I know why we're doing it. It's just removing people's freedom of the race. I think it's wrong. i do understand why you're doing it i'm not trying to criticize i just understand that when we do these things there's always good intentions but it just doesn't always seem to work out so well um so i don't know i don't know how you're going to grandfather them but that's would have to be what some of these folks have had them in here had them running their businesses it seems to me though with with bob's problems with with some of the ones that are taking advantage of the law and breaking the law and doing things it seems to me we should be able to come up with some other solution then make it about targeting the rbo's it seems that we could as I thought we had an ordinance that you could have like in residential property can only have so many families and stuff like that then we do something like that years ago.

You guys remember it doesn't change the fact that people are still read to them and throwing parties and there's fights and it that you can still have the required number of people living in there and still throw a party and be a problem area. So I don't know if I mean I'd be open to anything you suggest and on how we control these problems and we we have some issues I know in my district where we've had some problems with the short-term rentals I mean it's not it's not a whole lot of them I think for the most part they're following the rules but we have to do something to control the ones that aren't.

So I don't disagree to him. It's just that I I would like to know if someone said could say okay, this is yours, we're going to do and the ordinance will not affect anybody's freedom of liberties on the existing businesses that people are doing it right it won't affect them and it will address the problems that even even the problems that they have if it then if we grandfathered them yet that we continue so that doesn't solve that problem. I mean you can see so I I don't know because It just seems to me that that's all the problem because we can have revoked our license to become the problem now. Even if we grandfathered yeah, yeah. Well, maybe I don't know.

I think if you if you grandfather it they can continue to operate part of the question is like the couple who said a couple weeks ago is here. If you stick with the 600 foot radius. But one person pointed out to me we don't have it spelled out as to how we're measuring the 600 feet. We do have that. So is it come on up. Let's clarify some stuff you want to start by addressing Joe's earlier.

Sure so definition of family is defined in the zoning ordinance. So you can add 2 or more really no more than 3 people unrelated by blood or marriage. OK. The problem is and this is what always happens somebody calls us and says the the the the definition families not being met. We send an inspector out. How in the world do we prove that we have no idea who is related who's not we we can try to do an inquiry but on short-term rentals they're gone. They're gone after the weekend typically so there's just no way for us to enforce that to be able to to to actually do you know what that or what that state.

It's very difficult to know it's a but it's the same thing with the reveal is how are you going to might as you guys you guys got a person counter it's going to go count how many members are coming guest or I mean I just don't understand that's the problem is very hard to this this is the problem with the or this will be talked about going in that and this is why staff was heavily involved in trying to come up with something that we feel

have some enforceability to it. But but the more we venture into other territories, the harder it's going to be done force.

Question. The you mentioned that there is a way to measure the 600 foot.

Yes, that correct can explain that yes to find by property line to property. So we would take the for this point of the property. on that where the House is located and measure to the next property that we're there's a short term.

The question that somebody was asking was is that along the road or is that as the road lot to that was the issue that one person brought up that there there are places in the county where you could start at the back of that property line for where that is and you literally touch 3 different subdivisions. So By doing 600 feet. You could be cutting out a lot of short-term rentals because they would need to be on the same street and the whole purpose if if I'm understanding correctly, but the way you guys we're talking about the 600 feet was you're trying not to have a whole street. Short-term rentals.

But I think it's it's to prevent a congregation of wherever they are whether it's the same street the streets next to each other there's a bunch of short term rentals if the potential for issues is exacerbated by the number having many more all in one spot. So it's not about the subdivision it's all about the distance and that's the whole point and that distance come straight from our zoning or ordinance which is for group homes. That's the the the distance we have for group homes currently. So we just felt that that was simplistic in its approach that we're using the same set of standards for group homes as we would for short-term rents.

Somebody emailed me an interesting question. How do duplexes fit into this? In other words, you've got two residences that are basically in the same building. How would that apply?

Under the current ordinance, They would not be able to have short-term rentals next door to each other. Because you can have separate ownership within the duplex. And so you treat it as an existing home, existing just like any others.

That's quite grandfathering, I think is important. Because the scenario you just said, if someone does have a duplex or a fourplex, and there's two of them that are short-term rentals, then the first one's going to get it and the others aren't. And I don't know if that's that was really our intent. Patty, I don't know if you've got any thoughts, but it wasn't our intent when we started looking at trying to create an ordinance was to to hurt people financially. It was to control problem areas.

So the problematic of your bills that you guys talk about for those legitimate are they actually like on evolve or they on vacation rental. Okay, wow. The surprise and owner would allow that kind of behavior. They're not a good operator, that's for sure.

They're not local.

So these are corporations purchasing these.

We expect that most, if not all, are going to be advertising some way. Otherwise, how are you going to find it? So there should be some sort of advertising going on for us to find out who's doing that. The other thing about is those who pay the tax into the Convention and Sports Facilities Authority. So whoever pays that tax, that's an easy list to be able to find out who's doing what.

I would assume that St. Charles and St. Peter's both have ordinances that are...

I'm not familiar with St. Peter's. St. Charles has an ordinance, but St. Charles is doing the opposite of what we're doing. Saint Charles literally limited to the historic district only. Now we're doing it now not in the and not in the tour tourism district and everywhere else. So we're doing the we're doing the opposite so the city of Saint Charles limits their areas to a small defined area and the number with that. There's any other was went to follow them do they have anything. Not that I'm aware of.

If I can just kind of go in here. I I had no problem with grandfather in this one of the things we talked about you know when we were discussing all of this, but we would like to have them inspected so that there is a you know basic we know that they are. You know following any kind of rules that you know it's a safe environment that's the big thing because I know people who have gone to Airbnb and you know the electricity doesn't work and there's nobody to contact things like that so we wanted to make sure that there is someone to contact there. 24 hours there is somebody that can come and answer any real concerns I don't see that happening a lot we I owned a bed and breakfast for 10 years and you know you just you might have goofy people in there and we did have you know one our very first person we had to ask to leave because we said there was no smoking and he he he wasn't smoking but he brought a little band back and It was down on Main Street. And they closed the bar and brought the whole band back because they were Irish and he was Irish. And so they're partying on our back porch. And kind of the same thing. It was like, wait a minute. We didn't want this. And we just had to ask him to leave. And then he canceled his check on me. So I never got paid for anything. so I know things can happen and if there's somebody there like you know we were we could handle it right away not that's what some of the problem with this is that something starts going on and we've seen it you know that's why the city of st. Louis shut it down is because people come and say what a cool place call their friends They're not going to spend the night there, but they're going to come and they're going to party. The next thing you know, you've got this big party going on because it's a cool place to hang out. So we've talked a lot about how do we allow people to you know, to feel like they are safe, that they, as a business owner, they do a good job. I know, I'm sure a lot of the ones down in the wine country are, you know, beautiful bed and breakfasts and Airbnbs and able to do things. The 600 feet, I don't think we have a problem except that, like we said, we just didn't want clusters of them. We didn't want company coming in and buying out you know buying for duplexes and making them all into you know Airbnb's we just starts complicating things in it in itself one of the things that a lot of people were a couple people commented on is that we have it two adults and one child per bedroom and they wanted to add like oh but you can have up to four other people i'm not for the people per bedroom no for the whole in the whole so let's say you have you know four couples in a four bedroom and they each have you know a child you've already got what 12 people and then if you add four more in there sleeping on cots and whatever that starts getting just i think too many people But one of the things we did talk about is the more rules and regulations and things you can and can't do go in here, the harder it's going to be. We just want to be we want it safe. We want to be able to get in there and make sure that it's safe. And then after that, you know, you're here. Here's what you got to do. You got to, you know, provide a good service. And, you know, you've got to follow the rules and not let things get crazy. And, you know, and then we back off.

Is this work Mike.

I was looking I just don't know what it's supposed to do it shows up on me it's a little has a question what to talk to help me say we're going to well.

To what Patty said. I can have a problem with the government come in and tell us whenever you use the term say make sure the government knows if it's a that's always a bad term that's a bad thing okay, because now the government come in County government and do inspections the property. I mean the thing though the way these things are going to operate is going to be dictated by the quality of the service of the provider and the operator. We don't need inspections for the government to say that these are efficient VRBOs. And also the thing on the amount of people, if somebody has a big house with three bedrooms and they have some big spaces in the basement, some great rooms with a pull-out couch, You're going to tell them they can't have people sit on a couch? That's like, this is almost getting to revert to communism with some of these rules and this stuff. It's getting to be ridiculous where, like I said, I am not criticizing. I understand the purpose, but it always goes in the wrong direction. And when we're starting to spin off and all this other stuff, man, these people have been running the ones that have been doing a good job, paying their taxes, buying new furniture, painting their houses, fixing them up. I know. I got five ERBOs. I know. It's not easy work, and I did it most of myself. And they're not big moneymakers. I'll tell you that right now. You're not getting rich off of them. You're not. You are if you owe 6,000 of them. Well, yeah. Some corporations do. Mm-hmm. Well may you make it about I don't even know if you could do it could be I don't think you could do it got to be local resident getting Missouri resident, I don't can you do that I think so that the regulation and that kind of like communism to me than and then yeah, I know it's just that's what I'm saying is very often is bad ideas.

