City Council - Regular Meeting

All right.

Mayor Garitano.

All right, sorry about that. We are going to try it 1 more time. Thank you. All right. Good evening. Everyone and welcome to our work session for Monday, June 8th. It is now 532 PM like, to welcome everyone. So we'll proceed with the roll call.

Mayor. Council member here Council member.

Here.

Council member Ottenberg.

Here.

Council member Farmer. Here. Council member Means. Here. Council member Bockert. Present. Council member Crayon. Here. Council member Albers. Here. Council member Owen. Council member Mabry.

Here.

Council member Nyhan. Here. Council member Dodwell. Here. Council member Marshall.

Present.

Council member Rambo.

Here.

Council member Vanik.

Here.

Council member Kummer.

here all right thanks everyone and under mayor's comments and announcements i do want to take the opportunity to welcome nithya who is our intern here at city hall she is seated right next to uh director joe voonage so nithya if you want to wave a hand and say hello to everyone That's a warm welcome. So glad to have you here at City Hall and have you learn about local government. You'll have the opportunity to interact with our wonderful staff but also our council members and so and of course the public. So we welcome you and hope that you find this to be a very rewarding experience. So thanks again for being here with us tonight. All right, moving on, we are going to go into for information. We have several items here. So, at this point, right now, just as we usually do, I'd like to see if there are any questions or any matters that anyone wishes to discuss related to the any of the 4 information items. And if you do just raise your hand.

Yes, council member albers on the special. Council investigation report do you do you want any comments now? Or do you want to wait till the closed session?

The closed session is not related to the special council investigation report. So those comments should be now.

Okay. I just want to make a few things here. I was happy to see things went in Mr. Coomer's favor on this. Never was my intention for anything to happen to him in this situation, but I was kind of surprised that there was not any other results Listed on the report that. Mr lead sent to us, um. I think there were as many emails sent. On the matters before, during and after things with the election and things related to this report. Um, so I, I, at the time reached out to Mr. Coomer. No, I'm sorry. I'm sorry, Tim. Sorry. Mr. Lee about what was sent in and, uh, He said the only thing that he sent in was what Mr. Young told him to send in. So I don't think this represented what the nine of us on the special council meeting were thinking was going to be sent in on this. So I don't know if other people want to comment on that.

Well, could you be a little more specific? Like what was missing or what were you expecting that was supposed to be sent and was not sent?

Well, there was a lot of emails directed to various people on like things related to Tim on the, uh, the NID reports, um, were not, uh, were not published ever before. And they all of a sudden they were posted a couple of days after the election. There was never delinquent reports posted before on that. So I don't know why they were posted now. I just thought things along with how the city handled all this would be considered in all this. It, it, it wasn't supposed to be a investigation just on what Mr. Coomer's tax or not tax is, uh, is, uh, what we call him at a, um, assessment was about. So.

okay um so let's see what other council members maybe have to say and see if we can get you some answers okay council member farm yeah i mean i i'll just i i'll agree with cliff i mean i think certainly there was a question that we had about this uh nid fee and things like that and i just like mr albers i was glad that we were able to get clarity on that i wish we could have gotten clarity on that much sooner um but i do think it was the intention of uh those of us that were at that meeting and you know asked for the special investigation to make sure that everything that was going on is what should have gone on so whether that was clarifying the answers around you know outstanding need fees and do they qualify as a tax and all those things great we got those answers there was also i think some questions about just making sure that the machinations of what the city was doing was done in an appropriate way there was questions about There was some type of legal action that was supposed to take place in terms of recouping NID fees that was put on hold seemingly for some reason. We never got a lot of clarity on a lot of those things. I think the intention of, at least it sounds like Cliff and myself, was that this was going to be a well-rounded look at this situation. I think that there was certainly a question as to whether or not uh need fees qualify as a tax we got that answer back which is great and so we don't have to worry about that um but i do think that we want to make sure that we're doing all of these things this whole process is played out in an appropriate way so um i was also a little bit confused why the report seemed like about 50 what we were asking but perhaps it's just cliff and i councilmember

yeah just a general clarification i guess um mr albers you mentioned uh some emails that were not forwarded what emails are those i'm not aware of any emails that were under discussion and remind me if i missed it well along the line um i know i thought mr galani's email would be forwarded as part of this that everybody got

And I think Mr. Farmers forwarded several emails to Mr. Lee concerning this. And Mr. Marshall, maybe? No? No, I don't know. But maybe those specifically there.

So I guess a further clarification I need is, did the special prosecutor answer the concerns that were brought up in the report? subject matter was matter of confusion. Were those issues addressed?

No. Okay. Also, there was some discussion on whether to publish the fees Mr. Coomer owed before the election, because I don't know if certain people making these decisions, but that would influence the election if they all of a sudden told the general public. that Mr. Coomer owed these fees, whereas it might have been detrimental to Mr. Coomer at that time, but it could have been detrimental to the other opponent by not publishing those specs. And a little off subject, if we get a bill over $5,000 on this, it definitely should be challenged because there was hardly anything for this person to look at. And, and, and, and if that was the only thing that was being looked at, I don't know if Mr. Young could have made a judgment on that even so.

And so council member Albers regarding the information with the NID, did you feel that the timing of that information, I'm sorry, I didn't hear that. The, did you feel the timing is your concern of when that information was put out?

Um, well, before the election, it wasn't put out. Correct. It wasn't made public until after the election.

That is correct. Yes. So you feel that it was...

It could have been detrimental to Mr. Coomer if it would have put out before the election.

Okay, so I think that the one thing I think it's important to keep in mind is that the code 125.150 states that no official shall use authority to interfere with an election and so i believe that the city was trying to act with integrity following the law maintaining neutrality during the election and ensuring that there would be transparency so um you know truly all aligned with upholding ethical standards but um if the timing is a concern that it most likely means that your concern is it would have influenced the election but that information was produced and it was produced right after the election

And that report has never been shared before, I don't think ever, right?

No, there's no law that dictates how to handle that report, whether you publish it or not. The only law is the one that says that no official shall use authority to interfere with an election.

Why was it published like three or four days after the election and for the first time ever?

Because the election was over. Okay. I think as you stated, if it would have been published in the election, during the election, it would have influenced the outcome.

Well, it was never published before or after when I ran for council against Mr. Queenup.

The books on the NID, I believe, were not ready to be closed when you were running, not to have City Administrator Lee speak to that part.

The NIT account itself was closed in 2024, going into 2025. I don't believe it would have covered that specific election.

Okay.

All right. Council Member Marshall.

I guess that's where I have a big concern. It's not about the outcome of whether it's legal or not. But we as a city decided in 2024 to close the NID. We paid it off early. And then in 2025, we said we were holding $400,000 of overpayments. We have to get the past debt collected in 2025. And we never put anything out until after the election in 2026. I just think we should do a lot better job than that. I remember how hard it was to get that NID put in the first time. And maybe Mr. Lee could tell us how many millions of dollars and how many people were involved in it. It was not easy. And the city went through a lot of hoops to try to get it all set up. And then we have those people that are overpaid. They're not getting anything. Maybe they can't. Maybe they should. But I don't think we have all the answers to answer how was that ended up being. And I get the part about the election. I just don't understand how we let it go that long without addressing it.

Well, in general, we did send out letters trying to collect that and collect the delinquent assessments back in 2025. We were still working with those residents to try to get them paid. We currently have four individuals that are delinquent, one that's challenging it on legal grounds in HOA with some additional parcels. So that leaves only three properties that were delinquent more than one year, which their refund would be practically cover the total amount that they would owe. In general, we 100% have the money ready to go and be able to return it to the individuals that have paid into the NID. One thing we are waiting for is confirmation from bond counsel on the equation on what to give back and make sure that it gets given back to the correct individuals accounting for the three that are still delinquent.

When should we expect to get that list?

That list should be coming. We're working on it right now, probably next month, the month after.

Thank you.

Anyone else have anything? Council Member Rambo.

Yeah, thank you. I didn't know much about this issue and our city attorney wasn't Uh, an ethics specialist and and didn't want to weigh in as heavily as we thought we needed. And so, um, from my perspective, this was a duly called city council meeting and I'm compelled to attend. It's my job. And so I showed up and the only thing that I said in the meeting was. A strong statement exactly as Mr. Albers. suggested and Mr. Farmer suggested we want this to be as far ranging as it needs to be to find out if the city has done anything wrong above and beyond what might or might not have occurred with the NID. And so I am as disappointed as Mr. Albers that we didn't go that far. And we got an answer to a very specific question. but we didn't get the answers to the questions that i thought we were going to ask and i'm on record as as requesting so i don't know where we go from here um but um but it it as i said it was disappointing uh councilmember bannock okay uh what my makes my head explode about this whole situation is i had a conversation with mr albers a couple weeks ago

I'm not sure if everybody knew. I'm sure a lot of people knew. I'm not sure if Mr. Kalani had direct knowledge. But a lot of people knew about this situation, Mr. Kummer, before the election. Why didn't Mr. Kalani get out there and campaign on this knowledge that you all should have provided him? But no, you waited. You waited. Why did you wait? I'm not sure why you waited. I'm thinking, Mr. Kalani is a good-looking guy, nice family, does a good job for his ward. He's going to win. He's absolutely going to win. There's no doubt. When I heard Mr. Comer won, my belt fell on the floor. You know how he won? It was because he got out, he knocked on doors, went face-to-face, he talked to his constituents, and he won based on that. Mr. Kalani? I don't think he put any work into it. Now that the results come out, now everybody's got an issue with Mr. Comer winning and something perhaps going on with Joe Garitano and Thomas Lee. I think it's a horrible, horrible situation. That's the word I'm looking for. It's just such a terrible situation. And I would like to hear a response from somebody on that. Councilmember Trottier.

Cliff, if you have a direct response to that, I'll let you go because mine is not straight forward.

First, I mean, I have no problem with Mr. Coomer winning. I ran against them. We'd been civil for as long as we've known each other. So I have no, this is nothing about the election in my mind. You know, I congratulated Tim. I think Mr. Galani congratulated to the day after also, correct, Tim?

That's correct.

Yeah, so... It's not about the election in my and it's, you know, if Mr. young, I don't if. Can I ask Mr. young did you make those decisions. Yourself, or is that collaborated with anybody else on the questions I asked originally.

Could you repeat the questions to this question?

Okay. Mr Lee said. He took your direction on what the send to the special. Was that your decision or was that collaborated with anybody else?

I was called based on the motion that was made. I think it's important to note the motion that was made at the special meeting. I've got it pulled up here. The motion was to, I've got it to seek special counsel to investigate the matter of confusion. That was the motion. That was passed. i was not at that meeting i only saw it on video so i was called in contact and said what should i what should we do and we discussed it and had a conversation about who's we mr mr lee and i had a conversation just you two he he called me and i discussed it with him i did not discuss it with anybody else okay he asked me we had a conversation about what should be sent that's the extent of it well um

There's still a lot of confusion, so it hasn't been settled, but I'll defer to the next council.

Yeah, I'm going to let council member Trottier speak, but I do want to interject. that I wasn't at that meeting, but when I saw the motion, I was confused by the motion that was made at that meeting. I mean, I think you got what you wanted. You asked for investigating a matter of confusion. So if you had some specific questions or specific emails, I think those should have been brought forward. But when you have such a vague motion, I mean, being a former Ward 8 council member, I got questions from Ward 8 people saying, what in the world is this about? And try to explain it to them. So I think it's, I think everybody is confused. But I think ultimately you got the answer that you wanted, which was investigate the matter of confusion for whatever that means. Council Member Trottier.

So I have three questions. First, related to cost, I assume, Mr. Lee, we haven't received any invoicing from the special counsel. We have not.

It should be on the lower end of the estimate, though. By 2015, it should be on the lower end.

Okay. And then looking forward, I do have a concern with the publication of individual resident names in agendas related to delinquencies on anything. and i i'm not sure if there's anything in the charter or missouri state statute but i think it's in the city's interest to keep personal identities out of our publications to the extent that we can um i'm not sure if that should be brought up in a particular committee or you know what action should be had on that but i do think that should be visited for future um can i answer that yeah we could refer that to administration public works or another committee we could talk about it for sure So I am on that committee, so I can bring that up at the next meeting with the chair to see if we can get that added to the agenda. The 3rd point in hearing the issues. Well, 1st, and foremost, I will state that. This special counsel session, the investigation by this. Ethical special counsel. drew a lot of media attention, not in a positive light for the city of Wildwood. I've had colleagues at work, my mother, none of these people live in the city of Wildwood and they're coming out and saying, what in the heck is going on in Wildwood? It does appear that questions may be outstanding and unanswered. As it relates to personal emails between individuals of the city, I think those can be obtained by any resident. And I would just encourage that that be the path taken as opposed to additional special meetings, special counsel. I just think we have to move forward positively, but I do think information to satisfy lingering issues can be obtained without dragging the city through this saga.

Okay, one more.

All right, council member Al.

Last 1, Mr mayor, I think you cause a lot of confusion in this whole matter too, by publicly. Supporting Mr on Facebook as. The person to be elected in Ward 8. And I think that talk about confusion. That added a lot of mess to the.

I'm done. Thank you. Okay. I will not speak to matters as a private citizen or as a non governmental authority because I was not acting in my government capacity, but I retained my 1st amendment right. And so, therefore, I believe that our residents should be entitled to their 1st amendment right to speak to whatever issue or in support of any candidate as long as they're not using their official capacity, which I did not. And I believe the council members and elected officials would also wish to retain their First Amendment right. So regarding that, I think that's even more obvious that I don't want to involve what personal opinions I have regarding the candidates. I respect the outcome of the election. And I believe that we do need to look in moving forward. I mean, we are elected to do the business for the city, for our residents. There were questions that were asked by this council and I respected that. I felt that those questions should be addressed by the special council. But the special council has reported and the media has reported as well on the outcome. that there are no ordinance violations by any of those candidates that were in the 2026 election. I feel bad for these candidates. Some of them were implicated when they had nothing to do with this, but it's time to move forward. It's time to stop wasting our resources and the money from our city for a matter that's now been addressed by the special counsel's report. So I think we just need to focus on the business of the city.

Yes, I think it's important to go back and take a look at the circumstances under which the special session was called to begin with. It was called with barely 24 hours notice to the entire council. And it quickly became apparent that neither with such short notice, neither the mayor nor the city attorney could be present at that meeting. Now, a lot of confusion over John Potter, Any communication or lack of communication or the right procedure to follow coming out of that special session could have been resolved. John Potter, If the meeting had been delayed and if the mayor had been able to attend and if the city attorney had been able to attend, but there was a hurry to have this meeting. the four organizers of this meeting decided not to delay the meeting, not to reschedule it to try to have the mayor and the city attorney present. So I think if there's still a matter of confusion, we should go back and take a look at the circumstances under which this special session was rushed.

I have council members Vanek, Hoomer, and Farmer.

Yeah, regarding the charges or the way it was constructed initially, I think it was purposely vague. It was an intentional vagueness to the construction of this whole thing. So that when the results came back, We could do exactly what we're doing now. Well, that's not what I was confused about. I was confused about something else. Well, he was confused about that. She was confused. It wasn't specific enough. then has specificity poorly constructed included people that were unnecessary and there should be apology by that group to those seven individuals that had nothing to do with Mr Kummer's situation that got wrapped up in this whole investigative process but we don't hear anything about any apologies because Councilmember Kummer

you wish to speak councilmember cumnor okay so councilmember farmer so a couple things mr vanik who were the people we're supposed to apologize to the seven individuals that were included in the investigation who are who is that there were eight individuals in the article that was that was uh written in the leader do you mean the seven candidates yes okay i'm one of them yeah i called the meeting should i apologize to myself probably probably mr young if you could help me out what is the proper procedure if a meeting is called and the city attorney is unavailable to attend

There is no established procedure.

There is no established procedure. So if you, let's say, were to get sick and couldn't come to a council meeting, what would happen?

Typically, I would try to have someone else from my office attend.

