Council Workshop Meeting - Oct. 29th, 2007

Another long meeting of Overland's elected officials
means another long article here.

The Overland City Council met for a Workshop meeting in the Council Chambers on October 29th, 2007. Subjects discussed at this meeting included:

• The new sign at the Community Center
• Various ways to address Trash Service funding
• Demolition of the pool and associated buildings at Legion Park
• Parking and municipal boundary issues on Lackland
• The City Administrator position
• Issues with the Bridge at Wild Acres Park
• Issues with Police Radios

The Community Center sign issue was a simple matter of deciding on colors before it was ordered. The Council voted unanimously for a green background with amber LEDs (lights) for the message board. As our readers may recall this new sign will be a scrolling marquee that will allow the Community Center staff to put more information out to the public more frequently. It is our understanding that the message will be able to be added to or changed from within the Community Center. This should allow the Center staff to update the information on the sign as frequently as needed.

One interesting possibility that I don't believe has been discussed is the potential for this sign to be used to provide information to the public in times of emergency. While the need for electricity limits the sign's usefulness in that regard, it might be worth taking into consideration when the Council revisits the issue of providing backup power generation for the Center.

The next issue was Trash service. In the last budget, the Council voted to put $50,000.00 aside to help those in need with their trash bill. While that sounds simple, if you watch the video below you'll learn it's anything but.

Ultimately two possible plans were discussed. One, proposed by Councilperson O'Connell (Ward 2), was to set aside a month each year where people could come into City Hall with their federal income tax return(s) to show that their family earned less than $20,000.00 in the previous year. Once the application month ended the City would divide the budgeted $50,000.00 between all the applicants who would then receive whatever that amount was (up to the cost of a full year of service). For example, if 200 people successfully applied in that month, the City would divide $50,000.00 by 200 resulting in $250.00 per applicant which is nearly the annual cost of the service. However, if 400 people successfully applied each applicant would only get $125.00; if 1000 people successfully applied each would get $50.00, etc. As Councilperson Conlon pointed out we need to take any administrative costs associated with this program into account. City Clerk Linda Downs stated that if the guidelines for the Council were clear the administrative staff could handle it which likely means the costs would be limited to printing the forms and issuing the checks.

The other proposal came from City Attorney Bob Herman. He suggested that the City consider going to the voters for a real property tax increase aka "user fee". While we all just screamed no NO NO!!! this plan is worth some further review.

The idea is to add a tax on every lot in the city. That means that business, large multi-family properties, and industrial would also be paying towards the cost of Trash service even though they don't receive it. It might seem unfair to do this, but as Mr. Herman pointed out we do the same with school taxes now. Everyone pays the school portion of their property tax bills whether they have children in the system or not.

With more entities paying for the service it is likely the cost to the residents would be reduced to a degree. Also, the trash hauler would no longer need to collect the fees. The City should be able to negotiate a reduction in the cost as this plan would eliminate their collection costs. Interestingly enough, the cost of collection is borne, not by the City, but by the County as they would be the ones collecting this revenue for us.

Something else to consider is that those in need already have access to a program from the State of Missouri that gives them a rebate on their State income taxes based on Real Property Taxes (or in some cases rent) paid and their income. As this would increase their Real Property Taxes, it is possible their rebate would increase as well. If you've never heard of the Missouri Property Tax Credit you can find out if you're eligible by clicking on the link.

The City doesn't have the revenues at this time to pay for trash service. So, be it by quarterly bill as we do it now, or by annual "user fee" on the property tax bill, we are going to have to pay for it ourselves. The potential benefit of the tax is the possible reduction in the cost of the service.

It was also suggested that the City could budget each year to subsidize the cost of Trash service based on the previous year's revenues. Though that could reduce the cost even further, I'm afraid I'd have to see that happen before I believe it.

If the City was to move forward with this idea the soonest it would likely appear on the Ballot would be April. Councilperson Conlon pointed out that April elections require a 4/7th majority to pass bond issues, suggesting this measure would require the same. I'm not sure if this is the case. St. Ann's utility tax increase on November's ballot (which requires a 3/5th majority to pass bond issues), only needs a simple majority to pass.

Residents will need to see this in writing and in detail before they could seriously consider it. However, this plan has the possibility (depending on the number of lots taxed) to reduce everyone's bill by an amount similar to what we might expect to be able to do for low income families in the other plan. If the details are there, the loopholes are absent, and the numbers work then this plan could benefit all the residents without filing requirements and the like. As always the devil is in the details so you'll have to wait and see what the City does with this idea, if they choose to act on it at all.

Both plans have issues. Mr. Herman explained that Overland's powers are limited by what is granted to a 3rd class City in the State statutes. He said there was no statute authorizing any sort of financial assistance program, so it would seem we cannot do this. Interesting, when Mr. Herman was challenged on this, using the current Overland utility tax rebate for seniors as an example, he said that it was his opinion that the City does not have the authority to do that either. He suggested that the reason Overland has not had a issue with this is because the dollar amount involved is so low and there are a lot of legal gray areas when dealing with programs for seniors (pun intended).

The other plan would requires a majority, possibly a super majority of Overland voters to cast ballots in favor of a significant real property tax increase aka "user fee". While this increase would eliminate the quarterly trash bill we currently receive and could possibly reduce the cost of trash service for everyone, it's doubtful that such a measure would pass.

As always when the trash issue came up a few on the Council tried to make political hay out of it. Councilperson Owensby (Ward 3)suggested that we should have used "the million dollars" we had last year to pay for it. We can argue about what million dollars he might be talking about but the bottom line is that the service cost more that that annually (last time I checked it was between 1.2 and 1.3 million annually). Even if we somehow paid for the service with last year's "million dollars" that would still only cover one year. Councilperson Owensby was challenged multiple times to present his suggestion for how to fund the service in subsequent years. He didn't directly answer that question.

This discussion went on, and Councilperson Owensby's myths continued. Though it has been proven to be a misrepresentation many times, he still insists on telling everyone that St. Ann pays half as much as Overland for Trash service. St. Ann only pays for a portion of the trash service we have in Overland. St. Ann residents have to pay for recycling and the City of St. Ann picks up the yard waste rather than pay the trash hauler to do it. The City of St. Ann pays half as much as Overland because St. Ann only provides half the services to their residents. We wonder what Councilperson Owensby will use as an example if St. Ann residents don't approve a Utility Tax increase next month and they have to drop "city paid" trash in January as a result? (link)

Then there were the hints that the purchase of Wild Acres cost us our trash service. We didn't pay for that all at once, we make payments on it similar to how people pay for their homes. However, at the current cost of trash service we could sell not just Wild Acres, but every park in the City as well and probably only be able to fund the service for two or three years at best.

