2026-09-22 - Public Infrastructure & Utilities Committee

06:50Good afternoon. Calling to order the

06:52public infrastructure and utilities

06:53committee meeting for today, Wednesday,

06:55September 23rd. It's uh 3:30 p.m. Madame

06:59Clerk, would you please call roll?

07:01>> Alderwoman Boyd,

07:03>> present.

07:04>> Alderwoman Clark Hubard,

07:06>> here.

07:07>> Vice Chair Schwitzer,

07:09>> present. Alderman Devotey

07:11>> present.

07:12>> Alderwoman Cox Antui.

07:15Chair Browning

07:16>> present.

07:19>> Alderwoman Cox Antui. We have five

07:21present.

07:24>> Thank you. With that uh we will move on

07:26to approval of the minutes. I'll accept

07:28a motion to approve the minutes from

07:29Wednesday, September 9th, 2026.

07:33>> I move to approve the minutes from

07:34Wednesday, September 9th, 2026.

07:37>> Second.

07:39It's moved by the alderwoman from the

07:41first, seconded by the alderoman from

07:42the 13th. Madame clerk, please call

07:45roll.

07:45>> Alderwoman Boyd,

07:47>> I.

07:48>> Alderwoman Clark Hubard,

07:50>> I.

07:51>> Vice Chair Schwitzer,

07:52>> I.

07:53>> Alderman Devotey,

07:55>> I.

07:55>> Alderwoman Cox,

07:58Chair Brownie,

07:59>> I.

08:00>> Alderwoman Cox, we have five I votes.

08:05>> Thank you. With that, we'll move on to

08:08board bills for review. Uh we have uh

08:11members of our departments here today uh

08:14for um a couple different bills. And so

08:17we're going to move the agenda around to

08:19respect their time and do those bills

08:21first. Uh so we will start with board

08:24bill 75, which is my board bill, and I

08:28will hand over the chairmanship to my

08:30vice chair, Aldo One Schweitzer.

08:33>> Thank you, Chair Browning. We you are

08:35recognized on board bill 75.

08:57>> Thank you. Uh madam clerk if you would

09:00uh read the summary.

09:03Bora bill 75 introduced by alderman

09:05Michael Browning an ordinance pertaining

09:07to a neighborhood implementation

09:09trafficcoming system in the city of St.

09:11Louis and establishing procedures for

09:14constituent requests for trafficcomi and

09:17the process for implementation

09:19containing definitions an effective date

09:21and a severability call.

09:23>> Thank you. Uh so this board bill is uh

09:27something that we've been working on for

09:28the past two years. Uh we've been

09:30working closely with the departments and

09:33um I want to give a shout out to Caitlyn

09:35Smith, the mayor's policy adviser who

09:37worked on this when she was in my office

09:39and then continue to work on this uh in

09:41the mayor's office. And through that

09:44work, we've been able to um move this to

09:47a place where the departments feel like

09:49they can implement it. Uh they feel like

09:52we can really turn the page on how we do

09:54traffic calming in city. The whole

09:57purpose of this bill is to move the

09:59process of traffic calming into the

10:01hands of the professionals because it

10:03shouldn't matter who your older person

10:04is as to whether you have safe streets.

10:08It shouldn't matter how you

10:09[clears throat] get around in our city.

10:10You should be able to do so safely. And

10:13this is supposed to move this to a place

10:15where we're doing this in a data-driven

10:16way, a transparent way, and adding

10:20accountability into this process that

10:22doesn't require us to do a board bill

10:25every time we want to do a speed hump,

10:27but does make it so that uh this is

10:30democratized in a way that residents

10:32request traffic calming, neighborhood

10:34groups can request traffic calming. Uh

10:37older people will still be able to

10:38request traffic calming. uh but also

10:41even SOMPD captains who know the streets

10:45of their areas very well uh will be able

10:48to make requests. And this is all about

10:50trying to make sure that our streets are

10:53safe. And so we know that these are

10:55life-saving measures. These are

10:57scientifically proven to actually reduce

11:00crashes and save lives and prevent

11:03injuries. And we know that our streets

11:06have a long way to go. But with this

11:09bill, putting it into the hands of the

11:12department and starting to prioritize

11:13people based on who's most vulnerable on

11:16our streets, where are our streets most

11:18dangerous, we will be able to slowly but

11:24reliably make our streets safer for

11:26everybody who uses them. So, I'm happy

11:29to take any questions, but I also want

11:31to acknowledge uh both the streets

11:33department and the uh board of public

11:35service are here and are uh able to

11:38speak to this bill and speak to the work

11:40that's gone into this bill to get it to

11:42the point that it is. So, uh John or

11:44Kyle if or Andrew if if any of you would

11:47like to say something or the mayor's

11:48office, anybody's welcome to come up to

11:51this microphone uh and explain just

11:53everything that we've done to try to

11:54make this as good as it can.

11:58And if they're good to answer questions,

11:59that works, too. So, with that, I'm

12:01happy to answer any questions.

12:03>> Thank you so much. We'll go through

12:05members of the committee for questions.

12:07Alderman Boyd.

12:11>> Yes. Uh, thank you, uh, Alderman

12:14Brownie. And I'm sorry I missed your

12:16call. I don't know what happened because

12:18usually we connect. I don't see the

12:21problem with the bill. The only concern

12:23that I have and I spoke to uh the

12:25mayor's office earlier in regards to

12:28that, you know, we can put things on

12:31paper and saying that, you know, we can

12:33make sure things are happening, but I

12:36think when you start uh we starting to

12:39give it to the residents to request the

12:42speed bumps or whatever, what role will

12:44that auto person play in that? Are you

12:47taking them out of that scenario and

12:50they'll just have dialogue with the

12:52street department only when it comes to

12:54requesting those speed bumps and are you

12:57educating people on how the process will

13:00go?

13:01>> That's an excellent question. Uh right

13:03now every older person uses a different

13:06process to request traffic calming. Many

13:08of us use a petition that we then issue

13:11to residents where in my case I asked

13:13that 51% of the people who live on a

13:16block sign this petition. It does a

13:18couple things. It lets people know that

13:20traffic call me might be coming to their

13:21block. It lets people say, "Hey, maybe I

13:24don't want the speed hump in front of my

13:25house, so it lets people speak up

13:27there." Or it lets people just refuse to

13:29sign if they really don't want that on

13:31their block. Uh but with each other

13:34alter person doing a different process

13:36there are disperate results across the

13:38city. We end up with wards where the

13:41streets are more dangerous for people to

13:42navigate because for whatever reason

13:45that older person might not be as versed

13:47in traffic calming or street

13:49infrastructure as the next. We as older

13:52people cannot possibly be experts in

13:54every single subject that touches our

13:56wards. And it's really important that we

13:59do defer when possible to the people

14:01that do have this experience. But we

14:04specifically didn't want to cut all the

14:06people out of this process because at

14:08the end of the day, no one or this is

14:11how it should work at least that no one

14:12knows their ward's needs better than the

14:14people who represent that ward. And so

14:17we recognize that expertise that the

14:19audit person brings and that's why when

14:21this goes into effect next year. Uh it

14:24will start with all the people really

14:27approving the funding request. So you'll

14:29still be involved in that process in

14:31that if there's a request that comes

14:33through and uh say you're you know being

14:36asked to fund it out of word capital you

14:38could look at it and say you know I

14:39don't I don't have money for that this

14:41year. um put it on next year's list or

14:43you'll be able to control the funding

14:45mechanism. Eventually, we'd love for the

14:47department to have dedicated funding for

14:49this so that we really are just doing

14:51this on a systemic basis and addressing

14:53the most dangerous areas of our city

14:55with the expertise that is present in

14:57our departments. Uh but all the people

15:00are very much still involved in this

15:02process and will still be notified uh

15:05about what requests come through their

15:07way. Uh the other really exciting thing

15:10about this bill is that it includes a

15:12very transparent online map. Uh I'm

15:15excited about this because for the first

15:16time people are going to be able to see

15:17where requests are being made in our

15:19city. They're going to be able to see

15:21what the department recommends an

15:23estimated construction date and if for

15:26whatever reason the request is denied

15:28either by the experts in our department

15:30uh or the funding is denied by an older

15:33person, they'll be able to see that that

15:34was denied. and the reason why this will

15:37bring a level of transparency, but it'll

15:40also bring some accountability. So, say

15:42Alderwoman Boyd, you've made a request

15:44to the department to install some

15:47traffic calling in in your award, but

15:49it's been several months and you've seen

15:51no movement on. You can check on that

15:53online map and you can see when it's

15:55supposed to be installed. And if you're

15:57not seeing it, you'll have that

15:58accountability to be able to call the

16:00department or we'll be able to we

16:02absolutely have to get the department in

16:04front of this committee and say what's

16:06going on. Why aren't these being

16:07installed in an equitable way across the

16:09city? But one thing I really focused on

16:12when we were working on this bill is we

16:14really wanted to make sure that just

16:17because where you live in the city, it

16:19it doesn't matter really. We shouldn't

16:21let that determine your level of safety.

16:23We and we really want to make sure that

16:25the street treatment that's happening is

16:27the correct one. Uh speed humps are

16:29effective at reducing speed. That is a

16:32fact. But they're not always the right

16:35tool. And depending on where you're

16:37putting it, say it's in the middle of an

16:38intersection, you're not going to put a

16:39speed hump in intersection. But there

16:41might be a different street treatment

16:42that's available. And that's where

16:44throwing it to the department really

16:46does put it in the hands of experts that

16:47will be able to find the best solution

16:49for that uh that situation.

16:53Thank you. I just I I guess um and like

16:57I said as I have spoken to the street

17:00department and my LA uh myself and my LA

17:04and I spoke to the mayor's office and so

17:06I guess I'm just hesitant because I keep

17:09hearing how these systems will be better

17:13but I don't I haven't seen it and that's

17:16what my frustration is. You know, it's

17:19hard for me to explain to residents if

17:22I've moved the dollars, I did what they

17:25asked me to do. I did the legislation,

17:28they put it, my staff put in city works,

17:31and then they followed through and

17:33nothing happens. That's my frustration

17:36because I just feel like we need to make

17:39sure residents understand

17:42the time frame it's going to take. But

17:45some of the time frames Autumn and

17:47Brownie are extremely unacceptable. And

17:51so that's my frustration. Street

17:53department know where I'm coming from.

17:55They know what areas I'm talking about.

17:58And so that's what I don't understand.

18:01If we doing the processes and you all

18:03saying this is better, how is it going

18:05to change the process? And how will we

18:09know? Will the will the street

18:12department give you a time frame on when

18:15this project will start or approximate

18:19begin date? And so that's just my

18:21concern about that's why I'm hesitant

18:23about it. I don't want to sell my

18:26community a bill of goods and they

18:28nothing is delivered. So that's what I'm

18:30nervous about.