Okay. And I assume that you tried to do that with the special meeting?

I did, and no one was available.

No one was available. How many backup councils do we have on our contract with your firm in order to ensure that we have legal representation at a meeting when necessary?

There's not a specific number.

There isn't a specific number? There isn't a group of people that are listed?

There's not a group of people listed, no.

So how many people, how far down the line do we go before we either have to cancel a meeting or have it without legal representation? I'm just curious with your firm.

There's no reason to cancel a meeting if you don't have legal representation.

Well, we're being advised by several members that perhaps we should have.

And they're entitled to their opinion, but there's no legal basis for that.

Okay. And so if, correct me if I'm wrong, this meeting occurred several days before the council meeting that everyone that was elected was sworn in on, I believe. When would we have delayed it until? When would you have liked to do that?

All you would have to do is check the calendars of the mayor and the city attorney because there was no reason that you had to have that meeting prior to the upcoming council.

How many members are needed to have a special meeting? How many members do you think were available on the multiple days that we sent out? I do. It was nine on the day that we had it. So if we wouldn't have had it then, we wouldn't have had it at all. And so the whole point of this thing was to try to avoid this whole mess in the first place. I know because I was at the meeting and had a conversation afterwards exactly what was asked for. The matter of confusion was, one, whether or not a NID qualifies as a tax. Having read the report by the special counsel, it didn't seem like any remarkable legal gymnastics to get to. I'm not sure why our own city attorney couldn't have given that to us months ago. That's up to him. He has informed us several times he's not an expert on ethics, correct?

I've never said that.

You have said that. You said that in a meeting 100%, you said it.

All right, I think we ought to make sure we get the meeting back in order so we don't start impugning- I'm happy to get it back in order.

I'd like to finish my comment if that's all right. All right. Thank you. So the matter of confusion revolved around not Mr. Kummer, but whether or not This specific fee counted as a tax because as all of us up here know, the city of Wildwood doesn't really have a tax. So it's kind of a weird thing to put in our charter for something we don't generally have. So that was the specific question. And there were real questions about whether or not the city did anything wrong. i for one recall a conversation that we had about whether or what if anything the city should do to close out the nid when that time came and the instruction that was provided was to take any means necessary including foreclosure to close this out is that correct mr lee

We cannot in closed session minutes that we have for city council. We cannot find that. We went back and checked. You don't ever remember having that we did. I think it was a side comment, but there wasn't a direct motion listed. Just we, we had looked back on 2024 and 2025 all closed session minutes. So. point of information just what meeting are you referring to was it a meeting a council meeting a committee that's what was being referred to but that's i do believe it was mentioned though for sure that was meant which meeting uh just a point of information because i'm not following where this took i don't know exactly what meeting it was but it there was no motion that was listed on the the minutes itself for the city council at least but i do we do remember at least the staff that remembers does remember having a comment made

so the recollection then is that the comment was made and there was a pretty clear instruction to just do whatever we needed to do to close this thing out so that we could provide refunds to the citizens that were owed those refunds correct but i could seek clarification council member farmer point of information uh do you recall what meeting this place said it would have been mr marshall's got his hand up

I'm assuming it's the month before the letters were sent out to be final notification. So it would have been in June of 225. you're right 224. it wasn't closed June. It was finished the letters, which was attached that went to Mr. Coomer that was in June. So my assumption would be, and I, I also thought we had it in the meeting to say, yes, you've got approval to move forward and then follow that up a little bit later mayor with, uh, we had 400,000 dollars when we got to the budget. that we had to work around because we owed that money back, and that was in December, October.

So June 2025 is your recollection.

That would have been when that final direction came because that's what triggered the letters to go out.

Okay. But we didn't have any candidates on record at that time in June. We weren't talking about elections or anything like that. No, no, no.

So the real question is, As a council, we gave a directive to seek any legal means necessary, which I think is the appropriate thing because I, as I think everybody up here believes that the people that are owed these refunds should be able to get them. And so at some point in time, a decision was made to halt those efforts without telling any of us until well after the fact. And that is part of the confusion that went on too. So the question that was asked And if we don't want to look into it, we don't have to look into it. If people want to take other means to do it, whatever. But there are certain things that went on that I think are important for our citizens to understand this was going on in the background. This was a super weird situation. I think I said it several times. We don't normally have these types of nids. We don't normally have these types of issues. We didn't have any legal advice whatsoever, even though it was requested multiple times. I'm happy to share the emails that, John, you said went to your spam folder, which I find curious to begin with. So those are the questions that should have been asked. I had those conversations after that meeting. So it is a little bit, again, concerning. If there is confusion about what emotion means, maybe call the people that made it and ask them instead of interpreting something incorrectly, which is clearly what went on. Because I'm looking at the people at that meeting and everybody is nodding their heads that I think this was about 50% of a study. I'm hopeful that we could study the whole thing and everything would have come back and looked great. The fact that we didn't do it doesn't make me feel great. It makes me feel like, This is weird. I don't know why we keep going down this road. I am super excited that Mr. Kummer got, we got clarification on that. I told him when this came out, I was happy. I called him when he won. This is not at all some kind of a thing, vendetta against him. It's not. This is about making sure our city is doing things the right way. And there were considerable questions whether or not that was the case or not. And in my opinion, those questions still linger.

Okay, 1 of the point of information you had mentioned about the timing of the special meeting when I received the call from council member Marshall regarding the need for a special meeting. I had proposed also alternatives and mentioned Friday possibility, or even Monday before the council meeting. But my understanding is, is that there wasn't enough time to have that meeting at those dates that there needed to be more time between the meeting and the Monday night meeting. So, therefore, I mean, there were alternatives that were possible because it was held on a Thursday. Obviously, Friday would be an option. I believe would have been like, probably the same time. or even Monday before the council meeting when we knew we'd have everyone together. But I think the choice that folks wanted was to have it on that Thursday because that was the only time I had a conflict. So Council Member Marshall.

Just to clarify, Mr. Attenberg, the charter declares a special meeting is called by four council members. If the mayor doesn't want to, I called the mayor, he said he couldn't do it. The idea was, when's it available, and can we get nine people to come to a meet? So it wasn't a process of let's just throw it out there. It was the bare one that called. He said, no, then four members can do that. That's part of the charter. It's a 24 hour notice. So other meetings are 48 hours. That was 24. I'm surprised I heard so many people call and say, I got a call from council members telling me not to come to the meeting. That's kind of sad of people who said, well, I'm not coming. Well, I'm not coming for this reason. Your job as a counselor is to discuss this kind of stuff. And we needed to get it out there and we needed to get it as soon as possible. We got nine people, nine people showed up. So that's the reason. But the charter provides for four people, 24 hour notice and nine people to have an official meeting. Thank you.

all right um we have had a lot of discussion on this so we're kind of going back to the same folks so i'll go around and see if you have any other comments but otherwise um i think just one one question that has not been answered is this was common knowledge fairly common knowledge amongst a lot of the council members

Why didn't that information get Mr. Galani? Why didn't he campaign on it? Why didn't that happen if he had put in the the barest amount of effort, he would be sitting here right now. We wouldn't be having this argument.

I don't think that it's in the city's best position to assist or answer for campaigns.

Correct. Correct. But however, I'm sure Mr. Galani perhaps didn't know, was informed of this. He could have gotten out, knocked on some doors, gotten some votes and won. So that didn't happen. And now here we are pointing fingers at each other.

Council Member Ottenbring will go to Council Member Dodwell. All right. Well, I think Council Member Vanik also spoke more than twice. So I want to try to give folks an opportunity. Do you have anything else to add?

Well, just I appreciate Mr Marshall's reminder regarding what can be done to call a special session. I totally get that. I totally understand that for council members can indeed call a special session. But you also had the option when you found out that the mayor and the city attorney would not be available at that special session. To delay it to a future date now, it didn't have to be done before the city council meeting. Coming up on the following Monday, you could have had it after that. and kept checking dates until you found a date that would have worked for both the city attorney and the mayor and at least nine council members. Thank you.

I don't see council member Dodd. Well, go right ahead.

I'm a little disappointed that we are spending time pointing fingers back and forth at each other, especially those individuals that didn't attend the meeting, didn't participate in it and don't have a true sense of what was going on with it. It was a discussion among council members on how to move forward with questions that we had. The questions were sent towards the attorneys. So anybody who's asparaging anybody's reputation I think needs to stop right now. There's no reason for that. While we had questions regarding a potential candidate and his payment of city fees back to the city of Wildwood. That's a separate issue than what was discussed at the meeting. I was at the meeting and so I think we're bantering back and forth on specific things. Mr. Farmer made it very clear what the point of the meeting was. It'd be nice if we could all work together.

Thank you, Council Member Dodwell.

I don't think we have any more comments, so Council Member Rambo will certainly entertain your comment.

Everybody else has beaten this to death. Why not me? Yeah, that meeting was uncomfortable. I showed up out of a sense of responsibility, but I will say that One of the things that I was hoping to see from the report was process improvements. In other words, we had someone that that there was a question about his candidacy. Rightly or wrongly, we still have that question. And if another candidate in similar circumstances. files to run, it would be better to address it before the election happens so that everything's copacetic, everything's on the up and up. And we haven't done that. And that's one of the root causes of my disappointment in the whole process. So thanks.

Thank you, Council Member Rambo. All right. We've had a lot of lengthy discussion. I do see two hands. All right. I'm going to let you go, Council Member Mabry, and then Council Member Kummer. It seems like you have your hand up. Go ahead, Ed.

I don't intend to be last speaker to attempt to be considered most important, but I can't articulate any better than what those who had called the meeting, those four, which I was also, and I'll be proud that I called that meeting. I have absolutely no concept of how It could be perceived that I shouldn't have anything to apologize for. In fact, those four that called the meeting did so as the most expedient means of trying to get to the bottom of questions of confusion, which was caused by uh timing chronology decision making very peculiar absence of decision making and all those issues which which are what convinced me that we'd better have this meeting as quickly as expediently as completely as with quorumly as possible and not with all respect to everybody's busy schedules having a life it isn't well we can't meet Thursday let's try Friday morning well let's try Friday afternoon well let's try we can't do it Saturday we can do it we can do it Monday Monday morning well why don't we wait till it's too late and do it after swearing in where we've got a whole nother bag of bees to contend with The meeting had to have occurred as quickly as it could, not as late as it was too late. So there's been a real string of continuous convolution with this discussion, in my opinion. And it took all this time for me to collect all this to find that there are individuals who've spoken who aren't speaking of the issues that the meeting was called for. And the issues that the meeting was called for have not been answered. A very finely defined set of something was made a decision on, but it wasn't on all the aspects of the confusion that those four people that called the meeting and those nine people that attended the meeting have any right at all to participate in a conversation about. It's really about all. Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you. Council Member Compton.

Yeah, I just want to speak to the whole matter here and say that I feel that I am the exact person the city wants as a city council member. I've been coming to meetings for years. I've stared every one of you in the eye. I've talked on the topics that have to do with the city, and I fight for the residents. And this year, I learned that you could get a voter's roll, and I knocked on 370 doors and I canvassed everywhere in Ward 8. And many people asked me questions on different topics, and I answered them truthfully and went to the next door. And I can tell you that, to put it nicely, I'm super disappointed in my city and I am super disappointed in several of the council members that sit here because I can tell you that none of you have ever been in my position. I've been on the news, I've been in the post, I have been talked about amongst yourselves, good, bad, whatever. And when you do these things, they have repercussions. They have repercussions to people's health. You attacked my character. And I think it's wrong. And I don't want an apology from any of you. Any of you. And I can tell you that Mr. Garitano put that on his private Facebook page. I don't care. He told me he didn't. He was sorry if it upset me. I said, Joe, we've been friends a long time. I don't care. I don't need your endorsement. i felt so good about this election knocking on doors talking about the topics of the city and i can tell you wholeheartedly that if i thought i had done anything wrong i would have never run for this position i ran for this position to be a voice for the people of wildwood that i felt were being ignored for years in these meetings when i would come up here and talk And I don't know if that's why some of you wanted to have this special meeting to get rid of Tim Kummer. Tim Kummer's not going away. I'm a decades-long resident. I've watched this city develop. Some of it's good, some of it's bad, but you take the good with the bad. And I'm telling you, I'm here for the purpose of to do good for the city and that's a shame if you don't like me because that's very unfortunate because I feel I have a lot of citizens in Wildwood that like me so that's all I have all right uh we've had a lot of discussion it is my hope that we can

After seeing the report come through that we can move forward and focus on serving the citizens of the city. I think it was good to have a healthy discussion. But I think we need to get back to working on the issues that matter most to our residents. I don't have anyone else, so we're going to proceed with the rest of the agenda here. Anything else under for information. Yes, Council Member Marshall.

I guess, Mike, I thought the write-up was very interesting on Amendment 5, but that election is coming up within the next month. Do we have anybody, I know we don't have a state rep, we have plenty of candidates, but do we have a senator who would like to come and weigh in as to how this is good for the city, how this is good for the residents of Wildwood? I mean, I think there's so many, even after the write-up, there's nothing left but a whole bunch. Well, they might not change that. We all know that. They will change all of those things. But I thought the write-up was good, but I would just like to get more information, whether we could have him come to a meeting or give us – that's just my opinion, just a recommendation that we get more information on, because I think it's a big issue for the city long term.

Thank you for bringing that up council member Marshall. I just had a board meeting with the Missouri municipal league and there are still a lot of questions as to how this will affect cities. So we are not the only 1 that has those same kind of questions. And at this point meeting with the folks at Jefferson city, the legislator, the governor's office. I know that they're basically saying that there's things that they're still going to be figuring out along the way, which is. Perhaps not so assuring for us as a city, but I do think and you're absolutely right. We do not have a state rep at this time, but the state Senator, or at least we can get Jake Silverman who has been staying plugged in closely with this Jeff city to keep a surprise of what we can do to make sure that we're protecting our city going forward. so uh we'll make sure to see if we can send that invitation for senator gregory and uh and also i would say let's uh jake silverman come in as well okay thank you yep absolutely all right great thank you anyone anything else under for information all right we're going to move on uh so let's go to for action under planning and parks committee uh director voonage deaf interpreters at city events

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor and members of City Council, if you were not aware, for approximately five-plus years, the city has had, at many of its major events, including concerts and Celebrate Wildwood, American Sign Language interpreters. It was an idea that came from City Council via Ms. Clark when she represented Ward 1, and the response to the interpreters has been very positive. However, as you know, during the budget discussions in 2025 for this fiscal year, 2026, a number of items relative to Parks and Recreation were discussed and changed. And the direction City Council left the City Administrator and the Director of the Department with is to continue to find savings where possible. That led us to the interpreters. The Planning and Parks Committee considered it at its last meeting and resoundingly and unanimously supported retaining them at least through this year and reevaluate as we move into the budget year 2027. The recommendation before you tonight is to retain the interpreters for the remainder of 2026. And the department will respectfully request a motion and a second to accomplish such. Thank you.

Anyone, Councilmember Rambo?

Yes, I'd like to make that motion.