Councilperson Jones (Ward 4)had an interesting suggestion as well. He asked if it was possible to create a central location where people who cannot pay for service could bring their trash. Where to put a new City dump is an obvious question. However, I'd like to know how the disabled and the housebound elderly (who make up a major portion of those in need in Overland) would possibly get their trash to this location.

For various reasons, some outside the control of previous administrations and some not, Overland's revenues have be stagnant for years. While the revenues did not increase, our operating expenses sure did. Gas, wages, raw materials, and more all combined to put a real squeeze on our City (as it has done to most of us at home as well). As Councilperson Keller (Ward 3) correctly pointed out, we need to focus on ways to bring new businesses into Overland to generate more revenue. That is of course the ultimate solution. If Overland prospers, revenues increase and the City could potentially return to paying for Trash service (as Maryland Heights did thanks to their casino revenues). However, this doesn't happen overnight. There is a Chinese proverb that says it best: "One generation plants the trees; another gets the shade." We cannot resolve this issue at this time. The funds are simply not there. For the foreseeable future we are going to have to pay for our Trash service, as nearly every municipality around us does. While we cannot get out of paying for this service, there may be ways to reduce how much it costs.

We could go on for pages and pages about the trash issue (did we do that already?), but there were other issues addressed at this meeting as well.

Though the Council has not come to a final decision on what to do with the land afterwards, they did vote unanimously to direct the Public Works department to start the demolition of the Legion Pool and the associated buildings. Councilperson Owensby likely echoed the thoughts of many long time residents of Overland when he explained that though he understands there is nothing we can do to reopen that pool, he has a lot of fond memories from there and will miss the place. Some of the more interesting suggestions for this property's future have been a few ball fields, sand volleyball courts, gazebos, a concession stand (to generate revenue for Overland through sales at baseball or volleyball games) or some mix of them all.

An issue with parking on Lackland at Oakland was discussed. As Acting Public Works Director Chuck Boone and Chief Herron pointed out, though they agree that this is an issue, there is nothing that Overland can do about it as the City of Overland ends at the curb of that street. Councilperson O'Connell raised the question that if the road and the shoulder belong to Sycamore Hills, but from the curb out is Overland, how would Sycamore Hills put up No Parking signs if they choose to. Mr. Herman stated that the City could give Sycamore Hills permission to do so by passing a Council resolution to that effect. Mayor Schneider asked that the Ward 2 Council members get in touch with Sycamore Hills and possibly even the business that is the cause of this problem. While I agree working with our neighbors is a good thing, if all Sycamore Hills needs to resolve this is a Council resolution, why devote any more time to this issue that could be better used dealing with other problems in our own City?

The next was the City Administrator issue. Other than debates concerning the history of the previous attempt to hire a City administrator the Council voted unanimously to schedule a Workshop meeting to review the City Administrator ordinance. They also voted unanimously to contact the East West Gateway Council of Governments to let them know of our intent to engage them for the hiring process once again. It is nice to see our City finally taking a few steps in this direction once again.

One of the most surprising suggestions was when Councilperson Owensby stated that he thinks we should hire former Mayor Frank Munsch as the new City administrator. I didn't live here when Frank Munsch was the Mayor, I've never met the man and I have no idea what his educational background is. What I do know is that I agree with Councilperson Cuminale (Ward 1) when she said we need to fill this position with a neutral party. We need someone who doesn't live or work in Overland and has no connection to Overland Politics. Mayor Schneider agreed with this as well and seemed to suggest to Councilperson Owensby that anyone could apply for the position via East-West Gateway once the process begins.

Councilperson May wanted to be sure that we would only consider candidates who had been vetted by East-West Gateway. Though Councilperson Owensby tried to suggest some sort of discrimination in that statement (which Mayor Schneider promptly corrected him on), all Councilperson May seemed to be suggesting is that we limit the field to those who meet the qualifications for the position and were recommended by the neutral group we'll be hiring to make those recommendations.

After the agenda items were completed some new and old business issues were raised. Mr. Boone asked for direction from the Council on what to do about the bridge at Wild Acres. He explained that a structural engineer looked at the bridge and told him it would be better to tear it down and build new than to try to restore it. Mr. Boone would not commit to whether or not this engineer said the bridge was unsafe for foot traffic. The Council voted to direct him to use public works to recover and store all of the bridge's ornamentation that could be saved.

While there has been a persistent rumor in Overland that this bridge came from the St. Louis Worlds Fair, it is my understanding that the Overland Historical Society has been unable to find any evidence of this. In all likelihood this bridge was build by the property owner in the same style as the Worlds Fair but that's as far as the connection appears to go.

The Mayor suggested that we need Citizens Committees to help the City address issues and research solutions. The Overland Examiner could not agree more. There's entirely too much to do for 9 part-time elected officials. Many residents have expressed interest in volunteering for the city so filling those committees is not likely to be an issue. The Mayore also said he'd like to get together with the entire Council and tour all of the parks to start thinking about what they would like to do with them so they are much better prepared for filing for grants in the future. This is a great idea, however due to the Sunshine Law this will have to be a public event which could complicate matters.

Mr. Boone also informed the Council that he expects work to finally start on the Wild Acres Seminary Property roof in the next week or two. He also asked the Council members from Ward 3 to get together with him to work out positioning of the lights that are to be installed in Brooks park in the hopes that they will reduce vandalism there.

The Chief raised an issue with the Police Radios. He explained that there are several areas in the City where officers cannot communicate with dispatch. The Chief pointed out that their equipment is working properly, and that this is a problem related to the ever growing number of frequencies in use rather than an equipment failure. According to the chief there were a few possible solutions. One was to shift to an 800 Mhtz system. He didn't recommend this however do to the huge cost involved as every hand-held and vehicle radio would have to be replaced as would most of the equipment at the station. The solution the Chief recommended was to install a booster system. This would require equipment to be installed at the Station that he estimated would cost $7000.00. Additionally it would cost the City $3000.00 for each booster as well as about $150.00/mo. for a phone line connected to each one.

Chief Herron explained that the problem is mostly in the Western portion of Overland as well as some sections of Page. He recommended that they purchase one booster and install it at the Wild Acres Police substation first as this might resolve all of the issues. If it didn't handle the problems on Page entirely, they could add a second booster at the City garage. The Council agreed and directed the Chief to begin gathering bids for this equipment.

