Board of Aldermen Meeting Agendas & Minutes


Every effort is made to ensure that the Agendas and Minutes provided on this and subsequent pages is timely and correct; however, users should keep in mind that this information is provided only as a public convenience. In any case where legal reliance on information is required, the official records of the City of Ballwin should be consulted.

The Board of Aldermen meet on the second and fourth Mondays of each month at 7 p.m. in the Board Room of the Ballwin Government Center, 1 Government Ctr. Schedule and place subject to change. Meetings are open to the public. All citizens are urged to attend.

Board of Aldermen Meeting

Meeting Agenda

City of Ballwin Board of Aldermen Meeting Agenda and Briefs
Agendas and Briefs are available before a meeting takes place.
Minutes of a meeting are reviewed at the following meeting and are available after approval by the Aldermen.

Meeting Minutes

The meeting was called to order by Mayor Young at 6:38 p.m.

PRESENT                                                                                 ABSENT
Mayor Walt Young                                                     Alderman Frank Fleming – 
                                                                                     Out of town On business

Alderman Tim Pogue

Alderman James Terbrock
Alderman Ken Buermann
Alderman Jane Suozzi
Alderman James Robinson
Alderman Frank Fleming
Alderman Charles Gatton
Alderman Ray Lembke
City Administrator Robert Kuntz
City Attorney Lionel Lucchesi


Mayor Young said that it has been suggested to discontinue the Agenda Review Meetings prior to each Board meeting.  He said the reason the Agenda Review meetings were reinstated was that a couple of aldermen said they would like to try to do things previous to the meeting so that they could get questions answered.  He said we have had some very successful Agenda Review meetings, but one or two have been a problem because of getting started. 

City Administrator Kuntz informed the audience that the formal structured part of the Board of Aldermen meeting starts at 7:00 p.m., the second and fourth Mondays.  The agenda is advertised and posted on our website and a summary of the topics that will be discussed are at the table in the back of the room.  Since April of this year, the Board has agreed to come in a half hour early and discuss the topics on the agenda in a very informal environment.  No votes are taken.  Everything discussed in the Agenda Review meeting will be discussed in the Board meeting at 7:00 p.m.

Alderman Lembke said that he was one of the aldermen who asked that this topic be discussed by the Board.  There have been changes in his work schedule and it is now more difficult to attend the 6:30 meeting.  He said he is willing to defer voting on the continuation of the Agenda Review meeting until the end of the year.

Alderman Buermann said that under his comments he was going to suggest that there are 4 meetings left in the year, one is the capital budget and the other the operation budget.  Two out of four meetings require coming in at 5:30 p.m.  He said his recommendation is to change the Agenda Review meetings at the first of the year.  He said that Alderman Robinson, Alderman Fleming, and Alderman Gatton have issues with getting here early.  He said if we take a vote now, we can do it immediately or give it time.  He said there are enough Board members who have conflicts that any type of vote will mean the end of the Agenda Review meetings.  Mayor Young said that will be okay if that’s what the Board wants to do.

A motion was made by Alderman Robinson and seconded by Alderman Gatton to terminate the Agenda Review Meetings at 6:30 p.m. and start the Board Meetings at 7:00 p.m.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed. 

Mayor Young agreed that this will be the final Agenda Review meeting.  The Board meetings will start at 7:00 p.m., with the exception of the special meetings.  He said that this is now an opportunity for the committee meetings to be held at 6:30 p.m. to address other issues of importance. 


Alderman Lembke asked if staff is certain that this system is going to be technologically viable for a long time.  City Administrator Kuntz said that past experience has been 10 years.  He expects 5 or 6 years.  The other issues are service, replacement parts, and technology that’s not compatible.  Assistant City Administrator Aiken said that the proposed software system is made by the same company that manufactured the current telephone hardware.  This will be absolutely compatible with the system. 


