City Council - Regular Meeting

How we doing, Travis? You ready? We're live. Okay. All right. Okay. Good evening, everyone, and welcome to our work session for Monday, August 11. Uh, I do apologize for the delayed start. There were some technical issues uh that prevented us from getting the uh live stream or Zoom going, but those have been resolved. So, we're ready to proceed with the work session. So, thanks again for your patience while they work through that. And thank you to uh all our folks that were scrambling here fixing that tech issue. So, uh with that then let's go with the roll call, please.

Mayor Geritano. Council member Farmer. Council member Dodwell. Council member Nyan here. Council member Atenberg here. Council member Tradier here. Council member Mabberry Council Member Roblooski here. Council member Preston here. Council member Marshall Council Member McCutchen here. Council member Rambo here. Council member Bertson. Council member Crayons, Council Member Vanic, Council Member Alers, Council Member Galani.

Thank you for that. Then uh don't have any uh comments or announcements under the work session. So we're going to proceed with the four information section. And as usual, I'll see if anyone has perhaps any questions or comments related to the four information section. Again, there's no action expected out of this section here. So, justformational. So, let me pause for a second and look around the room and see if anyone or anyone on uh our council members joining us by Zoom uh have anything with regards to form information. Okay, we can certainly come back to it under miscellaneous if you do think of something that you uh would like to ask. Okay. Uh is that correct or do we need anything else? Let me ask the city administrator. We're still under for information before we proceed. Are there any topics or is there do we want to go to um any items here?

Yes. In this case, uh, mayor, the department's available to answer any questions on the for information items. That said, uh, tonight the, uh, the developer that is making the request, um, with Mia Rose is was going to have the availability to speak and answer questions from the council. Okay. So, uh, with that, if again, if there's nothing else before that, we'll proceed to that topic there. Joe, I got something real quick. I You do have something, Council Member Farmer. Sure. Go ahead. Yeah. I just um I don't know if Rick if this is you or Tom, but I have heard through the grapevine that on the uh route 100 MODOT project there seems to be a change into where that project is stopping. Is that correct?

Yes, that is correct. So, it's not a change. It was originally that was what they originally had planned even though they had indicated West Glenn Farms Drive. They're planning on stopping about 100 feet west of West Glenn Farms Drive and we're currently working with them to extend through it. Is there scheduling for if they don't extend through it to do the rest of it? They had indicated that it would be part of another project. That's what we're pressing them on now because there is no other project at this time that would connect it through and that's we are pressing them at this moment. We have been talking with our area engineer and we are working on it. So is that was that kind of a miscommunication on our end or on their end?

They had cons in this and I'll let the director of public works speak to this a little bit further, but they had consistently mentioned that West Glenn Farms Drive was the boundary. That said, we had then had to go find these plans. They did not provide them with them to us. And once we had identified that, we'd seen it about a month and a half ago where we had seen that it stopped right before that the lefthand turn starts. So in this case, they did not communicate that to me. I I could be wrong, but I vaguely recall Ryan Piery being here when we wanted to get a no left turn sign put in on Truman and talked about the specifically those issues at that intersection and that was going to be addressed in this program. That was expected. Yes. And that's what we're reminded.

It might behoove us to pull that clip and send it to them. That's a great suggestion. Yeah, if we have that. Absolutely. And I in conversations that I recall having and I always remember too here in Westland Farm. So bit shocked that we uh are seeing all this great work that eventually the road will look great and be a smooth surface that we can't just get that extra last piece there which includes the intersection. So uh we got to press them on that. Uh, Council Member Dodwell,

just real quickly, um, do we know if they have this on their planning sheet to go from the 100 ft west of 100 or Well, they're saying now they're doing it 100 ft west is where they're stopping of West Glenn. When do they plan on starting the rest of the construction heading heading east? So, we had asked them that and they have not gotten back to us. So, that's that's the next step is figuring out when. But really, this this shouldn't be them pushing it through should not be that big of a a change to what they're currently planning. Um, at least from my perspective, but um the Department of Public Works like to add any comment, but Okay. Yeah. So, right now we can come back to the council with a with a response from MOD at the next meeting.

Okay. Anyone else have anything at all before we move on to that next report? Okay. City administrator Lee, do you want to go ahead and introduce this uh where we'll pick up from uh with regarding this report on the chapter 100?

Yeah. So, tonight uh the department had put together a summary report if everyone had a chance to look at it. Um overall, it's there is one change and I wanted to pass this out, but we did have some technical difficulties. if you could um um overall tonight what was included on the reg this is an item that's regulated to the regular session as well um the developer Mia Rose and Greenberg Development have made the chapter 100 100 request back in April the council had approved an initial funding agreement for Gilmore Bell who we have a representative with us tonight uh to answer any questions about the the bond process the industrial revenue bond on chapter 100 process. That said, um the analysis has been complete and there has been a negotiation of what this would look like in reality and tonight we have an outlined report along with legislation introducing the topic and a document kind of outlining what that that contract includes. That said, um we have the developer here tonight as well and wanted to provide an opportunity for them to give an overview of the propo proposal and then also offer an opportunity for the council to ask any questions. Thank you. And again, if you just could introduce yourself to the council.

Yes, sir. Good evening. Uh my name is Tom Kimman. I'm the founder of Mia Rose Holdings. Um we are a partner in Wildwood Luxury Living with the Greenberg family and Ed Cohen. Um we're anxiously looking forward to getting the project started. So, appreciate you guys having us this evening. Um, we're certainly here to answer any questions and engage in any dialogue back and forth. Um, I did want to report on just a couple things. Um, we did have another follow-up meeting with the school district. Um, of which, uh, Mr. Cohen and I met with him in person on Friday morning. Um, was a very productive meeting. Uh, we left the meeting shaking hands and lots of smiles. um they're not going to be here tonight to oppose the project, but they're also not going to be here, you know, singing joys and supporting the project. But it was really beneficial for us to uh better understand what's going on within the school district with the declining enrollment and uh some funds that have uh you know being pulled from the district. So I think we just we got on a better page and better understanding of you know some of their concerns. In that meeting, um, uh, Mia Rose, uh, made three commitments to them. Um, we committed to, um, understanding their concern with affordable housing, uh, within the district for their teachers and for their staff members. So, we agreed in the meeting to extend uh, at any of our properties for any of their teachers or their staff the same uh, discount that we offer up to uh, emergency service folks. So we typically don't do that for teachers and uh um u staff members of a school district but uh we we did offer that up of which they very thankful for. Um we also wanted to communicate to them that we also have two more projects. Um to date Mia Rose

has done 21 of these. This will be our 22nd. Um of those 21 projects this will be the fifth chapter 100. So, Chapter 100 is not always used. It's used when it's needed to get the project over a financial hurdle and bring it to life. Um, but we made them aware that we've got a project in Eureka and a project in Ellisville. And at this point in time, we do not uh anticipate any incentives being required for those two projects. um which uh at the conclusion, assuming those come to life, there will be about a million dollars per year in property taxes that would be paid of which the school district would be getting a massive check from us on an annual basis. So, they were very pleased to hear that and uh asked us to build more in the district. Um, I also committed to not um pursuing any incentives within the district boundaries without having a fruitful conversation with them first and going through the pros and the cons of the project, etc., etc. So, they appreciated uh appreciated that that offer. So, um it was just over an hourong meeting. It was very very um it was a it was a great meeting. Um, I I've now better understand some of the the financial concerns that the district is going through that have nothing to do with us, but uh just generally speaking, they're they're uh um with the pressures that they're under. Um, I do think it's really important to mention that um when we started this project, we did have a debt partner on board. By debt partner, I mean a bank. Um about 3 months ago we lost that bank and the commitment uh was terminated. The good news is we were able to replace that bank partner with another bank partner, Southern Bank, um

who we've this would be our third deal with Southern. Um it is important to note that that bank debt is contingent on the chapter 100 being secured. So that is a very important part of the finance and capital stack. Um and then I would also just like to chat about the the strict timelines that we're on. We really uh we really need to get the project moving forward. Um you know there are certain deadlines in the ordinance that require us to meet certain obligations to start the project get it moving when we have to have found foundations completed when we have to be substantially complete. So, um it's not to our benefit to just keep letting the project extend and extend. So, um tonight we are respectfully asking that there be two readings and uh that would be hugely beneficial would allow us to start this fall. Um and I think uh uh Councilwoman Dodwell asked like how far will we be by the end of the year and I think we'll be in the position to be pouring foundations. So, that's kind of you know showing some meaningful progress. Um uh last uh not least um my hats off to uh Thomas Lee. He has done a pretty uh amazing job negotiating on the city's behalf um with the development agreement. So he's uh certainly holding our feet to the fire as it relates to spending within the city of Wildwood, which there will be none. Uh and then also capping and limiting and making us document the spending that would happen in the county proof of us doing what we said we would do. Uh and then the the bond issuance fee that would go to the city is uh is uh pretty substantial. So, um, that would be a check coming from us, uh, as part of the development, you know, to the city, which far far far

exceeds any amount of money that the city would ever get from a project of this nature. So, uh, Thomas, great job. Um, and and we are committed to moving the project forward. We're committed to, uh, there's lots of details in the development agreement. Lots. Um, and uh, you know, we're we're we're committed and we're in we're ready to move forward. So, um, happy to answer any questions. Um, anything on the technical side, I would like to defer to Andrew Rubin, our attorney. Um, but I am here to answer anything that you you may have. And if I can't answer it, I'll bring Andrew in.

Uh, Council Member Farmer, I see you've got your hand up. Yeah, if you if it's possible and I don't know if this might be you or the attorney, but um I would say it's probably fair to say that nobody up here are experts in developing large scale real estate projects. So um understanding the difference in the capital stack and why a project let's say in Eureka or Ellisville wouldn't require a chapter 100 versus this one. Obviously, there's some debt issues with the bank and things like that, but if you can maybe make that a little bit more clear, that might help answer some bigger questions that some folks have on that.

Yeah. So, when we look at uh the the project in Wildwood, it's kind of like the butt for what are the things that are impeding us or causing cost within the capital stack that are not ordinarily um uh costs that we would have to overcome. And there there are a substantial amount of them in at the Wildwood development. So um versus you know developing on a flat piece of ground somewhere uh there are some challenges especially with the retaining walls the foundation systems which are significantly different than we are challenged with on other projects. So when you basically look at the project I think there's about $4.2 $2 million of what we call extraordinary costs, which are things that we would not normally do in Ellisville or Eureka or, you know, for that matter, anywhere else. Um, you know, we've got over half a million dollars that we have to pay Amarind for some of the lines that have to be relocated and a substation that we have to build. Never had to do that before. So, it's just like a cost that hits you and it's like whoa, you know. So, um, those are the things. So what we've done is we've we've we've looked at the project and we've gone through and there's a list of extraordinary costs that we've come up with which is like I said it's about let me let me confirm I believe it's 4.2 million.

So while while you're doing that and this maybe you can answer this too. So, um, that's very helpful to know, but I am kind of curious, is that, uh, in some way a function of something that that the city has done or is that specific to just the land that this is going to be on or is this just I I guess I'm trying to understand why we've run into this across the street with Amron on some undergrounding, too. So I'm just trying to understand where is the sort of source of this extra not that I'm not happy you guys wouldn't be doing it but it it would be helpful for us to know is it something we're doing is it just something that is what it is. How does that work?

You know it it's a it's a combination but the the line items there's about 12 of them. So um most are site related um and then some are you know city influences of hey we want it to look like this and you know so and we are you know we're also building 7,000 square ft of retail so some of most of our other projects don't include the retail piece uh which which adds pressure onto the overall deal. Um, so when I when I say that this is required by the bank, so when the bank looks at this and the bank says, "Hey, we're going to give you this loan," they're going to look at a number of different requirements. One, they look at, you know, balance sheet of the borrower. Um, but then they also dive into the actual project. And when you start to look at the project and you start to look at the income versus debt service, there's what's called a debt service coverage ratio. And if that's not obtained, so what they do is they take how much money are you going to pull in from rents minus your expenses and what is the debt you have to pay us every month. And if there's not a 1.2 coverage ratio, most banks won't loan you money. So we're not able to hit that. So it becomes a non noninanceable project. And the only way you can do that is figure out how do I reduce the cost which reduces your debt and how do I increase my income or reduce my expenses. And you start to play the math. You're like, what do I have to do to get to that one two debt service coverage ratio? So we're we're like 1.18 even with the chapter 100.

So I mean you're I'm just trying to do the very basic math here. So with the extraordinary expenses, wherever they're coming from, that's about 4.2. I think it's 4.2. Yeah. The number that we've talked about for this over the span of whatever is 3.5 million, right? Correct. So ostensibly that 3.5 million is sort of offsetting the extraordinary expenses that wouldn't normally be there on a different project.

Correct. It doesn't cover all of them. Sure. But, you know, we just got to the point in talking with the city, we're like, you know, what would it take to cover all of those? And it was probably not something you all would want to consider. It was probably closer to 10 years 100% tax abatement. And so, we just knew in conversations were like, well, you know, they're probably not interested in that. There's probably a hard stop. So, it's like, what's the balance? So, we're not asking I would love to ask to recover all those costs, but we're not. So, or we're we're asking for about 75% of the costs that we would normally not have to pay on other projects. All right. Thanks.

Okay. Thank you uh for those explanations and answers. Very helpful. Anyone else that has questions? Council member Marshall. So, we know because we built a city hall here and had to do all the utilities to bring all that information in. We didn't have any way to get any tax protection. So, we had to pay that price in order to do that. I guess my question to you is that three and a half million that's spread out over 10 years. Will that make a difference to your bank? Because you're talking about money you need now and that's spread out based on taking it away from these other taxing districts. And does that not fall into the equation? I wouldn't think that would carry the same strength as having another investor for three and a half.

So, Ed, that 3.2 is monetized upfront. So they do a net present value on the full 10 years. So they do the money that you're saving on the sales tax on construction materials. Then they do the saving on the property tax and then they bring that all forward. And when bringing that all forward it's 3.2 versus the 4.2. So it's in it's in today's dollars that the analysis is based on. But I I would say I mean I don't think the the city uh pays property taxes uh as well. So there is some you know when you look at like developing this and you know um

right and maybe to clarify you you mentioned extraordinary costs. So, does that's is that even including some of the typical costs you would see in construction like the utilities like council member Marshall mentioned or the these are very unique in that it's it's the specific site because you have to do utilities wherever you go.

Yeah. So, for for example, so we have power lines that run through our site. That's that's not typical that you got to take those down and have to reroute them. Typically, a set of power lines is running. You tap right down in, you bring it into the site, you hit a transformer, you disperse. That would be totally normal. We're having to build a new substation for Amaran, which is just wildly abnormal. And we've been arguing it for over a year, but you know, even our our engineering staff just can't convince them otherwise. So, you know, you you you're kind of at a point where like everybody's beating on you and you're like, "You got to do this and you got to build it this way and it's got to look like this and like you just keep taking it all." At a certain point, you get to that breaking point. You're like, "Look guys, I can do the project and we can it can be successful for everybody, but like you got to everybody's got to stop pushing like we got to start pulling the rope in the same direction." So,

let me see if uh Council Member Alers and then again if anyone is uh council membersh or Rambo, if you do wish to ask a question, just make sure you use a raise hand. Go ahead, Council Member Albert.