Is there a second on the motion? Second. We have Councilmember Donwell. Okay, second on the motion. Colleen, do you have that? Okay, all those in favor please say aye. Aye. Everyone opposed or abstain. Okay, moving along. Thank you. Item B, Administration Public Works Committee, consideration of a dedicated communication platform for elected officials.

thank you mayor and thank you members of the council wanted to provide a quick update this was brought forth to the administration public works committee last week and overall it stemmed from set up the setup process that we have for the most recent council members a council member had requested right now in order to have phone calls with residents it's currently set up in our phone system where residents can leave voice messages through our phone system and then council members get an email immediately upon that delivery of the message That said, one question was raised that, hey, you know, it would be better to have some type of dedicated line that would actually represent the council member that they could use either a personal device or we recently have procured some Lenovo tablets that would be going out to the full council, something that would allow them to use that device and have it all kind of in one place. the department took a look at the issue to see what it would possibly cost back when we reviewed this the last time some of the technology was out there for dedicated phone lines but it didn't necessarily cover the sms component so you weren't able to use it for texting and it was pretty costly back when we looked at it when we did the transition to our current phone system it was around six or seven thousand dollars to add those users that said the pricing has got a little bit more competitive we've we've found a couple different solutions out there one being the zoom phone and what that could offer would be almost a dedicated phone application or a tablet application that would allow each council member to have a dedicated phone line that would be published on the city website. So if someone called that phone number, it would directly go through that app, not necessarily to your device itself, but through the app to a device of your choice. And in that case too, it would allow council members to also call out with that dedicated line. So the good news here is that specifically with Zoom, when we were looking into it, they added a new feature that was of concern prior was that the compliance component, because right now, But something like our email communication, we're able to do something called discovery, which allows pretty in depth search for our database. 1 thing that they've onboarded is something called zoom compliance, which would practically take the same type of approach to what we have for email, but would record call logs would record any text messages that are done in the official capacity of the city. And we kind of keep it all in one place. So the question that the department brought to the committee was that, hey, would we want to look into this technology? I know budget's tight right now, but this is something that would really very much help with onboarding of new council members and also would have an ability to kind of remove the personal device completely from the council members' phone, considering that we'll have these Lenovo tablets as well. When we looked into it, the approximate cost per year is about $4,488. We think that is a conservative estimate. That's what's based off of the pricing available for the setup that we're talking about here tonight. But that could go up to around $5,000 to $5,500 just as a kind of a net. So tonight, the department wanted to ask the council, the committee had recommended moving forward with the exploration and potentially putting together a uh legislation approving the onboarding of it that said we wanted to ask the full council before doing a deeper dive into this whether or not we should proceed with the platform as such so department's available for any questions uh happy to answer happy to answer them now thank you that's remember donwell

I appreciate where we're headed with this. One question I would ask is in addition to pulling together the pricing for it, if we could pull together also an initial blush for the administrative and administration and public works committee, a proper usage protocol that would be what each of the council members follow. This is a city-owned piece of property and so it has to be treated as such, not a personal piece of property. So I think we can provide some guidelines to those who are going to be using it. Thank you.

Uh, with your permission here. Yep.

Uh, yes, that we actually think that would be a really good idea. And what we could do as well would be adding it into the, uh, also a proper outlook policy. So any city owned devices, but then also the proper use of city, uh, city applications, if you will, if there's a paid account associated with it. The department is requesting a motion tonight to go ahead and do a deeper dive, come back with some draft language for the policy and then cost.

Okay, my motion by Councilmember Dodwell will be a second by Councilmember Robleski. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed or abstain? Right, that motion passes. We do have several items remaining for the for information section and we are approaching the time for a regular meeting. So I will ask that we recess the work session and come back to it after the main meeting. So if there's no objection, we'll do that. And then we'll take a break. It's 628. So I'd like to ask if we can start around at 635, our main meeting. Thank you. Good evening, everyone, and welcome to our main city council meeting for Monday, June 8th at 635 PM. Welcome again to everyone here. I'd like to start with the roll call.

Council Member Garrett, excuse me, Mayor Garreton. Here. Council Member Wroblewski. Here. Council Member Trottier. Here. Council Member Ottenberg. Here. Council Member Farmer.

Here.

Council Member Means. Here. Council Member Bockert. Present. Council Member Kranz. Here. Here. Council Member Elvers. Here. Council Member Owen. Council Member Mabry.

Here.

Council Member Nyhan. Here. Council Member Dodwell. Here. Council Member Marshall.

Present.

Council Member Rambo.

Here.

Council Member Vanik.

Here.

Council Member Kummer.

here.

Thank you, everyone. If you can please stand and join me for the Pledge of Allegiance.

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

All right, moving along with the agenda, the approval of the minutes will be part of the consent agenda. We will now proceed into public participation. With public participation, when we call your name, please come forward to the podium and state your name and your ward number. If you do not know your ward, please state your address. We kindly ask that you keep your comments to 5 minutes and as you approach the 5 minutes, we will provide you with a warning. We ask that you be respectful in your comments and also avoid any disruptions, making any disruptions during your comments. So we'll proceed with public participation. Colleen, do you have the first speaker for us?

Michael Sherman wishes to speak about deer policy survey and archery hunting regulations.

Good evening, Mr. Mayor and council members. Obviously, you know who I am, Michael Sherman, Ward 1. And to talk similar to what Mr. Rambo had said earlier, I know this horse has been beat, but I do appreciate the opportunity to speak once again. I know most of what I'm going to say you have heard before, but we have a little bit different audience tonight and many residents, new residents here that haven't been in past meetings. Plus, we're going to have quite a few probably listening to this when it hits YouTube. We also have the survey, I believe, going out in the middle of the month. So I just wanted to make a few comments and just remind our citizens that the cities around us have been doing this using bow hunting, managing their deer for years, and in some case, decades, safely, and at no cost to the cities. It's the homeowner's choice. My group specifically has been doing it for over 20 years and has never had an accident or an insurance claim. There are several actions that we take to ensure the shots are safe and we recover our arrows and the deer. We also pride ourselves on the great relationships that we build with our homeowners and their neighbors, and we follow whatever requirements the individual homeowners have for us. Again, this is a free service for those homeowners, and they can choose to use it or not. Today, we have no options in Wildwood for people living on less than three acres. if the city would create archery only hunting regulations specific for those one to three acres it would expand the deer management opportunities but also give the homeowners an option if they choose to help solve the problem themselves without spending the city's money or creating liability for the city if you or the residents are concerned a wounded deer may run off the property being hunted then include regulations requiring homeowners or hunters to to notify their contiguous neighbors. By doing so, we can ensure the neighbors are informed. The survey as currently written shows an illustration of a football field being just over one acre. In a neighborhood of one acre lots, you should have at least four contiguous neighbors, and sometimes five to six. For my group, when I notify neighbors we will be hunting a property, I also ask for advance permission to retrieve deer. And that permission, not only to hunt but to retrieve deer, is renewed every year. Since I document these communications and responses, for the 2025 and 2026 hunting season, 88% of those who responded granted permission in advance to retrieve a deer. Even in cases where we received no initial response or permission was denied, we never had an issue recovering a deer by knocking on doors or calling first. My last point to make for hunting the one acre properties, if we've received permission to retrieve a deer from only two of those neighbors, although we are hunting on only one acre, we have now a recovery area that is at least three acres and is equal to the requirement that we currently have in place today. The last thing I want to talk about real quick is the drone survey. I fully support the drone survey. The city needs to know exactly how many deer we have and where are they dispersed. And I think that this will show there's a lot of deer in those one to three acres. I also think that the Missouri Department of Conservation is a little bit behind the times. I got some information from a place that I was looking at doing deer management for, a large place that's west of the city, and they said the MDC came out and did a drone survey of how many deer they had on the property. if you look at white buffalo's page today they are now strongly endorsing utilizing a drone survey to get an accurate and complete count of the deer it's much more accurate it's less intrusive on neighbors and it's proving to be the most effective used across the united states so again thank you for the time to speak and again if you have any questions i'm always happy to meet to help answer those and provide additional information thank you mr mayor thank you next speaker please

laura brown wishes to speak on requesting a second reading for bill 3067 good evening my name is laura brown and i'm the petitioner for bill number 3067 and i'm in ward one I would like to request two readings of that bill tonight, just to expedite recording the deed with the county. Thank you.

Okay, thank you. All right, moving on. Next speaker.

Terry Connolly wants to speak on the special counsel results.

Terry Connolly, Ward 2. Thank you, Mayor and Council. I really didn't come here tonight to say anything until I listened to all of you talk before the meeting. This has been a circus. I look at what other city residents, people from other cities are asking me about what's going on in Wildwood. The way this was brought after the election, I don't understand, Mr. Farmer. Ed Marshall, whoever was involved before. To the people of the city, this makes it look like you're looking for a favorite to get back in office. Now, you might not agree with me, but I see a lot of pride in this council. Some good pride, some bad pride. Bad pride for a council is not good. We've got people, all of you have been on the board, except I guess for Mr. Coomer and a couple of the new Mr. Means and the other, I can't remember what his name was, but if this happens again, the council needs to get their act together. This looks horrible. And they're talking about Mr. Coomer said that he didn't want an apology from anybody. I think there's several of you owe him an apology. That's just my thoughts. If you could give him an apology, it would say a lot about the character of who you are. This council, to me, works like our federal government. We are so far apart on things, it's not right. The way I usually say about the federal government, to me, it's like a bunch of children on recess. They're fighting. Just take this to thought. Try to do better for the city. Try to think about what you're saying, what you're doing. I'm a pretty straightforward person. If I've got something to say to somebody, I'll look in the eye and say, I don't like you, you, you, you, you. And I'm not saying that. But I don't go behind people's back. And I see that some of you don't have the gumption to confront each other. I know you try to do this in a way that keeps the council members civil. But you've got a requirement to the city residents. Get your act together. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Gary Weigert wishes to speak on income tax.

So my name is Gary Wiggert. I'm asking this council group to come out against the income tax vote we have coming up. First, I want to say the governor, I support what he's done on taking control of the St. Louis Police Department. I think that's a fantastic job. I like that his wife is in charge of the PAC for her health, her future, the pro-life PAC. But when it comes to this income tax, I believe the governor is wrong in eliminating it. The reason why I'm against eliminating the state income tax is because Missouri income tax raises eight to nine billion dollars a year, three-fifths of the state budget. The Missouri Constitution prohibits tax on services right now and the Hancock Amendment protects us taxpayers. Currently the Hancock Amendment requires a tax increase must be voted on by citizens The Missouri legislature wants to change the Constitution and prohibit voters for five years from voting on taxes replacing the $8 to $9 billion. Even though I want to go to the legislature, I do not trust the legislature when it comes to taxes. To compensate for loss of revenue, the Missouri legislature must triple the sales tax or tax services such as lawn care, car repair, medical providers, realtors, lawyers, et cetera. Retiree constituents, and I really learned this by going door to door, I've gone to about 3,000 doors, and they are all voicing their opinion against this. Retiree constituents on a fixed pension or social security know this is a transfer of tax burden on the elderly. Citizens know better what taxes to increase than the legislature. And the last thing I'd like to bring up is, right now I'm being accused of setting up some kind of website called WWW Nile something or other. I am not behind that. I don't know who is, but I think you should pay your taxes though. So thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker. Okay. We don't have any more speakers. Well, thank you for public participation. We're going to now move into mayor's announcements and appointments, and I'm going to come down for an appointment, a special appointment that we have tonight. Okay, well thank you very much. I wanted to come down because we have a unique opportunity tonight for an appointment for a member of the youth community here in Wildwood. So Colin, if you want to come forward here and you can join us here. um you've got a special story here that i want to share but colin is being appointed tonight as a member of the historic preservation commission with a unique role as a youth member on the commission and this is something that i'm really excited about that we're doing in our city where we're opening up opportunities for the youth to be involved in local government and reading your biography, I was truly impressed, so I want to share that biography with everyone here tonight. So Colin Knight will be entering the 12th grade at Eureka High School, but he's originally from Albuquerque, New Mexico, and you moved to Wildwood in the fifth grade. And you love Spanish politics and history and participate in Model UN and the Spanish Club. I also participate in the Model UN. So that's a great opportunity. I love that exposure. All right. Well, Colin has a particular passion for local government. and given its decisions most directly affecting people's lives. And so when asked about his ideas for community outreach and engagement, Colin proposed having the city host a Minecraft server and challenge. So we're going to have to learn more about that. I know a little bit about Minecraft. It's all those boxes. But it sounds like something very interesting here. So that this challenge can have community members reconstruct historic buildings while learning about their stories. And I love how you tied this in because I was reading further in your biography here. But you also have ideas for merchandise, specifically thinking Chromebook stickers that could be popular. and you proposed a social media campaign with tick tock videos and uh sounds like you're even ready to dance in them so wow i might join you in that all right so in in your application you wrote that although the city of wildwood wasn't officially created until fall of 1995 it's important to consider the enduring and long history of the city and having attended wildwood middle school you You said that you took the school bus to school every day, and on those sleepy mornings, you knew you were nearing the school when you turned left at the intersection between Manchester and Pond Road. So you were always intrigued by the buildings along the short road right before you started your day at school, like Sebao's Furniture Store and the cozy barn-like structures near the road. And you came to appreciate the calm, rural, and rustic nature of the strip. So it was truly impressive to read your biography. I love the energy, and I can see that you're going to contribute greatly to the Historic Preservation Commission. You have a wonderful group. I know Robin is very instrumental in the work that happens there with director and the rest of the staff. And of course, we have also several council members that are liaisons with the group. So we want to point you to this role and we're going to congratulate you. Let's give him a round of applause and congratulate. So. Now, since he's courageous about making TikTok videos, I'm going to give you the opportunity. Would you like to say something?

All right. He's good. He's ready to move up there. I know I didn't prepare anything to say, but all I would really like to say is I'm thankful for all of you here. It's really exciting to be able to just participate in city government. I'm at such a young age. You know, I do truly think that this is, you know, the most one of the most important. segments of government like i already said um it most directly affects people and i think history i love history so i unders i feel like i understand the importance of it and i see the beautiful history of wildwood and i think that it should be preserved you know to the best of our ability and so that's just kind of my goal you know do the best i can well congratulations again to you of your family here as well they

Oh, hello. Well, we're very fortunate to have him here. So we're looking forward to your contributions and thanks again. Okay.

All right.

Can I have a motion for the appointment of Mr. Colin Knight to the Historic Preservation Commission as a youth member? Councilmember Ottenberg, Councilmember Bakker, all those in favor please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed or abstained? All right, thank you. Congratulations again, your appointment is official. thank you all right moving on uh we're going to go uh into uh section uh let's see seven which is communications petitions so we do have uh two uh excuse me three items listed under public hearings and director voonage uh we'll have you come up and speak to those thank you mr mayor mr mayor with your permission i'd like the city clerk to read the first hearing into record

PZ04-26, City of Wildwood Planning and Zoning Commission, in care of the Department of Planning, City Hall, 16860 Main Street, Wildwood, Missouri, 63040, a request for the review and consideration of modifications to Chapter 415.030, Definitions, Chapter 415.090, NU Non-Urban Residence District, in chapters 415.110 and through 415.160, such being inclusive of all our districts of the City of Wildwood zoning ordinance, specifically regarding the city's existing review standards, processes, and requirements associated with outdoor game courts, sport court, along with their corresponding review processes by the Planning and Zoning Commission and subsequent permitting steps by the City.

Mr. Mayor and members of City Council, the Planning and Zoning Commission has provided for your consideration tonight its letter of recommendation regarding the matter just read into the record by the City Clerk. As you know, in 2013, the City was one of the first communities in the metropolitan area to adopt regulations relative to outdoor game courts. That set of regulations was premised on installation of these facilities and oftentimes causing problems for neighboring properties. The regulations have been successful for the most part. The reason for the needed change relates to two components, pickleball and the technology associated with these outdoor game carts today. pickleball has brought a whole list of new issues for neighbors particularly noise and the technology has expanded lighting and other areas allowing these facilities to be used in more inclement weather and at all times of day and night to keep pace the planning and zoning commission reviewed literature that was provided by Mr. Newberry our senior planner doing the research and we believe now that the proposed regulations actually keep pace and put us a little ahead of the curve so tonight after public comment there will be legislation under ready for action to proceed forward with first reading if there are any comments on the planning and zoning commission's letter of recommendation after public comment the department will be glad to try to answer them at this time thank you thank you we might have a comment there's a gentleman jeff krueger filled out a card he said he wants the he's a petitioner introduction he wants to state the request remains unchanged

And he didn't say what public hearing he was speaking to.

Okay. Maybe we can see clarification. Do you wish to speak related to this public hearing? Yes.

Okay. Okay. Oh, that's the next. Yes. Yeah. I'm so sorry. I'm sorry.

