Laserfiche WebLink
<br />stated an item at the dollar store now will cost $1.09 with a new rate at 8.075. Ms. <br />Glickert noted she had not seen a vote on the brochure in the Council minutes. <br /> <br />Sarah Davoli, 7378 Milan <br />Ms. Davoli stated she was against Proposition S. She stated it was very expensive <br />to mail a two-sided, four colored piece, with two tabs. Ms. Davoli stated they own <br />their own business in the City and will now consider moving out of the City. <br /> <br />Anne Marie Kiddon, 7348 Wellington Ave <br />Ms. Kiddon voiced her disapproval of the handling of Proposition S. She stated that <br />many citizens came forward and proposed ways for the City to save money and <br />were not honored as if they were not heard. Ms. Kiddon felt the City and Council did <br />not do everything to cut costs in supporting the citizens. She referenced the <br />Strategic Planning Goals and Objectives, approved May 2009, by City Council. She <br />referenced in this plan, “Educational materials must be completed and provided to <br />the public” In the category, titled April 8 update, it has Proposition S educational <br />materials are ready to mail. Ms. Kiddon’s question was why so late, there was <br />hardly any notice, and people are out of town and will not get to read it and no <br />opportunity for discussion. Other questions Ms. Kiddon had were, why is the City <br />paying $12,000 for storage of containers, what is happening at Midland and Olive, <br /> <br />and votes by Council should not be on same night as Public Hearings. Ms. Kiddon <br />ended on Prop S stating that people will notice the higher tax when their bill arrives <br />and will realize they are not getting the same dollar value when shopping in U City. <br /> <br />Jan Adams, 7150 Cambridge Ave. <br /> <br />Ms. Adams noted that Mayor Adams called her boss, Attorney General Chris <br />Kostner and requested an Attorney General opinion on whether she and the Civil <br />Service Board violated the Sunshine Law when they deliberated on the appeal of an <br />employee who was recently discharged. She was surprised the Mayor sought a <br />public investigation by the Attorney General. She felt that every effort should be <br /> <br />made to resolve any differences amicably and within our City government rather than <br />make public accusations and tarnish the reputation of City Officials. Ms. Adams <br />referenced violation by the City under the Sunshine Law Section 610.021 and <br />610.022. Secondly the Council should obtain a legal opinion from a lawyer other <br />than John Mulligan on the application of Section 105.450 of Missouri Revised <br /> <br />Statutes relating to all contracts for Mr. Mulligan’s services. Ms. Adams referenced <br />the July 2009, Missouri Ethics Commission Newsletter, volume 3 page 2, regarding <br />conflicts of interest and public officials compensation. She stated she will publish all <br />her comments on www.\ucityparticipate.org. <br /> <br /> <br />Lawrence Taylor, 7472 Stanford <br />Mr. Taylor expressed his opinion of Proposition S. He thought the citizens need to <br />be told that the balanced budget is on the theory that the sales tax increase has <br />passed. What he did agree with in the Prop S brochure was the proposed tax <br />increase would not solve the City’s problem. <br /> <br />M. COUNCIL COMMENTS <br /> <br />Ms. Ricci stated that there was not any notice in her material that there would be a <br />vote on the CDBG amendment tonight, so she echoes the concern that when there <br />is a Public Hearing, there should not be a vote until the next Council meeting. She <br />had thought that was agreed upon at the last Council meeting. Ms. Ricci stated she <br /> <br /> <br />