Um I myself and I believe other council members do have concerns about the loss tax revenues going to all these entities. Um is is one concern that maybe you can elaborate on. And then I I wondered does this set up a precedent if we were to give this chapter 100 for future developments coming in. And if if we didn't give it to them, are we at risk for any action against us? You know, we give it to certain people this way, but now we're not going to give it here. So those are just broad scope concerns I I have. Yeah, I think that the to answer your um second question first, the the response that I would have is like every deal is its own deal. Some deals require help, some don't. And if there's if there's if you meet the legal definition of extraordinary and you know, you're able to defend that. Uh on one project um out in St. Charles County, uh we had to build a bridge over a creek. um that didn't that only provided benefit to a neighborhood behind us so that they could have a secondary access onto a main road. Provided zero benefit to us as the developer. None. We didn't even want to do it. The city required us to do it. So that project did receive chapter 100. We had to build a bridge, multiple intersections, four lane, four-way stop lightss. I was in the meeting when another developer in like we got our project approved that night and the other developer got up and said, you know, hey, I want to do the same thing, but I'm not asking for incentive. And the mayor looked at him and said, where's your bridge? No bridge, flat piece of ground, you

know, no extraordinary cost. So like my point being every project is its own own right. like you know if somebody's got to build another substation in Wildwood you that may be beneficial to the city to have to figure out how do you work with that developer to get that project done. I mean um and then so you're um I hope that answers that question. Um the regarding you know right now I think the the ground right now is getting a whopping $45 in property taxes. If if we leave this meeting and don't move the project forward, school district will still receive a good $18 a year, you know, we're going to spend just right around $50 million of investment and 5 years from now, the school will be receiving half of the the property tax which it will receive and then in in year 10 it will receive 100%. In my opinion, that's creating a tremendous amount of value, not only for them, but for the other tech or it could sit there, like I said, and sit there and do nothing. It's not activated. The real beauty of this site, the real beauty is once this project is done, what it's going to do to activate the whole downtown. It it's it's we can't even you can't sit here today and and fully describe exactly what that's going to look like, but you're going to have 300 people now in the downtown. I hope two years from now, two and a half years from now, we got probably half of it filled. I'm able to come back and report and just say, you see all the people walking around, you see all the people spending money. These are things we couldn't map out precisely on a spreadsheet, but thank you for letting us get the project done and hopefully it's been beneficial to the city.

Okay. Uh, Council Member Vanic,

um, my issue, only issue with the whole, uh, chapter 100 is, uh, the timing of it. Um it's people my constituents have come to me and asked it seems a little bit unfair to the city that and to the citizens that the project went through the entire application process and there was no mention of chapter 100 and then only after project was approved seems like all of a sudden you Hey, we really want this. So, how do I explain this to my constituents?

Yeah, I I there there were conversations ongoing while the project was being approved. And so, there was some dialect going about how, you know, some of the retaining walls and some of the design was coming to fruition. And frankly, you know, in the last 6 months, when you really think about it, I mean, the world continues to change. I mean, costs are not going down. labor. People are retiring from the trades. For every five that you're losing in brick layers, only two are going back in. So, labor's going through the roof still, especially on the trades and the construction. And materials still, you know, are not stabilized. I look back at 44 West, we built the largest Nijiha project in the state of Missouri. We paid $9 a square foot for the NIH panels. We finished that project in 24. Today the price $9 a square foot. Now keep in mind your project here is almost all nijiha. It's $17 a square foot in less less than a year and a half. So we on this Wildwood project we budgeted 11. The pricing came in at 17. So that either means I'm just a really crappy estimator, but it also means that just a lot of people in the world just aren't able to control costs either. And at the end of the day, the end user is the one paying for it. So we didn't know about this whole this this Amarind thing. We didn't know about that when the project got approved. Um that that was a totally that was a total shock. All right. I see uh Council Member Glenn, but also Attenburg. Okay. So, Council Member Attenburg, I see your hand up. You can go ahead.

All right. Can you hear me? All right. Yes, sir.

All right. So, um just to uh I guess I'd like to get a confirmation maybe from the city administrator regarding uh council member Albert's question on the chapter 100 application. Just to confirm that if this council approves this chapter 100 application, that does not mean that we have to approve all future chapter 100 applications that come before us. Each chapter 100 application submitted by a developer will have to stand or fall on its own merit. In other words, what we can do as a council is ask anyone submitting a chapter 100 application, what does this project do for the city? And if we're not satisfied with the answer, then we don't have to we don't have to approve that particular chapter 100 application. Also, I think it's important to keep in mind that when you've seen one chapter 100 application, you've seen one. In other words, one application might be for a 10-year, what I'll refer to as a tax abatement. Another one might be for a 20-year. Another one might be for a seven-year. Another one might be for a 15year. So each one will have to stand or fall on its own merit. Is that correct? Uh city administrator Lee,

from my understand with your permissions, mayor. Uh from my understanding, yes, that is correct. So it would have to meet our master plan, our town center update plan. Uh typically it will go through the review process for if it's a resoning request and it'll go through the site development plan process as well. If it meets all of that and they make the request, then it would be independently evaluated through our procedures and processing for public funding assistance. All right. Thank you very much.

If if I could just make a a a general comment too, just like the use of the vehicle of chapter 100. Okay. I just want to give you another example of a project we're working on in St. Peters uh Missouri. We're um right across from the Reclex um and right across from a Lutheran school if anybody knows where that is on Mexico Road. The the school. So there's a there's a signal just right down from where our development is going. The city approached us when we got it when we were going through the site planning process and said, "Hey, you know, the school has been asking for a four-way signal for years. They would love to have that signal so when the kids are leaving, you know, you can you can time the signal and we can, you know, there's been if we granted you chapter 100, how much is a light? So, we price the light up. The light ends up being about $850,000 with engineering and everything. And they said, "That seems like a big win for us if we grant you the chapter 100, but just use the piece of the sales tax. don't use the piece of the property, you know, the abatement. Um, and the city saves a million dollars of a future light they would have to put in because they own Mexico Road and uh, and then the school district gets uh, you know, a

new safe um, you know, intersection. You know, are you open to that? And I said, absolutely. So anyway, I'm bringing that up as, you know, I I I think the city, you know, I'm not I'm certainly not going to sit here and tell you what to do, but you can use these vehicles in a very appropriate way to get things on behalf of the city that are of of great benefit not only to the city, but the community. So, um, anyway, I just wanted to kind of bring up that and just uh talk about it.

Hey, Council Member Galani. Yeah, thanks. Um, yeah, just a couple points. I mean, I'm trying to wrap my head around where there would be any opposition to this from the city. Um, we've got this parcel of land sitting here in the heart of downtown and town center. We all agree that we need economic development and sustainability for the city moving forward. we hired a great economic development manager and then we're arguing with ourselves over here when we have opportunities to improve the economic condition of our city. It seems like um you know just from the perspective of financials, this isn't going to cost the city of Wildwood a dollar. Number one. Number two, to his point, the tax revenue on that property is basically zero today. So, in five years from now, 50% of the new tax revenue that would be coming in um would go to the school district and and the the taxing districts. And if this project didn't go through, I can't imagine that there's going to be anything between now and the next 5 years that's going to be approved, let alone start to be built that would generate any additional tax revenue for anybody. So, like I said, from a math from a numbers perspective, I'm trying to figure out what we're arguing for or against or about. Um, you know, you're talking about bringing a significant infusion of people, viability, money being spent. I mean, um, right in the heart of of the town center. Um, you know, we we there's no argument that we have a problem keeping businesses afloat. Um, restaurants, stores. I mean, I know a lot of people come here and they do their best to try to do it, but we have an opportunity here to do something from the city's perspective to help the economic development. So, I mean, it's a contradiction in terms for us to say we have an economic development committee, an economic development manager, and we care about economic development if we're going to consistently knock down every

project that comes to the table. And a a chapter 100 financing incentive is exactly what this is for. I mean, if if this isn't the right project for this, I don't know, tell me what would be. Um, and and the argument of if we give it to one, we have to give it to all. That's never happened anywhere in any city. Um it it I mean tax incentives are used to attract developers to create opportunities for developments and situations where they normally wouldn't be able to happen. I think this is a perfect example of that. Um so like I said, I think to me this is a slam dunk. I mean it's it's a no-brainer. Um I think residents should be and would be opposed to us if we didn't uh make this go through um and and get it done quickly. And you're talking about vibrance right here in the heart. And you know, on a second level, um, aside from the numbers, I mean, this property over here, I'm pretty sure we've been using it for free for a lot long time. Maybe we can just calculate the what it would have cost us to use that land and and and you know, and and I might be mistaken, too, but the land we're sitting on right now, wasn't that donated to the city? Um, so just a few additional points. If we want to go back and calculate what it would have cost us and what the interest would have been, it would far offset what benefits they're getting in tax breaks. So that's just another outside point, but um, like I said, I think this is something that would do a lot of justice for the residents of the city and the economic viability of of Town Center and everything included. So we just got done killing another project a few months ago that would have done the same. And I, you know, we've got highdensity zoning. This is downtown. This isn't um the outskirts of town. And this is where we need these exact type of developments. So, like I said, it's baffling to me, and I say this all the time, and I probably sound like a broken record, and

that's okay. That's why I'm here. Um, but if we don't take action and make smart decisions in situations like this, eventually developers are just going to stop coming here and talking to us and asking for approvals and our economic situation will just deteriorate further and we'll end up arguing ourselves into not being a city anymore. That's my opinion. So, thanks. Okay. Anyone else? Uh, Council Member Marshall,

and and maybe you could help us with this because this is certainly a gigantic administrative challenge for the city. How many hours are involved on the city staff to make sure that the records because it looks like it's a monthly adjustment in in order that we just don't have the staff for that. How where you have this in other cities, how much time is allocated to the appropriate reporting? Maybe that's a Bell and Gilmore, but I don't know. I I would this is the first time it's ever been included in the agreement to to document and all those invoices and everything. So it's the first time we've seen it. though you know I have been talking to Thomas just about you know a after this meeting you know I understand we at this point we don't want to change anything because we don't want it to delay anything but would like to meet with Thomas and just kind of go through like how can we best you know is there is there a way we can just produce an affidavit process because when you look our general contractor will probably have 40 to 45 subcontractors and they'll have 10 they'll have five to 10 vendors they'll be buying buying and sourcing materials from it can it's going to get sticky.

That's my point. Yeah. Thank you.

All right. Uh anything else from anyone else here that Council Member McCutchen, please go ahead. Um, so I I think some of our residents are going to be unhappy if we provide with the chapter 100 and I think we will have a a lot of other developers come up behind you asking for a chapter 100. And I disagree that it's going to be easy to tell those developers, I'm sorry, no, you can't have it. Um, so I think it's a slippery slope for for us to go down. But earlier you said that you have a development in Eureka, Ellisville, and Valley Park, and they're all in Rockwood School District. So, how much financially is the school district losing from those four projects?

Well, they they'll they'll not they won't lose anything from Eureka or Ellisville. There's a pilot. We have two projects in Valley Park that we met with the district on and we worked out a pilot payment program uh on 44 West and then on 44 East which is the Wet Willie site there. Uh there that's a um uh it's eight years of of zero. Um are are you are you asking me for a specific dollar amount? Yes, I am.

Okay. So between those four four projects, well two projects, they're going to make close to a million dollars a year in property taxes on the one after the fact. What I'm asking is what I'm asking is start on the start process. After the fact, they'll get more funding. Yeah. But there's

But I'm asking about between the time you start the project until you get to where the the greater funding will come in. So to to be very specific, 44 West is the only one that's operating right now and the school district is making money from that because there's a pilot program in place that they participate in. So that that um 44 East is the one that we just started in Valley Park, the old Wet Willie site. That one won't be online. It's It's got like 12 months worth of sight work and uh $5 million in retaining walls and just really intense stuff. So, that one won't be online for another two and a half years.

So, the school district will not be receiving any money for and and for two and a half years. They won't because and they won't receive it after that too because that's the construction period. So, you know, during during construction, you know, you're not fully assessed and you're not getting the full financial benefit anyway. Um, so total time, how will how long will the school district not receive any funding from this project? Um, on 44 East, they they won't receive anything for about eight years. Okay. And then in Eureka and Ellisville, was that a chapter 100?

No, neither one of those have any incentives tied to them. And so help me understand what the difference is between a pilot project and chapter 100. A

a pilot is a it's a payment in lie of taxes that um you can put in place. So, if a developer, let's say us, asks for 100% of of tax abatement, but yet the city wants to make sure that those districts are still getting money anyway, even with the 100% abatement. They you can put a pilot in place and say, "Well, we still want you to pay $100,000 a year or 50,000 or 200 thou whatever it is." It's just a pay. It's a program. That's a payment in lie of taxes. But typically that's that's that's negotiated over the course of of time and months kind of leading up to a meeting like this. It would be pretty odd to then say, "Hey, we want to pilot now uh you know on this project." So that that would be not ordinary. And so I mean the school district didn't support the project. They didn't reject the project. It would have to go through the school board. So what school district in effect is doing right now is just writing a fideline because the whole thing would have to go through the school district for them to say yes, we approve it or no, we don't. It' have to go to the school board. The

those are usually independent negotiations. Um, you know, I don't know if they have to go to the board, but you're talking about all the all the taxing. You would negotiate with all the jurisdictions, the the taxing juris, not just the school district, right? But my main concern is the school district. The federal government has withheld funding for education. The state government has withheld funding from education. And so then we approve this project and we're going to be, you know, holding more money from the school districts. Um I I I I what

I just cla You mean withholding which amount? The $45? No, they're going to be withholding what we would get once the project is is is over with. So, we're not going to see any additional taxes until the whole project is over and the the I was just seeking clarity. Go ahead.

Yeah. Um, and and another point I I hear a lot of, you know, may know 100% sure. I mean, we can't we can't say that this project is is going to be full, that the residents, all the apartments are they're going to be all gone, right? We can't say that in a year from now half of them half of the apartments apartments will be filled. We can't say how many kids will be in that building or not be in that building. We can't say that those residents that are in that building are in fact going to shop in Wildwood. You have the city has to provide uh shops that residents want to access. It has to be something. And so we've got a lot of offices and retail space that are not full at this point. So now you're going to add some more. So how do you plan on getting that retail space full when we have all this empty re retail space that is not full sitting in the city? I think the simple answer to that question is when you're providing that density with that number of people and visitors and things and stuff is that will begin to activate the rest of downtown along with the retail. I mean 7,000 square ft. I mean that's probably a 3500 square foot NCAP restaurant and then that other 3500 might be split up into like three little you know retail shops or you know commercial spaces of that nature. Um, you know, so I I mean the other option is don't do anything and let more stores go black, you know. So I mean that's that's that's kind of, you know, if you're not going to add density and add people and attract people to the downtown, you're certainly not going to fill up the retail space.

And how do you plan on filling up the retail space to this project? Well, I think I think you're going to have, you know, us and you as a community perspective. We're going to have a kind of a worldclass asset that people are going to want to come to and people I mean, frankly, we've got we have we are in conversations with a restaurant as we speak to bring them over and recruit them in. So, um, but we still need to get a little bit further along and, you know, I I think it would probably be premature for us to communicate like we we've cut a deal with them. so far. So, uh, but I think a year from now would probably be a great great time to be signing a lease and bringing a restaurant in. So,

yeah. I mean, my perspective is it's a lot of whatifs that listening to you don't you don't give, you know, you're talking about giving teachers discounts. You didn't say what that discount is. You're talking about giving um emergency um responders a discount. You don't say what that is, how that's going to work into it.

15%. And um like we talked beforehand, I'm not sure that 15% will be able to allow teachers to move into the apartments given the price that you're asking. Um so I I've had a lot of um comments from residents that are not happy um with the plan that they've seen. Some of them haven't seen a plan. Um, but they're really not happy with the project as a whole and they're certainly not happy with um the request for the chapter 100. Thank you for your attention. Thank you. The city attorney.