Though the meeting was long, and it had its tense moments, the Council definitely did a bit better at working together than at the previous Council meeting. Ultimately, we will have to wait and see how votes on some of these issues go at the next Council meeting before we can judge how they're doing.

The following are two versions of the entire video of this Workshop meeting for your review (please let us know how the first one plays for you):

If you are viewing this content through a news-reader
you might not be able to see the videos below.

click window to play

The above version is from a new hosting service
did it work well for you?

October 29th Overland
City Council Workshop
( 2 hours, 21 minutes )

comments are enabled

Keeping Kids Safe on Halloween

Halloween can be a recipe for disaster. Just think: hyper-charged by sugar, in costumes and masks, prowling dark streets with little supervision. The risks can be enormous. How can parents help protect thier kids and make Halloween a fun yet safe experience? Consider this advice for making trick or treating a safe experience.

Plan ahead. First, parents should make sure they know the expected route their children are planning to take for trick or treating. Make sure they have an expected time for return and that the kids have a watch.

Go along for the fun. The best approach is to make sure a responsible adult, preferably a parent, accompanies all trick or treaters. A little adult supervision can go a long way. Get together with other parents and take the little people as a group. Some of the fondest memories as an adult at Halloween, have been chatting with friends as the kids went door to door.

Stay on the beaten path. Remind your truck or treaters that they should stay in populated areas and away from open fields, back alleys and the like. Choosing well lit streets is a good rule.

Go only to known houses. This is a little tough to enforce, but is a wise choice. Just go to homes of people you know and can trust. While treat tampering is rare, you have to exercise a little caution. And there is a built in benefit - treats are usually a little better if the person behind the door knows the kids who are knocking!

Take a few safety precautions. Make sure your children have a flashlight or chemical "glow stick" with them. Putting a little reflective tape on the back of costumes is a good idea as well.

Watch for cars. This seems like common sense advice. but trick or treaters sometimes assume drivers can see them. Exercise extra caution. And remember, just because one car stops for them doesn't mean that all cars will.

Help them avoid crime. Sometimes children can unwittingly participate in criminal activities in the name of fun at Halloween. Toilet papering, parties, egging houses, terrorizing trick or treaters, engaging in harmful practical jokes, shoplifting and the like are criminal offenses. Sometimes masks and customes can make children feel invulnerable! Halloween is not an excuse for vandalism and crime. Warn them sternly. If they become involved in something like this, make them clean up or make restitution.

Custome safety. Here are some general guidelines for Halloween customes:

• Any costume should be made of flame retardant material. There are just enough jack o'lanterns around to make us think twice.
• Costumes should have at least some way of being visible in the dark. Reflective tape, lighter colors, battery operated flashing lights, and the like are important.
• Avoid high heels and other tripping hazards with costumes. Props like swords, scythers and the like should be bendable in case they are fallen on.
• Masks should have eye holes big enough to allow peripheral vision. If possible, avoid a mask altogether and use face paint.

As your children get a little older, trick or treating loses it allure and they will start looking for parties, haunted houses and the like. If your children are headed out for a party away from home, follow a few common sense rules:

• Set a curfew. Make sure the kids know what time they need to be home and that they have a watch.
• Know where they are going. Get a name, address, and phone number of their destination. It's also a good idea to make sure there will be adults supervising the party.
• Take a cell phone or change. Make sure your kids have a way to contact you and to get home if needed. Sometimes parties can turn ugly in a variety of ways and they may want to get out and fast.
• Consider hosting your own party. One way to stay in control of Halloween activities is to be the party host.
• Plan activities in advance. Consider having some active games like a scavenger hunt or a murder mystery. A little structure can go a long way toward a safe Halloween.
• Get creative. A pumpkin carving contest can be fun. You can even plan this around a theme like classic horror movies, local landmarks and the like. Have the party guests bring them along and carve them on-site.
• Videos are great. With a little care and planning, you can rent a couple of Halloween classics at the video store. This with some munchies and a little supervision can be a great teen activity.

With trick or treaters, teen party goers and the possibility of a little adventure in the neighborhood, it pays to take a few precautions.

Open flames are a real hazard. If you use candles in your jack o'lanterns, make sure that they are not where costumes can connect with them. Put them on a shelf, on a garden wall or somewhere where they are not a potential fire hazard.

Keep pets safe. If any group has the potential for a bad Halloween experiences, pets would probably be close to the top of the list. Put your dogs and cats inside on Halloween night to minimize their stress and keep them safe from pranksters who might put them at risk. Don't let the kids feed them Halloween candy - not good for the digestive tract of any domestic animal.

Patrol occasionally. It doesn't hurt a couple times Halloween evening to jump in the car or wander down the street with your cell phone and a strong flashlight. Taking the iniative to establish a presence can eliminate vandalism or other problems before they start.

Be safe, use a little extra care and plan ahead. You can make a difference in your children's safety this Halloween.

This article was provided to us by Officer Scott Barthelmass of the Overland Police Department. Information originally from the Firefighters Association of Missouri. Thanks Scott!! You can find their article in PDF format here.

Overland City Council Meeting 10/22/2007

Before this article begins I would like to apologize for the delay in getting this published. Unfortunately, my full time job (that supports my family), though my employers are very understanding and accommodating, does not always allow me the time needed to work on this project. Add to that the extensive work being done on a new version of this site (which is nearing completion), and time simply got away from me. Though I am doing radically better at time management these days, I still slip up from time to time.


The Overland City Council held their regularly scheduled meeting on October 22nd at the Overland Community Center. While we have become used to the spirit of cooperation and compromise the Council and the Mayor has shown since the August election both seemed all but absent at this meeting.

Residents comments included one resident asking when the Council was going to move forward on their proposal to fund helping needy families with the cost of their trash service (They budgeted $50,000.00 toward this earlier in the year). She was advised that they are working on it but as yet have no firm time frame for implementation. Another asked the Council and the Mayor to make filling the City Administrator position a top priority. One resident made an excellent point in my opinion. When Overland is already dealing with a negative image problem why would we add to it in prime time by holding a town hall meeting on a rat issue that is no worse than any inner-ring suburb? Also at residents comments an announcement of a Public Meeting focusing on Global Warming issues and what average people can do about it. This meeting will be held at the Overland Community Center, in the Activity Room on Saturday, November 3rd, 2007 from 2:00 to 4:00 PM. I hope to see you all there.

