County Council - Regular Meeting

off the roll. No, I was like, we're starting early. Let's do it. That was That was me, not Claire.

Tim, you're real um blurry. There you are. Okay. Yeah. You look like you're looking through a glass window. I've got a screen probably. I don't know. It says Tim Baker unverified. Maybe it's me. Maybe you don't want to hear. Yeah. I want to do it as early as possible. Um,

hey, could you toss me one of those pennies, please? Yeah. We lost Matt, but we can see you, Mike. No, I'm here. I just turn it off briefly. Okay, gotcha. There you are. Yep.

The glasses don't bother us. Wear them. If you need them, you wear them. just had to do that. Hey everybody, welcome to the county council meeting on a horrible weather December 1st, 2025. Um, most of the council is virtual tonight. Um, Mr. Hollander and I are here hardcore.

There you go. Thanks to all the county staff who are here. Uh, we have a a room full of county staff and Mr. Dino. So, uh, with that, we will start with, um, I guess I'll do a quick prayer and then, uh, how about you lead us in the pledge of allegiance. Let's stand. We'll do this quickly tonight. Father, we thank you for the time to get together tonight and conduct this business on behalf of those who we represent. We pray for all those and the weather today, Lord, and just the hardship that so many people were put in today. um a lot of those who were in wrecks and just pray that if any of them were injured that your will would be with them and and watch over them and heal them as quickly as we possibly can. We pray for your wisdom on tonight's meeting. We pray for your grace that we respect one another tonight and show that dignity. We ask all these things in your name. Amen.

Amen. I pledge allegiance to the United States United States and to the republic for which it stands. My nation with liberty and justice for all. You may be seated. Please call the role. Councilman Swanson here. Ma'am. Councilman Brazzle. Councilman Hammond. Councilman Elim here. Councilman Hollander here. Councilwoman York here. Councilman Baker

here. So, for the public, um the rest of the council is virtual tonight. We are going to try and get through tonight's meeting as quickly as possible. So, with public comment, uh I would ask the guys in the back to show that just to remind people, according to council rule 6C, a public comment period during a local government meeting is considered to be a limited platform to discuss the topics at hand. It's not an open for endless public commentary. The chair shall have the power to preserve order and decorum related to the members of the public so that the true deliberative process will not be disturbed. The chair shall have the power to use the council gavvel to silence members of the public who speak on irrelevant matters or get off topic, express political statements unrelated to St. Charles County government, interrupt the chair, exceed the time limit, or disrupt the normal normal course of business during a council meeting. Council Rule 18 C also says, "Speakers shall address only topics that are included on the meeting's agenda. If a speaker's comments do not address or cease to address an agenda topic, any council member may raise a point of order to the council chair. If such point of order is well taken, the balance of the speaker's time shall be forfeited." What that is to say, tonight we are only speaking on council agenda items. If it is not an item on this agenda, we are not talking about it. With that, we will go to our first speaker,

Michelle McBride with a status on tax bills.

So, if you want to call me out of order and say sit down, you may. But I just wanted to give you a quick update. Um, we have over 450,000 bills out issued and in the mail stream. Personal property and real estate bills have been online since about mid November. Um, the only thing that is not online at this time is the senior tax relief credit bills and those are in the mail. We are experiencing a delay from the third party vendor responsible for getting that updated information online. Um, so the senior senior tax relief recipients within initial credit year of 2024 cannot see them or pay them online yet. We are working with the vendor to rectify that, but the bills are in the mail with the accurate credit amounts. We have over 27,000 who are seeing a credit on their bill this year. Um, and my computer wasn't working fast enough to get you the sum total of that. Um, but I wanted to let you know that the bills are out. There are a lot of people getting a credit this year and that's where we stand.

Thank you. Arie Dino

Arie Thank you very much. Good evening, members of council. My name is Arie C ACO as county public advocate. First of all, I'd like to say thank you very much to our snowfighters both at the state, the county, and the municipal levels. They're out there trying to do a a tremendous job and trying to protect us and keep us safe. The WebEx tonight, I stopped by the county registars's office. Um they called the county council office for me, somebody from finance, the WebEx, and all the other political jurisdictions that I'm involved in. Um it's my health and safety is no different than any elected official. I uh busted my buns to get here to this meeting after going out to Winsville. And the roads are icy. The conditions are bad. There's I I stopped and helped out five or six uh cars in in several series of accidents on I7 and I 64 today. The WebEx virtual uh code should be made public according to chapter 610 of the revised state statutes of Missouri and there should be public testimony allowed by citizens uh because elected officials are no different than citizens in my opinion. Then the last meeting I talked about an employee. I won't bring up that employees name. Um, but I believe that this council is keeping secrets and trying to bury information. I believe that we're at the point of needing to bring in the Justice Department for our 435 county,000 county residents who are wanting deserving real and accurate facts. There should be no coverups. Um, I'm asking for a critical incident update about this issue by Police Chief

Kurt Frizz. this person uh violated on three occasions my federal and state civil rights. Joan Leham knows about it. The former police chief, Mr. Todd, knows about it. I believe what goes around comes around. I highly believe in karma. We need answers and accountability. Judicial issues we have currently going on with judge with a judge in the circuit court. That's an elected official who I think I can say names of elected officials. That's Mo Matt Thornhill pending before the Missouri Supreme Court. Um, when it comes to an administrative order that was given in case number 2511 CC01282, I have problems when our direct county director of facilities blatantly violated an order regarding parking issued by the chief judge W. Christopher Mcdana on September 12th, 2025. Uh there was a pending cause for show that's now since been dismissed, but it's politics as usual and we need to protect and ensure that our judges are safe. Now, when it comes with the uh government services 3 employee who was uh in a plea deal with the courts, was given several hundreds of thousands of dollars in a settlement, was transferred to the circuit court. Now, the administration doesn't want to fund that position and we're putting our county

that will move on to report the county executive. Um, let's see. Amanda Amanda Brower is going to go ahead and give you uh the report on the uh on the tip. Amanda Foul weather. I made it. Thank you, Mo. The Yeah, I made it. [laughter] Um, okay. Where's the clicker? Here we are. All right. So, um, hang on before you start. Can everybody online see? Yeah, that's a good question. Transportation improvement plan. Anyone?

I can see it. Fine. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. I didn't know if you could see us, Mike, but yes, I was given a thumbs up. Sorry, I cannot see you. I can only hear you. I'm audio only. All right, with that, thank you, ma'am. Okay. All right, let's get right into it. We can keep this meeting short like we said. Okay. Except I don't know what button to hit. Up arrow, I think. So, it's blinking down here. tech support. Sorry.

Hit this one first. No, you just go you go back to go forward. It's at least you should be able to do that. Famous last words, right? All right. For once in my life, it wasn't me. There you go. All right. So, which one? This one. Yeah, you go with it.

