Laserfiche WebLink
federal government keeps the Congressional Record that includes comments given in session <br />proceedings <br /> Ms. McQueen said that Robert’s Rules states “by a single vote, a series of special orders or <br />general orders or a mixture of both can be made; such a series is called an agenda” therefore it only <br />takes one to change the agenda. <br /> Ms. McQueen asked if it was not the City Clerk who prepared the resolutions and ordinances for <br />the agenda not the City Manager <br /> Ms. McQueen said discussion over video-conferencing is long overdue. She did not agree with <br />text or spirit of Resolution 2014-26. <br /> <br />Mayor Welsch noted from the City Clerk that the software storage software the City uses is being <br />upgraded and she has not been able to upload records lately. <br /> <br />Jeffrey Bassin, 531 Mapleview, University City <br />Mr. Bassin spoke of a past incident where a group of residents spoke against a business being <br />allowed and the Council then listened and overturn the City recommendation. Without citizen <br />comments that could not happen. Mr. Bassin said from his past experience he has never witnessed <br />the kind of meetings that have been occurring in University City. He quoted what “dictatorship” was <br />described in the dictionary. <br /> <br />Barbara Santoro, 514 Midvale, University City, MO <br />Ms. Santoro questioned not including comments and discussion in the formal minutes. She <br />suggested they could be included in a separate packet after each session. If comments and <br />discussion are not liked of the minority and insignificant numbers of citizens, the Council’s action <br />might be on the wrong track. <br /> <br />Gregory Pace, 7171 Westmoreland, University City, MO <br />Mr. Pace asked to clear up his last statement noting that he never said Mr. Salamon’s item ever <br />passed but rather that he went to work lobbying to get enough in favor and not until then was it put <br />back on the agenda. It did not pass because one of the votes he convinced to change could not be <br />at the meeting. He noted the point was that he did not bring the motion back until he had the votes. <br /> Mr. Pace noted his name was invoked tonight. He stated that he sent an email as to how he <br />interpreted Robert’s Rules and was accused of impugning Ms. Dickey’s reputation. Mr. Pace said he <br />just gave a comparison of interpretations to make a case. <br /> Mr. Pace said he hoped that one did not have to have expertise in order to speak to Council as <br />was just suggested by Councilmember Carr. Lastly he said he was not tired of the meetings. <br /> <br />Ed Mass, 8360 Cornell, University City <br />Mr. Mass stated that none of the gang of five were willing to go on record as to why all of the <br />meetings. He gave his interpretation which he prefaced by saying “Thugs often act in the dark of <br />night for specific purpose and try to get away quickly without a public notice”. He said all the <br />meetings were called quickly to pass rule changes and other items without public awareness and <br />notice. He asked to go on record stating, “The gang of five is entirely wrong removing any of the <br />discussion from the minutes”. <br /> Mr. Mass said he was taught that when a statement is made and their actions were contradictory <br />to that statement, it would be considered a lie. He stated Mayor Welsch’s action were contrary to her <br />statement in reprimanding Councilmember Kraft. <br /> <br />Mayor Welsch entertained a motion to go into a closed session according to Missouri Revised <br />Statutes 610.021 (1) Legal actions, causes of action or litigation involving a public governmental <br />body and any confidential or privileged communications between a public governmental body or its <br />representatives and any confidential or privileged communications between a public governmental <br />body or its representatives and its attorneys and (2) Leasing, purchase or sale of real estate by a <br />public governmental body where public knowledge of the transaction might adversely affect the legal <br />consideration therefor. <br />3 <br /> <br /> <br />