I don't know if we can figure out a way to cut to address these these problem areas that's I mean that source at that and not clustering that's To me that's the soul and sole purpose of of this ordinance again I use the analogy of a cul-de-sac with 10 homes. If you live there you don't want 6 of them to be air being these.

I mean you just don't know I understand and like if you said you grandfathered a little bit you know once and then you pull the permits on the guys that are doing it wrong if you can write it that way if you can write it that way. I think 600 feet, there's no other community that goes that big is due to Mike is 600 pretty big.

It's like I said it's mirroring group homes. But one every every and you think about most lots are 80 foot wide in the county. So you're talking about 5, 6, lots of the lot. So you could have one in some more street of 7 lot houses apart.

I think it's more problematic when you start talking about the ones that back up to other subdivisions that's when

those are the unintended consequences well i i think of it as the neighbor that lives next door to that one and then there's one behind them as well yeah i mean good night that's that's a lot of noise a lot of potential issues but that could happen there if 600 feet you can cross the street yeah so i'm going to kind of take this in a different direction if if you will here for a moment we have a lot of people who are doing it correctly as mr brazel has said and we really don't want to penalize them

When I first came on the Council we had an issue with somebody was burning debris in the backyard that should have been doing it and we created an ordinance that penalize them every time they showed up and they had to go to court and there was a fine structure first offense second offense, etc. Could we do something similar to that where if we have a rental that has numerous violations that then they lose their permit to be able to have a rental. But this does is it would but I mean that's it would be completely relation. We right now we don't have a rental inspection right we're not keeping track of rental versus and that's where I'm just throwing stuff there and I don't want to target rentals but if we're doing short terms or anything else some that's more complaint driven and then I hate to say is to have the courts get involved in it all because then that lengthens the process and everything else. but i do have to agree with mr brazel i really don't like government getting too much involved in this and there's a lot of really good people who spend a lot of money fixing these places up and no one on the street even knows their short-term rental right well i i appreciate the situation that bob brought up that's happening in his neighborhood and trying to help him out the only thing i would say is

This is your 26 year on the council. It's my 13th year. I've never heard of this problem. No one's ever brought this up to me in 13 years.

Have you ever had this come up? No.

So what I'm really worried about is we're taking a bad actor in a neighborhood and we're going to put a new policy in place for the entire county because we got a bad actor in the neighborhood. And I'm worried about overstepping to Jones point you know is this really a problem or is this we have an incident that we need to figure out and maybe it's not a short-term rental bill right maybe it can we work through our ordinance to be able to figure out what's happening in his neighborhood how can we fix that because you know Tony brought up the thing when he was in the Legislature and I know Roy's look at this part, but if you live in in the House and you're renting a room. Technically, I believe we're falling under short-term rental there. But Tony said that's in conflict with state law in his opinion. So it's like I'm worried about Us being in a position where we're stepping on other jurisdictions and it has us in conflict with state law I want to be able to fix their problem and I want to be able to address that I'm just worried to Joe's point that we're overstepping.

Well, you're you're also you're you're addressing Bob's problem, but what about the the scenario that I mentioned again the scenario of a cul-de-sac.

I get it but again I've been here 13 years no one's ever brought it up he's been here 26 no one's ever brought it up and 26 years ago there weren't a whole lot of short-term rentals either yeah we were in a way new era here when it comes and I'm not defending either one thought the term short-term rental and be it be the that's something that's fairly fairly new right okay been around for

well over a decade. I mean, we were going down and doing VRBOs in Florida 20 years ago, so it's not that new.

No, no, but I think it's new when it comes to places like St. Charles.

I think you're seeing an expansion in corporate ownership. I think that's the bigger part. The out-of-town folks who are coming in and buying up You hear about who's a black rock that they talk about all the time that are buying up all the homes and making the rentals and I'm just curious. Mike is there a better way that we could addresses and I'm not trying to put you on the spot, but I'm putting you on the spot. Do you think there's a better way that we could address this outside of a short-term rental bill.

I think I don't know there's hopefully there is a middle ground because the problem is as as we've confronted a couple of recent complaints right. We go there and to investigate and it's gone. The people have left the cars not want no longer parked on the grass that people are not the party is no longer happening. The noise, you know, none of the things the issues that my department is it is is work to address is is there right so we we can't respond in time to to fix the problem as it's happening. Noise complaint that would be PD at the time. Cars parked in the in the street that they're still there when we go there we can start that case but again it doesn't fix it right away. It's a it's a slow process. So the attempt to fix the issue is not quick. It's not short term in our in our ability to do it right now. To your respect to your to your your point the ordinance probably goes much further in terms of what we think is probably enforceable and difficult to work with but you know that that's trying to find them in the happy middle ground. I don't know what that is.

Yes, ma'am.

Kind of going to kind of where Matt was talking about it and you're here talking about it too. Do we have like parking violations do we have places that you you can't park in your front yard can can I park my front yard if I live in the county.

Yeah, current counties is really regulations. A vehicle to be part on a non part of surface so they have to be on gravel at least but on asphalt or concrete okay like that so they cannot be parked in the grass. They should not be part of the driveway things like that. They cannot be unlicensed. So unlicensed vehicles cannot be parked anywhere on the property in the driveway things like that. Then we also have trailers are these trailers things like that there's a limit on the number and the size and things like that okay, but that's about it. If if somebody is bought by parking a box truck in the driveway. But by the time we get there it's gone and and it's you know it may be exceeding the required the size requirement at the time. But again it's usually not there when we get there. If it's parked in the street same thing the street parking actually is PD because that's not in a private property that's on the public right away. So, um, P. D. Would have to go and investigate and nine out of 10 times they find that the vehicle is gone or there's no violation that they can find.

I think you're talking about one of the B and B that I had that people that big truck was parking there and but we were able to go over and tell them don't do it and they said OK we won't anymore I don't know they I've not heard any more complaints so there's a way we can go in you know on particular one to talk to the owners or send them a letter and say here we've had these complaints we've got how we kind of handle things now yeah that's what we send them a nice

a nice letter to begin with saying here are the rules, here are the regulations and all the things that you need to be aware of and then that way if we get complaints again then we kind of throw the hammer down by going through the court process. Unfortunately that's not fast but that's our hammer.

So are there any new rules we could put in place that could give you more teeth without having to do a whole big Ordinance. Or is that something you could think about maybe we could think on that yeah. I wouldn't be able to throw something out right here right right right I would expect you to but that might be a direction. You know I I was really in. I don't think system but I really like the idea that an inspection just to make sure that it's safe and like I said I've had a friend who've been in that situation where they were in a safe situation and you know I don't know how you take care of that and that's one of the things we just said and it was very basic on the inspection just you know does it have a fire suppression not suppression but you know fire alarm and things like that so so maybe you could give us some direction with a couple more things that could help if they are a violation in that instance well in all instances actually so

We can go back and take a look at that.

Mike, do you know, does St. Louis County have any short-term rental ordinance?

I'm looking at Robert because he did the research on the zoning codes. Do you recall?

I don't remember St. Louis County having it. I think everybody staying away from it right now.

Well, I mean I think we're finding out why the new in St. Louis City when the first thing they did when they they did there is they got sued and and they had to change their their ordinance that they were doing something much further by changing the property taxes saying they were not commercial and then it changed the taxes so that was a whole other issue but but yeah that the city was the recent one in Saint Charles City is really going to that we found around here.

Any other thoughts.

I will say just thrown out there with with Councilman York's situation. Part of the issue with the parking problem there is the street does not meet regulation with. So anybody the part of a big vehicle truck do we have box truck whatever. Emergency vehicles wouldn't be able to get around it right so that was that's a unique situation that's something we look at as part of it is Maybe they shouldn't be allowed if the street doesn't meet regulation, you know something like that. But you know that that would just take care of that one instance, you know.

Well that would also help in the neighborhood over by the convention center. Correct because you correct us you have a similar yeah, you have a similar issue over there. We're all the small streets for some reason that's that's because you have the oldest part of the city so that's how it was built back there. Mr. Swanson, any thoughts? No.

Mr. Brazel. It's just this is tough because I understand the problem. I just don't know how we get government to step in and solve the problem completely. That's the problem I think we all are seeing, that we don't want to overstep, as Mr. Brazel has stated, but then as Mr. Baker has stated, we need to do something. I don't know what that is.

Yeah, I think that really kind of comes back to the fact of I really don't like the 600 feet because of what the couple who was here before talked about like. If we grandfather, how do you grandfather and do the center of the you wave it if you're if your grandfather, you know. Yeah, you don't have to.