Okay. So then we will come back to him in just a moment here. So any other speakers and we do have Zoom. So if you are attending by Zoom and wish to speak, please use the raise hand feature.

it does not look like we have any speakers director voonage again mr mayor if there are any questions on the part of city council mr newberry and i'd be glad to try to answer them if not the department again would note that there is legislation prepared for tonight okay this is an opportunity that we have anyone that wishes to speak councilmember kranz yeah joe uh is there a certain lot size for sport coach for unfortunately no they are considered accessory uses in all of the our districts and the non-urban that's why the planning and zoning commission felt it imperative back in 2013 to establish requirements and now here in 2026 to make them better so uh sport court could be your backyard right It certainly can. And we've had a couple of instances where we've had half courts installed because of the area or size of lot. And we knew that regardless of the regulations we had in place would probably be problematic. And they have been. And those are the lessons we learned that went into the new regulations.

Okay, thanks.

You're welcome.

Thank you do we have anyone else Councilmember Dodd-Well and then Rambo Councilmember Dodd-Well please.

Just real quickly Joe under section four of the code pickleball activity item number D regarding the time of day. What's the top start time you've got in there that they can't go beyond 9am but the sun comes up at 5am this time of year you want them out there at 5am or.

Um, obviously we didn't put a start time. We thought more about people going to bed versus getting up. So, um, if there is a, if there is as the maker and second of the motion, um, or excuse me, when we get to the legislation, if there is an amendment to the legislation, that might be a good one.

Well, we don't let our trash service run through subdivisions before seven or seven 30 in the morning, I believe. So I think we ought to follow those same guidelines.

And I would add our land disturbance grading code says not before 7 a.m. Council Member Rambo.

Yeah, Joe, this is a quick one too. I lived next to a ball field for many years, and I always said that some of the kids having fun was never a problem for me. Pickleball's kind of in the same category if they're playing for a couple hours at a time and so on and so forth. But I could see somebody organizing a league and having play from... 9 a.m., 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. or something like that. And so my question is, would those impacts on surrounding folks be subject to our normal noise code? Do we have a dB or are we contemplating a decibel limitation or anything like that to strictly address the noise component?

Certainly, the noise code is the first line of defense. And the noise code, however, takes into account a continuous sound. over a period of 60 minutes and so the interruption of play yes kind of warts that application then it falls back to disturbance of the piece and then we're asking a police officer to make a judgment at the location and there may be kids playing and it's just a difficult role so what we're what i think the planning and zoning commission is attempting to do through the Department of Planning's assistance is to basically design things and put reasonable parameters around them so neither of those instances have to come into play.

Okay, it's only reasonable until you're the neighbor subject to 12 hours a day of hopping, I guess, but there's no way to do better. It sounds like you've looked into it and there's no way to improve the situation.

Yes, Mr. Newberry spent an extensive amount of time researching this, and we think we found a solution. It has to do with sound mitigation. It has to do with elevation of the court. Things along those lines where we know we can benefit from Wildwood's topography if we do this right and shield or muffle the sound more so than try to address it as an enforcement action.

But that still makes it subjective and not objective. And unfortunately, that may be the nature of the beast.

It is the nature of the beast like a lot of laws.

Thank you.

Do we have any other speakers?

Okay, Councilmember Farmer.

Yeah, I guess this may be a little bit along the lines of what Councilmember Ramberg was asking, but assuming that this goes through the way you guys are presenting, if there's a violation of some kind, is that a code violation or is it a police violation?

It's a code violation, so it would be under the auspices of the Department of Planning and Parks through our code enforcement team.

So I'm just, I mean, I'm just trying to think, like, I know obviously you guys aren't here like all night long. Some of you are here very early in the morning, but with some of these time provisions, I know we sometimes we run into problems where like you guys have to like physically see these things going on. So I'm just trying to think if there is some better way to make it so that. you know if hopefully very unlikely somebody decides they want to do this late into the evening how what is how do we do deal with that twofold first oftentimes when we do get a complaint about a code violation

We always ask the individual that's identifying the problem, would you be willing to be a witness? Some are, most aren't. So that's the first approach. If it's a continuous problem, would you come after we cite and speak to the problem? Secondly, Our best witnesses are police officers. So if there is a complaint, we're not asking the police officer necessarily to write a summons on peace disturbance. What we're asking them to do is to write a report saying, I arrived at this site at 5 a.m. and pickleball or basketball was being played. Police are great witnesses. They do it all the time and we depend on them.

All right. All right. Anyone else? Thank you. So, yes, sir. Council member Mayberry.

Thank you. Joe, this really. Thank you. Is a building permit required any place someone is found playing pickleball? It's a very simple question.

We require a zoning authorization and we do now require a county permit because there is certain components, particularly if lighting is involved. So we want to ensure that all components of our codes as well as building safety are applied.

And I didn't know a lot of this about pickleball until I read this report. It's got quite an extensive engineering study. Very, very aggressive attack rate, very short rescission rate, 900 pops, four times the sound pressure of tennis. That's quite a lot when tennis is as loud as it is to have sound pressure four times that amount. So any kids playing in the middle of the street for an hour and a half requires zoning approval or a building or a permit. That's important for me to know because that says a lot to how do we enforce these noise issues, noise pollution, and public nuisance, public whatever it's called, if it's not going to be an ordinance which is enforced by the police. Now you've got no enforcement because you're going to have to force somebody who's in the staff here. We don't have people sitting on a bench for an hour and a half waiting for a call to go enforce a pickleball concern. I'm just really seeing the ends aren't coming together to meet anywhere close to anything for me.

Well, a couple of points. First of all, a group of young men, young women playing basketball. For an extended period of time, we get complaints about that. And batting cages, aluminum bats and baseball. It's a ping that you can't miss. So it's not just pickleball. And what I would say is children playing in the street, we love it. Don't get run over, but we love you in the street. But Mr. Young, our city attorney, was very careful. We do not define an outdoor game court as a public street. So that is within the purview of the police. If they're creating a traffic concern or if they're placing themselves at risk, they handle that all the time. And we're dealing with it with e-bikes, electric scooters, and electric motorcycles right now. So I guess what I'm saying is the streets are intended for primarily getting people from point A to point B. Outdoor game courts are play facilities, and we're doing our best to allow kids to have fun in Wildwood, not obstruct their having fun. But we also know sometimes when you do those things, you impact a larger, larger group of people, and they're called your neighbors.

Thanks, Director.

All right. Anyone else? All right. So, uh, I guess if that concludes, uh, the comments, we can go ahead and close the public hearing. Can I get a motion to close, uh, the public hearing PZ 0 4 2 6. Maybe I can't remember Ottenberg. Is there a second on the motion? Maybe I can't remember Bockert. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Okay. We'll move on a second item. Director Voonage.

A recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding a communication dated April 14th, 2026 specifically related to PZ3-99 West County Community Church Fellowship of Wildwood that seeks amendments to the site-specific governing ordinance, thereby allowing the petitioner to retain two temporary structures for the purposes of their continued use for additional classroom spaces in association with current place of worship. The subject property is an approximately 30-acre tract of land that is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of State Route 100 and Mueller Road, locator number 23W410031, street address 17770 Mueller Road, NU Non-Urban Residence District with the Planned Residential Development Overlay District, PRD. The temporary structures are currently in place, is authorized by a variance granted by the City's Board of Adjustment, and being utilized for the aforementioned activities.

Director Voonage.

Mr. Mayor, first, this particular site is located in Ward 1. And Mr. Mayor and City Council, as was noted during the first hearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission has prepared for your consideration a recommendation relative to retaining two temporary modular classroom facilities that have been on a permanent foundation since their installation in 2022. Prior to their installation in that year, the Board of Adjustment was asked to consider an extension to the allowance for temporary structures in the city of Wildwood. The explanation provided by the place of worship, the leadership, was that Living Water Academy has seen a substantial growth in the number of students, and they are expanding the grades to accommodate demand. The variance granted by the Board of Adjustment was valid through 2027. And to the benefit and appreciation of the department, the leadership of Fellowship of Wildwood started talking about that 2027 date and their desire to keep the temporary facilities as permanent. the department would note that the planning and zoning commission endorsed such and that endorsement related to the fact that they are not visible from route 100 or any adjoining property the way the property was developed for the primary use the place of worship the classrooms sit well below the elevation of any of the road and any other property and the impact is truly limited to the property itself As with any classroom facility of a temporary nature, they were placed on a permanent foundation, inspected by St. Louis County, and then authorized by the city. The Planning and Zoning Commission endorsed the retention and believes it's in the best interest of the overall community and offering another option for educational purposes in the city of Wildwood. After public comment, the department will be available for any comments or questions, and thank you.

All right. Do we have any speakers?

Ann Young.

Hello. My name is Ann Young, and I'm a member of Ward 1. First off, I don't know if this is allowed. Am I allowed to share photos with you all?

You can hand those to the city clerk, and we can ask her to distribute those to the council.

Okay. I noticed in the letter sent to you all. There was not a single picture of any of the buildings, so I have provided actual images of the building for you. If we are allowing these to become permanent, then all of Wildwood needs to be considered in the future of this. One of my main concerns for the city has been affordable housing. I've even considered starting a company to combat these issues in other cities where I know I'm allowed to. I've never considered Wildwood because I know a mobile home community or a tiny home community would not be accepted by a lot of people. I've also considered storage units on some of the land further out from the city, and I also know that that would not be considered. There's a lot of guidelines about what is acceptable in the city, and temporary structures have never really been acceptable. So if by doing this, even though it can't be seen, are we actually willing to move towards accepting more areas where we can have temporary structures permanently? I think it's great that the church has had the opportunity to use their money to expand their congregational areas as they are currently doing. And that's maybe why they decided to not push faster on developing a more permanent structure for the school. I also understand that as a private school, the fluctuations in students is much greater and unpredictable than it is in a traditional space. And that's maybe why they are hesitant to develop a more permanent structure with additional classroom spaces, that the spaces may not be used in the future. But if the property has space for permanent structures, I believe you said 30 acres, they have the space. If we're not going to allow other types of temporary structures in our city, the use of temporary school structures as a permanent solution really needs to be vetted by more than just an email from a project management slash design firm. Also, if in the future there aren't being used as classrooms, where are they going to be used for? Are they going to sit there empty? Are they going to take them down? Another thought I've had is how long are these temporary structures realistically meant to be used? Just by the name alone, temporary, it brings to mind thoughts that you may have developing issues with other typical mobile home problems, and that occurs much faster than a permanent structure. And in 10 years, if these structures are starting to fall, is that something we're willing to have the students of our community learning in? I get that as a private school, most parents will vet the space their children will be learning in, and if there are problems, they're not going to stand for it, and they're not going to send their kids there. But is that not contributing to the problem of the fluctuation in students? I'm very curious to know if the school in any way has worked with professionals in future planning for both the school and both monetary and structural requirements. If the school continues to grow, are they going to need more spaces? Are we going to be back here talking about temporary structures again? I think the school is a great thing for the community to have, and I'd hate to see it go the way of St. Albans Private School, which has recently been closed. I know it seems simple and an easy choice to allow these to become permanent, but I don't think a lot of things have been considered in this simple decision by the city or by the church and the school. And I'd be remiss to say that we'd have, I'd be remiss if I didn't say that we have other concerns we would like to discuss with the leaders of the school that really aren't relevant to this necessarily, but are in a way. I do believe they are things we can settle between ourselves as community and that the church may simply not be aware of. Specifically, their pet raccoon. If this passes today without honest further future planning evaluation and evidence of that evaluation, I might be back with plans for a tiny home community citing this very specific variance as a reason, as an acknowledgement of your affordable housing issues and the city's willingness and openness in allowing such a variance in our community. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Jeff Krueger.

Good evening, Mayor and council members. My name is Jeff Krueger. I'm with Krueger Consulting and Engineering. And I'm appearing on behalf of Fellowship of Wildwood, which as we know is in Ward 1, as the petitioner of the original request. Before you is the same amendment that was reviewed by the Department of Planning and Zoning and subsequently recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission. on behalf of the church and myself i would like to make public a thank you to the staff and the planning and zoning commission for their work and the council's consideration of the matter i remain available this evening to answer any questions the council may have and i respectfully request approval of the amendment as presented thank you all right thank you do we have any other speakers

Okay, Director Boonage, please.

Thank you again, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor and members of City Council, first and foremost, the department wants to draw a distinction between homes and classrooms. Tonight, the proposal, the request, and the recommendation relates to two facilities that are used for classroom purposes. In terms of homes, the city does not prohibit pre-manufactured housing. It treats pre-manufactured housing the same as any other stick-built home, dwelling, residence, et cetera. Manufactured housing to be compliant with city code and building code is on a permanent foundation just as these classrooms are. Within town center and outside town center, the specifications for size of houses the construction of houses, et cetera, is all premised on the zoning. And so from the perspective of the city, a tiny house community could be in town center, where the lot sizes can be as small as 2,000 square feet, and in some instances, 1,500 square feet. Outside town center, it's a matter of the cost of land, but not certainly. Anything that prescribes house size relative to the zoning that is discrimination and has been ruled by almost every court in the land as not something a city can prescribe to so just to set the record straight what we're talking about tonight is two classroom for living water academy in terms of affordable housing and types of housing the city has been open to discussions on all of it the gambit from a to z in fact mr newberry and i have an ongoing conversation with a young lady that is trying to facilitate a tiny home community somewhere in town center the problem she faces is the cost of land and that's not an issue that necessarily the city can address at this time or any time unless the city attorney says we can so if there are any other questions relative to the commission's action or the comments made by the speaker the department will do its best to address them now do we have any members of the council here councilmember dodwell just real quickly joe the time frame for the usage

I didn't see in the documentation. Is this a two-year extension, a five-year extension, an in perpetuity extension?

It is in perpetuity. As is mentioned in the report the commission endorsed, I think what the place of worship, Fellowship Oahu, will find is that as Rockwood School District found. Temporary classroom facilities are not permanent facilities. They offer a different range of challenges. And eventually, the market will drive a solution other than these. This is, again, from the department's perspective, an interim solution.

Just one more question then. Does Green Pines still have their temporary buildings?

No, they actually stopped using them and actually offered them to the city at one point if we wanted something for our park property. And it's like, no thanks.

But they were there for probably a good 10 years.

Yes, as that peak in enrollment was happening and continuing, they had to do something. They're not great, but certainly, as you can see, these were purchased from the Francis Howell School District, as I recall, and are nice. Certainly, from the perspective, they've worked for the Fellowship of Wildwood for the past four years. I don't see anything changing, except that people will eventually say, why can't we be in the building?

Council Member Farmer and Council Member Krantz.

Yeah, I was actually going to mention the ones over at Green Pines, and I feel like they had one at Lafayette for a while, too. I think, I mean, certainly they're useful for a period of time. I vaguely remember, I think, when we were talking about having permanent ones put in here a couple years ago. I guess my question or my concern would be The ones at Green Pines were there for quite some time and then they weren't used. They basically held like hula hoops and stuff and they got pretty gross at the end. So I was happy to see those go when the school district decided to let them go. I'm just wondering if it makes, like, I'm just trying to, I guess, caution that, you know, if we're granting temporary places and then we're flipping it to sort of an endless thing does that create any issues for us or do we just say you know the likelihood lifespan for these is whatever it is 10 or 15 years and so at that point in time we probably need to take a look at what's going on because um I think that there was a considerable amount of expense if I remember when Green Pines took those out so there's an expense to get rid of them as much as there is to bring them in

mr farmer what i would say the blame falls on the department if there's not a review cycle associated with this or let's say a termination certainly that can be added to the ordinance and if the maker and second of a motion tonight to introduce the bill would like we can certainly consider that what i will tell you is is that if you visit fellowship of wildwood I've always found the facility, the grounds, the buildings to be in an immaculate shape. They care about the property. I would see a situation like what happened with Brockwood School District, not out of the realm, but certainly not probable.

