Laserfiche WebLink
Session 1242, Minutes Page 14 <br />April 14, 1980 <br />including federal money. He thought perhaps federal money might be available for <br />City, as it is listed on the Register of Historic Buildings. Several councilmem- <br />bers said that route had already been tried, and that large an amount of money <br />could not be had. Mr. Lieberman thought it might be wise to work through the Con- <br />gress to see if money could not be allocated for this type of thing in older cit- <br />ies so as to sustain their viability and attractiveness as a place to live. He <br />said University City contributes 50 million dollars in income taxes to the fed- <br />eral government, and receives only one million dollars in revenue sharing and com- <br />munity development funds, and he felt more money s'culd be returned to University <br />City. <br />Mayor Mooney stated, for the record, that Proposition No. 3 received 61'1% affirma- <br />tive votes.- <br />ORDER <br />otes: <br />ORDER OF.ADDRESSING COUNCIL <br />Mrs. Janie Yeai, 8527 Elmore,asked to address the Council. Mrs. Yeai asked for <br />an explanation of the order to addressing the Council, and Mayor Mooney said each <br />'time a member of the public wishes to speak, that person should fill out a re- <br />quest form and hand it to the city clerk, with the subject noted on it on which <br />he/she wishes to speak. Mrs. Yeai said she felt that should apply to everyone <br />equally. <br />RETURN TO DISCUSSION OF PROPOSITION NO. 3 <br />Ms Eileen Halasey, 7301 Cornell, asked_ to address the Council. Ms Halasey said <br />she felt the idea of giving the voters a choice as to how to fund the new roof <br />for City Hall was an excellent one. She also said -that the proposition should be <br />worded in such a way that the voters can understand exactly what is included. <br />She was somewhat.distressed when she noted that some changes were being made on <br />the first floor of City Hall with money from a grant and from an earlier Civic <br />Plaza bond proposal, and she felt she could not vote for Proposition No. 3 be- <br />cause -it did -not spell out exactly what was to be done with the money, and that <br />there was no guarantee that the money would be used for what she wanted it to be <br />used for. <br />REDUCTION OF ST.. LOUIS COUNTY ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES <br />Councilmember Lieberman noted that Mr, 011endorff had received a communication <br />from St. Louis County stating that the amount of animal control services previ- <br />ously furnished by St._Louis County was to be reduced. Mr. Lieberman said Uni- <br />versity City pays a large amount of taxes to St. Louis County., some of which pay <br />for animal control services. He moved that the.Council go on record in opposi- <br />tion to any reduction in animal control services by St. Louis County, and that <br />all effort be made by St. Louis County to actively enforce the animal control <br />ordinances in coordination and in cooperation with the animal control services <br />of University City, and that the City Council receive a report on whether or not <br />that cooperation exists and will exist, and that our County Executive and appro- <br />priate County Councilmen be advised of our opposition to this reduction. Coun- <br />cilmember Kelley seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. <br />MISCELLANEOUS <br />Councilmember Sabol said he would like to see some of the things suggested in the <br />