2026-10-12 - City Council

00:00Please rise and join me for the pledge of allegiance.

00:04I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of

00:08America and to the republic for which it stands,

00:12one nation under God, indivisible, with

00:16liberty and justice for all.

00:18Please join me in a moment of reflective silence.

00:34Please be seated.

00:37Your limitation is only your imagination.

00:41Ms. Cotter, please call the roll.

00:46Hosmer?

00:47Here.

00:48Mc gull?

00:49Here.

00:50Horton?

00:52Jensen?

00:53Here.

00:54Hardinger?

00:55Here.

00:55Carroll?

00:56Here.

00:57Lee?

00:58Here.

00:58Adegboyega-Otto?

00:59Present.

01:00Schrag?

01:01Here.

01:02Just so everyone knows, we're experiencing some technical difficulties this

01:06evening. The internet is down, so we'll be doing all of our votes by roll call

01:10unless the internet comes up.

01:13Before we begin, we ask all individuals present to please silence or

01:17turn off any cell phones or electronic devices.

01:20We also remind everyone this is a public meeting of the Springfield City Council,

01:24and we ask all attendees to observe the rules of civility and decorum and

01:27refrain from profanity.

01:30Outbursts, applause, or other disruptions are not permitted so that council may

01:34conduct the city's business in an orderly and respectful manner.

01:37Thank you in advance for your cooperation.

01:40We'll move to the minutes for approval. Ms.

01:43Cotter, do you have any such minutes?

01:45Yes. City council members have received the minutes of the September 21st,

01:482026 city council meeting and the September 28th and October 5th,

01:532026 special city council meetings in their packets.

01:57Does anyone have any changes to the minutes?

02:01May I have a motion to approve the minutes?

02:04I have a motion to approve. Is there a second?

02:07We have a second. Council members, please vote.

02:10Roll call. By roll call.

02:16Mc gull?

02:17Aye.

02:18Horton?

02:20Jensen?

02:21Aye.

02:22Hardinger?

02:23Aye.

02:23Carroll?

02:24Aye.

02:24Lee?

02:25Aye.

02:26Adegboyega-Otto?

02:26Aye.

02:28Hosmer?

02:29Aye.

02:30Schrag?

02:31Aye.

02:32Before we begin, sir, in the second row with the obscene gesture, I'm going to ask

02:36you to please refrain from making obscene gestures for this evening.

02:41Sir, I'm going to ask you to please do that or I'll remove you from the room this

02:43evening.

02:44Thank you, sir, very much.

02:47Mr. Cameron, please present the city manager's report.

02:50I'm sorry, there's no item on the consent agenda, so we'll move directly to the

02:53city manager's report. Mr. Cameron?

02:56Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and good evening, members of council.

03:00You have my full written manager's report that went out today, but I want to

03:03provide just a few of those publicly as well.

03:06First, an update on the driveway and property access standards.

03:09Back, I believe it was in March or April, we talked about Chapter 98

03:13and the amendments

03:14or concerns about the appeal process.

03:18So

03:19they are working as we intended and what we worked on back in April.

03:23We've received no appeals to the city manager and fewer projects require planning

03:27and zoning commission review. Therefore, I'm going to recommend that there's no

03:31change at this time. Staff is providing a full report to the

03:35community involvement committee tomorrow.

03:37Public Works Director Dan Smith has provided additional details again in

03:41my written report, which again, is available to the public.

03:45Last week, myself, Council Member Jensen, Mayor Schrag, Council Member Hardinger,

03:49and Councilwoman Swaffer, we all attended the leadership visit

03:53to Indianapolis.

03:55Normally, I probably wouldn't provide this information in a report, but there was

03:58quite a bit of great feedback about the city of Indianapolis and just kind of

04:02even though it's a larger scale, how we could scale some of those projects back,

04:05but some of the key challenges that they focus on as a community.

04:08And I'm thankful for the staff that also were able to attend.

04:11But my key takeaways that I wanted to share tonight were the importance of regional

04:14collaboration, strategic investment, practical solutions to housing

04:18and homelessness,

04:20and a clear communication about Springfield's progress and priorities.

04:23There's one comment about housing that stood out as the quote of the visit,

04:27"It's not a motive issue, it's a math issue."

04:33About housing.

04:34So when we're talking about the housing-

04:36I'm sorry, David. Sir, this is the second time I'm going to remind you to refrain

04:40from obscene gestures and from talking when other people are talking,

04:43please. That's not obscene to me, sir.

04:45I understand that's an obscene gesture, generally defined.

04:49I will get up and walk out as soon as you like.

04:51So sir, I'm not going to argue with you.

04:53If you continue to do that, you'll be removed from the room this evening.

04:56And please refrain from outbursts. Mr. Cameron, please proceed.

05:01Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

05:02I

05:03know that we're continuing to have discussions on housing, but also as we begin to

05:07work through that housing piece, I believe the motive is here, but making sure we

05:10come up with the incentives or the development processes that will help on those

05:14pieces with the math to make it pencil for the housing in Springfield is very,

05:18very important. So basically, it's just an important piece for us to continue to

05:22build partnerships with the development investment, but with also homeowners

05:26and buyers of ways that we can achieve that process.

05:30Historic City Hall.

05:32So we are still reviewing the remaining cost and construction schedule based upon

05:35what we know today. The anticipated completion date has been moved to the fall of

05:392027. I always like to be transparent-

05:41Mr. Cameron, I'm really sorry, I'm going to stop you.

05:43Sir, if you continue this, I'll have you removed. What?

05:46This is your last- I'm raising my hand. I thought it was a little finger.

05:49What's your problem, guy? This is your last chance, sir.

05:52I haven't said anything or done anything.

05:54Sir, this is your last chance for a warning. Who are you?

05:57Are you the mayor?

05:59Do you have a return by call? Will you please remove this gentleman from the room?

06:02Turn the f*****g camera around. We're going to pause for a moment

06:11F*****g s*n o*

06:12a b***h. Hey, Gene Miller. Says you okayed this f*****g 10

06:17unsold houses and he's got money for it. There's a bunch of money with you.

06:22I want to talk to f*****g Gene.

06:29Okay.

06:29David,

06:31please continue. Maybe back up a tiny bit.

06:34So let's talk about Historic City Hall.

06:36Excellent.

06:38Again, I want to roll back, talk about

06:41the

06:43project in itself. Sorry for-- That's a distraction a little bit.

06:46We can take a minute. We could sing something. I don't know what we'd sing.

06:49No, I'm not sure what we're going to sing.

06:51Okay.

06:52But I always believe in transparency and where we're at with projects.

06:54The Historic City Hall project has been one of those that you all have seen.

06:58It's kind of grown in scope and diversified a lot

07:01more on this project. I know the council took a tour of this facility in

07:05the summer, as did I.

07:08And the more that this council has identified or provided us

07:12the ability to make alterations to that work, it continues to identify

07:16other areas that were behind closed doors.

07:18I believe there was a stairwell that was

07:21discovered in this latest phase. But again, it does move the

07:25project back to fall 2027. But in

07:29response to making sure it stays and we get the finished product that we want,

07:33I have authorized the team to move forward with the necessary

07:36additions or corrections

07:39that are not necessarily provided in the construction

07:43manager at risk portion to prevent further delays using our available

07:47contingency and capital improvement funds.

07:50Looking forward to making sure this thing is completed right.

07:52We've had a lot of conversations. We've engaged a number of members to make sure

07:56that project is something that we can showcase to the community.

07:59With every hidden piece, we want to address it, not just continue to leave it as it

08:03is. So if you have any questions on that, please let my office know.

08:09Regarding the administrative delay on data centers, I mentioned it to the council

08:12at lunch, I believe last week, but we have two items-- No. Yeah, last week.

08:16We have two items coming forward. One would establish a legal definition of data

08:20centers, and the other would extend the current administrative delay through

08:23February 24th. Both will go before Planning and Zoning

08:27Commission on October 15th, followed by City Council on October

08:3126th.

08:33We're also finalizing our community input findings report.

08:36More than 1,000 residents completed our survey.

08:38More than 600 attended public meetings, and we received another 153

08:42written submissions.

08:44This feedback will help shape the options we bring to council.

08:48We're also making progress on neighborhood priorities since the council adopted the

08:52animal control changes in June. We've issued 108

08:55citations.

08:57The new rules and procedures made about half of those possible.

08:59So I want to thank this council, thank the staff for enforcing what we

09:03have on our books to work on things that the residents told us about in the

09:07listening sessions, continue to bring up.

09:09It may not seem like much that goes in this report, but it's something that our

09:12citizens are asking in addition to what we're also discussing as well.

09:16So the yes and message that was provided.

09:20The rental inspection pilot program is also producing results.

09:23About 490 properties have registered.

09:25All 31 properties that completed re-inspection passed after owners

09:29corrected the identified problems.

09:32And finally, we're looking forward to launch the neighborhood planning

09:36initiative in November, giving residents a direct role in identifying

09:39priorities and helping shape future investments in their

09:43neighborhoods. Another thing hearing on the Indianapolis trip was the fact of

09:46talking about working with neighbors or neighborhoods with properties that are

09:50available in advance of a development of what they would like to see

09:54and how they've been successful in that.

09:56Council Member Jensen, I know you heard the same thing as we all did,

10:01but it's just something about bringing the development process,

10:05one of our priorities, even more to the spotlight.

10:08So looking forward to reconnecting again with the city of Indianapolis and those

10:11partners and actually taking a little bit deeper dive than what we just heard on

10:14the trip.

10:15But Mr. Mayor, that concludes my report, and I'll be happy to answer any questions.

10:19Are there any questions for the manager? Council Member McGull.

10:23Thank you, Mayor. I was just curious about the

10:26extended time to complete the City Hall

10:30project. Do you know what the additional cost would be for

10:35extending it out for another year?

10:37If not, you can just give me that later.

10:39We can get it for you later. The delays are what it costs if we don't make the

10:43decisions and we're sitting there waiting to

10:47re-- It's about $5,000 a day.

10:50Mm-hmm.

10:50And so for me, it's like, how do I make sure that we keep that project moving

10:53forward with what can be altered or adjusted?

10:55And I want to make sure that that is done right.

10:57We will provide all report of what the final product will be, but we'll

11:01also, one thing that looking at this project and evaluating it

11:05after the fact, there will be a post project of

11:08why the project went in this direction from a standpoint of the contract and the

11:12way it was utilized. But right now, it's just getting the project done and moving

11:16in the right direction and delivered, but also at the time, just making sure

11:19there's a final cost and providing that to council, which will be public

11:22information. We'll make sure it's transparent as well.

11:25All right. Thank you.

11:27Council Member Hosmer.

11:29David, I just wanted to ask you to convey

11:33my thanks to Chris Dunaway

11:37for his work with a constituent of mine.

11:39I'd just like to read a short letter that I received a few weeks ago from a

11:43Jeff Phillips, and he said, "My wife and I have lived here for 12 years, caring for

11:46her elderly parents who've lived here for more than 40 years.

11:50In the 20 years development, this part of town has created real drainage problems.

11:54It's been especially bad in the last 12 years that we've lived here.

11:58We occupy the basement living space of the home, and a hard rain almost

12:02always meant water would come into the basement somewhere.

12:05As I think I've told you, for more than five years, I've been communicating with

12:08Chris Dunaway in your engineering department." He told me a

12:12long time ago that plans were in the works to improve drainage on our street, and

12:16we stayed in touch. Last year, the promise of relief finally came true.

12:20For several months, crews with the city were on our street digging, demolishing,

12:24and installing underground drainage.

12:26It's been almost a year since the project was completed.

12:29We lost power with the hailstorm a few weeks ago, and I was sure

12:33we were in trouble without a sump pump.

12:35It rained hard, and before the drainage work by the city, our living area

12:39would've been swamped. When the power came back on, I expected a mess.

12:43No water came into our home. We haven't had any flooding since the project was

12:47completed. I want to share my thanks with you for a job well done by

12:51our city government. We're so grateful because we lived with dread anytime

12:55rain was in the forecast. We breathe a lot easier now.

12:58I'm happy to express my gratitude to you and to give Chris Dunaway

13:02my appreciation as well. I know he sent a letter to the city, but

13:06I think it's important that we,

13:08again, criticize city employees when they don't do the job that they're supposed to

13:12do, but also praise city employees when they go above and beyond the call of duty

13:15because I think this is something that you talk a lot about

13:19restoring trust, and I think trust is restored when

13:23city employees take care of problems that citizens of this city have.

13:26And I think that was a job well done for Chris Dunaway and the Public Works

13:30Department,

13:32and whoever else was involved with that project.

13:34But I'd like you to convey my thanks to Chris.

13:39Thank you.

13:39We will certainly do that, and I certainly appreciate the fact that you recognize

13:42that effort. That's very important. I know it'll mean a lot.

13:46Other questions?

13:50Then we will move on to council bills for second reading and

13:53final passage. Council Bill

13:562026-207.

14:00Amended Council Bill 2026-207, a special ordinance

14:03authorizing the Director of Planning and Development to accept the dedication of

14:06public streets and easements to the City of Springfield, Missouri, as shown on the

14:10preliminary plat of Cape Point Place, generally located at 901

14:13Southwest Bypass, 849 South Suburban Avenue, and

14:173652 West Cape Point Boulevard, upon the applicant filing and recording a

14:21final plat that substantially conforms to the preliminary plat, and authorizing the

14:25city clerk to sign the final plat upon compliance with all of the terms of this

14:28ordinance.

14:31This council bill was amended on September 21st.

14:34Does the clerk have any scheduled speakers to speak as to the amendment this

14:37evening?

14:39Yes, sir.

14:41Please call them.

14:43Chris Wynn.

14:51Good evening.

14:52Yeah, good evening, Mayor and members of city council.

14:54Chris Wynn, civil engineer with CJW Transportation Consultants,

14:58located at 5051 South National Avenue, Suite 7A, Springfield, Missouri.

15:03Not a whole lot to add, really just here to answer any questions you guys have.

15:06I appreciate Council Member Lee for helping us get this amended

15:10at the last city council meeting. Essentially, all we've added is language

15:14that a trail easement satisfactory to the city and Ozark

15:18Greenways will be added to the plat prior to final platting.

15:22So, I'm here to answer any questions you guys may have, but appreciate your time.

15:26Okay, hold on a second, sir. Are there any questions for the speaker?

15:30You may be excused. Are there any other speakers?

15:33That was our only speaker.

15:34Public hearing is declared closed.

15:36Are there questions from members of city council for staff?

15:43Council members, please vote on the amended Council Bill

15:462026-207 by roll call.

15:51Horton.

15:52Jensen.

15:53Aye.

15:54Hardinger.

15:55Aye.

15:55Carroll.

15:56Aye.

15:57Lee.

15:57Aye.

15:58Adegbile.

15:59Aye.

16:00Hosmer.

16:01Aye.

16:02Mc gull.

16:02Aye.

16:03Schrog.

16:04Aye.

16:06Council Bill passes.

16:09Council Bill 2026-211.

16:13Council Bill 2026-211, a general ordinance amending Chapter

16:1736 of the Springfield City Code, Building Development Codes, by repealing Article 1

16:21Administration and Enforcement of Codes, Article 3, Building Codes, Article 5,

16:25International Property Maintenance Code, Article 11, International

16:29Residential Code, and Article 14, Existing Building Codes, in their

16:32entirety and enacting in lieu thereof a new Article 3, Building Codes,

16:36Article 5, International Property Maintenance Code, Article 11, International

16:40Residential Code, and Article 14, Existing

16:44Building Code, to take effect January 1, 2027.

16:48Public comment was taken on September 21st.

16:50Are there comments from members of council this evening?

16:54Clerk will please call the roll.

16:56Horton.

16:58Jensen.

16:59Aye.

17:00Hardinger.

17:01Aye.

17:02Carroll.

17:03Aye.

17:04Lee.

17:04Aye.

17:05Adegbile.

17:06Aye.

17:07Hosmer.

17:08Aye.

17:09Mc gull.

17:10Aye.

17:11Schrog.

17:12Aye.

17:13Council Bill passes.

17:16Council Bill 2026-212.

17:21Council Bill 2026-212, a general ordinance amending Chapter

17:2538 of the Springfield City Code, Building Development Codes, by repealing Article

17:294, Electrical Code, Article 6, Plumbing Code, Article 7, Mechanical Code,

17:33Article 12, Fuel Gas Code, Article 13, Private Sewage

17:37Disposal Code, Article 16, Swimming Pool and Spa Code,

17:41in their entirety and enacting in lieu thereof a new Article 4, Electrical Code,

17:45Article 6, Plumbing Code, Article 7, Mechanical Code, Article 12,

17:49Fuel Gas Code, Article 13, Private Sewage Disposal Code, and

17:53Article 16, Swimming Pool and Spa Code, to take effect on January

17:571, 2027.

17:59Public comment was taken on September 21.

18:02Are there comments this evening from members of council?

18:07Please call the roll

18:12Jensen?

18:13Aye.

18:14Hardinge?

18:15Aye.

18:15Carroll?

18:16Aye.

18:16Lee?

18:17Aye.

18:18Adegbileye?

18:19Aye.

18:19Hosmer?

18:20Aye.

18:21Mc gull?

18:21Aye.

18:22Horton?

18:23Aye.

18:23Schrag?

18:24Aye.

18:26Council bill passes. Council Bill

18:292026-213.

18:32Council Bill 2026-213, a general ordinance amending Chapter

18:3638 of the Springfield City Code, Building Development Code, by repealing

18:40Article 17, 2018 International Energy

18:43Conservation Code in its entirety and enacting in lieu thereof a new

18:47Article 17, 2018 International Energy

18:51Conservation Code to take effect January 1,

18:542027.