Rick Robert and myself talked about today. one thought we had was you would actually because that we're not talking about zoning this is not grandfathered under zoning this is a license so you would do some sort of allowance So if the bill, as it's currently written, allows for six months for staff to put together the rules and requirements and the forms and all that, we could do, within that six months, do a catalog of all that are paying tax to the sports facility, the convention sports facility. So then we would know who's paying and we would say, now we know who the active list is. And then that would give them 30 days after we initiate the process to apply for. The grandfather if you will so anybody that doesn't apply after 30 days there are a lot but we have to have a time limit on that because we can't just go for over and so that was something we're thinking about as a possibility that way you would have that within that time frame and then after overtime they would start to

to to you know disappear or change or whatever and those they'd start to spread out a little bit more after that that's just a thought that we had on on the top of our head okay mike yes sir here's a thought and i tell me this is a bad idea but uh it's a bad idea it's a bad idea so if what if what if we grandfathered all the existing short-term rentals and then anything From thereafter anything within a 600 foot radius of another. Short-term rental that would be issued under a conditional use permit would that be too burdensome.

Well with what we specifically do not want to do it under so many. So the CEP would be a zoning process. And the reason for that is because you get into all kinds of other issues with land use. It's much more complicated.

But we are changing the land use.

No, it's licensing. We're not touching the land use. It's single family, it's single family, it's single family. But how is it different than a hotel? It's smaller in scale. But it's a single family use it's still the size of the structure is still being utilized the way a family would utilize it if it wasn't short-term rental that's the goal that's what it's supposed to be. That's the whole point of the short-term rental within residential districts. They're utilizing a house just like a family would. Just on a temporary basis and unfortunately sometimes they add more people and have some issues with it.

I think that's arguable. I mean, to me, if I own a house and I live there permanently versus I rent it to different people every weekend, I mean, yeah, the zoning is the same, but the use is different, I think.

Is it being used for a residential purpose? They're living in it just like the family would?

I mean, again, I'm not trying to argue with you, but how is this different than a hotel? If I have a hotel with four rooms.

A hotel would be zoned commercial.

be correct it would have much higher standards and building standards and everything else in place the single family does not that's why it's limited to the size and you're not residential land use anymore your commercial land use now i get it you know so not not if you issue the conditional use permit though you could issue a conditional use permit in the residential

Zoning district could you're going to fall under if you do that you can put restrictions under the conditional use right so you could do that with every one of those do we really. I personally don't want to get into having to do a cup for everybody who wants to do a rental while I think Charles got out of saying that's how we would have to do what I'm saying under your again if if there was within within the 600 foot.

From an existing I mean if if if there's a short term rental If that's no other short-term rental around, then it wouldn't be an issue.

Kind of like to your backyard, the backyard.

Yeah.

Terry, any final thoughts? Again, I just wrote down here, sometimes the problems outweigh the benefits. I think there certainly is benefits. that can be seen by us having a policy. It's just a matter of can we solve the problems that come along with it. Obviously, the grandfathering, I think, is a problem. I think the 600-foot thing is a deal that if people are grandfathered from that point on, anyone that would be applying for one of these would easily No, okay, we've got a 600-foot limit here to whether I can even apply to be a short-term runner.

So those are two things. So may I offer a suggestion that we spend a little more time massaging this?

Yeah, but what changes? I mean, if the council doesn't support this, we could save a lot of time and stop it now. But I mean, what other changes could be possible? I mean, we're picking his brain, and he's the guy with the information and thoughts. I don't know. I just think if we can figure out a way to control the clustering of short-term rentals within a street neighborhood, and also have a way to control problem ones. That's I mean, that's the ultimate goal for me. It's not government trying to step. I don't want to get I don't think government should get involved in all these these issues. But when you've got people who have homes and their lives are impacted, I think sitting back doing nothing is is not the right choice personally. So

I agree with that in theory. The problem is, to Terry's point, is the medicine worse than the disease? Are we putting something on there that's going to create a bigger hardship for the folks in the county than the issues that we're coming into? And if I'm hearing the comments on the council right, it sounds like we don't have an agreeable bill at the moment.

of where we're at. I totally agree with the exceptions for the wine country, except the fact that some people point out that when the county makes rules, they should apply to all parts of the county. I don't know if we agree or disagree with that, but I think it's a valid point to make.

Well, my only comment with that is that I think if you live in a historic area like defiance and he and in that area of the wine district you and you live in one of those homes you kind of expected potentially to be a short-term rental near you if I live in heritage or Wheeler cannon I don't expect my 2 of my neighbors on both side of my house to be short-term rentals so and at the end of those are problems that we need to figure out a way how to how to make sure that there's no longer a problem to the neighbors so. I think we can come up with a good solution. I think we're almost there. I just think we need to take what we've got, add the fact that we grandfather all existing, maybe give them six months to register or a certain time, and then after that, then the 600-foot buffer takes effect.

How about if we let Mike and his staff see if they can come up with some other thoughts give them an opportunity to work through some suggestions because it sounds like there may be another way to skin this cat rather than to patty's point doing a whole new bill maybe we can find another way around it part of the thing yes we can certainly take a look at that i mean it's some of the conversation we already had but we can delve a little bit deeper into that

Well, Tim, I don't know if you know when I first came on, I met with the staff on this very thing is to try to do an Airbnb and pretty much talked myself out of it because of all the issues. Is it workable? But I think it can be workable. We just need to know what it is we want to accomplish. And once we figure it out, is there a different way to do it? Then maybe we try it that way. We can always come back and do this a year from now.

If I may, Ms. York and Mr. Baker, have you reached out to the city of St. Charles and hear about any negative feedback that they've had once they put theirs in place? I wouldn't even know who to reach out to.

I happen to have my son lived through all of that because they were going to put it in the sub in any subdivision anywhere in the city and found out that that people had been doing that illegally kind of thing and and long story short they decided let's pull back on everything just zero in on the historic district even then they they had it to their there were people already there that because of the new ordinance, they wouldn't be able to be in existence. So they had a grandfather, if I remember correctly. And then I don't think they've had much problem with it since then. I haven't heard any complaints from the people who put it in. But we could check, maybe that's part of the list of things you could come up with and see what they have found to be egregious for them. But there's a very specific about what you can and can't do. It's like eight, ten pages long of all the different things you can and can't do.

But is it only on Main Street? It's historic districts, so it's around there. But they also limit the total number in the city. So there's a cap.

It's Main Street, Frenchtown, Old Town. There's like six or seven historic districts now in St. Charles. So all of those were allowed to do it, midtown.

To your point, that would be kind of the opposite. That would be us putting the restrictions on Wine District and not on anything else. It would be a much more focused... You know, the biggest issues that people don't think about is when we create any type of ordinance, it goes countywide and we are such a different county. Like if you're in Terry's district, it's very municipal. If you're in Joe's district or Matt's district, even Patty's district, it gets very rural. But the same rules apply all the way across the board. And what makes sense in a municipal subdivision doesn't make any sense out in a rural area. But yet, once you make that rule, it applies. So it creates some different challenges when you're doing county stuff as opposed to when you're doing municipal stuff. I would make a suggestion, unless anybody has different thoughts, that let's let Mike's department. Think about this for a little bit maybe come up with some ideas and see if we can come up with something everybody can live with. It sounds like right now we don't have a bill that's going to be possible. So we need to think on that a little bit and maybe it's not a short term rental bill maybe it's something different but any other thoughts.

Just to just put a cap on what I'm saying I think if we if you can find something that controls the problem ones and then keep them from clustering that's that's I think my ultimate goal for those with this ordinance so you know it's not that it's not to damage the people that are putting the money into homes and fixing them up and making them and we want that. we just don't want the parties and the the nuisance and again the scenario of the cul-de-sac where you have 10 homes and six of them are short-term rentals and i live on one of those four homes no one wants that right so i appreciate that direction that's good all right with that we will take a break until seven o'clock

Can I ask somebody? Well, I need to find somebody who can fix this chair. I feel like my feet don't even touch the floor.

Thank you. Anyway. All right. All right. All right.

Thank you.

Good seeing you. Yes, yes, how are you? Oh, I will love to meet you. Thank you. . . . This is the first time I've put on jeans. I've been wearing them for quite a few weeks. It was kind of weird. I came in there like, oh, huh. It took me like three times the time. It's like another piece. Just keep my stuff. Just get down. I can do it in time. We can do it in a week. This is the first time I've ever watched it. So they were on their way to my lab. I gave them a name, and they do it every day. It's just kind of a weird thing. Now, usually during summer, we're still super structured. Some guys can come back just three days in a row, and others will come back in a month. And then we'll find this through the summer school, so it's a couple classes. Some guys come back every summer, and I'm just sitting there. So we still have all of that together. But then, like, my wife is in the middle of her eating load right now. And she's punching all this stuff that she wanted in school. And, like, six years ago, she made a big deal about it. And now that she's done it, it's going to be . . . . . Yeah. Yeah. Hey, here's a little thing I got on here, too.

Oh, this is no big deal, right? No, it's not the same thing. It's a dead end. It's just wood.

I guess so. I'm just going to call the electrical contractor.

so right here electrical services on the agenda electrical services repair

Good evening everyone welcome to the Monday June 8th County Council meeting. We do not have a pastor for this evening. So we're going to have a moment of silence and Councilman Matt Swanson is going to lead us in our pledge of allegiance. So if you please stand. Take a pause.

Thank you.

Thank you.

You may be seated. Please call the roll.

