2011-05-09 Regular City Council Session

Home Browse Search

Elsie Glickert, 6712 Etzel Ms. Glickert spoke on the proposed fire station on Vernon and Westgate and asked for the history of why this location was considered. She noted that this property was in a flood plain and every tributary of River des Peres flows under Vernon Ave. Ms. Glickert stated that a two-block area floods every spring. Ms. Glickert asked if the City really needs a new fire station and noted that just because there is Federal money out there it does not mean the City should take it. She noted that in 2009 a bond issue did not pass that would furnish a new station. Gregory Pace, 7171 Westmoreland Mr. Pace stated Ms. Glickert had a valid point about the location of a new firehouse. He said it was listed as being in a 100-year flood plain but in talking with residents in the area, it does flood yearly and the land for the firehouse is at the lowest plot of land in University City. Mr. Pace said on page 5 of the environmental assessment done by NPN Environmental Engineers they say “no evidence of ponding or inadequate drainage was observed during the site reconnaissance.” He said that said it did not flood while they were there. Lisa Hummel, 7575 Stanford Ms. Hummel spoke of her dissatisfaction on the decision to keep the lights off at Ruth Park driving range. She said it limited revenue for the City, recreational opportunity despite the tax payer investment that was made in the facility. Ms. Hummel recounted her conversation and emails with Mr. Walker. She also was concerned that the Mayor thought this issue was out of her control. Ms. Hummel also admonished Mayor and Councilmembers who voted to give Mr. Walker budget transfer authority at the last Council session. P. COUNCIL COMMENTS Mr. Kraft continued his review of the State Audit report. The first was cost allocation where the City had $900,000 of cost allocation without proper documentation. He said unsupported cost allocations can lead to poor decisions. Example he gave were: the ease in obtaining cost figures for out-sourcing trash but the delay was getting the City to determine how much it was costing the City to perform those services. Mr. Kraft said the cost allocation for Capital cost was unclear and unreliable. He said an outside consultant found hundreds of thousands of Capital costs were not properly included in the internal numbers. The next example was the income source of the golf course and the driving range has always been a mystery. Mr. Kraft stated the net revenue numbers have always been easily available but prior to 2010 it is not clear if any of the revenue from the golf retail shop was properly captured. He said the expense side has always been a mystery of unsupported cost allocations, as the cost associated with the holding pond at the bottom of the driving range were included as Public Works expenses and not charged to the golf course. Mr. Kraft said that there has not been an attempt to amortize the Capital cost of the golf course which leads to wild swings in cost as big ticket items, which last many years were expensed in one fiscal year. Mr. Kraft pointed out that the State Auditor said the driving range decision was made on using flawed false cost accounting data. He noted that even now to find out how much revenue is made from night time golf is just a guess. Mr. Kraft said in summary the City needs reliable cost accounting data based on well documented cost allocations. The third topic he discussed on the State Audit Report was on Internal Controls. He said essentially the question was is the money being collected in taxes in fees going to the City or is it