Okay. Okay. All right. So, um I want to start by saying we've been working as an office really hard with the cities to try to um talk through projects before they're applied for really make sure everything that the cities are applying for federal funds for and to us um is doing the best that we can for the county. We want to make sure every project is thinking about everything that we possibly can. So, this year we had 32 project applications from eight jurisdictions. um they requested 21.1 million in county funding with 76.8 million in project costs and that included federal funding that had not yet been awarded. So that's why that number is our number is low and that other number is high. Um you can view applications at this website. So if you're on at home you can see that. Um so overall the roadboard recommended approval or partial approval of 27 applications. So that partial approval was nine projects that did not get federal funds this year were awarded funds for design only next year so that they can go ahead and get some get some conceptual study done get a better cost estimate and then hopefully go after uh federal funds in the following year. So, the intent is that they'll have a better chance of getting those federal funds if they can get a little more into the weeds. Um, so the remaining 18 projects are construction and our our regular projects. And the total county funding for those was 17.9 million. That's 38.9% of the whole project total. Um, again, federal funds came in over 40%. So, that was really good. uh on the projects we did get obviously we were doing well um sponsor funds at 10% and then other funds which is developer and MDOT cost

share at nine so 46 million in total new project costs um the first of actually the only new road this year is Marlay Drive extension this will be um done as part of the improve I70 project so really exciting mod has been great working with us to say Hey, we're in here. Are there projects you want us to do while we're here? Um, that you probably will either spend a whole lot more doing later or won't be able to do. So, Marlay Drive was something the city of Wsville has been um trying to do for a while. Obviously, it requires a lot of co coordination with MDOT and the railroad. So, they're ecstatic that they are able to get this done. Um, the total is 5.2 million and we will fund 40% of that. Um, and 50% will come from cost share, the other 10 from the city. Okay. Uh, improvements to existing roads are Welden Spring Road phase one. Again, this one got 80% federal funds. So, we're only um only spending 418,000 at the 16% for, you know, $2.5 million project. Um, base road improvements, we're funding 28% with 65% federal funds. Highway P improvements phase one in Flint Hill. Again, um federal funds at 65, we're funding 28. Brian Road improvements, they were able to get the 80% federal funds in Ofallen for that one. And then for Mexico Road, they got 71%. For traffic flow and safety, um we see some of a little bit of the same. Countywide safety is a project being done out of my office. you actually approved that agreement with MDOT at the last meeting. Um that will be kind of just countywide safety improvements.

Deer Road Reconstruction is really our own major our only um major construction fun project this year that doesn't have federal funds and that's just because of the road classification, the work that needs to be done. But I do think we'll probably put in another application for less funding. Um, but we did go ahead and fund the five million 80%. Uh, Wville Parkway at Parkway Ridge, this one has federal funds and developer funds. So, we always like to illustrate that when we have developers involved. First Capital at Kings Highway Roundabout, uh, that one has 74% of in federal funds. And then Boonlick Fairgrounds Road Roundabout, they also had 75% in federal funds. Um, and then a couple bike ped projects. Again, these are be these are with the improve I70 and we just would not be able to do these at all if it wasn't for this project. So, the first thing we're doing is um the pedestrian bridge over I70 at um Lynn just it'll be just east of Route Z. They were going to put pedestrian um pedestrian accommodations on Route Z and it's a nightmare to get under there to get to it. So, the city was looking at doing this um and MDOT just hopped on and was like, "Yeah, we can help you do that." Also, GRG um agreed to participate if they can do their branding. So, they don't have any trails out there, but um we're going to sit down with them and kind of discuss what we can do and how we can connect them into the system out there. And um yeah, and so that is a great a great uh partnership between multiple agencies. And then the TWW bike ped is just adding that extra 10-ft side path to the interchange they're building so that um bikes and peds will be able to get through that interchange in the future.

Oh boy. Oh, I'm hitting the wrong one. And that's all I have actually. Uh, does anybody have questions for Amanda? Yes, I do. Yes. [clears throat]

What how much do we have sitting in the um the the fund to fund economic development projects? So we keep 10 million in the fund every year and that is so that if a major project comes up that's significant uh job significant something very important to the county and they need to build a road like this year because sometimes they move really fast. Um that money is there to support that effort. If we didn't do that, then we'd have to, you know, try to find funds in a future year versus being able to just transfer money. You know, they go through the application project, but basically that fund is there so we can transfer immediately to another project.

So, would this highway end kind of fall onto that criteria? I mean, we it's uh we've got a a stall on development and freeing up money from this fund for N. Wouldn't that uh fit the category of what this this funds these funds could be used for?

In my opinion, route in development is is mostly residential. If there were some big um something some big commercial or office building coming there, then yes. But I it doesn't generally meet the requirements that we usually set. Could you explain to him how we've used these dollars in the past like with Streets of St. Charles and what's gone on with that to give him a better idea.

Yeah. So, we've I I mean I can point to two really big ones. We've used it for North Point, the Spencer Road extension up um north of 370 for St. Peters that got done that one was like a year they got it done. we transferred $3 million and um that road was built and you know a 5050 cost share and then another one um was Calon Calonia Parkway was was kind of a economic development. I think we ended up using some of the funds there. Um and then yeah like Main Street St. Charles came out of the economic development because they're ready to move um right away. And I think initially we're ready to move a little quicker, but we've that that was an economic development application. Um

I had another one. That's okay. The distribution center at 370 when they went in. Oh yeah. And then also Premier Parkway. Is that Yeah, we went ahead and I don't know. Yep. Yep. Yep. Yep. Yep. They were, you know, they were building the building and they needed to they needed it built not three years from now. That's right. The Amazon the improvements to Premier Parkway for Yes. And St. Peters paid half and and we used we went into this fund to get Well, how much how much is how much is p is the most we've uh the road board has paid in any given year. Have we have we got that 10 mill have we spent all 10 10 million in any given budget year? Not since I've been here.

But I think it's kind of just sitting there then. I mean, you know, and highway end does have a commercial component to it with a lot of I mean, like like the development that's currently proposed on end, it has some commercial component that frankly, you know, we we as a council and that's I think I'm speaking for the majority has some concerns about the traffic and if we're not proceeding with commercial next development long end, then I would think this money would qualify, this fund would qualify to help highway end.

Yeah. And we can absolutely move it if we want to. Like highway in is 2027 anyway. So this is 2026 funds. And if we want to say, hey, we didn't do anything. We want to, you know, make sure these funds are utilized. I don't And it's like any other project. If if Highway N for example, uh if that project we'd like to put in for those economic development funds, we have to apply for it and then they have to meet the criteria. So it be it would be judged against the criteria that those funds are set to pay for. It may meet it, it may not. I don't know the answer. Yeah. So we apply to the road.