The bills and the approval of the minutes went without issue other than Councilman May asking that the October 15th, 2007 Special Council meeting minutes be amended to include his motion to table the consolidation issue. The vote to approve this change went 7-1 with only Councilman Owensby opposing.

At this meeting Mayor Schneider reappointed some members and newly appointed others to the Board of adjustment. At an earlier meeting the Mayor expressed his desire to ensure that every Ward was once again represented on the Board.

Jack Arnold of Ward 2 was reappointed to the Board by a 7-1 vote with only Councilperson Owensby opposing.

Rudy Kuhlmann of Ward 4 was reappointed to the board unanimously. Oddly enough, Councilperson Owensby made the motion.

Bob Aston (not sure of the spelling here) of Ward 3 was appointed unanimously.

Dennis Hegamann (not sure of the spelling here either) of Ward 1 was appointed unanimously.

Jon Seals of Ward 1 was appointed as the alternate unanimously.

There was no mention of addressing the expired terms of some on the Planning and Zoning Commission, though we assume that will be coming up in the near future.

During the Clerks report several new business licenses was listed including Wendy's, which I believe is for their location in the Home Depot parking lot at 170 and Page that has been closed for some time now. Personally I've always been a fan of Wendy's so I look forward to their reopening.

During the Report of the City Attorney is when everything started to fall apart. The first issue raised was the consolidation of lots 9616 - 9622 Midland ave. These are commercial properties that had formally be occupied by a construction company. It was said at an earlier meeting that the owner needed to consolidate the lots because he had a buyer whose bank would not finance the deal unless they were consolidated into one property. Normally consolidations like this are a simple procedure. The Council is involved because all lot consolidations or subdivisions require an Ordinance. Normally such a consolidation would go through without a hitch because the property is vacant and consolidating the lots makes it easier for the owner to sell the property (hopefully bringing a new business to Overland in the process). This issue was a bit different however.

Before we go further I would like to point out that my family lives within a few blocks of this property. While I am confident my position on this issue would be the same if it was anywhere else in town, to some this would constitute a personal bias.

First there is the type of company looking to move into the property. Pool Pros (this link may be broken) is a swimming pool maintenance company. As such they would be storing large quantities of chemicals including chlorine on-site (as they currently do at their 2533 Link Location). That puts those hazardous chemicals across the street from Legion Park, a few doors down from a Day Care Center, a few blocks from Marion School (and along the route many children walk to get to that school). Additionally, these lots boarder Cold Water Creek and several residences share a property line with it. Considering all of this it would seem obvious that such a business does not belong at this location. There are a host of industrial park locations in Overland that would be better suited for such a company. These issues were also raised at the October 15th Special Council Meeting that was held after the Town Hall Meeting that evening.

Normally, this would not be a concern when considering consolidating lots. Consolidating the lots helps the seller, but the buyer normally has to go through the same inspection and review process all commercial interests have to go through to open a business in Overland. However, it was suggested by Acting Public Works Director Chuck Boone that the former construction company and the new pool company are similar businesses and thus he would have to transfer the Conditional Use permit. This would allow this company to move into this property without Planning and Zoning Commission or Board of Adjustment review and without any Public input on the issue. It is because of this that the consolidation became an issue. Several on the Council felt that they could not let this business circumvent the process designed to protect the city and its citizens.

I reviewed the Overland Ordinances on Conditional Uses trying to figure out where Mr. Boone was coming from on this. To give a current conditional use permit for one company to another would seem to come under one of two ordinances:

SECTION 400.705: TRANSFERABILITY

All conditional use permits shall be approved for the originating applicant for a specific location, and may not be transferred to any other location by that applicant. Should title to the property be transferred to a different owner, a renewal of the original conditional use permit shall be required. (CC 1976 App. A §10.10; Ord. No. 2449 §1, 11-14-88; Ord. No. 2542 §2, 12-11-89)

SECTION 400.685: PROCEDURE TO AMEND APPROVED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT

In order to amend an existing conditional use permit, the application procedures, required materials, approval process, and appeal process shall be the same as for a new permit.

In both cases it appears that a new company would have to go through the same conditional use permit application process that all companies have to go through. That means a review by the Planning and Zoning Commission and a Board of Adjustment Hearing, both of which allow for public comment. Interestingly enough, this property is currently zoned as C1. According to APPENDIX A: TABLES OF PRIMARY USES, ACCESSORY USES AND PLANNED USES, whether you call this company a Construction Contractor (as Acting Public Works Director Chuck Boone suggested) or a Repair Services (off-site) company (which seems more accurate) both such companies are specifically prohibited from being in a C1 zone.

If the Conditional use permit process is properly followed it appears that there is no way within Overland's Ordinances that a company like this could operate at this property. Also, there are specific provisions in the ordinances for public protest and City Council review. If the city was to have this company properly follow the process set forth in our ordinances it is doubtful that they would be allowed to open both because of likely public protest and the fact that our ordinances do not allow this sort of company within this zoning classification.

Councilpersons May and Cuminale both of Ward 1 (where this property is located) fought for proper review as did Councilpersons O'Connell and Conlon (both of Ward 2). They were concerned that this company was going to be allowed to circumvent the normal process. At one point they offered a compromise to amend the ordinance consolidating the properties to specifically require a planning and zoning review for any company seeking to occupy the property. This compromise was not adopted. Ultimately, Councilpersons Owensby and Keller, both of Ward 3 and Councilpersons Jones and Dills, both of Ward 4 voted for the Consolidation with the Mayor casting the deciding vote in favor of it.

I was disappointed in the Mayor on this issue. Since taking office, when faced with a divided Council, Mayor Schneider has tabled issues to be fully discussed at a Workshop meeting in order to try to find workable compromises. I have appreciated his efforts in this regard in the past and I was surprised that he did not do the same here. Ultimately this consolidation passed, however if the company does move forward and the Public Works department does attempt to circumvent the process, legal action against the city on this issue is highly likely. If reason does not prevail at City Hall, hopefully good business sense will and the Owner of this company will reconsider this location. If so I hope he chooses to look into properties in more appropriate locations and zones in Overland.

What disappointed me the most on this issue were a number of people in the audience. a group of people including several I know to be C.O.G.G. members booed and waved "thumbs down" signs when some on the Council argued for public input and proper review and cheered when others on the Council voted in favor of this consolidation even though circumventing public input and review seemed likely. C.O.G.G. stands for Citizens of Overland for Good Government. I would really like to know how these members believe circumventing public input and proper review is "Good Government". Perhaps someone from this organization will comment on this article to let us know.