The only reason I bring it up, I have honestly no concerns about the church whatsoever. It's more the precedent that it sets and the question that we get asked in the future rather than just saying, you know, we do these every, we have a lot of things where it's like, hey, we look, just look at this every five years and we figure that out. And I don't know if it's a good thing to put that process in place or not.

What I would say to City Council, if there is an agreement to move forward with the legislation and first reading tonight, we add something like that. Maybe not a termination date, but certainly a review date to make sure that the condition of the facilities, the two classrooms, has been maintained and that from the perspective, all health and safety components remain in place.

Great, thanks. All right, and I believe we had Councilmember Kranz. Go ahead, Councilmember Kranz.

uh so my understanding is that um temporary is permanent that is the request before you and the recommendation from the city's commission and we're just talking about classrooms just two classrooms although as you can see from the aerial that was on the screen for a while they're fairly good size so how long is temporary like mr farmer was alluding to

well i describe them as temporary because that's how they were purchased by the place of worship from this point forward if the ordinance is approved they are permanent so they will remain permanent as long as the place of worship would like to use them yes unless again we add some type of review clause on a period of time to ensure that they have not become the, let's say nuisance that Rockwood let their facilities become at Green Pines Elementary.

Okay, thank you.

Director Voonage, have you had or received any, or has the city found any code violations in the past regarding this property? I mean, I don't recall hearing anything come out of this area.

no i have not i would defer to mr newberry he also receives a number of calls over in the course of any given day nothing sir okay right anyone else

All right, we've had good discussion here. The portion of the public comment is already closed, but the public portion of it is when you come up to speak. So that is at this point where we are. So if there are any council members that have questions, please let me know. Council Member Albers.

So Green Pines became, well, correct? I guess we've stated after a certain amount of years.

Well, the school district stopped utilizing the temporary facility, secured it, and it stayed on the property for an extended period of time. And over time, it just wasn't cared for. the Department of Planning contacted then Dennis Griffith who is director of facilities for the school district and we started a dialogue that took a while to finally get them removed but we did get them removed well I would be in favor of some kind of review after is 10 years appropriate for this kind of building or Well, if there's concerns on the part of the City Council, I think five years in terms of a review cycle or even something shorter. It's really up to you all as a collective body if you think it needs to be on a time frame that sets at ease your concerns as well as the community around it. I would not recommend 10 years. I think that's too long. I think five years has been kind of the sweet spot, so to speak, for our telecommunications reviews and others. But I'll leave that up to your all's wisdom and discretion.

Okay. And we'll have this back later on the agenda. So there is time if anyone wishes to make that motion.

mr mayor if the individual that spoke during public comment has a question or has a suggestion they can certainly email me joe at the city of wildwood.com and i'll be glad to try to address it and forward that concern on to you at the next meeting in july okay great

Well, it doesn't look like we have anyone else that wishes to speak. So can we get a motion to close this public hearing item? Maybe I can't remember farmer 2nd by council member comer all those in favor. Please say, aye aye. They want to pose rip stain. All right this public hearing item is closed. We'll move on to the 3rd item.

Okay. Waiver request to the existing moratorium on demolitions of historic assets, 18312 Acorn Ridge Road, existing dwelling that is part of a residential lot to be removed to accommodate new construction. The building was constructed in 1900. Department of Planning is seeking authorization to prepare the appropriate legislation for the next City Council meeting.

Director Vinnich.

Again, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor and members of City Council, as you know, in January of this year, the City Council passed legislation precluding demolitions of historic assets listed on the city's inventory until the historic preservation plan is completed. that plan is near completion but however this particular application was received at the deadline in april and has been working its way through to you tonight the department is respectfully requesting authorization to proceed forward with the preparation of a resolution on this matter That resolution will be before you in July, and the Historic Preservation Commission will visit the property between now and then. If the Historic Preservation Commission basically recommends against the demolition, the city council will be advised at that july meeting and obviously the resolution then would be at risk otherwise the department would like to at least get them the the effort into motion so as the property owner can begin preparation for the new home that they would like to construct on the lot so again the department is respectfully requesting after public comment to be authorized to prepare legislation, a resolution in this case. After public comment, if there are any concerns or input from the city council, the department will be glad to try to address it. Thank you.

Thank you. Do we have any speakers?

Sheila Roberts.

Hello.

I am the owner of acorn ridge road 18312 so my request was kind of a not really that i want to tear down the property and build a new home but from the article in west news magazine um it indicated that and then when i came to the city hall that this new master plan for historic preservation could take until the end of the year. And I anticipate putting my property on the market and selling it. So I wanted to have a waiver in place in case a new buyer wanted to, it's a six acre parcel. So if they wanted to take down this existing property and then build something new, they would have that option. So they did look into that and it would be transferable. So I needed to meet the deadline to apply for it if this situation arises when the property is sold, because my intent is to sell it as land. The current house has this little 602 square foot portion. It has been added onto four times from what I can tell. So it's one tiny little portion of a larger structure. So that was my intent, to get this waiver so it would be in place when I list the property because I don't know when the preservation commission is going to finish their work. It could take until the end of the year. That's what I was trying to accomplish.

Okay, well, thank you very much for your comments. Director Voonage, you have anything else you wish to add?

Well, fortunately for the property owner, it appears now that we're in the hearing processes relative to the final draft of the plan. Historic Preservation Commission has adopted it in principle. It was at Planning and Zoning Commission at its June meeting just a week ago. for public hearing and it will be to city council sometime in July, no later than August. So it will not be the end of the year unless there is a problem that arises either at the commission level or here at city council. Again, from the department's perspective, what has been described in the inventory sheet that was done as part of the inventory, the survey, indicates that the house does have some issues. Certainly the property owner knows more than the department in this particular case. But again, if the property owner believes that by August she will have not listed the property for sale, then the resolution would just not be acted upon And the plan would be adopted and the insurance the property owner would like that the buyer would have the option to remove certainly would be in place. I would argue that if we do the inspection, the Historic Preservation Commission and they endorse it, that particular endorsement runs with the land, not with the owner. So again, it would be a benefit to the sale of the property as well. So... Again, tonight the department is still seeking direction and in this case authorization to prepare the resolution so as to facilitate what the property owner would like to achieve.

Great. Seeking a motion then, Director Meebich?

Yes, just to prepare the resolution for next meeting, and I will have more information at that time.

All right, Councilmember Donwell, do we have a second on the motion? Councilmember Mabry? Yes, question. We have a motion on the floor. Go ahead.

So you're recommending that we do the waiver, just for clarification?

I think the waiver is to the benefit of the property owner in that whether it's done by the plan approval and then the new owner has to come before and seek the authorization or.

So there's another step here.

Yeah, there is another step. And by the time we get back in July, hopefully we've either quelled the concerns of the property owner or we proceed forward. And it's just another item that they can offer at the same time.

So will the news be good for the property owner, you think? Yeah.

Based upon what I've read regarding the property and the description, Ms. Hopkins, excuse me, Ms. Roberts provided? I think yes.

All right, thanks.

All right, anyone else? All right, so we have that motion on the floor. Council Member Mabry? Thank you.

Ms. Brunage? I love it if I'm the only one who's confused, but I am having second the motion for a waiver. The property owner, I surmise, considers the option of legally offering the property with the offensive structure torn down so it could be free land. saves the buyer the same 30 to 50 000 to tear the same offensive building down in order to have a clean slate is that anywhere close and they just want that built-in option actually i think the property owner is hoping to have the waiver in hand and give the choice to the new owner retain it restore it reuse it or demolish it okay as the city T. Wade in on what the value of this. T. structure is as a city asset, so that we know whether we're writing off a potential asset for the city. T. For the sole benefit of a seller of the property, who has no longer any vested interest in the property once they stolen and we've got.

Well, again, I believe Ms. Roberts is just trying to facilitate the next step if the new owner would like to proceed with the demolition, not necessarily complete the task herself. What I will tell you is a small portion of the existing building was constructed in 1900. And as we know from past visits to other properties where the asset has been added onto and onto and onto, the asset suffers over the course of time, and what was there that may have been historic and worth consideration is no longer the structure it was because of the add-ons.

Understandable. From the last two or even three site tours that the Historic Preservation Commission attended, There's very little aesthetics or historical significance of what's left over after a residence has been tacked onto and modernized numerous times. So that helps.

And again, what I will advise the commission and mayor is that the Historic Preservation Commission has to authorize the demolition if the resolution is going to be recommended for favorable action in July.

And the waiver that's issued come with a strongly worded caveat that The the final authorization by the Commission is not a rubber stamp and they're all likelihood they're going to do all they can to figure out what value of any this asset can have if protected once it's torn down and some new builder has a clean footprint to build on that asset gone for ever.

Mr. Ray, what I would say is it's not necessary because the commission needs to visit the location before the department would support the adoption of the resolution authorizing the demolition.

Can we wait to conduct a site tour before a waiver is issued, too?

Well, certainly, if you do not conduct the site tour because of conflicts in schedules, weather, whatever the circumstance may be, the resolution would then be postponed If it's on the July agenda, if you don't want it on the July agenda, we could set it for August and see what gets done first, the plan or the resolution.

So you're talking, it sounds like you're proposing a July site tour of this property.

Actually, I'm proposing a June site tour. That's the only way the resolution can proceed.

Well, thank you. That sure has helped.

All right, we have that motion on the floor. It doesn't look like we have any more discussion. So all those, do we need to have the motion repeated or is everyone aware of it? Okay. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed or abstain? All right, that passes. All right, that concludes all of the, well, we do need to close the public hearing out so uh we will close that public hearing out uh can we get a motion to close council member marshall seconded by council member nine all those in favor please say aye aye Okay, that public hearing is closed. We're going to move into all business under legislation. We have 3 items. Normally I would suggest we read some items in mass, but it looks like these 2 of them are quite significant. So we will do each of these individually since they're only 3. I will start with Bill 3059. Can I get a motion for a 2nd reading of Bill 3059 concerning Ward 5? Made by Councilmember Bockert. Is there a second? Councilmember Means, was that a second? Okay, so all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All right, Colleen, please go ahead and read Bill 3059.

Bill 3059, an ordinance of the City of Wildwood approving a record plat, trust indentures, general warranty deed, and a deposit agreement with associated letters of credit, which guarantee the required subdivision improvements for a 30-lot residential development that is to be located on attractive land in the northwest quarter of Section 1 and part of the northeast quarter of Section 2, Township 44 North, Range 3 East, of the Fifth Principal Meridian, City of Wildwood, St. Louis County, Missouri, and more specifically situated on the northeast corner of the intersection of State Route 100 and State Route 109, hereafter to be known as Point at Brightleaf Subdivision.

Director Voonage, do you have anything you wish to add?

Mr. Mayor, the bill remains unchanged from its introduction at the May meeting. Again, this is the Fisher-Fichtel project at the property located on the northeast corner of State Route 100 and State Route 109. I will advise the city council that over the course of the last couple of months, while preparatory grading has been underway for the installation of utilities and future street sidewalks and trails, the rains have created some issues. The department, I should say the departments, public works and planning have tried to address those issues as best as possible. Today's rain, again, prompted another email from some of the property owners in Village E, which is the village closest to the new project, and there is a basin in Village E. What it was described to me by our code inspector, Frank Wafflin, is that the area is covered with siltation control devices. The area where the water drains, and it is brown water, it is not mud it is not anything other than water that's discolored by crossing the disturbed site is the access point that they have to have and so we have been thwarted in trying to figure out how to let people in and out of the site while holding water from these torrential rains so we've advised fisher frictal of the problem um if there is restoration that will that is necessary of that basin in the villages at brightleaf we will make sure it gets done and so that's the commitment of the department to the city council other than that the plat the deposit agreement the trust indentures and the general warranty are in appropriate form for final action tonight thank you uh we have this uh bill on the floor is there any discussion on the matter

All right, seeing none, please call the roll for final passage calling. Thank you.

Council member blue ski. Yes. That's a member. Yes. Council member. Yes. Council member farmer. Yes. Council member means yes. Council member. Yes. That's a member. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes.

Council Member Nyhan. Yes. Council Member Dodwell. Yes. Council Member Marshall.

Yes.

Council Member Rambo. Yes. Council Member Vannick. Yes. Council Member Kummer.

Yes.

All right. Bill passes. We'll move on to the second item under legislation, Bill 3061, before the Council concerning all wards. Is there a motion for the second reading of Bill 3061? Made by Councilmember Ottenberg. Is there a second? Made by Councilmember Donwell. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Okay. Colleen, please read Bill 3061.

Bill 3061, an ordinance of the City of Wildwood, Missouri, revising the budget for the City of Wildwood, Missouri, for the fiscal year commencing on January 1, 2025, and ending on December 31, 2025.

City Administrator Lee, do you have anything you wish to add? Yes, thank you, Mayor. Available for any questions tonight. But this budget amendment we need to put together to finish the audit that's going to be presented in July of 26 in good standing. And also just a quick couple updates. A COUPLE NOTES ON THE REVENUE THAT CAME IN LAST YEAR. WE ACTUALLY SAW THAT SALES TAX REVENUE WAS UP JUST A BIT THAN ANTICIPATED, AND WE'RE SEEING THAT COME IN PRETTY STEADY FOR THIS YEAR AS WELL, KEEPING UP AND BEING A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN WHAT WAS ANTICIPATED. PUBLIC SAFETY SALES TAX WAS RIGHT ON CUE, AND THEN ALSO THE UTILITY TAX ACTUALLY WAS THE LARGEST, HAD THE LARGEST SPREAD OF ALMOST $250,000 MORE THAN WHAT WAS ANTICIPATED. That said, it does seem with some of the rising prices towards the end of the year last year, we saw a little bit of a larger increase in a variance more than what we anticipated. So wanted to point that out does seem as long as there's no modifications to the sales tax structure or the taxing structure, that it does seem like we are kind of absorbing the some of the cost increases that we've seen from our contractors. And then a note on the contracted expense, the majority of those drivers are coming from the fact that we had six mobilization efforts last year for snow removal. That was one of the largest efforts that we've had in the most number of days in the city's history, which also we had to refill our salt wares because they were depleted. Then a quick two other notes. Park maintenance included also with right-of-way tree removal and right-of-way tree trimming. Those were pretty large drivers due to the two tornadoes that came in. One in March, an EF2, and then also the one that came in in June as well, late May. Both of those caused extensive damage. We also had almost two-thirds of the properties out of service at one time or another for the March storm. which took a pretty long, conservative effort. So those typically don't happen, which is good news for us, because then we can usually take in the revenue increases and not have to deal with the large storm events. But other than that, those were the major items that wanted to be pointed out tonight. But after this, we will have the auditors, Ruben Brown, coming in for a presentation in July to go through the annual comprehensive financial report. We're getting close to completing that now.

Thank you. Great, thank you. Anyone have any questions for City Administrator Lee? All right, seeing none, then Colleen, please call the roll for final passage of Bill 3061.

Councilmember Trottier?

Yes.

Council Member Ottenberg. Yes. Council Member Farmer. Yes. Council Member Means. Yes. Council Member Bockert. Yes. Council Member Kranz. Yes. Council Member Albers. Yes. Council Member Mabry. Yes. Council Member Nyhan. Yes. Council Member Dodwell. Yes. Council Member Marshall. Yes. Council Member Rambo. Yes. Council Member Vanik. Yes. Council Member Kummer.

Yes.

Council Member Wroblewski. Yes.

great thank you uh moving on to bill 3062 also concerning all wards can i get a motion for the second reading of bill 3062 made by council member ottenberg is there a second made by council member nyan all those in favor please say aye aye you want to pose or abstain all right colleen please read bill 3062.

Bill 3062, an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Wildwood, Missouri, authorizing changes to the Wildwood Zoning Ordinance, specifically Chapter 415-030, definitions by the addition of 11 descriptions and by adding new requirements to Chapter 415.210-M-3, Planned Industrial District Regulations, section e 9 and section f 1 items a through f all of which are to address information technology and data processing facility commonly known as data centers and their locations operating parameters and design components within this community In association with the industrial area of the city's master plan. Such being consistent with the action of the planning and zoning commission set forth in this letter. Recommendation on the matter that is dated April 6. 2026.