Yeah. It's every project needs to be sponsored by county highway or a municipality. Um other than like the the federal funds that I get that we spend in my office, everything else is applied for and vetted by the road board. And my own projects are also vetted by the road board. County. Yeah. Just some history. We when I first came here 19 years ago, uh we were looking at at economic development. And what was going on then is is our problem was that uh we had this money for roads, but you had to get in line and and it was a three-year process, right,

before you could get anything. People were, you know, we heard stories about people going somewhere in Texas. And in Texas, they'll just sit down and write you a check. Here, go build your own road. Okay. So, the idea was, you know, we had money to help economic development, but it involved uh an arterial a process uh like we do with our arterials that made people wait for 3 years to see anything. Yes.

So, that's why we set this up. I don't remember how much money we originally put into it. And my hope again is, you know, some giant corporation that wants to wants to bring jobs here comes in and says, "We want to build a building and we want to build it over here, but there's no way uh for us to get to it." Well, you know, we can do a 50/50 and and help you help you build that road. That that that was the idea, and I think it's worked fairly well and and yeah, if the money isn't used, it's still there for other purposes. And we have had multiple applications in one year, too. So even you know I don't think any project one project has had seven but there have been years where we've split that between multiple projects and it's been more

but again you know even even in the in the past somebody come in and say we need to we need to we're going to build this we need a road well you know in the past we might have said okay we'll put it in the budget next year right well we've got it in the budget now and if we don't use it it's there for the next year but it's there and available able if it can help us uh get something done. And there there's been several other uh places. Well, we this is the Was it an arterial or was it economic development for Main Street? It it was a little bit of both. Little bit of both. Yeah. Okay. Mr. Baker, do you have any other question?

Well, yeah. I mean, I think it's a great use of the fund, but I I guess if we're not utilizing all $10 million and it's just sitting there, is are we are we leaving money on the table that we could be spending helping our citizens? No, it just rolls over the next year. Yeah.

Right. And so I mean I think you know we've been trying to find money for N throughout the budget and trying to move stuff here and there and you know we've got money sitting there for economic development and I think this is economic development because I think it's kind of put a little pause on on on developments along this corridor with the traffic being what it is and what not want to want not to proceed with growing our county because of this highway end. So if there's money to be used then I I just don't think it should be sitting there. I think we should utilize okay

maybe 10 I get it but we haven't like we haven't had a year where we've utilized all 10 million. I mean unless I'm stand corrected but uh I I get it. I understand what's the purpose for it but we have a unique situation I think here to uh that we could tap this money and we could refund it in future future budget year. I think what she's talking about though is for 2026, what what you're talking about with highway in we're not going to be funding until 2027. Right now they're still going through all of the design for in we're not at a construction phase for it yet.

Yeah. So if we needed to do that in 2027, I and and the road board was okay with that. Again, they they are really passionate about the economic development. They really do like that. That's something we do and that's something that um is sitting there for that. So, okay. Any further questions? If we do anything on Highway End, if we do it the same way we've done it in the past, the administration, including these folks that are speaking to you tonight, we'll we'll sit down with MDOT and find out if we do this, what can you do? Yeah.

Like I said, we're not we're not going to spend a whole lot of money to speed this thing up for six months. if if we if we're gonna the more we spend, the quicker we're going to expect it to be done. And uh you know, if if we have to come back and ask for money from this fund, you know, we'll we'll do that. Um but again, um you know, it's the sort of thing that has to be negotiated and then brought to you for your approval. Okay. [clears throat] Councilwoman York, did you have a question? Yes, I did. Um Amanda, the um First Capital Kings Highway and the Boonlick Fairgrounds roundabouts. Yes,

those sound really exciting. Um are those going to be they're in the 2026. The design is in 2026. I believe construction year for those federal funds is 2029. So they're they're a ways out, but they'll they'll be getting started. Yeah. Oh, I just wanted to know when people start asking me when is it going to be done because they'll have heard that it's going to be started. So, yes, we're looking at just design. Is that what we're looking at or just uh so my the all the

all the funds they have requested are in the tip. The construction is in 2028, but I don't know for sure that they'll be at construction in 2028. We only go three years. So, that's why we sometimes end up rolling. So I hope that makes sense. Yes. So this is just [laughter] conceptual design or is it the actual design? It's the actual design. They have a traffic study and a conceptual design done. Okay. Yep. Thank you. Any other questions? Yes, sir. If I may, Mr. Eel, this is

uh first off, I talked to the individuals in Flint Hill concerning the redesign of what we'll call their downtown area. uh they were ecstatic about it. Uh they've been working with you at length on this. They really think it's going to solve a lot of problems. We did have an accident just recently up there. Um so they were very appreciative of that. So I wanted to make sure I share that with the rest of council. Uh moving a little bit farther south, we have had some issues with the Piney Road uh 461 interchange there. Um we had a rollover accident and everything else. We know we have Dave Hokll Parkway coming through. Is there any discussion about having a roundabout in that section working with MDOT in the future?

Um there hasn't been any discussion, but MDOT is coming out with their um Route 61 plan or improvement ideas. I think later this month. So I am not sure if they looked at that interchange, but we can absolutely go back and ask them to or start on something there if we need to. There's a lot of blind spots in that area and I travel that area a lot and all. So I think where Piney Road comes in to that interchange, MDOT really needs to look at that and I know you have great connections with them. So moving a little bit farther south, uh you discussed Marley uh earlier. Yes. Um going all the way from Church Street, Highway Z, whatever you want to call it there.

Uh what kind of lighting are we going to do on the outer road? Is it going to be something that is similar to what Wentzville is doing in their historic district or is it just going to be lighting from the highway I70? I would assume they are putting in a sidewalk or a p or a a wider sidewalk. Um so I would assume they would have pedestrian scale lighting at that road and then you know regular intersection lighting at the intersections.

Would that be through city of Wville or MDOT? So, um I am not sure. Usually, MDOT makes them do like an addition to their project to pay for those additions or those added costs because MODOT doesn't do those. Um I would assume that's how it's going to work. Okay. Because I've had a couple of business owners in the area that are invested in it. This is gonna be a weird and for those people who don't understand how Marley goes off of Church Street there all the way to basically where the McDonald's is, this gonna be a massive change to Wville on the south side. They want to keep that historic

feel of it. And being a member of the historical society, they're vested in this as well, what it's going to look like to continue that. And I do believe, did you discuss already the uh walkway over I7? I think you alluded to that with the gateway um pathway that will take us all the way over and almost bring us into um oh shoot uh our big park over there. Why did I just skip my mind? Um oh on the on Yes, on the south side. Yeah, Quail Ridge over to Quail Ridge and all. So that's where a lot of the residents in the society want to make sure the lighting in that area is

very similar to what we see in downtown area. And I don't, like I said, if I need to talk to my Wville elected officials, that's easy enough to do. I didn't know who's in charge of what because it's kind of a weird easement zone. And Marley has always been that way. Yeah, the pedestrian scale is it's obviously a safety um need like it's not something special. It if they want a certain aesthetic, they'll have to work through that. But MDOT and the city have those conversations on the regular, so they'll get that done. Okay. I appreciate Amanda. Thank you much. Yeah. Any other questions for Amanda? Yes, I do. This is Tim. Yep.