Alderman Robinson questioned spending $28,000 for preparation of the inventory, with $10,000 being repaid with a grant.  He asked why is this needed.  Alderman Buermann said he was under the impression that this would be part of the arborist’s job.  Director of Parks and Recreation Bruer said that most of the street trees in Ballwin were planted about 40 years ago.  This year there have been approximately 200 calls for removal of street trees.  She said there are a lot of hazardous trees.  So far it has been a call in / removal basis.  We need an inventory so that we can identify where the hazardous trees are so that we can develop a plan for removal and a plan for replanting.  Once we get that, we can offer a cost sharing program with new subdivisions that would like to have street trees.  She said the inventory needs to be in place first.  She said there are about 50,000 street trees in Ballwin. 

City Administrator Kuntz said the computer program inventory will be a GIS software.  We will know the exact location of each tree, age, species, and condition.  It will be a software program that becomes the data base to build on.  The $28,000 would be spent on gathering this information.  If we prepared the inventory ourselves, there wouldn’t be time to answer the 200 calls.  He said the community is a composite of all of these things.  We made the commitment to be a Tree City.  It has a quality of life benefit.  Preparing the inventory involves a tremendous amount of field work.  Once it’s done, we can maintain it and use it as a tool to manage our forestry program in the future.  It’s partially offset by a grant.  He said he would have liked to report that it won’t cost the City anything because they gave us $28,000 – instead, we received $10,000.  That’s the most that they would give.

Alderman Robinson asked if we need the census to maintain our status as a Tree City.  Director of Parks and Recreation Bruer said no and recommended that we do the inventory.

Alderman Pogue asked if the arborist was budgeted for last year.  Ms. Bruer said it was a replacement for another position.  City Administrator Kuntz said it was budgeted for 2005.  He said the budget included no additional full-time employees.  The Parks and Rec proposal reflected the elimination of a full-time position, which was a senior staff person at the front desk at The Pointe.  The arborist was recommended and funded by eliminating the senior staff position to free up the dollars to apply towards toward the arborist.  The position has been very well received in terms of value for the money.  He said we did not add a new position to create the arborist position.  Alderman Pogue said that when the budget was approved, we did not specify that we were hiring an arborist.  City Administrator Kuntz said that he believes we did.  He said if he is incorrect, he will report this at the next meeting.

Alderman Pogue said that he prefers staying on a call-in basis to remove a tree, and use the $18,000 to plant new trees as direct replacements.  He said that new subdivisions could cost share and change the ordinance requiring street trees in new subdivisions, which he doesn’t think we have at this time.  He said the developer could be required to put in street trees as part of their cost. 

Alderman Lembke said that he received a second call from a resident on Running Creek.  He said they have ash trees that were planted by the developer as part of the GI Bill and the FHA Mortgages.  They planted the trees in the parkway and they are now 20 – 22 years old and are beginning to die.  He said we have taken out a couple of these trees.  The resident claimed that there are a lot of ash trees on that street that have reached their maturity.  We don’t know that, so we have no means of budgeting for how many of the trees will need to come out or what condition they are in.  He said it would be nice for our arborist and Parks Department to be able to quantify this liability and budget appropriately for necessary tree maintenance and removal.  He said preparing the inventory is an expensive tool. 

Mayor Young asked if it is suggested that we have a list of trees that should be set out in new subdivisions.  City Administrator Kuntz said we have a list of approved trees. 

Alderman Terbrock said that he doesn’t understand what the arborist’s job description is.  Why would we hire someone to do this inventory when we have an arborist on staff?  He asked if our arborist is certified.  Director of Parks and Recreation Bruer said that we don’t have the software or the instrumentation to do this survey.  There are 50,000 street trees in Ballwin.  She said this would take a long time if we were going to do the inventory ourselves, and we would have to purchase the software. 

