Laserfiche WebLink
<br />cancel their upcoming meeting with Schnucks and to not have any further meetings <br />with businesses in U City unless so directed by Council. <br /> <br />Ms. Carr seconded the amendment to the original motion. <br /> <br />Mr. Kraft asked to divide it into two motions, stating the first motion was simple and <br />straight forward. He said the amended motion telling the Commission not to meet <br />was too confusing. <br /> <br />Mr. Crow said he was not sure he was opposed to that but thought Council had an <br />official statement from a member of the Commission that previously spoke and Mr. <br />Olander’s letter and felt Council has heard enough. He thought Council needed to <br />clearly state that if a member(s) of a commission states that they are working as a <br />Commission for University City and contacting small or large businesses of which <br />they have concerns. Mr. Crow stated it came back to the charge to Ms. Forster that <br />this was probably not within the Commission charges and would like to prevent the <br />upcoming meeting from occurring because enough damage had already been done. <br /> <br />Mr. Kraft said the only issue was if Ms. Foster came back stating that they can’t do it <br />the motion to amend would be irrelevant. <br /> <br />Mr. Crow stated that if the Commission decides to meet in the upcoming weeks, it <br />could exasperate the problem, so he would like to have it directly from the City <br />Council that the members be prohibited, even if limiting it to Schnucks. He said it <br />should be a concern when there are one or two members of the Commission <br />reporting to act for the body. <br /> <br />Mr. Glickert noted that it would have been nice if Council would have received this <br />information earlier than just now as this is the first time he saw this and Council was <br />being asked to vote on something they just saw. He said the motion made sense <br />and was innocuous enough until Council got direction. Mr. Glickert said as a citizen <br />whether they are on a commission or not and go to a store that is not up to standard; <br />they have a right to approach store management. <br /> <br />Ms. Carr said the reason it came to Council today was because she had to listen to <br />the audio to make sure that this was not discussed with the Commission on April 16. <br />She thought it was important that the Schnuck’s meeting was discussed with the <br />Commission and received the majority vote, it would be entirely different. Ms. Carr <br />said Council wished the members of the Commission would have consulted with the <br />City Manager. She said the audio was just put on the website this day and she <br />introduced it under Council liaison section of the agenda which was entirely <br />appropriate. Ms. Carr said if Council waits too many more weeks, it would continue <br />th <br />to go on. She said at the Commission’s June 20 meeting this was first brought up <br />and questioned whether it should go under new or old business but was never <br />introduced to the Commission prior to that. She said she would walk into any store <br />and tell them she did not think it was clean but the difference here was the <br />Commission members were representing themselves as the Commission, therefore <br />as a University City’s position. <br /> <br />11 <br /> <br /> <br />