Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout19820222 special 8 0 : '- ., SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING, FEBRUARY 22 , 1982 A Special Council Meeting was held on February 22 , 1982 , at ! 1,7: 30 p.m. in the Council Chambers with Mayor Pro Tern Prenger pre- ';siding. Present : Blume, Borgmeyer, Brant , Gordon, Halsey , Hequembou, g, � Prenger, Scheulen and Wade. Absent : Kliegel . y: The purpose of the special meeting was to meet with the Housing regarding the Capitol West Project and also to meet with j! I'Lt. Governor Rothman' s Staff and with Gary Markenson of the 1? jMissouri Municipal League regarding pending legislation. ! i Ted Herron, Executive Director of the Housing Authority, spoke to the Council. He stated that the Capitol West portion of the • !project is an amendment to the overall progress of the urban renewal ¢project. The Housing Authority did carry out a portion of the II pproject which is East of Broadway which consisted of acquiring land !public parking and building streets . Because of some executive !! orders they were forced to go from a 50 year flood protection plan a in Milibottom to at least a 100 year flood protection plan. This 'necessitated considerable more money and they were forced to turn . to the Army Corps of Engineers for funding as well as to HUD. ! It was the contention of the Housing Authority that money would jbe forthcoming from the Army Corps of Engineers . However, as time progressed, the City Council requested that an alternate plan be 1 !'developed. The Housing Authority has prepared that alternate plan land they are now in a position where the Capitol West amendment 1 (must be expedited. Financing is falling due in September and this project is scheduled to close in November. Tom Crouch, with Urban Programming of America , Inc. , then spoked to the Council. He stated that the general goals of the planning process to develop the alternate plan for Capital West included theij elimination of flood damage, the economic revitalization and physic#1 • rebeautification of the area. Some of the specific planning objectives included capitalizing Il on existing investment that has occurred in the area , encouraging additional private investment in the area , bringing about attractive complimentary development in the area, supporting new development 1 . . , and observing environment constraints. Four land use alternatives were presented by Mr. Crouch and explained to the Council . Plan I is a lease cost: approach , Plan II incorporates a linear park concept: and Plan III suggests a ': greater intensity of f development . Plan IV includes the major i linear park area associated with the Wears Creek Corridor and it includes developiment of u1.tea which have excellent location in I terms of other buildings . Plan IV also shows an expansion potentia . 1! for St . Maary` is Hospital . It is their opinion that Plan IV combiners ; best elements and represents the beat alternate plan . Concept I proposes that Wears Creek be cleaned and beautified, that West Main Street be beautified in the form of undergrounding .j of existing overhead utilities along the street , landscaping, and the inclusion of a buffer strip along the North side between the i� street and the railroad yards . They propose surface parking lots ' which would help fill the need created by the Truman Office Building. In Concept II the main feature is a linear park running througN the central area. This would be a passive park area which would r ' serve employees in the area with a picnic area and would provide i1 a positive appeal to the area. Concept III involves a more intensive use of some of the areas .! This concept shows a hotel which would have some off street parkin ' but would also rely on a parking structure across the street. This'f . , structure could be shared by both the Truman Office Building and ii the hotel and would provide approximately 1 , 800 parking spaces. This concept also shows a bus site . Concept IV contains elements from the three previous plans !� with the linear park most prevalent. Concept IV also contains the!t ! hotel, parking structure , an office building, and bus site. Additional sites are also shown which could be developed. I Fred Walton , with Urban Programming of America, Inc. then ! spoke regarding the procedural steps to be taken. September 1 the (j 1 I 1 1 1 l 1•• 240 SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING, FEBRUARY 22 , 1982 federal funding will be terminated and the closing documents must be processed. Before that time the Urban Renewal Plan must be formally amended. The Urban Renewal Program placed a responsi- bility upon the local community to have a financial input of a certain match and for Jefferson City that would be one-fourth. The plan requires that we have in total seven million in cash or non-cash grants and aid. Some of the non-cash grants and aid have already been certified. The bulk of the seven million dollar commitment for Jefferson City for the non-cash credits was in the large parking structure which was on the original plan. We will probably ask HUD to forgive us for some of the non-cash credits as he is not sure that the total is going to match the seven million dollar requirement. Steps need to be taken immediately to begin marketing the tracts of land. Public Hearings need to be held advising the public of the changes in this plan as opposed to the original plan. Meetings will have to be held with local, state , and federal public bodies to advise them of the time frame and the changes to the plan. We need to complete the acquisition, relocation, demolition, land assembly process and site improvements of the land. The question was raised why the land south of the expressway was not included in the alternate plan. Mr. Herron explained that it was only the Army Corps of Engineers program that went across the expressway. Everything that was done south of the expressway and on the south side was strictly a deal between the City and the Army Corps of Engineers. This area was eliminated in the Urban Renewal Project. Mr. Herron stated that in these concepts we cannot look to undergrounding of the wiring at this time due to expense. He has had discussions with Missouri Power & Light Company and they have tentatively agreed to do so, however, with the energy crunch he is not sure if they can live up to their. commitment. When asked if the Council would have any say an to what is included in the project after the overall plan is approved, Mr. Herron replied that this would be the