Laserfiche WebLink
the Economic Development Sales Tax to move forward the Loop Trolley feasibility study. <br />Ms. Brot seconded the motion. <br /> <br />In answer to Mr. Price’s question as to why the City of St. Louis only contributed $50,000 for <br />the feasibility study, Mr. Edwards explained that the City of St. Louis did not have an <br />Economic Development Tax to draw from and it supplied what it could at the time. Mr. <br />Edwards stated that St. Louis City will be paying more once the TDD was established as a <br />D-1-b <br />larger portion of the route would be in St. Louis City, bringing in a greater portion of the <br />money generated from the TDD. <br /> <br />Ms. Ricci made a Point of Order concerning Mayor Adams’ memo advising the <br />Councilmembers of his role with the Loop Trolley Company for the Loop Business District. <br />Ms. Ricci felt that the Mayor had a conflict of interest and should recuse himself from voting <br />on anything in conjunction with the Loop Trolley. <br /> <br />Mr. Wagner stated that Mayor Adams’s position on the board for the Loop Trolley Company <br />was not a paid position and the organization was not-for-profit so therefore he did not feel <br />Mayor Adams had any conflict of interest. He was not opposed to Mayor Adams voting on <br />any Trolley issues. <br /> <br />Mr. Price requested the City Clerk to record that this Council is committed to making sure <br />that the Economic Development Board’s allocation for Olive Street Road takes place next <br />year and does not get postponed, changed, reduced or pushed back. <br /> <br />Mayor Adams stated that according to the Charter, a Council member should make it known <br />to the rest of the Council if a conflict of interest might be present. The Charter did not say <br />that the member would have to recuse himself. He felt that his disclosure of his position on <br />the board of the Loop Trolley Business did not necessitate his recusal. He also said that the <br />City’s attorney opinion was that he did not have a conflict of interest because there was no <br />monetary compensation for his position and it was a not-for-profit organization. Mayor <br />Adams asked the Council for their vote on whether he should recuse himself from future <br />voting on the Loop Trolley. The vote for Mayor Adams to remain as a voting member on all <br />Loop Trolley issues was passed with one NAY coming from Ms. Ricci. <br /> <br />Ms. Ricci requested that the City Clerk entered into the Council’s record that she believed <br />Mayor Adams has a conflict of interest. She had not received any written opinion from the <br />City Attorney stating that Mayor Adams did not have a conflict of interest and would like the <br />City Attorney to sign off on this. <br /> <br />Mayor Adams called for the vote on authorizing the City Manager to send a letter of <br />commitment for allocating University City’s Economic Development Retail Sales Tax funds of <br />$250,000 for the Loop Trolley feasibility study to the funding agency. The majority voice <br />vote authorized approval for the City Manager to send the letter of commitment. <br /> <br /> <br />J. UNFINISHED BUSINESS <br /> <br />BILL 8938 — An ordinance vacating and surrendering all rights and privileges for the use of <br />the southwest five feet wide by fifty-eight feet long portion of existing easement located <br />within lot 23 of block 4 of the University Terrace subdivision, known as 7411 Amherst and <br />August 6, 2007 <br /> <br />