Yeah. Just I wanted to just clarify one item in the commentary and that is that there is no requirement nor is there any opportunity for the school district to have any vote or approval or denial on this. they don't have a role in the process. The role is that they're provided financials and they have an opportunity to comment upon them which they have and the city actually took the extraordinary step of requiring uh per the council's direction of having the developer actually speak with them and talk to them directly uh which they have done. So we've done above and beyond what is required of the statute required more of the developer than is required under the statute but we are not waiting on any voter action by the school board because they don't have a role in this process.

I understand that. Okay. Okay. I just wanted to make sure that was clear. But it it will go before the school board. I'm not saying they have to vote on it. No. No. It won't go the school any financial transaction that's going to impact a school board. I mean a school district usually goes through the the school board. This does not. Okay. Okay. Anyone else? Uh, Council Member Attenburg, uh, would you like to speak? Uh, yeah. Can you hear me? Yes, we can.

All right. Super. I just wanted to I guess reiterate uh what was mentioned earlier which is that uh approval of this chapter 100 application on this project does not require us to approve any future chapter 100 applications that may come before our uh council. Uh we are not on a slippery slope if we approve this chapter 100 application. And I think the other thing we have to keep in mind is um I I have yet to hear myself a single resident complain about this project or this chapter 100 application. Certainly nobody in Ward 3 has complained to me. When I uh last year when I was in a um effort to visit with a number of residents in the city, I knocked on over 2,000 doors. And the number one question I heard from residents is when is the city going to get serious about bringing new dining, entertainment, and shopping venues into our town center area. This is key. This project is key. It's been said that we can't guarantee what the fill rate's going to be on this project. How many potential new residents may decide to rent in this project once it's completed. But I don't think this developer would be wanting to build this project if they didn't think it was going to be successful. They're certainly not building it to remain empty. Being an economic development, I can tell you for a fact that I talked with a number of our small businesses that are watching what this city does. They're desperate for increased foot traffic. This project is the first step on the road to getting increased foot traffic for our businesses and town center. Thank you.

Okay, we are approaching 6:30 here. Uh I know this is an important topic. I want to make sure that everyone has had the opportunity to uh ask their questions, seek information. Is there anyone else that has a question or com? Uh, Council Member Alers,

I'm sorry to ask again. The the newer I don't think we were made aware of certain costs like the uh power the the grid things is that included in the 4.2. Is that part of that? Can you can you outline those costs again because I think those costs are new to me right now? I kind of put a different light on some of this. Can Can you just state those costs again? It's it's that that number is included within the uh extraordinary cost summary. I can summarize I can summarize. Yeah, just briefly.

Yeah. So, we've got uh so when when uh I'll list off the number and the scope associated with that and just know that uh at the end it totals to 4,230,000. Okay.

Uh so, uh $525,000 for the retaining walls and fencing. So, this is in exhibit A, so I can certainly don't need to write it down or I'll just kind of rip through it. uh $475,000 for exterior exterior elevation enhancements. Um the $175,000 for drive-thru structure, you have to access uh off of um main and so you got to pull through the building, which is a little um abnormal. Um the uh fire department has uh $310,000 of additional code requirements that are being asked of us. Um rock uh $215,000 for the rock that has been encountered and soil remediation. Um $180,000 for a rooftop patio. Um there's some uh $75,000 for intersection/publicfacing enhancements. Um $50,000 for exterior lighting upgrades. $1.1 million for interior enhancements and uh $110,000 for structural stem walls. Amaran $465,000 for the Amaran substation infrastructure. Um yeah, I mean that basically summarizes okay those items.

Thank you. Yeah, we don't have a building um that we built that you have to drive through. It would have been nice to just kind of drive on the other side, but we we understand the look and the feel and why that's really important to the city to make happen. So, thanks again. Okay. Uh, Council Member Farmer.

Yeah. Uh, I know we're getting short on time here and I appreciate Mr. Albert's asking for those numbers. I I'm okay at math, so I was kind of trying to add some things up in my head there. And there seems to be, I would say, a number of items that are necessary in the extraordinary expenditures because of things that we're asking you to do as a city. And I think that that's an important thing to think about because um we are sort of confronted up here as on a council as being generally perceived as being, you know, anti or very negative to development, things like that, which I think is certainly a story of the city from a while ago. I'm not, you know, I don't think we want to have rampid development certainly, but we want to have development in the way that we as a city expect them to be done. And a lot of these expenses sound like that's what these are. Driving through the building, enhancing the way that the outside looks, things like that. I'm personally a little puzzled by the $400,000 substation. Is that just working for you guys or is that apply to other people, too? Like,

that seems like an insane number to me. Zach's one of our Zach's a development manager for Mia Rose and he'll be overseeing the actual design and construction and he's been the one that's been battling Amaran. Sure. So yeah, uh Zach beats me Rose. Uh the big u ex extraordinary cost is that we are essentially setting up this entire area for all future, right? Um, so we we have large electrical manholes, concrete encased duct banks so that in the future they don't have to be they don't have to go back to a smaller developer and say

you got to put this in and run these eight conduit for them to expand.

So I've had a number of conversations with different council member, different residents, things like that. And one of the I think primary um issues that has been brought up repeatedly and this happens a lot you read it in the paper any time like that is you know people have looked at this in a way as some sort of a handout to a developer and I guess technically speaking in a way it sort of is but in this case what I'm hearing is you know half a million dollars is being spent sort of like the bridge that you referenced this is being spent in an area that by the way has pretty consistent power problems. we have spent a lot of money on an elevator because the power keeps going out over here. So, you know, to me that sounds like a benefit. I think getting this information um that you know there is this number of extraordinary costs perhaps it's been buried in there before and we need to do a better job as a city of pointing those things out because I think that that kind of information at least for myself personally lowers the amount of heartburn and concern I have about an issue like this. um you know this is not about a conversation about whether this is the right project for the city. We already had that conversation. This is about a financial incentive for it. And I think um for myself personally, you know, hearing that we have uh I believe very strongly that we need to work as a city with developers in the right way to get the projects that we want. And this to me sounds like something that can work very well if it's done right. I think we've had a number of projects on this um parcel of land over the years that have come and gone and this certainly seems like the best and most realistic iteration of what it can be. And I also think, you know, for those of us that are concerned even a little bit that if we grant a chapter 100, it automatically means that we have to approve one for everybody else. Obviously, we've heard a lot that we don't have to do that, but just a couple days ago in the admin public works committee, we started working on a framework for the city of

what that would look like in the future. What kinds of projects would be even thought about to use a chapter 100 and how that might work. So, I think those questions can be solidified in a framework that we're putting in. So, I mean, I I I will I think I've been pretty clear with everybody that I've been one of the people on the fence about this scenario from the beginning. I no project is perfect. I've done some development work in the past. I know that it gets weird at times. Um but hearing that, you know, I don't love the idea of taking taxing money away from the school district and things like that, but I also know that, you know, they have their own issues they got to figure out when it comes to their tax situation. They don't always do things the right way either. We don't get a say in that. We have one chance to do this the right way in Town Center. And I've been up here now for 6 years trying to figure out what the best answer to that is. And I think um you know we've debated enough on whether or not the project is a good project. It was voted and supported on. If this is being said, which it sounds like it is, that the bank has a specific number and that specific number meets a specific total. And if we don't have this approval, then that bank doesn't get to make the project happen. And we can understand it's half a million dollars from Amir to help the city. We're asking for, I would assume, a million or so dollars of just things we would like to have to make it look pretty and do things that we want. That's how this kind of back and forth should work. So, I mean, I think um I understand my I'm just going to say this. I know you guys would like to have a second reading and perhaps that will be the case. It takes a lot of us to say that. This is a big uh question for the city to answer. I don't know how it will go, but um I I think that I feel much better after hearing you come up and talk through these things than I have for the entire course of this project. I wish we could have had that kind of a dialogue way earlier than we're having it. That would have helped a lot. So, um thank you for the time you came up here to to talk to us. I know I got a lot of questions answered and and I hope the rest of you guys did

as well, but um my my level of heartburn is much better than it was talking to me, for sure. And thank you uh council member Joe Farmer for for those comments and and thanks to all the council members for asking good questions. I think it's important to get the clarity that you need. Uh I do want to make a couple of comments here. I had shared with a couple council members whether I should comment or not and they they said I should and uh I wanted to share how I thought about this but and please indulge me. It might take just a couple minutes here, but uh I moved to Wildwood 17 years ago. Uh we well, you would probably all know by my accent. I grew up in New York and Brooklyn, which is a very busy place. And then uh my family and I relocated to Virginia and I had a farm behind my house where they grew winter wheat, corn, and soybean, and I'd see tractors and all that stuff. So, I went from one extreme to the other. Uh but uh when uh we came to Wildwood uh it was about 17 years ago took a walk through this town center and I saw this beautiful town center of what it is. Uh and I said there's a lot of promise here. This is there's something happening. You don't see this anywhere else around here that has this beautiful town center where you walk down these streets, go to the movie, go out to a nice restaurant. And I said to myself as I stood on the corner there at Maine and Taylor, I said, "This is probably 2, three years before being completed." Uh that was a long time ago and it still looks the same. Uh there hasn't been a lot really in our town center. And our town center, as you always know, uh I say it's a very unique small area of our

city. And we invested as a city for this town center to thrive because it's what preserves the open space and Wildwood outside of the town center. But um as you've seen, um you know, and you've heard, there have been a lot of businesses that have struggled. I kind of sat down and with some friends came up with a list. We we came up with 55 businesses that are not here today that were at one point here. Whether it was Botanica or um you know, you had Cold Stone Crearyy or uh you know, Papa Murphy's, you know, if something's good and it's thriving and it's making money, there's no reason why it should be gone, right? Because it's it's a good business. And even in talking with a lot of the businesses today, what you hear the struggle is we we just don't have the foot traffic. You know, we try and you know, I try to get out there and promote these businesses as much as I can for our city because really when you walk around here, where do you see your friends at Sunny Street Cafe having coffee or at the Bread Company? You see people in the local businesses. That's the community. or you see them in our parks or you see them maybe at a local church, but that's about it, right? That's where you're going to run into people that, you know, and that's what makes community. And then, you know, I'm fortunate I've served on the council and now in this role, so it's been over 10 years. So, we saw some ideas come about. Um, there was an idea years ago of Elodrome. I was totally against it. I even called the news and got on there and said that's not a good idea. And I know there were people probably didn't like me when I did that. And you know, being a resident where I am, which is this area behind here, you

know, I'm looking out for the residents there and we had seen what kind of developments were going to encroach on Manchester Road by the roundabout and the Veladone was a concern about what it could do in that specific pocket. And I always thought, well, if they could do something up by Maine, where it really needs to be, it's further away from Manchester Road. It's on Main Street right here. It's where it it's there to support. And then this proposal came about and it checked off the boxes. It was like everything that where it needs to be away. It was kind of like what you couldn't ask for anything better. It wasn't adjacent to any subdivision. Nobody was really, no one was upset about it and it was kind of like the right place. But anyway, you know, I know this this is uh something that we don't entertain this type of question that we have before us here, but also wearing the hat as the mayor and trying to be the chief advocate for our city and for our businesses. Sometimes I feel like we are we we we sometimes get put into a disadvantage because you see a tool like this being used down the road and the the playing field is not even we can't we can't get something in our town center unless we either have to accommodate that and I think it's a valid concern someone brought up about well if we do this do we have to do it elsewhere I think we have to look at is this is a very unique area of our town center that needs that kind of incentive there to make it to make it thrive to bring the people there and to bring life to our town center so that people can go shopping can walk and you know again of locations that's probably one of the best locations and I know comments have been brought up about

what about the impact to other taxing entities well when others do it I mean I commend this council for asking that they go have a conversation with the school district I don't think that's been the case at all with others who have done it. But I do think that we have to sometimes think about putting Wildwood first. We really want to make this city thrive. We have to look at it and maybe in these unique situations entertain that so that we can try to find a way to get this town center right here in this specific area to thrive because we hear it over and over in the surveys. The residents want more dining options. They want to shop. They don't want to get in the car and have to drive down the road. And honestly, I don't think we want them either to go down. We want them to stay local, shop local. And so, it's like, how do we get it going? And I feel like Wildwood, we always get something that is good and it's in the palm of our hand. And sometimes we can let it go. And so I think we have to think hard about whether or not we we really want to see if this is an opportunity to try to get this town center going. So I mean that's really the impact of the the impression I've gotten from talking to people. I talked to a lot of families and folks. I mean whether you're a young family with children, you want to stay local. If you're retired, don't want to be driving far to go to your doctors or to go to um shopping, wherever it is. You want to stay close to home. And what better way that we could do it by putting Wildwood first and trying to help support this community. Cuz otherwise, I'm afraid it'll just continue to be like it's been at least for the last 17 years I've been here.

And I guess it's the last 30 years since the city's been incorporated. I don't know what will change. And so that's that's my thoughts around it. I think that you've asked all good questions. I know it's not an easy thing to entertain you, but you're doing your homework. And so, Council Member Farmer summed it up best. I appreciate your comments. I appreciate all of your comments. I mean, you all ask good questions. So, those are my thoughts there. Thank you for again taking the time to listen to me. All so with that um we don't have anything else. We do have uh actually we do have the work session but you know if we could just uh maybe adjourn the work session and come back to it later. Um and we'll take a quick break if folks need to use the restroom. Um so uh it is 6:48. What do we say about about uh why don't we shoot for 6:55? So maybe that'll give you just about a couple of minutes here where we can uh start the main meeting. Thank you. Uh do we need to make a motion? City attorney.

Mayor, a motion to adjourn until after the regular meeting. Okay. Motion to adjurnn until after the meeting. Uh council member Alers, council member Bockard, and uh all those in favor, please say I. I. I. Thank you.

Slowly make your way back to your seats. We're going to start with our main meeting. Okay. Um, let's get started with our main meeting. Again, thank you for your patience as we uh have been discussing some important topics here. So, with that, uh we'll start with the roll call.

Mayor Geritano. President. Council member Farmer. Council member Dodwell here. Council member Nyan here. Council member Attenburg here. Council member Traier here. Council member Mabberry here. Council member Robooski here. Council member Preston here. Council member Marshall present. Council member McCutchen here. Council member Rambo here. Council member Bocker present. Council member Crayons, Council Member Vanic here, Council Member Alers, Council Member Galani.

Okay, you're able to. I'd like to ask if you can please stand and join me for the Pledge of Allegiance. Okay, thank you again. Uh, next item on the agenda is the approval of the minutes that will be part of the consent agenda. Uh, next, uh, portion of our meeting is public participation. So, uh, if you wish to speak, uh, please make sure you filled out a speaker card and given it to our city clerk. If you are a participant online, we'll ask that you use the raised hand feature. So, at this time, uh, just want to share a couple reminders that we value your comments during this portion of the meeting. If you do wish to speak, again, fill out the speaker card. And when your name is called, please approach the podium, state your name and ward. If you're not sure of your ward, your address will be fine. uh to ensure all those that wish to speak have the opportunity. We do have a fivem minute time limit and we'll let you know as you approach that time limit. If you have any questions for us, please mention that during your remarks and identify the official you would like to respond. That official will make note of it and then at the conclusion of public participation, any official who chooses to respond will have three minutes to do so as all uh and direct as all questions directed to that official. The official may choose to respond to your questions after tonight's meeting. Again, we ask that you be respectful in making your remarks. Uh we ask you not to interrupt others or use any profane or abusive language. Those are prohibited. And I want to thank you in advance for these guidelines. Who is our first speaker for

tonight?

