Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Price said the City Manager should meet with the Council to review <br />comprehensively what the City’s strategies are. He does not want to get it through <br />email or in a packet. Mr. Price wants a discussion on the recommendations. He <br />asked for a commitment be made to the Council that they will have every item <br />explained in detail so everybody understands what is going on. <br /> <br />Mr. Glickert said he is in favor of immediate attention to the State’s <br />recommendations but felt it could be done through email communications with each <br />other. <br /> <br />Mr. Crow felt that the threat and depth of the issues covered in the audit were in <br />basically three areas; billing and collecting of revenues, competitive bidding and <br />some Sunshine Law violations. He said it would be good for all of Council to <br />participate in these decisions. Mr. Crow said that many times the information <br />comes to the Council at the last minute with staff asking members for a yes we <br />need to do this. <br /> <br />Mr. Kraft noted that he was actually at the meeting when the State Auditor made the <br />presentation and felt that seeing more people at these meetings was a good thing. <br /> <br />Mr. Price moved that Council set up at time and place to meet in the next two weeks <br />to hear what the City Manager and City staff recommendations are to the Auditor’s <br />findings. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sharpe. <br /> <br />Mr. Walker noted that he had circulated the draft report with the City’s responses <br />and asked Council and staff to submit any comments on the recommendations <br />made in response to the report by the State Auditor. He considered and <br />consolidated the various comments and sent them to the auditors. Those <br />responses are in the final report from the auditor. <br /> <br />The voice vote of Mr. Price’s motion to hold a Council Study session within the next <br />two weeks to discuss the staff’s response to the Missouri State Auditor’s report <br />carried unanimously. <br /> <br />4. <br />University City’s Loop and youth issues in the Loop. <br />Mr. Walker noted that the City is making every effort to address the issues that have <br />have arisen in relations to the large gatherings of the youths in the Loop. There is <br />a proposal for reconsidering the focus of the current Loop curfew which presently <br />stands at 9:00 p.m. for those less than seventeen years of age. Staff will alsoreview <br />police staffing in the Loop in light of the police needs throughout the entire City. He <br />was advised that during past weekend the City had four officers in the Loop on <br />Friday, five officers on Saturday and four on Sunday. Mr. Walker said they will be <br />working with adjacent municipalities to develop a strategy to address these <br />challenges on a regional basis. He said there will be a focus on the proposal for <br />charging for parking on City- owned lots on the need to increase security. He said <br />this information gathered will be shared withn the Mayor’s Task Force on <br />Seniors/Youth, which is working on proposals on how to better provide for the needs <br />of the youth in our community. <br /> <br />CITIZENS COMMENTS <br />Jessica Bueler, 6362 Delmar <br /> <br />