Another issue that was raised was the consideration of the job description for the Computer Technician position that needs to be filled in our MIS department. It is clear that another person is needed as there is simply too much work for one person to effectively manage. However, this description was discussed at length at the Council Workshop meeting on October 1st. At that meeting, several on the Council were concerned about the low qualification requirements for this position. After much discussion the Council seemed willing to compromise on the qualifications but ultimately voted to table the issue so they could further discuss the qualifications as well as consider the need for bonding MIS employees at a Workshop meeting the following week (that was later canceled). Councilperson O'Connell was outraged when the job description came up for a vote as none of the proposed compromises were included and the issue was supposed to have been tabled for further discussion.

As a compromise Councilperson O'Connell motioned to amend the job description to include the suggested qualification compromises. That vote went 4-4 With Councilpersons Owensby, Keller, Jones and Dills opposing and Mayor Schneider casing the tie-breaking vote by opposing as well. The Job Description ultimately passed with the same vote breakdown and the Mayor breaking the tie in favor of the job description. This has major implications. If Council members do not feel that their agreements made in Workshop meetings will be upheld when issues come up to vote at Council meetings then why would they want to participate in these workshops at all? This issue came up before, during the Purzner administration and then Councilperson Schneider was one of those expressing similar concerns.

Yet another issue came up at this meeting. Councilperson O'Connell asked what happened with the mailing of the notices for the October 15th Town Hall. Councilperson O'Connell pointed out that at the September 17th Council Workshop the Council agreed to send those mailings via first class mail to ensure that they reached the public in time. The announcements were later sent via a bulk mail company resulting in most residents not receiving notice of this meeting until after it was held, some as late as a week after the fact.

Oddly, Mayor Schneider said that happened under the last administration and that Councilperson O'Connell should not lay that issue at his feet. However, it is clear in the video of this Workshop that Mayor Schneider chaired that meeting (as he was elected Mayor a month prior). Though the Mayor had been suggesting using a mailing service for the notices, a review of the video of the meeting meeting (in this article) shows that at 1 hour and 21 minutes in (1:21:00 approximately), the Mayor himself says to the Council "we have already decided we're going to make this a first class mailing". It seems that if City Hall had followed the direction of the Council an the Mayor on this matter the notices would have likely reached all of the residents well before the meeting. Even though Councilperson Jones properly pointed out that the Overland Examiner is not the official website of Overland when Councilperson O'Connell referenced it the fact remains that we have a video of that meeting in its entirety for the public to review.

Interestingly, Councilperson Jones suggested that they do not have to stick with what is decided at workshops when issues come up in Regular Council meetings. This begs the question, why bother voting on anything at a workshops? Better yet, why bother to hold them in the first place? The Council Workshop meetings are designed to give the Council the opportunity to express their views on various issues, seek public input if they choose to, and try to find reasonable compromises that will allow for a successful vote on various measures. If decisions make at Workshop meetings are going to be ignored then those meetings would seem to be all but pointless.

Another contentious issue came up at this meeting. This time it was the issue of the mandatory retirement age for the Police Department. It has already been established that this requirement, instituted back in 1959, is well within the EEOC Police and Fire exemption for age discrimination. At their meeting a month or so ago the Police Pension Board voted 4-1 in favor of Chief Herron's motion to ask the Council to remove the age requirement entirely.

The Chief's stated reasoning for this was that though this mandatory retirement age for police officers was in fact legal, and the City would win if a lawsuit was brought against us for age discrimination, the cost of defending against such a suit would likely be high and could be avoided by eliminating the requirement all together. If you take this reasoning to its logical conclusion, you have to wonder why Chief Herron is not asking the Mayor and Council to eliminate of the Overland Police Department entirely. After all, even when officers and command staff follow all the laws and standard procedures they can still be sued, and even a successful defense is costly (as we've seen at the OPD several times in the past).

At that Pension meeting concerns were raised as to whether the average person over the age of 65 was fit for the physically intensive job of being a Police Officer. Chief Herron stated they could remove an officer who was unfit to fulfill the duties of a police officer. However, this happened recently with Officer Sheffer, a 17 year veteran of Overland PD. His health declined to the point that he was let go by the police department due to an inability to perform as a police officer. Though it should, currently the Police Pension has no provision for dealing with such disabilities like the non-uniform pension does. This termination didn't go so well as it is my understanding that Officer Sheffer's legal council successfully forced the department to take care of him financially.

You cannot selectively enforce physical standards. If OPD wants to ensure that all officers meet whatever physical fitness requirements they decide on (and put in writing) they will have to test everyone regularly. That would include command staff. Failing to do so leaves them open to legal action should they try to remove another "unfit" officer from their ranks. It seems to me that, contrary to the Chief's opinion at the Police Pension Board meeting, the department cannot, without risk of legal action, remove an "unfit" officer from their ranks unless several policy changes are made.

The proposed ordinance would have eliminated the mandatory retirement age. However, a reasonable compromise was suggested. Since the Social Security Administration has changed the retirement age for full benefits (as you can see in their chart here), it seems reasonable to suggest that we change the mandatory retirement age to mirror Social Security's. Since their retirement age is based on your birth year, and they could possibly change this again in the future, it was wisely suggested that the proposed ordinance revision be amended so that the Police Mandatory Retirement age is the same as Social Security's minimum age for full benefits.

The Vote to amend the proposed ordinance in this way went 6-2 with only Councilpersons Owensby and Keller opposing. The vote on the amended ordinance passed 6-2, again with Councilpersons Owensby and Keller opposing.

There were a host of other interesting issues that came up during this meeting. However, due to this already being a lengthy article, I'm going to leave those to our readers to discuss in the comments below if they choose to do so after watching the video.

The following are two versions of the entire video of this Council meeting. We had some trouble uploading it but the process is now complete and we have 2 versions of the video your review (please let us know how the first one plays for you):

If you are viewing this content through a news-reader
you might not be able to see the video below.

This version is from a new hosting service
Does it work well for you?

October 22nd Overland
City Council Meeting
( 2 hours, 55 minutes )

comments are enabled and encouraged on this article

Comprehensive Plan Review Committee Meeting

This article slipped through the cracks I'm afraid. While the video has been uploaded for awhile now, time constraints prevented me from writing an article about this meeting when it happened. Before long it slipped my mind. I apologize for that and I'm working on ways to keep such mistakes from happening again.