18:32>> And nor do I, older woman. I I think

18:35you're right to be skeptical uh coming

18:37into the history of this. You're

18:39absolutely right that this has not been

18:41done properly in the past and that the

18:44department hasn't had the proper support

18:46or the staff to necessarily do these

18:48well in the past. Uh but that is

18:51something that is exciting about the

18:53transition that we're in the middle of

18:55right now that we are moving towards a

18:57department of transportation that is

18:59going to be a real strengthening of the

19:02streets department to encompass safety

19:04into their responsibilities and really

19:06start to focus on how we can make our

19:08streets safer for everybody who uses

19:10them or how they choose to get around.

19:13Uh, I think the reason we have the

19:15process that we do right now with the

19:17board bills to make speed humps was born

19:20out of a place of exactly what you

19:23mentioned. You did all the right things

19:24and still wasn't happening. So all their

19:27people wanted a physical board bill to

19:29show their constituents saying, "Look, I

19:31did my part." But at the end of the day,

19:34that just adds in more bureaucracy, more

19:37process, and actually delays the

19:40implementation of some of these safety

19:41improvement measures. The online map and

19:44the transparency and reporting that's

19:46built into this bill is meant to replace

19:48that and allow not only you to see when

19:51the anticipated construction date is,

19:53but our residents as well. And that'll

19:56help build a lot of trust. So whether

19:57your residents bring you a request for

20:00traffic calming or they make it

20:01themselves or the neighborhood

20:03association in your ward decides to make

20:05that request, you'll be able to see it.

20:07You'll be able to see exactly the

20:09decisions that are being made around

20:10that. What kind of thing is recommended,

20:13what kind of thing will be installed and

20:14when it will be installed. And I think

20:16that is a huge step forward for our

20:18departments. I know they're excited

20:20about it. But if you would uh like to

20:22hear from them, uh Kyle, I think uh

20:25you'd be a good person to be able to

20:26speak to just how the department is

20:27viewing this. And I now see that

20:28Director Jackson has joined us. So

20:30Iologire

20:33Jackson, you've been involved in this

20:35bill as well uh and uh have extensive

20:38experience in other cities that you

20:39brought to us. And so if you'd like to

20:41say a few words, I'd like to invite you

20:43up here

20:46>> and please introduce yourself and uh

20:47your title forever.

20:50Thank you sir. Um good afternoon members

20:52of uh the board. James Jackson, director

20:54of streets department. As the alder

20:56person uh just shared with you, one of

20:58the key things that's going to happen

21:00with the streamlining of this process is

21:02the responsiveness which the alder woman

21:04is speaking to. Um, and we have taken

21:08great strides in our ability to reach

21:11out and connect with the residents when

21:13they send in their requests to ensure

21:15that the information is actually put in

21:17the system so they know who to go to and

21:20have a point of contact that can walk

21:22along with them as we move through the

21:24process of assessing whether or not a

21:26street hump is um appropriate in the

21:29locations that they're requesting. So we

21:32have every confidence that the um

21:34methods or the processes that we put in

21:36place will be beneficial to the city and

21:39be more responsive.

21:47>> Anything further, Alderwoman Boyd?

21:49>> No. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr.

21:52Jackson.

21:53>> You're welcome, ma'am.

21:54>> Thank you. Uh wonderful. Alderwoman

21:56Clark Huburn.

21:57>> Thank you. Thank you, Alderman Browning,

21:59for the work you've done on this and

22:01Caitlyn um here in this office and in

22:04the mayor's administration. I do um have

22:07seen your passion for projects like

22:09this. So, thank you. And director

22:11Jackson, thank you. When you talk about

22:12responsiveness, that that's like music

22:14to our ears down here. I do um want to

22:18ask just for the record and for people

22:19watching because we understand that that

22:22that first piece is us and then the

22:24responsiveness that you talked about

22:26director Jackson is on your end but the

22:28actual installation comes on the BPS

22:30end. So I would like just here for the

22:33record if BPS can come up and just tell

22:35us how they feel this will work faster

22:38or better um in going into this system.

22:41>> Absolutely. Uh John

22:46Good afternoon, committeemen. I'm John

22:49Kohler. I'm the planning and programming

22:52manager for the city's board of public

22:54service.

22:56And I've reviewed this bill that that

22:58Caitlyn and Alderman Browning created,

23:00and we've worked diligently over the

23:02past over a year now to fine-tune

23:06the language as you see it presented to

23:08you today.

23:11There is a transitionary period that

23:14this bill, even though it's effective

23:17July 1st of 2027,

23:21the Department of Transportation isn't

23:23fully active till, I believe, July of

23:262029.

23:29As you all know as alderman, BPS manages

23:33a lot of the the traffic calming

23:36initiatives, what types of projects we

23:39put out on the street. We manage the

23:41construction of the projects. So this

23:45language in this bill is a transition of

23:48the current process, but the way it's

23:52crafted is that streets will now take

23:55over ownership of the process, but will

23:59work with necessary departments

24:02like the board of public service to move

24:04forward with the assessment, the design,

24:09uh review and the construction of the

24:12project. So, we're in a transition mode.

24:15So, we support the language of the bill,

24:18but the specific process will be refined

24:23as we move forward throughout the

24:25transition period between now and July

24:28of 27 and then ultimately

24:32before the full transition of the the

24:35DOT.

24:37>> Thank you. Thank you. That's exactly

24:38what I wanted to hear and needed. I

24:41think we all needed to hear it work

24:42knowing that we're all working on the

24:44page for this um is what's going to make

24:46the difference. So, thank you Mr.

24:48Kohler. I want to correct myself. I

24:50endearingly call her Caitlyn all the

24:52time, but this is policy director Smith

24:55and she has proven that so many times.

24:58So, policy director Smith, thank you for

25:00the work that you've done on this. Uh

25:02and I don't have any more questions.

25:04fully supportive and madame clerk asking

25:07if you can please add my name as a

25:08co-sponsor to board bill 75.

25:11>> So noted.

25:13>> Thank you Alderman Clark Huard. Uh

25:15Alderman Devote.

25:18>> Alderman thank you for your work on this

25:20as well as policy director Smith and the

25:23remainder of the crew. Uh I just I I've

25:26got a just a schematic or a mechanical

25:29question just to make sure I understand.

25:31Alderman. Uh my understanding is that

25:34should this bill pass, there will

25:35actually be four ways in which

25:38trafficcoming measures may be employed.

25:41Uh through aldermanic request, I believe

25:44neighborhood organizations uh or a SID

25:47uh community improvement district,

25:50special business district if I remember

25:51right, uh also through a resident

25:54petition. Is that correct?

25:57>> Yeah. And I think the department will be

25:59uh figuring out in the transition period

26:01what that exactly look like because as I

26:03mentioned each other all the person has

26:04a different one right now. Uh but uh it

26:07is going to be as I understand it very

26:10much in the lane of uh some sort of

26:12petition that the residents will be able

26:14to gather and request it. Uh they they

26:17certainly don't want to make it so that

26:18just a single person could inate them

26:20with requests. Uh which we know would

26:23absolutely happen, right? some some

26:25eager person would go out there and just

26:27be like, "Yeah, I want my streets to be

26:28safer." Which we all do, but the key

26:31part of this is that even though there

26:33are four different places and the fourth

26:34one is the SoomD captain,

26:37>> correct?

26:37>> Um the key part of that is that no

26:39matter who's requesting it, it's going

26:41to the department and then being

26:42reviewed by the professionals there to

26:46decide the appropriate treatment to the

26:48street to make it safer. So, it's not

26:51necessarily what we do right now, which

26:53is we are given a button to install a

26:55speed hump. And so, we hit that button

26:57and we install a speed hump. And as a

26:59result, we have a lot of speed humps in

27:01this city. And they're not again very

27:04effective at reducing speed. Sometimes

27:06absolutely the right treatment for a

27:08street, but other times there's more and

27:11better ways to do this. and uh it would

27:15be great to be able to just get that

27:16expert opinion instead of constantly uh

27:19installing speed humps

27:20>> and to make sure we're we're all on the

27:22same page. The other component of course

27:24uh if this comes to paying for that uh

27:27that improvement and could you explain

27:30that process? Yeah. So eventually we'd

27:33like the DOT to have a dedicated traffic

27:36calming fund so that these types of

27:38requests can be made reviewed and

27:42installed based on what is needed and

27:44not based on political support. Uh but

27:48for now as we transition until the

27:50funding is there for that uh the request

27:53will go through the department and come

27:55back to the alder person with a request

27:57to fund that traffic calming. Uh at that

28:01time the alder person will decide

28:03whether or not they want to allocate the

28:05funding and uh you know the the downside

28:08of that is if you choose not to fund it

28:10it will go up on the website as a listed

28:12thing that wasn't funded. But as I

28:15understand, you'll have the ability to

28:16explain to people why it wasn't funded.

28:18For instance, you could say, "We're

28:20doing a whole traffic study next year

28:22that's going to redo this entire street.

28:23So, we're not going to do it this year.

28:25We're going to do it." But for whatever

28:28reason, we don't want politics to decide

28:31how people's like how safe people's

28:33streets are. And uh we don't want it to

28:37be the case that uh people feel like

28:38they have to be, you know, friends with

28:40their alderman to get traffic calming

28:42installed.

28:42>> Understood. Again, thank you for uh your

28:45work and the team's work on this

28:47project. And madame clerk, if you would

28:49add me as a co-spot,

28:52>> so noted.

28:53>> Thank you, Alderman Alderwoman Cox Anti.

28:58>> Thank you, Vice Chair. Thank you,

29:00Alderman Browning, for bringing this

29:02bill for us and for policy director

29:04Smith for for your work on it. Um, I'll

29:06[snorts] start by saying I I do

29:08certainly appreciate the spirit of why

29:09you're bringing bill here today. I think

29:11I agree with you and and hearing from

29:13our department leaders the importance of

29:16speed and executing these safety

29:17improvements for our neighborhood. Um I

29:19understand that a lot of efficiency can

29:21be improved by streamlining this work in

29:24the hands of people that have the

29:25knowledge and expertise to to make these

29:28calls and to assist the alderman and and

29:30making those determinations. So I

29:31certainly agree with you on on that

29:33component and I appreciate the work

29:34you've been doing with bringing the

29:36Department of Transportation forward to

29:38try to help in that process. Um I think

29:41I share um some of my colleagues

29:42questions just really wanting to

29:44understand mechanics of the impleation

29:46of this especially in the interim when

29:49um we don't necessarily have the

29:50department of transportation fully up

29:52and running or funding mechanis

29:54mechanisms determined. So my question uh

29:57builds a bit on Alderman Devote's

29:59question um trying to understand what

30:01the determination process would be. Um

30:04and looking through the through the

30:06board bill I understand you are

30:07repealing in entirety the three pre

30:09previous ordinances um that address

30:12speed humps. Is that correct?