I I've got a I provided a petition to the council members for a trail along Upper Bottom Road. Is Is that a project that the county is going to be asking the road board to fund or what's the status of that? Um I don't know what county highway plans to do for next year. Um I I will say that you know when we do projects we're we're obviously doing a selective scoring. So um or I shouldn't we're doing a scoring criteria. So I am unsure how that project would score without looking at at it closer. Um so I I can't really answer that.

We we've uh myself and John Lines have looked at that very on the very surface level. uh there's some pretty significant engineering challenges that need to be looked at um which would take some pretty serious investment uh in a project. So I guess my question back to the council is this is this a project the council wants to pursue and if so we can start to build out what it would take to do the studies to do the engineering and bring the the project uh to a cost estimate. Um but I think I would at this point give it back to the council. Is this something the council wants to pursue? It's a sidewalk from was it Canyon Drive, Tim?

It it was actually a very short section from upper bottom loop or upper bottom road where where we cut it off

up to the park and and I would I would argue that the these aren't some sign these aren't significant design issues. I think there's some possibilities to to to do some uh creative thinking with the guard rail and and the edge of edge of pavement that we could do that to to avoid some of that slope area. But I would say yeah, I mean it's a project that I mean I've got I think the petition had 41 signatures and uh you know it's it's a it's a project that the citizens in my district sorely need. We we've got a park that that can't be accessed from uh from people who live near.

And then I guess the other question is we build the section from Upper Bottom loop up to Springbend Park and then we get requests from residents further west down Upper Bottom all the way to Junk Station. I mean it it has the potential to expand exponentially uh in terms of project spread. Sure. But but I would say you know again I would throw it back to the council. Is this something get the numbers the council wants to pursue? And if so, we'll we'll work the numbers and do the engineering uh to some looking at what the engineering um requirements would be. I mean, isn't there a fund specifically for trails and sidewalk?

It's it's not a separate amount. it. We do fund some projects that include sidewalk or if we've done like a road project in the past and we didn't have a sidewalk so there's a missing link will sometimes go back and do that but it's not a it's not a set aside and those projects are scored against the other projects and honestly most of what we're doing now has federal funds so we're we're looking into that. Go ahead county executive if is Mr. Baker finished Mr. Baker, are you finished? Yeah. Okay, Amanda. Yeah. I mean, I think you already mentioned it. We've done sidewalks and trails as part of road projects.

Is this is this part of a road project? This is just a standalone a standalone trail. Have we ever done that? We've done a couple just like I said, they've been because it wasn't done in a previous project. The one I can think of is Pitman um Pitman Hill, I think, to the new park. Is anybody else could Yeah, but didn't we just didn't we just go and re restripe it and widen it or something like that? I don't know. Okay. I think that was somewhere else. But yeah, there's there's Get us the history of that. Yeah. Yeah.

We did Coxillo Road from uh from towers to uh to uh uh 94 south. I we did it years ago, but we put in a sidewalk. And I I would argue that a sidewalk should have been constructed as part of when the road board funded the upper bottom road back 30 years ago or whenever it was. I mean, it wasn't done for budgetary purposes. And now we have the money to do it. I think we ought to do it. So I I think your question is does the council I mean I'm one of seven, but I think we should have this project. I think Upper Bottom Road is a I got a park. Like I said, we've got a park and nearby residents cannot get to it. I I I mean, this alone should score pretty highly in my opinion.

Yeah, we I mean, I will also add that we have a bike ped plan that we had a consultant do back in 2021 and we're actually expanding on it and um that happens in there's several instances of that throughout the county. Obviously, it's a big county and we put in tons of parks recently. So, um, that's that's not a unique situation, um, per se. Not saying that it's not a worthwhile project. Just stating that there's probably at least 20 other kind locations that fit that same bill. Okay. Any other questions for 41 people signing those other ones?

I'm sure they would. I said, have you, not would they? No, they have not. Okay. Thank you. Yep. Any other questions? Seeing none, thank you very much. Anything else from the county executive? No, sir. That'll get us to the consent agenda. Any items to be removed from the consent agenda tonight? I have one, Mr. Baker. the uh let's see the the change order with CMT on the parks, you know, and I understand why we're doing it, but the change order is more than the original contract amount. Is there

Hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on. You're making a motion to remove it. We're going to go through that first before we discuss. Okay. I I second motion. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? I I All those opposed. All right. So that is removed. Any other items to be removed? Motion to approve the uh consent agenda. Second. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. I. All those opposed. So the rest of the of the uh consent agenda is approved. Mr. Baker Parks. Now you can explain. Mr. Graham's on his way.

I understand the change orders. CMT did the design for the runway. Now they're coming back with construction services when the reality is you can we can find a lot of engineering firms to do the constru the construction oversight and uh I'm wondering if if it wouldn't behoove us to get RFPs from uh rep reputable firms uh to provide the construction services as opposed to just giving a change order to the design engineer. I think what we're getting is is uh we're probably going to get a higher price because they're they're a sole kind of a sole bidder on this one.

So CMT um is the contractor on record or the engineer on record for the airport. Um and every few years we go out and uh bid or select proposals from uh various companies uh to work on projects at the airport. So CMT was I believe awarded that uh contract through the airport a couple years ago. Um they have engineered and designed this project. The construction administration fees on this are basically requirements of the federal government and the FAA. Um, so the reason why it's high is there has to be basically daily people out there doing federal construction observation program um, recording attendance, preconstruction meetings, preparation of CAD files, all those sorts of things. Um, so it is a higher number for what we would probably consider a construction observation type services. Uh but when you look at the the overall contract that uh we just approved for the MODOT project, it's uh you know three and a half million construction project. Um it is being covered as a 9010% split between grant funding um and the county. So the FAA and MODOT is picking up 90% and the county is picking up 10% of that on a reimbursement. So that's that's why we're

I'm not saying it's not it's not needed service. I'm just saying how do we know this is good price if if we didn't get more than one uh one engineering firm submitting a proposal for this cost. You know you have the the the firm that designed it and does the construction inspection. That's fine. But they're not the only firm that can can oversee this construction. Yeah. That's a many different consultants that and again I think what it comes down money

again I think what it comes down to is the FAA and MDOT their requirements with them being the consultant on on record with the engineering um they basically you know are trying to I guess have a little bit of consistency through the project and the observation um you know through their their funding and their project. Um so so that's why we're we're proposing it here now. So Mod is saying that we have to we have to use the firm that designed it to oversee the construction.