Lauren Jordan from Turnberry Place. Thank you, uh, Mayor Geritano and council members. Uh, I do have a PowerPoint that I'd like to share with the council if possible. it. Uh we do ask if you have paper copies that you can either give them to our city clerk and she'll distribute those um and then that way the council will have them to review. I appreciate that. Okay. Thank you. And do you do you want to wait till they get it or do you want to start? It's up to you.

Uh I'll just wait till they have it in hand. Thanks. That's what you guys emailed earlier, right? Uh I'm not sure who all received this. Yes, that is correct. If you did receive the email and see it, it is the same document. So um all right things these are being passed around so you can please go ahead.

All right yeah thanks for the opportunity to speak in front of you. Uh the issue at hand is opening or clo keeping closed the striker entrance at Turnberry Place where as a community uh we've expressed that I believe um at the June 9th meeting and uh I think we got some really positive comments which we began taking action on. Um we were a little surprised to see uh that an assessment and analysis had been made by public works without notification. Um, you know, uh, we were very much interested in working with the city to address any concerns of the council. Uh, we had already taken steps to beautify the area, including cleaning the area, uh, and removal of the fence. I think it was outlined in a West magazine article where we were um formerly notified of uh you know of the of the changes to the city stance on the new um road closure of uh I forget what ordinance which was in the June 9th meeting supposedly uh pushed forward. That's not to be um negative in any way, but like it was supposed to be looking forward not not at things that were currently um such right for new new developments. Uh one thing that we would like as a community is the opportunity to appeal the analysis uh made by public works. Uh we believe that there's at least two points which were heavily weighted that um probably should not be weighted quite as heavily. One being the emergency um obstruct like like being able to allow uh emergency vehicles back and forth. A couple community members have reached out to West Metro and uh they don't

they've not had an issue and also uh there's been no issues over 29 years uh for the emergency vehicles to access that area of of course the road was not closed during that entire time. just just stating that there's been no issue and we don't see any issue with uh overcoming the delineators which have been um installed properly after guidance from Rick Brown's office. I re reached out two weeks ago for a contractor to help us install it to the city's liking. Um and we have not quite uh heard a response, but I'm more than happy to continue working with the city in order to further beautify the area. Um what you have in front of you is a commitment uh outlining what one of our community members feels is a very strong proposal for that entrance and we would like to uh move forward with that with that type of plan um with major funding. You know p uh primary funding would come from our community. What we would like to ask for is support on uh any road items such as like the the actual pavement, but other than that, the beautifification would be taken on to taken up uh taken up by the community of Turnberry Place. So, uh the only thing that that's really outstanding is the question of uh well, I I don't even think I'll broach that question of why anyone would want that open. uh that's their own opinion, but I would point out that there's no real need uh public safety need I believe um any particular particular financial benefit to the city to actually open up this road. And so um I'd be really uh interested in allaying any concerns that the council might have uh if the road

were closed uh by working with you directly. Um, there are a couple of other points that I wanted to maybe address with uh Mr. Rick Brown directly uh by calling his office and uh maybe getting some of the points uh changed uh on review of our appeal. That's it. Okay. And thank you for your comments here and um maybe we might have some comments in a moment here. We'll see. Uh are there any other speakers? Okay. So again, thank you and um you you may take a seat at this time. Thank you.

Thank you. So, um, we don't have any other, uh, public comment speakers here, but I think, uh, given that we did have this speaker here, uh, maybe we could provide at least maybe, um, I'll look at our admin and public works committee, uh, to see because I know there there's obviously an effort here to try to do something and I think the council's uh, uh, made it clear back in June that policy was going to be forwardlooking, but I think this has definitely gotten the response of trying to address some of those issues that have been raised, especially uh the Ballards there that uh need to be placed so that you don't have uh probably one or two people that seem to be abusing that uh that area there. But um you know the HOA and and maybe with through follow-up discussion can occur uh whether it's offline or through admin public works maybe we can kind of get something finalized here. Um, since you're the chair, how do you feel about that?

Yeah, I mean, we can certainly try to do that. I mean, I I would say, um, I think what you guys are referring to there, so there was two items that we put forward a couple months ago. One was basically a prohibition on gates and other blockages on streets, that being a forward-looking proposal specifically more directed towards new developments, but obviously applies to the street public streets within the city. The second was an assessment of the existing gates and obstructions within the city so that we could get a generalized report of what they look like and if any of them were out of alignment for where they were at. Um, if memory serves in this case, um, I think Director Brown and his guys went out, I don't know, a couple weeks after the meeting or something and scored the area a 75 if I if I I remember right. And a 70 being kind of that threshold for like a real problem. And that 75 was after a pretty extensive and, you know, a good amount of work that the that the residents in Turnberry did. So, um, in general, I mean, I'm I'm I got the email and I'm looking at this and I I certainly understand the residents of Turnberry not wanting to have it opened up. I'm not super excited to get it opened up necessarily either, but the idea with this is is to cl close loops and when we have a policy in place, the policy kind of works. That's how it goes. So, um, I would suggest that, you know, part of this plan that I'm looking at says that the residents, the HOA is going to pay for the upkeep of this space. I'm pretty sure that's been the plan for 30 years. So, I don't know how that's any different from what's happening today. I don't know. Can you say something or No,

if there's What's that? If there's no objection or Okay. Yeah, would it be We we can do it offline. That's fine. Yeah. I think and again, we're not going to solve that. Uh this tonight's not even an agenda item. Um but I think that this is very helpful to see what additional steps you may be willing to take and obviously see where that kind of falls in with the scoring if it changes some things or not. Um yeah,

it's correct that the uh admin public works committee meetings are open to uh the public and I'd encourage you and representatives to attend those to see how things how things move and how we how we think and how we base decisions we do on practices we do. So that that you're you're invited and you're welcome and encouraged. Thank you. So um yeah, I mean I think at this point let's see if we can have a discussion and then if has further followup in the admin public works committee that would be the best place Rick is I see it came up. I mean,

well, I felt like it was appropriate since I was involved in the discussion in the in the in the item in in its entirety, but u we did provide a report to the council at the last meeting and really the only gate that was considered was the Turnberry fence closure and it was discussed at work session at the July meeting and that's where an action a motion was passed to direct the department to move forward with removal of it. Now we haven't made taken steps in that direction and what I wanted to point out was for the policy that we passed at the June meeting there is an additional step that has not been taken by the department which was essentially and I did convey this verbally over the phone was to communicate to the HOA the direction that we were headed. So there certainly is another step per that policy that they get informed of the rating and have an opportunity to essentially appeal it or at least provide additional information that might affect the scoring. So that has kind of been done tonight, but I think probably I need to make sure I've formally communicated the decision and the rating to the HOA before we do much further along that process.

Yes, city administrator late.

Thank you. And also just wanted to add some additional context that and and if the council would like to they can correct the the motion to if it's appropriate with the city attorney. Um that said based off the understanding from the department administration it was that yes we want to look into the feasibility of this to review the concrete street slab replacement project to see when we're planning to work in the turnberry area and if we're looking at that concrete slabs there to incorporate these into a future project that would have to be approved by the budget. And then also obviously the traffic restrictions that are currently present there would have to be changed as well which would be an ordinance change. So there'd be ample opportunity for the HOA and also the full public to give comment if that was correct. That's the understanding from the department side.

Okay. Yeah, that was my understanding too looking to the feasibility. I don't believe that there was direction to go ahead and actually do the work uh to do that and I think you know we have an opportunity here see with the HOA you know they obviously have expressed a strong strong desire and intent to uh not have the road opened um you know it's uh I think something that we at least look at to see what we could do. Yes, Council Member Marshall,

just to clarify it, this was a board of public safety which had all the different fire departments and the police departments. They're the ones that recommended that we don't have any gates because it actually slows down a response time. And amazingly enough, a long long time ago, um I represented W and the road was closed only because Streker Road and uh Clayton Road were very very different uh 20ome years ago. They were not safe. They weren't open. you couldn't get in and out of there. So, the the mandate came forward 100% from the board of public safety saying, "Hey, look, we need to get emergency response vehicles in and out and that's where it kind of got started. So, just to clarify it, it wasn't the admin committee made it up. It came from the public service."

Yes, thank you for sharing that. I remember uh hearing that. Well, the city attorney advised it's not agenda topic, so we should refrain from further discussion on it. But uh I I think we need to take this information and then see what we could do next with that. Okay. Thank you very much. Uh we don't have any other speakers. Anyone else online? Okay. So moving on then. Um we don't have any announcements. We do have appointments under the consent agenda. So we'll proceed to the public hearing. No, director Vunich

Ultimately [Music] there was no interest in a restaurant site that particular location. So therefore the first amendment changed the restaurant to a two-story office building. Again, no interest. And now there is a part as a lawn maintenance company that would like to construct a 5,000 to 6,000 ft² building and accommodate office and warehouse uses there as well as limited storage of equipment. The planning and zoning commission considered the request. The analysis that is in the report from the planning and zoning commission identifies the reasons it believes the reasonzoning is appropriate and primarily site has some unusual characteristics. One being a metropolitan St. Louis sewer district pump station is located on the property via the easement. Those pump stations can create some issues relative to odor. Additionally, the visibility is very limited. It sits well below the elevation of Route 100 as well as Route 109. Therefore, may not be a prime location for lead or other commercial uses that depend on adequate visibility. So, tonight the planning and zoning commission is recommending that this particular resing be supported by city council and later on on tonight's agenda, there is a bill that is planned for introduction that would achieve that outcome. If there are any questions at a public comment, the department would be glad to answer them. Thank you.

Thank you, Director Bonich. Uh, do we have anyone that wishes to speak for the public hearing? Okay, Mr. Mayor, excuse me. Um, I'm having issues with the microphone system. Um, again, it's not coming through. So, if you don't mind, and Tom, if you could help me, please.

All right. We'll just declare recess until testing. Testing. Testing. Testing.

I can hear you. I just can't see you. Now I can see you. Okay. Well, thank you uh all for your patience as we work through the technical issue there. So, we will uh resume our meeting. And again, for those of us that are joining by Zoom, we did have a technical issue. So, we just had a brief recess while they fixed that. So, back to Director Voonage and we have a public hearing. So, do we have any public hearing speakers or director Vunage?

Mr. Mayor, according to our city clerk, there are no speaker cards. If there is anyone interested that's attending via Zoom, if they'd use the raise hand feature, we'd certainly be glad to hear your comments. Otherwise, the department's available for any comments or questions from our city council. Okay. I did see council member Dodwell and then Alers. So, Council Member Dodwell,

just real quickly, Joe, I'm looking at the the uh section A on the elevation showing the the hill that goes down to the existing pump station. Um, are they going to be putting anything along the top of that hill between um the gravel and anything to ensure that we reduce the runoff down to that pumping station from probably what's going to be more or less porous uh environment where that building's going to be sitting.

Yes. uh given the fact that there is a pump station that's uh owned by the district as well as there has been extension of services from the district. This particular project has to meet MSD storm water management requirements as well as the cities and we are asking for a robust landscape plan since this particular business is a landscaping business. Thank you council member. I was just the limited outdoor storage. Uh I know that can get out of control sometimes. Uh you think it'd be more vehicles or supplies or the the restriction is that there's no outdoor storage of materials such as sand, gravel, rock.

Yeah. In this particular instance, there's several trailers that the business has. They remove the lawnmowers, store them inside, and leave the trailers outside. Thank you. Anyone else? Uh, Council Member Mabry is is the southern border of this proposed development. Does it abut the northern boundary of the new subdivision proposed?

Yes, sir, it does. What's just curious what's the timing uh of construction and the timing of approval compared to each other? What I'm getting after is the old if you like the if you like the scenery, you better own it. If you like the view, you better own it. The the people who are going to be buying these homes, there's going to be a lot of them. And they're going to have their they're going to have their um whatever they call the things you walk into when you're going to look at a home, the displays. Thank you. They're going to have those way down on Manchester and they're not going to do anything with this northern edge until a later plat. Question is, uh are is this development going to be completed this uh landscaping business uh storage and office? Will it be completed a year before that other development even starts building displays? Or is there going to be an overlap where we have to write in conditions that um the developer for the subdivision has to disclose conditions at their northern boundary. Long sentence.

Well, I don't believe this particular project will be ahead of the reserve at Wildwood. The reserve at Wildwood has been given authorization for go full grading. Right. So, they're going to be moving quite a bit faster than this particular project. This particular project will get first reading tonight, a second reading in September, and then we step into the site development plan process, the architectural review board process, and then finally improvement plans for construction purposes. I actually see this as a project in 2026. The intent though is to ensure that buyers in the reserve at Wildwood know what's going on around them. And so the department of planning and department of public works are available to answer questions from future buyers, encourage them to call city hall. And this particular instance, the plans for the reserve actually identify the um the uh pump station and on the plans it says that in occasion you should expect an odor. So there is a warning to buyers that's on the plans relative to this particular location. I want to compliment the department on going through and making uh added comments or updates that addressed a lot of concerns I had about uh conditions, building conditions and site conditions. The 25 ft uh building height I believe one story that is below the grade of the uh going down to to 100. So, you won't be able to see the roof of this building from the burm of the side uh of the south side of 100. Can that be raised by request later on? Or is there an ordinance that in that zoning whatever it is, you're not legally allowed to ever ask for a two-story building?

Well, certainly if they ask for a two-story building, the process would start with the planning and zoning commission and conclude here. And obviously the record now contains your concern about a two-story building being too visible from the surrounding roadways.

Any any commercial industrial use being visible from the south side of 100. I I'd love to see all the industry we could get, but people have a right to not have to be confronted by that. Uh even if it's barely in town center. Well, I think one of the key elements because this project started out as a denial with the department of planning because the petitioner wanted to build a metal building much like a butler building for lack of a better description and for the most part now the building will comply with uh town center guidelines architecture. So I hope he will not show up at a meeting and say there are extraordinary circumstances and he'll need a chapter 100. I was you don't believe it but I was thinking of that.

I say that tongue and cheek. Mr. Udle had very well-versed on what this what our expectation is. For all intents and purposes in 30 years we've never approved a metal building in town center and his was not to be the first according to the planning and zoning commission. Sure. Anyone else? Council member McCutchen. Yeah. Will there be a buffer between the subdivision and this development? And what will that be?

Um the the buffer is Bottom Creek. It separates the two sides. So there's Bottom Creek, Bottom Creek, and it's established with then our code requires 50 ft on either side of Bottom Creek from top of bank, not the channel, not the floodway from top of bank, so to speak. And then obviously there's a substantial grade difference between the two. And so I would estimate that at least from the southern edge of the proposed building to the first culde-sac where homes will be placed is well in excess of 300 ft. Well, and in that bottom creek area, that is where the that's where the majority of tree preservation occurred. so we could ensure the stabilized banks would be retained. So I think we've done good a job as we can to ensure that the residents in the reserve have protections but also recognize this site. I think the question and I've heard it tonight during a discussion relative to the mixeduse project if the qu the commission stated if not this use what would go there and that's a pretty darn good question when you have a pump station that creates odors and this is one of the few that I think could resolve that because the employees are gone most of the day they just come pick up the equipment go out on the go out and cut grass do what they do and then come back at the end of Okay. Anyone else?

Thank you. All right. Uh, see no other comments. I think we just need a motion to close the public hearing. Motion made by Council Member Marshall. Is there a second? Made by Council Member Preston. All those in favor of uh the motion to close the public hearing say I. I. I.