Councilman Swanson there and Councilman Brazil here. I'm in Hammond Councilman Elam here Councilman Hollander here Councilwoman York here Councilman Baker here.

First item tonight is public comments there is a clock in front of Mister Swanson there that is going to show 3 minutes on it at the end of 3 minutes you'll hear an alarm. That will let you know that your time is up I will thank you for speaking we will move on to the next speaker normally we do 3, 4, 3 against on every issue depending on the speakers that are here our first speaker tonight is Bobby know regarding bill number 5490.

Y'all knew with this this was coming so anyway, thank you all for doing this in the work session for it for 90 I do appreciate it. You know The best way to describe this is this is not about the businesses, this is about the citizens, this is about the constituents, your constituents, the people that vote for you, you know your your job basically comes down to 2 words and that's to serve and protect, you know nothing in this bill says that they can't have a short term row nothing in there. It just says that there's going to be a registration process and they're going to pay for it. not a profit they're just going to pay for that process it says that if they have too many complaints that they can come out and inspect it and make sure that it's safe and those things those kind of things don't have happen again I really urge you to take another look at this put a couple things in there I'm not concerned about the grandfathering I think if somebody went to the expense to open a business and a short-term rental that there should be some way for them to keep that. We can't force people to sell. That's not who America is, to sell your business in order to accommodate some regulation or rule. But I can't urge you enough to tell you that people are complaining. This is getting attention. It's getting attention. The Post-Dispatch has written about it. KTVI has written about it. And I receive a lot of text, social media, a lot of messenger stuff, people just saying, just keep going after it. We've got to get this done. But as I said before, this ordinance doesn't say you can't have one. That's not what it says. It doesn't say that if you have one that you're going to be forced to sell it. What it does say, it does protect the people that live in that subdivision along that street and a short-term rental next door. We have a whole issue problem down on my street. And if this was in place and we could begin to make complaints, call the police, do whatever it takes to get something done, we may not have the problem in the short term. As I said earlier, it's owned in Oregon. It's managed by a St. Charles company. They may even be in the audience right now. It appears to me that that company that's here in St. Charles managing this has a whole lot of these in St. Charles and around Missouri. And keep in mind the lady that came here in the last one when we were talking about this bill she said her words you can look it up. The reason she came to Saint Charles County and started because we didn't have regulations. And what does that say that says it's wild West Saint Charles County gets referred to that a lot as the wild West it's always on the radio talking about it because there is freedom out here and we weren't so hard on the covid and so on and so forth but I get off the subject. I urge you to really take another look at this, it's not that bad. A word or 2 that's it you know this is a good ordinance, Roy did a good job. All right, thank you. Thank you.

TJ Moe regarding bill number 5490.

Hi guys, thank you for taking the time to listen to me I oppose this bill for a few reasons so I grew up in Saint Charles County been here most of my life. I have one short term rental now and in the process of starting other one nearby now than 600 people is close. The first one we took was a fire damaged house that have been vacant for 3 years. we put about $200,000 into it brought it back up to life and everyone of the neighbors around has thanked us for bringing it back and doing something with the House that was just going to sit there that one has been very good again the neighbors all contact us if there's any issues and there aren't many to because it's to our benefit to make sure that there are no issues because that's how you stay in business. The second one now we've got 490,000 we're putting a $190,000 into it specifically to make it a short-term rental you do designs differently you have a team to come install and that was not in service yet and so if an ordinance like this goes in or out all of the additional money that would have been used to make this something that would have been beneficial as a beneficial city to pay 5% tax to get into the county and so that is one of the top reasons we voted. There are a few others this as it as it relates to the occupancy that you guys are talking about Having just two per room would be amongst the most strict in the entire country. There is the North Carolina School of Government. They wrote a manual for local governments to adopt and try to figure out how the country is going to deal with this. They say the most common is having two plus two to plus four. Dallas has three per room. Lexington, Kentucky has two plus two. Albuquerque has two plus four, I believe. and Colorado Springs has 2 plus 42 rooms plus 4 additional and that's because you have these large places like the one that we're putting a $190,000 in just renovations in as something that you have plenty of open space there are 3 floors very easy to put people in place in the bedrooms are just upstairs so having just a blanket rule when you don't know anything about the House makes very difficult in the occupancy is the top driver of revenue and so it's actually the predictor if you bring all the way down to place I could have 12 you bring it all the way down to 6 then suddenly it's not a profitable venture anymore, you know the House could easily hold that okay to that that is the the probably my top concern. The 600 foot rule again will be amongst the most restrictive in the country only blue cities and states are 600 to a thousand everybody else is between about to 50 and 500 including Saint Louis central city. Last thing is that the grandfather which it seems like we're on the same page there that that would be a big problem so. I think for your time in this thank you.

Matt Becker. The number 5490.

Good evening guys. So my back from here on behalf of St. Charles Realtors tonight and we're here to speak in opposition to any ordinance that would further restrict short-term rentals in Saint Charles County. At its core the issue is about private property rights When someone purchases a home pays property taxes maintain the property and complies with local laws they should have the freedom to use that property in any lawful way that they see fit. The burden should be on government to justify taking away those rights not on property owners to justify keeping them. I understand the concerns have been raised about noise parking nuisance issues but those problems are not unique to short term rentals. The homeowner can host a loud party. You've got long term tenants that can cause parking problems. and destroy homes. We have measures in place to already deal with those. We have ordinances and enforcement mechanisms to address bad behavior already in place. We should enforce those rules rather than creating new restrictions that impact every responsible property owner because of a few isolated incidents. Another concern is the precedent this creates. Today the discussion is about short-term rentals, but tomorrow it could be another lawful use of private property. Government should be very careful about creating new restrictions that limit property owners and what they can do with their own homes. Property rights are not supposed to be granted by government. They are supposed to be protected by it. Once those rights are restricted, it becomes much easier to justify additional limitations in the future. There's also an economic factor to consider. Visitors that stay in short-term rentals spend money in our local restaurants with our local businesses. They spend money in entertainment venues and small businesses. Those dollars stay here in Saint Charles County and they benefit our local economy. Most importantly, we should also be careful not to create policies that pick winners and losers in the housing market. Hotels, large apartment operators and corporate housing providers already have significant advantages in terms of scale, resources and market presence. It simply shifts the demand away from individual property owners and towards larger commercial interests. Government should not be in the business of limiting competition or protecting one segment of the lodging industry at the expense of homeowners who are simply seeking to make lawful use of their property. A fair marketplace allows consumers to choose where they stay and allows property owners to compete on equal footing. If there are legitimate concerns, let's address that behavior. Enforce the noise ordinances, enforce parking regulations, hold bad actors accountable, but do not punish responsible property owners and limit private property rights because the actions of a small minority. I respectfully ask the Council to reject additional restrictions on short-term rentals and instead support policies that protect both neighborhoods and the rights of property owners that are already in place and exist. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you. James Foudray on bill number 5490 and bill number 5496.

Good evening. My name is James Pludrake and I'm a Republican candidate for County Council in District 7. I just watched you spend the work session rightfully trying to protect county neighborhoods from short-term rentals. I also see you're introducing a multi-family zoning bill tonight that does nothing. It's a toothless election year sham bill designed to give you political cover. Yet one block away at City Hall, planning and zoning commission is deciding whether to place 50 high-density rentals on Yugi Road. Leadership is not defined by property lines or bureaucratic excuses. It is defined by who stands for our residents and when their quality of life is threatened. We know what real leadership looks like in the county and Mr. Brazel You're a costly on the front lines were roughly fighting for your people crossing boundaries and aggressively defending zoning against predatory developers. You don't make excuses about boundary lines and you stand for the people we have other areas of the county such as duck clubs and other places that need this kind of protection other than just a historic winery district. We need more champions who will perform We need more champions who will use their platform to advocate for single family neighborhoods across St. Charles. Our neighborhoods are watching and we remember who fought for us when August 4th arrives. Thank you for your time. Thank you.

Thomas Maynard regarding erosion completion project.

But the bank just think the Saint Charles County Council for allowing us to speak. We were here on May the 31st. And this is we're back where they can to the continuing problem with the property that's not being finished in on that shows inherited landing. The ground works company. And you'll see. They since we were here on the 31st they showed up one Friday and worked 8 hours. came back Monday and work 2 hours. We haven't seen him since. It's been it's been another week. It's like they just they they had a excavator over there. They took the excavator and took off with a week or went out that day and came home and it was gone. It's almost like it's just job abandonment. They're just not finishing this thing. Put the other picture of what it used to look like. This is what it used to look like across the street. You know, it's like a park setting. And then the lab and then the other picture that's up there. It's pretty much what's been destroyed what my question is is is Tim Baker Rob Wiley a lot of good folks here but they've tried been trying to help us so much they can. I think the problem is we need to get the people that are accountable here at the county council meeting and make them answer questions for you guys such as Steve Randall I think he's with I think it's wrong corner and chipper and They're a consultant. You know, while they were working on this thing, these people were out here every day, soil consultants and packing soil in against this and that, and they were doing surveying work. We haven't seen Heidner, Herr, and nobody. They've just left this pothole sitting over there. And, you know, if anybody in here, I'm sure everybody has nice homes. You want to live across from a quarry that wasn't there. I've been there 25 years. It wasn't like that when I moved in. And we need it fixed. And you know, I don't know what we can do at this point. I've heard about performance bonds. I've heard about things we can pull in this and that. So I don't know what can be done, but I don't think these people should be allowed to continue to work in ST Charles County when they can't finish a job.