18:56Public comment was taken on September 21.

18:58Are there comments this evening from members of council?

19:01Council Member Adegbileye.

19:03Thank you, Mayor. Just a few comments, and I did have some typed up in my notes,

19:07which I can't get to, so I'm going to go a little bit from memory here.

19:11Couple of things. I've mentioned this before, but I really think

19:14as we move forward into next versions of this, looking at engaging

19:18the architect and engineering

19:21professions earlier and sooner and more directly than they were

19:25in this particular round.

19:28The focus seemed to be with home builders and contractors and the

19:32Chamber's GDAC committee.

19:36Also, we operate our own utility company, and maintaining the older

19:40code and maybe making some updates to it, I believe is a good thing,

19:43but looking forward to a day when we

19:48actually work harder to get those energy codes more strict.

19:50And I know those energy codes do cost construction

19:55dollars. It seems like the conversation was primarily geared

19:59to homeowner dollars and home building dollars, which

20:02seem to be a smaller piece of our entire city's construction model.

20:07But we operate our own utility company, and at some point, not having higher

20:11energy codes, better energy codes, will cost us in the construction of

20:15new facilities.

20:17Lastly,

20:19it seems interesting to talk about the cost of energy code

20:23adoption,

20:25but not talk about the cost of the rest of the code adoptions.

20:28There are things within the rest of that code that will cost more money, but there

20:31was no conversation about that. So,

20:34I will not be supporting this tonight, but I wanted to make sure it was clear that

20:37I think we should be continuing this.

20:39Other cities in Missouri have adopted the new code with its amendments,

20:43and I appreciate staff's time looking through those options, but I'm going to

20:46continue pushing on this particular issue.

20:50Other comments?

20:53Please call the roll.

20:56Hardinge?

20:57Aye.

20:58Carroll?

20:58Aye.

20:59Lee?

20:59Aye.

21:00Adegbileye?

21:01Nay.

21:02Hosmer?

21:04Aye.

21:05Mc gull?

21:05Aye.

21:06Horton?

21:07Aye.

21:08Jensen?

21:08Aye.

21:09Schrag?

21:10Aye. Council bill passes.

21:13Council Bill 2026-214.

21:17Council Bill 2026-214, a general ordinance amending Springfield

21:21City Code Chapter 98, Streets, Sidewalks, and Public Places, Article

21:257, Encroachments on City Property, to expand the type of encroachments that may be

21:29administratively approved and modify the requirement for obtaining an

21:33encroachment license.

21:35Thank you. Council Member Jensen, I believe you have a motion?

21:38Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I do have a question of staff before I offer my

21:42motion.

21:43Question of staff?

21:44All right.

21:46Mr. Smith, I've received several concerns over,

21:50really, the last 24 hours related to some of the language in this

21:54ordinance, specifically

21:57the language around electrical duct banks and

22:01vaults,

22:03and whether it could apply to the creation of

22:07data centers.

22:09It's my understanding that that's not the case, but I was

22:13hoping you could explain what type of infrastructure that terminology is

22:17referring to.

22:22Could you-

22:24And-

22:24Where in the section is that?

22:27I don't-

22:27You mean encroachments in the right of way?

22:29Yes. Yeah. I don't have access to my notes.

22:31Encroachment in the right of way is

22:33Okay. So, for private-

22:35Could I get you to talk into the microphone, please?

22:37Sorry.

22:37Thank you.

22:38Sorry. Yeah. So, this is talking about privately owned

22:42infrastructure, electrical duct banks, and vaults,

22:45and what

22:47type of infrastructure that's actually referring to.

22:50I'll give some examples of where that's been done.

22:53For instance, AT&T, when they put in fiber, may put in a duct

22:56bank. We put in a duct bank for

23:00different infrastructure along Grant Avenue

23:04Parkway to organize the utilities.

23:08When we did this, there was no intention to

23:12have any kind of a focus on a particular type of

23:16development, such as a data center.

23:19It's really looking more generically at the types of things that get put into the

23:23right of way for private developments.

23:27Okay. I

23:28guess,

23:30what is a duct bank?

23:32Oh. So,

23:34imagine a

23:38series

23:39of conduits together that, for instance, you may

23:44have fiber optics in a section, you may

23:48have

23:51a gas line in a section. You may have

23:55just some other utility. For instance, on Grant Avenue Parkway,

23:59it organized the utilities all together, making them more

24:02compact and easier to access

24:06because our right of way was limited.

24:10I hope that helps.

24:11Yeah, I think that makes sense.

24:12Okay.

24:13And I have a picture book called "Engineering in Plain Sight," and I almost brought

24:16it, but I didn't think that was why. So, thank you.

24:19I wanted to respond to those concerns, make it clear that I

24:23don't think that ... um, that that is going to be

24:27any functional outcome of allowing for some sort of process that

24:31bypasses any public input. So, I appreciate that.

24:35Um, with that out of the way, I, um,

24:39move that Council Bill 2026-214 be amended

24:43by deleting Exhibit A in its entirety and inserting a

24:47new Exhibit A in lieu thereof, a copy of which is attached to this motion and

24:50incorporated by reference and was shared with council in advance of today's

24:54meeting.

24:55I second that motion. Council Jensen, do you want to expand on that or-

25:00Yeah

25:00... just leave for questions?

25:00Yeah, absolutely. Thank you. So, um, my understanding of this bill,

25:04um, when I think about what encroachments are talking about, it's, um, looking

25:08at whenever we allow private uses to come onto public

25:12property. And one of the best examples I can think of was during the

25:16COVID pandemic, um, we allowed businesses in our downtown

25:20area to build those, um, sort of sidewalk, um,

25:24cafes. That's not the best terminology, but like, they converted a non-street

25:28parking spot into an outdoor seating area.

25:31Um, that provided, um, in my opinion, as someone who lives and

25:35works downtown, and who is a city planner, provided a

25:39lot of street-level activity. You

25:41were able to talk to folks as you walked by.

25:43You saw their food and said, "Hey, actually maybe I want to eat at this restaurant

25:47tonight." Um, and it creates a lot of value, a more engaging

25:51downtown, and something that I think is really helpful.

25:53One of the barriers I've heard from downtown businesses is that our,

25:57um, commercial, um,

26:00insurance requirement for these types of encroachments was really, really

26:04high. Um, so businesses were being required to take out an insurance policy

26:08of $3.5 million in order to build a sidewalk cafe.

26:13Staff did an analysis of the losses the

26:17city has experienced over the last several years from these types of encroachments,

26:21and it came to, I think,

26:23$30-ish thousand.

26:25Um, so I had asked staff to prepare an amendment that reduces the

26:29insurance requirement down to $1 million.

26:32Um,

26:33ah, and it would also allow, uh, the traffic engineers to

26:37require a higher insurance threshold if the project presents a

26:41unique risk or challenge to the city.

26:45Are there questions from members of council?

26:48Just a quick clarification.

26:49Yes.

26:49Um, that's all correct. But the $30,000, just so everyone understands,

26:53that was not the claims in the aggregate.

26:55That was just-

26:56Yeah

26:56... the highest single claim we identified.

26:58So hence-

27:00Great point

27:00... we believed it supported the lower amount.

27:02Thank you, sir.

27:04Questions?

27:08Uh, council members, please vote by roll call vote.

27:14Carroll?

27:14As to the amendment, sorry. As to the amendment only.

27:17Carroll?

27:18Aye.

27:19Lee?

27:19Aye.

27:20Adegbile?

27:22Aye.

27:23Hosmer?

27:24Aye.

27:25Mc gull?

27:26Aye.

27:27Horton?

27:28Aye.

27:28Jensen?

27:29Aye.

27:30Hardinger?

27:31Aye.

27:32Schrag?

27:33Aye.

27:35Motion passes to amend. The public hearing will be

27:38continued

27:40as to the amendment only to the October 26th

27:44council meeting, and it will be voted on at that time.

27:50Council Bill 2026-215.

27:54Council Bill 2026-215: A special ordinance amending the budget of

27:58the Department of Public Works for fiscal year 2026/2027 in the

28:02amount of $5 million to appropriate funds from the Spinning Forward

28:06SGF one half cent sale... Excuse me, capital improvement

28:10sales tax to fund the completion of projects recommended by a

28:13committee of the Neighborhood Advisory Council for the Neighborhood Works Plus

28:17program.

28:20Public comment was taken on September 21st.

28:22Are there comments this evening from members of council?

28:27Please call the roll.

28:31Adegbile?

28:32Aye.

28:36Hosmer?

28:36Aye.

28:37Mc gull?

28:38Aye.

28:39Horton?

28:39Aye.

28:40Jensen?

28:41Aye.

28:41Hardinger?

28:42Aye.

28:43Carroll?

28:44Aye.

28:44Lee?

28:45Aye.

28:45Schrag?

28:46Aye. Council bill passes. We will now move to the public hearing

28:50portion of the agenda. If there's a council bill on the agenda you wish to

28:54speak to, particularly item 17.1 through

28:5714.6, you must sign up with the city clerk before she

29:01reads the title.

29:03Please indicate whether you support or oppose the bill.

29:06This time is for your comments only, not to ask questions of city council, staff,

29:10or the audience.

29:12Uh, because the internet is down, uh, the clerk will be keeping your

29:16time manually, so please refer to the clerk's station if you're curious about

29:20how much time you have elapsed. And please observe the rules of

29:23civility and decorum, or you may forfeit your right to address council this

29:28evening.

29:29Council Bill 2026-232.

29:34Council Bill 2026-232: A resolution establishing for the

29:38city's collective bargaining team a goal to negotiate collective bargaining

29:41agreements for three-year terms, and a separate goal that either party to a

29:45collective bargaining agreement may submit to advisory

29:48arbitration any instance where the parties are unable to negotiate an

29:52agreement on future wages.

29:55Good evening.

29:55Good evening. Jordan Paul, city attorney.

29:57This is a resolution requested by Council Member Hosmer.

30:01This resolution would establish as goals for the city's collective bargaining team

30:04that in the next round of collective bargaining full contract negotiations, which I

30:08believe three of the four of which, um, are up next year, the team

30:12will attempt to reach agreements as to providing for three-year contracts without

30:16annual wage reopeners and allowing for either party to seek advisory

30:20arbitration in the event wage negotiations for a new contract or an

30:24amendment to an existing contract do not lead to an agreement.

30:29Are there questions from members of council for staff?

30:33Yes, Council Member Lee.

30:37So Craig,

30:39Councilman Hosmer, this may be more for you, but

30:43have the groups that we're negotiating with, do they want

30:47this? I'm in favor of this. I think it's a good idea.

30:50I just want to make sure that the folks that we're

30:54negotiating with, that they want this as well.

30:57It's my understanding that they do.

30:59They do?

31:01Collective bargaining came to Springfield, I think, in 2013.

31:05I was on council. And we passed a resolution at

31:09that time to go ahead and do non-binding arbitration.

31:12And I think

31:14we also passed

31:16our first contract was a three-year contract, but it's always got a wage

31:20reopener. And really, wages are the fight every year.

31:23And so the city spends a lot of time, energy, resources, and we spend

31:27a lot of money with outside counsel.

31:29The collective bargaining units spend a lot of time, money, resources, and

31:33they spend money on counsel.

31:35It seems like with a three-year contract that has maybe

31:39an opener because if revenues go down for the city or go up for the

31:43city, maybe you could revisit the issue of pay.

31:46But we're in constant negotiations, and

31:50I think that

31:52doesn't allow us to work with the

31:54firefighters, the

31:57police officers, and other people

32:00that work for the city

32:02on other issues. And I think we're constant in collective bargaining, and I

32:06think it's just a friction that we can do away with.

32:09So I think this would be a good change for the city,

32:13and I think they're here today, or some of them are here, but so

32:17I think they could speak for themselves, but I believe that they would be

32:20supportive, as I think the city should be.

32:23Council Member Teague, question.

32:25Yes, thank you, sir. Mr. Prall, I'm just curious, would these requirements,

32:29if passed,

32:31also

32:32be required of any subsidiary organizations of the city, like the

32:36city utilities?

32:38No.

32:39I believe there's

32:42some charter opinions I've come across just in passing since

32:46I've been city attorney where

32:49city utilities really has two carve-outs, generally speaking, from the charter, the

32:53financial provisions and the personnel provisions.

32:56And my recollection is their personnel provisions is what generally

33:00creates a parallel system for merit rules and collective bargaining.

33:04Okay. It's not lost on me that we're considering this on the same

33:08day that CU approved a collective bargaining contract without

33:13approval from the unit they were bargaining with.

33:15So I think this is a good

33:18proposal.

33:21Other questions?

33:22Thank you. Are there any scheduled speakers?

33:25Yes, sir. Devon Keeney.

33:35Good evening.

33:36Hi. Mr. Mayor, members of council.

33:39My name's Devon Keeney. I'm the president of the Southern Missouri Professional

33:42Firefighters Local 152. I'm here today to

33:46support moving this resolution to committee.

33:49I want to thank Councilman Hosmer and staff for presenting this

33:53resolution and their work on this.

33:55I believe that with a review from committee that includes input from the city's

33:59labor unions, that this resolution could continue to uphold city

34:05council's original intent when it passed General Ordinance 6090 in

34:082013. Advisory arbitration seeks to put the cases

34:12of both labor and management in front of an independent arbitrator to then

34:16present their opinion to council for approval or rejection.

34:20This process does not take away from council's authority, but provides clear

34:24guidance on an impasse resolution that is fair, unbiased, and

34:27can provide an opinion from a subject matter expert who is

34:31well-versed in helping give guidance in dispute resolutions.

34:35I also want to speak in support of the stated goal of three-year wage

34:38agreements.

34:40It is possible to put in safeguards, as Councilman Hosmer mentioned, that

34:44protect the city in years of economic turmoil and also protect bargaining units in

34:48years where revenues are higher than projected.

34:51Having the ability to negotiate meaningful three-year wage agreements would put us

34:55in line with peer cities like St. Charles, Lee's Summit, and Central Jackson County

34:59Fire District in Blue Springs.

35:02I believe three-year agreements are good for recruitment, retention, would save

35:06the city money on legal expenses, and keeps both groups from having to be in a

35:10constant state of bargaining. I believe this resolution is a positive step in the

35:14right direction of affirming city council's original intent in 2013

35:18and could set everyone up for a more fair, hospitable bargaining environment in the

35:21future. If anyone has any questions, I'd be happy to answer them.

35:26Any questions? Thank you very much, sir.

35:28Thank you.

35:29Any other speakers?

35:31That was our only speaker.

35:32At this time, the public hearing is declared closed.

35:36I'd like to make a motion to refer this to the Plans and

35:39Policies Committee on the motion that I provided to

35:43council on Friday.

35:46Is there a second?

35:49I have a second.

35:52I believe this is a complex thing, and I very much would like the

35:56benefit of a committee review to make sure we're on the right track, and I

36:00trust in the committee to move this forward.

36:03Are there any questions?

36:07Then please call the roll to vote as to the amendment only.

36:12I'm sorry, the referral only.

36:14Okay.

36:16Hosmer?

36:18Aye.

36:19Mc gull?

36:21Aye.

36:23Horton?

36:24Aye.

36:25Jensen?

36:26Aye.

36:27Hardinger?

36:28Aye.

36:29Carroll?

36:30Aye.

36:30Lee?

36:31Aye.

36:32Adegbileyi?

36:33Aye.

36:34Schrag?

36:35Aye.

36:39The matter is referred to the Plans and Policies Committee.

36:43Council Bill 2026-233.

36:49Council Bill 2026-233, a resolution approving the

36:53use of Zone 4 Minor Neighborhood Improvement Program funds from the quarter

36:57cent capital improvement sales tax in the amount of $50,000

37:01to partially fund combined phase one and phase two site improvements to McDaniel

37:05Park in Zone 4.

37:07Good evening.

37:08Good evening, Mayor, members of council. Ron Schneider, director of parks.

37:13This council bill designates Zone 4 Minor Neighborhood

37:17Improvement funds in the amount of $50,000 to be used

37:20towards improvements at McDaniel Park.

37:23Without going into the full history of this project that was conceived nearly two

37:27years ago, I'd like to just give a quick update on where we're at at this current

37:30time.

37:32Earlier this summer, we developed a bid package that included

37:36the site work for the bicycle pump track at McDaniel Park.

37:39Remember, the pump track was a donation from the Trail Spring

37:43organization. A new entranceway and parking lot, a new

37:47pavilion and restroom facility, and a new connector path to the South

37:50Creek Greenway Trail. Bids were opened on July 15th,

37:55with the low bid being over budget by nearly $700,000.

38:03Bids were opened on July 15th. Sorry, I already said that.

38:07Through partners and close supporters of the project, we were able to raise an

38:10additional $517,500.

38:15That's a pretty big amount of fundraising, a great

38:18accomplishment in a very short amount of time.

38:22The additional $50,000 through the

38:25Zone 4 Minor Neighborhood Improvement funds would bring the

38:29deficit to a reasonable amount, allowing the Park Board to move forward with the

38:33project at this time. I'd like to thank Councilman

38:37Adeyemi for his support of this council bill, as well as City

38:41Council for their consideration tonight.

38:43And I'd be happy to take any questions or comments at this time.

38:48Before you do that, Mr. Adeyemi, do you have anything you want to add or any

38:52specific thing you want to say to this?

38:54Yeah. Thank you, Mayor. A couple of things that maybe Mr.