No, I'm not necessarily saying that. and say that the construction observation uh requirements through the FAA and MDOT are basically kind of I mean there's obviously a number of firms that we went out and got proposals from to uh to do this uh to be the engineering on record for for the airport. Um, but I think they would prefer I I can't necessarily speak for the FAA or MODOT that when it comes to these type of projects that they want the same engineer who's engineered and designed it to also do the construction administration due to the familiarity of the project.

So were you are you basically saying that it no matter who came in and did this, the FAA and MDOT are going to mandate that this gets done to to do the construction observation? Yeah. I mean it's a requirement. It's a federal requirement that we have to do the observation and and basically have somebody out there all the time and that's why it's a higher higher dollar value than normal. Okay.

Well, I understand I understand the FAA requirement. What I what I'm saying is that how do we know this 387,000 is a competitive price if we only have gone to the firm that designed it? Because again, there's many engineering firms that could do this oversight, and the CMT may very well be the best firm that that does this from a price standpoint, but we really don't know that. We're just we're just guessing. Would we have to rebid the entire federal project if we did that?

I honestly don't know what the FAA would make us do. So, yeah, I'm not for certain if they would uh step in and try to, like I said, my guess knowing the FAA, I mean, they're, you know, anytime you you work with a federallettered organization, that's probably not an easy process and they have very strict rules. Um, so I talked with my airport manager and uh he said that this number was in line with previous projects that they've worked on regarding, you know, the FAA and these sorts of deals. Again, it's a 9010 split between MDOT and the FAA and the county. So, we are only on the hook for 10% of the actual construction and administration of prices. So, Mr. Baker, do you have a recommendation?

Well, I would just say the FAA and MODOT doesn't care who's doing the oversight. They're just requiring that construction oversight be done by someone other than a county official, which I understand. And I guess my question is, and this is basic to other council members, are we good with this? I mean, we're, you know, I've been the engineering is what I do. So, I know that you probably price is going to be a little bit higher because they know that they're not being they're not bidding against any other consulting firm. So, they could they can price it. Maybe they're competitive, but we really don't know if we don't go out and seek RFQS. I appreciate that. Do you do you have a recommendation?

Yeah. Go out to RFQS for engineering firms to to provide the oversight. So, are you making that as a motion? If I can add here, I I heard uh Ryan say that they did send this out to quite a few people, Tim, that uh quite a few organization uh engineering firms and stuff and and this is what they got back.

Not everybody wants to work on an airport. Yeah. You know, it's it's a little bit um more uh oversight from the FAA you have in there. Um, usually you just have highway and and St. Charles County. Now you have the FAA and they're going to be coming in there. They want it done right. And so I you know, Ryan, am I correct here, Ryan? I think I think you're right. I mean, a lot of people called a lot of people, talked with a lot of people.

Yeah. And when we submitted those bids, I mean, there was a number of firms that submitted it. Um, the parks department has only operated the airport for the last couple years. Um but uh from what I've been able to gather and from what I I have have learned is that uh traditionally we have solicited basically an engineering firm on record um to that does these sorts of things for construction administration, engineering and design. Um they work with the FAA, they work with the state, they do all the red tape stuff that uh that everyone enjoys. Um, and so when we bid those services out, I I like I said, I think it was last year, the year before where CMT was awarded that that uh that that contract. Um, so yes, I I Yeah.

So I would entertain a motion from council. Yeah. I make a motion that we table this this item so we can uh I think we need to find out if this is a competitive price. I mean, yeah, sure. We we we went out and seek qualifications for firms to design it. This is the first we've gone to firms to oversee the construction. Is there a second? Seeing no second, I'd entertain a motion. Motion to approve. Motion to approve. Do I have a second? All those in favor? Second. All those in favor? I I no. All those opposed. Mr. Baker.

No. Motion passes. Uh that gets us to resolution 2512. Resolution number 2512, a resolution setting an annual reimbursement rate of 100% for financing pursuant to chapter 99 RSMO, chapter 100 RSMO, and chapter 353 RSMO.

Any questions or comments about this resolution? Seeing none, please call the role. Resolution number 2512, a resolution setting an annual reimbursement rate of 100% for financing pursuant to chapter 99 RSMO, chapter 100 RSMO, and chapter 353 RSMO. Councilman Swanson. Yes, ma'am. Sorry. Yes. Councilman Brazzle. Councilman Hammond. Councilman Elum. Yes. Councilman Hollander. Yes. Councilwoman York, yes. Councilman Baker,

yes. Resolution 2512 passes with bills for final passage. These were introduced in the last meeting, but we are not within the window um for these to be actually read and passed. So, these will be held over until the December 15th meeting. We will read those one last time, do any final discussion, and we will vote on those at that meeting. So that'll get us to bills for introduction starting with 5446.

Bill number 5446 requested by Mike Summer, sponsored by Mike Elim. An ordinance amending the 2025 budget adopted as ordinance 24-106 as amended by transferring unencumbered appropriations between line items in the general fund and the fleet management fund. Any questions or comments about this bill? No. That'll get us to bill 5447. Bill number 5447 requested by Steve Elellman, sponsored by council as a whole, an ordinance adopting and appropriating the fiscal year 2026 budget for St. Charles County, Missouri.

Any questions about this bill? Yes, I do. I This is Tim. Um, I know we talked about it last time uh at our at our work session, but I still want to make the motion to amend the budget to uh to take money from the Lake St. Louis Boulevard project and add it to the sound wall on Milwood Drive court. So, point of order, I would ask, are we doing that here in the budget or do we do that in the tip? We do it in both, right?

So, okay. Um, so Mr. Baker, I would tell you we have to split that into two things. One, if we want to remove the money for the Lake St. Louis Boulevard, we would do that as one vote. And then where we would move the money after that would be a second vote. So, would you like to make that motion? So, Mr. Baker is making a motion to amend the 2026 budget for St. Charles County by removing the Lake St. Louis Boulevard funding that is in there for 2026. Second. I have a motion and a second. Um, all those in favor say I. I. I.

All those opposed. So, we are moving the Lake St. Louis Boulevard money. Now, Mr. Baker, you have a second amendment that you would like to make. Yes. I would like to add the the money for the soundwall on No Court from the monies. Uh yeah, I just like to add the proposal to add the Nowood Court sound wall. So we have a motion there. Do we have a second? Second. So Miss York is a second. Uh all those in favor I I All those opposed I No. No.