And I think, uh, do you have anything you want to like it to restore back to the way it was? Um, it's quoted here that apparently

you had 140,000 liquidated damages to date and we have withheld payment on that account.

So maybe $5,000 we could get our trees and bushes back because how is grass going to grow in July? It's not going to happen. You know that. So I was just like any help any of you have. I've called Steve Randall back in February. He said it was going to be done. He said grass would be growing by March 31st. Then I called him back. He said, okay, give us two to four weeks. That's the end of April and we're it's going to be a year. July will be a year and we've had Johnny on the spot we've had sheds we've had tractors we've had bulldozers. We need your help.

Thank you.

Clifford Morris erosion control project in heritage.

Thank you for your time. I'll be right across the street from Tom. There's a mess there I mean it's just a nice or probably her property values, I guess our taxes will be lower. But what I'm concerned about that I was so with Steve Randall came by last April I signed 3 temporary easements and one permanent easement for them to work. And we were told was one part of our front yard is going to be crazy better is going to be easier to mold. Now what we have left as they stretch. My front yard that's probably got at least 50 maybe a 20 foot drop that is the goes down the rocks. I can't get the guy to speak Randall I can't came to come you know talk to him. So I do seem off another e-mail today because last night it was like 4 weeks ago and I said When it's convenient for you, I want to set up a time where I can meet you face to face so you can come look at this and tell me what you're going to do about it, because it's really dangerous. We're both about, I'm in my mid-70s, and that thing's dangerous. You go down that thing, you're in trouble. He said he's going to put up a chain link fence down by the creek. Well, he can do that as common ground, but that doesn't help if you're going to fall down the thing. And I just want some solution to that slope being corrected. I mean if they're not going to do it. I guess I get my own a landscape contractor come in there and fix it will say put them. I'd like to be reimbursed somehow. You know I just you know I kind of I kind of do a lot but not complain a lot about this but come been too long. I was told that when he signed this they could be done in my place last October over the end of October. They fished up about April. and left that they left this mess thing you can't move. And so I'm just I'm like Tom I'm looking for some kind of answer for where do we go from here what kind of pressure to be put on to fix this problem. I want to thank you for your time. That's all I have to say thank you use.

Page Kelly regarding Waterford crossing non agenda item.

Good evening. My name is page Kelly. I'm a homeowner in Waterford crossing in a lifelong Saint Charles County resident. You might recognize my email, my name from your emails last week. I have spent substantial time trying to get a simple issue addressed a failing road that residents use every day and that your own leadership has already acknowledged belongs to the county. I want to start with what should be the least controversial statement in this room. Residents deserve safe, maintained infrastructure. That is the baseline expectation for what taxpayers fund and what is to this day we are not receiving over the past 2 years myself and many others in our neighborhood have worked through the proper channels extensively what we have a consistently encountered is not resolution or accountability but deflection most recently you'll see in the top image that my repair ticket for the newest large pothole was closed last week without repair citing that this issue is under legal review. This is the same attempt to reset the issue back to square one as if the past two years never happened. The problem with that approach is I have documentation to ensure the record is clear. As shown in the bottom two images from last summer, both Mike Elam and Robert Wiley acknowledged in writing that this roadway belongs to ST Charles County. They even went a step further committing to a full replacement specifically this year in 2026. So I have to ask, why are we still here? Why has this allegedly been under legal review for two full years? And just as importantly, how much taxpayer money has been spent reviewing this issue instead of fixing it? Residents are paying into a system that appears to be spending time, energy and public funds debating responsibility for a road that your own leadership has already acknowledged and committed to fix. Residents deserve to know what that has cost. In addition to the failing road, traffic conditions alone should be alarming to every person in this realm. During school pickup and drop off, cars line up and block the roadway in both directions. Eastbound traffic toward Highway K stacks up from parents parking on the street to wait for their children. Westbound traffic coming off of Highway K cannot move because of parents waiting to turn into school. The road simply becomes impassable and further, many children walking in and out of cars. All of this creates a serious public safety issue. Emergency vehicles would simply not be able to access our neighborhood or the businesses near us. If your own children or elder parents lived in our neighborhood, would you accept that level of risk? Now on top of all of that, we're seeing survey stakes marking a future connection to outer three 64 directly in front of our subdivision. It's difficult to understand how increasing traffic is even being considered on a road that is already failing and has been so difficult to get addressed. So I'm here today, respectfully asking for your help in moving this forward to make sure this gets resolved. I'm asking for a clear acknowledgement of the commitments already on record, a timeline for repair and full replacement, and accountability to ensure that it actually happens. Please help in bringing this to a resolution and ensuring our community receives the safe infrastructure it deserves. Thank you.

Thank you. Don't forget your... Oh, thank you.

Laura Sipes regarding a tutorial on liberty.

My name is Laura Sipes and thank you for this opportunity to speak to you tonight. My ancestor was Edward Doty. He came over on the Mayflower as a servant to Stephen Hopkins. He was a signer of the Mayflower Compact. He was a servant, but he worked to make sure that he was the richest man in the colony by the time that he died. He was also the first man to fight a duel and he was the first man to be cited for peace disturbance. He left England so he didn't have to live under a king. He wanted to be a citizen and not a subject. He was the signer of the Mayflower Compact, and he insisted the most important statement in that Mayflower Compact that government could only exist by the consent of the governed. And it also became the basis of the United States Constitution, or one of the most important bases, that we only exist by the consent of the governed. Daniel Sipes, my ancestor, marched at Valley Forge as a barefoot soldier and lost his toes to frostbite so he didn't have to live under a king so that he could be a citizen and not a subject. His dad stayed home, Paul Sipes, on the farm, but at night he acted as a saboteur to the British, blowing up British food supplies, bridges, and important British positions so he didn't have to live under a king so that he could be a citizen and not a subject. My uncle, Walker Sipes, also known as Cotton Sypes, lost his life over occupied France in World War One so I could be free so that I could be a citizen and not be a subject. Millard and Curtis Sypes, my father and his brother, were at Attu and at Honolulu. My father, they fought in World War Two so I could be free and be a citizen and not a subject. Ben Franklin said those who would give up essential liberty for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty or safety. And in East Germany, the Stasi generated some surveillance state that you were attempting to instill on the people here in this county through flock cameras. It caused widespread paranoia. It called cause mental illness, economic decline and extreme abuses of power by the government. I'm here today to tell you that I do not consent to being spied on by flock cameras. I'm here today to tell you to give me liberty. I will not give you my liberty for temporary safety. And I demand you remove the flock cameras immediately and that you apologize to the citizens of this county. It is not your right to spy on someone everywhere they go. And I want to know if you've researched the people that are storing this data, Peter Thiel and Palantir, he appears over 2300 times in the Epstein files. You're in direct violation of the Constitution, the Supreme Court, and Carpenter versus the U.S. It says you cannot track citizens without probable cause. Turn off the clock cameras. Take them down. Don't spy on me, bro, and apologize to the citizens of this county. Give me liberty or give me death.

Amen. Thank you.

Arne Dinoff, regarding parks, court case, and debate.

Thank you very much, Mister chairman members of the Council, my name is Arnie C. A C Dean of County public advocate running for County executive. First of all I want to address and hopefully Mister Brazel will address the total replacement of the entire roof of this building. We're going to do it. Let's get it done right the first time. Let's force the insurance and if the insurance doesn't want to cooperate and be a team player, let's take him to circuit court. We need to make sure that this roof is replaced on the dime of the insurance company. The next 2 issues I'd like for the Council to hold and table for more discussion. Bill number 5490 short-term rentals and 5491 fireworks. So the fireworks industry and contractors can appear and be part of this equation and discussion. For the past 10 days it appears to be we have County Police vehicles inside the Bush compound on Missouri Highway 79. And so I asked the police chief, is there an active ongoing police investigation into the death of Stephen Bush? I was told that this is being paid totally privately being paid for by the family or others and is not at taxpayers expense. I'm highly disgusted and highly embarrassed by the county hiring a city of Chicago based consultant firm Hassel Levine and associates to the tune of a minimum of $400,000 to $600,000 including their expenses and travel. I am not a happy camper with their plan. I do not like the lack of effort and the lack of thought that they have put into our 2040 comprehensive master land and zoning plan. I'm astonished that they did not even have the audacity TO SHOW UP LAST THURSDAY AT THE COUNTY MASTER PLANNED STEERING COMMITTEE, BUT YET THEY APPEARED BEFORE, VIA THE COUNTY WEBEX. STEVE ELMAN AND BRIAN LUDWIG, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION, DIDN'T EVEN BOTHER TO APPEAR. OUR COUNTY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION STAFF COULD HAVE DONE A MUCH BETTER JOB IN-HOUSE, COULD HAVE SAVED TAXPAYERS OF UPWARDS OF $600,000. BEFORE THE MEETING, UNFORTUNATELY, THE ELEVATOR GOT STUCK. And I'm glad that the door open for Steve Elman. Please let's try to get the elevator fixed. So no other residents or county officials get stuck in the elevator. The county executive debate. The debate was unfair, unethical, unprofessional, just flat out wrong. My name was never offered as a choice to voter survey poll takers. Steve Ellman, you never stood up for me to protest that the debate was not fair by not including and asking me to participate in the stage debate. Shame on you. Shame on my own Republican county party leaders. Shame on the county central committee. Even the husband of the county vice chair, Deb McFarland's husband, viciously assaulted me, tried to break my wrist. Thank you, Mr. Dino.