Anyone oppose or abstain? All right. The motion passes. All right. We'll move on now to legislation under unfinished business. Uh we do have several bills here and I'd like to see uh and hopefully the ones that I've asked to be excluded, those are where you have a significant uh budgetary impact. Um want to treat those separately, but if there's no objection, uh can we get a motion uh for the second reading of the following bills? And again, just let me know if you object to the doing these in mass. Bill 2996, 29 97, 298, and 29.99. Is that fine with the council? Anyone opposed with uh doing these in mass? We'll do this 3,000 separately uh given the significant uh budgetary impact there. So, uh okay. Uh do we have a motion for the second reading of those bills? Made by council member Preston and seconded by council member Farmer. All those in favor, please say I.

I. Okay. So, uh go ahead, Colleen, and please read the second reading of these bills.

Bill 2996, an ordinance of the city of Wildwood authorizing the mayor to submit on behalf of the city applications to the St. Louis County Office of Community Development for the allocation of $25,500 and $51,000 of the 2023 and 2024 Community Development Block Grant Funds, CDBG, for senior services and accessibility improvements within the city's park system and authorizing the mayor to execute the municipal housing and community development supplemental cooperation agreement. Bill 2997, an ordinance authorizing the mayor of the city of Wildwood, Missouri to negotiate and execute professional services agreement on behalf of the city of Wildwood with UPDC Properties LLC doing business as urban planning development corporation for easement acquisition services on the Valley Road Improvement Project within the city of Wildwood. Bill 2998, an ordinance of the city of Wildwood, Missouri, amending section three of ordinance 2964 of the city of Wildwood, Missouri, incre increasing the total authorization amount for the city contractor agreement authorized pursuant to said ordinance 2964 to allow for the completion of the 2025 asphalt resurfacing project within the city of Wildwood. Bill 29.99, an ordinance of the city of Wildwood, Missouri, amending various sections of chapter 145 of the code of ordinances of the city of Wildwood, Missouri, and establishing policies for purchasing and the disposal of surplus stock.

Okay. I'll ask uh the directors to come up if they wish to uh mention any comments related to these bills for second reading or if we have any questions or comments from the council members. Mr. Mayor, bill 2996 relates to the city's allocation of community development block grant funds. This memorializes the expenditure of approximately $76,000 towards senior programming and other services to that particular demographic. All right. Anyone have any questions for Director Bunage? Okay. Seeing none, uh then uh Director Brown, do you have anything? Or city administrator Lee, do you wish to

I would just make a quick mentioning, mayor of uh bill 299. It is changing our code ordinances to amend our current policy for purchasing authority and our RFP process. This is something that's been discussed at the administration public works committee, but really it's supposed to makes us a little bit more agile in the sense that our current formal RFP process kicks in at $10,000. And what this bill would do is it would extend that that practically to 5 to $20,000. So anything below 20,000 would not have to go through the extensive going out to the newspaper and typically taking about 4 to 6 weeks for that RFP to be turned around. um anything over 20,000 would still be going through that same exact process. And the other good thing about this bill that uh the department actually recognized and appreciate from the city attorney's perspective is that we broke out our current policy, our current code does not identify the difference between a RFB, an RFP and an RFQ. And this pretty much establishes situations for which an RFP would make more sense than an RFB where it might be software. and we've ran into this this issue multiple times over the last couple years that it might make more sense for an RFP to be used instead of an RFP because you're not necessarily just looking for the lowest bidder when it comes to some type of software solution. You're going to be looking for the solution that fulfills the needs of the city um to the to the most extent. So that's done and then the RFQ process is also added in there which we already do but this helps define exactly how that process plays out. Um the other major component that's added here uh it's twofold. there is the CPIU uh each year on January 1, whatever the change in the CPIU is for that annual year at that $20,000 threshold will adjust. So in last year, I believe it was about 3.2 if I remember correctly. Um if the CPIU has changed positive 3.2, then that would adjust by 3.2%. If it's changed, if it's negative 3.2, if we hit

a uh a lull, then it would decrease by 3.2%. But it helps um have an automatic system to help keep that purchasing power and purchasing policy in in place. Uh obviously it also establishes that all purchases of this extent especially if under the RFP threshold uh must be budgeted by the city council. And then the other major portion of this uh bill is the surplus stock policy that is incorporated. It's a very small provision but currently we have to as a department has to treat every item that you know say you have an iPad that goes broken becomes broken or not no longer functional we have to treat it as if it was purchased yesterday when it comes to the getting rid of it. Um so in this case it'll allow us to use the rules established through the IRS which practically allows electronics to be devalued. It actually does in seven years an electronic device devalues to zero dollars. So each year you're getting a law diminishing returns, but it gives us the exact amount. Still we'll have a report submitted to the council when we're selling these, you know, electronics is typically what we're trying to take care of. Um, but this will allow us to streamline that process and make the whole city team become a more agile, functional, uh, responsive um, group whenever we have projects come our way. Available for any questions.

Any questions for the city administrator pertaining to the items that he mentioned? Council member Farmer and Council Member Dodwell. Go ahead. Yeah. Uh, not exactly a question, but I did just want to let everybody know this is kind of a one part of a multi-part thing that we've worked through with the help of our treasurer to get some of these systems modernized. So, I'm super glad to finally see it on the docket here and ready to get this thing put in place. Council member Dodwell,

I was just going to echo what um Mr. Farmer just said. Um, it's been a long time coming. Um, the fact that we're putting some specific process controls in place to make it easier for our staff and for the council to move things forward more quickly improves our performance as a city. Thank you. Great. Anyone else? Okay. Uh Director Brown, do you have anything you wish to add?

Um thank you, mayor, council members. Uh relative to bill 2997, I'm bill for I'm a bill for any questions. However, I do want to mention that the amount of the contract with the uh consultant is proposed to be $32,000 for right away and easement acquisition services, not 32,500. As I state in my memo, I made an error in the memorandum and I wanted to make note of that. Otherwise, I'm a vote for any questions uh for bill 2997 or 29.998 relative to the increase in the contract authorization for our 2025 asphalt resourcing project. Anyone Anyone have anything for Director Brown? Okay, seeing none, then uh let's do a roll call for uh final passage of bills 2996, 2997, 29.99.

Council, excuse me, 29.998. So again, 29.996, 297, 298, and 29.99. Thank you, Council Member Farmer. Yes. Council member Dodwell, yes. Council member Nyan, yes. Council member Attenburg, yes. Council member Traier, yes. Council member Mabberry, yes. Council member Roblooski, yes. Council member Preston, yes. Council member, Council Member Marshall, yes. Council member McCutchen, yes. Council member Rambo, yes. Council member Bockart, yes. Council member Vanic, yes. Council member Alers, yes. Council member Galani,

yes. Thank you. We'll move on to the last item under unfinished business, number five, bill 3000. And I get a motion for the second reading of bill 3000 made by council member Bockard. Is there a second? Uh, council member Farmer. All those in favor, please say I. I. I.

I. Okay. One oppose. Council member McCutchen. So, um, go ahead and please read bill 3000 for a second reading. Bill 3000, an ordinance of the city of Wildwood, Missouri, authorizing the mayor to negotiate and execute a city contractor agreement on behalf of the city of Wildwood with Gersonen Construction Company Incorporated for the construction of the State Route 109 and State Route BA South Roundabout Project, including traffic control and other incidental items as shown on the construction drawings and specifications. Director Brown, do you have anything else that you wish to add?

Um, nothing new, Mayor. Um, other than I will point out that in the um work session, I had a memorandum that was listed for information relative to the benefits of roundabouts as there was a lot of discussion about that at the former meeting in July. So, if there's any general questions or specific questions about the project, I'm happy to do my best to entertain them at this time. Hey, anyone have any questions for Director Brown? I see council member Doddwell. Please go ahead. Just real quick, Rick, um when do we uh estimate a start time for this? Will that be next fiscal year or this fiscal year? Um the actual construction at this point based on the contract documents won't likely occur until next February. That would be the notice to proceed date.

Okay. And then just one other question. I noticed that on 109 there is a portion of 109 from Clayton Road up past that intersection that has not been repaved. I'm assuming that will be completed once that roundabout's completed. Um, Councilman, not exactly. They they do have plans to resurface the section from Clayton Road up to immediately south of our project yet this year. At least that's my understanding. But they will leave a gap for for this project for sure. Okay, seeing none, uh then let's do a roll call for final passage of bill three. Council member Farmer,

yes. Council member Dodwell, yes. Council member Nyan, yes. Council member Atenberg, yes. Council member Tradier, yes. Council member Mabberry, yes. Council member Rablooski, no. Council member Preston, yes. Council member Marshall, yes. Council member McCutchen, no. Council member Rambo, yes. Council member Bockart, yes. Council member Vanic, yes. Council member Alers, yes. Council member Galani, yes.

Uh, Council Member Rambo, apologies, but can we just seek some clarity on what your vote was? I'm sorry. I I meant to be clear and loud, but um uh I voted yes. Okay, you're loud and clear this time. Thank you. Uhhuh. All right. Bill 3000. Go ahead. Uh passes. Yes.

All right. Moving on then. We're going to go into new business. and and again uh I will uh seek to have several uh but we'll exclude uh a few actually uh given uh let's see we have here bills three uh 3002 um will be uh given the small size of the budgetary impact 3002 and then bill 3004 we can read those in mass and then we'll handle all the other bills separately um any objections All right. Um All right. Can we get a moat? What's up?

I would like um bill 30004 pulled out of the Well, well, in that case, we'll go through each one one by one. All right. So, moving on. Uh bill 3001 before the council for first reading and concerns award 8. Can I get a motion for the first reading of the bill made by council member Galani? Is there a second? Uh, Council Member Bocker. All those in favor, please say, "I." I. I.

Anyone oppose or abstain. All right. Um, um, Colleen, go ahead and please read bill 3001. Bill 3001, an ordinance of the city of Wildwood, Missouri, authorizing the city administrator to execute the necessary agreement purchase order to procure from an unlimited play the selected playground equipment for the all-inclusive facility that will constitute phase two of the city's village green. Director Vunage, do you have anything you'd like to add uh in addition to the information that's already been provided?

Mr. Mayor and members of city council, as you know, phase two of Village Green is proceeding forward. We received an invoice from Unlimited Play, the general contractor, seeking half payment of the playground equipment. Playground equipment has been held by Little Tax Commercial at the 2024 price. So, at the last meeting in July, city council authorized the preparation of this legislation and the department is available for any comments or questions. Anyone have any comments or questions? Council member McCutchen, do we need a second reading this evening? Uh, no, ma'am. Thank you, Doug.

Anyone else? All right, then. This bill will be on the agenda for the next meeting. Uh, so we'll move forward to bill 3002. Can I get a motion uh for the first reading of this bill concerns uh ward 8 made by council member Albert seconded by council member Galani. All those in favor please say I.

I abstain. Mayor Colleen, please go ahead and read bill 3002. Bill 3002, an ordinance of the city council of the city of Wildwood, Missouri, authorizing the mayor to execute the attached city contractor agreement and associated materials with Shereekq Creek Excavating for the installation of a new trash enclosure for the city hall site. Director Vunich, please uh feel free to add anything that is not already presented.

Mr. there. Members of city council, a competitive bidding process was exercised relative to a new trash enclosure for city hall. The previous trash enclosure had to be removed to accommodate the construction footprint of village green phase 1. The planning and parks committee reviewed the bids that were submitted and selected Sheret Creek Excavating for this project and if there are any questions, the department would be glad to try to answer them at this time. Thank you. Okay. Anyone have any questions or comments for director Vonage? All right, seeing none, then bill 3002 will be back on the agenda at the next meeting. Moving on, we have bill 3003 before the council for first reading concerns 8. Uh, can I get a motion for the first reading of bill 3003 made by council member Bockard? Is there a second on the motion? Made by council member Galani. All those in favor, please say I.

I. I I Anyone oppose or abstain? All right, Colleen, please go ahead and read bill 3003. Bill 3003, an ordinance of the city council of the city of Wildwood, Missouri, authorizing the mayor to execute the attached city contractor agreement and associated materials with Sheret Creek Excavating LLC for the reassembly of the Essen Log Cabin within the phase one area of the village green site. Okay. Director Vunage, do you have anything you'd like to add?

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Mayor, and members of city council. Again, a competitive bidding process was held regarding the reassembly of the Essen Log Cabin. The bidding process was the second of two. The second bidding process was substantially success, more successful than the first. And tonight the the planning and parks committee is presenting its recommendation via this bill to select Sherek Creek Excavating at a cost of less than $280,000 to reassemble an invest log cabin in phase one of Village Green. There are any questions or comments? The department be glad to answer them at this time. Thank you.

Okay. Anyone have any questions or comments? Council member Alers. Um, is is there an assessment of this is the stuff this was this was stole, right? This stolen at one point and now it's back under storage. What can you assess the condition and maybe what's left of the original cabin?

Well, what's left of the original cabin is 80% of the original logs that form the four walls. What's missing is the rock foundation, the flooring, the trusses, and the roof. So, all of those are new items that will be part of the reassembly. And along with those four major structural components, the windows and the one door were also lost as well. Okay. And has the is the parks department looked at maybe a fundraiser for this project? The department of planning and parks over the past five plus years have tried fundraising efforts. We've collected funds at all of the Celebrate Wildwood events. We've talked to the Essen family which has offered some potential funding given it's a legacy of their family in the settlement of this area um many generations ago but for all intents and purposes majority of the funding is coming from the taxpayers of anyone else have any questions or comments for director? All right. Uh then uh seeing uh no other questions in this item will be back on the agenda for uh the next meeting. Okay, moving on to bill 3004 before the council for first reading and also concerns W 8. Um uh can we get a motion for bill 3004? Made by council member Bockard, second by council member Vanic. All those in favor, please say I.

I. Anyone oppose or abstain? All right, we have one opposed. Council member Kutchen. So, um, Colleen, please go ahead and read bill 3004. Bill 3004, an ordinance of the city council of the city of Wildwood, Missouri, reapproving the consolidation of three existing lots of record into two parcels of ground that are situated on the southwest corner of Taylor Road and Main Street, with such also being attractive land that is located in in the southeast quarter of section 1, Township 44 North, range 3 east of the fifth principal meridian, city of Wildwood, St. County, Missouri, and hereafter having the resultant properties known as Wildwood Town Center Plat 4.

Director Roish, do you have anything you wish to add? Uh, in addition to what you've already presented,

Mr. Mayor, members of city council, this is a reapproval of this consolidation plat. The necessity of the reapproval is that it's rapidly approaching the 120day limit and the department was unsure if we could meet that deadline which is a couple days from today. The department does not necessarily know why we need the reapproval. Stocken Associates knew that the plat was approved in April 2025 by the city council. department thought it had provided the information to Stocken Associates. But in that analysis, I would probably favor Stocken Associates being on top of the matters versus the department given how busy we were in the early spring. If at all possible, the department would respectfully request a second reading tonight given that all intents and purposes a second reading was granted in April.

Okay. Before we ask for a second read, anybody have any questions or comments? Great. Uh, Council Member Marsh, what's this do? It actually takes the three parcels of ground that now form what would be the mixed use development site. That's been the subject of tonight's chapter 100 conversation and creates two parcels of ground, one of which is the intended location of the multiple family building. Can I add something? City administrator Lee.

Um, Mr. Just to clarify too this uh and it's this is in the separate report um about a different the other item of under discussion but this also includes that small sliver of the property on Manchester Road that's also getting improvements. Correct.