38:56Schneider did not mention. A, thanks to Councilman Simpson

39:00for starting this project before I came on board, and

39:04it's been a couple of years in process, and I think we even met even

39:08before I was elected with Mr. Lee as part of my neighborhood

39:12association. And so it's gone back quite a way.

39:14So thank you for

39:17that effort earlier on.

39:19Thanks to your team for kind of working through the issue.

39:22It was a big one to work through, and glad you were able to get to that point.

39:25I want to make a couple of comments.

39:28You mentioned Trailspring, Hatch Foundation, Abilities First are all contributing

39:31toward this,

39:33the additionals, and I think part of the responsibility here is for

39:37all the stakeholders in the project to contribute something.

39:40That's why I brought this forward.

39:42I also noted on our agenda later tonight, 13.1, 13.2,

39:46are extensions and modifications for trails that will connect to this

39:50park.

39:51So I think just, again, leveraging expenditures and things that we're

39:55doing in one part of our city, I think will really show well.

40:00Lastly, I also did a little bit of research, and there are two parks in our

40:03system that do not have pavilions nor bathrooms, and this

40:07being one of them. So, glad to start to see this come together for

40:11that part of the city.

40:13Thank you.

40:14Any other questions from council for staff?

40:18Thank you very much.

40:19Thank you.

40:19You're excused. Are there any scheduled speakers?

40:21No, sir.

40:22The public hearing is declared closed.

40:24This bill as a resolution will be voted on this evening.

40:27Are there any comments from members of council before we vote?

40:31The clerk will please conduct the roll call vote.

40:33Mc gull?

40:34Aye.

40:35Horton?

40:36Aye.

40:36Jensen?

40:37Aye.

40:38Hardinger?

40:39Aye.

40:39Carroll?

40:40Aye.

40:40Lee?

40:41Aye.

40:42Adeyemi?

40:43Aye.

40:44Hosmer?

40:44Aye.

40:45Schrag?

40:46Aye. Council bill passes. Council Bill

40:502026-216.

40:54Council Bill 2026-216, a general ordinance amending

40:58Chapter 36, Article 4, Section 4.01B

41:02of the Land Development Code Official Zoning Maps by rezoning approximately 2.75

41:05acres of property generally located at 1435 West Talmadge Street

41:09from Mid-Density Neighborhood, Medium District with Conditional Overlay,

41:13District Number 115, to Mixed Density Neighborhood, High

41:17District with Binding Site Plan, Condition

41:20287, and adopting an updated Official Zoning Map.

41:25Good evening.

41:26Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of council.

41:28Justin Crichton, I'm the assistant director of the Planning and Development

41:30Department. So this property currently has 74 micro-efficiency

41:34units in two buildings, and the owner wants to add three additional units

41:38that would put them over the density cap that's currently allowed by the COD.

41:42That COD, which is number 115, caps density for the site at approximately

41:4527.25 units per acre for a total of

41:4974 units. This request would not add any exterior.

41:53It wouldn't move the building footprint.

41:56And the binding site plan that was submitted with this application

42:00shows that it meets the RMX 3 district standards, including the

42:04parking and landscape requirements.

42:06I will note that this site is at the transition between our traditional

42:09neighborhood and city corridor place types, which makes it appropriate for this

42:13kind of higher density development because it's pushing up against the higher

42:17functioning roadway and at the edge of the neighborhood.

42:20The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of this item eight to

42:23nothing at their September 10th meeting, and staff also recommends approval.

42:27With that, I'll be happy to answer any questions.

42:30Are there questions for staff? Councilman Brad Adeyemi.

42:33Thank you, Mayor.

42:34Sorry.

42:34Maybe I missed it. How are they adding the units to these projects without

42:38increasing the footprint?

42:39It's all interior renovations. So they're micro-efficiency units, and

42:43they're reconfiguring some space inside to make

42:46More units than the current COD allows.

42:48So we're going from micro to micro-micro.

42:50I think we're going from regular to additional micro-

42:52Oh, okay

42:52... as I understand it, yes.

42:53Thank you.

42:54Council Member McGall.

42:56Thank you, Mayor.

42:58I'm in,

43:00I guess, approval of this particular bill, but I have a question

43:04about your terminology. If you look at the

43:09explanation portion of the bill, I think

43:14paragraph 16, you guys use a couple

43:18of terminology

43:20in your approval or staff recommendation.

43:24One of those is you use the terminology, general

43:27conformance to the comprehensive plan.

43:30I've seen the terminology substantial conformity to

43:34the comprehensive plan. I'd just like to know

43:37what's the basis for that distinction?

43:41I don't know that there should necessarily be a distinction there, but when we're

43:44generally talking about conformance with the comprehensive plan, that means that

43:48the overall rezoning request does align with the future vision and the types of

43:52uses that are

43:53described in these particular areas.

43:55This one, like I said, happens to be at the intersection of two different ones,

43:59which makes this more appropriate for a higher intensity

44:02residential use, which is what this property is.

44:04So it's in substantial conformance with the comprehensive plan.

44:07Okay, but you use the terminology general conformance.

44:11In bill 12.4, you say substantial conformity.

44:14I'd just like to know what's the difference?

44:17Maybe Steve knows, or you guys know why you all use different

44:20terminology,

44:22or it's just-

44:24I think it's just a term of art that we use probably interchangeably.

44:28I can assure you that both that 12.4 and this request are both in compliance with

44:32the comprehensive plan.

44:33Okay. I was just trying to get some kind of basis of the nomenclature

44:37I saw. But if there's no distinction, okay.

44:41That's fine.

44:43Any other questions?

44:47Thank you very much.

44:50Does the clerk have any scheduled speakers?

44:52Yes, sir. Ricky Haas.

44:55Good evening.

44:56Good evening.

44:57Good evening, members of council. I'm Ricky Haas with Olsen.

45:00A civil engineer by trade,

45:02representing the developer.

45:05I'm at 550 East St. Louis in Springfield.

45:08So before we were brought into this project, this is an

45:11existing complex obviously. Somehow this facility got built

45:15with more units than what was allowed, and so the solution was that

45:19those three units sit vacant. And so, we were

45:23approached and asked to resolve the issue.

45:25And so,

45:27we're really grateful to members of staff to hear

45:31us out and come to a solution on this.

45:33And so rezoning is part of that. I think

45:37part of our "trade-off" here was to bring the site

45:41up to code, the new landscape code.

45:44So we'll be doing some landscape improvements,

45:46modifying the island in the middle of the parking

45:50there to allow for more landscaping.

45:54Also, it was under-parked for the number of

45:58units that were there, so we're adjusting the parking a little bit to bring it up

46:01to code.

46:03You can kind of see at the south end of this exhibit, the entry gate

46:07also was not up to code, so we're providing the correct

46:10spacing off of the right of way and a turnaround at the gate.

46:13So getting the whole complex up to compliance and trade-off,

46:18being able to actually use those units that sit there vacant.

46:21So kind of a win-win. Hopefully, we can get some tenants in there

46:24and

46:26create more tax revenue, get some people in some housing,

46:30and win-win for everybody. So,

46:34we had a neighborhood meeting.

46:36The neighbors were informed. Nobody attended.

46:38So,

46:40yeah, I think that's all I've got. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

46:44Questions?

46:47Thank you, sir. Next speaker.

46:49That was our only speaker.

46:50The public hearing is declared closed.

46:52City Council will vote on October 25.

46:56Council Bill 2026-217.

47:00Council Bill 2026-217, a general ordinance amending Chapter

47:0436, Article 4, Section 4.01B of the Land Development Code

47:08official zoning map by rezoning approximately 6.8 acres of property

47:12generally located at 4233 through 4297,

47:164268, and 4270 South Hillcrest Avenue

47:20from general commercial district to light industrial commercial district

47:24and adopting an updated official zoning map.

47:28Good evening.

47:28Good evening again, Mr. Mayor. This request is an appeal of the citywide remapping

47:32that took place earlier this year.

47:34The property was annexed into the city in January 2025 under a consent to annex

47:38agreement, and it retained its county zoning until the remapping

47:42remapped it to GC. GC made the existing uses legal

47:45nonconforming. So the comprehensive plan identifies this area as the city

47:49corridor place type, and that place type lists storage uses as

47:53supporting uses. The LIC district, or light industrial

47:57commercial district, limits uses by size and intensity so that they

48:01don't have a significant impact on the neighboring properties.

48:06The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of this item eight to

48:09nothing in the September 10th meeting.

48:13Staff also recommends approval of this request.

48:16Happy to answer any questions.

48:17Are there questions? Council Member Adamyasti.

48:20Thank you, Mayor. And much like Council Member McGall's question, mine might be

48:25more

48:26terminology related.

48:28Go to the next slide.

48:30P&Z recommended approval eight to zero on September 10th?

48:33Yes.

48:33It looks like I'm seeing these

48:37numbers a lot of times in the presentation, but are they in the packet as well, the

48:41actual votes?

48:42I don't know that those are in these actual staff reports.

48:44We get a report after the P&Z, and they just add those numbers because somebody

48:48asked me to one time, I believe so.

48:49Okay, great. Thank you.

48:52Other questions?

48:55Thank you very much. Does the clerk have any scheduled speakers?

48:59No, sir.

49:00Then the public hearing is declared closed.

49:02City Council will vote on October 25.

49:05Council Bill 2026-218.

49:08Council Bill 2026-218, a general ordinance amending Chapter

49:1236, Article Four, Section 4.01B of the Land Development Code official

49:17zoning map by rezoning approximately 0.17 acres of property generally

49:20located at 1469 North Rogers Avenue from General Commercial

49:24District to Mixed Density Neighborhood Low and adopting an

49:28updated official zoning map.

49:31Welcome back.

49:32Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This request is also an appeal of the citywide remapping.

49:36This property has an existing duplex on it, and the owner plans to rehabilitate it.

49:41The remapping and rezoning of this property, or transition of this property to

49:45GC, or General Commercial, which is a commercial district, as the name

49:48implies. The duplex actually can continue under the GC, but GC

49:52does not match the overall residential use of this property, and it doesn't support

49:56new residential investment in the way that a residential district would.

49:59So RMX-1 is a residential district that allows the duplex as a conforming

50:03use, and the comprehensive plan identifies the property as the Center City

50:07Neighborhood place type. That place type does list single family, attached, and

50:10low-intensity multifamily as supporting uses.

50:13Planning and Zoning Commission did vote to recommend approval of this eight to

50:16nothing in the September 10th meeting. Staff also recommends approval.

50:22Questions?

50:25Thank you very much. Does the clerk have any scheduled speakers?

50:29Yes, sir.

50:30Kyle Winchell.

50:38Good evening.

50:39Good evening, Mayor, members of council. I'm Kyle Winchell.

50:42We bought this property. It did have an existing duplex.

50:48That was not brought up to code, so when we bought the property, we've been doing a

50:52bunch of rehab to it.

50:54It had a blight notice on it. We got all the blighted

50:57problems fixed,

50:59and we're going to try to get it to we can get another house in the

51:03neighborhood.

51:05Thank you very much. Other questions for the speaker?

51:10Thank you very much.

51:12Next speaker.

51:13That was our only speaker.

51:14The public hearing is declared closed. City Council will vote on October 25.

51:21Council Bill 2026-219.

51:24Council Bill 2026-219, a special ordinance approving the final

51:27development plan of Planned Development District Number 298, generally located

51:31at 3515 East Olive Street.

51:36Good evening.

51:36Good evening, Mr. Mayor. This final request is a final development plan for

51:40a new outdoor sporting goods store.

51:43So council approved PD Number 298 in July 2006

51:47after the property was annexed. That PD covers about 50 acres south of

51:51Chestnut Expressway and US 65.

51:55That PD had a list of

51:57permitted uses that included retail and office uses similar to the old highway

52:00commercial district that does include sporting goods stores, so this use is in line

52:04with the PD. In 2006, the PD did not include building

52:08footprints or a street design, and for that reason, the ordinance that approved it

52:12requires that each final development plan go first to the Administrative Review

52:15Committee, then to the Planning

52:18and Zoning Commission, and then finally to council for approval.

52:20So each final development plan must include a traffic impact analysis.

52:24The ordinance also requires that some other improvements be made that have already

52:28been made as part of this overall PD.

52:31The Administrative Review Committee did review and recommend approval of this on

52:35August 13th. Staff also finds that the plan substantially

52:38conforms to the requirements of PD Number 298, and the Planning and

52:42Zoning Commission recommended approval of it eight to nothing on September 10th.

52:47Any questions, I'll be happy to answer them.

52:49Thanks. Thank you very much. Do you have

52:53scheduled speakers?

52:55Yes, sir. Ricky Haas.

52:59Welcome back.

52:59Good evening again. Ricky Haas with Olsson, 550 East St. Louis.

53:03I'm with Olsson, and I'm representing the developer.

53:07And so we've looked at a lot of different developments on this particular

53:11site. It's quite challenging just with some of the stuff that we

53:15have to work around. You can kind of see running northwest to

53:19southeast, there's a large drainage easement.

53:22We have three plus sinkholes that are identified with their

53:26setback on here.

53:29And then we've also got quite a bit of sloping grade going from

53:32west to east. So

53:35we've looked at a lot of developments that kind of took the whole

53:38space up, but this one focuses more on the west side of the

53:42drainage.

53:44At this point in time, we plan to keep it all one parcel.

53:47Everything east of the drainage would be done in future development.

53:50We'd be back in front of you with another final development plan at that time.

53:54So the area that we're only talking about is on the southwest.

53:57You've got the sporting goods store there, and then the developer asked us to see

54:01if a kind of a drive-through facility would fit down at

54:05the intersection there. So there's just a little drive-through drawn in

54:09there with enough parking for that.

54:12There's a sinkhole right at the south end of the building.

54:14At this point, we've worked around it. It's not ideal.

54:19We basically wanted to make sure that this project would work if we're unable to

54:23remediate that. So

54:26we'll work with a geotechnical engineer and city staff

54:30as development goes on to see if that can be remediated and utilize that area

54:34for something better than a sinkhole.

54:38And then access, so this

54:42site can only have access to Olive on the south.

54:46We aren't able to take access to Eastgate, so

54:49you can kind of see the two access points that we've got identified there.

54:54I really don't have much more else to add.

54:56If this does get approved by City Council, we plan to go right to starting

54:59permit drawings and moving forward with the project.

55:02So,

55:03with that, I'd be happy to answer any questions you have.

55:05Questions of the speaker.

55:09Yes, Councilman Abiase.

55:11Thank you, Mayor. Just to be clear,

55:13Mr. Haas, when you were saying

55:16that you've kind of shown a drive-through facility, is that the thing that

55:19says

55:21future phase on it?

55:22Yeah.

55:22Okay.

55:22Correct.

55:23Thank you.

55:23If that does go through, I believe we'd be required to do another final development

55:27plan. So it's kind of just a placeholder at this point.

55:29It's not part of the new building right now. It's just a future phase potentially.

55:33Future separate building. Correct.

55:34Separate building. Okay. Thank you.

55:37Yeah.

55:37Other questions? Thank you very much.

55:41Are there any scheduled speakers?

55:43No.

55:43Other scheduled speakers?

55:44No, sir.

55:44The public hearing is declared closed. City Council will vote on October 25.

55:49Council Bill

55:492026-220.

55:54I would note Councilman Lee has notified me that he will be recusing himself

55:58from this item. The record will reflect that recusal.

56:02Council Bill 2026-220, a special ordinance

56:06approving the first amendment to the Springfield Plaza Tax Increment Financing

56:10Redevelopment Plan to allow multifamily residential use within Redevelopment

56:14Project Area 2, extending the duration of the tax increment

56:17financing with Redevelopment Project Areas 1 and 2, and

56:21directing the city manager or designee to implement such changes to the Springfield

56:25Plaza TIF Redevelopment Plan.

56:28Good evening.

56:28Good evening, Mayor and members of council.

56:30I'm Amanda Olin Salin, Director of Economic Vitality and Workforce Development.

56:35Tonight, we are here to talk about the first amendment to the Springfield

56:39Plaza

56:40TIF, redevelopment plan.

56:43Just a high-level overview of what tax increment financing is or TIF.

56:47It is

56:48authorized under the revised Missouri Statutes Chapter

56:5299 to redirect incremental tax revenues

56:55within a redevelopment area to fund project

56:59cost.

57:02A TIF can have a maximum life of up to 23 years

57:06and does require adoption of a redevelopment plan.

57:09The Springfield Plaza TIF

57:12Redevelopment Plan was originally approved by City Council on May 6th of

57:162013 and covers roughly 96 acres near West Sunshine

57:20Street and Southwest Bypass.

57:23The plan calls for a phased implementation, so Redevelopment

57:27Project Area 1 is the northern approximate

57:3035.5 acres and was activated in December of

57:342016 and is substantially complete and built

57:38out. Redevelopment Project Area 2, which is the southern

57:41approximate 60.8 acres, was activated in April

57:452023 but remains undeveloped.

57:51So a little bit more history of the Springfield Plaza Redevelopment

57:55Plan. It does propose a commercial development

57:59to facilitate that redevelopment, remediate blight, and encourage

58:03a consumer-friendly environment

58:06to really maximize the highest and best use of underutilized

58:10properties within Springfield.

58:12So you can see that the estimated construction start year for phase

58:16one was 2015, and the estimated

58:20start year of 2016 for Redevelopment Project Area

58:242. Again, I mentioned that that was activated in 2023.

58:28There were various kind of market conditions and things that happened that

58:32slowed the development of that second phase.

58:36So the total plan development cost for the project is around

58:40$78.5 million.

58:43And the total project cost that can be reimbursed to the

58:47developer is approximately $9.6 million.

