January 7, 1980 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Session 1235, Minutes Page 11 January 7, 1980 evening, and Councilman Adams suggested St. Louis County should make an effort to eliminate the crows at their feeding grounds, which seem to be in unincorporated parts of St. Louis County. Mr. Ellman said the Public Works Department will be us- ing two cannons on Wednesdays and Thursdays in an effort to frighten them away. Councilman Lieberman felt that the presence of the crows constitutes a very serious health hazard and indicated he thought the City should go on record to the St. Louis County Health Department informing them that the crows are a severe health hazard and demand that something be done to take care of this problem. Mr. Ellman said he would write a letter to the St. Louis County Health Department outlining what should be done in this matter. SUMMER RECREATION PROGRA"I Councilman Lieberman proposed that an agenda item be prepared having to do with the Park Department and the summer recreation program, so that Council may discuss it. It was decided to have this on the agenda at the January 21, 1980 meeting. COOPERATION WITH OTHER COMMUNITIES IN UTILITY SALES TAX LITIGATION Mayor Mooney said University City is being joined by several other communities in an effort to reinstitute the sales tax on utilities. The firm of Ziercher, Hocker, Tzinberg, Human and Hichenfelder will be retained to participate in this litigation, with the costs being shared by the participating communities. Councilman Lieberman applauded City Attorney Kay's efforts in taking a leadership role in this matter, and said he felt University City must continue taking the lead role. Councilman Metcalfe asked that concerns she has about this issue be put in the rec- ord. She said the matter of whether or not both the sales and utility taxes should be levied is a valid question that will have to be decided, but that she felt it was wrong for the state legislature to remove the sales tax revenue in the middle of University City's fiscal year. She also felt that the law firm retained to handle the litigation should furnish an opinion as to whether or not University City could collect the tax for itself and not as a member of the pool before deciding whether or not to go ahead with the suit. City Attorney Kay said this may not be possible. Councilman Kelley concurred with Mrs. Metcalfe's opinion on this matter. Councilman Adams said he felt the law firm could not make a decision of that nature before de - ceding whether or not to file suit, that it would have to be decided by the court. Mr. Ellman said, since University City was the major community in the group filing suit, it would be necessary to either go ahead with it or drop the suit --that the City could not qualify its participation based on whether or not, if the suit is successful, the City would still have to be a member of the pool. Councilmen Met- calfe and Kelley both felt it was important to have the opinion before filing suit. Councilman Metcalfe moved that the Council seek a legal opinion from the firm who will be working on this as to the likelihood of University City receiving a favor- able decision with respect to the retention of the income from the sales tax for University City rather than its distribution through the pool, and based upon that, the Council will proceed to a further decision, after the opinion is received, as to whether to go ahead with the suit. Councilman Kelley seconded the motion. There was more discussion, with Councilman Lieberman speaking against the motion, noting, that University City will, if their stance on reimposing the sales tax is upheld by the court, still have the option of withdrawing from the pool. Councilmen Kelley, Metcalfe and Sabol voted Aye, and Councilmen Lieberman, Adams, Glickert and Mayor Mooney voted Nay. The motion was defeated by a vote of four to three.