The final speaker.

Thank you.

Thank you. That'll get us to oral report from the county executive.

One of the things just wanted to address some of the issues down with matches trail time and Mary been been very helpful to bring some of these to our attention. We did have contact with corner Chiffrin to the highway Department. The reason they showed up the Friday and Monday they did is we threatened to revoke their performance bond. That got them off the stick, but apparently it wasn't enough to keep them coming back. I know today it was pouring rain, so I called in to see if they had planned to be there today or not and never heard back. So what John Lyons, the Highway Director, and I have committed to is we're going to be on them every day. We'll call them every day and find out where they are, why aren't they doing what they said they were going to do. They are already about $140,000 in liquidated damages. So there there is some money there maybe we can use if we need to I really would like not to pull the bond because what it means is we potentially have to start all over again and I don't want these folks having to wait any longer than they have so our our commitment is to just keep pushing them and keep moving to try to make them show up and do what they said they're going to do.

I'm going to start with Patty first.

I just want to know what is it.

It's a detention base and is that what it was a mediation area back in heritage. Who's who's in charge of the actual it that the county yes, yes, doing that okay, yeah, it's our funds that the federal money federal dollars were used to buy out some of the properties to mitigate the flood and started working on we did have a couple of hiccups there in a 72 inch water main break. which delayed things they hit the bedrock which delay things but nothing that would explain the amount of time it's taken to complete the to this point.

Could could we do this under emergency ordinance. Pull their pull their performance bond and get a contractor under you know we've we've already saved a $140,000 that we're not paying this contractor.

could we do this under emergency ordinance at which because time is of the essence with regard to this grant and go that route i would refer that to rory or joanne i'll just speak from experience because we have once or twice pulled a bond when they remember remember the straight line winds over the airport and what a disaster we had up there the the bonding company is going to have some say over what happens now if okay okay two names I want to remind the council of one is ground works who by the way is doing a bunch of slab repair for us and they're out there every day so I don't know why

That's such a priority over this job so ground works and corner and shepherd I've seen a bunch of contracts with corner and shepherd that we give to design our parks, I think they they did spring bend just remember this because the next time they come up with a contract, I'm going to vote no and I asked all you guys to consider the same this is we've got somebody that we hired that won't even return our residents calls that's the easiest part of what we do. So yeah, I'm a little bit upset that that we're a year after this water main break and we're still no better off than we are than we were a year ago so please remember those 2 names, thank you.

I just like to say how much money is owed to the contractor. It's different they've been painful. Know how much money is on the table do we know. So $140,000 you guys are saying is under is under penalty liquid damages are going to be a bit if we owe them less than $140,000.

No, no, they so right now they have been paid up to the point where if there were no liquid damages they would still be owed a 180,000 and some change.

So technically there's still sort of $40,000 are going to cash out of this. I mean, Rob, I'm going to say this, you guys, I think you kind of let the citizens down on this because if you have a performance bond, that's what they're for a year later, nothing's going on. I don't know why John, we didn't just pull the bond and get all the bids and get it going.

Well, again, you got to remember with all the deadlines with the ARPA stuff, as soon as we did that, then we got to get another contractor in there again on the,

I know but then something's happening.

Well I get that but we don't want to lose the funding either. I mean if they got they got because when it when it started up in this. Well when it started up in the spring we weren't too worried about it right like they were they were making progress when they started in the spring. And they just kind of fizzled out and I don't have a good explanation because we can't get good answers out. But we have been tracking everything so we've been making sure we didn't overpay but with the ARPA funds. Everything has to be spent this year. Anything not spent this year, we don't get reimbursed for. And so when, you know, let's say March, you know, maybe March is when we would have been like, okay, maybe we should be considering.

You're talking about 25 or 26?

No, we're talking about 26, March 26, because technically the project, we were hoping the project was going to be completed tail end last winter, late fall, early winter last year. That's when it was supposed to be completed. So, They didn't make it that happens you get into a winter delay that happens. But when things didn't progress this spring we did have a discussion about you know what we want to do we want to try and finish things up we want to try and go down this you know point the bond route if we pull the bond and then that gets bogged down with bonding company things don't move as fast as we want to now the project is delayed more than because you know for the most part they're down to wrapping things up supposed to be. I mean, finishing up a few items, all the pipes in the ground, you know, finishing a few gaming baskets, getting some grading done, getting some seating things done should have been pretty minor things. So from a looking at it on paper, it made sense. Let them finish rather than risk. We not getting the project done on time. And then we forfeit grant funds at the end of the year.

Basically, the bond would cover them. If we got nonfunded, the bond should cover that. Right? It's the way it should work. And so here's the thing, is we have all these contractors, we have all these different contractors, we have contracts for a reason. We have contracts to stick by them. And if this company is screwing these people over like they are, and the county's not defending them as they should, because they're your clients, and we're not doing our job, bottom line. We're not doing our job, I'm just saying. And I'm not criticizing you, I'm just saying, we don't settle this stuff, you just get it taken care of, and do you move forward in a positive direction.

And we're not doing that. Having grant funds just threw another wrench into the mix. If it hadn't been grant funds, I think things would have gone differently.

I know, but it's just one excuse after the next for these folks.

I understand.

We've got a deadline.

Yep, so we're going to keep pushing them as best we can.

Anything else from the county executives?

Yes, the issue that the page brought up and she is correct we had worked on it last year and we thought we had a deal where we would bring the road up to spec and then dedicated to the city of Darden Prairie since it serves their their residents. The deal fell through because the Council of the Darden Prairie City Council said that the the section where Waterford crossing connects the highway K with the property of O'Fallon and that we didn't have the right to give it to him. So it has been a bit of a legal fight over that one little patch where it connects in the highway. We talked today and talk with Mister even today and we are going to go ahead and we're going to fix the road. There's there's some complications for traffic the road isn't wide enough to like close a lane and still a traffic through so we have some logistics to work through to make sure that we can still get traffic in and out of that subdivision as you said that they're on the way in and out primarily so as of as of this morning. Director lines and I talked and we're going to get the project moving. There's still going to be some legal issues on that intersection, but we'll get through it we fix the pothole there the first time I wasn't aware that it got that bad again so miss page sent the e-mail and so we're going to go out and do the short term repair so that's a safer place, but then move our plans forward to replace the road. Can't you have some temporary asphalt as a bypass. It it's the width of the road is the problem so to put a milling machine out there, it's not wide enough that we have to close the whole road the bypass should be in a foul property and they're the ones that are working with.

Yeah, it's this and we're you know how it has both sides of the road and the intersection and okay, we just have the payment.

Yeah, I basically.

So that's that's been the issue that's that's really been the whole thing is that whole section he was originally mode and then he was a fallon and she's right about everything that she said she's a 100% right about everything the problem is you get into all this jurisdiction and It's government pointing figures at put fingers at each other and I get it super frustrating. We can't go fix their road they don't want is fixing their road, but we can't fix that road without their permission to get involved and then we had a deal with garden prayer we thought to bring the road. And then garden prairie said no and now garden prairie got a new city administrator who doesn't know anything about any discussions that happened before so it's it's lovely making of the sausage is at the end of the day what it is but in the meantime you've got a very narrow road that is very busy that has a very busy car wash because highway case filled with car washes that keeps going in and out and then you've got a middle school that is the busiest middle school. In the Fort Zumwalt school district because all 3 of my kids went there and that road is crammed with cars all over the place and then that leads to a subdivision which is back to you that road also leads back to the renaud center so trying to figure out how are we going to be able to fix this because the damage is right in the middle of the road so to their point you can't shut down a lane and move it over because it's right in the middle so it's taken a lot more logistics than what anybody care to so we need to figure out how we're going to be able to do that without making your life even more complicated by trying to fix it and having nowhere to send the traffic. It's being addressed is the short answer of what's coming and I'm sorry that you had to go through a year of back and forth and government pointing at each other so I apologize for that but it's going to get done. So again that that intersection part not hours. So we can't do that without O'Fallon saying we can do that.

Everybody on the planet think that the found that the well.

Yeah, right that that's been the whole thing mode that says it O'Fallon garden prairie says it O'Fallon we say it O'Fallon O'Fallon says it's not. So

That was the plan with garden prairie until they backed out on it. We're going to we're going to bring it up the spec and then deed it to the city of garden prairie.