Can you do a roll? Excuse me. Council or Chair Elon, do we have any discussion? Did we have a chance to have discussion on this? My bad. Thank you. I I don't know what I was thinking. I did. I went straight to the vote after the second. So, Mr. Swanson, I'll go to you. Thank you for correcting

discussion on this. We're we're asking to move money into a plan that has no plan at this point with the soundwall. Mr. uh or Councilman Baker and I, we've had numerous discussions on this, but what is the plan moving forward on it? So, we're going to remove funds, move it into something that I don't know if we have a clear direction where we're going with it. And Mr. Baker just left the screen. Uh so, I don't know if he's still hearing me or not. Um, well, he's somewhat back. I'm not really sure what I'm standing there. Like a ghost. He kind of looks like an aberration. Um, so with moving our funds over, where are we going with this? Because I've heard concerns talking to friends in my MDOT world that can we even build the soundwall in that zone because it's MDOT easement? Can you can anyone answer that question for me?

Yeah, I can. I talked to Andy Turk and you know I take it that they're his position was it was we're if we're building it through roadboard funds it's not an issue but is it in their easement? It would be I mean we would have to get their their ultimate approval but I I mean it's no no different than us doing anything within within a MDOT easement or rightway. We've got to we've got to secure the the necessary approvals. Right. Uh what's the time frame on something like that? Does anyone staff member have or Mr. Baker if you have that knowledge?

Yeah. So what I'm proposing is we fund the engineering which I' I've talked about and I'm conservative. I think $100,000 to do an update, the sound study and and the engineering. It shows the length and does prepares the construction documents for the wall and then the 650,000 or the I think it was 550,000 which is what I I believe Amanda thinks the cost is that would be the construction. So the we would be following the normal steps that we do on any project where you fund the engineering then you fund the construction and in this case we're funding them both in 2026 because I don't believe the engineering is going to take as much time. I mean the sound study will but uh again it's 100,000 for the engineering and then 550,000 for the actual wall construction.

And if if I may Mr. Baker to push back on you a little bit here. Um I had a fatality in my district just this past week on Highway 79 and Highway M. Uh we lost an 11-year-old girl. Um I had another rollover accident at Highway Pine Road in 61. I understand that this is a sound issue, but if we're looking at reallocating money for the best use within our community, I have two accidents that have occurred in just a handful of days apart that my constituents are asking for me to do something about. You're asking for a project to make people's lives sound better. Yet, I have the talents and I have to represent my people as much as you have to represent your people. And I completely get that. And we have had numerous conversations about this. My views have changed a little bit on this because of what has happened recently. And when a father no longer has his 11-year-old girl because he made a left-hand turn on a blinking light that said he could do so. This is really hard for me to go through of saying we need a soundwall where I'm dealing with life and death issues versus a quality of life issue. And I hope you understand that. And I'm just being completely honest with you and transparent to everybody. This is a hard one for me to vote on. And Tim, that's why I'm just doing this publicly here. I have to represent my people in district one. They elected me and it's very hard for me to do a quality of life when I have life and death issues in district one. And I hope you understand that.

What I mean, but you haven't brought anything forward. I mean, you're just saying that you'd like to do that. does it doesn't mean we can't do both. I mean, there's only so much money. There's only so much money, sir. There's only so much money and you don't have a plan put forth yet of where we're going to go with this. You want to do a study and this or that. And how many other areas how many other areas need a soundwall? And you know what? Living off Highway 61, the county could put a soundwall up and down 61 to improve everybody's quality of life. But I'm more looking at safety in district one over quality of life. And I think we may have to disagree on this one.

So when we're funding maintenance for slab repair in Augusta, is that a quality of life issue for people or is that a safety issue? No, that'd be a Mr. Brazzle question. He represent. Well, let me understand there there's other things in in our current tip that isn't a safety issue. And just because you have a safety issue in your district doesn't mean I can't address a a a quality of life issue in mine. I mean you I haven't heard you say that you would like to do something obviously just you're voting it down because you have a need that that that just seems in disguise.

Well um not to break protocol here or anything else or rules but I'm not voting anything down because nothing's been proposed to me. I just proposed it. You gave me an outline of what you want to do, not an actual hardcore proposal. Okay. And my hardcore proposals, we fund the engineering for a soundwall along Nowood Court, and then we also fund the construction along Nowood Court. What's the cost estimates? I just told you 100,000 for engineering, 550,000 for construction based on what Amanda estimated the cost to be. Okay. Did that go out to proposal? Absolutely.

I didn't see any of those numbers. Anybody else see those numbers? I will it have to go to proposal? Yes, it will. Mr. Hollinger.

Yeah. You know, I I feel that um you know, number one, the the whole soundwall issue that that to me is a mod issue. They've already made their decision. I don't agree with their decision. Okay. But the point is, I don't think that St. Charles County should be getting in the soundwall business because it is a a neverending uh, you know, rabbit hole that we are going to find ourselves in. Uh, I feel for the people. Uh, I wish that it would have been constructed back when MODOT uh built the highway and did the study, but at this point I think it's uh it's just not something that we should be uh looking to do. Now, as for moving the money from the uh Lake St. Louis Boulevard extension, you know, we've obviously moved that money,

right? Uh we've pulled it away from one project, but it's not reallocated yet. Exactly. Okay. So, that's that's my my feeling on it.

Miss your is Tim again, but I thought when Amanda spoke last week, she probably recall there was a 770,000 uh surplus in the budget. I'd like to use that for the soundwall. I mean, it's money that's currently not obligated. And and and keep in mind St. uh St. Charles County Roadboard I think paid I want to say the number was $20 million for Highway 364 and I would uh I would bet that in anywhere in our agreements to fund that it did not exclude sound walls. So, we have paid for sound walls because there are sound walls. Just

so Miss York. I I didn't have anything on this. You You don't want to weigh in on this discussion? I don't have to table this discussion till we have uh we can have the entire council discuss it, please.

I'm fine with that. Um, I would just say a the last meeting that we had, we had people show up from two different areas along 364. I believe they were both in my district. Um, I believe they both lived in my district and um I'm against getting down this road on soundwalls cuz they were in two different areas. So, you want a sound wall at this one place that you're proposing, but the folks who spoke off of Motherhead Road, their backyard is actually louder than the area that you're proposing. And in talking with MDOT, they said that there are at least 15 to 20 areas that using the metric that you're going for and saying that's a sound hazard there. We're going to have 15 or 20 of those at least throughout St. Charles County. I think if we start down that road, it's going to be awfully hard for us to tell the next person who says,"Ive this amount in my backyard, I want a soundwall." You're going to have that along I7. You're going to have that along 40. You're going to have that along 364. I think if you open up this Count of Worms and you start doing a soundwall in one place, the council is making themselves liable to do these type of soundwalls all over the county. I don't see how you get to say that one neighbor gets to have a soundwall and no one else does. So I do not want to get into doing to the numbers that you've thrown out $650,000 per soundwall multiplied by 15 20 30 times across the county. We don't have that kind of money. Mr. Hollander.