58:51This is a pay-as-you-go TIF, so those revenues are

58:55reimbursed as they are generated.

58:58So there's no obligation of the city or financial risk to issue any

59:02bonds or be responsible for any of those development costs.

59:06The TIF itself captures 100% of the new incremental

59:10real property taxes, or PILOTS, and 50% of the

59:14new sales taxes, or the EATS. And there is a

59:18mandatory surplus of PILOTS at the amount

59:22of 25%, which will be redistributed and has been

59:25redistributed to the affected taxing districts.

59:29There is also a community improvement district, or a CID, that was

59:33established, and that helps to accelerate the repayment of those

59:37reimbursable project costs. That's an additional half cent

59:41sales tax, and one half of that is subject to the TIF EATS, and the

59:45other half goes back to the developer

59:48as a part of those reimbursable costs.

59:51And initially, the TIF was established to cease after 18

59:55years when the developer was fully reimbursed or whichever

59:59would come first.

1:00:02So just to kind of orient yourselves geographically, there's a picture on the

1:00:06left here of when the redevelopment plan was

1:00:10first approved, and then on the right with the first phase built out.

1:00:13And really, if we kind of zoomed out a little bit more, you will see how this

1:00:17project has been an overall catalyst for that area along West

1:00:20Sunshine. Of course, you have the recently approved Sunshine Town

1:00:24Center, which has the new Target. You have Menards.

1:00:28You have the Chick-fil-A kind of across the street on Sunshine.

1:00:32So really, this is to help to facilitate the full build-out of phase

1:00:35two of the project.

1:00:38So the core purpose of this first amendment is to really modify the

1:00:43Redevelopment Project Area 2 to incorporate multifamily residential

1:00:46uses or approximately 420 dwelling units

1:00:50alongside 325,000 square feet of commercial and

1:00:54retail space. This will replace the original plan

1:00:58for Redevelopment Project Area 2, which contemplated around

1:01:02250,000 square feet of office

1:01:06and commercial space, and this will

1:01:09This amendment will help to significantly boost the market appeal

1:01:13and commercial viability of the phase two build-out.

1:01:19So, as a component of this, it will also extend the duration

1:01:23of the TIF from 18 years to the full allowable

1:01:28maximum amount of 23 years. So, redevelopment project

1:01:31area one will now expire in 2039, and redevelopment

1:01:35project area two will now expire in 2046, so extending

1:01:39that for five years.

1:01:43So, the

1:01:46proposed amendment will really

1:01:50introduce those

1:01:52dwelling units, so residential use within that.

1:01:55And the anticipated construction start year is really 2026.

1:02:00You all may remember approving a rezoning for the

1:02:03property. And the extension, again, will help to

1:02:07ensure that there's time for the full build-out.

1:02:10There's also a budget reallocation which is proposed with

1:02:14this, and really all that's doing, it's not changing the total project

1:02:18cost, but it's really just reallocating those project costs between the two

1:02:22phases. So, you can see that outlined here in this

1:02:26graphic, but the total reimbursable cost

1:02:30remains at the

1:02:34$9.6 million.

1:02:41Okay. So, as we dive into this,

1:02:46as an additional part of this, the cost-benefit analysis for

1:02:50the redevelopment plan was completed for redevelopment

1:02:53project area two only. As you may remember, I told you

1:02:57that that initially contemplated around 250,000 square

1:03:01feet of office and commercial space.

1:03:04So now it will include mixed use with housing, commercial,

1:03:08retail in that plan. And I think an important note

1:03:12to that is with this modified schedule, there's an estimated

1:03:15$32.9 million of PILOTS that is contemplated,

1:03:19yielding a surplus of approximately $8.4 million

1:03:22directly to those impacted taxing jurisdictions,

1:03:26and $20.4 million in EATS. You can see that

1:03:30that's significantly more than what was originally contemplated,

1:03:35which was approximately $10.3 million in PILOTS with a

1:03:3825% surplus of around $2.6 million,

1:03:42and zero in EATS, as an office

1:03:46use would not generate as significant sales

1:03:49taxes as it will with the retail component added in.

1:03:55So again, 100% of those new property taxes or PILOTS that are

1:03:59captured or that 25% surplus would be

1:04:02redistributed directly to the affected taxing districts, which includes

1:04:07the Republic R-3 schools, the library, OTC, the

1:04:11county, and that would provide an immediate financial benefit to those

1:04:14impacted taxing jurisdictions.

1:04:18As we kind of talked about, this is a pay-as-you-go structure, so those

1:04:22reimbursable costs, that approximate $9.5 million,

1:04:26will go back

1:04:28to the developer. But if there are stronger revenues, obviously

1:04:32that will accelerate that full reimbursement, which could

1:04:36actually shorten the lifespan of this TIF.

1:04:39This project is in alignment with Forward SGF.

1:04:42It's within the city corridor place type,

1:04:45which is designed for commercial and service-related development.

1:04:48And that place type also supports multifamily

1:04:52development and reinvestment, so promoting

1:04:56this reinvestment within a major corridor throughout Springfield.

1:05:02The TIF commission did hear this item on

1:05:05December 22nd,

1:05:09and voted unanimously with a 10 to zero vote to recommend

1:05:13approval of this TIF amendment,

1:05:17and city staff also recommends approval.

1:05:20I'm happy to answer any questions that you have.

1:05:23Questions.

1:05:25Council Member Halasner.

1:05:29Amanda,

1:05:30explain to me what the reimbursable costs.

1:05:34That's a function of state statute or is that city policy?

1:05:38I'm-

1:05:39The amount of reimbursable, the

1:05:42categories of work.

1:05:43The categories?

1:05:44Yeah.

1:05:45So, those are public improvements.

1:05:47So that is outlined as far as what would be eligible

1:05:51for TIF-related

1:05:54revenues. And of course, as a part of the initial

1:05:58redevelopment plan, those were outlined and then also

1:06:03have been considered as a part of the amendment.

1:06:05So yes, it is a part of what is allowed to be reimbursed as public

1:06:09improvements and then, of course, that's evaluated by staff and city

1:06:13council.

1:06:15And so all of this, did you say 9.2?

1:06:19Yes.

1:06:19All 9.2 are public improvements that the developers had to

1:06:23do to-

1:06:24Correct

1:06:25... qualify for-

1:06:25For the overall development

1:06:27... the project

1:06:27Within each phase. So phase one,

1:06:30those

1:06:32have been mostly reimbursed up to this point as the project has built

1:06:36out for phase two. So this would really trigger reimbursement of those public

1:06:40improvements for redevelopment project area two only.

1:06:44So kind of that southern half of the development.

1:06:47But am I correct in thinking that the 9.2 is a

1:06:51total for the project?

1:06:52Yes. And it's around 9.5, but yes-

1:06:55Okay

1:06:55... that's a total of the entire project, which

1:06:59equates to around 12% of the overall

1:07:02$78, $79 million total project cost.

1:07:06And

1:07:08that would only be ...

1:07:12the period of taxation would only stay in place until it either

1:07:17expires by time or is reimbursed to the developer?

1:07:20Correct. It's pay as you go. So,

1:07:23as extended, where I outline that that would extend, I believe,

1:07:31up to the year 2046 would be the

1:07:35last time that anything could be reimbursed, or if it performs, it could

1:07:38be reimbursed sooner. So it's pay as you go.

1:07:41So as the project generates those TIF

1:07:44revenues and EIDs, those PILOTs and those EIDs, that would be reimbursed

1:07:48toward those eligible project costs.

1:07:51So it could expire sooner, but no longer than the maximum

1:07:5523 years.

1:07:57And what was the original full amount of the reimbursable?

1:08:03It's always been the 9.5 million. The total

1:08:06eligible project cost has not changed between the original

1:08:11adoption and the proposed amendment.

1:08:14So there's been no recapture-

1:08:15No

1:08:15... of any of that to date?

1:08:17Oh, yes. There have been

1:08:19TIF revenues that have been reimbursed to the developer

1:08:24for a portion of those costs, but just for redevelopment project area one.

1:08:28This is to be able to extend and redirect some of those to

1:08:32redevelopment project area two.

1:08:34Okay, thank you.

1:08:36Council Member Adegbile.

1:08:38Thank you, Mayor. Thank you for the presentation.

1:08:40I'm glad to see a higher density development for commercial

1:08:44and adding the residential in the phase two

1:08:47part of the project.

1:08:49And I can understand extending the timeframe on the phase two

1:08:53component. Can you talk to me a little bit about the five-year extension on phase

1:08:57one and how that relates to the 23-year RSMO requirement?

1:09:01Yes. So, that is to keep it

1:09:04consistent with the maximum allowable 23-year timeframe.

1:09:09Really, that's just kind of a safety net just to

1:09:13ensure that there's time to potentially realize those revenues,

1:09:16considering there were many factors initially, and I'm sure the developer's

1:09:20representative can speak to you all if you have questions about

1:09:24what some of those potential challenges were during the timeframe.

1:09:28Of course, we had a global pandemic and other things that have happened during this

1:09:32time. So it was a little bit slower to develop than

1:09:35originally proposed. However, this does allow

1:09:40to look at what some of those highest and best uses would be for that

1:09:43project area, too, based on kind of what the market is demanding

1:09:47today.

1:09:48So phase one was originally an 18-year?

1:09:52Correct.

1:09:52And now we're taking it to the 23 maximum.

1:09:54To the 23.

1:09:55Okay.

1:09:55Yes.

1:09:55Thank you.

1:09:56Yes.

1:09:59Other questions? Thank you very-

1:10:02And I think just in case I wasn't clear, really the bottom line

1:10:06is that the amount stays the same. Those numbers are just shifting

1:10:11within the budget. So the overall bottom line is that the amount of

1:10:15eligible project cost has remained the same throughout the duration.

1:10:21Thank you very much.

1:10:22One more.

1:10:22Yeah, sorry. Council Member Horton.

1:10:25Did I hear you right when you said that

1:10:28for phase one,

1:10:30there's a five-year extension,

1:10:33but the majority of the funds had already been

1:10:37reimbursed for phase one?

1:10:39Yes. Phase one is built out, so there's been a lot of those

1:10:43project costs that have already been reimbursed.

1:10:46But not all of them, and so therefore, that's why this request

1:10:51for an extra five years is a part of this

1:10:54package.

1:10:56Yes.

1:10:57It's still one overall TIF. So the maximum time

1:11:01for all phases is 23 years.

1:11:05So you would extend the first phase and the second phase.

1:11:07Really, the reimbursable cost will be contained within

1:11:11the second phase. There's been approximately $3.9 million

1:11:15in PILOTs and EIDs that have been directed toward those reimbursable project

1:11:19costs to date.

1:11:21Thank you.

1:11:24Any questions at all?

1:11:27Thank you very much. Does the clerk have any scheduled

1:11:30speakers?

1:11:32Yes, sir. Tom Rankin.

1:11:39Good evening.

1:11:39Good evening. Thank you, Mayor, members of council.

1:11:41Thank you for hearing our proposed amendment to our TIF.

1:11:45Just a little bit more background before I explain maybe some of the more details,

1:11:48but we purchased this property in 2007.

1:11:53We tracked new housing home starts for Greene County, and the highest

1:11:56concentration in the county for new housing home starts was within a mile of this

1:12:00location. And so we thought it would be a

1:12:04great spot for retail because retail follows rooftops, and we just

1:12:09kind of missed the mark, if you will.

1:12:11In 2007, we purchased the ground. We had land under contract with

1:12:15Lowe's.

1:12:16In 2008, before Lowe's closed, we had the Great

1:12:20Recession, which lingered for a number of years.

1:12:24Lowe's obviously backed out of the deal because the world as we knew it

1:12:28from an economy standpoint,

1:12:31retailers just weren't doing anything.

1:12:34In 2010,

1:12:36although the recession was still lingering, online shopping really kind of took

1:12:40off,

1:12:41be it mobile phones and whatnot, and the need that retailers felt

1:12:45for bricks and mortar diminished.

1:12:47So there weren't many retailers looking to grow

1:12:51bricks and mortar locations because so many people were doing online shopping.

1:12:56In 2013, we did have our TIF approved, and in

1:12:592016, we started construction on what is now

1:13:03150,000 square foot of retail with Ross Dress for Less and

1:13:07Burlington and Michaels and Ulta Beauty and others.

1:13:11And

1:13:13So while that was under construction, it started in 2016.

1:13:16Obviously, we had COVID,

1:13:17which dramatically impacted retail and what

1:13:21people were doing in the way of shopping.

1:13:23This year, 10 years later after we started our retail center, we

1:13:28have our last tenant, Aldi,

1:13:30will be open next month which will be great for the center.

1:13:33But my point is, it took us 10 years,

1:13:36much longer than we anticipated, to build to fulfill 150,000 square

1:13:40foot retail center. That RPA 1, which is roughly

1:13:4435 acres,

1:13:46that has

1:13:49repaid almost $4 million in infrastructure.

1:13:52I will say, we spent $12.6 million in public improvements.

1:13:55Excuse me,

1:13:57$9.6 million in public improvements, and that is the public streets,

1:14:02Seminole Street. We built the traffic signal at Seminole and West

1:14:06Bypass. We built McCurry Street. We put a traffic signal in at

1:14:10Sunshine and McCurry, and then we improved the Walmart signal there at

1:14:13Zimmer and Sunshine.

1:14:16As well as offsite detention, public utilities, and things of that nature brought

1:14:19us to the $9.6 million. So we're not asking

1:14:24for any more money than that. That money's been spent.

1:14:26We just want more time to get reimbursed.

1:14:29We had originally 18 years from the TIF.

1:14:33We're asking for a statute of allowance for 23, so we're asking for just that,

1:14:37just to be allowed what

1:14:39is allowed in the state.

1:14:41And then secondly, we had our phase two, which is, again, we've developed roughly

1:14:4435 acres, and we have roughly 60 acres yet to develop.

1:14:47We had the opportunity to sell 20 acres to a multifamily developer.

1:14:52You all rezoned that several months ago.

1:14:54They've been under construction, and it's going to fill a great need for

1:14:58multifamily housing with 420 units in that immediate area.

1:15:01So we're grateful for that. But what it doesn't allow us to do is recapture

1:15:05property taxes from that multifamily development.

1:15:08So this allows us to,

1:15:10again, recoup some of that property taxes that'll be paid through the

1:15:14multifamily development towards our $9.6 million that we spent.

1:15:19Happy to answer any questions that you might have.

1:15:22Questions for the speaker. Council Member Hosmer?

1:15:25Tom, just to make sure I understand this.

1:15:27You've got a total of $9.6 million in

1:15:31stranded costs that were built out public improvements?

1:15:34That's right. That money's been spent.

1:15:36And of that $9.5, approximately $4 million's

1:15:40been paid back already?

1:15:41That's correct.

1:15:42So you've got actually outstanding another $5.5?

1:15:45That's correct.

1:15:46Okay. Thank you.

1:15:52Any other questions?

1:15:55Thank you.

1:15:55Thank you.

1:15:56You may be excused. Any other speakers?

1:15:59No, sir. That was our only speaker.

1:16:01So the public hearing is closed. City Council will vote on October

1:16:0525. I'm going to take a very brief

1:16:08recess here to confer.

1:16:26Okay, here we are, back in action.

1:16:29Ms. Cotter, would you please read agenda items 13.1 and

1:16:3213.2 together?

1:16:37Yes. Council Bill 2026-221, a special ordinance

1:16:41approving the plans and specifications for the South Creek Greenway Fremont to

1:16:44Glenstone project, accepting the bid of Hunter Chase

1:16:48and Associates for the construction of the project in the amount of

1:16:51$797,922.17,

1:16:56authorizing the city manager or designee to enter into a contract with such bidder,

1:16:59and declaring this ordinance qualifies for approval in one reading pursuant to

1:17:03Section 2.16, subsection 25 of the city charter.

1:17:07Council Bill 2026-222, a special ordinance

1:17:11approving the plans and specifications for the South Creek Greenway Sunset to

1:17:15Glenstone Crossing project, accepting the bid of Hunter Chase Associates

1:17:19for construction of the project in the amount of

1:17:21$254,055.60, authorizing the

1:17:25city manager or designee to enter into a contract with such bidder, and

1:17:29declaring this ordinance qualifies for approval in one reading pursuant to Section

1:17:332.16, subsection 25 of the city charter.

1:17:37Before staff begins, we have a last-minute change.

1:17:41So the first bill, and that's Bill 2026-221, we

1:17:45believe there's a small clerical error in that bill.

1:17:48So instead of voting on it tonight, I'm going to ask council, when we get to that

1:17:52point, to hold that bill over an additional week so that staff may

1:17:55look into the structure of that. So,

1:18:00any questions as to that one particular thing?

1:18:05Seeing none. Staff, please explain both bills.

1:18:08Okay.

1:18:08I'm Dan Smith, Director of Public Works.

1:18:11Good evening, Mayor and members of council.

1:18:13Good evening.

1:18:14So this is, you can see on the screen,

1:18:18actually two projects that

1:18:22are extending a trail from Fremont Avenue

1:18:26along Sunset, there by the mall, to Glenstone and

1:18:30Crossing.

1:18:31And so,

1:18:33the first bill, which is the one that we will be

1:18:37asking to hold over and vote on next time, is the one

1:18:41in yellow,

1:18:43running from Fremont to Glenstone.

1:18:46So the project itself had six bidders, so we were very

1:18:50pleased to get that much interest in the project.

1:18:53Both bids did.

1:18:55The way we did it,

1:18:59we combined the lowest two base bids of

1:19:03the same contractor to choose the winner.

