HomeMy Public PortalAbout19810223 council work session 54
Work Session Council Meeting, February 23 , 1981 '{.
_..
The Council Work Session of February 23, 1981 was called to Roll ;
•J order at 7 : 30 p.m. by Mayor Hartsfield. All Councilmen were pres- Call '=• '
• ent with the exception of Mr. Borgmeyer. •
The first item of business was discussion of the disposition Bald Hill ':
, of the City's property on Bald Hill Road. The Mayor made referenc Road `-'
`: to his memo to the Council on the possibilities of selling this Property
site to the Cosmopolitan Club. He stated that the site was not
extremely useful for City purposes , but it has been used by the
Cosmo Club for public service type activities . The Mayor said tha•
he did not feel the current mix of use by the firing range and
public use was a good mix and felt the best disposition of the
property was to sell it to the Cosmo Club. Mr. Frank Miller and
Mr. Hollis Parsons were present as representatives from the
Cosmopolitan Club, and they indicated their interest in acquiring
the property from the City. Councilmen Whitecotton and Kliegel
• expressed their feelings that the City should sell the property
j because of its current lack of use. Councilman Crader agreed with .:.
that sentiment but thought a covenant should be included in any
-'- contract for sale of the property to state that its use should be .
• for public activities and that any civic club would have access to
the property. Mr. Miller of the Cosmo Club stated that the Club
would have no problems with Mr. Crader' s proposal and would wel-
,, come that clause in a contract. He said that the only use the
y:
club felt would be inappropriate would be private parties . Dr.
Brant said that another proviso in the contract should be that the
Cosmopolitan Club could not sell the land to a private interest,
but that if they ever decided they did not wish to own and main-
tain the property, it would revert back to the City or Park Board
for the price the Cosmo Club paid for the land. Mr. Crader said
that he felt it is important for the City to be allowed to use the
firing range until a new range can be built . Mayor Hartsfield
stated that if the City was able to use the range until the end
of 1982 it would allow enough time to build another range at 1
another location. The consensus of the Council was to proceed 1
along the lines of the Mayor' s memo. The Mayor stated that he
would direct the staff to draw appropriate ordinances . fi
The second item of business was House BILl 864 . The Mayor House Bil.l
mentioned that this Bill wan on the House Perfection calendar and 864
would eliminate the State' s requirement to pay groan receipts tax-
es on utility bills , lie stated it was a direct: threat to our rev-
,
enue and felt the City could lose approximately $600,000 a year
if the Bill is passed. He urged the Council to contact Repre-
sentative Strong and other members of the legislature to express
the City 's opposition to this Bill.
The third item of business was a report on the status of the ' MPL suite
Missouri Power and Light suit against the State concerning the against
State' s withholding of gross receipts utilities tax. Mr. Graham State
stated that the suit had been heard approximately two weeks ago,
but that no judgment had been returned to date .
The next item of business was an inquiry from Dr. Brant con- Protested
cerning the City's protested taxes that they are holding. He Taxes
questioned why these funds had not been released and why they had
only been invested at 534%. He was concerned about the interest
money the City was losing over the period of the last year. Mayor
Hartsfield stated that the County had not released the protested
taxes because of several audits that had been going on the past
year. Dr. Brant stated that he would like a report from the staff
1 by the next meeting as to when we can expect the funds to be re-
leased and also as to why higher interest is not being earned on
the protested taxes .
The next item of business was the discussion of the city hall City Hall
report as prepared by Architects Alliance. Mr. Seth Evans gave a Report
general overview of the written report and the procedures used to
get information for the report. He also handed out a revised pager
18 which was to be placed in the report. Mayor Hartsfield com-
mented that he had been told that the current owners of the prop-
�t
55
Work Session Council Meeting, February 23 , 1981
erty identified as Site C in the study would not be willing sellers
if the City was interested in acquiring that property. Councilman
Halsey asked why the Housing Authority and Parks and Recreation
Department were not included in the study. Mr. Evans stated that
Parks and Recreation was included in the study although their
Board had expressed the feelings that it was not necessary for the
Parks and Recreation Department to be located in a new city hall .
Mayor Hartsfield said that the Housing Authority was not included
in the study because they had agreed to occupy the building at
911 East Miller Street currently housing the Public Works and
Planning departments . This move by the Housing Authority would
allow their current office space in the Dulle Towers to be con-
verted to apartments for the elderly. Councilman Halsey noted that
the report said that City officials had been contacted for their
comments concerning a new city hall , and he asked which officials
had been contacted. Mr. Evans stated that the Mayor and Councilme
Hequembourg, Brant, and Prenger were the elected officials con-
tacted. Mr. Benton stated that attempts were made to get Council-
man Borgmeyer's opinions also but that personal conflicts had
precluded any meeting with him. Mr . Benton explained that he had
contacted these officials because of their tenure on the Council
and familiarity with the issues concerning the new city hall.