Well, it does include the second lot is the actually a large a 4 acre plus lot that is not intended for development at this time. was originally considered for 14 single family detached dwellings on individual lots, but I believe that there is a concern about bedrock and its depth. So again, this would create the future development lot and the current development lot. Uh, anyone else have any other questions? Thank you.

All right. Well, seeing none, then uh did you say you request a second reading for this one? Yes, Mr. Mayor. I believe it's on the agenda by no fault of the petitioner, but more so trying to figure out between Stocken Associates and the Department of Planning may have dropped that ball, so to speak. Okay. Can we get a motion then for a second reading of the bill made by Council Member Dodwell, seconded by Council Member Preston. All those in favor of the second reading of bill 3004, please say I. I. Anyone opposed or abstain?

One opposed. Council member McCutchen. So we'll go ahead and proceed uh with the second reading. Colleen, please go ahead and read the bill for a second time. Bill 3004, an ordinance of the city council of the city of Wildwood, Missouri, reapproving the consolidation of three existing lots of record into two parcels of ground that are situated on the southwest corner of Taylor Road in Main Street, with such also being a tract of land that is located in the southeast quarter of section 1, Township 44 North, range 3 east of the PR fifth principal meridian, city of Wildwood, St. Louisis County, Missouri. And here after having the resulting properties known as Wildwood Town Center Plat 4.

Okay, the bill has been read for a second time. Eric Vage, you're back up again. I guess there's any other question for the second reading. Thank you. Anything at all? Okay, seeing none, then uh can we get a roll call for the second reading of Bill 3004? Council member Farmer? Yes. Council member Dodwell, yes. Council member Nyan, yes. Council member Utenberg. Yes. Is that a yes? Can you clarify? Okay, there we go. Council member Tradier, yes. Council member Mabberry, yes. Council member Rablooki, yes. Council member Preston, yes. Council member Marshall, yes. Council member McCutchen, no.

Council member Rambo? Yes. Yes. Yeah. Would you mind? Since it is a roll call, we do need video. Yeah. Before that. Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah, I for I forgot that part, but yes. Council member Buckert. Yes. Council member Vanic. Yes. Council member Alers. Yes. Council member Galani. Yes. Okay, that bill passes. All right, moving on. Uh, bill 3005 before the council for the first reading and uh concerns all wards. Is there a motion for the first reading of bill 3005? Made by council member Galani, seconded by council member Preston. All those in favor, please say I.

Anyone oppose or say?

Okay, we have one oppose. Uh so go ahead. Uh Colleen, please read bill 3005. Bill 3005, an ordinance of the city council of the city of Wildwood, Missouri, authorizing the city of Wildwood, Missouri to issue its taxable industrial revenue bonds, Wildwood Luxury Living LLC project series 2025 in a principal amount not to exceed 52 million 500,000 for the purpose of providing funds to pay the cost of acquiring, constructing, and improving a facility for the industrial development project in the city approving a plan for the project and authorizing certain actions and agreements in connection therewith.

City administrative Lee, is there any information you wish to add that hasn't already been provided?

Thank you, mayor. Just to cover a few things. Um, this the petitioner is here in uh in the audience tonight and did speak during the work session. They have requested two readings of the bill tonight um to get moving on the project. That said, the full city council. Uh just a couple quick notes too that overall this um this development it's a couple couple things here. Uh we've had a pretty long lively discussion, but wanted to discuss a few certain specifics that we have really the the financial impact to the city so we can provide just the one to one. So the city's financial deficit here is it's null. So if you actually take, you know, say they bought 100% of the products within St. Louis County, you did the math on, okay, 1% of all those materials, which 15 million, I believe it was 15,700 700,000. 1% of that is what is taxable to the pool. If you take our distribution, which is 1.824% 824% of that it added up to be and this is 100% if they bought everything in St. Louis County it'd be about $3,000 lost in revenue. That said for the issuance to handle the administrative cost associated with this project the city would be able to um is actually net bringing in $262,500 into the to help oversee the cost and also the work that's already gone into reviewing it. On top of that as well, we do anticipate based off the population growth that would be anticipated that it would be about uh 15 to $30,000 that would be brought in each year to our uh capital improvement sales tax fund just through that half cent fund. Um especially if they have spending habits that are consistent with the rest of our residents. And then from the utility tax side, we can anticipate anywhere between 20 and $30,000 in utility taxes. Um the only net negative could potentially be

the the pool tax distribution, but if you add those residents in 2030, it'll actually make up more than enough cuz right now they're currently thinking that it would be about 30% of materials. Uh and that adds up to be about $863 in distribution from the pool. So just wanted to provide some of the the key statistics, but the department's available for any questions along with our city attorney. And we have actually a representative here with um with uh with our our bond council here tonight too. So available for any questions. Thank you. Okay. Do we have any questions for city administrator Lee or any of the folks he mentioned? Council member Dodwell and then council member Mabry.

It's not a question. I would like to move that we have a second reading this evening so we can get this moving forward. Okay. So um is that uh is so then you're making a motion. So you would have ask for a second. Can we have comment? So city attorney then would that discussion happen under Yeah. There's a motion on the floor and it would be appropriate if there is a second and then there can be once that vote there can be a debate on that motion and after that motion there can be additional debate and question on the question presented.

Okay. So, I guess let's follow that then if uh council member Dodwell um is making the motion and then uh I did see council member Preston uh wishing to second it but um council member I see your hand up uh but is that related to the motion making the motion or Yeah, I was going to second the motion uh but uh council member Preston beat me to it so I'm good right now. Thank you. All right. Thank you for that. All right, with that uh motion being made for a second reading, uh all those in favor of a second reading, please say I. I.

Okay. Um we will do a roll call then. Um so, Colleen, yeah. So, once now we have the second reading, there'll be there'll be the opportunity. Oh, it could fail too. Yeah. So, voting before we're voting on it. Well, the first reading took place. That was the voice vote that happened before. Okay. So, now, uh, Council Member Dodwell made a motion for a second reading.

So, if the second reading vote that will take place now passes, then there'll be a second reading on the floor for discussion. Um, and if it does not then, uh, city attorney, I guess you might want to, right? So, so right now we've already there's already been a vote and there will be the mayor's directed a roll call vote, but after that roll call vote, there's still an opportunity for discussion, common questions on the bill itself. Okay. So, um, and John, just to clarify, we do need a supermajority if we're going to be reading it twice tonight versus and I think it's 11 that 11, correct? Yep. No matter what.

Okay. So let's see if we have opportunity for a second reading. If it fails then s city attorney is there still opportunity for questions? We'll be back to the first reading. Is that questions? Yes, but not debate. Okay, understood. Okay, let's see with that then. Um the motion made by council member Dodwell, second by council member Preston for the second reading. Council member Farmer. Yes. Council member Dodwell. Yes. Council member Nyan. Yes. Council member Attenburg. Yes. Council member Tradier, yes. Council member Mabberry, no. Council member Roblooski, no. Council member Preston, yes. Council member Marshall, Council Member McCutchen, no.

Council member Rambo, yes. Council member B. Can you clarify one more time? Yes. I'm I'm sorry. Yes, my vote is yes. Okay, thank you. We can hear you good now. Council member Bakert, yes. Council member Vanic, Council Member Alers, Council Member Galani, yes. Council member Utenberg, can you just clarify your vote as well? Yes. Say that one more time. We Yes. A little trouble.

That's a lot better. Thank you. All right. Can you tally up the results? Okay. What is Okay. So, city attorney has advised that, uh, it is one vote short, uh, for a second reading. So, does that mean we're back to the first reading? Okay. So, questions at this point to the first reading, Council Member M.,

thank you. I specifically did not want a second reading tonight. Thank you. Got to get close, too. I did not want a second reading tonight. Got questions and opportunity for amendment. Uh, a question for Mr. Lee. Uh, on the on papers you sent out tonight. Um, I see this I see the extension of 6 months against the condition for explainable delays. I found the reference uh in 4.5 of the lease. I do not see what I consider uh protective enough conditions that define what's excusable and what isn't. Anything can be argued as excusable for a delay uh if it's not specifically conditioned against being maneuvered into an excusable delay. And that's for this proposal that's being somehow given a year and a half delay under certain acceptable conditions. That's not a good contract as far as I'm concerned. And it would have to have extraordinary uh definition of conditions defining what defines an excusable delay. Not what doesn't define an inexcusable delay. It's not our job. But to keep the tendency to keep moving the target down the line up to a year and a half from December well it was July 20th I don't understand why it's being delayed another 6 months already before we've even started but now from December 31st 28 another year December 31st 29 and that's not only for developer substantially complete but then also

issuance occupancy permit. Um I just don't know when those conditions were added that they are already part of the first reading if they are. I don't even know if these are part of the first reading or not. If the blue stuff is applicable, but how do we get better definition before the next meeting so that amendment can be made that we have an addendum that u plugs up this giant hole of a year beyond the six months? I can uh I can let the city attorney also speak to this, but I want to just read that provision just to and then we can get specific context from the council if we want to make changes. It's the excusable delay provision and tonight there was a handout given. U the city had pushed back to the developer to move that date to July 31 of 20 uh it was 2028. That said the original date that was submitted to the city during negotiations was the December 31, 2028. Uh there were some other provisions that were were met, but that said they have a window and they could explain further of window where they would have to pretty much sell this product to make it fill. Um which made it make more sense to have it extended that 6 months. So that's for the delay that's been passed out tonight. Coming back to excusable delay, I just want to read this subsection. It's 3.8 of the agreement attachment G. Uh notwithstanding anything to the cont contrary contained herein, I'll just skip to the important stuff. Um pretty much no delay or delay can be they have to be caused by events or actions outside of the control of developer including damage or or destruction by fire or causality strike lockout civil disorder war restrictive government regulations. That's the one that I think uh Mr. Maybe you're speaking to restrictive government regulations. Okay. Um and then lack of issuance of any permits and or legal authorization by a government entity necessary for the construction occupation of the project. So in this case with the any permit section that they are getting pretty close to having their permit. So that is no longer going to be a an argument for

it. That said I mean if they want to argue their occupancy permit that's also tied to the um to the actual timeline itself. So I don't think they would get too far with being able to get their bond issuance at that point. U when it comes to the actions outside the delay if we would like to strike the item restrictive government regulations because it is somewhat broad. I think that could be suffic. I do believe that most contracts of this nature do have a fire and destructive war clause in it. It's a force mayor that pretty much says that something bigger than the city bigger than outside ourselves that pretty much causes a market condition just changes the entire playbook. Um that said, it also has to be approved by the city council in writing. Uh John, would you like to city attorney? Would you like to elaborate a little bit further?

Yeah, so the the excusable delay provision that defines what an excusable delay in section 3.8 and it is pretty uh industry standard uh for those purposes. In addition, I will note that at the end it does provide that to in no event shall an excusable delay extend the completion date beyond December 31, 2029 unless approved in writing by the city. So there is a one-year limitation on any excusable delay beyond that December 31, 2020 deadline.

Uh I've never had that occur honestly. building in a building in a a delay target. You you you meet those on their own terms. Is this a municipal government thing as opposed to um a com um any other sectors, private sector um uh institutional? Well, for for in the I can't speak to other industries necessarily, but in the context having a you know having an excusable delay provision is pretty standard a force majour type clause. Um and this is more restrictive than your general force majour clause by having that uh limitation that it cannot any force majour or excusable cannot extend beyond that time period set forth in the

so and to clarify I mean this is just an example but right now what this is saying is that if they had pretty much the entire building built out let's just say they had the structure erected and they had a massive fire god forbid and we do not want that to occur but if that happened they would still have to unless there was a granted approval in writing by the city council. They'd still have to have that project delivered and an occupancy permit in hand, people inside there by December 31, 2029. So that's that's the type of incident that it's it's trying to protect against. But if we would like to get a little bit more restricted, that would be something that the department could definitely work on. just to just to define out all of the uh accidentally utilitable utilitable and the industry standard customary um issues that are presented as excusable delays when they're when it's when it's to the advantage of one party to the other. Uh just don't meet an awful lot of contracts that have a built-in delay date. That's that's usually for both parties to sit together and argue about with the provisions of force majour and weather days and um impacts of labor market and all that other thrown in. I did not see 3.8. I I got to 4.5 but 3.8's in a different place cuz where I'm looking under three granting provisions, mine only goes up to 3.3. So, I'm I'm I couldn't find another document that had a 3.8 in it that was next to the 4.5 that I did that I did find. I'm on this 189 page um document. And uh I found I found 4.5 on page 55. When I go to section three, my section three ends on 53 at 3.3. So I

don't know where to look for 3.8 if it's in it says is set forth herein. It cuts off at 3.3. If you're looking at the uh PDF document shared online, it should be page 170 out of 189. It is a pretty large document. I do apologize. Yeah, just to be clear, this isn't in the lease agreement. This is in the development

gathered that much. I just couldn't I just didn't go down to 170 certificate substantial completion. If if the city's got it nailed down Pat, then then I'm satisfied. Okay. Um let's see. We have a couple hands up. Council member Vanic and then Council Member Galani. Um, just a quick question. Um, I have a Councilman Cray can't be here. He gave me a statement he wants me to read. Is this for is this portion uh right now only for questions or is this comment and debate?

Yeah, per the city council's rules, it is just for questions. Debate happens after second reading.

Okay. Thank you. Okay. Uh, go ahead, Council Member Galani. So, I guess I have a question because we had Council Member Mabry had a question that we just went through and he got answered prior to the motion for the second reading and now he's satisfied with his question is I mean we have to wait till next month just because of that. Absent Absent a motion to reconsider by a member who voted against Actually. Yeah. Absent a motion to reconsider by anybody. I'm sorry.

By anybody? No.

City attorney's checking. Just wait a moment. I'm just trying to expedite a process instead of wasting 30 days for no reason. So, the the way the city council's rules read in section uh 110210, it provides that uh uh a motion to reconsider may be made by any member in the majority. Technically the majority was the losing side on that vote.

Well, the m. So then well actually the majority was voted yes. It was the supermajority we needed. Correct. So so anyone anyone who was in the majority which was the failing side on that motion can make a motion to reconsider per the city council's rules. So yeah, Colleen, what were the vote outcomes there? How many did you have just declared? We had 10 that voted yes and five that voted no.

Okay. So, anyone who was part of the 10 that voted then would be able to make a motion to reconsider. Okay. Is that appropriate then to do uh this time or is that something or do we need to have discussion? Could you if there's additional questions but otherwise a motion is appropriate at this time. Okay. So, I called on you. Is that what you're seeking to do or is that Yes. that appropriate then? Yes. Okay. So then is that what your intent is? Yes. Okay. Um and then so you're seeking a motion to reconsider? Yes. Is there anything else that needs to be stated with that motion?

Yeah. Motion to consider it on the floor. It would require a second. It only requires a simple majority for passage. And at that if it does pass then the motion for second reading is back on the floor. Okay. Who was just to second that? I think council member Preston. I saw your hand up. So now that we have this motion on the floor, we can do a voice vote and see if this motion passes to reconsider all the requires is a majority at this time. Okay. So uh

the vote is on a motion to reconsider the vote the vote on the second reading. So this would only bring back the vote on the second reading for consideration by the council. All right. Then in that case, um let's try that with a voice vote and see if that works. All those in favor of the motion to reconsider, um which means that you would uh if you vote yes, then you wish to the second reading for a vote again. Okay. All those in favor, please say I. I. I. Anyone oppose? I um

right. Can we get a V hands? Okay. So, we have one, two, three, four, five. So, the majority passes. So, the motion is back on the floor. So, now a motion needs to be made for second reading or No, the the motion was already made. So, this just brings the vote back. So, if there's any debate or discussion on the second reading, that can occur now. Otherwise, a vote on the second reading. Okay. So again, we'll open up now for again discussion or debate. I see council member Marshall and then council member Vanic.