Okay, thank you. Right. The room age please.

Thank you Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor and members of City Council, as the title explains, these are regulations relating to data centers. For the most part, over the last several months, if not longer, you could not turn on a television news program, look at a magazine, a newspaper, or post without hearing about data centers. The key components of this particular set of regulations is that it defines what a information technology and data processing facility is. It limits the location of them to the industrial area of Wildwood, which is the Wildwood portion of the Chesterfield Valley. It makes data centers, conditional use permits in a planned zoning district, the M3, which for lack of a better way to describe it is we have a pair of britches and we're putting a belt and suspenders on it to make sure we get it right. And the performance standards are reasonable relative to protecting residents and the environment if they were to locate in the industrial area of Baldwin. The bill has not been changed since its introduction at the May meeting. And if there are any questions, I would be glad to try to answer them along with John Young, our city attorney, and Mr. Dewberry, our senior planner. Thank you.

Any questions for Director Lunage? If not, I'll ask a question. Oh, Councilmember Dotwell, please.

Just a comment. Thank you very much for the team that put together the information and the fact that they are requiring the current building standards, light sky standards and that the city will not be bearing any cost or any utility usage that the entity itself has to bear those costs and any water retention, depletion activities. So thank you very much to the crew that put all this together.

You're very welcome. I commend Mr. Young and his team. They helped a great deal, as well as Mr. Newberry's research. And I like to think that other communities are getting wise. A lot of them are saying now, don't come if you don't bring your own water and power.

Being an IT person, I'm glad to see these things in there.

Yeah. Thank you Council Member Dodwell. I do have a question and I know this is a question that we came across when we ran into the uses for marijuana cultivation, sale of, and this might be appropriate for the city attorney. I know that sometimes folks have asked the question, why not just ban them outright? And I'd like to see, make sure that we have a good understanding of what the state or what What is or isn't allowed?

Yeah, quite simply, the city doesn't have the legal authority to ban them outright. So the regulation is the appropriate approach.

All right. Anything else, Director Boonage?

No, just again, thank you all for your support. We appreciate it.

All right. Seeing no other hands up, we'll need to do a roll call again. And Colleen, thanks for honoring the request to keep along where we start.

Council Member Ottenberg. Yes. Council Member Farmer. Yes. Council Member Means. Yes. Council Member Bockert. Yes. Councilmember Kranz? Yes. Councilmember Albers? Yes. Councilmember Mabry? Yes. Councilmember Mannion? Yes. Councilmember Dodwell? Yes. Councilmember Marshall? Yes. Councilmember Rambo? Yes. Councilmember Vanik? Yes. Councilmember Kummer? Yes. Councilmember Wroblewski? Yes. Councilmember Trottier?

Yes, great. Thank you. We're going to move on to new business and in this case, I will recommend unless there is any objection by the council that we read in mass all the items listed under legislation. Again, I'll seek if there's any objection and I do know we have a request for a 2nd reading of bill 3067, which we can address after the 1st reading. So, any objection if we read in mass these bills. All right, seeing none, can we get a motion for the first reading of bills 3063, 3064, 3065, 3066, and 3067? Made by Councilmember Ottenberg, seconded by Councilmember Trottier. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed or abstained? All right, Colleen, go ahead and read those bills.

Bill 3063, an ordinance of the City of Wildwood, Missouri, authorizing the mayor to execute a certain purchase agreement with the trustees of Hickory Manor Village D for the purchase of certain real estate at 16550 Pond Grover Parkway. Bill 3064, an ordinance of the City of Wildwood, Missouri, authorizing the mayor to negotiate and execute a consultant services agreement with SC Engineering LLC, Doing Businesses Cochran, to provide construction engineering services for the Green Pines Park Shared Use Path Project. bill 3065 an ordinance of the city council of the city of wildwood missouri authorizing the mayor to execute the attached amended city contractor agreement and associated materials with chariot creek excavating llc for the reassembly of the essen long cabin within the phase one area of the village green site which reflect a group of change orders totaling twenty seven thousand four hundred and seventeen dollars and eighty nine cents bill 3066 an ordinance of the city council of the city of wildwood missouri that hereby authorizes a modification to chapter 235 article 2 park and recreation of the wildwood code of municipal ordinances by deleting section 235.040 item D, consumption of alcoholic beverages and replacing with a new section 235.040 item D, consumption of alcoholic beverages, which could thereby allow greater flexibility for such activity relative only to city sponsored and permitted events held therein. bill 3067 an ordinance of the city council of the city of wildwood approving a lot split plat which will create two legal lots of record from the parent tract of land that was part of a lot split plat of parcel a-1 and parcel a-2 of la chateau de chambard a subdivision recorded in plat book 235 page 891 of St. Louis County Records, and being situated on the west side of West Bridal Trail, south of Manchester Road, historic Route 66, hereafter to be known as La Chateau de Chambard Adjusted Flat.

Thank you very much for reading all these bills here for the first time. We commend you for having read so many here. Do we have anyone, either Director Boonage or Director Brown or a city administrator that wish to have anything else to add?

Mayor, I apologize. I don't have anything to add, but if there are any questions relative to 3063 or 3064, I'm happy to do my best to answer them.

Anyone have any questions for Director Voonage? All right, Council Member Palmer.

Yeah, it may have been in there. I might have missed it, Joe. I apologize if I did. But when it comes to the cabin, where are we on the total for the money we are spending in there? Like how much more capacity do we have?

The latest assessment of invoices indicate that we're approximately $20,000 away from meeting the cap. That was part of the ordinance that was approved. Now, saying that, that doesn't necessarily include several of the items that have been identified on the change order.

I meant for the whole park, not just the cab. I'm sorry. Because the cabin counts towards the park, right?

Well, the last time I did the math in my head, I forgot to add the cabin. So I don't know if you want me to do that. Tom, any thoughts on your part? I can see his wheels turning, so I'm going to defer to him.

Yeah, I had this number one second. I can pull the exact figure for you, Mr. Farmer.

And if I may, with the mayor's permission, there is a list as part of the bill indicating what Charette Creek Excavating has requested. The additional grading and new path split rail, that ultimately will hopefully be paid by the credit that we'll get from Bombshell Construction. They have asked that they not be required to proceed forward and we're willing to credit that amount to the city. a couple of the items the department did not endorse they knew that they were being the work was being done but it was not advised that it would exceed what was originally budgeted as part of the city contractor agreement you may ask them why is the full amount shown in the proposed bill At this stage, the negotiations between Charette Creek excavating the architect of record have not proceeded to the point where I feel that I could make those adjustments. What I'm asking of the city council eventually is to endorse it. I promise you we won't go to that maximum amount, but I'd like to get work back started or started back.

If you don't have it right now, Tom, I'm just wondering, I'm just thinking it might be a good thing whenever next month or something where we can say, here's how much we can spend on the park. Here's how much we have spent on the park. Cause there's like a lot of moving pieces and we got other stuff that we have coming in. So just so everybody knows where we're at and what capacity we have left.

We can have that, uh, with the, with the request from the council, we can have that on the work session. But when we did the last time we went in and actually got the report for each year, and we did the calculation, it was around for, it was a little bit less than 4.5Million that 3.5 has turned into 4.5. Um, and we still had roughly about. Don't quote me on this, but I'll have this back, about $600,000 in cushion after all the expenditures.

And that includes the part?

Yeah, after you take out the $575,000, because it's only city fee expenditure. So after you take out the $575,000 we have towards Phase 1 and the $575,000 for Phase 2, that's where we get that number. If we didn't have those grants, that would be a different story.

It just might be a good idea to try to lay that out as clearly as possible, because there's...

it's a big number and there's a lot of pieces of brown certainly okay anyone else have anything for director voonage um and i apologize to the clerk and mayor garitano Typically, I try to identify bills that the department has been asked to consider for second reading, like in the case of miss brown I also forgot to identify the one that relates to the park and trail regulations and alcohol sales. With the concert being on June 19 and the lines club using that as a major fundraiser. The department inadvertently didn't identify it on the list to Ms. Lobeck, and my apologies, but the department would respectfully request consideration of a second reading of Bill 3066. And my apologies, Mr. Mayor.

Okay, thank you. We'll certainly ask the council in just a moment here. Anything else before we move on? Do you have anything else you wish to add or?

Mr. Brown, I just wanted to clarify, don't we need, we're the department requesting two readings on, okay, nevermind then. In that case, mayor, no further.

Okay, so therefore we did complete the 1st reading and now we do have a request for a 2nd reading bills. 3066 and 3067 if there's no objection, I will. Recommend reread these bills and mass any objection to reading them in mass. all right so can i get a motion for the second reading of bills three zero six six and three zero six seven made by member farmer seconded by council member bacher all those in favor please say aye aye aye and an opposer abstain recalling can you please read uh both of these bills

Bill 3066, an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Wildwood, Missouri, that hereby authorizes a modification to Chapter 235, Article 2, Park and Recreation of the Wildwood Code of Municipal Ordinances by deleting Section 235.040, Item D, consumption of alcoholic beverages, and replacing with a new Section 235.040, Item D, consumption of alcoholic beverages, which would thereby allow greater flexibility for such activity relative only to city-sponsored and permitted events held therein. Bill 3067, an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Wildwood approving a lot split plat, which will create two legal lots of record from the parent tract of land that was part of a lot split plat of parcel A-1 and parcel A-2 of La Chateau de Chambard, a subdivision recorded in plat book 355 page 891 of st louis county records and being situated on the west side of west bridal trail south of manchester road historic right 66 hereafter to be known as la la chateau de chambard adjusted platte thank you colleen

Oh, yeah. All right. Thanks for coming back up, Director Moonidge. Assuming you just spoke to these, so I don't know if you have anything else you have to add.

any questions i'll be glad to try to answer them in english okay we have the bills on the floor for discussion anything else all right seeing none then colleen can you please do the roll call council member farmer yes council member means yes council member boggart yes council member kranz yes council member albers yes council member mabry yes council member nyan yes council member dodwell yes council member marshall yes council member rambo we Council member Vanek? Yes. Council member Kummer? Yes. Council member Wroblewski? Yes. Council member Trottier? Yes. Council member Ottenberg?

Yes.

Okay, both of these bills have passed. We'll move on to the next portion of the agenda, which is under appeals. Director Moonage.

Mr. Mayor, with your permission, if Ms. Klobeck would just read in a couple of items off that list, and I'll have a very brief explanation.

Planning and zoning hearing of appeal. Caption is luxury villas at Latitude N38 in care of Latitude N38 LLC. 11605 Stud Avenue, Suite 102, St. Louis, Missouri, 63141. Case numbers PZ10-25 and 11-25. Property owner Latitude N38 LLC and applicant Latitude N38 LLC.

during the lunage please go right ahead mr mayor and members of city council as you may recall the planning and zoning commission recommended denial of this tandem request relative to the approximately eight acre tract of land located on the southeast corner of crestview drive future main street netherton road An appeal was filed by the owners of property to that action, asking City Council to review. The matter relative to the application was determined to meet the requirements of the code. relative the information and citations. Tonight, the department is respectfully requesting that the city council set the hearing date for the September meeting of this group.

All right. So you're seeking a motion or yeah, a motion for a hearing. And I would assume you'd recommend the next council meeting or actually September, September. Oh, September. Sorry. I missed that. Okay. So if there are anyone that wishes to make a motion for, as the director recommended in September, um, for the September city council meeting made by council member Mabry, is there a second on that motion made by council member Albers, uh, All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. One oppose or abstain. All right, that date is set. Thank you. Thank you, Director Moonage. Okay, so moving on. First readings from hearings with favorable city recommendation. We have before us two bills here. And again, I'll see if there's any objection to read these en masse for the first readings for bills 3068 and 3069. Okay. Seeing no objection, can I get a motion for the first reading of Bill 3068 concerning all wards and Bill 3069 concerning Ward 1 made by Councilmember Kummer, the second made by Councilmember Farmer. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Anyone oppose or abstain? All right, please go ahead and read the bill.

Bill 3068, an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Wildwood, Missouri, authorizing certain modifications to Chapter 415.030 Definitions, Chapter 415.090 NU Non-Urban Residence District, and Chapters 415, point one one zero through four one five point one six zero such being inclusive of all our districts of the city of wildwood zoning ordinance specifically regarding the city's review standards processes and requirements associated with outdoor game courts sport court along with their corresponding permitting steps that are administered by the Planning and Zoning Commission, with such being in accordance with the Planning and Zoning Commission's letter of recommendation on these matters dated May 4th, 2026, PZ04-26, City of Wildwood Planning and Zoning Commission. Bill 3069, an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Wildwood, Missouri, authorizing a permanent... excuse me authorizing an amendment to an existing planned residential development overlay district prd ordinance number 522 which would allow the petitioners to retain two temporary structures for the purpose of their continued use for additional classroom spaces in association with current place of worship which is situated on an approximately 30 acre tract of land that is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of State Route 100 and Mueller Road, with such being in accordance with the Planning and Zoning Commission's letter of recommendation on this matter, dated May 6, 2026.

Thank you. We have these two bills on the floor. Director Goonidge, is there anything else you wish to add?

Mr. Mayor and members of City Council, with the assistance of Mr. Young, Bill 3069 was discussed at length during the public hearing about adding a review clause and a term associated with that review clause. Is the amendment appropriate now or second reading?

Okay. Yeah. According to Robert's rules, that would have to be done at the second reading. Yeah. So that would be next month.

Thank you both. Okay. And if there are any questions, the department would be glad to answer them at this time.

All right. So do we have any questions? okay we'll see none then uh these bills will be back at the next council meeting for second reading all right uh we'll move forward through into the agenda we do have uh no resolutions although they would be part of the consent agenda we'll move into the consent agenda if there's no objection for approval of the consent agenda can i get a motion for approval of the consent agenda maybe a council member farmer seconded by council member kranz all those in favor please say aye Aye. Anyone opposed, abstain. All right, we'll move on to miscellaneous. If there's anybody that wishes to speak, otherwise we'll seek a motion for adjournment. Anybody, what's that, Council Member Bogert? I'm seconded by Council Member Kranz. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. You want to pose or abstain. All right. That concludes our main meeting. We do need to return back to the work session. I will kindly ask if we can just take a momentary break and then we'll resume. So it is about 8, 11. We'll try to see if we can get everybody ready in about five minutes. Thank you. Everyone, let's slowly get back to our seats here. Okay, we are going to resume the work session where we left off. All right, so back to the work session where we left off, we're moving under for action B, administration and public works committee, which is 1 considering. No, is that the item there?

Yeah. Where is it? Hang on.

And then 2, so I'll be 2.

Yep. We didn't do this. We are. Okay.

All right, archery, hunting regulations and deer management policy survey. All right director sorry city administratively go right ahead.