City Administrator Kuntz said that three companies were contacted.  Two declined the project because it was too large for their resources.  It takes a portable GPS unit.  We borrowed GPS equipment from the City of Chesterfield two years ago to just do signs.  It took one person 6 months to do the signs.  He said we are trying to move more into that technology.  This is a jump start.  It’s a way to get an instant data base to effectively manage and determine our priorities and resources.  He said we have an Engineer too, but we bid out a lot of engineering projects.  There are some things that are good to do in-house and some things that just are not cost effective because of adding staff and buying equipment.  He said that’s why this is recommended.


A motion was made by Alderman Lembke and seconded by Alderman Buermann to adjourn the Agenda Review meeting.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed.

The Agenda Review meeting was adjourned at 6:59 p.m.

Walter S. Young, Mayor

Robert A. Kuntz, City Administrator




October 10, 2005


The meeting was called to order by Mayor Young at 7:02 p.m.

PRESENT                                            ABSENT
Mayor Walt Young                           Alderman Frank Fleming – Out of town On business
Alderman Tim Pogue
Alderman James Terbrock                                        
Alderman Ken Buermann  
Alderman Jane Suozzi  
Alderman James Robinson  
Alderman Frank Fleming  
Alderman Charles Gatton  
Alderman Ray Lembke  
City Administrator Robert Kuntz  
City Attorney Lionel Lucchesi  

The Pledge of Allegiance was given.

The Minutes of the September 26, 2005 Agenda Review meeting were submitted for approval.  A motion was made by Alderman Lembke and seconded by Alderman Buermann to approve the Minutes.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion was declared passed.

The Minutes of the September 26, 2005 Board of Aldermen meeting and Closed Session were submitted for approval.  Alderman Robinson questioned the process for recording and preparing the meeting Minutes.  He said that during the September 26 meeting, Alderman Fleming made the statement that he is happy with the job that Simon Development has done with the Meadowbrook project, and he thinks they will do a great job with the Hill Trail project.  He said that this statement is not included in the September 26 Minutes.  He said that the minutes should be amended to reflect Alderman Fleming’s statement.  Alderman Robinson said, “in the same meeting, there was a statement that the Mayor had made a previous statement at a Planning & Zoning meeting.  The Mayor said that wasn’t what he said and that the Planning & Zoning Minutes were incorrect.”  Alderman Robinson said that if the Minutes are a verbatim record of the proceedings, someone won’t have to be held responsible for determining what is important enough to go into the Minutes.  He suggested that the process of preparing the Minutes be reviewed. 

Alderman Buermann amended the minutes to state that “Alderman Buermann asked Mr. Simon if he had agreed with the terms or the conditions we set forth and the promises that he made to the residents.”  Alderman Robinson said that something this important should be included regarding the development. 

City Administrator Kuntz said that the Minutes as provided at this time, are not a verbatim transcript.  To create a verbatim transcript, it would take staff 4 – 5 times longer to prepare.  He said that the Minutes are supposed to be an overview of discussion, a verbatim record of the actual decisions, either by motion or vote.  Any comment that is incorrect through omission or misinterpretation could be corrected by an amendment at the following meeting.  He said this is an efficient process, and if verbatim Minutes is required, it will be like a court transcript and much more cumbersome for most times when it’s not an issue.  He suggested that in order to be sure that a specific statement is in the Minutes, it could be prefaced with “for the record”.  A motion to amend will be sufficient to make a correction. 

City Administrator Kuntz said that sometimes there is a lot of discussion.  It could be 20 pages before the next topic is discussed.  He said it is his understanding that this is not the purpose of meeting Minutes.  Most cities do not have verbatim Minutes. 

Alderman Suozzi said when she asked the pavement expert if asphalt was better than concrete, this was to confirm that our new procedure or new standards for streets was asphalt, stating that asphalt was to be used with concrete curb and gutter, and was to confirm that we had made the right decision.  She requested that this amendment be made to the Minutes, that our standard is asphalt.

Alderman Pogue amended the Minutes under Worker’s Comp, “The motion passed by a vote of 6-2”.

Alderman Buermann said that he would like the statement added that he had asked Mr. Simon if he agreed to the terms presented by the Trustees of the Hill Trail development.