Overland's new Comprehensive Plan Review Committee (CPRC) met for the first time on October 16th, 2007 at the Community Center. This was mostly an organizational meeting to introduce the members to each other and explain the role and goals of the committee. As our readers might recall, at the September 24th City Council Meeting Mayor Schneider named Mark Giroux to head this committee and left naming its membership to him. While concerns were expressed about this in many corners, now that the committee is named many will likely put most of those concerns aside.

The Committee is made up of the following people with all but Don Rolfing being Overland residents:

1. Mark Giroux - Chairman - also: Planning and Zoning Commission Member and President of C.O.G.G.
2. Bob Young - Member - also: Ritenour School Board Member
3. Don Rolfing - Member - also: Community Fire Protection District Inspector
4. Eedie Cuminale - Member - also: Overland City Council Member (Ward 1)
5. Barbara Olsen - Member - also: Local Business owner
6. Fran Kulhmann - Member - also: Overland Treasurer and Secretary of C.O.G.G.
   
7. John Alberici - Member - also: Local Business owner
8. Lee Patterson - Member - also: Overland Business Association Board Member
9. Capt. Mike Laws - Member - also: Director of Operations for Overland P.D.
10. Stacey Ficken - Member - also: Local Bank Manager
11. Chuck Boone - Member - also: Acting Public Works Director
12. Tom Eckert - Member - also: Chairman of the Overland Board of Adjustment
13. David Sippe - Member - also: OBA Board member and Local Business owner

There is a good mix of people, experience and opinions represented on this committee. I have had conversations at one time or another with nearly every member and all have been reasonable and willing to consider the opposing views of others for the most part.

There were several guests in attendance at this meeting. Mayor Schneider, City Clerk Linda Downs and Beth Noonan of the St. Louis County Economic Development Council, who spoke about several areas where the St. Louis County EDC could be of assistance.

The original Comprehensive Plan (AKA "Master Plan") for Overland was written back in 2001. The purpose of this committee is to review that plan and work out changes needed to fit Overland for today and tomorrow.

All the members of the Committee were given copies of the current plan to review and consider for the next meeting. That meeting is currently scheduled for November 13th, at 7:00 PM. It was explained that the city offered the use of the Council Chambers for future meetings. With 13 members on that committee they will have to work out where everyone will sit as the dais only accommodates 11 I believe. However, this is a disappointing choice. The smaller rooms at the Community Center have excellent acoustics which allow everyone in attendance to hear clearly as well as allow for clear audio recording (as you can hear for yourself in the video below). Without the sound system in place it is extremely difficult for the audience to hear anything being discussed at a normal volume on the dais. It also makes audio recording nearly impossible. While I understand the Committee's desire to meet without taking up a time slot at the Community Center that might otherwise be rented, I hope they take into consideration residents who might attend in the future and their likely desire to hear what is discussed at the meeting.

The most interesting discussion at this meeting was the explanation of the ground rules for the committee. If followed, rules like these could better enable any organization, perhaps even our City Council, to be more productive. Those ground rules are:

• Come prepared for the meetings
• Focus on the big picture not the little ones
• Respect the opinions and comments of others
• No posturing, grand-standing, or personal agendas
• No "war-stories" during the meetings
• A 90% plan is far better than no plan
• We will never be 100% on all things and that's OK

One ground rule above I really liked was "A 90% plan is far better than no plan". Whenever a body, be it a committee like this, a City Council or whatever else considers an issue, there will likely be conflicting opinions on how to resolve it. For most issues, a compromise can be reached that may not be the perfect solution, but it is far superior to no solution. All too often people allow their personal agendas to prevent them from even considering compromise. Frequently when this happens nothing is accomplished.

It is likely that this committee will not find a perfect solution for every issue that every member agrees with. However, if they work together they will probably find agreeable solutions and/or compromises for most. Moving forward with a plan that addresses most issues, even if they end up having to leave out some they could not come to an agreement on, will still benefit the City (assuming we actually use the plan this time around). Ultimately, politics and policy are about negotiations and compromise. Sometimes people forget this, but more often than not when people don't work together to find a middle-ground most can agree on, nothing gets done.

Overall this was an interesting meeting and I am personally looking forward to seeing what this mix of people comes up with. It is nice to see some diversity in viewpoints and I am hopeful that this will result in a more effective and complete Comprehensive Plan in the future. Only time will tell if the city leadership will choose to follow or ignore it as happened with the previous plan.

What follows is the video of that meeting in its entirety:

If you are viewing this content through a news-reader
you might not be able to see the video below.


Comprehensive Plan Review Committee (CPRC)
Meeting October - 16th, 2007
( 1 hour )

comments are enabled on this article

Special Council Meeting 10-15-2007

9616-9622 Midland Ave, Overland
Image thanks to Google Maps

The Overland City Council convened for a Special Council Meeting to consider the lot consolidation for 9616-9622 Midland Avenue. This was a short meeting, but not without its issues. City Attorney Robert Herman explained that an ordinance is required to subdivide or consolidate property lots and that this is a simple administrative process.

It was explained that this property was going to be sold, but the bank would not approve the loan unless the lots were combined and the closing date was set on a date prior to the next Council meeting.

Councilpersons Conlon and O'Connell were the most vocal opposition to this. The issue was the precedent this action would set. While the property's sale might be expedited by taking care of the consolidation at this special meeting the issue here is really the property owner's poor planning. If you know that you cannot close a sale without combining the property and you know an ordinance needs to be passed for this to happen why would you even consider setting a closing date prior to the next City Council meeting?

Thankfully, the Mayor listened to these concerns and said he wanted to table the issue. Surprisingly, Councilperson Jones moved for a second reading anyway. That motion was seconded by Councilperson Owensby, though the Council never voted on the measure. This is another example of Mayor Schneider listening to all sides in my opinion. Had he moved forward with this issue there may well have been enough votes to pass it. If this happened the City Council would likely have to hold Special Council Meetings on all issues like this in the future to avoid potential legal action for making this effort for one party but not another.

Earlier in the meeting Mr. Herman referenced a sign on a local judges door that reminded me of one of my favorite sayings:

Failure to plan on your part
does not constitute an emergency on my part.

The bottom line here is that had the property owner properly planned for the closing of this sale there would have been no need to even consider holding a Special Meeting to begin with. Frankly, I am surprised this meeting was scheduled to begin with.