Thank you mayor and thank you members of the city council wanted to provide an update here tonight. And in front of you is the full report along with. A couple versions of the survey. One, and I'll just go through this real quickly here. For version one, which would be exhibit B, we marked the pages individually as well to ensure some continuity because they do look similar. Exhibit B was the original draft that was brought to the Administration and Public Works Committee. That draft survey did not have feedback from the committee at that time, and also an important thing to distinguish as well is that it didn't have the initial feedback we received from the Missouri Department of Conservation as well, which was only one pointed note. There's also the draft survey instrument version two, which is Exhibit C, THIS ACTUALLY GOES AND SHOWS THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE TO THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT, LINE ITEM BY LINE ITEM, SO COUNCILMEMBERS CAN SEE THOSE CHANGES IN REAL TIME. AND THEN VERSION 2, THE CLEAN EDITION, EXHIBIT D SHOWS THOSE CHANGES INCORPORATED IN A FINAL FORM. TO KIND OF BRING THIS BACK A BIT, WE ARE CURRENTLY ON A a little bit of a tighter timeline than we'd want, just given the fact that Professor Nanes, he's out, the University of Chicago is currently out of school at this time. So his perfect window of being able to have max participation and be able to complete the scope of services that he's provided to us is gonna be best served if we can meet the timeline here provided. And then also really kind of focusing in on June, so the rest of this month, July and August. So one item here wanted to go through before we jump into the survey itself, the proposed timeline. We had talked about this relatively a couple weeks ago at the last meeting, but this is somewhat the final proposed timeline. So, Professor names has been helping us already this week, but then pending council approval tonight, and the council can provide some direct input. If changes need to be made in that case, we would plan to have this survey distributed to random households within Wildwood. By next week, so it is a little tight. Then the survey response period would be open for approximately 1 month. We would send 1 follow up letter about 2 weeks after to help direct more individuals to take the survey. We did remove the mail in the paper copy survey that you would mail back in. Now it would be all digital to allow. little bit more flexibility with the review of the the analysis and then last but not least we would have it closed around July 15th and then professor names would review that that data and then come back and have a report submitted to us by latest August 7th we believe it would be a little bit sooner than that the plan would be to have that final report ready to go and and then submit it to the full city council for presentation at the August 11th meeting. That said, Professor Naines is unavailable that day, so there's a couple different options. He can come at a future meeting, which could be the September meeting for follow-up questions, He could also put together a video, or if there was a different time, we could schedule something, more of a special meeting to discuss the analysis. So I wanted to point that out. Professor Nanes, a quick note on the expenditure here. I have it not to exceed $7,500 due to the paper and the printing cost that it's going to take. But overall, Professor Nanes, his agreement here is covering $4,120 for his portion of the work. So now I will go ahead and jump into the, I'll make this a little bit simpler. So when you go to exhibit B, which is the original draft survey instrument, that was what was presented to the Administration and Public Works Committee to kind of separate the two different sides of feedback. We did get some direct input from the Missouri Department of Conservation. And they had 1 specific note, they thought it was it read well that it was easy to understand, which was 1 of the goals for the department. But in general, the 1 item they wanted to ensure was that there was a note about them preferring distance sampling surveys as their preferred method. They have not officially switched over. They do think. Drone surveys are extremely helpful, but as of right now, their department's viewpoint, at least for the entirety of their organization, is more so that they are still relying on the distance sampling. So that is added under Section 4. There is a new section added, State Wildlife Agency Guidance, and it has just a little note of the feedback that they provided. So that covers all of MDC's feedback into the full survey. Other than that, they said it looked good to go. The other changes that were made, and I'll just go through this really quickly from the committee's feedback, is as follows. There were a couple different items that were brought up. So first and foremost, in the introductory section, which seemed to get the most changes to it, had the most changes to it, there needed to be a statement clarifying what amending the city code would do with regard to direct costs by local bow hunters or in general, some type of information about the cost. There also needed to be a item there explaining why do you have to address deer in the first place? So looking at the recruitment rates was mentioned at the meeting. So we did add a note there. Disclaimer, talking about Really, this has been included in all our communications about our deer management program, but something that just reaffirms that private property owners have this as an option. But nonetheless, anything that the city does does not give someone unauthorized access to their property. So that was added in as a notation. And then there was also a. Item in there included that just talked a little bit more about the distance sampling component as discussed by. So, other than that. Going into the actual questions, there was 1 big change. We talked about this the last council meeting, but the question section 2 question 2 that asks about what's the best approach and it really asked the direct question we're looking at tonight and through the survey. Should we change down from 3 to 1 acre? There was a option that originally had said reduced to 1 acre and allow parcel aggregation. The committee discussed this, and there wasn't an official motion, but. The idea was that the council isn't necessarily considering lowering it to 1 acre and providing for parcel aggregation. So there was a request to remove that option in its entirety. So I wanted to make sure to call that out because that would be removed. And then. The department did look at the back end of the survey technology, and there was a question about having to keep the 3 acre minimum as the 1st answer choice for that question. In this case, that was then we can randomize the answer choices. So every person that gets the survey and takes it will actually see a random assortment of answers and it won't be in any direct direct order. Other than that, there was a request from council from the committee to include a rough number. We didn't have a direct quote for doing the section. We're going down to section 4 now. There was a question about including what our anticipated costs would be for a drone survey. We do not have that exact estimate in hand, but the committee had agreed to put an approximate number about 50 to $60,000. Then last but not least, there was also one last item. Section 3, question 4, there was a request to have also the submission of proof and notification of residents along the property line. So that was added as an additional option for that question as well. Other than that, there weren't all too many changes. The survey was shortened to be a little bit more digestible for the resident populace. And the idea tonight is to get the council's feedback, but also hopefully without too many changes, we can actually have those changes read out tonight so that we can incorporate them directly and then begin working on the production and the random sampling. Departments available for any questions, but if we wanted to go through this, we certainly could 1 at 1 at a time.

Thank you. Thank you council member council member.

This is an easy one to help. I don't know if I ever asked, how does the random distribution of this work? Is it like a computer-generated thing?

Yes. So Professor Names would handle that component, but it is a computer model. So to give a little bit of a peek under the hood, we would provide to Professor Nanes a pretty much an Excel spreadsheet that includes every single address within Wildwood along with the ward that it's in and the approximate size with acreage per St. Louis County data. And what we would do there is he would pretty much take it and run with it. He would come back with, here is the list of addresses that need to be mailed to survey, and the city wouldn't be involved with anything further than that. But we do have that list of properties that actually have a parcel that has a parcel that has a structure built onto it, meaning it's the same list we use for our Gazette. It means someone will actually get that survey. It's not going to be delivered to just a parcel that has no building. Thank you.

I did see council member Kranz and then we'll come back to council member Dodwell yeah Mr. Lee at the committee meeting I thought we we said that the drone survey is what we wanted to do and then I see the contact with the department of conservation says well wait no we think distance sampling who proceeds thermal drone survey. So you changed it. So I'm just wondering why you would change it if the committee recommended the drone survey. And I want to follow up a little bit because Mr. Sherman just said that the state's a little behind in their technology. They are using drone surveys. White Buffalo is using drone surveys. And the cities are using drone surveys. So why would we change to distance sampling? And do you really think the public will understand what distance sampling is?

Well, just a quick note on the addition first thing to your second question. It was added and it's something the council here with their request could be easily removed. That's why we have it in its own separate box so that it's literally it's feedback from MDC. But MDC did state that that's their recommendation for inclusion. They got a copy of the survey and said, hey, we would recommend adding this notation in there.

But you're making it the choice of Wildwood. That is my problem when the committee said drone survey.

Well, in this case, though, the question still does ask the resident what their preferred method would be.

Yeah, but I don't want it to say it's a supplemental. The drone study should not say supplemental. The way you wrote it up on, well, you don't have the page numbered, but.

It is section four before question five. Yep. Travis can get it up there on the screen.

So all I'm saying, Tom, is that terminal drone survey I don't think you need to mention distant sampling unless you want to really explain it to the public that it really doesn't get an accurate count because you can't go through all the properties because landowners don't allow us to do it. And that when you kill your deer, you want to get an accurate number so you don't kill too many when people say deer are not showing up anymore. So to me, a drone survey is accurate. It gives you the count of your deer. And that's it.

Um, anyone else that, uh. We have here, we have council member Marshall, and then we'll come back to council member God.

Well, yeah, I like the introduction part, but I'm a little bit surprised. After these 2 or 3 years, we've actually seen a reduction in car accidents, which is 1 of the primary reasons we want to do it. But we mentioned the accidents, but we don't mention the dollar amount of those accidents. the police report them so they're not like they're getting you know a bumper scratch these are deer that were reported you know the ones they have are reported being killed in order to do that so we have this big reduction but we want to talk about how much we spent I think our preliminary numbers that year just in, now this would be money saved to the insured residents of Wildwood if they are residents. They say $400,000 in car accidents in that third year of doing that. So if we want to talk about that, I just think that we have the accidents. I think some way it would be appropriate to put what an average deer hit with an automobile cost. And with that kind of reduction, that's a lot of savings for people.

if that was if that's the council's will then we can definitely have that added in it it's kind of written so it could eat we can kind of include some of these notations in there if it's the request of the council council member dodwell is that did you say you were how do you get that detailed under

the introduction section where we have how many incidents were reduced by each year and the size statement in that area.

AAA had a number of what they said.

So I just want to make sure everybody's heard Council Member Dodd-Well. We have some side conversations that I just want to make sure we're pausing here. So Council Member Dodd-Well, your motion, please. If you don't mind restating it.

I agree that on the introduction section, As you scroll down and you see the NE1 area where calling operations were completed, collisions declined over time. In that section where it says 71 incidents down to 54 incidents down to 43 incidents, that next to it, since we don't want to take any more space that we put that's a x amount of dollars in cost reduction for residents who may have had an accident just so we can sell what we're doing here a little bit gentlemen and ladies all right so councilmember mr uh yeah i'm sorry we're trying to get this around what we'll say but

okay well we do need a second for that motion so is there anyone that wishes to make a second that'd be the second so council member mabry so we do have this motion on the floor now so the discussion's on the motion here um council member france just in all fairness with

auto accidents. What this is about is opening more land up for hunting. If you open more land up for hunting, your accidents are going to increase more. So I'm not sure where you're going to get the information about what the cost is. I don't mind.

I'm looking at trying to explain to our residents the expense that we made for the prior deer culling events.

We have saved money. The first year of accidents was flat, wasn't it? So you're going to explain that as well?

Yeah. All right. So just a moment and again, we want to make sure everybody has a chance to speak. I had a couple of people talking at the same time here. So just Councilmember Kranz, did you finish what you had to say? And then Councilmember Dodwell.

Okay. Do I have to make a motion on that drone survey? Well, there's a motion right now. Okay. That's a question.

Yeah. So if you wish, you can make an amendment, or if you want to wait and see what this motion turns out to be like, you can do that.

Okay.

Councilmember Dodwell, I know you were saying something. Do you want to follow up, or are you okay with that?

I just would like to move forward with a motion that we put those details in the introduction section. So our residents know that with the past activities the city has done, we have reduced our risk of car accidents so that they understand that their tax dollars are being spent wisely.

Got it. So we do have that motion on the floor. Anyone else that council member tried here related to the motion?

It is related to the motion, but it's related to the matter at large. I think I'm in the middle of both parties at this point. We are wasting a lot of time evaluating this, and I think we're going to end up in a spot where we're not going to get white buffalo or the bow hunters at this next season. This survey should very simply be about expanding property available to bow hunters. In my opinion, I think there's a reality where we're going to have to rely on white buffalo in some areas and we can rely on bow hunters and others. This is a great survey. I'm glad that we did it thoroughly. I think it misses the mark, which the intention here was do residents want to reduce the property size available or bow hunters to do their thing should the property owner give their permission. So I do agree with, you know, we could add all these numbers and economics, but I don't know that that's, we're not trying to paint a picture that archery is better than white buffalo or vice versa. So the numbers are irrelevant. I think quite simply, do people want properties open sub three acres, yes or no? then oh last point to the drone survey i believe that city council's decision to figure out how to survey the deer i'm not sure that we want to get into explaining that the resident maybe we can explain our why we chose what we did but i'm not sure that this survey hits you know the intent of what we're setting out to do thank you for that uh again related to the motion council member marshall

I totally agree. I think we're asking questions that people could answer and yet it's still going to come back. The council is going to have to vote on changing any of this stuff. So if the survey came and comes back and this number of people said we should do it, that doesn't mean the council is going to agree to doing that either. So, I mean, it's a long process. And I kind of think, as Matt's saying, is there's a lot of detail here, and we've been going on it for months, and I think it's somewhat confusing. I don't think the people that at least I represent, not many of them, know what a drone survey is. I mean, I just think we're asking technology questions that will come down, and do we want to spend $80,000 for drone surveys? If it comes back, that's good, but I don't think we need to spend all the time trying to get people to vote one way or the other. I'd make it.

Okay. uh council member rambo again related to the motion yo

what we wanna do is count the deer. And I agree with the notion that we have many folks out there that don't know what a drone survey is or distance sampling is because we have council members that don't know the difference and we've been talking about it for six months. And so it doesn't make any sense to ask folks who have daily lives and don't care about deer hunting questions about the technology. So I agree with those comments completely. We should leave that off and figure out how we're going to count them separately because, you know, we had the arguments about distance sampling. I do not understand haploid's arguments. but we can do it the most cost effective way that gets the job done. And we shouldn't muddy the waters by asking the question.

All right. Thank you. Council Member Kranz.

Let's just take it out of there. I agree. Take drone out of the survey and we can decide on our own.

uh when the time comes so the motion on the floor is made by council member dodwell which i believe is unrelated to the drone piece that's related to a cost figure so so either so just just a moment i i just want to make sure we everybody's clear the motion on the floor uh made by council member dodwell um it's basically summarized as related to a cost figure uh exactly savings so that is it so that's what we can address that question first and then come back with a second motion related to drone unless you want to tie this all together um but well okay so let's so it doesn't seem like anyone wants to make an amendment we'll address it separately Councilmember Trottier

With Councilmember Dodd-Well's permission, I'd like to amend your motion. I think we need to get rid of all of this. And so that way, there's no numbers. There's no white buffalo numbers. There's no incident numbers. And this is quite simply, do the residents that we're going to poll want one acre, whatever the metric is? But this is for acreage to be hunted on, plain and simple.

and so the regulation obviously that yeah the portion about if they go less than three acres the regulations tied to that are important i believe this advertisement and the introduction that's all information that's available on the website okay i think our residents deserve a half page summary that we put here on why we're doing it that's that's the only reason we requested it through the committee is so that they understood what we've done so far and why we're doing more.

I don't know. I'm okay with that. So would you be okay with amending your motion to include the summary? That's fine. And strip everything else out of this except for acreage and regulations. So we can do this.

Everything else out of the survey questions or?

Yes.

No, I think we still need to keep the survey questions. The additional information and meat that's added in here, maybe we could ditch that so that it's simple questions, but it's only, what, five simple questions?

Okay, so Councilmember Trottier, I think what your intent is, is basically to undo the motion that's on the floor. So, in that case, the proper way would just be to vote on this motion on the floor. And if it fails, obviously, then you could make another motion after that. But it just seems like that would be counter to what we have. So, again, the motion on the floor was made by Councilmember Donwell to include some of the cost figures. So that's the main question we're addressing right now. And that's just in the intro, right?

Just in the intro.

That is correct. Yes. So given that it looks like we may have various opinions, it's probably just best if we do a roll call vote.

Council Member Farmer?

Yes.

Council Member Means? Yes. Council Member Bockert?

No.

Council Member Kranz? No. Council Member Albers? No. Council Member Mabry?

Yes.

Council Member Nyhan? Yes. Councilmember Dodwell? Yes. Councilmember Marshall? Yes. Councilmember Rambo? Yes. Councilmember VanEck? No. Councilmember Kummer? No. Councilmember Wroblewski? No. Councilmember Trottier?

No.

Councilmember Ottenberg?

No.

Do you have the total? I think I know. Yeah. Okay, so it is a no. All right, so now we're back if we want to entertain another motion. Council Member Trottier did intend to want to make another motion, but if that's okay, go ahead if you want to make that motion now.

So getting back to the intent of what the survey is trying to achieve, it's trying to achieve whether or not residents want to reduce the acreage size that's allowed to be hunted on in the city of Loudwood and the regulations related to that. I think that this is a fantastic proposal, but it could be stripped down. So I think section one should be kept. Section two should be kept.

section three should be kept section four i would remove section four and i would keep this as simple as possible all right so that is your motion then um just to colleen did you get that all right so basically motion to remove section four a second made by council member Bacher. All right, so we have this motion on the floor now. May I ask a question about it? Yes, now we are entertained related to the motion.

So, Matt, then you want to have a separate endeavor to decide how we count the deer, right? It's just the council, right? We don't advertise it to anybody. The council will later decide how we go about counting the deer. Okay, I'm good.