A motion was made by Alderman Buermann and seconded by Alderman Suozzi to approve the Minutes as amended.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion was declared passed.

City Administrator Kuntz said that it will be a significant cost factor if verbatim transcripts are required for Minutes.  We would have to use a court reporter.  He said that 99% of the time, this discussion has not been necessary.  When detailed verbatim Minutes were prepared, it was 22 pages long.  He said he didn’t have time to review that many pages, and then instructed that the Minutes be prepared in summary form. 

City Attorney Lucchesi said that in general, he does not recommend verbatim Minutes.  Most Boards have experienced that verbatim Minutes can hurt, not help. 

Alderman Gatton asked that in the future, if there would be litigation, do we retain the audio tapes?  City Administrator Kuntz said that the tapes are not retained beyond the next meeting.  He said we are not required to keep the tapes.  We have an approved set of Minutes and we don’t release Minutes to the public until they are approved by the Board.  They are at first in draft form.  We are complying with the law.  He said that verbatim Minutes is not recommended.




Ann Porcelli, 229 Bitterwood Drive:  Mrs. Porcelli spoke about the privacy fence behind her property along the common line with the Pointe property.  She will be losing trees and cutting approximately 6 feet into 3 pine trees with the erection of this fence.  She proposed moving the fence back to where she originally understood it to be.  City Administrator Kuntz said that this will be discussed in the City Administrator’s report and asked Mrs. Porcelli if she can wait until that time for the discussion.  She agreed.






CONSENT ITEMS:  (Budgeted items which are low bid and do not exceed expenditure estimates and/or items which have been previously approved in concept.)

A.  Banking Services
B.  Voice Mail
C.  Street Tree Inventory 

Alderman Buermann requested that Item C be removed for further discussion.

Alderman Lembke requested that Item A be removed for further consideration.

A motion was made by Alderman Buermann and seconded by Alderman Suozzi to accept Consent Item B.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed.




Banking Services:  City Administrator Kuntz said that banking service bids are very difficult to analyze.  This renewal is essentially an extension of the current terms.  Bank bids are complicated in the sense of the establishment of the accounts and line item charges.  He said this is who he suggested that to Finance Officer Loehr to discuss an extension.  If the costs are close to what we currently have, rather than establish a new relationship, if we are satisfied with the fees, it can be recommended to the Board to approve the extension.  He said that several cities do not even bid bank services.  He said he is not in favor of this method.  He does not see a significant variance to justify going through a formal process.  He said it’s difficult to compare fees.  It might be + 2 cents on one item and + 20 cents on another. 

Alderman Suozzi asked on a monthly basis, what does Ballwin incur in terms of bank fees.  City Administrator Kuntz said a couple thousand dollars because several of the fees are offset by interest rates.  There is an income that’s offsetting the difference.  We always deal with a Ballwin bank.

A motion was made by Alderman Buermann and seconded by Alderman Lembke to extend the contract with United Missouri Bank.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed.

Street Tree Inventory:  City Administrator Kuntz said that $28,000 was the only bid.  This project is too large for most local vendors.  To do this in-house is not an efficient application of local resources.  Alderman Suozzi asked if there is any risk of losing the $10,000 grant if we do not proceed.  Is it tied directly to this expenditure?  City Administrator Kuntz said yes.  Alderman Suozzi said we need to do the inventory.  This was a need that was identified last Fall during the budgeting process.  She said we have over one-third paid for by the grant.  Trees are an important asset to the City.  We need to know what we have. 

Alderman Terbrock asked if this grant can be obtained again in the future.  City Administrator Kuntz said that every year there is a grant and we apply.  He said there has to be a good reason to turn it back this year and then ask for the same thing next year.  $10,000 is the maximum amount that they will give for grants.  He said if the Board doesn’t like the concept, then we can see what can be done in-house and return the grant. 