30:13>> That is correct. And you know as you

30:16look at those ordinances that are being

30:18repealed, you'll see the history here.

30:20you'll see attempts at doing something

30:23similar to this in the past that never

30:25quite worked because as long as, and

30:27this is just to be frank here, as long

30:29as all the people control the funding

30:30for these things and it's not funded as

30:32a central tenant of our city to do, uh I

30:36think you're going to see some inequity

30:38and how it gets done. And I think that

30:40was the concern by people is that this

30:42was being done in an inequitable way.

30:44Some people were getting the speed humps

30:47in their ward and other people weren't.

30:48and it felt uh like that was hurting

30:51residents in neighborhoods that were

30:53already very you know ignored and

30:55disinvested. And so that I think failed

30:59in the past because they were trying to

31:01change a process without changing

31:03structure of department to be able to

31:05meet that process. And now with the DOT

31:08transition, we are working on changing

31:10that structure, putting in place the

31:12people and the processes that are going

31:14to be able to do this work. And so the

31:16policy will actually match the workforce

31:18that will be able to go out and do the

31:20work and make sure that we're doing this

31:22in an equitable way. But just in case we

31:25aren't, there's that transparency and

31:27reporting clause that is going to help

31:29us really see where this is being done.

31:32And I know there are residents in our

31:34city who will keep us uh really on task

31:38and accountable on this because they're

31:41going to study these maps and they're

31:42going to say, "Hey, I noticed that, you

31:44know, some wards aren't making as many

31:46requests and maybe they'll go up and try

31:48to organize people to make their streets

31:50safer." Or maybe they'll notice that,

31:52hey, this ward seems to be getting a lot

31:53of things installed whereas this ward

31:55isn't. And if that's the case, we have

31:57the ability to to talk to the

31:59departments, figure something out, and

32:00make sure that this is going in a way

32:02that everybody is getting fair

32:04treatment. Because right now, if you

32:07look at maps of where our city is most

32:10dangerous, especially for pedestrians,

32:12bicyclists, anyone not in a car or

32:14sometimes even people in cars, it looks

32:16like the rest of the maps of our city.

32:18It looks like an inequitable result

32:20really uh poorly laid out across our

32:23city where the neighborhoods that always

32:26don't get the investment aren't getting

32:27that investment either. And we don't we

32:29want to put an end to that. We want to

32:31make sure that you're safe no matter

32:32where you are in our city.

32:34>> Thank you for that. Um and and I again I

32:36I do appreciate like you said the the

32:38clarity and creating the transparency

32:40for for our residents. Alderman Devote

32:42called out sort of three ways you could

32:45request a speed pump either by petition

32:47neighborhood organization or even by the

32:48alderman. And I think having that um

32:50variety um is going to be very important

32:53for for the reason that you just claimed

32:55so that we have equitable access traffic

32:57calming measures. Um the the reason I

32:59bring up and again I just want to be

33:01clear for the record today, you know,

33:03what we're doing and the difference

33:05between the previous ordinances and what

33:07this ordinance will put into place is

33:09how that process will work. Um, and you

33:11mentioned in answering Alderwoman Boyd's

33:13question, you know, the intention is not

33:15to fully remove, you know, aldermanic

33:18participation in the process. There will

33:20still be um a necessary contribution if

33:23determined by the alderman for for

33:26allocating funding to the project if

33:28that is the way the project is going to

33:30be funded. Um, so I want to make sure

33:32I'm understanding that correctly.

33:33Looking at the previous ordinance, I

33:35think it's ordinance 71394 for any of my

33:38colleagues that are following along that

33:39actually the ward capital fund as a

33:42funding source. In your board bill,

33:44there is no mention of a requirement for

33:47a particular funding source, but there

33:49is a mention that the determination will

33:51be made across various departments and

33:53collaboration with various departments.

33:56Is your intention with that paragraph

33:57that that determination would include

34:00the cross collaboration between the

34:01alderman and department leaders?

34:04>> Yes. Uh, alderman are, you know, whether

34:07we like it or not, alderman are still a

34:08really important part of this process.

34:10We represent our constituents at the end

34:12of the day. As I said, we are the

34:14people, or at least we should be the

34:16people who know best what's going on in

34:17our ward and how best we can help it.

34:21And so, I didn't want to and we and

34:23nobody wanted to cut that important

34:25representative process. Uh but we also

34:28didn't want the other person deciding

34:30what treatment actually went down on the

34:32street because that's not really within

34:33our wheelhouse and we end up making you

34:36know sometimes some pretty poor

34:37decisions. So just like we make good

34:40decisions when we go out and do a bigger

34:42project this meant to make smaller

34:44projects fall under that umbrella of

34:46expertise. uh but it's absolutely meant

34:48to uh keep all the people still closely

34:52tied into this process and uh the

34:55funding mechanism I think we'll get to

34:59this a little more when we get to the

35:00next bill we're going to present which

35:02is alderman devotees uh is something

35:05that we're going to need to allocate

35:06over to the department over the next few

35:08years and so we'll be having

35:10conversations about where best to take

35:12that from where best to make sure that

35:14there is money available but Just to

35:17give an example, even if we did like

35:20something as small as $200,000

35:22uh to traffic hauling every year at

35:25three to$4,000 per bumpout, we're

35:27talking at least 16 intersections that

35:29you could do with $2,000.

35:32And if you could make every, you know,

35:35the top 16 most dangerous intersections

35:37in our city safer each year, eventually

35:40the most dangerous intersection in our

35:41city isn't going to be that dangerous at

35:43all. So this is meant to really get to

35:46addressing the need in our city in a

35:49systemic way that is uh prioritizing

35:52where people are getting hurt the most.

35:54And so the other way that we didn't

35:56mention here is that um one place that

35:59can instigate this request as well is

36:01the department of trans. So if they're

36:04looking at their data and they're saying

36:05this is a really dangerous spot in a

36:07city, we need to do something about

36:09this. then they can make a design and

36:11they can bring it to the alder person

36:12and say hey we need the funding for this

36:15and eventually we'll get to a place

36:17where they just do get funding to

36:19address the most dangerous places in our

36:20city every year. Uh because I really

36:23again I don't want this to be political.

36:25It's not political. Safety is not polit.

36:27It should be just a guarantee and we

36:29want to make sure that we're getting

36:30that way in an equitable way. But just

36:33in case we added accountability into

36:35this bill as well.

36:36>> Okay. Well, well, thank you for that.

36:38And I do think that that clarity and and

36:40explanation for why that's a big vague a

36:43bit vague in the bill is important. And

36:44if I'm summarizing what you said

36:46correctly, just to make sure I'm

36:47understanding, I think it by design

36:49knowing that as this gets built out,

36:51there may be flexibility what that looks

36:54like, but the intention is to keep the

36:56collaboration there and understanding it

36:58will take a variety of different

37:00departments and also automatic

37:02representatives working together to make

37:04those determinations depending on what

37:05the proposal looks like. Is that a fair

37:08summary? That's a fair summary. And it's

37:09it's always been our intention to build

37:11out the Department of Transportation

37:13over time, not to just have everything

37:15fall into place on July 1st, 2029, but

37:19to kind of step by step get us there.

37:21Because one push back we got from the

37:23public when we were doing the DOT effort

37:26was, why is it going to take until 2029?

37:28That's four, it was four years away at

37:30the time. And they were like, it

37:31shouldn't take four years for us to

37:33start seeing safer streets. And I

37:36assured them at the time and I think I

37:38am delivering on that assurance right

37:40now that we are going to be working on

37:43this piece by piece, putting in place

37:45the pieces as we go so that we can start

37:47seeing results as soon as possible and

37:49not just an arbitrary date far far into

37:52the future.

37:53>> Okay, understood. With that, alderman, I

37:55have no further questions. Again, I

37:56certainly agree with the spirit of this.

37:58I agree that, you know, safety shouldn't

37:59be political. Um, and with that, I

38:01request to be added as a co-sponsor as

38:02well to board bill 75. Thank you,

38:05Alderwoman. Uh, Alderman Aldridge, I

38:07believe you had some questions.

38:21I could just hold it because I'mma pass

38:22it back. Uh, first off, thank you

38:24Alderman Al or Alderman Browning and

38:28Chairwoman Schwitzer for even allowing

38:30me to speak, but thank you alderman

38:31Browning for uh, this piece of

38:32legislation. and I'm going to go a

38:34little different route and thank you

38:35madam uh policy director Caitlyn Smith

38:38uh for working on this. Um I know how

38:41committed uh both of you have been even

38:43before uh Caitlyn transitioned over to

38:45bigger and better things of working on

38:47policies to try to make our streets

38:49safe. Uh understanding that our streets

38:51are more than just individuals that use

38:52cars. We got to make sure that we make

38:54it safe for people who ride bikes and

38:56who walk through our city. Um and kind

38:58of change that uh narrative that um it's

39:01only meant for cars. So, I really do

39:03appreciate your work and one thing I

39:04know about you, Alman Browning, is uh

39:07you know, you really bring all the

39:09partners and players to the table. I see

39:10BPS, I see the streets department um to

39:13make sure that this is something um that

39:16as it moves forward hopefully has the

39:18the most impact. We never sometimes know

39:21with legislation until it actually is

39:23implemented, but if we don't do

39:24anything, we will, you know, not know

39:26how that's going to work out. So, um I

39:29really love the the the transparency uh

39:31element of the bill. I think it's

39:33important uh also for residents to know

39:36um exactly where speed humps are being

39:38uh placed and giving community a a voice

39:41at the table um outside of maybe an

39:44older person just want to install speed

39:45humps in certain locations um and not

39:48other locations or maybe want to install

39:51um a bunch of speed humps like a million

39:54dollars worth of speed humps right

39:55before like an election time, right? but

39:57making sure that those were always uh

40:00part of the process um in general. But I

40:04guess my question is as this transition,

40:08this seems to be that it would

40:09transition out of BPS hands into the

40:12street department hands. Am I correct

40:14there?

40:15>> Yeah. Elements will transition. I think

40:18uh part of the whole DOT transition is

40:21to have the streets department turn into

40:23something that's more comprehensive

40:25about how we get around our city. So the

40:29uh 2D I'm going to call it 2D elements

40:31of our street like paving maintenance of

40:33our streets. That's the streets

40:34department's responsibility right now.

40:36But under the DOT, they're also going to

40:38be responsible for people's safety as

40:40they get around incorporating all

40:42methods of travel. So, they will, I'm

40:46assuming, but this is something that the

40:47mayor's office can speak to a little

40:48more, uh, because they're they're the

40:50executive branch, right? They actually,

40:52uh, fulfill these bills and these

40:54policies. Uh, but I think they will be

40:57getting staff and people that are

40:58dedicated towards doing this work.