All right, anyone else have any questions related to the motion on the floor? Okay, Colleen, probably best we do another roll call just to get clarity.

Council Member Means? Yes. Council Member Fokker? Yes, it was, yes.

Okay, so if you don't mind yet, could you start over again?

Council Member Means. Yes. Council Member Bockert. Yes. Council Member Kranz. Yes. Council Member Albers. Yes. Council Member Mabry. Yes. Council Member Nyhan. Yes. Council Member Dodwell. Yes. Council Member Marshall. Yes. Council Member Rambo. Yes. Council Member Vanek. Yes. Council Member Kummer. Yes. Council Member Wroblewski. Yes. Council Member Trottier. Yes. Council Member Ottenberg. Yes. Council Member Farmer.

yes all right so that is a yes all right so uh back to uh the floor again uh anyone else that wishes to make any motion related to this item here all right uh city administrator mr farmer had his hand up oh sorry about that council member comer do you want to speak okay go ahead do you oh do we all right council member farmer

yeah i i just had a question on um i think if i remember right when i listened to the meeting um there was a at one point we had in here whether we wanted to do you know reduce it to three reduce it to one acre make now we have in here make it three acres but you can aggregate that kind of property i'm just going to suggest again because there's a massive number of parcels that don't qualify for this, that if we're going to spend the money to ask these questions, we should probably ask them the whole range. Do you want to keep it at three? Do you want to reduce it to one? Do you want to make it aggregating? I know that adds a level of explaining, but I mean, there are a lot of the city that regardless of if we move this to one acre or not, it doesn't change a whole lot. So I think that, I mean, that seems to be where the most of our residents live is in less than one acre, if I remember correctly. and to confirm so that would be adding back in that last uh answer choice this would be question two travis if you don't mind scrolling i'm just saying like because we we asked for three and then i and then it's like or change it to one or do we want to have i guess three one acres or however many available to go to three i i mean i i'm i'm with matt i would much prefer this to be as simple as we can make it but i do think that you know if i remember right that's something like 9,000 houses in the red area that I don't know that people realize that that's what that is. That's a lot of people.

Council Member Bacher, did you want to?

Yeah, I just have a point of information. What do we expect to net people-wise? What's a typical survey in Wildwood? How many people responded?

We typically well, for this, it's a little different because we're going to use random sampling, but the idea would be to have about 1200 individuals included in the survey and then the hope would be to see approximately 40 to 50% response rate. So, roughly 5 to 600 people.

I think that's pretty high. Yeah.

Okay. Any other questions?

Council Member Vanik. For Mr. Lee, if we... Council Member Vanik. Thank you. For Mr. Lee, if we went to one acre, how many additional... Do you have a figure offhand that you could tell us how many additional properties that would include?

Yes, so we did the math on this using county parcel data. We have percentages. I'd have to, I could grab the actual number of parcels, but it broke down to the as follows. 88.4% of the city's landmass includes 3 acres or more lots, which that also includes Babler and our other Rockwood range, et cetera. And then 4.2% consists of parcels between one to three acres. And then 7.4% consists of parcels less than one acre. So we could most definitely provide the total number of parcels. I remember it was about 16, a little bit over, less than 2,000 for one to three. Less than one was over 7,000. And I believe the over three acres was really not that much. I would have to quote the numbers back.

I think if we did both the green and the red, it was like 11,000 total. That's that's correct. So it was like, I think it was like 1900 was the green and the rest was the red.

Okay, else that wishes to speak. All right. Anything else?

So really, other than that, so what we have tonight as of right now, because I know Mr farmer did mention possibly going back to that question, but we are not including the dollar figure tied to the car accident number. And then also we are removing section 4 and its entirety if. The question tonight, though, is this survey in good enough form to move forward? If not, then we can most definitely still work on it. But the plan was to have this most likely mailed out by the 15th. Maybe sometime next week was the plan. So, if the council is comfortable, the department would be requesting a motion given the input here tonight to move forward with the draft provided with the notes by the council.

Sure, I'll make that motion. so we got a motion on the floor everyone clear on the motion any discussion yes yes can you restate your motion uh council member farmer do you want to restate it oh yeah so just to uh to proceed with the notes as mr lee was just laying out so dropping out section uh four um we voted to not change the stuff in the um intro and then i i suggested just because we're going to ask these people to add in the additional aggregation questions just so we have them because i i think my suggestion would be if we if it comes back and we decide to drop this to one acre then the next inevitable question is how do we like do we are we going to include other people so we should probably i would think get that information but that's just me

And just for clarity, because I think we already addressed item section for right prior section.

This is in section.

2, and then also, so what and correct me if I'm wrong, Mr farmer, but what I believe Mr farmers trying to communicate is that the clean copy, the revised clean copy is approved other than removing section 4 in its entirety. And then also going back to question to.

Yeah, so what I'm saying is Exhibit D, which is our Draft survey instrument version two clean is how it is defined. So we've already said we're basically going to go with the intro as it is written. So no update there. We voted to take out section four. And then the last piece would be, I'm just suggesting, I can't remember the number, the question number I'll find here real quick. Wherever we talk about the parcel size, I would just add in the aggregation question all the way through. And then I don't know that we have to talk about this anymore, but that's just me.

All right, so we do have a motion on the floor. Don't see any other discussion. So let's try voice vote. All those in favor please say aye. Aye. Anyone oppose or abstain?

All right, that passed. So that's question 2, Colleen, if that helps you.

Yep, so to confirm, we're adding back in. We've approved the clean survey with section 4 removed and we're now for question 2, adding back in option choice, reduce to 1 acre and allow parcel aggregation back into the fold.

Yeah, and then can I just ask a process question because i think i heard you guys suggest maybe doing like some randomized thing for the answers which sometimes i would ask professor names the best way to do that because i just think with especially with question two i think you want to have that be a very clear step down thing so people like leave it at three acres this is what it is change it to the like i i think that's how i would do it but i would ask the professor the best way to make that happen

Okay, thank you for that direction there. Anyone else? All right, Council Member Rambo.

Yeah, I just have a question. It's for Tom, actually. Dr. Names has spent his lifetime learning how to conduct surveys objectively without inducing any biases. That's why I complain so often about every time we want to do SurveyMonkey, Every monkey thinks they can do a survey and it's a science. And this is important to us. And so I want to be clear that Dr. Nains gets to have input on what might be unconscious biases that we're introducing into this survey. And the reason I'm asking that, I have many reasons for asking that, but the one that just popped up is that We've leapt to the strong conclusion that opening up 4% of wildwood to archery hunting is going to solve the problem. And folks may, people are desperate to protect their gardens, protect their landscaping. I've spent thousands on tick-borne disease mitigation and tons more on damage mitigation from from deer. So I have an incentive to get rid of them. But people need to understand that This is independent of that because it's going to help solve the problem, but it's really not going to solve the problem. And so I felt that it was that this survey was going a bit too far in the direction of this is going to be great. Well, it may be great, but it may be great. It will be great for that. that 4% area, not the entirety of wealth. And so I went all the way around just to ask you that question. Is NANES going to weigh in on the objectivity of the survey so that we can be confident it's truly reflective of the will of an informed populace?

yes that is the plan right now after now we have this he has a copy of the most this whole report um he has a copy of a lot of the information we publicized himself that was the question that said if he were to make massively substantive changes to the survey we we may have to reach back out to the council and revisit it just but he has that we've told him if there's something that could lead to direct bias then we want to know about it and in that case he'd provide that directly to us all right

Thank you. It looks like we have covered that item here. So we'll move on to the next section of the agenda. We do have an executive post session, but if there's no objection, I would like to propose changing the order and us moving into miscellaneous. Chief Cruz has been sitting here patiently all night long. And we want to first thank you and your department for the service that you provide to our community. So, again, thank you for your patience and if there's no objection, we'll hit the miscellaneous items and then we'll come back to executive close session.

We need a do we need a motion for that change the order or is that any objection?

Nope. Okay. So, since no 1 objects, we'll then do that. And so director, let's move into the miscellaneous items.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, members of City Council, the first item under receiving file is a report from the Planning and Zoning Commission with recommendation to remove the requirement for a gate to be constructed by the fire district across a private driveway that accesses a property immediately to the south of the fire station. The owner of the property contacted the department and requested this action, and the fire district is in concurrence. Planning and Zoning Commission agreed. And since this is a conditional use permit, City Council has the authority to exercise power review within 15 days of the receipt and file of this report, which starts tonight. Otherwise, in 15 days, the action of Planning and Zoning Commission will become effective. If there are any questions, the department is available for them.

Okay, again, you heard the director. If no one wishes to exercise power review, then in 15 days, this will move forward. Doesn't look like we have anyone. All right, so go ahead.

The next item relates to a request by T-Mobile to add new antenna on the telecommunications facility that's located at the Meredith Retreat Center. Currently, the conditional use permit requires the antennas to be no greater than 24 inches off its surface. T-Mobile is requesting that that be increased substantially. Under the regulations associated with telecommunications towers in the City of Wildwood, such requires a public hearing and the city and the planning and zoning commission recommended the city proceed forward is there any questions the department would be glad to answer them any uh council member albers they have one there right now right Yes, they have a set of antenna on it, which are compliant. As I say, they would like to increase that antenna substantially, so as, for the most part, it'd be 84 inches instead of 24 inches.

I'm sorry, is it a replacement then?

It is a replacement. Okay.

Thank you.

And the last item is the revised plat for Hills Hollow, a large lot single family subdivision on the northwest corner of Pond Road and State Route 100. The applicant requested the waivers through the centralized waste forwarder treatment plan be amended since no ninth lot is planned. That was done. The preliminary plat had to catch up with the change in waiver and that was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission last Monday night. Is there any questions? Department would be glad to answer them.

We have any questions.

Okay.

Thank you. All right, seeing none, thank you. All right, so that concludes that item. So therefore we do have a request to go into executive closed session. related to RSMO 610.021 subsection 1, subsection 3, and subsection 13. All right, and also subsection 2, so if I can get a motion made by council member Marshall, so they're going to buy council member tried here. I had a question. Is it a question or do you want to be at the 2nd?

So I had a question if. Under the miscellaneous section, if that would be an appropriate time to bring up an item that we have not discussed tonight.

Um, we could, uh, yeah, we could certainly hold off on the closed session if you want to bring up just really quickly.

I sent an email to this effect. Is it possible that the council members can receive a draft agenda?

To the Monday meetings, the Wednesday prior understanding that, you know, minor things could change, but yeah, originally I know we have a process that we had worked out with the former city clerk to send out. A draft agenda by Wednesday with the understanding that changes could still be made. By staff, and I know that the reports that support that still are worked on at that point in time. Which may mean unless unless I'm mistaken, those reports probably won't be available to as they are today. But I think the key thing is getting you that draft. So you at least know what's in the pipeline that's coming up in the meeting. And certainly, if there are reports as they become available, I think we can. Try to get those out to you. But I know there's a lot of work that happens behind the scenes to get those reports together. Does that sound?

Yeah, so the report's obviously the meat and potatoes of the agenda. So if the intent is just to provide the agenda the Wednesday before, I don't think that achieves

Well, I think I don't want to take the liberty because I know there's a lot of process that happens behind the scenes. So perhaps city administrator, do you want to speak to that?

Or I don't need a decision tonight. I'm just curious if it can be explored. Can we get this sooner than Friday?

What Colleen is got some opinions on that. We can definitely explore it. The 1 thing to keep in mind is that with the, with the agenda, the way it is not the agenda, but the schedule we have planning and zoning commission that takes place the Monday prior to council. A lot of the action that takes place during those meetings, then subsequently get put on the council agenda because of the timeline restraints within state code. So, then those reports have to be adjusted and modified based off the recommendation from the planning and zoning commission. The same could be said for the administration public works committee. It is something that. We can most definitely explore as a, as a council body here. I think that there could be a discussion about how can we structure the, the actual calendar to allow a little bit more flex between those 2 periods. But I do know. I will say it's not from a lack of trying. We can try to get as much information to you as possible while also still making that deadline. But we may have to discuss some trade-offs if we were going to have the full packet ready for publication on that Wednesday prior.

So I guess to clear up my question, I'm not looking for an answer tonight. I would just, I think it would be beneficial to everybody if we could explore, you know, maybe we need to shuffle things around to make this, to be able to receive the data more than 48 hours in advance.

Okay. So we'll, I think that's a good request. We'll see if the staff can meet and talk about how to get that accommodated. So I appreciate you bringing that up.

All right, Director Blunish has an answer. Mr. Trotty, I'm going to be honest. There isn't a week that doesn't go by that the Department of Planning and Parks doesn't have at least two agendas, two agendas, sometimes three. We do the best we can to get the reports done. I cannot guarantee you'll have them on Wednesday. In fact, I'll tell you, I can't do it. You'll need another Director of Planning and Parks. Thank you.

all right thank you director boonage well maybe it's something we look at um you know we have no no no no no no no no you're you're not going anywhere if the answer is it can't be done it can't be done just to be clear i was just asking no nothing

That's the plan list goes on and on.

All right well, let's, let's. Certainly, we can take a look at it and maybe maybe maybe in the future, it's maybe the council meeting happens another week of the month or something like that. So that it maybe allows time. We don't know that we can solve that, but I do appreciate that feedback. And director, we understand your frustration. I understand it. I think that it's good that you express that to us so that we know. The pressure of the job, so with that, I think we'll seek now, let's go back to the request to go into executive session. Let's 610.021 subsection. 1. Subsection 3, subsection 13 and did you say. Subsection 2, can I get a motion? All right, we have council member Marshall and then a 2nd by council member farmer. We'll need a roll call please.

Council member means yes. Council Member Bockert? Yes. Council Member Kranz? Yes. Council Member Albers? Yes. Council Member Mabry? Yes. Council Member Nyhan? Yes. Council Member Mudwell? Yes. Council Member Marshall? Yes. Council Member Rambo? Yes. Council Member Vanek? Yes. Council Member Kummer? Yes. Council Member Wroblewski? Yes. Council Member Trottier? Yes. Council Member Ottenberg? 5%. Council Member Farmer?

Yes. Okay, so we're going to go into the community room for closed session and we will be back. Thank you. for coming back into the council chambers. I do want to share just maybe a quick item because there was a article today in the post-dispatch regarding the scooters, e-bikes, and I guess other type of motorized or unmotorized vehicles. So, and Wildwood was noted in there, but I do know that the Board of Public Safety plans to look at that to try to see if we need any updates regarding our code. And I know it's been a hot topic. So if you do have questions from residents, let them know that this is being looked at to make sure our codes are staying relevant to that. So important there. And 1 other item, I think that might be helpful in case you have any constituent questions. Is we've had some issues or complaints. With some disturbances, kind of in the dearberg shopping center with teenagers. So, so the management reached out to me about wanting to discuss potential ideas or solutions to see how we can help the businesses. So, I think that might be something that may end up in 1 of the committees for discussion, but just wanted to keep you in the loop as I know that. Sometimes the 2 are somewhat related. Yeah. So, anyway, just know that we are looking at that. Okay.

Um, city administratively and something to just a note on the children at, um. At the town center, and the question, uh, if residents ask something, we've been trying to get out to our residences is. As long as the kids aren't riding the illegal motorbikes and things along those lines, we would welcome them over at the Village Green. And it's a place they could play football. It's dedicated for that space. Obviously, they can't be obnoxiously disturbing someone or causing mischief. But we have the police right there. It overall is meant to be that space. So I think it's just now getting more attention from the parents to drop them off over there. We do have cameras, a couple cameras over there, which would be able to keep an eye on things. So I just wanted to add that note, too.

All right. Well, thank you for that. Thanks for a long meeting tonight and wish you all good evening. Please keep Council Member Ottenberg in your thoughts and prayers on the news of the passing of his mother this evening. So if there's, get a motion to adjourn. Made by Council Member Mabry, Council Member Cummings is second. All those in favor, please say aye.