Alderman Buermann said that if we tell them that our revenues are flat, he has a problem spending $18,000.  City Administrator Kuntz said that streets cannot be repaired with this grant.  It must be used in the Parks Department. 

City Attorney Lucchesi asked what software program comes with this.  Director of Parks and Recreation Bruer said they provide the program. 

Alderman Lembke said that we have done something similar to this with our streets.  It was prompted by the Federal Government that said we had to establish the value of our streets and sidewalks and be able to report this information.  A consultant was hired to further this aim.  He said we have now been able to take that data and put it into a flowing process.  We have the ability to determine where the money should be spent and on what streets.  He said our trees are also an asset, and the same information that is provided about streets may later be required regarding the city-owned trees.  He said that at this point, we don’t know the liability.  As we move into a more difficult financial situation, and if we don’t know what the liability could be within the next 3-5 years or more, we could be strapped with a lot of tree removal because we didn’t see it coming and it wasn’t budgeted.  He said with this process, we will be able to know what our asset and potential liability is.  Preventative maintenance of the trees may need to be communicated to the residents.  He said from a long-term perspective, if we don’t do this now, we could be very sorry later on. 

Alderman Gatton said that he does not get a lot of complaints about street trees.  He has received complaints about street trees that have been removed by the residents without talking to the city.  At this point, since we don’t have a data base of what street trees we have, we have no way of proving this unless we see them doing this or shortly thereafter.  This is an asset that’s disappearing.

Alderman Terbrock asked if the inventory will include the trees that have been taken down?  City Administrator Kuntz said it’s a snap shot at a point in time.  It won’t go retro-active.  He said if there is a visual record that a tree was there, it will be included as an asset.

Alderman Suozzi asked if there is an ordinance prohibiting cutting down street trees.  City Administrator Kuntz said yes.

A motion was made by Alderman Robinson and seconded by Alderman Suozzi to proceed with the street tree inventory and accept the recommendation of staff to approve the Kincaid and Associates contract.  A roll call vote was taken with the following results:  Ayes:  Robinson, Suozzi, Gatton, Lembke.   Nay:  Pogue, Buermann, Terbrock.  The motion passed by a vote of 4 – 3. 

(See additional motion regarding Street Trees under Aldermanic Comments on Page 7)

Arts Commission:  City Administrator Kuntz recommended that a different direction be taken regarding the Arts Commission.  He said the present form is not working.  Alderman Buermann said that it is difficult to find people to serve on this commission. 

A motion was made by Alderman Buermann and seconded by Alderman Lembke to reconstitute the Arts Commission with a 3-member board with quarterly meetings, aldermanic representation, coordination with staff regarding programming, and that there be sub-categories for Friends of the Arts to assist on a volunteer basis with promotions and other events as they come up in the community.  Alderman Lembke would remain on the commission.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed.

Fence Issue:  City Administrator Kuntz said the Board has an e-mail from Mrs. Porcelli explaining the issues and a response from City Planner Aiken outlining the options.  He said that staff recommendation is that this be structured in an easement form to enable the location of the fence as they proposed it.  Recording expenses and other legal requirements are unknown and it is not staff’s recommendation that this be incurred by the City.  The recommendation is to go with the easement, with the understanding that the formalization of that, if there are charges, would be paid by the beneficiary as opposed to the City of Ballwin. 

Alderman Lembke asked Mrs. Porcelli if she is willing to do this.  Mrs. Porcelli said that their funds are very limited at this time.  Alderman Lembke asked if she has talked to the developer to see if they are willing to help with the cost.  She said the developer has not cooperated with her so far and she does not anticipate that they would assist.

City Attorney Lucchesi said the recording is not expensive, and preparation could be less than $100 and not more than $200.  Alderman Robinson said recording the easement would cost $26.50 for 2 pages.  He asked if a survey would be done.  City Administrator Kuntz said that Coachlight did a survey when the development was approved.  Alderman Robinson asked if there are adjoining landowners who will want to put up a fence and take up another 3,000 square feet?  He said this could become 9,000 square feet or 12,000 square feet.  City Administrator Kuntz said that the City can’t spend public money for private purposes. 