41:00That's how it works in other cities. And

41:02that's again where I think director

41:04Jackson brings a a wealth of knowledge

41:07uh, from other places that he's uh,

41:09really been a part of the transition to

41:11DOS and other cities. And so we

41:13appreciate the expertise that he's

41:15bringing in. You know, speaking of

41:16throwing to the experts, I think that's

41:19what we did when we tried to to write

41:21this bill is we really tried to work

41:22with the experts to design a system that

41:25looks like how other cities do it. When

41:27it works in other cities, we know it can

41:29work in our city. Uh if director

41:31Jackson, who is uh the director of the

41:32street department, don't know, I am uh

41:34one of the biggest fan of his down at

41:36the board because I've uh had the

41:39opportunity to see firsthand how uh

41:41intentional uh he has been about um

41:45changing and making things a little bit

41:48more efficient. uh even from stepping in

41:51during a a snow um era and just the way

41:55that he's been able to execute uh a lot

41:58of uh the necessary services that is

42:01needed the city. So a big fan and um

42:04always appreciate the work that our

42:05street department uh do the members the

42:07men and women they work very hard and

42:09they're underst staff. Um I guess um I

42:12my my question with asking that that it

42:15it transitioning from BPS is the street

42:17department. um is

42:21and I think you hit on it a little bit.

42:24What are those conversations and we're a

42:26little bit far out, but what are those

42:27conversations looking like um to ensure

42:30that as this process happens? I know the

42:34director is probably looking at all this

42:36and and changing stuff. But

42:37historically, uh when it it comes to the

42:40street department, you know, even if we

42:43look at like the 50/50 sidewalk, right?

42:45Um or we look at other things in street

42:47department. I it I'm I typically go

42:50through BPS because BPS tends to get it

42:53done quicker. Uh it's contracted out and

42:56unfortunately also because we are

42:58underst staff in the city of St. Louis

43:00when we do it in-house it takes a longer

43:03timeline to get it done. So, how are we

43:06ensuring that there's not going to be um

43:08a bottleneck? Um that I have seen

43:10historically from like our street

43:12department um when it come to

43:16making sure that when our streets are

43:18still getting repaved, which sometimes

43:19that moves a little slow um and that now

43:23we will add on the speed hump um to the

43:26streets department process. Yeah, it's a

43:28great question because there is a

43:30history there that I think needs to be

43:33addressed and that's why I was such a

43:36proponent for the Department of

43:37Transportation because I think there was

43:39a failure to recognize in the past that

43:41the very structure of the department was

43:43holding it back from being able to do

43:44some of the things were expecting of it.

43:47And when you looked at the charter, it's

43:49because they're not that wasn't their

43:51responsibility. It was maintenance that

43:52really was written paint and pavement.

43:55is mainly the responsibilities of the

43:57street department right now under the

43:58current charter. But when it transitions

44:00in 2029 to include the safety of people

44:03and the planning aspects, uh that's

44:05where I think we'll see intentional

44:08efforts to put in place staff that will

44:10be able to move this along. What I can

44:12say is our current system,

44:15we're not going to be worse than our

44:17current system, right? because we

44:18currently already request speed humps

44:21through the process of submitting a

44:23board bill, but then it goes to the

44:25department and then the department has

44:27to contract it out to get installed and

44:30we sometimes wait several months or if

44:33we submit that bill say uh in November,

44:36they might tell us this isn't happening

44:38until late spring. Uh and that's just

44:41weather dependent and other things like

44:42that. We know when paving season is when

44:44you know work like that can be done but

44:48right now the process does somewhat

44:51work. The main weakness of it is that it

44:54is again the older people the people who

44:57are not experts making these decisions

45:00uh and sometimes people do get locked

45:02out. There are wards with less traffic

45:04calming because you know the older

45:06person doesn't prioritize that. This

45:08isn't directed at any individual older

45:10person. This is meant to make equitable

45:12results for our entire city because

45:14that's how we should always be acting as

45:16a city. And uh so I think as I

45:20understand it and they can speak to it a

45:21little more, but um BPS will continue to

45:24help with this in the meantime until the

45:26street department is has the tools and

45:28the resources available to be able to

45:31handle this on their own.

45:32>> Thank you. Um

45:34>> Kyle, did you want to say something

45:35about that?

45:36>> Yeah, I' I'd love to have anything you

45:42Hello board. Um my name is Kyle Nelson.

45:44I'm the bicycle and pedestrian

45:45coordinator in the street department. I

45:46just want to give a little um context to

45:48your question. Um so we kind of do

45:50traffic calming in two different ways

45:51right now. One is really our speed hump

45:53process. Uh the speed humps like has

45:55been mentioned a lot go through

45:56ordinances but they eventually come to

45:58the traffic division to my desk. I sort

46:00of manage those and then once they get

46:02approved then we push it off to BPS to

46:04then finalize the construction. Um the

46:07other way which I think a lot of you

46:09have done is maybe orchestrating some

46:10bumpouts or some other piece of traffic

46:11calming which would just go straight to

46:13BPS. So I think a very important part of

46:15this bill is it's really taking those

46:16different forms of requests and

46:18funneling it to one desk. Um I think in

46:22the current layout would be closer to

46:23what the speed hump process is. Right?

46:25So we broaden out different pieces of

46:27the traffic calming toolbox um beyond

46:30the speed humps but the process would be

46:31closer to that subtracting the need for

46:34an ordinance. So the request would come

46:36through one person, one desk. Um we

46:38still need to have internal discussions

46:39about that exact process. But I think

46:41street department would sort of manage

46:42the request inflow and then as we

46:45transition towards the DOT, we would

46:47still work with BPS to then actually do

46:49the contracting work. So I think as you

46:51appropriately point out, you know, we

46:52don't have the staff or the capacity to

46:53do the construction of these. Um but you

46:55know, street department and BPS work

46:56very closely on a lot of things. So I

46:58think just by defining some of these

47:00steps, establishing more of a program,

47:02it'll really help that process be not

47:04only more transparent but more efficient

47:06as well.

47:06>> I guess as you see this process and

47:08thank you that was very helpful and I

47:09think one of the things that you

47:10mentioned that also what I appreciate

47:12about I think what the alleman is trying

47:14to do and the street department and and

47:16Miss Smith's trying to do is kind of you

47:18know when it comes to streets it

47:19probably should be under uh one

47:21department if it's bumpouts, if it's if

47:22it's repaving, if it's speed humps. Um

47:25and I I think you really answer that.

47:26So, do you I guess envision um

47:31as this as this move forward and maybe

47:32when we get to the Department of

47:33Transportation that there will still be

47:36I guess either even though it'll be

47:39coming to the street department

47:41contracted out to BPS or work with BPS.

47:46>> I think a really important factor of

47:48like as the DOT evolves is how many more

47:50sort of construction arms more staffing

47:53comes into play. So, it's really hard to

47:54speak to, I think, who's actually doing

47:57the work. Um, but as the DOT evolves, I

48:00would assume the Department of

48:02Transportation would have the ability to

48:04reach out to contractors. So, we

48:06wouldn't need to go from street

48:07department to BPS to the citywide

48:10contractor. We could um just skip that

48:12BPS step and the streets street

48:14department will then the DOT would be

48:16able to use that um to their their

48:18ability. Okay, I'm gonna wrap up because

48:20I know I'm not on this committee, but I

48:22appreciate the alderwoman and I see the

48:24uh the attorney down there shaking his

48:26head. U but I will say uh Mr. Devote,

48:29moving forward, uh Alderman Browning, uh

48:33I would love to work with the street

48:34department and you all to figure out to

48:35make sure that those bottlenecks and

48:37staffing don't work. I I like this one.

48:39It'll be interesting how this plays

48:40actually into the the ultimate from the

48:42fifth wards bill and and funding, which

48:44is a questionable one. But I do like uh

48:47this one that you have.

48:50Thank you, Alderman.

48:53Alderman Sier, do you have any

48:54questions?

48:56>> Uh, I don't have any questions. I had

48:58the opportunity to meet with Alderman

49:00Browning. Uh, and we are in conversation

49:02about a few. I, you know, in general, I

49:05support the direction that we're going

49:07with the legislation. I think, uh, you

49:09know, I think professionals and folks

49:10with expertise should be making

49:12decisions. And I also really think that

49:14public transparency for the residents

49:16and the community to follow along and us

49:18not being the only ones with certain

49:19information is really important. I've

49:21talked to the alderman about some things

49:22for ADA and other things I'd like to see

49:24added, but I think that'll be a floor

49:26conversation.

49:28>> Thank you. Um, so I was on the board of

49:31alderman when we transitioned from uh

49:34the previous speed hump request process

49:37to what we have now where an alderman

49:39puts in an ordinance. Um, you know, one

49:41of the big reasons that that happened is

49:43because every request for speed humps,

49:45you know, nine out of 10 would be

49:47denied. Um, and our constituents were

49:50getting very frustrated because they

49:51would request speed humps. We'd say, we

49:53asked, they said no, and there was an

49:56$800, you know, some sort of amount of

49:59money that was done for a study and that

50:00type of time, too. Um, and people

50:03weren't getting the speeds. it was just

50:04not happening. Which is why I think that

50:06the board at that time voted to have

50:08alderman have this this role to be able

50:11to put in speed humps. Um to Mr.

50:13Nelson's point though, you know, it's

50:15speed humps isn't the only solution and

50:17sometimes it's a lot of speed humps are

50:18put on a block where bumpouts would have

50:20been more appropriate or some other

50:22larger um type project would have been

50:24more appropriate as well. So, um, you

50:26know, my concern is

50:29I feel like we have the ability to get

50:32speed humps on the ground now and get

50:34bumps on the ground now. I do not want

50:37to accidentally make it harder for us to

50:40do this. Um, and what would you say to

50:43that in terms of, you know, when we talk

50:45to our constituents about it? Yeah, I'd

50:47say that the the current process was

50:50born out of a place of extreme distrust

50:53in the department over a proven record

50:56of not installing requested traffic

50:59calming. Attitudes about traffic calming

51:03and understanding about its efficacy

51:06have really evolved over the last

51:08decade. And I think the the experts

51:10behind me would agree with that. Like we

51:12have lots of scientific proof now. A

51:15good example I'll give is that the

51:16treatment that MODOT uh did on Natural

51:19Bridge Road is saving lives. There are

51:22far fewer crashes on that road than

51:24there used to be because of the measures

51:26that they installed. And that was, I

51:28think, a pretty early project when it

51:30came to like a major traffic calming uh

51:32project for that that road. Uh and we've

51:35even learned things since then about

51:37better ways to do this. So, not only is

51:39there a bigger toolbox available than

51:41there used to be, but uh I think that

51:44the department also is viewing its

51:46responsibility differently partially

51:48because we're going to change the

51:50charter to change their responsibility.