1:19:06And when you looked at the base bids, the

1:19:10engineer's estimate was

1:19:13Just over a million dollars. The combined base bids were around

1:19:17800,000. So we got very good bids on this.

1:19:20Very pleased with that.

1:19:23Another notable aspect of this is the

1:19:27utilization of federal dollars. This has

1:19:33the carbon reduction funds

1:19:35providing for 80% of the cost of both projects.

1:19:39We used local funds for 20% on

1:19:44the project highlighted in yellow.

1:19:46The one in green

1:19:48is on MoDOT right of way, and MoDOT covered 10% of

1:19:52the local match on that one. So we appreciated that

1:19:56partnership with them. You can see also a

1:20:00sidewalk extending to the south. That connects to

1:20:03a bus stop on Glenstone, so another helpful

1:20:07connection.

1:20:09Anyway, all in all, a great project.

1:20:12Excited to bring it forward. We do have, I believe, as was

1:20:16mentioned earlier, another project coming soon

1:20:20that will redo the intersection of National and Sunset,

1:20:24but it will also bring

1:20:26the trail from the existing

1:20:29trail connection there at McDaniel Park and

1:20:33connect to this project. So two

1:20:37projects coming, building trails.

1:20:39I will mention also, we are rebuilding the signal

1:20:43infrastructure there at the mall entrance

1:20:47on Sunset as well. Old infrastructure just needed to be

1:20:51replaced, and so that's included as well.

1:20:56Questions? Council Member Lee.

1:21:01I just have a comment. You already said this, but I just wanted to

1:21:05praise you guys

1:21:07leveraging our dollars where we're spending 20% and

1:21:11acquiring 80% federal funds, and on the other one,

1:21:1410% with state and federal covering 90.

1:21:19That's such a good way for us to get these trails in,

1:21:24where we leverage those dollars, and I appreciate you guys going after them the way

1:21:28you did.

1:21:28Thank you.

1:21:30Council Member Adebayosi.

1:21:32Thank you, Mayor. And when you zoom out on this particular couple of

1:21:35projects and the one you mentioned,

1:21:38connecting that to McDaniel Park and the remainder of South Creek

1:21:42Trail, huge benefit for the residents that live on the east side of

1:21:46Glenstone to be able to traverse across there.

1:21:49Can you talk a little bit about that gap on the yellow line?

1:21:52Yeah. So what we're doing there is utilizing some existing

1:21:56trail that's still in good shape, and so that just

1:22:00helped reduce the cost of the project and-

1:22:03Yeah

1:22:03... and utilize-

1:22:04I just want to make sure for those following along online or in the-

1:22:07Sure

1:22:07... in the meeting here, that that's already in place.

1:22:09Well, thank you for bringing that up, because that is a good point.

1:22:14Other questions?

1:22:16Thank you very much. Are there any scheduled speakers?

1:22:20No, sir.

1:22:22Then the public hearing is declared closed.

1:22:25So we'll first take the

1:22:28bill to be held over. Does that need a vote or just ask for

1:22:32absence of objection?

1:22:34Just absence of objection is fine.

1:22:35Is there any objection to holding over council bill

1:22:372026-221 to the next council meeting?

1:22:42Seeing none, that bill is held over.

1:22:46Now, are there any comments from members of

1:22:50council? Sorry.

1:22:52Seeing none,

1:22:54council, please vote. Take the roll on council bill

1:22:562026-222.

1:23:03Horton?

1:23:04Aye.

1:23:06Jensen?

1:23:06Aye.

1:23:07Hardinger?

1:23:08Aye.

1:23:08Carroll?

1:23:09Aye.

1:23:09Lee?

1:23:10Aye.

1:23:11Adebayosi?

1:23:12Aye.

1:23:12Hosmer?

1:23:13Aye.

1:23:14Mc gull?

1:23:15Aye.

1:23:15Schrog?

1:23:16Aye. Council bill passes. The other council bill is held over

1:23:21until the next meeting. Ms. Carter, we're going to read items 13.3

1:23:25and 13.4 together. Those are council bill

1:23:282026-223 and council bill

1:23:302026-224.

1:23:33Council bill 2026-223, a special ordinance approving the plans and

1:23:37specifications for the Martin Luther King Jr.

1:23:39Bridge maintenance and rehabilitation project, accepting the bid of KCI

1:23:43Construction Company for the construction of the project in the amount of

1:23:46$596,164.24,

1:23:51authorizing the city manager or designee to enter into a contract with such bidder,

1:23:55and declaring this ordinance qualifies for approval in one reading

1:23:59pursuant to section 2.16 subsection 25 of the

1:24:02city charter. Council bill 2026-224,

1:24:08a special ordinance approving the plans and specifications for the Grant Avenue

1:24:11Viaduct maintenance and rehabilitation project, accepting the bids of

1:24:15KCI Construction Company for the construction of the project in the amount of

1:24:18$965,913.28,

1:24:23authorizing the city manager or designee to enter into a contract with such bidder,

1:24:27and declaring this ordinance qualifies for approval in one reading pursuant to

1:24:30section 2.16 subsection 25 of the city charter.

1:24:40Good evening, Mayor-

1:24:41Good evening

1:24:41... and members of council.

1:24:43Excuse me.

1:24:44My name's Andrew Smith. I'm a professional engineer in the streets division, and

1:24:47I'm the project manager for these projects.

1:24:49In 2024, the City of Springfield and the Missouri Highway and Transportation

1:24:52Commission entered into a service transportation block grant program

1:24:56agreement for an 80/20 cost share for the improvements to the Grant Avenue Viaduct

1:25:00and the Martin Luther King Jr. Bridge for nearly $3 million.

1:25:03The final project includes expansion joint replacement, deck repair, and an epoxy

1:25:07overlay with an estimated combined cost of $2.8 million.

1:25:11Five bids were received for this project, and the low bid was

1:25:14$1,562,077.52 from

1:25:18KCI Construction Company.

1:25:20The city's 20% cost share would be

1:25:22$312,415.50, funded from the

1:25:26eighth cent transportation sales tax fund.

1:25:29The other 80% will be reimbursed by the state.

1:25:31And I'm here seeking approval to award that little bit.

1:25:36Any questions from members of council for staff? Councilman Jensen?

1:25:39Yes, thank you. I drive both of these almost every day, and they

1:25:43definitely need this work. I'll echo Councilman Lee's comments earlier about just

1:25:47praising city staff,

1:25:49yourself, and others that make this possible to reduce the cost that our

1:25:53citizens have to carry for these types of projects.

1:25:57Just a question on timing. I assume they're not both going to be done at the same

1:26:01time, right?

1:26:02That is correct. They each have an eight-week window in which they can be shut

1:26:05down.

1:26:07Not at the same time.

1:26:08Awesome.

1:26:09Only one at a time will be allowed to shut down for the four-week period.

1:26:12All right. Thank you, sir.

1:26:13Mm-hmm.

1:26:15Any other questions?

1:26:17Does the clerk have any scheduled speakers?

1:26:19No, ma'am.

1:26:21Then the public hearing is closed.

1:26:23These bills qualify for one reading and will be voted on separately tonight.

1:26:30Any comments from members of council?

1:26:35Council members, please vote on council bill

1:26:372026-223.

1:26:41Horton.

1:26:42Aye.

1:26:43Jensen.

1:26:44Aye.

1:26:44Hardinger.

1:26:45Aye.

1:26:46Carroll.

1:26:46Aye.

1:26:47Lee.

1:26:47Aye.

1:26:48Adeyosi.

1:26:49Aye.

1:26:50Hosmer.

1:26:51Aye.

1:26:51Mc gull.

1:26:52Aye.

1:26:53Schrag.

1:26:56Measure passes. Council members, please vote on council bill

1:26:592026-224.

1:27:02Jensen.

1:27:03Aye.

1:27:04Hardinger.

1:27:05Aye.

1:27:06Carroll.

1:27:06Aye.

1:27:07Lee.

1:27:08Aye.

1:27:09Adeyosi.

1:27:10Aye.

1:27:11Hosmer.

1:27:12Aye.

1:27:13Mc gull.

1:27:14Aye.

1:27:14Horton.

1:27:15Aye.

1:27:16Schrag.

1:27:17Aye.

1:27:19Council bill passes.

1:27:22Council bill 2026-225.

1:27:31Council bill 2026-225, a special ordinance authorizing the city

1:27:35manager or designee to accept federal grant funds in the amount of

1:27:38$4,261,000 from the Missouri Department of Natural

1:27:42Resources through the Clean Water State Revolving Fund

1:27:46Emerging Contaminants grant to fund the Northwest Wastewater

1:27:49Treatment Plant Foam Fractionation Project and to enter into the

1:27:53agreement to carry out the grant amending the fiscal year

1:27:562026-2027 budget of the Department of Environmental Services

1:28:00in the amount of $4,261,000 for design and

1:28:04construction, and declaring this ordinance may be passed in one reading pursuant to

1:28:07Section 2.16, subsection 25 of the city charter.

1:28:12Good evening.

1:28:13Good evening, Mayor and council members.

1:28:15I'm Ron Petering, Assistant Director with the Environmental Services Department.

1:28:19So this project is

1:28:21named the Northwest Treatment Plant Foam Fractionation Project.

1:28:25What that is, is using a nano

1:28:28foam technology to remove a family of man-made

1:28:32chemicals, generally called PFAS,

1:28:35from the wastewater stream. That's a topic that's been getting

1:28:40increasing amount of national attention over recent years due to

1:28:44potential concerns on effects on the environment and

1:28:48on human health.

1:28:49And so,

1:28:51this project will remove

1:28:54a very high percentage of that from the wastewater stream.

1:28:58It will then destroy that to where it can be safely disposed of.

1:29:02So,

1:29:04this project previously received council approval in 2024

1:29:08to apply

1:29:10with the Missouri Department of Natural Resources on an

1:29:12emerging contaminant grant,

1:29:17which we did, and in 2025 to appropriate funds to proceed

1:29:21with the design.

1:29:22The project has made its way through design.

1:29:25We've received bids recently, so now we're about ready to go to

1:29:28construction.

1:29:30So the good news is that we were ultimately successful with that grant

1:29:33application,

1:29:35and thus the purposes of this ordinance tonight is to formally

1:29:39accept that grant offer from MDNR and also

1:29:44to approve an associated budget adjustment reflecting the receipt of those

1:29:47funds.

1:29:49Now, the ordinance is written to accept a grant amount of

1:29:52$4,261,000.

1:29:56At the time we made the application, that was the estimate of total project cost.

1:30:01But Section 4 of this ordinance also allows flexibility

1:30:05for the city to

1:30:07ultimately accept up to

1:30:08$5,113,200

1:30:12if needed for the project and if additional funds were to be offered by

1:30:16MDNR.

1:30:18Currently, based on the engineering contracts that have been completed and

1:30:22construction bids in hand, the expected project cost will

1:30:26now be approximately

1:30:27$4,636,000.

1:30:31And in discussions with MDNR in recent days since the

1:30:35receipt of the construction bids,

1:30:37they have shown a willingness to adjust the grant to cover the entire

1:30:41cost of design and construction.

1:30:44So thus, we now expect to be successful in receiving at least

1:30:48$4,636,000 in

1:30:52grant funds. And again, this ordinance accommodates that outcome.

1:30:56So,

1:30:58just in conclusion, we've had some good news for several council

1:31:02bills here on grants.

1:31:04Between this grant and the one that we had before you,

1:31:08I think a month ago, for the Group 8 sewer

1:31:12rehabilitation,

1:31:14this is now $8 million

1:31:16of grant money that the department's successfully been

1:31:20able to deliver

1:31:22on some projects. So we want to, I think, acknowledge the hard work of

1:31:26our staff. That's not Just luck. That takes a lot

1:31:30of skill and dedication in creating some

1:31:34compelling

1:31:35grant applications that

1:31:38stand out in a competitive environment.

1:31:41And I also want to acknowledge

1:31:44MDNR in administering these funds and just

1:31:48our partnership that we have with that

1:31:51state agency. So with that, happy to answer any questions you have.

1:31:55Any questions for staff?

1:31:59Council Member Hosmer.

1:32:01Ron,

1:32:02could you explain these,

1:32:05dumb it down for me, but

1:32:07Sure

1:32:07... the science behind the foam fractionation project.

1:32:12Does that just

1:32:14adhere to the PFAS and then you-

1:32:17Essentially, it is

1:32:21using very, very small, what is referred to as nanobubbles

1:32:25to,

1:32:28sort of like a bubble bath in a way, only very tiny bubbles

1:32:32that

1:32:33increase the surface area that's available.

1:32:36And then

1:32:37the PFAS,

1:32:39the way they're made,

1:32:41these manmade chemicals have a part of their chemical structure

1:32:45that will attach to the surface of that, and then

1:32:49that surface

1:32:50foam can be skimmed off and essentially separates

1:32:55that

1:32:56from the wastewater stream. And then we can take the

1:33:00concentrated foam, and we can

1:33:03modify that to where we can then safely dispose and

1:33:07destroy that.

1:33:08So you basically skim the foam

1:33:12with the PFAS and then make it inert, or how do you-

1:33:16Yes. Yes.

1:33:19Well, we first treat it with sort of a conditioner, and then it goes through an

1:33:22ultraviolet light process to

1:33:26break it down into a compound that

1:33:29isn't hazardous, and then we can safely

1:33:33dispose of it after that.

1:33:34And then secondly, is there any way for us to monitor

1:33:38who is adding that to our wastewater?

1:33:44Well,

1:33:48that's difficult.

1:33:50Every

1:33:51business, every household, theoretically, is

1:33:55adding some amount to it because PFAS is everywhere,

1:33:59and so

1:34:01every user of the sewer system is discharging a certain amount.

1:34:06We have, with our industrial users around town,

1:34:10done some sampling processes with them

1:34:15recently, over the last several years, to

1:34:19identify what levels any of those might be contributing,

1:34:24and we've had some discussions where we've found some

1:34:28levels to try to bring those down.

1:34:33We've also looked at some of our waste haulers that haul in to us.

1:34:37We've monitored

1:34:38several of those and

1:34:42have taken some steps to phase a few of those out,

1:34:46actually, from continuing to contribute to our waste stream.

1:34:51Thank you.

1:34:53Council Member Adegbile.

1:34:55Thank you, Mayor. And just following on Council Member Hosmer's

1:34:58question,

1:35:01you mentioned industrial uses may be contributing to this.

1:35:04You mentioned the haulers maybe bringing waste that's got that.

1:35:08It's my understanding that it's also in asphalt-based parking lot

1:35:12sealers and things like that.

1:35:16And I thought I had read or seen somewhere where some of the

1:35:20organizations in our city have

1:35:22stopped using the material that includes the PFAS in their parking lot sealers.

1:35:26Is that something that we have looked any further into as to how we

1:35:30could reduce the amount that goes in our system as a result of that kind of

1:35:34use?

1:35:35Sure.

1:35:39I'm blanking standing here today on the acronym.

1:35:42I think we're talking about two different things.

1:35:44Okay.

1:35:45The parking lot sealer

1:35:47has

1:35:48got a different compound in it.

1:35:52It's not PFAS, but it's another-

1:35:54So this process doesn't remove that.

1:35:58Doesn't necessarily remove that.

1:35:59Okay. Thank you.

1:36:00But to your question on that topic-

1:36:02Yeah

1:36:02... yes. Our department's

1:36:07been monitoring that, and we have had some programs of education

1:36:10with

1:36:13parking lot

1:36:14refinishers and pavers in the area.

1:36:18Some of them,

1:36:20we have successfully, they voluntarily moved to a product

1:36:24that is not as

1:36:27concerning. And so we've had some success with

1:36:31that.

1:36:33But yes.

1:36:35So I'm mixing up my acronyms, sounds like.

1:36:37And I'm sorry.

1:36:38That's okay.

1:36:38I'm standing here, and I'm kicking myself that I can't pull the-

1:36:41That's all right. Thank you

1:36:41... other one out of my head right now, but yeah.

1:36:45Any other questions for the speaker?

1:36:50Thank you very much.

1:36:50Okay.

1:36:51Before we begin the public hearing, I'm pleased to report that the

1:36:55internet is back on, and so if any member of council has not

1:36:58logged in, please do so now, and we will start voting

1:37:02back on the computer system. And also to speakers that are

1:37:06speaking in the public hearings, now the screens are back on, and so

1:37:10the timing will be done by the screens and not manually by the clerk.

1:37:15We'll begin the public hearing now. Does the clerk have any scheduled speakers?

1:37:18No, sir.

1:37:19Then the public hearing is declared closed.

1:37:22This bill qualifies for one reading and may be voted on

1:37:25tonight. Are there comments from members of council?

1:37:31Seeing none, council members... What? Not yet.

1:37:40Just bear with me here.

1:37:47That went faster than I thought. Sorry about that.

1:37:54We could sing it. Should we do this vote by roll call?

1:37:56Yes.

1:37:57Yeah, let's do it by roll call. Please call the roll.

1:38:04Hardingher

1:38:06Aye.

1:38:06Carroll.

1:38:07Aye.

1:38:08Lee.

1:38:08Aye.

1:38:09Adegbayasti.

1:38:10Aye.

1:38:11Hosmer.

1:38:12Aye.

1:38:12McGull.

1:38:13Aye.

1:38:13Horton.

1:38:14Aye.

1:38:15Jensen.

1:38:15Aye.

1:38:16Schrag.

1:38:17Aye. Council bill passes.

1:38:22Ms. Cotter, we're going to do the next bills

1:38:2614.1 through 14.6 together for the purpose of

1:38:30the public hearing. That's council bills

1:38:332026-226,

1:38:37227, 228, 229,

1:38:41230, and 231.