Alderman Gatton said that Mrs. Porcelli is suggesting that the proposed fence be put where the existing silt control fence is located at this time.  Where there is grass and dirt, this is the dividing line where she would like the fence to be placed.  He said we are not going to give the property to the residents.  They would be given the ability to put up a fence on city property.  They will maintain the fence and the land on the south side of the fence.  Ballwin will still retain ownership.

Assistant City Administrator Aiken said that this is a similar situation to the fence behind North Pointe.  There was a wall that was built on North Pointe property.  He said we granted an easement to allow the neighbor to keep his wall on our property.  We didn’t give up ownership of the property.  City Administrator Kuntz said that this is essentially the same thing.

Alderman Lembke asked who paid for the legal transfer of the property behind the North Pointe.  City Administrator Kuntz said the property owner; we would never do it any other way. 

Alderman Robinson said that it appears that Mrs. Porcelli wants the city to prepare the paperwork, transfer the easement, and get it filed with the Recorder of Deeds.  Mrs. Porcelli said that she understood that none of that would be necessary and that she could simply put the fence on city property.  She said there was a fence there before and Fischer & Frichtel took it down.  She said for 30 years it was assumed that the homeowner owned everything up to that fence.  Alderman Lembke said that two years ago, he and Alderman Gatton determined at that time, to the satisfaction of all the property owners that the barb wire fence was not the property line. 

Alderman Robinson said that he always tells people to not put the fence on the property line.  The fence should be put on your property, then you can claim the fence.  Problems are created if a fence is on the property line. 

Mayor Young said that if Fischer & Frichtel are putting up the fence, and we tell them where to put the fence, it’s our fence.  If they are doing the work and doing it for us, it’s not granting the home owner an easement; we are just putting the fence where we want it on city property.  Nothing will have to be recorded. 

Alderman Gatton said that a home that is close to this location, the lady thought her property extended to the fence.  When the survey was done, she found out that her property actually ended 10 feet before the fence.  The fence had been installed at a location that was convenient for the ball field, not on the property line.  There is a precedent just two doors away for exactly what Mayor Young is suggesting.  City Attorney Lucchesi said that if the city is willing to maintain the fence, the homeowner could cut the grass on their side of the fence. 

Alderman Robinson said that if someone gets hurt on the other side of the fence, it’s city property, it’s the city’s responsibility and liability.  Mayor Young said that the fence that’s on the north side of Ballwin Commons Drive was installed by the city.  Alderman Robinson suggested that Mrs. Porcelli contact a real estate attorney and they give her an estimate. 

Alderman Pogue suggested holding this issue over and asking Fischer & Frichtel if while the fence is being installed, will they pick up the cost of preparation and recording the easement. 

A motion was made by Alderman Lembke to ask staff to contact Fischer & Frichtel and investigate the possibility of them picking up the cost of this.  City Administrator Kuntz said he encourages the property owners to do their due diligence as a backup.  He said they want it resolved and Fischer & Frichtel wants to put the fence up.  Both should be done.

Alderman Lembke withdrew the motion.  As a review, he said that staff going to contact Fischer & Frichtel before the next meeting.  City Administrator Kuntz agreed.  Alderman Lembke said that the homeowners are going to go back to Fischer & Frichtel at the same time and see if they can get one more opportunity to work with them.  This will be brought back to the next meeting for consideration.

A motion was made by Alderman Gatton and seconded by Alderman Lembke to hold the fence issue over to the next meeting.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed.

Mayor Young asked when will the fence be put up around the retention pond.  Assistant City Administrator Aiken said that there won’t be a fence around the pond.  It’s a pond just like a pond in the park.  Mayor Young said that one end of the pond is very deep.  When soccer games are played there, this could be dangerous.  City Administrator Kuntz said that we asked for the fence across the top for that reason on one side.  It won’t be put up until the sod has been laid.