I guess my question would be is we've heard tonight that we want to make changes to it. We all are looking at documents. We had stuff presented to us tonight that first time I've seen it in all the meetings. I'm not exactly sure the advantage of pushing this through for second reading when we know that we still have or the petitioner wants to make more changes to it. Mr. Lee is going back looking at the documents. I just think when you're trying to rush something like this, you need to be very cautious as what you're getting into. You're you're talking $52 million and you're going to rush it through on two readings in one night. We don't do that on a $10,000 project. It just seems to me that we're getting a little bit ahead of everything that's got to be done uh right away. So, just my comment.

Okay. Uh Council Member Vanick, you hand up next. Sure. Um, Councilman Crayons can't be here tonight. He gave me this uh letter uh that it's okay that I read this only if this is debate on the substance of the bill that's after the second reading. Okay. So, not now. Thank you. Perfect. Okay. So, um I think C uh who else we have? Council member Mabberry, I see your hand up. And uh Council Member Galani, I did. I think Council Member Dodwell had her hand up first.

Okay. Yeah, I want to make sure I'm not missing anyone here. Okay, we can come to you. Were you up next? We Okay, we can come back if you do wish to speak. Council member Mbury, go ahead. First time I heard about a little less than a million dollars in stuff that the city wanted extra sparkly compared to an Ellisville or a Ballwin or something wherever they get their other Chapter 100s. Um I was darn near dead set against supporting anything more than a five-year plan. cut the cord and and and put it to bed in five years. 100% of everything they asked for in five years. But years six through 10, I saw no uh validation for the lower diminishing returns that would come from those years. Um, but throwing a million dollars of stuff that Wildwood wants that they wouldn't have thought to put in another project is about what of rational value should be for those returns from years 6 to 10. Um, I've had that just vaguely supported through other um discussion. So, that took that issue away. But the other items um don't warrant a second reading tonight. Uh I they the whole question surrounding conditions that to me are not buttoned up satisfactorily. U they just don't need to rush it a month. There are more questions that will come up based on the answers that we got tonight that we didn't have before we met. Council member Kani.

Yeah, I guess I'm a little confused because we were one vote short on the last second reading vote and I I thought I heard that all the questions had been answered in the following discussion and that's been brought up that there's changes needing to be made. I'm not aware of any changes that are on the table at this point that need to be made. The previous questions that council member Mabberry asked as to why he didn't vote for the second reading were just a few minutes ago stated that they were answered and he was fine and everything was good. So once again, we're running around in circles and pushing something out another month potentially for things that really don't exist and aren't on the table. And that time is not going to pay us anything to do any activity or complete any process or do anything different than we have on the table here tonight except for to delay the developer for another month which we throw around arbitrarily like it doesn't matter but for people running businesses it actually does. And you know, once again, this is a uh a thing that isn't going to cost the city a dollar, is going to put a project on the table that is going to bring in lots of money. You heard the city administrator just rattle off in the in the near term what it's going to do. And that doesn't even take into account the people that it's going to bring to the town center and the the liveless and and all of the economic development that we keep talking about. So once again, it's I can't be more frustrated because we do this every time. It's laughable. It's not no business operates like this and we're wasting time. We're causing unnecessary duress to the business people that are coming here. And we talk about economic development. Developers are just as much business people that are trying to do business in Wildwood as any other business. we have big ribbon cutings and pomp and circumstance, but when it comes to developers, we we act like, hey, we'll just kick it down the can another two, three months and see what happens. So, like I said, if there was a legitimate

point of substance that was going to change or be addressed between now and September, that's fine. But we've been tableabling this situation for many months. This isn't the first time we're talking about this or looking at this or considering this. This is this is the the finish line, guys. like this is where we get it done and move forward. Um, but here, you know what? We have the ability to kick it down the street for another 30 days, which will do absolutely nothing for us or the city and cause an unnecessary delay for the business people that are over here trying to make the city better and conduct business with us. So, I just can't wrap my head around the why. And the points that were recently brought up, and all due respect, Council Member Marshall, aren't factual. That's not there. There's there's nothing being tabled to be changed. There's no changes on the table. There's nothing that we are trying to change or looking to get changed or negotiating to get changed. So, what's the delay? Sorry. Sometimes I just have a hard time.

All right. So, uh, next speaker I believe we had over here is, uh, but I, uh, let's see. I think I had council member Dodwell. Do you do you still wish to speak or not? Yes, sir. Okay. Then we'll come back to council member McCutchen. I'd like to ask the council members who voted no on this

what it's like walking through any of the businesses here in Town Center. Have any of you come to any of the businesses here in Town Center? Have you talked to the owners of the businesses in Town Center? Do you know how difficult it is for them to get business coming into their facilities? Have you talked to any young adults here that would love to live in the city of Wildwood who can't afford the ungodly prices that the uh realy uh environment at no fault of the individuals trying to sell or trying to purchase, but that's just the way it is. They can't afford to move into a house out here. They're dying to move out here. Uh they love the parks. They love the trails. the longer we have been going over this site for 10 years now. I want to move this project forward. I think we've had a city administrator, a legal council both here for the city and for the petitioners and an outside party legal counsel that has been looking at all of these things. And for us to continue to say, "Well, bring it back next month. bring it back next month. I agree with Council Member Galani. We need to do our due diligence ourselves and yeah, this came in late this afternoon, but I trust the attorneys who have been involved in this conversation. I trust our city administrator who has been involved in this conversation. I trust that we're dealing with an individual organization that wants to do business in the city of Wildwood and who has shown that he is his organization is capable of doing business throughout St.

Louis County and St. Charles County in a successful, professional, and expedient time frame. If you guys don't think that they want to get this built as quickly as possible, you're fooling yourself. They don't make any money at renting any of this stuff until they get it built. So, the more we kick it down the road, the harder it is. And that's the reason people are leaving Wildwood for doing any kind of development. And that's just it's frustrating to me. I can only imagine what it is to them. Council member McCutch.

Um, yeah. I'm going to make two comments in reference to the two comments that were just already made. We don't know for a fact that young adults moving into the city can afford the prices for the rent for months that they're asking based on what I know and what the the apartment price rental prices are. I don't there may be some, but I don't think there's a lot. Has anybody looked at the

I'm still talking. Um, and then the city's not a business. It's a city. There's a difference between municipality and a business. They're not the same. They should not be run the same. Um, and then are there I I heard the developer said that they were going to have changes. And so, Mr. Lee, are is the city going to have changes? No. Based off the developers discussion today, the thing that the item that was brought forth tonight that date changed, they've accepted all of their changes. They had originally wished to make some changes to the sales tax component of reporting that said they have in order to pro provide a actionable item tonight. They've accepted the terms

and then I didn't get them the additional information this afternoon. I got it when I sat down here. So I haven't really had a chance to review it and to really know what is in there. Um, and I, you know, the other question, I'm in Town Center, geez, at least three times a day for something or the other. I shop in Town Center, you know, I support Town Center, whether it's here where we are or whether it's close to Wildwood for where Big Chief is, that's all Town Center. And so, yes, I I do live here. I do shop here and I do it a considerable amount of time. All right. Uh, coming back to uh like to we we'll do Council Member Farmer and then I see Council Member Galani and then Council Member Main. All right. Um, so I I was just going to say I appreciate uh Mike and Katie's enthusiasm. I I appreciate everybody's enthusiasm on this. I mentioned in the work session that I was a little dubious that a second reading would make it through tonight because as Mr. Marshall said, it's it's a big number. Um I I will say the conversation we had in the work session helped me to think differently and understand some things about this project that I didn't know which kind of shifted where my thinking was. And um whether this second reading thing happens tonight or not, I would say to our development partners that the vote the first vote went substantially different than I thought it was going to go. So, I would suggest that you guys take that into account and be excited that if this was a regular second vote, this would have passed with the votes that went through tonight. So, whether we get it through tonight or not, I think I think that there's good answers on both sides. But, I'm I mean, I am looking around this room at the people and their votes. I don't see anybody that seems super excited to flip a vote right now. So, we could certainly sit here all night and talk about it. I

don't think it's going to make any difference. So, I don't know if the proper direction I don't want to cut anybody's comment off specifically Mr. Mabry is it was uh he who asked the first question, but I don't know if the process is to call the question or what. I don't know that we need to beat this horse any more to death than we have. I think you know it sucks that we got to wait 30 days or whatever. But, you know, as I have found on my time in the city council, a lot of these timelines kind of suck. So, that's just how it goes. Okay. So, since you are speaking and you did mention calling the question, city attorney, can you just clarify that? Thanks. Yeah. A motion to call the question requires a second and a two-thirds majority vote. Okay. So, therefore, we're going to vote on calling the question.

Well, I guess my question would be I I don't know if this is the right process. I I'm not sure if calling the question is the right decision here. I just kind of think like we can keep beating this thing up. I don't think it's going to change anybody's mind tonight. So, however we stop that conversation is what I would like to try to do. Okay. Um, well, I guess you know, it's up to you if you wish to make if if I guess John, I'm looking at you. Is is the proper move to end the conversation on this this evening is to call the question on whether we're going to have a revote the second time or so. So, the motion before the council right now is the second reading. Okay. So, if you would like the reconsideration of the second reading. Oh, the reconsideration vote already passed.

Okay. So, now we're going to have our second vote of the second reading. Correct. And we need a super majority now and then supermajority again. You need a super majority now to approve the second reading and then it's a majority of the members to pass the bill if it's passed. If the second reading is approved. Got it. Okay. Well, I mean, unless unless anybody I guess I need a second, but unless anybody wants to keep talking about this thing, I'm happy to call the question.

All right. So, council member uh nine has uh made a second. So, again, this is calling the question on the whole topic of a second reading. So, we'll be back again to discuss uh the second reading in just a moment. All right. So, since you've made the motion uh to uh call the question in order for it to pass, we do need supermajorities. So, I guess we'll need a roll call. Council member Farmer. Sure. Sure. Okay. Great. Thank you again. Uh so again, the vote here calling the question is to end debate or discussion. and see anybody can say it better than me. But

yeah, just to be clear what we're doing, this would end discussion on the motion to have a second reading. So that would end debate on the having that motion made uh or approving that motion taking longer than mining it. Yeah. And just and also just to be clear, a supermajority in this context or twothirds is a majority of those present. So it would be 10 votes, not 11. because I know that Mr. Glab had their hands up. Does anybody else want to talk except for these two people? Because if not, it is probably faster to just let them talk than to go through this whole process. I don't want to disrupt anybody's voice here.

I have two lines. Okay, then I will resend my motion. Okay. Well, I have I have council G. You okay with that? All right. Then we don't we do not have all the question on the floor. We'll go back to the discussion. Uh, Council Member Nolan.

Yeah, mine's really quick and it's just something that I forgot to mention in my last rant, but um, somebody brought up that we're spending it's $52 million. It's a big deal. It is $52 million, but we're not spending it and we're not on the hook for it. Somebody else is investing it in our city. And second, there's been a lot of conversation about the merits of the development and who's going to move in there and whether it's the right thing. That's not really part of this conversation. The project has already been approved by the city and deemed the best case development for that spot. So, that's already done. It's it's going to be built. So, having conversations about whether it's going to be good or not or who's going to move there is irrelevant. This is strictly on the Chapter 100 tax abatement program. Um, and that's it. It has nothing to do with the project itself or the timeline for the project or any of that stuff. It's already been approved as a project base.

Okay. Council member Maker, you're up.

Yes. Thank you. It took till tonight after the meeting started for the fact that there are a dozen items that purportedly total a million three that add extenduating costs to this project where these costs would not exist anywhere else. Um that happens too many times. proposal after proposal, developer after proposal, proposal also, just as kicking the can down the road does. There's reasons sometimes for that. This was a good reason of that. It's happened before that we've gotten information very just in time or just a little bit before too late. That's an occasion. And I would be the only one to vote no for this proposal. If the vote was to just eradicate years 6 through 10 from this arrangement, that constitutes a certain number of hundreds of thousands or million dollars added. And when we find out of the dozen items that purportedly total to a million3, I circle the ones that look like the ones that were specifically asked by Wildwood in his desire to have a top drawer project that other uh cities, municipalities would not have had to be required to add to get a cheaper overall price. the rest of the items that were not the items that Wildwood in instituted just go with the ground. That's the project. That's what the person picked out for owning the property that's got rock under it or that needs extra gravel to fill up something. That's the only reason I didn't want the second reading tonight. It wasn't to do anything other than make certain that we don't get more surprises after the next meeting starts for the second reading a month from now. If those surprises had not occurred after the meeting started tonight, I would have never cared because I would have

had the answers to questions or I would have known to ask questions. What is the real return to the contractor that they're making from years 6 through 10? And how do they compare with what we're giving up to give them five extra years to wrap this bond up? This this is not a 10year. This is not a 10-year anything. This is a three to five year something before they've got occupancy. That's all. That's was really just all it isn't to do anything other than that.

All right. Um then all those folks that uh requested to speak uh have spoken. So therefore uh city attorney just appreciate your guidance here. So right now then we're going to go ahead with the vote then. And could you just clarify again what this vote is for and what we need? Right. The the vote is for conducting the second reading and it requires a simple majority. Those present. No, it needs 11 votes. It's a second reading. I'm sorry. He's right. I apologize. Still requires 11 votes. 11 votes. So this is again to clarify just to have the second reading. This is on the second reading. This is to approve second reading of this.

Okay. Thank you for that clarification. And then it would take a simple majority after this vote to pass this bill. So that's going to be 11 and then a simple majority that would be necessary. Yeah. Yes. Majority of the city. Okay. Okay. So everyone clear on that? If you're not, now's the time to ask. Okay. So Colleen, you want to go ahead and do a roll call? Council member Farmer. Yes. Council member Dodwell, yes. Council member Nyan, yes. Council member Attenburg, yes. Council member Troier, yes. Council member Mabberry, no. Council member Robooski, no. Council member Preston, yes.

Council member Marshall, no. Council member McCutchen, no. Council member Rambo, yes. Yes. Council member Council member Bockard, yes. Council member Vanic, no. Council member Alers, Council Member Galani, yes. Same 10.

Okay. So, with that then, city attorney. Okay. So, you heard that this will be on the agenda for the next meeting. Okay. Well, then moving on uh back to the agenda here. Uh we're going to move into the next section. First readings from hearings with favorable city recommendation. So for first reading of bill 3006. Can I get a motion for the first reading? This concerns ward one and you anyone the wish to make a mo motion? Council member Oleski. Second made by council member Preston. All those in favor of bill 3006 please say I. I. I.

All right. Uh, Colleen, please read bill 3006. Bill 3006, an ordinance of the city council of the city of Wildwood, Missouri, that hereby authorizes a change in zoning in association with an approximately 1.5 acre parcel of ground that is located at the terminus of Hawthorne Village Parkways intersection with State Route 109 from the amend excuse me from the amended C8 Plan District commercial district to the second amended C8 I reckon you know, but we've lost audio and video again. Period. I had a blue screen of death earlier, but it went away.