Yeah. I believe there's there's been a motion made. Okay. to move these funds to the sound wall and I believe that we were in the process of there was a motion and a second and the process of yeah voting when Mr. Swanson pointed out that we needed to have discussion. So my point is that I if we are still in the process we need to go ahead and and vote. Well, hang on. I I got a question for you Mike. You mentioned that this area is is worse than my the area on Nwood. How do you know that? Was a was a sound study done there or you just think that's the case, county executive?

Well, now that you asked uh actually Rob Wy this morning uh went out and uh we we have a decibel uh reader, correct? Now, and you went out with a decibel reader. And just uh as an example, um we've got the area that Mr. Baker wants to uh to remedy. Um and right down the road on the same side of the street I think in your district. Yes.

Uh it was 83 dB there. Across the highways the Dunore place where the people who came uh to the last meeting. Uh it it registered 80 dB there. Now going uh uh further down further down into your district, Mr. Elim, uh it's only 77 there at at at the turn. Okay. Uh if M where Mr. Baker wants to do it, it was 80.5 today. Apparently, it was higher the day he did it, but we did all these at the same uh at the same time today. But then if we go uh on Highway 70, and of course we didn't go to 15 places like MODAT did, but we did go to uh I guess seven places and along 70 uh Mr. uh Mr. Hollander's district there, Mark Twain subdivision. Um that was uh 81. Let me see here. Yeah, that was 81.6 dB. Uh and on the other side, excuse me. No, that that's that's uh that's actually in uh St. Charles Hills, which I think is uh Councilman York's district.

Yes. Right.

So, hers she's got an 81.6. Then right across the street from that uh Mr. Hollander's got a 84.4. So, you know, this if this is a if this is a problem, it's a problem in a lot of different places. And and if it's a problem with a road that we've built, that's one thing. But these were roads that were built uh um by by MDOT. They've been built over a long period of time. And um you know, we did in 1992, we did a uh a corridor preservation bill in this whole 364 corridor, even 10, 15 years before anything was built, everybody knew where it was was going to be. Now, that doesn't help Mr. Baker's folks, but everybody else, you know, basically moved there after it was it was built or should have known it was going to be built. So,

I'd like I'd like to personally be out there with seeing those decimal readings. We've had decimal readings of 89 on this guy's front porch. 89 where 85 will get you hearing loss. And sure, if there's a bad area around the county, then we ought to talk about it. But just to say we're not going to do it, well then I think we should not be doing slab repair and and other stuff that that's general maintenance and that has no quality of life issues. We don't do slab repair on MOD's project table for when all the council is there. So I'd like to withdraw my motion. So you're making a motion to table? Yes.

Excuse me. Excuse me. He just with He just moved to with Excuse me. He just withdrew his motion. It it wasn't able to be tabled. No, but he withdrew his motion for that. He has this on the 15th. Yeah, he can withdraw his motion. He cannot move to have it tabled while it was on the table for a vote, but he can withdraw his motion. So, you are withdrawing your motion for so that we can discuss the 15th. Right. So, if you withdraw your motion, there is no reason to table it because if you withdraw your motion, it's done. I'll withdraw it. Okay. Any other discussion about the budget?

Yes. I'd like to make a motion to um remove the funding from Lake St. Louis Boulevard. I thought we did that. We did. No, we didn't. You just removed it, sir. So, make your motion again. I'm sorry I couldn't hear. I want to make a motion to remove the funding for Lake St. Louis Boulevard Extension. I'll second. That's already done. We already we already did remove it, Matt. That was the first motion. So, we we removed that. So, voted we already voted to remove it. Yes, we did not vote. I didn't No, we're all good. Being virtual, I did not mark that down. My apologies.

It's all good. We We moved to remove it. We did not move to move it somewhere. So, it is currently removed from Lake St. Louis, but it is not moved anywhere else. Everybody good? Okay. So, that'll move us on to bill number 54. Sorry. No motion to move it anywhere else. There is no motion to move it anywhere else at the moment.

Okay. Um, so that'll get us to bill 5448. Bill number 5448 requested by Samantha Shadrich, sponsored by Mike Elim. An ordinance amending sections contained within the Personnel Administration Plan Chapter 115 of the ordinances of St. Charles County, Missouri. Repealing sections 115.360, 115.790, 115.810, and 115.860. Repealing and replacing section 115720 and establishing section 115335. All concerning the personnel administration plan, including but not limited to benefits.

Any questions or comments on this bill? I'd like to comment that I think uh Samantha Shadrach did an amazing job putting this all together. Looks like she went through it line by line to get it where we needed it to be. And I just want to congratulate her and thank her for doing it. So noted. Any other questions or comments? Seeing none, that'll move us to bill 5449. Bill number 5449, requested by Amanda Brower, sponsored by council as a whole, an ordinance approving the transportation improvement plan for fiscal years 2026 through 2028 and corresponding intergovernmental agreements.

Any questions or comments about this bill? So, I would like to reopen this discussion about the Lake St. Louis Boulevard money that we took off and I would like to make a motion to use that money to put towards Highway in second

discussion. Um, have we I I noticed that a lot of times what what people say is if we do one of these, we have to do a lot of these or if we start here, we're opening a can of worms. Would it might be judicious if we do have issues with with sound walls, could we just make a line item and then have us go out and and maybe see what uh what do I want to say? kind of uh put them in order to and something that we revisit every year that we have x amount of dollars and this is what we can do just do towards sound walls. Would that be something anybody's interested in?

I would be. Yeah, I think that's what we need to do. Thank you for bringing it up. That's that's fine. But I have a motion on Highway in Right now and a second. We have a motion and a second on moving the Lake St. Louis Boulevard money to highway in looking for discuss about this. I I thought you had said that we we've already allocated all the money necessary for 2026. Isn't that not the case? I mean, I thought that's what you just said. I said I'd like to move the highway in money or that

No, from what Amanda was talking, I thought all the money for for all the money is needed for for in 2026 for highway in is is there which includes engineering, I believe. So, Amanda, would you like to come up?

Come over here. Sorry. So, the tip is a three-year plan. So, if you're asking to remove Lake St. Louis Boulevard completely from the plan, you have 2026 money, 2027 money, and 2028. Correct. I'd have to look at it. But so yes, those dollars could be moved to route in in those same years. So if we're talking strictly 2026, strictly 2026,

you were talking about the $10 million uh economic development money, which is in the 2026 budget. The $10 million you were talking about then was the economic development money that we had for the road board. That's what you were asking about. Two different things. No, I I thought when what Amanda said right now we have what do we have funded for highway N in 2026? Amanda,

hang on. I put 10 million in 2020. Yeah, 10 million in 2026. And and what's that for? It's it's just budgeting it so that it'll roll over to when we need it. I don't know that we'll need all of that this year. If we need it, it'll be for right away cost. It's something we can negotiate with when we go talk to and if if this amendment passes, we can negotiate with that money, too.