Appointments and Meetings:  Alderman Buermann said in regards to the appointment of the Municipal Judge, City Attorney and Prosecuting Attorney, he recommended appointment of Laird Hetlage on an interim basis until July 1, 2006. 

Alderman Buermann said the Finance & Administration sub committee will formulate an overall strategic plan and that plan will be in place by March 31, 2006.  We would start advertising for the Municipal Judge position beginning on April 1, 2006 and run it for 30 days.  Alderman Robinson recommended that this be discussed in closed session since this is a personnel issue.

A motion was made by Alderman Robinson and seconded by Alderman Lembke to discuss this personnel issue in closed session.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed.

Steering Committee:  Alderman Suozzi said she is concerned regarding the Steering Committee because of its potential duration of 12-18 months.  She said in April, if for some reason she is not here possibly not re-elected, and Alderman Fleming may be in the same situation, that she would like to have someone to also come to the meetings to maintain consistency to be on the same page as an alternate.  She said that if there is a meeting as early as the 17th, which is a proposed date, that commitment would need to happen fairly quickly.  Alderman Buermann volunteered to be the alternate on the Steering Committee.  City Administrator Kuntz said that all of the meetings will be open to the public and the Board is welcome to come at any time.  Mayor Young said that he will also be attending all of the meetings to be informed.

Street Trees:  A motion was made by Alderman Pogue and seconded by Alderman Suozzi to amend Ballwin’s ordinance to require developers to include street trees in their site development plan. 

Mayor Young asked if street trees are currently required.  Assistant City Administrator Aiken said Ballwin does not have an ordinance at this time that requires street trees.  Occasionally they will put in the trees, but it’s not required.  City Administrator Kuntz said that the number of required trees could be determined by the amount of frontage. 

A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed.

National League of Cities:  Alderman Robinson said the NLC conference is coming up in December.  He said he thinks it’s important that City Administrator Kuntz attend.  This was discussed during the budget planning sessions and was unanimously agreed at that time that the money would be set aside to cover the expenses to send the City Administrator and Aldermen who want to attend to that conference.  He said he wants to reconfirm the position of this Board. 

A motion was made by Alderman Robinson and seconded by Alderman Buermann to reaffirm the Board’s position to send the City Administrator and Aldermen who want to attend the NLC conference in December.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed. City Administrator Kuntz said that this vote does not reflect Alderman Fleming’s position since he was not in attendance at this meeting. 

A motion was made by Alderman Buermann and seconded by Alderman Lembke to adjourn to closed session, according to the provision of the Missouri statutes for the purposes of discussing personnel and real estate.  A roll call vote was taken with the following results:  Ayes:  Aldermen Buermann, Robinson, Gatton, Terbrock, Lembke, Pogue, Suozzi.  Nays:  None.  The motion passed to adjourn to closed session at 7:56 p.m.

 The Board convened in closed session at 8:00 p.m.

A motion was made by Alderman Suozzi and seconded by Alderman Lembke to adjourn the closed session.  A roll call vote was taken with a unanimous result, and the closed session was adjourned at 9:04 p.m.

The Board reconvened in open session at 9:05 p.m.

Mayor Young announced that personnel issues and real estate were discussed in the closed session.  No formal action was taken.

A motion was made by Alderman Suozzi and seconded by Alderman Pogue to prepare legislation for consideration to appoint Laird Hetlage as Interim Municipal Judge until April 1, 2006.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed. 

A motion was made by Alderman Robinson to establish a committee, a process and protocol for selecting the Municipal Judge and Provisional Judge, the committee to be composed of sitting odd-year aldermen.  Alderman Suozzi said it is best to have the entire Board do this.

The motion failed for lack of a second.

A motion was made by Alderman Buermann and seconded by Alderman Terbrock to adjourn the open session.  The motion passed unanimously and the meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m.

Walter S. Young, Mayor

Robert A. Kuntz, City Administrator


Aldermen Meeting Record of Proceedings