51:52And when we went and campaigned on that

51:54across the city, we talked to people and

51:57we talked to other people about it and

51:58we talked to constituents and residents

52:00about it. we often heard uh that desire

52:04for the department to be out there doing

52:06that work. And so it is always a matter

52:10of trust between the legislative branch

52:12and the executive branch about how

52:14things are going to get implemented. But

52:16I can tell you that the people sitting

52:18behind me today are a team that is very

52:22different from the past. We are dealing

52:25with people now that have extensive

52:27knowledge in the most up-to-date ways to

52:30make our streets safer and a real desire

52:33to make those streets safer for uh it's

52:36it's never going to be a guarantee that

52:38I can say, you know, so and so is going

52:40to do this because we don't have that

52:42power as legislators. And I try to

52:44explain it to my constituents all the

52:45time. I am their representative to the

52:47government. I am not the government

52:48itself. I cannot order Director Jackson

52:51or his employees to go do something. We

52:53always are going to pass something and

52:54ask that they do it. But I think our

52:56mayor, her staff, the department staff,

53:00uh, everybody that we've worked with on

53:02this is absolutely committed to

53:04implementing these requests and making

53:06sure that we can make the street safer.

53:09There are going to be times when it gets

53:10denied, but that's where the reporting

53:12and the the transparency comes in is

53:15that we want to know why. And I think

53:18what was happening before that left all

53:20the people so uneasy was that requests

53:22were getting denied and then the other

53:24person would have to explain it to their

53:26residents without really any info as to

53:28why it was denied.

53:30>> Uh or they would be required to do extra

53:32steps. But you know, as silly as it is,

53:35I it would would someone from the

53:37department be willing to to say we're

53:40not going to require a traffic study for

53:41every single one of these requests? I

53:42think this is a bill that's designed to

53:44do some of these smaller things uh and

53:47not the larger projects like that a

53:49traffic study would be appropriate for.

53:51But um just to to get it on the record,

53:54I think it would be good if if someone

53:56from the department could speak to how

53:58they plan to treat these requests and

53:59and how they plan to

54:01>> Yeah, I would appreciate that. Thank

54:02you.

54:04>> Director Jackson, are you able to speak

54:05to that?

54:08John,

54:10>> um again, uh Director Jackson, uh

54:13streets department, um members of the

54:16board, the mayor was very specific when

54:19she interviewed me. And uh I'll be

54:22honest with you and share with you. It's

54:23the first time I've been interviewed.

54:27Uh in the eight positions that I've

54:28held, I've been requested. This mayor

54:32interviewed me four times, and she was

54:34very specific. She wanted

54:36responsiveness. She wanted us to be

54:39attentive to our residents needs. She

54:41and she particularly uh she didn't

54:43mention it, but I think she was very

54:45aware that I was also involved in the

54:47transformation of the DOT down in the

54:49city of Atlanta. Our intention in this

54:52effort, in this process, is to ensure

54:54that we are responsive, that we are able

54:57to explain the decisions that we're

54:59going to be making. And when it's uh not

55:02a decision that you want to hear, you're

55:05going to understand why that decision

55:07was made. The way that this department

55:09is coming together, I also heard uh the

55:12comment about why are we planning so far

55:14out. That was one of the steps that we

55:17missed in Atlanta. We did not plan far

55:20enough out. And the the result of that

55:22process was two to three years after the

55:26department stood up, we were still

55:28experiencing hiccups. So, Alderman Brown

55:31and the team that put this legislation

55:34together were very smart. Your comments,

55:37your questions are very introspective

55:39and it is our job, it is my job to

55:42respond to that and that's what you can

55:44count on.

55:47>> Thank you. Yeah, I I think the

55:50you know concerns we had in the past

55:52where requests would be made, the speed

55:54humps would be denied and the residents

55:56would be unhappy with that that answer.

55:58Um, so I think the transparency piece is

56:00good, the reporting is good. Um, I do

56:03have, um, you know, I guess because this

56:06won't go into effect until July of 2027,

56:09we shouldn't expect to see any sort of

56:11reporting until after that date. Well,

56:14that is going to depend on how the uh

56:17the structure and what the outline or

56:20detail is in terms of the reporting, but

56:22I know that uh Director Smith has been

56:24very engaged in ensuring that the

56:27information that needs to be brought

56:29forward is available. I don't know how

56:31uh we've worked to ensure that uh

56:34between she and uh her guidance from the

56:36mayor that information is going to be

56:38forward be forwarded or come forward,

56:40but I have every confidence that you

56:41will be kept informed. Okay. Um, you

56:44know, we have other board bills that

56:45call for, you know, the streets that are

56:48going to be paved in the next year to be

56:50public information. We haven't had that

56:51posted um in the years that that board

56:54bill is in effect. So, we we don't have

56:56that. So, I'm I'm concerned that we're

56:58putting something into a board bill that

57:00might not happen based on my experience

57:02with other information that's not yet

57:04public. And I I don't know if people can

57:06speak to to that piece.

57:07>> Well, that's news to me. Uh, in fact, we

57:10did have we do have the list of streets

57:12that are going to be published uh or

57:14that are going to be paved. Uh, it's

57:16news to me that it hasn't been

57:17published. If it hasn't been published,

57:18it's going to be short and in coming.

57:20It's going to be coming forward.

57:22>> Thank you.

57:22>> Yes, ma'am.

57:25I just wanted to add that um one of the

57:27the things that I think frustrates

57:29residents and all the people alike is

57:31that we don't always know what streets

57:33are going to be paved next year because

57:35we haven't chosen which streets have get

57:37are going to get paid next year and

57:39because the all the people are such an

57:40important part of this process right now

57:43uh it really requires funding from the

57:46all the person to pave the street and so

57:49uh it it it's hard to plan ahead and

57:53that means that the utilities can't plan

57:54ahead and so we end up digging into

57:56freshly paved streets and there's all

57:57sorts of other things that kind of play

57:59with this. I know you know this

58:00otherwoman. I'm not trying to explain it

58:02to you because you wrote the utility

58:04coordination ordinance and it is I think

58:07making a real difference out on our

58:08streets. But there is an element of that

58:10that is not in play right now is a

58:12published paving list. And I think this

58:16is again something that's going to come

58:17up in Alderman Devote's bill when we

58:19talk about it is that getting a

58:21dedicated source of funding to the

58:22department will allow them to start

58:24sketching out a plan of knowing what

58:27they'll be able to pay each year and

58:28being able to publish that ahead of

58:30time. again so that we can make sure

58:32that this is being done equitably. Uh

58:34because right now with all the people

58:36deciding which street gets paved, it

58:38really ends up being that the squeaky

58:40wheel gets the grease and not

58:42necessarily that the the street that's

58:43most in need of paving gets paved. Uh

58:47what we'd love for this department to be

58:49able to do by the time we're done is

58:51that streets are getting paved and

58:53having traffic calming installed uh in

58:56sequence so that as we're maintaining

58:59our streets, we're also making safer.

59:01And we know that with a limited number

59:03of streets in our city, we're going to

59:05get to a point where this city is going

59:07to get safer and safer every year as we

59:09move through that process. But I totally

59:11understand the skepticism because um we

59:14haven't gotten to that place yet. But I

59:16think as we put the pieces of the DOT

59:19together, we're going to structurally

59:21have what we need to be able to start

59:23delivering these results to people and

59:25for that them to be able to have that

59:27paving list. I'm as much as the next

59:29person looking forward to be able to

59:31have a paving list to review because I

59:32want to make sure we're doing it in an

59:34equitable way. But I also I think we all

59:37would agree we'd love for our residents

59:38to have that info as well. uh so that

59:41they can look and see, oh, okay, you

59:43know, I'm not on the West this year, but

59:45I am next year, so I'm willing to be

59:46patient, or I'm not on the list for five

59:49years, and I feel like my street is

59:50falling apart. I need to elevate it to

59:52my older person, and then we can argue

59:54for

59:55>> procedurally, are you envisioning a

59:57citizen service bureau request form?

1:00:01How how do you anticipate that, you

1:00:03know, the intake of this to to move? I

1:00:06think uh right now it would be uh I

1:00:10think Kyle will speak to that. Um but

1:00:14I I think the department will be able to

1:00:16tell you a little bit more about what

1:00:17they're expecting, how this would work.

1:00:18Um I know how it currently works, which

1:00:20is people reach out to us and then we

1:00:22provide a a petition. So I imagine

1:00:25there'd be a central email or or it

1:00:27would be by Citizens Service Bureau. It

1:00:29get routed to the department and then

1:00:30the department would send them a form or

1:00:33something. But um if you have any

1:00:34thoughts, I'd love to hear it.

1:00:37>> Yeah. Once again, Kyle Nelson, bicycle

1:00:39and pedestri coordinator, street

1:00:40department. Um the way I think this

1:00:42would really work well and we have a lot

1:00:44of peer cities that are doing similar

1:00:45programs to this. So you we have places

1:00:47we can look um Minneapolis, Nashville,

1:00:50Milwaukee, like a lot of midsize

1:00:51Midwestern cities are doing these sort

1:00:53of trafficcoming programs. So at least

1:00:55we have some kind of guidelines that we

1:00:56can base this off of. Um but I I think a

1:00:59big thing a lot of them do is build some

1:01:00sort of online intake form. Um I I think

1:01:03establishing those things be working

1:01:05with it, you know, kind of developing

1:01:07some sort of web page. I would I would

1:01:09really envision this to have a dedicated

1:01:11web page that kind of explains the

1:01:12program, explains the process, probably

1:01:14houses the map that is required um

1:01:16different things. Um probably ultimately

1:01:18this still goes city works. I think that

1:01:20is sort of our main centralized man, you

1:01:23know, managing system for a whole broad

1:01:25scale of um different construction items

1:01:28requests throughout the city. Um but

1:01:30hopefully I think we have this set up in

1:01:32different places um you know whether

1:01:34it's all their residents different

1:01:36different places that um this allows for

1:01:38those requests to come in through they

1:01:39can just do it online that routes it to

1:01:42city works and then that notifies us as

1:01:44employees of how this is kind of go

1:01:45through. Um I I think the resident form

1:01:48will be an important part of that too,

1:01:49right? How do we design this? How do we

1:01:50make sure that we're getting% of

1:01:52signatures from the block? How are they

1:01:54submitting that? We need to make sure to

1:01:56be equitable so that it's not at all

1:01:58online, right? We recognize that all not

1:01:59all of our residents have that kind of

1:02:01access. So there need other outlets as

1:02:02well. Um but they they'll be thinking

1:02:04through those different things, but

1:02:06really the main housing I I really see

1:02:09as its own dedicated web page explaining

1:02:11sort of the program and then how you

1:02:12file, how you enter, and things like

1:02:14that. Okay. Um, so for for a situation

1:02:18in which um you're getting multiple

1:02:21requests all over the the city um you

1:02:24know I know that they'll be the how the

1:02:26requests move will be prioritized in

1:02:27different ways. Um it does still end up

1:02:30coming back to right now with the ward

1:02:32capital funding uh most of the the speed

1:02:35humps and traffic calming uh that the

1:02:37alder person would be deciding whether

1:02:38or not to do it. So I pretty much fund,

1:02:41you know, any project that comes to me.