1:38:44Yes, sir. Council bill 2026-226, a general

1:38:48ordinance repealing Special Ordinance 23765,

1:38:5224472, 25460, and

1:38:5527410, and amending Chapter 2, Article

1:38:594 of the city code by adding thereto a new Division 9 for the purpose of

1:39:03codifying the governing provisions of the Police Civilian Review Board and

1:39:07bringing the board into compliance with the city charter.

1:39:10Council bill 2026-227, a general ordinance repealing

1:39:14Resolution 9214 and 9749, and amending

1:39:18Chapter 2, Article 4 of the city code by adding thereto a new Division

1:39:2213 for the purpose of codifying the governing provisions of the

1:39:26Enhanced Enterprise Zone Board.

1:39:28Council bill 2026-228, a general ordinance

1:39:32amending Chapter 2, Article 4 of the city code by adding thereto a

1:39:36new Division 10 for the purpose of codifying the governing provisions of the

1:39:40Citizens Advisory Committee for Community Development.

1:39:43Council bill 2026-229, a general ordinance repealing

1:39:47Resolution 10874, amending Section

1:39:512-271 of the city code, and amending Chapter 2,

1:39:55Article 4 of the city code by adding thereto a new Division

1:39:5812 for the purpose of codifying the duty of the Citizens Tax

1:40:02Oversight Committee and codifying the governing provisions of the Citizens

1:40:06Advisory Board.

1:40:08Council bill 2026-230, a general ordinance repealing

1:40:12Resolution 8900, 9104, and

1:40:169838, and amending Chapter 2, Article 4 of the city code by adding

1:40:20thereto a new Division 11 for the purpose of codifying the governing

1:40:24provisions of the Tree City USA Citizens Advisory Committee.

1:40:28Council bill 2026-231, a general ordinance

1:40:32amending Chapter 38, Article 2 of the Springfield City Code for the purpose of

1:40:35modifying the certification and registration requirements of

1:40:39certain crafts, trades, modifying the membership of the Building Trades

1:40:42Examination and Certification Board, and more clearly defining the board's role

1:40:47and duty to hear appeals of order, decisions, or determinations

1:40:51made by the city, and applying the requirements of the city's construction

1:40:55codes.

1:40:56Good evening.

1:40:57Good evening, sir. Good evening, council. My name is Nick Woodman.

1:41:00I'm an assistant city attorney with the city's law department, and I will be

1:41:04presenting the six council bills which relate to the city's recently

1:41:07completed boards and commissions audit, which is why the titles of

1:41:11these bills are covering a lot of territory.

1:41:17Before I get into the substance of these bills, I wanted to go over the background

1:41:21of how they arrived at city council tonight.

1:41:24As you all know, on March 9th, 2026, at the mayor's request, the city

1:41:28council referred a board and commission audit to the Plans and Policies Committee.

1:41:32This referral asked that the city clerk

1:41:35produce a compliance report of the city's boards and commissions for that

1:41:39committee's review. The audit reviewed whether each board's composition and

1:41:42structures complied with the city charter, any applicable state laws, and

1:41:46any relevant city code provisions.

1:41:49The audit report was then presented to the committee at its August

1:41:5318th

1:41:55meeting.

1:41:56And after the staff presentation of the report, the committee requested that

1:41:59ordinances be drafted to carry out some of their findings of that report.

1:42:04These six draft ordinances were then presented to the

1:42:07Plans and Policies Committee at its September 15th meeting, and they were then

1:42:11voted out of that committee and brought forward to this council for review this

1:42:15evening.

1:42:18So,

1:42:20as you have guessed from the titles,

1:42:23these bills are covering a lot of territory.

1:42:25But

1:42:26really what they're doing is we have two categories of amendments that we're asking

1:42:30the council to make here.

1:42:32One

1:42:34bucket of amendments

1:42:36are what we're describing as corrective bills.

1:42:39These are bills that are actually making an amendment to a city

1:42:43board to bring it into compliance with a city charter provision.

1:42:47We have two boards that are at issue with this type of amendment.

1:42:51That's going to be the Police Civilian Review Board and the Building Trades

1:42:55Examination and Certification Board.

1:42:57Both of the corrective actions with these bills are bringing the board's

1:43:01membership into compliance with City Charter 15.5.

1:43:05We have another category of bills tonight, and there are four of

1:43:09these, which are codification bills.

1:43:11So,

1:43:12as Ms. Cotter and I were reviewing the

1:43:16various city boards, some of the boards, their

1:43:20governing authorities are not codified in the city code.

1:43:22They're found in resolutions or special ordinances.

1:43:25And so, a best practice recommendation made by the board audit

1:43:29report was to codify these provisions into city code,

1:43:33and that's the second category of bills.

1:43:38So, with our corrective bills,

1:43:41we have

1:43:43We have two of these, and the main purpose of each, as I said already, is to set

1:43:47the board's authorized membership at nine.

1:43:50City charter section 15.5 generally requires that all city

1:43:53boards have nine members. There are some exceptions to that, none of

1:43:57which apply to the Police Civilian Review Board or the Building Trades Examination

1:44:01and Certification Board.

1:44:04So what I'm attempting to show here is the corrections that

1:44:08the bills are going to be making. So with

1:44:11Council Bill 2026-226,

1:44:14currently the Police Civilian Review Board, its authorized

1:44:18membership is set at seven,

1:44:20we'll be bringing that to nine to comply with city charter section 15.5.

1:44:25Additionally, this bill will codify the board's existing governing

1:44:28provisions into Division Nine of Chapter Two, Article Four.

1:44:33And then we have the Building Trades Examination and Certification Board, which is

1:44:37a little bit more complicated.

1:44:39That board is currently authorized at 11 members.

1:44:42We're going to be bringing that down to nine to bring it in compliance with the

1:44:44city's charter.

1:44:46We are also asking council to consider

1:44:49relaxing some mandatory appointment requirements that apply to

1:44:53this board.

1:44:54Currently, the code requires council to appoint building trade professionals to

1:44:5810 of the 11 seats. This bill would relax that requirement to

1:45:02four of the nine members.

1:45:05It was noted in the audit report that these mandatory appointment

1:45:08requirements have made it difficult to appoint

1:45:12replacement members to this board when we have members that term out or resign.

1:45:17Additionally, in between

1:45:20the Plans and Policy Committee's

1:45:22request that staff prepare amendments for this board,

1:45:26we learned that the Department of Building Development Services was already working

1:45:30on some amendments to this board.

1:45:32So we've co-opted their ordinance and added our board audit

1:45:37recommendations to that bill.

1:45:41And the amendments that the Building Development Services Department were

1:45:44making is to spell out some of the board's role on its appeals and

1:45:48certification decisions.

1:45:51I'm going to have to rely on Mr. Google, if the council has questions about those

1:45:54items, to weigh in on those.

1:45:59And then our last category of council bills that we have

1:46:02are these four codification bills.

1:46:05So what I'm attempting to demonstrate in this slide is the

1:46:09various boards that currently have governing provisions that are found either in

1:46:13resolutions or special ordinances, which are not contained within the city code,

1:46:17and where we'll be placing them in Chapter Two, Article Four of the city

1:46:21code.

1:46:23This best practice recommendation is based on trying to clarify

1:46:27where these boards' governing authorities are located and have a more

1:46:31transparent board process if staff, the public,

1:46:35members of council have questions about what governing provisions apply

1:46:39to certain boards, that they're just found in the city code, like any other

1:46:43ordinance about a city board.

1:46:48With that, I know it seems like we're

1:46:51making a lot of changes.

1:46:53We're really not. We're bringing two boards into compliance with Article

1:46:5715.5 of the city charter,

1:47:01and then we're attempting to codify and place in the city code the

1:47:05various governing provisions of some of these uncodified boards.

1:47:07And then this is a summary slide

1:47:10to demonstrate what all these are doing for council.

1:47:14And

1:47:16with that, I'm available if the council has any questions about these items.

1:47:20Questions from council, Council Member Horton.

1:47:22Thank you very much, and thank you to the Plans and Policies

1:47:26Committee for all of the work on this. Thank you to city staff.

1:47:31I actually wanted to zero in on one of the council bills

1:47:35that is specifically

1:47:372026-226, specifically

1:47:41referring to the Police Civilian Review Board.

1:47:44In the final report that has been

1:47:48attached to

1:47:50this bill,

1:47:53one of the provisions, or one of the recommended

1:47:56actions is to,

1:47:59of course, to correct membership from seven to nine.

1:48:02It codifies governing provisions in Chapter Two.

1:48:06But I wanted to zero in on that third part for a specific reason, and

1:48:10the third part says to repeal prior

1:48:14special ordinances-

1:48:15Yeah

1:48:16... related to the Police Civilian Review Board.

1:48:19And

1:48:21I just wanted to bring up that I'm hoping

1:48:25that a complete repeal of all prior

1:48:28special ordinances does not include

1:48:32Ordinance 2022-249,

1:48:36which eliminated mandatory citizens' police

1:48:40academy training before a citizen could

1:48:44apply for the Police Civilian Review Board.

1:48:48And at the time, the issue was

1:48:52individuals who wanted to apply had to commit to 30 hours

1:48:57over multiple weeks, and it was determined that

1:49:01that posed as a significant limitation in

1:49:05terms of the pool of candidates that could be considered

1:49:09for the Police Civilian Review Board.

1:49:12So I'm hoping, as we're doing a clean sweep here, that

1:49:16we're paying attention to that particular ordinance, and that

1:49:20ordinance is not necessarily being repealed.

1:49:24So can you answer whether or not-

1:49:26I can

1:49:26... this particular-- I can give you the specific ordinance if you need to do some

1:49:30research on it.

1:49:31No. What I can say about that is when we're talking about the repeal, we're

1:49:35taking the existing special ordinances that

1:49:39created the Police Civilian Review Board, which there are three,

1:49:42and we're repealing those and placing their provisions in the city code.

1:49:46So what is going to be adopted in the city code are the provisions

1:49:50of Special Ordinance 27410, which was the

1:49:54most recent special ordinance that governs the Police Civilian Review Board

1:49:59And if you look at line 98 of that council bill,

1:50:03you'll see that there's a subparagraph E that does require members to

1:50:07attend a training program, such as the Citizens Police Academy

1:50:11sponsored by the Springfield Police Department, or such other training as may be

1:50:15approved by the city manager. Those are the current provisions that govern

1:50:19membership on the Police Civilian Review Board.

1:50:20So, we're not going back to some 30-hour training program that may

1:50:24have existed. We're just adopting

1:50:27special ordinance 274110 into the city code.

1:50:30Could you repeat what you just said about-

1:50:32Yes, ma'am

1:50:32... the training? Because, again, my understanding is that

1:50:37that particular training is not a requirement for

1:50:40consideration on the Police Civilian Review Board, no longer

1:50:44since that ordinance

1:50:462020-249.

1:50:52Yeah. All I can say on that is the current language that

1:50:56appears at line 98 of that council bill.

1:50:58Okay.

1:50:59It reads, "Members shall attend a training program, such as a Citizens Police

1:51:02Academy sponsored by the Springfield Police Department, or such other training

1:51:07as may be approved by the city manager." That is existing language that

1:51:11governs the Police Civilian Review Board.

1:51:12Are we able to make sure that those two are not conflicting with one

1:51:16another?

1:51:18We can, yeah.

1:51:18Because it

1:51:20sounds a bit vague in terms of what you're reading.

1:51:24And what is clearer to me is ordinance

1:51:272020-249.

1:51:30Unless someone repealed that particular ordinance,

1:51:34that's no longer a requirement. And what I'm hearing is a little bit

1:51:38of vagueness in terms of there is some sort of

1:51:41training required, but is it the actual

1:51:46Citizens Police Academy? So I just wanted some clarity.

1:51:49You can get back with me on that. Wanted to make sure that those two are not

1:51:53conflicting.

1:51:53Okay. Yes, ma'am.

1:51:55Thank you.

1:51:56Council Member Jensen.

1:51:58Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, sir.

1:52:00I had a question about council bill

1:52:032026-231, the building trades.

1:52:07Yeah.

1:52:07I just wanted to make sure I understand properly.

1:52:09So,

1:52:11we're going from a board which required

1:52:1490 some odd percent of membership to

1:52:19be licensed in the field down to four out of

1:52:23nine, or a minority are required to hold licensure.

1:52:26Yes.

1:52:27At the same time, we are also giving this board new

1:52:31authority to hear and

1:52:34hear appeals on code interpretations from

1:52:38city staff with the ability to overturn those

1:52:42decisions.

1:52:43Yes. So if I could-

1:52:46Please

1:52:46... speak to that a little bit. So the existing

1:52:50code provisions on that require two persons certified

1:52:54or licensed in the electrical field, two persons certified or licensed in the gas

1:52:58fitting trades, two persons certified or licensed in the mechanical field, and two

1:53:01persons certified or licensed in the plumbing field.

1:53:04And then we have an additional requirement that brings it to 11, which are two

1:53:08building contractors, one from the residential field and one from the commercial

1:53:11field.

1:53:12What we're attempting to do in that particular council bill that you're referencing

1:53:17is drop those two persons down to one. So it'd be one from each field.

1:53:21We're also adding language, and this will be at line 106 of that council

1:53:25bill.

1:53:26Or, sorry, it'll be

1:53:28line 113. And it'll read, "While not required, it is the

1:53:32preference of the city council that to the extent practicable, the members of the

1:53:35board, other than those required under those mandatory requirements,

1:53:41be drawn from among persons certified or licensed in the electrical, gas fitting,

1:53:44mechanical, or plumbing trades and persons who are building contractors." So

1:53:48while it won't be a mandatory requirement that

1:53:53those additional members be from those fields-

1:53:56Mm-hmm

1:53:56... it is a preference that's stated in the code.

1:53:58Right. Okay. I just wanted to make sure I understood that properly.

1:54:02And the thinking on that was that, so that board is going from 11 to nine

1:54:06members, and we're not having to do anything to remove

1:54:10anybody from that because it currently doesn't have enough members to meet

1:54:14the nine, I believe. So,

1:54:16the thinking on that was to try to make it

1:54:19easier to appoint replacements when those become available.

1:54:22Yeah. We experienced that at the Public Involvement Committee as

1:54:26well with a number of our positions.

1:54:29It just seems odd to me that when we're giving a board

1:54:33the power to overturn decisions of staff, that

1:54:38not even a simple majority of the board is required to

1:54:42have experience in the field.

1:54:43Sure.

1:54:43But I understand the preference is to try and respond to-

1:54:47Well, that's a policy decision for the council.

1:54:49If the council wants to go that way on that, we'd be more than happy to prepare an

1:54:52amendment.

1:54:53Thank you. And if I didn't say it at the beginning, thank you for all of your work

1:54:57on this, and thank you to the city clerk's office, because I know this was

1:55:01a lot for you all to go through.

1:55:05Other questions?

1:55:09Thank you very much. Are there any scheduled speakers?

1:55:12No, sir.

1:55:13So the public hearing is declared closed.

1:55:17City council will vote on each bill separately

1:55:20on October 25.

1:55:25Now we'll begin petitions, remonstrances, and communications.

1:55:30Here are a few reminders of the rules. Please adhere...

1:55:34Actually, before I read this, are we going with the timer or

1:55:37manual?

1:55:42I think.

1:55:42Okay, we'll be going with the timer we think, so please bear with us.

1:55:47Please adhere to the time constraints.

1:55:48Remember, this is a time for council members to hear residents' comments.

1:55:52Please make your comments to city council only, not to members of staff or to the

1:55:56member of the audience.

1:55:58Your time allotted will be reflected on display screen, we think, in the front

1:56:02of the room. Please observe the rules of civility and decorum, or

1:56:06you may forfeit your right to address us this evening.

1:56:09The clerk will please call the first person to address the council.

1:56:13Abby Stowe

1:56:25Hello.

1:56:26Good evening.

1:56:26Good evening. Thank you guys for this opportunity to talk to you.

1:56:30So obviously, four city council seats are up for grabs in

1:56:332027, and that leads to the question of who's going to run.

1:56:37Now, the requirements are pretty simple.

1:56:39You just have to be a registered Springfield voter who's lived

1:56:43here for two years, location dependent, depending on the seat,

1:56:47and you also have to have enough disposable time and

1:56:51money to essentially work an unpaid part-time job

1:56:54for four years straight. Now, technically, Article 2, Section

1:56:592.3 of the city charter doesn't state that exactly, but that's kind of what

1:57:03it gets at. Springfield is the third largest city in

1:57:06Missouri, and yet we are one of the very few that pays

1:57:10our council members nothing. Now, just for clarification

1:57:14and for comparison here, Kansas City allots

1:57:17$81,000 for each of its council members while the mayor

1:57:21makes around $160,000.

1:57:24Lee's Summit, smaller in both population and budget, compensates the mayor

1:57:28$40,000 and council members $15,000.

1:57:32Fayetteville council members earn around $20,000, while the mayor earns

1:57:35$35,000. Now compare this to Mayor Schrag's

1:57:39$200 a month, approved by voters in

1:57:421986.

1:57:44Now, the result of this is that our city council can't reach its

1:57:48full potential as a representative and a receptive

1:57:52institution in our city. Membership is essentially placed

1:57:55behind an implicit paywall in which only citizens who

1:57:59have this type of disposable time and income to run

1:58:03are able to hold a position in this office, and that leaves

1:58:07Springfield worse off. An unrepresentative local

1:58:11council means that it cannot be made up of ordinary workers.

1:58:15People in hourly, inflexible jobs can't

1:58:18realistically take such a demanding role, with

1:58:21oftentimes meetings during the day.