Also raised at this meeting was the concern that the company looking to purchase the property was a swimming pool maintenance company. Taking a look at the location of these properties (map), it's a stones throw from Legion Park, at least one Day Care provider and an extensive residential portion of Ward 1. Pool Maintenance companies store hazardous chemicals, usually in large quantities. Allowing this sort of risk in this area seems foolhardy at best. Though consolidating the property does not circumvent the rest of the process to open such a business (zoning changes and variances if needed as well as the commercial inspection process), I thought residents of this area of town (which includes my family) should be aware of this potential future issue.

What follows is the video of this short meeting in its entirety.

Overland Town Hall Meeting 10/15/2007

The City of Overland held a Town Hall meeting to consider the perceived rodent problem in our city. I say perceived because though it is definitely a substantial problem for those who are affected by it, as the representatives from Rottler Pest Control correctly pointed out, the issues with rodents in our area are no worse than the average older, inner-ring suburb in our area. While this meeting can be seen by some as being proactive in trying to address an issue for residents, it can also be seen as unnecessarily bringing more negative publicity to our City. It's simply a matter of perspective.

While there were about 60 residents in attendance it's hard to say how many might have attended if the public had been directly notified about this meeting well in advance. I believe it was the September 17th, 2007 Workshop meeting where the Council decided to have this Town Hall event. At the same meeting they decided to send out a mailer to pass along helpful information related to the issue and invite residents to attend and speak on the issue. Unfortunately, that mailer went out too late as no one in attendance had received one, and all the residents that I have talked to who have received it, got it on October 16th or later (I still have not received one). I am hoping that City Hall learns from this experience. Unless you're willing to foot the bill for First Class stamps it can take weeks to get a mailing into the recipients' hands. This is a manageable problem with proper planning and execution.

At the meeting several representatives of Rottler Pest Control offered a host of suggestions, the most interesting of which was examining ways to bait (poison) the sewers. There are a number of considerations here. Will MSD allow it, what poisons to use to avoid secondary casualties (predators eating the rats and the like), etc. However, they made it clear to the Council that they could not present a plan or realistic estimate without detailed information on where the problems are.

Acting Public Works Director Chuck Boone was asked about this information. Interestingly, though he had told the Council that they didn't have the data at an earlier meeting, he stated at this meeting that they did have the information. At issue here was that Mr. Boone probably didn't think of the log book that is used when residents sign for the free bait boxes as a source of statistical information when he was asked the first time. Mr. Boone offered to provide statistics on this from log that covered August - October. The Council agreed that this was not enough data to be able to plan from and ultimately asked for a year of data from this log to be entered into a database so it could be analyzed to determine were the problems were and start seeking bids to address them. Mr. Boone told the Council that neither he, nor any of his staff have the time for that. One interesting suggestion, raised by Councilperson Cuminale after the meeting was that we hire a temp to do the data entry. Also, Councilperson Colon offered to donate some of her time to get this done as well.

This seems to be a recurring problem in Overland (and likely most smaller municipalities). Frequently when a solution to a problem or a new need is raised the department heads point to the difficulty of finding the time to accomplish the task. While I sympathize with having a heavy workload, our government has to start thinking outside the box a bit. The tasks that are currently taking up the bulk of the city's time are, for the most part, business as usual. Overland's revenues and growth have been flat for years, perhaps it's time to start evaluating business as usual and eliminating or at least changing the procedures that are not working. The time saved could potentially be put to use on new solutions that resolve rather than manage the issues facing our community.

Ultimately the Council took the information gathered under advisement. I suspect that this will be an agenda item at a future workshop, and perhaps, as Councilperson Conlon suggested, another Town Hall meeting.

What follows is the complete video of this meeting. The Special Council meeting that followed is not included and will be the subject of the next article.

Testing: Flickr Slide Show

This post is a test of flickr slide show. Assuming it works this slide show includes the bulk of the photos we took at Autumn in the Park this year.

We're testing this code here for inclusion into the new web site.

Meetings on Monday Oct 15th

Reminder: There will be a Town Hall Meeting at the Overland Community Center starting at 7:00 PM. The Subject of these meeting will be rodent issues and potential solutions.

Immediately following this meeting will be a special meeting of the Overland City Council to consider a bill that would consolidate the lots from 9616 to 9622 Midland Ave (map).

We have been very busy with projects related to the new version of the Overland Examiner. As a result, we've had limited time for this site. I believe the best approach at this point is to focus on the new site so that it can be up and running sooner. We will continue to provide meeting coverage and hope that a solution for the sound issues at these events will be found soon.

Council Workshop October 1st, 2007

This meeting was difficult to cover as has frequently been the case in the last several months. Being able to hear what the Council is saying in the Council Chamber, in the absence of the sound system, is difficult, if not impossible for many in the audience. This becomes even worse when someone is trying to record the event.

At this point I have to take issue with holding public meetings in a space where many in attendance cannot hear what is being said. A quick review of Missouri's Sunshine Law brings us back to an all familiar provision:

610.020 subsection 2: Each meeting shall be held at a place reasonably accessible to the public and of sufficient size to accommodate the anticipated attendance by members of the public, and at a time reasonably convenient to the public, unless for good cause such a place or time is impossible or impractical. Every reasonable effort shall be made to grant special access to the meeting to handicapped or disabled individuals.

I believe the argument can be made that these meetings are not being held in a place that is reasonably accessible, or accommodating the anticipated attendance when most in attendance cannot hear what is being said by the Council or the Mayor at these meetings.

Everyone has been reasonable with this issue due to the Council meetings having to be held at the Community Center because of the high attendance (and the judge's order). We understand that damage could be done to the sound system if it is regularly moved back and forth from the Community Center to City Hall. However, that sound system is regularly broken down and moved from the gym to a storage room in the Community Center. Since it apparently can be moved short distances without concern, it would seem to me that the best approach, if the intent is to be reasonably accessible, would be to hold workshop meetings in one of the smaller meeting rooms at the Community Center. That way, the sound system could be setup without damage concerns and everyone in attendance could actually hear what their elected representatives were discussing. Better still, the sound system might not even be needed at all as the acoustics in the meeting rooms are far superior to the Council Chambers.

I also have to take issue with holding Pension Board meetings at 3:00PM (as is the case with the scheduled Joint Pension Boards meeting scheduled for Tuesday, October 2nd, at 3:00PM) 3:00PM meetings cannot possibly be considered "at a time reasonably convenient to the public". Overland is a blue collar town for the most part. The majority of our residents are working, on their commute home or picking up children from school at this hour. Holding meetings that involve a great deal of taxpayer money at an hour when few, if any, taxpayers can attend is not in the spirit of the Sunshine Law in my opinion.

