Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. Price said Mr. Womack was not saying that an individual would not have a right <br />to register a complaint to a store manager but rather action was taken that the body <br />did not vote on but was done as an individual representing the body, as policy. He <br />also noted the letter stated that they could meet at their place or at City Hall, giving <br />credence to people who don’t know, that the City was involved. Mr. Price said he did <br />not need to talk to anybody else as to why they did not get a vote of the body to <br />decide their action. He said he did not need another meeting for somebody to come <br />here and say I did this and Mr. Womack would not agree with what they said. Mr. <br />Price said they could go back as individuals but not representing the Human <br />Relations Commission because they never voted on that action to begin with. <br /> <br />Mr. Kraft asked if the motions could be divided in order to make it clearer to Council. <br />He said the first motion will probably be unanimous but the amendment he was not <br />thrilled about directing the Commission members not to do something. <br /> <br />Mr. Glickert said the letter was on Mr. Olander’s letterhead and the first sentence <br />said he was asked by the Human Relations Commission to do something, so again <br />Mr. Glickert did not have any other information in understanding that he was directed <br />by someone on the Commission. He said if there was anything to move toward <br />would be toward Mr. Olander. Mr. Glickert did not think the Commission should be <br />affected by one of the Commission members under his purview to communicate with <br />a retailer in University City. He said the first motion is good but will abstain from the <br />second motion. <br /> <br />Ms. Carr seconded Mr. Crow’s motion to amend the previous motion. <br /> <br />Mr. Sharpe agreed with Mr. Crow and said that based on what Ms. Carr said as the <br />liaison of the Commission, the Commission has not agreed to any of this and he felt <br />somebody should be told to cease and desist. He said the idea of having a second <br />meeting and the Commission has not met to direct the members to do what-ever <br />they are doing and should be told to cease and desist until Council gets better <br />information. <br /> <br />Mr. Price asked to affirm that an aye vote was affirming Mr. Crow’s motion. Mayor <br />Welsch said and aye vote would affirm the amendment to the original motion and <br />then Council would vote on the amended motion. <br /> <br />Mr. Kraft asked to have the amendment restated. Ms. Pumm said the motion was to <br />instruct members of Commission to cancel any upcoming scheduled meetings with <br />Schnucks and not to have any further upcoming meetings. Mr. Crow added to his <br />original amendment stating to cancel the upcoming scheduled meetings with <br />Schnucks, and prohibit the commission or its members from having any additional <br />meetings with any other businesses in University City. He asked if it would help if he <br />said until after their role has been clarified by the City Manager/City Attorney. The <br />motion was to cancel any upcoming scheduled meetings with Schnucks and prohibit <br />the Commission or its members from having any additional meetings with any other <br />businesses in University City until the Commission’s role had been clarified by the <br />City Manager/City Attorney. <br /> <br />12 <br /> <br /> <br />