Okay, Council Member Rainbow, uh, we did hear you. So, can you hear us? Um, yes, now I can. I had I was trying to actually text Travis to tell him I lost audio and video, but I can hear you now. Okay, great. Thank you. Can you see us? Yes, I can. Okay, I can as well. All right. Thank you for confirming. Just to just to be clear, Scott and I can hear one another loud and clear, but you guys often don't hear us, so it's not like we're sleeping. Okay. All right. Well, thank you, Rob. All right, Joe, go ahead.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, members of city council, at tonight's public hearing, this matter was presented from the planning and zoning commission to city council. There was some discussion relating to the components of this particular reasonzoning. I will not restate those, but if there are any other questions, the department be glad to answer them. Do we have any questions on bill 300? Right. Seeing none, then uh this bill will be on the agenda next month for second reading. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay, moving on. Uh we have uh let's see resolutions within the consent agenda. So if there is no objection by anyone, uh we'll proceed with the consent agenda unless Yeah. And mass unless you wish to exclude any item and handle it separately. All right. All right. Is it is it do you wish to exclude an item or is it your question uh dependent on uh Okay. So it may mean that you it might affect your vote on that one. Okay. So you will exclude then that one and just handle that separately. Um or uh let's see if director who who's handling this one here I can handle it. All right. Um and this may be

maybe if he answers your question you can let us know if you wish to exclude it if it affects your so this is just re it's not changing anything actually there's a discussion at administration public works committee about this right now but this isn't changing the current policy this is something the state requires us to do to establish that we have a conflict of interest policy so it's just it's a state requirement yep and John if you have any clarification there but that's my understanding yeah the state requires that by annually we approve this resolution and it must be done by September 15th.

Okay. You okay with keeping that in there? Okay. Great. Uh seeing uh then no one wishing to exclude any items then we'll go ahead and approve the consent agenda and mass. Is there a motion for approval of the consent agenda? Made by council member Farmer. Is there a second by council member Bockard? Um any any questions? Any comments? All right. All those in favor please say I.

I. Anyone opposed or abstain? Okay, that mo that proceeds. We have miscellaneous. Anything under miscellaneous. All right. Seeing none, then we will seek a motion to adjourn the main meeting. We are going to return back to the work session. Can I get a motion to adjourn the main meeting made by council member Marshall, seconded by council member Bockard. All those in favor of the motion, non-debatable, please say I. I. I. Oppose or abstain.

All right. The main meeting is adjourned. We'll go back to our work session. So if you can go back to the work session material. Okay. Where we left off uh was the end of the four information. So we'll move under uh under for action under administration public works committee the proposed changes to the city's procedures for review and processing of requests for public funding assistance. Yes. You want to go ahead?

Yeah. Thank you. uh mayor and uh this is a a committee item that has been reviewed by the economic development committee and the administration public works committee. It is an it's an amendment tonight that the the department is looking to for some direction from the full city council to amend the current procedures for the review and processing of public funding assistance which would include but not limited to something like a chapter 100 request. Um it also include tiffs, nids, sids, um sids, etc. it would be for any of those reviews. What this does, it establishes criteria that has to be met in order for it to be considered. One item that was considered during the um during the administration public works committee meeting was the financial threshold that must be met in order for a policy to be uh not a policy, a proposal be considered. That's the one item um that was a little bit needed a little bit more fleshing out. So the department is requesting direction from the council to draft legislation um authorizing this per the recommendation both EDC and the administration public works committee with the thought behind the fact that the $2.5 million 10year threshold would be amended and also that the town center activation be amended to include town center/industrial district activation. Um available for any questions though. Thank you. Yeah,

Council Member Utenberg, I see that you have your hand up. Go ahead.

Uh, yes. Thank you. Yes. Uh, so regarding the um proposed guidelines for um considering uh uh tax deference proposals that would be submitted to the city council and specifically the minimum uh revenue requirement over 10 years of 2.5 million that the city administrator mentioned. has any discussion taken place over what that should be amended and uh changed to? And the reason I ask is because the latest projection I've seen on the 10-year revenue that would be delivered from the uh proposed MIA Rose project uh is about $860,000 I think it is. So even the MIA Rose project would not meet that $2.5 million threshold. And as a result, uh, it would, uh, it would fail to meet the guidelines as they're currently proposed. And if the Mia Rose project can't meet those guidelines, I don't see any other projects, uh, meeting those guidelines anytime soon since any other projects that might include a chapter 100 type application would probably end up being smaller than the Mia Rose project. So, I'm just curious where we think that 2.5 million should be revised to.

The department has done some research um and was thinking of somewhere in the range between two uh 500 and 750,000 u net return over the course of 10 years. That does add up to about 50,000 and 75,000 which would be consistent with a large-scale development that brings in about 30 to $40,000 in sales tax revenue and then 30,000ish um for franchise tax as well. Since we do not have a property tax, that is truly what uh brings out the kind of a limited threshold just based off the fact that it's very difficult to estimate what the direct impact will be just based off the population being added. Thank you. It's uh but just to re and reinforce 500 to 750 All right. Thank you very much. Okay,

Council Member Farmer.

Yeah. So, um, having written this, I will say like the 2.5 that was sort of a a national average. So, like obviously that factors in places that are significantly more expensive than Wildwood and also have way larger like tax obligations and things like that. So, uh, that was mostly an error on my part and not correcting trying to correct it to Wildwood. So, we talked about it at admin and public works and I think we're coming with a solid idea. The idea is really not to um necessarily set this bar so high that no one can reach it. It's designed to be uh a solid threshold where you know a project might not check every box, but it checks enough of the boxes for consideration. So it should the goal with it is to make make these kinds of conversations a little bit more manageable where we're not talking about um you know exactly the parameters of a specific project necessarily although each one applies to it but it's a framework to say hey this checks you know four of these six boxes so that's that's a good project and something we we can cons should consider versus this doesn't check any of the boxes and so therefore we don't even need to have that kind of a conversation. I I doubt very much that any project would check all of the boxes. So, I mean, it's going to create there's there's no rubber stamp in it. It's going to create a conversation one way or the other, but it's really meant to more limit much smaller projects than to like penalize larger ones, if that makes sense.

Okay. Anyone else? Council member Marshall. So I I think this is a great step in the right direction, but maybe to prepare for the next meeting, let's go back. We've done these before, so maybe lay out the ones we've done for the sewer system, for the community improvement district, and how those panned out over 10 years and the ones that were paid off over that time period because they're not really new. It's just they're new if you didn't know we've ever done them before. But that might be a nice way to show the examples of how you can do the community improvement district and how you can do the neighborhood uh or any traffic ones and where you do it. And then we currently do have a form now, don't we? When somebody comes in and wants So maybe start with that too. So if people have never seen these things, it might be a good way to start with those attachments to kind of give you some background as to how important this is.

Yeah. So legally the way that they and this was for the Mia Rose project, they did sign off the application forms. So for the that's the procedures of for processing and review of the um her public funding assistance. So that was provided and that in the report the report tonight on the work session it does go through each step in those procedures and whether or not they had fulfilled that requirement. So that that part has been done. What this would do is pretty much once it's been submitted once their application has been submitted the recommendation from the report provided by um Mr. farmer would be to have some criteria to grade the individual instead of having right now where it says does it meet the city's goals for the master plan? Does it meet the city's um economic development guide goals? Does it meet the city's town center update plan goals? Instead of the kind of the overarching themes of our guiding documents, it says here's a specific set of criteria. If it meets this, then it's up for discussion. If it doesn't, then it goes back into the B.

I think that's great. I just think showing that we've done it before. I mean, we we had people paying 20 years and they couldn't build their development because of sewer system. We just kept turning down the development and you know, they paid 20 years for the MSD expansion um without anything for it. Thank you. Okay. So, with that then uh do we want do we want to take a motion at this time or is this an item that needs to come back based on uh

I mean if it's a work session thing it's going to come back anyway, right? Yeah, it would it it would come back as it the procedures are currently established by policy that were established by ordinance. So technically to amend it, you would have to pass an ordinance. So if we want to include this grading criterion, solidify it in the policy, it would need to be passed be an ordinance. I wrote it, so I mean I think it reads pretty well, but I'm happy to defer to the rest of the admin. We went through it pretty pretty good. So, I mean, I think, you know, to Tom and Scott's point, like, we need to just figure out that that number. It's just kind of math. So, I think we have a way to do that. Okay. So, then therefore, we'll just come back. You want to bring it back next month and we'll have a solidified number recommended?

Yeah. Okay. Uh, did I see a hand go up? Is that Well, yeah. Um the one issue I've always had with chapter 100 is that I feel that the developers who are kind of more proactive and upfront uh with their planning process and all that should get um preferential treatment versus those who wait until perhaps later in the process. And that's my concern and and a lot of my constituents have expressed that also that they would like to see that worked into whatever is the final product.

Yeah. I mean there's a big there's part there's parts in this that talk about um like when we went through the bond commission thing that the developer would have to you know provide financials so the bond group can kind of sign off on that. So like my my guess would be and I could be wrong. If if this was kind of in place for the conversation we had earlier that the the 4.2 million and over whatever costs and all those kinds of things would have come to light significantly sooner because there would have been a reason to do it. Um I'm just kind of found that there unless there's a reason to do something I don't know that people generally opt to do it. Okay.

All right. So this will come back. Um, seeing no other hands up, we'll move on. Next item under the um on the agenda here is the proposed communications protocol for city projects utility work and development adjacent activity.

Thank you, mayor. Um, so this tonight is policy that was reviewed by the administration public works committee. It's just outline two different protocols for our city staff and also the internal team. Um, it's really more so for the work that's related around around town. Um, for instance, we had some utility work that took place uh over on Taylor Taylor Road uh the other day and then um a contractor hit a line. It caused some utility work to take place and we had a protocol in place. We followed this protocol as a template. Uh all of a sudden that's over on our website and it's out to social media and we had that living document um on the website to be able to direct folks to it. So what this does, it practically takes a protocol we've been practicing in most parts um and just puts it in writing so we can help guide our uh new communications manager in her role um but also help guide internal communications of what rises to the level for not only a department head that might hear of something or an employee that might hear of something. What rises to the level where hey that needs to go to the city administrator so that could be distributed to the council or go into a weekly CA report or rise to the level of a committee. uh this just solidifies that it would come back as a resolution. So tonight the department is looking for a motion to draft legislation in the form of a resolution to establish this policy for the entire team. Thank you.

Council member Dodwell. I make a motion that we do so. Okay. Is there a second on the motion? I'll second by Council Member Marshall. Motion on the floor. Any other discussion? Otherwise, all those in favor, please say I. I anyone oppose or abstain? All right, that motion passes. We're moving on to the next item on the planning and parks committee. The first item, the rebidding process for the Essen log cabin reassembly results and recommendation. Director Vunage, I guess uh I don't know. Do we we still uh you still wish to speak to this item even though we talked about Mr. Mayor? I believe that uh trains left the station.

Yeah. All right, then we'll proceed. Uh, next item, Village Green, phase two fundraising effort with the community.

Mr. Mayor, members of city council, the planning and parks committee considered the fundraising efforts for phase two of Village Green, which is the all-inclusive playground. There are two components that the committee is recommending tonight to proceed forward with the fundraising brochure which will also be available on unlimited plays website as well as the cities and also establish a committee an informal committee of interested residents to assist in the fundraising effort. Both of those were recommended by unlimited play the general contractor for the all-inclusive playground and the committee endorsed both. Tonight, the department is respectfully requesting the committee's action be endorsed by the city council so we can proceed forward with the publication of the brochure and have the first meeting of the committee which is scheduled for tomorrow at 4.

Okay. Is there anyone that wishes to make that motion? Made by council member Oleski, seconded by council member Dodwell. Any discussion on the matter? All right. Seeing none, all those in favor, please say I. I. Anyone oppose or abstain? Okay, that motion passes. Thank you. We're moving on then to miscellaneous. We have uh several receive and file items here. And again, just a reminder, receive and file um unless there's any specific action by the council, uh these would just be received and filed. So, uh director Vudich, go ahead.

First item relates to Bertner Park and the master plan that was developed for it. The city council endorsed establishing a volunteer committee that included Dr. Rambo and Colonel Jaxi and several other residents. And that group completed a master plan for the particular site which is on Hinken Road and approximately 27 acres in size. The master plan has a light touch to the property, meaning that it includes a small parking area, several shade structures, a small pavilion, and trails. Other than that, the feeling was amongst the ad hoc group that any further development would be overdevelopment. The community was contacted via mailings as well as an open house, and they concurred. The planning and zoning commission endorsed this plan at its meeting last Monday and it is before the city council for receipt and filing. If there are any questions department be glad to answer them.

Okay. Any any questions or anything from anyone here in the council? Right. Council member McDutson. Well, I just have a quick question. Um, so this particular project had a master plan for a park. Are we going to be using that same template going forward? Yes, ma'am. That is the intent. The process went as far as to provide a cost estimate which is actually consistent with the budget amount that's set aside in 2027. Okay, moving on. And then I guess the next item.

The next item relates to a site development plan preliminary plat that was acted upon by the planning and zoning commission at that same last Monday night's meeting. This is a three lot subdivision that is proposed on the east side of Etherton Road north of Manchester Road. The property is 3 acres in size and each of the lots will be approximately 1 acre in size. The major issues that were discussed during the process of its reszoning and presentation both to commission and city council were storm water management which has been reviewed by department of public works department of planning and the metropolitan St. Louis sewer district and the extension of utilities which will all be available to the lots. Equally important to the Department of Planning, the fronts of the homes face Etherton Road and have side entry garages, which is a consistent pattern with the historic or the existing homes on Etherton Road, so they'll fit in relatively well. If there are any questions, the department be glad to try to answer them.

Any questions? All right, seeing none, then um move on to the next item. The next item relates to the planning and zoning commission statutory requirement to review all capital improvement projects that are proposed by the city. In this particular instance, it is the Bright Leaf Trail that'll connect the villages of Bright Leaf to Green Pines Park. Mr. Brown attended the meeting at the Planning and Zoning Commission and was an assistance in this regard. Planning and Zoning Commission endorsed this project, gave it two thumbs up. There any questions? The department be glad to try to answer them. Okay. Uh, Council Member McCutchen,

just a clarification, this goes all the way up to Highway 100. It it connects to the small cul to the trail that was constructed by Fisher Fickal and Consort Homes. So yes, it'll provide a connection to Taylor Road extension and then there's a trailer along trail along Taylor Road extension in with sidewalks. So yes, you'll be able to get to town center on a pedestrian network that is safe and functional. Um good job to the Department of Public Works.

And next we have uh the report of the nominating committee. These two are just forformational purposes. If there are any questions, the department be glad to try to answer them. Any questions? All right. Thank you.

Seeing none, then uh we do have one more item uh at the request of the city attorney uh which is regarding legal and privilege communications. So, um there was a request to go into executive close session. We try our best to keep that short. But uh we do need a motion uh for um is it section 610.02.1 subsection uh one which again pertains to legal and privileged communications. Uh if we can get a motion made by council member Farmer, a second by council member Marshall. We do require a roll call vote. Uh Colleen, whenever you're ready. Council member Farmer.

Yes. Council member Dodwell. Council member Nyan. Yes. Council member Attenburg. Council member Tier. Yes. Council member Mabberry. Yes. Council member Rablooski. Yes. Council member Preston. Yes. Council member Marshall. Yes. Council member McCutchen. Yes. Council member Rambo. Yes. Council member Bert. Yes. Council member Vanic. Yes. Council member Alers. Yeah. Council member Galani.

Great. Going to move quickly over to community and we will uh be back. Thank you.

That's okay. Thank you everyone. We return from closed session. So at this point, uh I'll ask if there's anything else under miscellaneous. Uh or if not, uh council member Ber. No. Okay. So, uh, motion to adjourn made by council member Bacher, made by council member Vanic. All those in favor of the motion to adjourn the, uh, work session, please say I. I. I.