Councilman Halsey asked about the furniture needs for a new city
hall, and the Mayor responded by saying that it was likely that
furniture for common areas would be necessary, but that all exist-
ing furniture in offices would be moved and used if at all possi-
ble. Councilman Halsey said that if it were assumed that Site B
would be chosen, what would be done with the existing city hall.
Mr. Graham stated that the City could go to court, show its plans
for a new city hall, and the court will allow for the sale of the
building with the proceeds going toward the new city hall project.
The Mayor asked about parking at Site B, and Mr. Evans
stated that the existing parking across the street plus the short
term parking at the building would meet the projected needs . Mr.
Graham asked how the proposed square footage of the new building
was determined. Mr. Evans answered that very little growth was
assumed for the new building. Mr. Graham stated that building
a larger facility would cost more now, but he felt it would allow
for expansion more easily at a later date . Mr. Hequembourg stated
that the plans would allow for expansion of the building at a
later date and that there would be flexibility for moving existing
walls within the building to allow for rearranging of space. Dr.
Brant stated that the city hall as planned could be expanded both
to the went and south. Mayor Hartsfield said that he felt it was
important to try to be modest in size and cost while meeting our
needs, He did not anticipate much growth in the near future and
stated that in fact he had been cutting down the number of City
employees over the past two years . Councilman Prenger asked if thr
cost of demolition of the Gordon building was included in the stud .
Mr. Evans stated that it had been figured in the study at approxi-
mately $1000 .
The Mayor acknowledged the reservations made by the Park
Board concerning their occupancy of a city hall building, but said
that the Parks Department was being included more and more in ad-
ministrative type activities such as the pay plan and rules and
regulations , and he anticipates that there would be a need for the
director and his secretary to move to the city hall at least in
the long term. The Mayor asked about the time frame and cost of
a soil study. Mr. Evans said the cost would be between $5000 and
$8000 and could take up to 60 days . Mr. Grader asked the current
balance in the revenue sharing fund, and Mr. Hamburg stated that
as of October 31 of the current fiscal year we will have a balance
of over $1 million. Mayor Hartsfield stated that in the immediate 1
future the Council would have several decisions to make concerning i
the city hall project and that in the next meeting there would be
consideration of an ordinance on the revenue sharing project for
Work Session Council Meeting, February 23, 1981
this year and also of an ordinance concerning the recommended
soil testing. Mr. Kliegel asked about increased construction cost
over the next 12-24 months . Mr. Evans stated that he projected v:
an increase of 1/2% per month and that was built into the project
estimate in the report. Mr. Kliegel stated he was concerned about
the economy and future revenue of the City and felt it would be
wise to wait two years to make a decision on the project. Mr.
Crader asked if President Reagan could cut out revenue sharing.
Mayor Hartsfield answered that it was not likely and that it was
not in the list of cuts presented to the Congress . Mr. Crader
moved and Mr. Wade seconded that soil testing be undertaken at
Site B as proposed in the study. Mr. Prenger stated that he felt
a vote was needed on whether a city hall is needed before any-
thing else is approved. Mr. Halsey said that he felt the Council
should know what would happen to the existing building before
going ahead with another site. Mr. Graham answered that before
the court will approve the sale of the current city hall it will
have to see the plans for a new city hall. He stated that the
court had already approved the City renting the building if it
could not be sold. Mr. Halsey stated his concern about having
another vacant building on High Street. Mr. Hequembourg said
that the Council needs to make a decision on whether to build
another facility or remodel the existing building. He stated that
a decision should be based upon the needs of the City and that
putting off the project for two years would just increase costs .
He said that revenue sharing was intended primarily for capital
improvement projects and that he would vote against using revenue
sharing for any operating costs . The Mayor also stated his oppo-
sition to the use of revenue sharing monies for operating ex-
,
penses.
Mr. Wade asked if the Council of the Whole had made a decision,
concerning the new city hall over a year ago. The Mayor answered
that the Council had made that decision during last year' s
revenue sharing appropriation process . Dr. Brant said that the
Council had voted several times to proceed on different phases
of this project , such as the land acquisition at Site B. He said
that there are still several phases at which the project could be
stopped. Mr. Prenger stated that his committee on capital im-
provements had sent the question of a new city hall back to the
City Council last summer and felt that the question had not been
answered to date. He felt that the needs for a new city hall
muse be established before any further decisions are made. The
Mayor said that he had not seen any other priorities of this
magnitude and felt that the status of a new city hall was impor-
tant and that the Council should decide to put money into this
project. Mr. Halsey said there were several good uses for revenue
sharing and he needed to know how many dollars would be left out
of revenue sharing for the next three years if a city hall was
built. Mr. Kliegel said he thought the revenue sharing could be
used to subsidize sewer rates , and Mayor Hartsfield and Mr.