Yes. Yes. So So Lake St. Louis Boulevard in Ofallen has 602,000 in 2026 and another 8,400,000 in 2027. Correct. So technically we've already we've already removed What's the total cost for Highway N? Did I hear 100 million? Yes, but we're not paying all of that 100 million.

No, I mean 100 million, you know, the kind of the rule of thumb I always heard was a million a mile, but that was years ago. So, if it's 5 million a mile, which seems just 100 million just seems a lot of money. I mean, I I just have a hard time understanding how it's 100 million. I really do. It's four lanes, a lot of rightway, a lot of utilities, a lot of drainage. I mean, it's all the things. I understand about 100 million, though. And 100 million would get us to Perry Kate, correct?

Yes. And a hundred million is probably a conservative estimate, but like the county executive said, if we're going to go talk to them, then we want to be sure that we're planning for as much as it I mean, if a bid comes in at 100 million, you know, whatever the construction portion, I think, is only 70 to 80 70 to 80. But if a bid comes in at that 80 million, we want to be able to cover it. So we've got we're budgeting a h 100red million but it's only going to be 80 million now. What

we're budgeting for future further design. They have not yet paid for final design and additional rideaway and utility costs as well as construction.

Highway in is the number one unfunded road project in the St. Louis metropolitan area according to MDOT. This is the air. This is the road project that MODOT has identified as the most pressing need in the St. Louis metropolitan area. They even talked about it at their annual breakfast meeting that they had the other day um in Maryland Heights where they laid out all of the road projects that are going on over the next 3 years in the St. Louis metropolitan area. So my opinion is and the reason for this motion is we have a lot of construction that is going on along Highway N. Um residential plans that are there with a lot of new homes that are going in both in Winssville and Oallon and we have a potential project that's coming before us. Highway N has been that corridor that we have looked at that's been the new expansion corridor out west. And I think as the residents have stated multiple times, Highway N needs to be addressed. And that's why I am moving for this money to be put toward the number one construction need, road construction need that we have in the St. Louis area according to Modi. We have a motion. We have a second. Any other discussion? Thank you. Seeing none. All those

I do. Hang on. Okay. I thought did last week when when Amanda spoke, she said there was $770,000 that was unencumbered. Is that correct? I don't know where that's coming from. From the last meeting. What does that have to do with the motion that's on the table? Because it it it's All right, just keep make the motion then.

I I did I made the motion to move the Lake St. Louis Boulevard money that's in the 26 to 28 tip to Highway N. Mr. Hollander seconded it and we're doing discussion right now. Is there any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor say I. I. I. All those opposed. No. Right. So, I had to do that first. So, uh, due to so many people being virtual, I'm going to say let's do a roll call vote. Councilman Swanson.

Councilman Swanson. Councilman Brazzle. Councilman Hammond. Councilman Elim. Yes. Councilman Hollander, yes. Councilman York, no. Councilman Baker, no.

So, the motion fails because you have to have four. Um, so we will not move that money and it will continue to sit. That gets us that gets us to bill 5450. Bill number 5450 requested by Steve Elman, sponsored by Mike Elim, an ordinance authorizing the county executive to execute agreements for 2026 advocacy and lobbying services. Any questions or comments on this?

Seeing none, that gets us to 5451. Bill number 5451 requested by Steve Elman, sponsored by Mike Elim, an ordinance repealing the current chapter 122 in its entirety, enacting a new chapter 122 and amending section 115710 ordinances of St. Charles County, Missouri. Wait a minute. Any questions or comments about this bill? That wraps up our bills for introduction. That gets us to announce, Mr. Chair, miscellaneous. Yes, sir. Going back to the the vote. Yes.

Um it should be a majority of those present and in attendance at the meeting whether by video conference or not when it comes to voting on an amendment. Oh, so it's not you don't need four. Correct. Just for the final vote. You need four for Okay. Not on an amendment. So on an amendment because we have five here and you had three yeses and two nos, then it does pass. Yes, I stand corrected. All right. Thank you. So, those amended changes will show up in the 26 to 28 tip moving forward. Correct? Yes.

All right. Thank you. Um, with announcements and miscellaneous, I would tell you first of all, um, our next meeting is going to be on December 12th, but um, I believe council wants to do a work session next Monday. December 12th. 15. I'm sorry, what did I say? 12th,

two weeks from tonight. So, uh, 14 days. That would be the 15th. Thank you. I don't know why I said the 12th. Um, everybody was freaking out because they're going to show up on a Friday. They're like, "What? No." Um, so Mr. Baker and Mr. Brazzle had asked for a work session. Um, I would ask the council, "Do you want to do that work session next Monday?" Um, do you want to do 4:00? I think 5:00.

5:00. Um, do you want to do the work session next Monday at 5 or do you do do you want to do the work session uh before the December 15th meeting discussion? I I would prefer to do it next Monday simply because um you know, number one, I think everyone would be here and number two, I think there's still issues that uh several council uh councilmen have uh concerns about. Okay. Right. I I see no reason why we can't can't do it. Mr. Baker, you good next Monday? Yeah. Councilwoman York. Yes, I'm good. Mr. Swanson.

I'll have to check my calendar. Four weeks back to back is it's getting a little tough, but let me check my calendar. I'm with you. Um, so we will tenatively plan on doing a work session uh next Monday at 5:00. This is a work session only. No meeting, which means nothing will be voted on. It can only be for discussion purposes. Um, the next voting meeting we will have will be at 7:00 on December 15th. Thank you. Uh, any other announcements or miscellaneous from the council members? Yes, sir. If I may. Yes, sir.

Um, I'm not going to go into issues that we talked about tonight, but I will just say road improvements trump sound walls non-stop. But moving past that, um, we've had a lot of issues today being an educator and our bus drivers for all the districts deserve a huge shout out. And one of the things I'm trying to work on within my friends here in the District One area, go out and buy a $ five dollar gift card and give it to the bus drivers. The amount of I don't want to say trauma they went through, but just dedication they went through today is something that no one will understand unless you've driven a bus. So, if you're a parent or if you're anyone out there, go out, get a $5 gift card to Amazon, wherever else, and give it to those bus drivers because they worked their butts off today. When you got all those students on that bus and the craziness and the long hours trying to get home, you thought it was bad for you in a car by yourself. Imagine 40 kids in a bus all screaming and hollering at you. So, congrats to all of our bus drivers out there and all of our other workers who helped plow everything.

Kudos. Very, very good point. Very good. Very good. Anything else from anyone? No. Motion to adjurnn. Second. Motion and second. All in favor? I. We are adjourned.