No we're well we're picking on or basically over with all due respect, how about if we sidebar this and we'll have a conversation so the rest of the county doesn't have to listen to our back and forth so And at the end of the day though I'm sorry is where we're at John thank you do you have anything else. With that that will wrap up County executive report of get us to consent agenda any items to be removed from the consent agenda. Seeing none I'd entertain a motion motion to accept the consent agenda. A second of the motion and second all those in favor say aye aye any opposed by staying. I abstain you abstain here. So noted. We have no bills for final passage. We have one bill for introduction, bill 5496.

Bill number 5496, requested by Mike Elam and Matt Swanson, sponsored by Mike Elam and Matt Swanson, an ordinance establishing a temporary moratorium on multifamily residential zoning applications within unincorporated St. Charles County, Missouri.

Questions or comments on this bill Mister Baker, you know what what was what's the reason for this since we have not approved a apartment development least than the 3 and a half years I've been on Council we haven't approved any so what's what what precipitating this all or not.

So you and Mister Swanson both sit on the master plan committee. So what we're doing there is obviously a lot of conversations about apartments. some people feel very passionate about apartments so when you're looking at how do apartments fit in to the county housing program there's not a better time to look at that then while you're doing the master plan so while you guys are considering the master plan it seemed like the ideal time to sit down and figure out how do apartments figure into this but just to be clear we're not going not that there's any bless you TJ not that there's anything pending before us right now because we have no apartments pending nobody put anything forward. But this is giving us an opportunity to say don't even bring us anything we're not even going to consider it. We're going to give the opportunity with the master plan committee to sit down and look at this and figure out how to apartments fit in one of the issues that you you run into and Matt talked about a little bit with housing is we've got to figure out how do we keep our kids and what role does that play I don't know about you guys, but I didn't go from my parents house to house. I went from my parents house to apartment to apartment to apartment to apartment and finally with my wife got pregnant we moved into a house. But until then there was a role that you kind of play with housing and rentals until you get to a point where you can afford a house or where you figure out where do you want to put down roots. But right now in our County. I've realtors in the room that can correct me pretty quick, but the average price of a home in our County is well over 350 to $400,000 the average price of a new home is over $600,000 in our County. Our kids can't afford that they they just can't. And if you read the business Journal story that nest Sandoval had out and talking about the schools and the city of Saint Louis school district over the last 20 years has gone from 44,000 kids to 16,000 kids. We have seen a decline of 7.7% I think you said percent Charles school district, I want to say Francis House 6.3 in Zumwalt it's 8.3 declining kids so The point there is we don't have young families who are moving into our community in the numbers that we used to our fastest growing demographic over the last 5 years has been 60 plus adults. We better figure out nothing wrong with 60 plus adults, I may be one of those but. I'm just saying we need kids for a healthy community we need young families for a healthy community and there are different roles that different real estate plays I'm not here to advocate for apartments but I am here to say while we're doing a master plan seem like the ideal time to just hit pause on this stuff and give you guys and the rest of the master plan committee an opportunity to study it. Mr. Swanson.

Yeah and Mr. Baker one of the things when I talked to Mr. Elam about this is at our last meeting we had we didn't really get into this topic and that's just a committee i want when they bring the master plan to us collectively to have a deeper conversation on it so i thought the six months gives us plenty of time to move forward on it because as you and i discussed at the meeting udos and zoning and all that fun stuff we need to bring all of us elected officials in on this topic is 6 months and I mean I just I don't know why just I mean I guess I'm just trying to wrap my arms around why we're just doing a 6 month more to answer that question 6 months we can always extend it 6 months I figured that was just a nice number to choose with it all I mean there was any deeper conversation 6 months half a year we should have the master plan in front of us with the next couple of months is what they said during our meeting so with our attempt to try to we to limit apartments. In our master plan, I think it goes back to what we discussed with the zoning of looking at the map and where do we think something would be appropriate or not appropriate and we didn't have that deep conversation during our meeting. You're right we know we didn't. And that's why I think the elected officials are the ones who really should have that conversation.

Are you talking about discussing it within the next 6 months?

Hopefully we'll get the master plan in front of us soon.

Do we have to wait to the master plan to put this on a

They're still analyzing we don't have to but they there is a whole master plan committee that's currently working so I know that it just seems ideal to put it in front of them now and let them. See how it figures in the house.

I agree with him on this. If you're saying 6 months, that's right after the November election, it seems to me that it could potentially look like this is just a political talking point. It should say in here more terms to remain in effect. until the council repeals it it shouldn't have six months in here because it's otherwise meaningless because if we if we if we extend it we gotta we vote on but we should have to come together to repeal it that's i will support it if it says that otherwise it's just uh just a talking point that does it's useless i would agree

Well if you wait until you have the master plan you're going to have a better idea of what it says and should we have apartments or should we not.

I don't need a master planner 400,000 are consulted to tell me we need apartments in this County we don't need apartments in this County and the other thing is is this whole master plan thing is kind of a joke because we're starting on that we're supposed to have that last year and it's just keep keeping postpone postpone and then that meeting they had last week. They were even there. And so, you know, you've got these consultants from Chicago, and I don't, we've never done that before, if I remember, hired a consultant for this kind of stuff when it should be input from the citizens. I don't understand any of it. I don't like it. So, no, it should be, apartments should be on, they should be banned until we revisit it with the council, and we should have our We should have our we should have a master plan delivered to us to the Council like within a month because this is it's just everything to push because the election season I get it, but it's not right. It's just not right and so that's my 2 cents.

Okay, yeah, I'd like I'd like to point out that that just reading this on the surface. It would seem that we're there's a moratorium because there's a problem. There isn't a problem in my 18 years on the Council we've approved one one and that was part of a bigger project apartment complex okay, so it's kind of having a moratorium on something that really is not a problem at least it hasn't been is just to me now and I can I can see the reasoning with with the you know what's coming up in the next months with what we're working on in the master plan, you know. So that that's just my point, you know, I just it just seems like we're having a moratorium on something that's not not even happened.

Mister big yeah, I would just say I would agree with Joe, I don't I think that just a moratorium and let's let's take it from there with we if we as a council want to want to end that moratorium that we can do that at a later date, but 6 months I just I just owners and the 6 month time frame, I mean it just this is not making a lot of sense to me.

Yeah, there there's legal problems with doing a permanent moratorium And six months is pretty much the limit of what would be, what is at least the case law has said is something that a council can do. So it might be what you'd like to do, but I don't believe that it would be on legally safe territory to do that. County executive.

Question for Rory. They can pass an ordinance and just take apartments as a permissive use out of the ODO, right?

Sure.

Yeah. I mean, there's a place in there for apartments. We haven't approved any. We've approved one in the last 19 years, but it's still there if somebody wants to come and ask for it. So if you don't want any apartments ever, then that's what you do. You take it out. But I don't think anybody really wants to do that. So I'm studying it. Can you make sure your mic is on?

And this is something for staff with regard to UDO, could we just have all apartments as a conditional use permit, not in any permissive zoning? That would solve a lot of the issues because then we would get, we as the elected body could decide each one if we even want that.

That would be in the master plan.

Well, it would be in our UDO when they draft the ordinance based off the master plan steering committee because there's a lot of stuff that we need to cover during and one of them is data centers, we're gonna have to face that issue, and we wanna make sure that there's a conditional use permit.

Mr. Executive. Okay, I'm not able to read it from here, but that last, what this shows is every year it has how many apartments, how many apartments were approved by each political subdivision in that year. Is there any way that they can, well, Anyway, if you look at ours, it's zero, zero, zero, except for that one year. But what's more interesting is if you look at the overall, at the beginning of this 19-year period, it was anywhere from 16% to 20% of the new residences, the new permits were for apartments. And then it started going up a little bit, and I think 20, 21, and 22, it got up to 40%. I mean, and I think that's when everybody really realized what's going on here. My inclination at the time was, gee, I believe in the market. I guess there's a market for these things or people wouldn't be investing in them. But I think the people may have overestimated the market, because if you look, it started going down. And I think last year or two years ago, it got back down to 16. percent and then this year went up a little bit a little bit more than that so i guess my my point here is i think we were building way too many apartments for a certain length of time i'm not sure we still are but this is why we can do a moratorium we can look at this and get an idea where we want to go from here can we get a copy of that yeah We'll get that to everybody. And again, it's just, the people who are raising it as an issue, it really was an important issue three or four years ago. It's trending in the right direction. But yeah, I mean, I can't, I mean, it's that one time that we approved those apartments, and I don't really... I think most people realize that it's hard to get anything like that past you guys and past me, so I don't see it coming, and I don't see it as a big issue. I think we'll probably continue this kind of trend, but that's why we have a process every single year to look at a master plan.

Do we have any stick over these municipalities like the road board funds to try to, I mean the problem is, We all know the problems in the county are from these municipalities. I mean, you drive around my district, it's St. Peter's. Is there any stick that we can carry to swing at these municipalities to try to get them to comply, or is it just the toothpaste out of the tube right now?