Graham pointed out that the sewer fund had to be self-supporting.
At this point a vote was taken on Mr. Crader' s motion, and it
passed by a show of hands with a 5-3 vote. Mr. Hequembourg
stated that perhaps when the soil study comes back the Council
will be able to decide between the existing building and Site B.
Mr. Crader stated that he had been skeptical about a new city
hail prior to this report but felt that the study by Mr. Evans
had convinced him that a new city hall should be built on Site B.
The Mayor stated that consolidation of City departments was im-
portant and without that consolidation any significant expenditure
of money would be wasteful.
The next item of business was Jim Weber' s report on the fire Fire Safety
safety of the current city hall building. Mayor Hartsfield asked of Current
if the Council wanted to take any action on Mr. Weber's report. City Hall
Mr. Crader asked if any extra fire escapes could be built , and
Mr. Benton replied that the existing staircase is not fire rated
and that it would be expensive to bring it up to fire code stan-
dards. He did say that the door at the bottom of the stairs
could be changed at a minimum expense. Mr. Crader stated that
1
!': 57 i:
-.A
Work Session Council Meeting, February 23, 1981,-',1 <s
j `' ' fire escapes would be needed if the city hall was rented or sold. •Y
V, %� Mr, Menton stated that a panic bar would be needed on the door at 41.
the bottom of the stairs and that the whole stairway would have to
'
be improved to a two hour fire rating. Mr. Hequembourg suggested -.'
;4 that a bar and alarm be placed on the door and also that the �!
Council hold their meetings elsewhere when a large crowd is ex- l'
, pected. The Mayor stated that it was not always possible to pre-
c
' diet when a large corwd is expected. Mr. Hamburg stated that
court is held in the Council Chamber three times a week and that
there is generally a large number of people present at those times .
The Mayor suggested that Mr. Weber draw a proposal with estimated
( costs to bring the building up to fire code standards . The Mayor
pointed out that at next Monday ' s meeting revenue sharing was a {.:.
key decision. Dr. Brant pointed out that if an emergency would
§' come up, some of this year' s revenue sharing funds could be {
diverted to another project and next year's revenue sharing alloca-
}> tion could be appropriated for the city hall. Mr. Hequembourg
'. estimated that after a new city hall is built there would still
I ' be $1 million available for other projects over the next three
,
'`" years. 3:.
Meetings The next item of business was setting up a schedule of meet- 1
with Boards ings with City committees and boards . Mayor Hartsfield asked the
, and Com- Council how they would like to handle this. Mr. Halsey suggested
' missions that all boards meet with the Council on one evening at the Police �.`
A;.,
x Station. Mr. Hequembourg pointed out that there were several ''
il
.
issues to be discussed with the boards that the Council had never
addressed and that this would take some time. The Mayor stated
that he asked the Housing Authority to come to the March 23
session to discuss the proposed Wears Creek project and other
matters . Mr. Halsey stated that people on the various boards and
commissions do not know each other and that a joint meeting might
be helpful in that regard. The Mayor stated that if there were a
, I joint meeting, each chairman could give a statement on his com- ,,1.
I mission's duties . Mr. Prenger stated that he thought: there would
Ii be a benefit in meeting with boards and committees at one time to
t facilitate communications . Mayor Hartsfield stated that we would
,, Ii have the housing Authority at the March 23 meeting and all the iI
'i boards and commissions would be Invited to the first: work session Hi
in April as suggested by Councilman Halsey , and that from there on
individual. meetings with boards and commissions would be scheduled.
Mine. II The Mayor reminded the Counci.l that they had had questions
I concerning the current: liquor license and towing ordinances and
i stated that he would like their input before having the staff draw
'j ordinances in these areas. He asked the Council to contact the
City Administrator or himself with input into these areas . Mayor
Hartsfield stated that he was going to cancel the work session
on March 9 which would leave work sessions for March 23 and 30.
I+ He :said that Lieutenant Governor Rothman would address the Council
lion March 30. The Mayor asked the recently appointed investment
( committee to include audit review in their scope of work. Mayor
Hartsfield stated that the cable TV and trash issues were very
significant and that any decision the Council made would be with
the citizens for a long time. He said that in the near future
he would be setting up special committees to deal with each of
these issues . Dr. Brant noted that the work sessions and meetings
had been very long recently and he urged the staff to insure that
all required materials on meetings were in the packets and that
the Council read the packet material before hand so that issues
I
will not have to be rehashed.
Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Hartsfield adjourned
the meeting at 9: 30 p.m.
II