Soapbox moment over.

The Council held a Workshop meeting in the Council Chambers at City Hall on Monday, October 1st, 2007 beginning at 6:30PM. The meeting started with consideration of a job description for hiring another person for the MIS (computer / IT) department. The additional person is certainly needed. However, the chosen pay scale, starting at $31,000.00, is too low to hire an IT professional. That means this is an entry level position. The suggested requirements are a high school diploma (or GED), A+ certification and 2 years work experience or equivalent education. Though those requirements seem rather low, the 2 year experience pushes the limit of the pay proposed for this position.

The Council decided to table this discussion for further review and consideration of possible confidentiality agreements as well as bonding requirements for this position (as well as for the current MIS employee). The Council plans to revisit this issue at a newly scheduled Workshop meeting to be held on Tuesday, October 9th at 6:30PM in the Council Chambers at City hall.

The Council then moved on to the Marquee sign. They agreed to accept the bid from Bill Yount Signs for $17,551.60 for the new Marquee sign as well as Gillick Brickwork Inc.'s $7780.00 bid for the brick work and Lee Deering Electric company's $2,300.00 bid for the electrical work needed for the sign, bringing the cost of this new sign to $27,631.60 not including the costs of moving the existing sign at the Overland Community Center to Wild Acres.

The next item considered was lighting at Brooks Park. The Council agreed to accept a bid from Lee Deering Electric company (I didn't catch the amount of this bid).

From there the Council discussed park grants. It was proposed that they apply for a St. Louis County Park Grant to repair and upgrade the bathrooms at Norman Myer and Brooks Parks as well as bring them into compliance with ADA (American's with Disabilities Act) regulations. Acting Public Works Director Chuck Boone estimated that this could be done for approximately $140,000.00.

Councilperson O'Connell expressed concern about investing more money into the frequently vandalized bathrooms at Brooks park. He suggested that we get the lights installed first and see if vandalism is reduced before we put more money into that property. Councilperson Owensby took exception to this. Mr. Boone pointed out that they would be investing in ways to prevent future vandalism. One example he gave was the use of motion activated fixtures that would prevent vandals from jamming faucets open and blocking drains in order to flood the bathrooms (as has happened more than once in the past). While this might work, as a friend pointed out to me earlier this evening, these very sophisticated and expensive faucets can be destroyed rather easily by a vandal with a very simple and cheap hammer. The result would likely be the similar with water flooding the bathroom but with the added expense of repairing, or more likely replacing these expensive fixtures.

Councilperson O'Connell asked that the Council consider adding resurfacing the track at Norman Myers park to the grant proposal. It was said once that the cost of doing this could be around $30,000.00 However, Councilperson Jones suggested the Ritenour High School track as an example of what would be put on the Norman Myers track. That type of project generally costs around $100,000.00 or more on a full size track. Also, vehicles, including large semi trucks, have to drive on the existing track for setting up the various fairs and events that are regularly held there. I don't believe this material would hold up to that abuse.

Ultimately the Council voted to submit a proposal for improving the bathrooms at Norman Myers and Brooks parks as well as resurfacing the track at Norman Myers. I hope they have a plan for protecting the track from vehicle traffic at future events. I also hope that the cost of doing this does not hurt our chances of receiving a grant, like the over 1 million dollar proposal for a new pool complex did last year. The Council also agreed to consider Legion Park for a grant opportunity later this year, and to discuss that at the next workshop meeting.

The next item addressed at this meeting was openings on the Board of Adjustment. One member of the Board apparently wants to resign, and an additional opening was created when Les Dills was appointed to the City Council. The Mayor proposed the following names, keeping in mind the Council's concerns about equal representation of the Wards, on this board:

1> Dennis Hegaman of Ward 1 (please post a comment if we are wrong on the spelling)
2> Bob Estin of Ward 3 (please post a comment if we are wrong on the spelling)

With Jack Arnold (Ward 2) and Rudy Kuhlman (Ward 4) remaining as members and Tom Eckert (Ward 4) remaining as the Chairman.

Additionally, Mayor Schneider proposed John Seals (Ward 1) as a board alternate. At the last Council meeting Councilperson Eddie Cuminale asked that John Seals be considered to fill a vacant seat on the board. Discussion followed with Councilperson Owensby asking the Mayor to consider Cliff McBride (not sure on this name at this time) as well.

What threw me was when Mayor Schneider said: "John Seals was the only resident to come forward and express interest". Why, especially when you consider the constant charges of nepotism or cronyism lately, would you choose to limit "the only resident to come forward and express interest" to the role of alternate rather than full member, regardless of the fact that the alternate would likely be used semi-regularly on that board?

The issue of providing assistance with the cost of Trash service to those in need was covered briefly next. The Council was informed that City Attorney Robert Herman would be prepared to make a presentation to the Council on what options they would have with such a plan as well as the pitfalls. That presentation is scheduled for the October 29th Council Workshop meeting.

There were a host of issues discussed under new business including possible stop sign locations, speeding concerns and the like. The Council and the Mayor also agreed to move forward on establishing city email addresses for the Council members (a request made by Jim Schmidt at the last Council meeting if I remember correctly). The Council got a look at a new Ordinance proposed by the Municipal Court as well. This proposed ordinance will be brought to the Council at the next regularly scheduled Council Meeting.

One interesting item that was mentioned under new business was when the Mayor raised the possibility that the Council might be equipped with laptops in the future to speed the dissemination of information and documents while reducing printing costs (both financial and environmental). While this is certainly a good idea I hope that the City will consider the real need of computers, cameras and modern radio equipment in our police cars as well. Having the best tools at someone's disposal generally allows them to work more efficiently. However, while laptops for the Council might improve their productivity, laptops and the like for our Police officers would likely save lives. It is simply a matter of priorities.

Under Old Business Councilperson Jones asked about the trial period for the Blackberries several at City Hall had been using. Mr. Boone stated that no one was using theirs other than as a phone because they had as yet been unable to get the vendor to come in for the training they had promised to provide to the employees equipped with these devices. Based on that response, it appears the City will be considering canceling this trial and returning the equipment.

What follows is the video of the meeting in its entirety. I've amplified the audio as best as I can though it can still be hard to follow at times:

If you are viewing this content through a news-reader
you might not be able to see the video below.

City Council Workshop
October 1st, 2007
(2 Hours, 15 minutes)