1:02:44But if there's another alder person or

1:02:46say a vacancy in a ward and they're not

1:02:48doing it, does is my ward then kind of

1:02:51punished and it have to like kind of sit

1:02:52back and wait for other people to move

1:02:55or because I get these things done

1:02:56pretty quickly. So I' I'd like to

1:02:59continue to do that.

1:03:00>> I I think I mean there's different

1:03:01criteria that's outlined in there how

1:03:02we're going to address this. I know um

1:03:04focusing on areas on the high injury

1:03:06network, for example, is one of our

1:03:07priorities. Um, but I don't necessarily

1:03:09see this being on a date order system

1:03:12where something will be held up because

1:03:14we don't have a funding source for one,

1:03:16we have one for another, right? It's

1:03:18it's building that list, being

1:03:19transparent about what that list is, and

1:03:21then working through it in an organized

1:03:23way. Um, but if one doesn't get funded,

1:03:25hopefully it enters that map. um there's

1:03:27some sort of box that's checked that

1:03:29says why it's not moving forward and we

1:03:31can keep moving through the so I think

1:03:32we can be managing multiple of these at

1:03:34the same time to at least keep them

1:03:36moving through through the program. Um,

1:03:39I think some of it too I think it will

1:03:40help to have, you know, different

1:03:42deadlines throughout the year. So

1:03:43there's kind of more understanding of if

1:03:45you get it in by X date in the spring,

1:03:47you can expect construction, you know,

1:03:49in this window and kind of set more

1:03:51dedicated timelines like that for, you

1:03:53know, again, different kind of

1:03:55transparency measures that we just you

1:03:57guys know that things are moving along,

1:03:58you guys know that things looked at and

1:04:00there's actually some sort of cue that

1:04:02we're entering things into the

1:04:03construction in a reasonable way. I

1:04:05think that would be really helpful

1:04:06having those sort of consideration

1:04:08deadlines where you'll know when the

1:04:11next batch are going to be going out.

1:04:13Um, you know, I know that follows sort

1:04:15of a typical schedule now with when

1:04:17construction is possible for the

1:04:19different materials and the weather

1:04:20conditions that they need and our, you

1:04:22know, yearly uh the budget year and what

1:04:25becomes available when. Um, but I do

1:04:27think that having more of that available

1:04:29to to folks and and to alderman so that

1:04:32you know when I have a speed hump

1:04:34requested in my ward and people keep

1:04:36asking for the installation date I can

1:04:37see well you're part of the you know

1:04:39spring batch and the spring batch goes

1:04:41in and you know within and you know now

1:04:44I normally say once there's a request

1:04:46made the petitions and it's probably a

1:04:48year from when they turn in their

1:04:49petitions and the board bill goes

1:04:51through to actual installation. So, you

1:04:53know, it obviously is a significant

1:04:55amount of time, but having that be

1:04:56consistent across the city would be

1:04:58helpful. Um, okay, those are all of my

1:05:01questions. Um, I would also like to be

1:05:04added as a co-sponsor, please.

1:05:07>> So, I do think this is the the way we

1:05:10should be moving. Um, and I'm very

1:05:12hopeful that that it's better. I'm my my

1:05:15small fear is that you know when the

1:05:17control gets taken away from the older

1:05:19person that I'm less able to answer to

1:05:22my community when they ask for something

1:05:24like this and I like to be able to

1:05:25answer my community when ask for

1:05:27something like this. So that scares me a

1:05:28little bit but I do have a lot of uh

1:05:31belief that this is policywise

1:05:34you know procedural wise the better

1:05:36direction the more professional

1:05:38direction for these decisions to be

1:05:40made. So, um kind of balancing that, um

1:05:44desire to be able to get things done as

1:05:46quickly as possible for my constituents

1:05:47with the way things should work in a

1:05:50functioning city. Um so, thank you for

1:05:53allowing so many questions. All right.

1:05:55Is there any anything you'd like to say

1:05:57before I open it up? See if there's any

1:05:59public comment.

1:06:01Sure. Is there anyone from the public

1:06:03here to speak?

1:06:04>> We have none.

1:06:05>> Okay. Any further a question?

1:06:08>> Oh, of course. boy and you're

1:06:10recognized.

1:06:11>> And so I'm hearing what you all saying,

1:06:13it sounds good on paper, but everything

1:06:17you saying, I'm not as fortunate as some

1:06:20of you all. So I've been waiting five

1:06:22years for speed humps. I've moved my

1:06:24money over. I report to my uh community

1:06:29where those dollars go, the war capital

1:06:32dollars go. And nine times out of 10,

1:06:34those people ask me, "Well, why don't

1:06:36you get a refund?" because they haven't

1:06:38done the work. So I'm trying to figure

1:06:41out CSB is not the place to send these

1:06:45requests in because in my ward we are

1:06:48working through CSB and we get reports

1:06:52regularly from the NIS's and they're

1:06:55closing our CSBs

1:06:57and so I need somebody to make me

1:07:00understand why this is so critical where

1:07:03it will be and I also heard Alderman

1:07:06Browning say not only speed bump for

1:07:10bumpouts. Well, that's a whole another

1:07:12piece that the street department is not

1:07:14communicating. I'll say to me, I'm not

1:07:17going to speak for anybody else to say,

1:07:19well, you might not need speed humps.

1:07:22You might need you might do better with

1:07:24bumpouts. So, these are the questions

1:07:27that I'm asking for the people in my

1:07:29community because I feel that if we

1:07:33going to do it right, we do it across

1:07:35the board. I heard the alderman from the

1:07:3814 say, "Well, I go to BPS and it

1:07:40happens faster." I heard a woman

1:07:43Schwitzer say, "Well, I get mine done."

1:07:46Well, guess what? Mine it's not

1:07:48happening in my ward. So, somebody has

1:07:51to explain to me how this will be

1:07:53improved. I did talk to the mayor's

1:07:56office today and I did talk to Mr.

1:07:58Jackson and I did talk to the street

1:08:00department and say these are the speed

1:08:04humps that I have to keep going back and

1:08:07asking when are they going to be put in?

1:08:10Why haven't they been put in? And what's

1:08:12the process that we are missing? So

1:08:15that's why I'm skeptical of this bill

1:08:18because it sounds good, but my residents

1:08:22know what I do with my W capital because

1:08:24I give them a report every October so

1:08:26they'll know this is where your money go

1:08:28cuz this is your tax dollars. But I'm

1:08:32just nervous about this

1:08:34because like I said, it it sounds real

1:08:37good. Oh by everybody's going to work

1:08:40together. But guess what? I don't think

1:08:43on my end that's happening. So, if

1:08:46somebody could give me clarity, that

1:08:48would help me a whole lot.

1:08:51Thank you for that that question,

1:08:53Alderwoman. I I think it's every

1:08:55intention of this bill to deliver more

1:08:59equitable results. We absolutely

1:09:02understand that there are parts of our

1:09:04city that are not seeing what they need.

1:09:07And you know, I kept thinking as as you

1:09:12were just talking now, I kept thinking,

1:09:14you know, nothing nothing changes if

1:09:15nothing changes. Like the current

1:09:18systems not working well for you, right?

1:09:20And so I'm trying to move this in a

1:09:23direction where we do have that

1:09:25transparency, that clarity. And the

1:09:28reporting requirements in this bill are

1:09:31such that if you do fund speed humps and

1:09:35they're not installed, there will be

1:09:37something that not only you can look at,

1:09:38but your residents can look at as well

1:09:40and see what the reason is. Hey, you

1:09:43know, the map says it was supposed to be

1:09:45installed last spring, it's now the

1:09:46fall. Where is it? And that's where I

1:09:49think if you know if if I know the the

1:09:53people standing behind me, I think they

1:09:56very much care about the results that

1:09:58are happening and to hear that you're

1:10:01still waiting on speed humps that you've

1:10:04done all the right things for, followed

1:10:05our current processes and you're still

1:10:07not getting those. I think they should

1:10:10be answering you on that and and talking

1:10:13to you about why that is because it's

1:10:16not right that one older person can get

1:10:18things done quickly and another older

1:10:19person can't. But the way that we've

1:10:22designed this bill is to make it so that

1:10:24if that happens, and I'm not ever going

1:10:27to be able to say I can guarantee that

1:10:28that won't happen, but if it happens,

1:10:31there's going to be evidence and it's

1:10:34going to be public. so your residents

1:10:37will be able to see that you did

1:10:38everything right. And beyond that, I

1:10:41also think it's about data collection.

1:10:43Um to your point that CSB doesn't work

1:10:46and I think we heard uh Mr. Nelson from

1:10:48the street department say that they're

1:10:50not looking to use CSB. They're they've

1:10:52set up a dedicated website. uh but to

1:10:56the point that it does work, we would

1:10:58get data that would really be able to

1:11:01see the amount of requests that are

1:11:02coming in and what is that ends up being

1:11:05installed and we can use that data to

1:11:07refine and improve our processes going

1:11:09forward. Uh, one thing that I heard from

1:11:13other departments and other cities, um,

1:11:15I had the opportunity to go to a

1:11:18National Association of City

1:11:19Transportation Officials conference back

1:11:21in May and I talked to people from a

1:11:25bunch of those cities that Director

1:11:26Jackson just mentioned uh, that uh, have

1:11:30and I think uh, also Mr. Nelson

1:11:33mentioned um, that have made these types

1:11:36of changes recently. And I'll pick on

1:11:39Nashville because the Nashville uh I

1:11:43remember their director of their DOT was

1:11:45at this conference and she was like

1:11:47going around trying to hire people at

1:11:49the conference saying we're always

1:11:50hiring because they're still building

1:11:52out that DOT in that city uh because

1:11:56they moved ahead with it and didn't have

1:11:58all the pieces in place. We're trying to

1:12:00be a little more intentional with this

1:12:02and put the pieces in place ahead of

1:12:04time so that this is fully operational

1:12:06by the time we get to that

1:12:08implementation date, but I'm aware that

1:12:11this department over time will

1:12:14constantly evolve to better meet the

1:12:16needs of our residents. And one of the

1:12:19ways we can do that is by collecting

1:12:20that data, by having processes like

1:12:24these that allow us to understand the

1:12:26need. Uh, so if your residents are

1:12:29requesting traffic calming and they

1:12:31didn't get the result they wanted and

1:12:33they followed up with you, you're you're

1:12:34absolutely going to be able to follow up

1:12:36on this and you'll actually have more

1:12:38information than you have now if we

1:12:40follow this new process uh to be able to

1:12:43fight for your residents and get the

1:12:45results that they're looking.

1:12:50>> Anything else, Alderoman Boyd?