responsibility of the Board of Commissioners of the Housing Authority . They will take steps necessary to protect the City and are determined that top quality businesses will be included in the project . The Housing Authority has agreed to sell property to the State of Missouri for $750 ,000 for the parking structure if they would like to purchase it . It in then hoped that this parking structure would be shared by the hotel facility as well as the office building, although the State has not committed to anything. Con- cern was expressed by some members of the Council regarding ceiling the land to the State without some form of commitment . It was the feeling that the City needs to have leverage before the land is sold. When asked if it would be possible for the Housing • Authority to sell the land back to the City, which is the land designated for the parking structure, Mr. Herron stated that this was a possibility. This would prevent the Housing Authority from holding the land for a couple of years and paying interest on a loan, necessitated to repay HUD, and would give the City leverage o with the State for a commitment on the parking structure . Dwight Fine and Bart Tiachner of Lt. Gov. Rothmans staff appeared and presented a slide presentation regarding the Missouri Municipal Code Bill. In addition to outdated laws that cannot be enforced, the Missouri Municipal Code Bill eliminates laws that are tabled unnecessary. It also replaces the existing classifi- cation of cities with a uniform broad grant of power to munici- palities . At present there are five classifications of cities in Missouri. These five classifications would be streamlined and combined into three new classes , Constitutional Charter Cities , General Statutory Cities, and towns and villages . The new classifications would not be based on population, but would be based upon the form of government chosen by the people. This 241 SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 22 1982 would be either operating under a charter or continue operating under an umbrella statutory classification that covers the existing forms of government. Another aim of this bill is to remove duplicative language spawned by these classifications . The bill would remove from the Statutes specific listings of authorities and instead grant home rule cities all powers not limited or denied them by the Constitution or the Statutes of the State. This bill has been reviewed by the Missouri Municipal League and they have made changes which will be introduced as an amend- ment to this bill. Gary Markenson of the Missouri Municipal League then spoke to the Council and briefly discussed issues in the General Assembly which will be under floor debate in the near future . One bill is House Bill 1124, the annual employee collective bargaining bill. Current State Statutes require cities to meet with city employees , reduce the results to writing , and at that time the City Council can accept , modify or reject the proposal . This bill simply changes the language to read that the city must negotiate in good faith with the union and must prepare a contract to be submitted to the City Council for acceptance or rejection , but not modification. Another issue is reassessment . A number of bills have been introduced to delay the implementation of reassessment from 1984 to 1986 or 1987. These bills are showing some progress. However, there are other bills which would be proposed amendments to the Missouri Constitution to be voted on by the people . Bill HJR93 allows the General Assembly to create three classes of property : 1) Agriculture 2) Residential 3) Business , industrial , railroads and utilities . The legislature could have different assessment ratios on each class of property. This bill would eliminate the merchants and manufacturers tax and provides for reimbursement by a higher tax levy on the third class of property. It would also provide a homestead tax exemption for every residential homeowner, the amount to be fixed by the General Assembly at some point in the , future . Bill SJR25 separates out utilities as a fourth class of property. It is the assumption the legislature would have an even higher assessment ratio on utilities than they would on other !; business and commercial. Another issue is the Hancock Amendment . There iu legis- lation in the House , HJR65 , that would significantly change the Hancock Tax Limit Amendment to the Missouri Constitution . Its impact on the state is to change the tax limit from a limitation on revenues to a limitation on expenditures . The impact on cities is it would repeal the mandates provision on expanded services . It would repeal the provisions that require cities to have a vote of the people anytime a tax, license or fee is increased. Another bill pending is the amendment to the open meetings law, House Bill 1253. One provision of this bill states that cities must provide notice of any public meeting. If you want to hold a closed meeting you must provide notice of the meeting and the specific exemption of the closed meeting. Also, before you have a closed meeting you must have a public meeting and take a public vote before you go into the closed meeting. If any of the amendments to the open meetings law are violated, each individual councilman would be subject to a $100 fine plus paying attorney' s fees of anyone who brings suit against you. If you are found guilty of holding three illegally closed meetings , you would automatically forfeit your office . The Missouri Municipal League has been able to secure exemptions for holding closed meetings such as disciplining employees . They have also amended the bill • 42- SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING, FEBRUARY 22, 1982 by allowing you to have a closed meeting when you are discussing the city' s position prior to negotiating with unionized city em- ployees. Another bill would change the tax on Savings and Loan Institutions from 2% of gross revenues to 7% of net revenues. There is a bill that would raise the gasoline tax from 7c to 11c a gallon. Another bill is unemployment insurance. Bills are now in the legislature to increase the employer' s contributions by an amount in excess of fifty million dollars a year. Gary Hamburg then stated that this meeting was called to acquaint the Council with bills pending before the legislature and their importance as they relate to cities. He stated that it may be necessary for some of the Councilmen to testify either for or against a bill as a bill would affect the city. Meeting adjourned.