1:58:24And that type of exclusivity means that issues that impact most of

1:58:28Springfield can go unheard, or at least unprioritized when it's

1:58:32not at the top of your agenda in your personal lives.

1:58:36That's not necessarily a negative, it's just simply unrepresentative.

1:58:40Rent goes up again and again for most of Springfield while paychecks stall,

1:58:44and that's the reason why people come to Springfield in the first place.

1:58:48It's cheap. That's why I stayed. I grew up in Springfield, and I only

1:58:52stayed for college, quite frankly, because it was cheap.

1:58:55That was my best option. But obviously, if that's no longer the

1:58:59case, I might end up leaving. That reality of

1:59:03trying to attract and maintain Springfield talent becomes

1:59:06impossible if the type of things that keep people here aren't

1:59:10being recognized or prioritized by city council.

1:59:14And just beyond the cost of living, I've loved living in Springfield because I like

1:59:18the culture and I like doing this and coming here and being heard.

1:59:23But truly being heard is difficult to achieve when

1:59:26council membership is treated as volunteer work.

1:59:30Honest, you guys don't get paid. It's hard to expect an email or

1:59:33phone call back in a timely manner when you are paid $0.

1:59:39Now, weirdly, I do think it's the perfect time for such an amendment

1:59:43because

1:59:45increasing perceived accountability and promoting a healthy

1:59:48democratic council might just be key for increasing public

1:59:52trust and

1:59:54letting Springfield know that they too can run for a position like

1:59:58this instead of just being on this side of the podium.

2:00:01And the money isn't out of reach, obviously.

2:00:03I'm flanked by people who are making more than $100,000 a year, some of them

2:00:07$300,000 a year, which is fine. But it means that if we can

2:00:11prioritize certain things, we can certainly prioritize this.

2:00:15And

2:00:16also, this isn't a new thing. Council Member Jensen, I know that you've

2:00:19personally expressed your discontent with

2:00:23how

2:00:25council membership should be a realistic opportunity for people in every part of

2:00:29the city, but that ends up not being the case.

2:00:31Council Member McGill, you expressed a similar thing and said that

2:00:35having

2:00:37council member salaries could result in healthy competition.

2:00:40Obviously, you ran unopposed for two elections straight.

2:00:43So we're in a pretty big city. That's kind of strange, and it's

2:00:47because we get paid $0. Zero.

2:00:51So Neil, you're on your way out. If this seems like something that might be

2:00:54controversial, might as well go out with a bang.

2:00:58Ultimately, democracy isn't something that exists by default.

2:01:01It's something that we have to invest in.

2:01:04Being able to prioritize that is something that can lead to more public

2:01:08trust, to more accountability, to more responsiveness, and ultimately, just a

2:01:11better city. Because I love Springfield, and I want to love

2:01:15staying here.

2:01:17But ultimately, that comes with the asterisk of knowing that I'll be heard.

2:01:21So I think that it is time that Springfield invested at least a little bit in its

2:01:25leadership. Thank you.

2:01:27Thank you very much.

2:01:29Council Member Jensen.

2:01:31Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Stowe.

2:01:33I feel a lot of

2:01:35what you suggested, I'll be honest with you, I really

2:01:39doubt that this council would put forward what you're talking about as

2:01:43a charter change. I

2:01:45do somewhat doubt that this council is willing to put forward a

2:01:49request to voters to compensate ourselves.

2:01:52I

2:01:55hear what you're saying about messaging it.

2:01:57I don't think it's something that we can do.

2:02:00I would suggest that you look at the citizens

2:02:04process for putting issues on a ballot.

2:02:06It's certainly something that you can suggest.

2:02:10The other thing I would ask is whether you think

2:02:13this body has built up enough trust and goodwill with

2:02:17the community to pass such a thing that would require a popular

2:02:21vote.

2:02:22I think with enough messaging and with enough education and with enough

2:02:26communication, like with what I'm doing right now,

2:02:29I think so. Because ultimately, any issues that people have with city

2:02:33council, they could fix by being on the other side.

2:02:36But it's not possible, because there's only so many

2:02:40people who can take off of work during the day.

2:02:43And ultimately, I understand also the hesitation with

2:02:48not having enough public trust to do this right now.

2:02:50That's why,

2:02:52Council Member McGull, you're on your way out, might as well just try.

2:02:56And with the citizen petition, that's also possible.

2:02:58But ultimately,

2:03:00you'll see eventually if there's enough public trust, because it would have to be

2:03:03voted on eventually. The easiest way to get it voted on and on the ballot

2:03:07is through this body. And I could obviously gather a bunch of

2:03:11signatures, too, but that's

2:03:13a lot of work.

2:03:15I'd be interested in, and not tonight, but, if you'd like to reach out your

2:03:18thoughts on how to increase accountability along with compensation.

2:03:22So, thank you.

2:03:25Councilor Brad DeYarste.

2:03:27Thank you. And,

2:03:28to tag onto your comments that Councilman Jensen has made in

2:03:32previous, I also will echo a comment we heard

2:03:36at one of our council workshops,

2:03:40which was not only the representation side of the situation, which you explained

2:03:44very nicely, but it's also at some

2:03:48point, if I have to do this in addition to my, quote-unquote,

2:03:52"day job,"

2:03:54my time's limited.

2:03:56But if this was my day job, guess where we would all be every

2:04:00day? In a building, in an office,

2:04:02getting more things done. So, I think there's two

2:04:06sides to that equation. One is representation, the other one's being more efficient

2:04:10at our work.

2:04:12That's what I think I tried to speak on with in terms of

2:04:15responsiveness. Again, it's hard to expect an email or a call back when

2:04:19you are paid $0 per the city charter.

2:04:23And also, just in general, if you call the clerk's

2:04:27office, you reach the clerk. You can't reach any member of the city council

2:04:31because you guys don't have normal working hours, because you are not salaried

2:04:35members of the city government, and that's not how the city clerk or the city

2:04:38manager is treated. It's a very unique position that you guys are the ones that we

2:04:42elect as Springfield voters, and yet it's the one

2:04:46position,

2:04:47the nine positions that we invest in the least as Springfield

2:04:51citizens. It's a strange dichotomy there.

2:04:56Thank you very much.

2:04:59Next speaker, please.

2:05:00Donovan Nivens.

2:05:06Next speaker, please.

2:05:10Mitchell Budd.

2:05:24Good evening.

2:05:25What's going on, guys?

2:05:27Man,

2:05:28so the first two times I talked to you all,

2:05:31I was just reading a piece of paper.

2:05:33So, it's like,

2:05:35actually speaking to you all today is

2:05:37a first for me, believe it or not.

2:05:41And also, I came to a meeting, not the last meeting, but the meeting before that,

2:05:45and I was just going to let you guys know that,

2:05:49well, I

2:05:51had to take two buses to get here.

2:05:54And then the meeting ran for like four hours.

2:05:57I had to ride my bicycle about 11 miles home

2:06:01in the middle of the night. So,

2:06:03I was a little upset when I left, but it's

2:06:06situational. More upset with the situation than with you guys.

2:06:10In fact, on whatever this lady was talking about, I wouldn't do your

2:06:13job

2:06:15for any amount of money. So,

2:06:17I have no

2:06:17interest

2:06:22in doing that. So, I do appreciate you all taking the time to do

2:06:26this stuff. But,

2:06:28anyway, I came here today

2:06:31to talk to you all about

2:06:35two different safety ordinances. Okay?

2:06:39The first one I want to address, I read a news article

2:06:44in 2018,

2:06:46written in 2018, that said it is illegal to go fishing in the pond

2:06:50at Doling Park

2:06:52because it is

2:06:55too dangerous, and a kid might step on a fishing hook.

2:07:02When I was a kid growing up, there was a beautiful pond, probably two

2:07:06miles from my house,

2:07:10and

2:07:12one of the highlights of my childhood was fishing in that pond.

2:07:17So, the first thing I'm going to recommend is that you all find somewhere in the

2:07:21budget here for an expansion to the pond at Doling Park

2:07:25to make it accessible for catch and release fishing.

2:07:31I believe this would not only add a significant improvement to the

2:07:35quality of life of the people that live in my neighborhood,

2:07:40but would essentially pay for itself because I believe it would also increase

2:07:44property values in the area.

2:07:47Now, the second safety ordinance

2:07:51I came to address is the Springfield Pedestrian Safety Ordinance

2:07:55that went into effect also in 2018.

2:08:00This ordinance was essentially created because somebody was sitting on a

2:08:04traffic median

2:08:06that was about,

2:08:08I don't know, two and a half, three feet wide.

2:08:11Okay? So, I do believe there was a very real safety

2:08:15concern with the median that this person was standing on or sitting on.

2:08:22However, there's a traffic median next to Walmart on Kansas Expressway that

2:08:27I like to use to express my First Amendment rights

2:08:30in the way I see fit.

2:08:34In fact, I believe that playing an acoustic guitar with no amplification and

2:08:38singing songs

2:08:40in a public forum

2:08:42is arguably freedom of speech in its purest form.

2:08:48To address the safety side of the situation,

2:08:52I want to point out that there is a sidewalk

2:08:55right next to this traffic median that is six feet wide,

2:09:00okay?

2:09:01And when I ride a skateboard

2:09:05down that sidewalk, there's no barrier between the sidewalk and the road

2:09:09either.

2:09:10So when you're riding a skateboard on the sidewalk, assuming you're in the middle

2:09:13of the sidewalk,

2:09:15you're only three or four feet away from flying out in the middle of the street and

2:09:18getting hit by a car.

2:09:23Now, again, I've addressed

2:09:27another-- The only place in the city I've been allowed to play my music

2:09:31is downtown, which I do like going downtown.

2:09:37However, a friend of mine was killed in February,

2:09:41approximately 75 feet away from where I perform downtown,

2:09:45and there are safety concerns associated with being there.

2:09:52But that night after the bars closed

2:09:54and the police cleared out, I walked up the street,

2:09:58and I looked at his blood on the sidewalk, and the next day

2:10:02I went back downtown

2:10:05because I love what I do, and my family is dependent on my tips.

2:10:10So I have no desire to get you to agree with the way that I

2:10:14express my First Amendment rights.

2:10:17I only believe that I should be able to express them without facing

2:10:21criminal charges.

2:10:24And I

2:10:27have been in court for

2:10:30two years. Actually, my trial date for a ticket I received in

2:10:342024-

2:10:35If you could just finish your sentence.

2:10:37Oh.

2:10:37We're on time.

2:10:37Excuse me.

2:10:38I wasn't watching you, but finish your sentence, please.

2:10:39Sorry. Yeah. So

2:10:422024 to now, I've been arrested seven times, received nine

2:10:46citations. And so I do believe that you could probably pay for

2:10:50the pond expansion with the amount of money you've spent trying

2:10:54to prove that playing an acoustic guitar and singing songs isn't considered a

2:10:58constitutionally protected form of free speech.

2:10:59Thank you very much for coming.

2:11:01Yeah.

2:11:01Thank you very much.

2:11:02No.

2:11:02Next speaker, please. Thank you.

2:11:04You guys have any comments?

2:11:06Nothing?

2:11:07Thank you very much.

2:11:08All right, guys. Have a good one.

2:11:11Chris Albert.

2:11:22Good evening.

2:11:23Hello.

2:11:25I'm here because I'm complaining about the billing for CU,

2:11:29very confusing and lack of actual payment

2:11:33information.

2:11:35The situation came out of the fact that around end of June, my

2:11:39AC went on the blink.

2:11:45It wasn't putting out as much air as it should.

2:11:47My bill went up and everything like that. So we got that fixed.

2:11:51This was in late June. The bill was high.

2:11:53In order to catch up, I started paying every week to catch up with small payments.

2:11:58I also couldn't pay the full bill because I only got paid

2:12:02once a week and lived paycheck to paycheck.

2:12:06But I couldn't understand why my bill was so high after

2:12:09making the payments, and it just kept going this way for the last

2:12:13three months.

2:12:15That's the story. I finally got a shut-off notice and tried to get the money on the

2:12:19day it was due. I went to CU office to pay $75,

2:12:23but it wasn't enough. I ran home, found my electricity off, so

2:12:27I went and got more money, though I couldn't work with them.

2:12:31I was told my electricity was turned back on

2:12:35because I made a partial payment, yet I paid them another

2:12:38$100 so that everything would be copasetic.

2:12:42And they said it was

2:12:44going to go for a deposit. And I said, "What deposit?

2:12:48What do you mean a deposit?"

2:12:50They showed me a printed sheet that took $50 and

2:12:54transferred money. And on that sheet, that computer sheet, it says

2:12:58T-R-A-N-F-F, which means

2:13:02transfer. It doesn't say deposit, it says

2:13:06transfer. And I asked, "Well, what does that mean?" They said it was

2:13:10going for the deposit. I asked, "What?

2:13:13What deposit?" They showed me a printed sheet that they took $50

2:13:17and transferred the money without telling me, without asking me,

2:13:21without even showing it on the bill that

2:13:25I got

2:13:26here

2:13:28monthly.

2:13:30They showed me a printed-- They also did this in June for $100

2:13:34and didn't inform me of that.

2:13:37The only way I found out that they gave me was because of a computer

2:13:41readout. On the readout, it states transfer, which I just

2:13:44explained. I

2:13:46also saw many LPC, which is called late payment

2:13:50costs.

2:13:51At that particular point, and I've done this all deal, I

2:13:55drove up a trouble with $10 recon charge twice, 20

2:13:59bucks. LPC was $160

2:14:03that you don't-- And what it says here-- Well, we'll get to that.

2:14:07And then a deposit on hand, $150. So I'm out

2:14:10$330

2:14:12sitting over here that I can't pay my utility bill.

2:14:16And considering the economics of what we're going through today with all

2:14:19the prices and stuff, it makes it very difficult if you're on a

2:14:23limited

2:14:25Social Security and everything else to keep up with this.

2:14:28The

2:14:29mere fact that City Utilities doesn't inform you of

2:14:32these things, and that goes to this point of

2:14:36Other charges and adjustments. What does that mean?

2:14:40If I have a late payment charge, then that should say late payment

2:14:44charge instead of other charges and adjustments,

2:14:48which here was $26.

2:14:51I added those up and it came up to probably a cost of

2:14:54$150, $160

2:14:56if you go back to five, six, seven months that you know.

2:15:00I always thought, well, these are for fuel adjustments.

2:15:06And what they're doing is charging you 10% on the money you

2:15:09still owe, and then it just keeps going and going.

2:15:13This is some of the things that

2:15:18high loan payment companies do to you.

2:15:21It's always underneath or we're going to keep you...

2:15:24And what I figured out is CU is keeping you on their

2:15:28tab continually because you'll never catch up, especially if you're poor,

2:15:32especially if you're not making a lot of money.

2:15:34And I sat there and I thought, what about a family with four kids

2:15:38and both adults are working and everything?

2:15:41Your utility bill, especially for this summer,

2:15:45which one day it was 105 degrees for about five days.

2:15:49Well, I asked her about that. I said, "Well, you can't turn off the electricity if

2:15:52it's over 100." "Oh, no,

2:15:55it's 105 degrees." So basically, whoever

2:15:59sat around in their air-conditioning office decided, well, we're going to just do

2:16:03105. 105 degrees. Well, you sit in a house when your

2:16:06electricity is off at 100 degrees and see how you feel about it,

2:16:11even at that,

2:16:12three or four

2:16:14fans going on. So

2:16:16as a payment customer, I have the right to know what you're doing with my

2:16:20payment. Where does the deposit go?

2:16:23Is it to pay for your data center on Highway 65?

2:16:27Time is up, but if you want to finish your sentence-

2:16:29Okay

2:16:29... please.

2:16:29Well, obviously that person hasn't been experienced, but that's the

2:16:33deal. And according to this,

2:16:36what really is interesting, it said I owed

2:16:40$469-

2:16:41Sir

2:16:41... but when I went there, they said only $354.

2:16:43Thank you so much.

2:16:44Okay.

2:16:44Are there questions from members of council?

2:16:45Questions?

2:16:48Council Member Haas.

2:16:50Chris, if you could get us a copy of what you're complaining about

2:16:54because I agree with you. I think that City Utilities, as a city-owned-

2:16:57Yeah, for sure. In fact, I brought you copies.

2:16:59Okay. Thank you.

2:17:00If you would give that to the clerk, she will disseminate that.

2:17:02This is the computer readout they give you, and it

2:17:06goes back from school year.

2:17:07Okay.

2:17:08And like I said,

2:17:10if I had known what an LPC was, I would've gone

2:17:14more to get that paid for.

2:17:16Thank you s-

2:17:16I thought it was just a fuel adjustment.

2:17:17Thank you so much.

2:17:19He asked the question.

2:17:19Time has expired. I know.

2:17:21Thank you so much. Is there another question?

2:17:23I had a question of staff. Thank you.

2:17:24If you just hold on real quick, sir.

2:17:25Thank you, Mr. Albert.

2:17:28I've never seen this before. Are we able to refer matters to

2:17:32the CU Board for a report back to council like we do to

2:17:36other boards and commissions?

2:17:40I don't know that that is spelled out.

2:17:43I know that some

2:17:45boards specifically

2:17:47call that out. I'm sure there's some way we can structure something

2:17:51like that.

2:17:53I don't know what the particular vehicle is, but if you're wanting them to look at

2:17:56or study something, I'm sure there's a way to accomplish that.

2:17:59Sorry. The reason I ask is this isn't the first concern about billing

2:18:03practices that I've received, and so I'm trying to figure out what the best

2:18:07avenue for CU Board oversight

2:18:11in collaboration with the city. So, thank you.