1:12:53>> That's all. Thank you.

1:12:55>> Okay. Thank you very much. Uh, seeing no

1:12:58further discussion, Alder Alderman

1:13:00Browning, you're recognized to close.

1:13:03>> Well, thank you all. Great questions. I

1:13:05really appreciate the involvement. I

1:13:07think we all have the same goal here,

1:13:08which is safer streets and sidewalks for

1:13:11our residents. I think they have that

1:13:13same desire. Uh, we certainly saw that

1:13:16with the Department of Transportation

1:13:18results on the ballot. Almost 90% of

1:13:21people in the city during a during a

1:13:23presidential election voted for this. So

1:13:25massive voter turnout and almost 90% of

1:13:28people voted for it. That's because

1:13:30people have an absolute desire to get

1:13:34around our city safely. They saw the

1:13:36rise in traffic violence over the years

1:13:38that we had the pan. They've seen and

1:13:41felt how dangerous things feel. And they

1:13:44wanted to see a department that took

1:13:46more ownership of our streets and our

1:13:48transportation network and start to make

1:13:50better decisions that actually make

1:13:53people safer. This is a critical step in

1:13:56the transition to the Department of

1:13:58Transportation.

1:13:59Uh I I don't want to label this as a DOT

1:14:03bill, but it very much is in that we

1:14:05want to make sure that this is moving us

1:14:07to a department that really is looking

1:14:09at the comprehensive framework of how

1:14:12our streets and our sidewalks and all of

1:14:14our transportation network fits together

1:14:16and a big part of that is by putting the

1:14:18decisions in the hands of the so uh

1:14:21thank you all for the time today that

1:14:23you've devoted to this and I ask for

1:14:25your favor favorable consideration.

1:14:27>> Thank you alderman. With that, I will

1:14:29entertain a motion for a due pass

1:14:30recommendation of board bill 75.

1:14:34It's been moved by the alderman from the

1:14:365th, seconded by the alderwoman from

1:14:38that we p pass board bill 75 with the

1:14:41due pass recommendation. Madame clerk,

1:14:44please call the role.

1:14:45>> Alderwoman Boyd,

1:14:47>> present.

1:14:51Alderwoman Clark Hubard

1:14:52>> I.

1:14:55>> Al Vice Chair Schwitiser

1:14:57>> I.

1:14:58>> Alderman Devotey

1:14:59>> I.

1:15:00>> Alderwoman Cox Santo

1:15:02>> I.

1:15:03>> Chair Brownie

1:15:04>> I.

1:15:05>> One present five I votes.

1:15:08>> By your vote you have sustained the

1:15:09motion from the alderman from the 5th

1:15:11and pass board bill number 75 with the

1:15:14due pass recommendation. Congratulations

1:15:16alderman. It's many many months if not

1:15:19years and years of of hard work. So well

1:15:21done. I'll turn it back to you for uh

1:15:23the rest of the meeting.

1:15:28>> Thank you, Alderwoman Vice Chair

1:15:30Schweiser. Uh really appreciate you

1:15:32taking helm there. And um with that,

1:15:35we're going to move to uh the next item

1:15:37on our agenda. Again, out of respect for

1:15:39the departments that are here, we want

1:15:41to let them get back to work uh and do

1:15:43the important work they have to do. So

1:15:45we're going to do board bill 71 next. Uh

1:15:48that is Alderman Matt Devotees. Uh so

1:15:50Alderman Dvote, you are recognized on

1:15:52board bill 71.

1:15:55>> 71 chair.

1:15:56>> Oh, I'm sorry, not 71. There's you have

1:15:58two on the calendar. 78. Uh we're going

1:16:00to do 78 because that requires the

1:16:02departments.

1:16:03>> We don't want to tackle that speed hump

1:16:05right now, do we?

1:16:07>> This is really funny because we are

1:16:08going to follow this with a couple speed

1:16:10hump bills and it we're just going to

1:16:12see the the current process in action.

1:16:14But uh right now we're going to do 78

1:16:17which is the uh St. Louis works bill.

1:16:20>> Uh agreed. And thank you chair and

1:16:22madame clerk if you would please read

1:16:24the summary.

1:16:30>> Or bill 78 introduced by alderman Matt

1:16:33Devote Michael Browning and Clark Hub an

1:16:36ordinance pertaining to the street

1:16:38improvement fund commonly known as St.

1:16:40works and specifying the allocation of

1:16:42funds and the creation of cost centers

1:16:45and standards governing the deployment

1:16:47of these funds containing definitions

1:16:50and effective date and a severability

1:16:52clause.

1:16:54>> Uh thank you clerk and thank you

1:16:56committee. Uh I'd like to begin by just

1:16:58with a a tip of the hat or a thank you.

1:17:00Uh once again, a big shout goes out to

1:17:04uh Miss Smith, uh Director Smith, but

1:17:07also Alderman Browning who laid a a good

1:17:09part of the groundwork uh for this

1:17:12particular bill, which like the last

1:17:13bill was or is the result of

1:17:16collaboration

1:17:18uh between uh not just uh myself, but

1:17:22also the mayor's office and the involved

1:17:24departments. I think it's another good

1:17:26example of working together to move

1:17:27things forward. Uh this is in many ways

1:17:31a DOT bill and specifically it is a

1:17:34funding bill. Uh it is uh put forward in

1:17:38front of you to start to begin to lay

1:17:40the foundation for things that we've

1:17:42been talking about that is putting funds

1:17:45directly in the hands of the today's

1:17:48street department but eventually our

1:17:50DOT. Uh I do want to make uh three

1:17:54points and I'll be I'm trying to be

1:17:55respective of time here, but three

1:17:57points uh with respect to what board

1:17:59bill 78 accomplishes. Uh number one, it

1:18:02essentially sets up three cost centers.

1:18:05uh essentially three different accounts

1:18:08uh to think in terms of transportation

1:18:11uh in terms of forestry and then finally

1:18:14a capital improvements

1:18:17an account to be administered through

1:18:19the board of public service. Second,

1:18:22what it does is it uh it moves funds or

1:18:27it reallocates how we uh deal with STL

1:18:31works funds from our individual

1:18:34aldermanic accounts to or directly to

1:18:37the the DOT. And I think that's very

1:18:40important for all of us to understand

1:18:42here. uh historically or at least with

1:18:44respect to this particular calendar year

1:18:48uh we all received

1:18:50um in our sub accounts uh $270,000

1:18:54to use for STL works type projects. And

1:18:59then the third thing it does, and I

1:19:01think this goes to some of the concerns

1:19:03raised by both Alderwoman Schweitzer as

1:19:06well as Alderwoman Boyd, is we talk in

1:19:08terms of accountability,

1:19:11transparency,

1:19:12and I think what's also very important

1:19:14is as we're talking about the allocation

1:19:17or the movement of these funds from

1:19:18alderman from 14 aldermanic sub accounts

1:19:22uh to the DOT,

1:19:24what we're also putting in place is a

1:19:27mechanism for accountability.

1:19:29specifically the creation of a five-year

1:19:32plan or a plan uh with respect to how

1:19:35these funds will be will be uh used and

1:19:39deployed but then more importantly a

1:19:41report to this committee this committee

1:19:44on an annual basis. So those are the

1:19:47three I think big nuggets that this

1:19:49particular bill um bites off and again

1:19:54this is a funding bill. I want to make

1:19:56very clear that this doesn't fund our

1:19:59DOT, right? I mean, we're talking about

1:20:01for this particular year, $270,000

1:20:05times 14 sub accounts or a little over

1:20:09$3 million. This is a small step in the

1:20:12right direction. Uh I do have uh with me

1:20:15today uh Director Jackson. Again, we're

1:20:18loading you up this afternoon. Um,

1:20:21director, is there anything you would

1:20:23want to add with respect to this

1:20:24particular bill?

1:20:29>> Thank you, Alderman Devote. Uh, again,

1:20:31James Jackson, director of streets. Uh,

1:20:33Mr. chair. Um members of the board, this

1:20:36year we are currently in our uh street

1:20:40paving um season and internally

1:20:44[clears throat]

1:20:45right now we do have the cap the

1:20:47capability of paving our local streets

1:20:49and we do that every year and I believe

1:20:52each of you uh understands uh what go

1:20:55what what begins to happen around March,

1:20:58April of each year. we come to you and

1:21:00we begin asking you for the funding to

1:21:02actually address those streets uh that

1:21:04we know are in disrepair and that we

1:21:07want to take care of. Right now we're

1:21:09paving in wards one, four, and five. And

1:21:14um we will be going back to Ward 14

1:21:16simply because uh the alderman of that

1:21:19board understood the seriousness of

1:21:21actually getting those streets done and

1:21:24uh gave a significant portion of their

1:21:27funds uh to the organization and and we

1:21:30smile when we look at that. But here's

1:21:33the reality of this. If we don't get the

1:21:36funds, we don't get to fix the streets.

1:21:38The last time our city's streets were

1:21:41assessed was 2014.

1:21:43We're currently in a pilot right now

1:21:46that will help us to identify what the

1:21:48condition of two of the city's wards are

1:21:51right now. And we want to use that as an

1:21:53example to help the rest of the wards

1:21:55understand. Once we know what the

1:21:57condition of our streets are, we can

1:21:59share with you what the the recommended

1:22:01levels of maintenance are. And then

1:22:03based on the funding that you provide

1:22:05us, we can prioritize those streets to

1:22:07get them repaired. But we can't do it

1:22:10without the funding. So what Alderman uh

1:22:13Devote is actually bringing forward to

1:22:14you today is an opportunity to help us

1:22:18deal with the condition of your current

1:22:19streets.

1:22:23>> I'm sorry, Director Jackson. I heard you

1:22:25say you were piloting a program in two

1:22:27wards. Can you state which wars those

1:22:29are for the

1:22:30>> Yes, ma'am. Madam alder, I I didn't want

1:22:33to put him on the spot, but right now

1:22:36we're piloting this program in wards um

1:22:40six and 13

1:22:43>> and we're looking there there are some

1:22:45other u older persons who have expressed

1:22:47an interest in it.

1:22:48>> Yeah.

1:22:48>> The reason [laughter] we're the reason

1:22:50we're piloting it is just as with the

1:22:53discussion that we just had about uh the

1:22:56the speed humps, we want to get it

1:22:59right.

1:22:59>> Yeah. We want to be able to explain to

1:23:01you how the process is going to go. We

1:23:03want to help you to appreciate um that

1:23:06putting these funds where uh they need

1:23:09to be and getting the recommendation

1:23:11from the area experts is what's going to

1:23:14help you keep your streets in the best

1:23:16repair that we can with the funding that

1:23:18we have available.

1:23:20>> Thank you.

1:23:21>> Yes, ma'am.

1:23:23Thank you.

1:23:29>> Alderman, any anything else to say

1:23:31before we ask committee questions?