Well, without taking the time and giving an entire history of the road board and transportation funds, Councilman York may remember this as a former mayor. But you know, 40 years ago, the problem was nobody trusted anybody. Every city was against each other, and nobody trusted the county, and we didn't trust them. It was a great accomplishment getting that thing passed. And we have had to go back to the voters four different times. Most recently, we went back and got 78% approval to continue to do it. And the reason I think the voters, the voters gave us 70% is we have never used it as leverage against anybody. We have had a fair independent process where, you know, we get people from each of the cities and the unincorporated areas, you get on the road board, there's hearings, people come in, there's a process. The road board makes a recommendation, sends it to me. I send it to you. You all approve it. I get to veto it if I don't like it. But we've never used transportation funds to leverage. And again, I don't want to start doing that. we start doing that we're going to we're going to people are going to accuse us of using it for other political purposes and even though this is a not not political it's about apartments.

Good good question, but I just yeah, I was I was under the impression when Mister Swanson was talking that we're going to be a discussion of you know the apartments with you know

not just the unincorporated but the municipalities also and is that is that the case uh or is it just something that we are going to be discussing i would hope we can bring in the municipalities and collectively start working better together on this as the county executive said there is some old history between the county versus the cities and i'd like to see us all get on the same page with this it's going to be tough is this working

It might you know get my you know my point is that you know we're we're we're in a position where we would be talking to the municipalities about something that they a problem that they have created okay if it is a problem okay and.

It's a breath I think I guess my got cut off, but none of them. Couple thanks to Terry's point. I think doing a resolution, if it doesn't have an expiration date on it or something, whatever, or he says it's probably right, I guess, but it sends a message to the cities that this is what we're, that's what we're thinking. This is, this is what we should do collectively. The other thing is, is these apartments, if you guys follow, you can run the numbers on these. Most of these get federal funding and they get federal funding for these big developers out of state. And they're building these things for tax breaks, these conglomerate companies. And then you will see that down the road, they usually go to HUD, they get their tax credits, and they go to low-income living. That's what will happen. Second of all, with, let's see, what was your other point, Terry? I just talked about, on the apartments, they are problematic because the cities are putting them in at a high rate, but we cannot keep up with the infrastructure. And as you know, St. Charles County government forward funded $130 million from county money into state roads. $130 million in five years, which we only got back $30 million. That's all we got back because we're trying to keep up with the state infrastructure because MoDOT does a terrible job. and so we're afford funding state projects with county money because we have to we don't really have a choice but we're not getting paid back for it so the taxpayers are paying twice they're paying tax account or state taxes and they're paying county taxes so it's so screwed up it's unbelievable so these apartments are causing those problems that's why highway in is a parking lot disaster highway 40 is a disaster and so the stop it just has to stop and be collectively come up with a plan and as far as the account the city's not following i don't know why the county wouldn't say we're not going to give you county road funds if you don't comply with our master plan would it be legal i don't know but they'd have challenges in court i mean so it'd be worth it you say you guys aren't getting any county funding because you don't comply you're building all these apartments you're building all these high density houses you're creating problems for everyone in the county so we're not going to fund your your um county projects anymore Okay, sure, it'd be a challenge, but that's what you should do. That's my thoughts, anyway.

Okay, any other thoughts? Seeing none, we will- Mr. Chairman?

Yes, sir. Just one correction, I think. You said 131, it was 191 million.

Was it 190? 191.

A man about to be 130. Yeah, you're right about your description. The other thing is on the, I don't know what percentage of these are subsidized. Again, none of them are subsidized in the unincorporated areas. But my understanding is the subsidies are all for seniors. There's no low-income subsidies that I'm aware of for a long, long time. So yeah, HUD is involved and there are subsidies, but my understanding is most, if not all of them, are for seniors, not for

I do have a chart on it. I got it from a government or someone, and it's got a chart on which ones they go on HUD and stuff. Once you go to an apartment complex, you have no say on that, okay, right or wrong. A community has no say on if something's going to go HUD or NECAC. We have no say. It's against equal opportunity and all that stuff, which is fine, but the citizens need to know that. so when they're getting building all these apartment complex eventually there's a very high propensity that they will be uh low income necac and hud that's just the way it is i'm i'm not disputing that but i would tell you because todd barnes was here before he left community council and the issue that

a column at risk population. I think that's how we're referring to them these days. But the problem in Saint Charles County was all of the apartment complex that used to accept the vouchers and really used to have section 8 housing and like the complex was section 8. from the way I understand it they don't do that anymore like a a complex isn't section 8 they have a voucher program to visit an individual so they give them the the voucher that they can use the problem that community Council was talking about is in Saint Charles County. None of the apartments except the vouchers anymore. So they if they start accepting the vouchers you have to do it for 10 years you have to accept them for 10 years. But what they started doing here because all these new apartments started getting built and they're all like crazy expensive that the older apartments came off of the voucher program as soon as they could and they said we're not accepting that anymore and they went to market rate which is why we've got apartments here that are literally 40 years old at least the ones I know in North O'Fallon that I was thinking of the 40 year-old apartment, but they're getting $1100 a month. for a 40 year-old apartment and they don't accept the voucher programs so the at risk community doesn't even have that the only places that I know that do the voucher programs are senior housing. There's some senior housing complexes that they accept the voucher programs, but you have to be a senior to be able to use that I don't know where all this stuff is going to go it just seemed like It was a natural time while we're doing this to be able to look at it and it's been a hot topic of conversation so it makes sense in my mind at least for us to study it any action to be taken on any of the table bills. Seeing none that will get us to announcements and miscellaneous.

That is the New Mellie Festival this weekend. You guys can't miss it. They sell more gizzards than any other festival in the state of Missouri.

They sell more gizzards.

Hot gizzards with hot sauce, and they are wonderful. They got a lot of cold beer, too. And so come on out. The parade's on Saturday at 2 in New Mellie, and the festival starts on Thursday. So come on out. It's a good little country. Well, it's not a real little fair. It's a good fair, though. It's good Americana.

I can't imagine. Oh, I'm still on the gizzards. Is there something we would like to do as a council or maybe as the county government for the 250th anniversary of our country? Some kind of a special award we give for something or rename a street or maybe a kids coloring contest or something like that? That something we want to explore or just let everybody have the best fireworks that they can.

There you go. I know Andy was here. Matt, have you been working with him on the 250th committee?

Honestly, he'll send an email sporadically and usually it's never a pure directive of what's happening.

250th anniversary committee. Yeah. We did a resolution for them and there was a group that was doing it wasn't County sponsored by we were supportive of it. I haven't heard. If they're doing anything. about it.

I just didn't know if we as a council maybe wanted to do something with kids but it's kind of late now because 4th of July is coming up but you know kids coloring contest or something but

I'm open to him.

Yeah, I just want to revisit the topic of I know we had talked about at one time having a work session on stormwater eyes, I think we still need to do that and I would really love for the that the committee that design consultants that are doing the stormwater studies for cinnamon hills and overall Saint Peter's how road to come out and give us an update on that. you know, every time it rains, I have to have my phone nearby because I get all the complaints and all the discussions of flooding. And it's a topic that I still think that we we need to have a work session on I know we tried and I know you tried about 6 months ago and I wasn't prepared because I was out of town the week before but I like to just put that bug back in your ear that we really need to we have some problems in this County, I mean we've got some development issues that are resulting in and then people just every time it rains a water in their basement and it's it's it's just something that we're neglecting them and I think we need to do something so there's why don't you let me know when you're prepared next next council meeting. Well I guess the question is John will will will will those training studies be complete.

Well, it's fine. I mean I like you guys want to coordinate first and then we'll set a date. Yeah, perfect. Thank you. Let's let's do that. Any yes, Mr. Swan.

Yeah, Sunday's flag day. So if you have a flag check to make sure it's in great shape if it's falling apart a little bit. I will gladly come and pick it up and deliver it to our local American Legion. If you're in Wentzville off Lickenhouse Boulevard, they have an old mailbox there that you can drop them right on in and then retire and properly so fly old glory.

There you go and congratulations to Mister Swanson on wrapping up his teaching career officially.

I sorted out the only to 29 I didn't do the full 30.

You know that marathon tough I I get you with that I would quit entertain a motion Mister chairman should not sorry Mister County executive.

Yeah, while we're on teachers in retirement. There's been a lot of stuff on the internet about the NEC the last week or so.

Yes.

And somebody, you know, half of this isn't true, so it may not even be true, but somebody quoted a member of the council saying, with regard to the NEC, the county executive's wife is on the executive board of the Charity Horse Show at NEC. What's her salary? Now I don't even know if that was actually quoted correctly, but whether it is or not, I just, my wife, My wife rode horses until she started teaching, and she taught for 30 years and didn't get on a horse. And the day after she retired, 12 years ago, she started riding, and she rides all the time now. And she also donates probably 100 hours a year to the two shows that they have out there, and they are for charity. And she receives absolutely no salary. But she did receive this last year, an induction into the 2025 Hall of Fame for the charity horse show in return for all that she did. So no salary, but she got a bowl out of it.

There you go.

I'm very proud of her.

All right, with that, I would entertain a motion to adjourn. Motion to adjourn. We are adjourned.