2:18:13Well, under Missouri law statute, it says utility companies come under

2:18:17the corporation rules, and they are obligated to let us

2:18:21know how much money I'm paying or how much money I owe.

2:18:25That's a Missouri law statute. And the usury

2:18:28law,

2:18:30luckily, they can charge you 10%, which that's what City Utility does.

2:18:34They charge you 10%.

2:18:36Other questions?

2:18:38Thank you very much for your time.

2:18:42Next speaker, please.

2:18:43Rob Ibañez.

2:18:53Good evening.

2:18:53Good evening. I'm Rob Ibañez. I'm a tenant in the West Central neighborhood in

2:18:58Zone 3.

2:19:00I'm just here to express my disgust with this council for a shameful display of

2:19:03governance from the last meeting.

2:19:06Specifically, I'm referring to the handling of Council Bill

2:19:092026-208.

2:19:12Citizens took time to prepare statements to advocate for transparency

2:19:15regarding the usage of ALPR cameras, only to be silenced and turned away.

2:19:19Now, for months, I've watched community members attend these meetings to

2:19:23present research and express concerns over this issue, only to

2:19:27be dismissed and not taken seriously.

2:19:30That said, I do thank Council Member Jensen for actively listening

2:19:34and doing what he could to respond to the people, and I also want to thank Council

2:19:37Members Yatsé and Horton for their advocacy and

2:19:41support for the last meeting. But what could have been a moment to demonstrate

2:19:44meaningful leadership became an act of cowardice.

2:19:48Mayor, your decision to move this resolution to committee was disappointing

2:19:52but not surprising.

2:19:54Same goes to everyone who voted yes except for you, Council Member

2:19:57Hosmer. For someone who's been on this council for as long as you

2:20:01have, you know all too well that bills tend to die in committee.

2:20:05You've even said so on multiple occasions.

2:20:08So respectfully, your comments and your decision to vote yes

2:20:12contradict your previous stances and make you appear inconsistent.

2:20:17Now, sending bills and resolutions to committee is practically a death sentence for

2:20:21any progress. And if you don't believe me, right now, a tenant's right to

2:20:24council has been sitting in limbo in the Community Involvement Committee for

2:20:28nearly two years. It has only been brought up as an agenda item twice.

2:20:33Furthermore, January 2025 to September 2026,

2:20:3720 months. The committee has canceled their meetings 10 times.

2:20:42So for folks who are unaware, these are monthly hour-long meetings, so we're having

2:20:46to wait months at a time for any progress to be made.

2:20:49So if anyone believes for a second that these shenanigans won't occur in the Plans

2:20:53and Policies Committee, then you are sorely mistaken.

2:20:56I know that Council Member McCall chairs that committee, and I don't trust him to

2:20:59take this seriously. I can't even trust him to respond to his constituents

2:21:03seriously.

2:21:05And that's what it comes down to.

2:21:07This council continues to betray us in every way possible, and it's

2:21:11becoming really difficult to trust this governing body.

2:21:15You continue to show your true colors. You are not working-class champions.

2:21:19You are privileged capitalist pigs who continue to kowtow to your rich

2:21:22donors and prioritize profits over people.

2:21:26It is despicable. I am tired of this.

2:21:29And if anything that I said bothers you, then go ahead,

2:21:33prove me wrong. Otherwise, everything that I just said is gospel.

2:21:39Thank you very much. I don't know if there were questions. Question?

2:21:42Council Member Hosmer.

2:21:45Rob?

2:21:48Hey, I missed him. Never mind.

2:21:51Next speaker, please.

2:21:52Tanya Claiborne.

2:22:02Good evening.

2:22:03Good evening. I'm Tanya Claiborne, one of your friendly neighborhood

2:22:07socialists and proud member of the Party for Socialism and

2:22:11Liberation.

2:22:12I rise to speak in favor of a ban on data centers within the city

2:22:16limits and in favor of ending the city's contract with

2:22:20Flock Safety.

2:22:22Ironically, I also want to thank the majority of City

2:22:26Council for your opposition to seriously considering these measures,

2:22:30as well as your flagrant attempts to silence the people who disagree with you.

2:22:35You see, as a socialist party here in the belly of the beast, it is our

2:22:39task to point out that government at all levels under

2:22:43capitalism is not and never has been

2:22:46designed to be truly of the people, by the people,

2:22:50and for the people. Government under capitalism

2:22:54only serves the powerful moneyed interests.

2:22:58We could have asked for no better demonstration of

2:23:02this than the mayor and the City Council's refusal to

2:23:05allow working-class citizens to speak against the surveillance state.

2:23:10To top it off, you allowed two people who voiced outrage at this

2:23:14injustice to be arrested for doing so.

2:23:18Many expressed shock at this brazen display of contempt

2:23:22for concerned citizens. But as socialists, we

2:23:26understand that it is the role of government under

2:23:29capitalism to preserve the power of the ruling

2:23:33class and dismiss the complaints of the oppressed working

2:23:37class.

2:23:38You have further demonstrated your contempt for the people by

2:23:42presenting a marketing campaign for the acceptance of data

2:23:46centers in our midst

2:23:48when it is obvious that the vast majority of Springfieldians

2:23:52want no data centers in the city limits.

2:23:55Your contempt for the citizens of Springfield is further evident by

2:23:59your closed sessions, backroom deals, and by trying to

2:24:02silence our friends who wanted to speak out against Flock

2:24:06surveillance.

2:24:08The people are taking note. We won't simply just vent,

2:24:12forget, and move on. We will hold you accountable in

2:24:16every way possible, and we will continue to point out

2:24:21every example

2:24:23you give us that capitalism, with

2:24:27its government minions, is not meant to work for the interest of the

2:24:30vast majority of the people.

2:24:33We will also provide socialism as the alternative,

2:24:37under which citizen involvement in participatory democracy

2:24:41through neighborhood and workers' councils is essential

2:24:45to the functioning of a people's democracy as opposed to a

2:24:49hindrance under capitalist exploitation.

2:24:53Sure, we believe in radical ideas, such as

2:24:57that everyone deserves healthcare and a safe and

2:25:00livable home. Yes, that includes not having to

2:25:04live near the pollution and noise that a data center

2:25:08brings.

2:25:10But lest you think it is only we so-called radicals

2:25:14that are opposed to data centers and the surveillance state,

2:25:17these issues have united the people across political

2:25:21perspectives to a greater extent than I have seen

2:25:25in the past several years. The people will

2:25:29not be silenced. We will continue to oppose

2:25:33corporate greed in the form of data centers in our midst, and we

2:25:36will fight the surveillance state.

2:25:39Honestly, we don't need City Council's help to

2:25:43demonstrate that socialism is a superior system.

2:25:47We advocate for the needs of everyone.

2:25:49We believe in shared responsibility and shared benefits for

2:25:53all. Conversely, capitalism demands

2:25:57strict obedience to the ruling class and noninterference with the

2:26:01profits of the few at the expense of the needs of the rest of us.

2:26:06So yes, extend the moratorium and define what is meant

2:26:10by data centers. But anything short of a

2:26:13permanent ban on data centers that are large enough to do harm

2:26:17to the well-being of the people of Springfield

2:26:21is not acceptable. We will not

2:26:25relent. All of that being the case, we

2:26:28sincerely want you to do the right thing.

2:26:32We just understand that you are too beholden to the moneyed interest to

2:26:36do so.

2:26:38So either do the right thing for the people you purport to

2:26:42represent, or give us more examples

2:26:46that government under capitalism will continue to fail

2:26:50working people. Either way, we thank you.

2:26:54I'd be delighted to answer any questions.

2:26:57Thank you very much.

2:26:59There are no questions. Thank you very much for coming out.

2:27:02We will now move to the new business portion of the agenda.

2:27:06Ms. Cotter, please read items 16.1

2:27:10through 16.4 under new business.

2:27:14The Public Involvement Committee recommends the following appointment to the

2:27:17personnel board, Randall Allen, with term to expire March 1,

2:27:202029. The Public Involvement Committee recommends the following appointment to the

2:27:24Springfield Green County Environmental Advisory Board, Kelsey

2:27:28Inman, with term to expire October 1, 2028.

2:27:32The Public Involvement Committee recommends the following reappointments to the

2:27:35Springfield Green County Environmental Advisory Board, Barry Rowell and Nancy

2:27:39Williams, with term to expire October 1, 2029.

2:27:43Refer to the Community Involvement Committee the review of the 2026

2:27:47legislative priorities and recommendations for the 2027

2:27:50legislative priorities.

2:27:52Is there an objection to these

2:27:55referrals?

2:27:57I'm sorry.

2:27:58I don't know who was first. Council Member Jensen and then Council Member Horton.

2:28:02Not an objection, just a note for the legislative priorities.

2:28:06In the Finance and Administration Committee,

2:28:09we advanced a recommendation, it just hasn't come to council yet, to

2:28:13include requesting a set-aside allocation

2:28:16for LIHTC funds specific to the Springfield metro market. So, thank you.

2:28:21Council Member Horton.

2:28:23I just wanted to mention that

2:28:26we have an outstanding resolution, Resolution

2:28:30108-56, that pertains directly to

2:28:34legislative priorities. And that particular

2:28:38resolution was sponsored by three council members, Schrag,

2:28:42Hosmer, and Jensen,

2:28:44reaffirming the city of Springfield's commitment to local control

2:28:48and initiating a community discussion

2:28:51on the appropriate role of the local referendum in the

2:28:55implementation of Forward SGF. I am just simply

2:28:59asking that,

2:29:01in light of the fact that

2:29:04bills will be pre-filed in December,

2:29:10when we send this to committee, if this particular resolution

2:29:14can factor into

2:29:17the discussions that we have on legislative priorities.

2:29:21So I would defer to the chair, but I assume all council members can

2:29:24send requests

2:29:27to the CIC?

2:29:29Sure.

2:29:29Okay.

2:29:31Other comments? Any objection?

2:29:35Seeing none, these are referred.

2:29:40Ms. Cotter, please read item 16.5.

2:29:45Refer to the Community Involvement Committee the review of consent to annexation

2:29:48strategy and recommendations.

2:29:51Is there an objection to this matter being referred to the CIC?

2:29:56Seeing none, the matter is referred.

2:29:59Please read item 16.6.

2:30:04Refer to the Community Involvement Committee the review of the SGF Action Plan

2:30:08to address homelessness.

2:30:10Is there an objection to this referral?

2:30:12Council Member Horton?

2:30:13I do have an objection to this referral,

2:30:19without being able to make some comments on

2:30:23some of the components of this particular referral that I read.

2:30:27Okay. Since there's an objection, we will now move to see if there's a motion

2:30:31to refer it. May I have a motion to refer?

2:30:37We have a motion to refer. Is there a second?

2:30:40Second. Now, comments from members of council.

2:30:43Council Member Horton, do you want to start?

2:30:45Yes, I would.

2:30:46So there's

2:30:49four components of this particular

2:30:52referral.

2:30:54Two is just to kind of

2:30:56have a certain understanding before this goes to committee, and then

2:31:00the fourth is

2:31:04directly related to a component that

2:31:09should be added to

2:31:11this committee referral.

2:31:14And so I'll just begin by saying this, that

2:31:18concerning the first part of this referral, where it's talking about that

2:31:22there has been substantial public investment.

2:31:26With the exception of $7 million in substantial local

2:31:30ARPA

2:31:32funds, which is the American Rescue Plan Act funds appropriated by city

2:31:36council for capital projects for homeless services in

2:31:402022, up until fiscal year

2:31:432025, there actually was no

2:31:48local sales tax dollars. We had no skin in the game

2:31:52addressing core aspects of homelessness

2:31:55intervention programs, such as the Purposeful Day Center, jail

2:31:59diversion, nor the Crisis Cold Weather Sheltering.

2:32:03Our local revenue situation did change, though,

2:32:08though not close to the level of a substantial

2:32:11investment, when voters approved the

2:32:15three-cent recreational marijuana sales tax in

2:32:192024, thanks to Hosmer pushing to send

2:32:23the question to the ballot earlier that year.

2:32:26And since the voter approval, maybe $1.9

2:32:30million has been appropriated of local

2:32:33dollars over that short period. And

2:32:38not exclusively for just addressing homelessness.

2:32:42So local public investment just shy of $2 million is

2:32:46hardly a substantial investment given

2:32:50the post-pandemic impact of homelessness, particularly families

2:32:54with children and senior citizens over the age of 65.

2:32:58Historically,

2:32:59the default public funding has been exclusively federal

2:33:04With an average of 1.2 million annually, stretching those

2:33:08dollars to do it all,

2:33:11building

2:33:13maybe five affordable rental housing units a year,

2:33:16funding for several social service agencies,

2:33:21business loans, and home repairs.

2:33:23So that 1.2 million stretched across those particular

2:33:27categories alone. The normal HUD appropriations

2:33:31haven't kept up with

2:33:33pre nor post-pandemic demand

2:33:37amid federal policy shifts and a deepening

2:33:41housing shortage unnecessarily complicated by a

2:33:45restrictive RMX1 zoning map passed by this

2:33:49council this year, where missing middle housing is

2:33:52illegal to build across the vast majority of

2:33:56areas in zone one and three that were already

2:34:00community approved but voted against.

2:34:04I will also say on the topic of substantial investments for homeless

2:34:08diversion and prevention, in October 2024,

2:34:12council was recommended preventative solutions by Adam

2:34:16Bowdenek

2:34:18of CPO to the tune of 4 million, but we didn't take

2:34:21any action

2:34:24to make a substantial annual investment.

2:34:27That would've helped 800 households get housed

2:34:30or avoid eviction altogether. So perhaps

2:34:36if we send this referral to committee, we can understand that the number one

2:34:40cause of growing homelessness is eviction.

2:34:43But the second point that I would like to make is,

2:34:48if we send this to committee

2:34:50with a specific call on the referral that says a

2:34:54regional coordination on an assessment of

2:34:58how many people seek services in Springfield that came here

2:35:01from elsewhere,

2:35:03we really should understand that the majority of our chronically homeless

2:35:07population, particularly as of 2023, were

2:35:10long-term residents. We know this because it's

2:35:14documented

2:35:16by Jackie Railroad in the Daily Citizen, May 17, 2023.

2:35:20A survey of nearly

2:35:22280 homeless persons showed that 68%

2:35:26lived here for more than five years,

2:35:29with 30% of that percentage living here over

2:35:3325 years. Only 31% had

2:35:36lived here less than five years, with

2:35:40only 4.7% having lived in Springfield less than

2:35:4430 days, which is the definition of transient.

2:35:47On a personal note,

2:35:49I don't have an orientation to craft policy tied to budget

2:35:53decisions that will identify, profile, or exclude

2:35:57non-locals or transient persons from receiving help.

2:36:02I was a transplant from Florida 13

2:36:05years ago, and my family lived in a hotel until an

2:36:09apartment was available, and we received help from the Salvation

2:36:13Army's food pantry, realizing we had to choose between

2:36:17paying childcare so that we could go to work or

2:36:21groceries until we got paid the following month.

2:36:24We could pay for childcare and go to work

2:36:28because the food pantry was there, and

2:36:32as a transplant, and I wasn't from this region.

2:36:35The third point I would like to make is this committee referral

2:36:39calls for a recommendation on whether city funding should be

2:36:43limited

2:36:45to restoration-focused support.

2:36:48And I am hoping that city staff, if this goes to

2:36:52committee, will see the gaps in service and recommend

2:36:56the least restrictive criteria because federal

2:36:59HUD funds do not allow for flexible

2:37:03appropriations when we have service gaps in our system

2:37:07that need flexible funding. And furthermore, I would

2:37:10discourage mirroring local action based on the

2:37:14regressive federal shift. My final point is

2:37:18this.

2:37:20We want upstream solutions to homelessness, which is

2:37:24why I have high hopes for the quality of

2:37:28place care team

2:37:31of city staff,

2:37:33and I also find that Councilman

2:37:35Jensen's proposed strategy is

2:37:39rough right now. The proposed strategy is very promising.

2:37:43I also want to acknowledge that

2:37:46pertains to this topic.

2:37:49Former Nixa Public School Superintendent Steven Kleinsmith

2:37:53has sent city council two pieces of communications

2:37:58in the last three months calling for a convening of stakeholders

2:38:02on this topic of homelessness, and this referral could be

2:38:06a step in that direction.

2:38:08And so with all of those particular pieces

2:38:14spoken and on the record before we possibly send this

2:38:18to committee, I just wanted to make sure that we get some facts straight about

2:38:21this and to make sure

2:38:25that we are considering

2:38:27policy decisions that are not regressive and

2:38:31mirroring the federal shift. That's all I have to say.

2:38:34I'll yield the mic.

2:38:37Other comments?

2:38:40Council members, please vote by roll call.

2:38:43Is that correct?

2:38:45No, we're going to vote.

2:38:46Okay, we're going to do it by the computer.

2:38:49Please vote. We're voting on the referral, to send this referral to

2:38:53the Community Involvement Committee.

2:39:09The matter is referred to committee.

2:39:12Ms. Cotter, please read item 16.7.

2:39:17As per RISMO Section 109.230 subsection four, city

2:39:21records that are on file in the city clerk's office and have met the retention

2:39:24schedules will be destroyed in compliance with the guidelines established by the

2:39:27Secretary of State's office.

2:39:31Any objection?

2:39:33With no additional business to come before city council, may I have a motion to

2:39:36adjourn? We have a motion to adjourn. We have a second.

2:39:39Council members, please vote electronically on adjournment.

2:40:01We stand adjourned.

2:40:04Move it up a little

2:40:04lower.