1:23:32>> We are ready for questions. Sure.

1:23:34>> Okay. We'll go ahead and start uh by

1:23:37order of seniority. Alderman Boyd.

1:23:40>> Uh thank you uh Alderman Devote and uh

1:23:45Mr. Jackson, you and I have had several

1:23:48conversations in regards to that, and

1:23:50I'm glad that somebody finally is

1:23:53listening that the older people have no

1:23:56knowledge of how to pick streets that

1:24:00need to be paid. That is not what our

1:24:03expertise are. Our expertise in

1:24:05legislation, and I appreciate Mr.

1:24:08Jackson and his crew that really tries

1:24:10to work with it. But when you working

1:24:13with an antiquated process and you have

1:24:16little dollars and so the size of the

1:24:21ward that I have and the little money

1:24:23that I have, me relinquishing St. Louis

1:24:26works, which is my gold pot to help do

1:24:30projects that I normally wouldn't be

1:24:32able to do. I told Alderman Devote I

1:24:35could not support that because until we

1:24:38come up with a better way on this

1:24:41dispersing this board capital and making

1:24:44sure that it is evenly distributed by

1:24:47the mileage in the ward. It'll never get

1:24:50corrected. So the concept is probably

1:24:53good as Alderman Brownie's concept was

1:24:56good. But in the ward that I'm in, I'm

1:25:00nervous because I still feel that my

1:25:03community, it gets shortsighted and it

1:25:07gets slighted. And I give credit to uh

1:25:10Mr. Jackson and his crew because they

1:25:13did ride with me and we did find some

1:25:15issues that were going on, but again,

1:25:18those hadn't been addressed. He did send

1:25:20them to where they need to be sent to,

1:25:22but this still haven't been addressed.

1:25:25So, it's just real interesting to me

1:25:27that when the director streets tells

1:25:30people this is a serious issue and you

1:25:33need to address it and they don't

1:25:35address it and now we coming back saying

1:25:38oh okay so the other people have this

1:25:41money so we can use this money no sir no

1:25:45ma'am not until I see a checking balance

1:25:48and accountability I cannot go along

1:25:51with this thank you all so much for

1:25:53presenting is, but I think at this time

1:25:56we need to relook at it to see how we

1:25:58can critique it and make it more

1:26:01transparent and make it more

1:26:03accountability. And yes, my ward was

1:26:05picked. And I was honored for that

1:26:08pilot, but guess what? That's going to

1:26:10take time, too. That's going to take

1:26:13time for them to get through this

1:26:15project to make sure that they know

1:26:18what's the worst of the streets and

1:26:20what's the least of the streets that

1:26:22need to be paid. So, thank you all very

1:26:25much.

1:26:27>> Alderwoman, if I could or chair, if I

1:26:28could make two comments if you uh

1:26:31Alderwoman Boyd, uh you and I have

1:26:34talked and I appreciate your very frank

1:26:36discussion. Uh I want to make sure that

1:26:39um terminology that you used is

1:26:42something that has come up when I have

1:26:44spoken with multiple alders and I want

1:26:46to make sure that we're all on the same

1:26:47page because I'm getting very very

1:26:50similar comments. Um, this bill deals

1:26:53with STL works money only. It does not

1:26:57deal with ward capital. Uh, so I want to

1:27:00make sure that we're all on the same

1:27:02page uh when we're talking about that.

1:27:04Um, that ward capital that uh today is

1:27:07equally applied across 14 wards. I

1:27:10believe it was in the ballpark of about

1:27:12$740,000

1:27:14this year. I believe uh that won't be

1:27:17affected by this particular bill. uh

1:27:20rather this only addresses the STL works

1:27:23funding which again for the past

1:27:26calendar year which is how STL works

1:27:28funds are are distributed was 270,000.

1:27:32So that point and again

1:27:35>> um it's a common question or common

1:27:37alderwoman that I've I have heard from

1:27:40multiple folks as I've been talking

1:27:41about it. The second thing is uh you're

1:27:45absolutely right absolutely right with

1:27:48respect to the inequality

1:27:51of how STL works funds are distributed.

1:27:54There is no doubt about that. Um

1:27:58again we are talking about equal

1:28:00distributions. Um I represent as many of

1:28:04you know four neighborhoods. Four

1:28:06neighborhoods. Uh I know the alderman

1:28:08from the 14th is here. I believe he

1:28:10represents 11 or 12 neighborhoods. Uh,

1:28:13Alderwoman Boyd, my memory is is you too

1:28:15represent more than 10. I don't know the

1:28:17exact number, but 10. That's a lot of

1:28:21difference in the geography

1:28:23uh and and how far I can make $270,000

1:28:28go versus you. So, I think what one of

1:28:32the big benefits of this money is that

1:28:35the funds are pulled together. They are

1:28:39provided to do and there is databased

1:28:44decisions that will be made about how

1:28:46these funds are and and so I would like

1:28:49to offer that with you. I know you and I

1:28:51have talked about that. I know it

1:28:52probably won't change your mind but I

1:28:54think it is worthy of a of a point.

1:28:56Alter

1:29:02>> thank you ali.

1:29:04>> Yes.

1:29:07>> Any other questions? Aler one.

1:29:10>> No sir. Thank you.

1:29:12>> Thank you. Next we'll go to Alder one

1:29:14car covered.

1:29:15>> Thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank you Alman

1:29:17Devote for bringing this forward and for

1:29:19uh our conversation we had last week and

1:29:21I did some more digging and fully

1:29:23understand this and how I believe that

1:29:26this will make this process um not just

1:29:28more equitable but the data driven piece

1:29:31to it is what's going to make the

1:29:32difference as well. Having the street

1:29:34department on board uh to make sure that

1:29:38the all of the the dots, the eyes are

1:29:41dotted, the te's are crossed and

1:29:42everything and making sure we get this

1:29:43right. It all it makes me think about

1:29:45the story that your predecessor,

1:29:48Alderman Bulmer, used to tell me about

1:29:50how he picked his streets was when they

1:29:52rolled down the street and whoever's car

1:29:54was the bump would ever had the bumpiest

1:29:56ride. That that was how they picked

1:29:58that. We know that that's most important

1:30:01uh not safe, right? even more so um not

1:30:05equitable which I know that this this

1:30:07and the other tools and the other uh

1:30:09legislative pieces that we worked on

1:30:11today are are moving us forward in. So

1:30:13that's why I asked you early on uh to be

1:30:16a co-sponsor and looking forward to

1:30:18continuing to support you in this work.

1:30:20>> Thank you Alderwoman.

1:30:23>> Thank you Alderwoman Schweitzer.

1:30:26>> Thank you. I really appreciate the time

1:30:28you took um Alderman Devote to talk with

1:30:31me about this bill and go through it

1:30:32with me. Some of the things that I think

1:30:34are really important is that these funds

1:30:36would be solely available to major

1:30:39streets. Is that correct?

1:30:40>> That is for the first five years. That

1:30:42is absolutely right.

1:30:43>> Okay.

1:30:44>> So, what this bill does is it dedicates

1:30:46the DOT portion of these funds entirely

1:30:49to major streets for the first five

1:30:52years of the program. At the end of that

1:30:54program, uh then again based upon a

1:30:57database review, all streets, alleys,

1:31:00and sidewalks would then fall within the

1:31:03ambit. Now, again, with the funds we're

1:31:06talking about, we're not going to be

1:31:08able to cover all of that. But what

1:31:09we're doing is we're laying the

1:31:11groundwork for these cost centers moving

1:31:13forward, right?

1:31:14>> Yes, ma'am.

1:31:15>> Yeah. I think it's it's interesting

1:31:16because one of the things that happened

1:31:19with having the American Rescue Plan Act

1:31:21funds available for uh repaving so many

1:31:24of the major streets in the city of St.

1:31:25Louis is that it's clear that a lot of

1:31:27the reasons these streets hadn't been

1:31:29repaved is that a street like Kings

1:31:31Highway or Grand or Jefferson that goes

1:31:33through so many wards that would be so

1:31:35expensive to do and you don't want to

1:31:37necessarily do at peace meal was just

1:31:39never something the older person

1:31:41individually could do especially when

1:31:42there were 28 aldermen and a smaller

1:31:45amount of word capital in St. Louis

1:31:46works. You'd have to save for a decade

1:31:48to have enough money to pave you know

1:31:50your section of of Kings Highway or

1:31:52Grand or whatever whatever it is. Um, so

1:31:56you know, but but that all said, when

1:31:58St. Louis works is allocated to the

1:32:00first ward, I usually put it towards

1:32:02sidewalks, um, which, you know, I have

1:32:04over, I think 12, uh, 1.2 million worth

1:32:08of sidewalk work is what the streets

1:32:09department told me I have in the first

1:32:11ward, which I can't cover with W capital

1:32:13and St. Louis works combined um, every

1:32:16year. Uh, and, um, you know, so like the

1:32:20alderman from the 13th, I do rely on the

1:32:22St. Louis works funds to be able to to

1:32:25do this work within my ward. Um, but I

1:32:28also simultaneously haven't had to pay

1:32:32for major streets. So, you know, there's

1:32:34that kind of saying of like rearranging

1:32:36the deck chairs and the Titanic. You

1:32:38know, it's like we don't have money for

1:32:39all of these things, but we're going to

1:32:40move these pots around and so we're

1:32:43still not going to have money for all of

1:32:44these things, but I won't have access to

1:32:46it anymore to make decisions. you know,

1:32:49how do how do I communicate that with my

1:32:51constituents if, you know, they see us

1:32:52voting for this and they think I just

1:32:54took away, you know, $270,000 from them?

1:32:57>> I think that's a fair question. And what

1:32:59you tell your constituents is we're

1:33:01taking small bites. We have a major

1:33:04issue with respect to paving, whether it

1:33:07is streets, curb cuts, bike lanes, or

1:33:10sidewalks. We're not going to be able to

1:33:13fix those things overnight. This is a

1:33:16movement to setting up a databased

1:33:20system to prioritize

1:33:22the the the kind of work transportation

1:33:26type work citywide.

1:33:29>> Um I feel your pain. Uh and I think Mr.

1:33:33Nelson I think he is still behind me.

1:33:36But in a recent discussion, uh, I

1:33:38learned that I've got 649 outstanding

1:33:41sidewalks request in the fifth with I

1:33:43which I think beats the next closest W

1:33:46by about 240. Uh, allocating max dollars

1:33:51of W capital to those. It would take me

1:33:5510 years plus to get there. I understand

1:33:58the issue. So what we've got to do is

1:34:01we've got to determine what can we bite

1:34:03off today. Let's do it. Let's do it

1:34:07right. Let's do it in a way that that it

1:34:10can be verified and driven by data and

1:34:13then let's move on to the next step.

1:34:16>> Sidewalks are an issue. They need to be

1:34:19dealt with. That is something that

1:34:21requires work.

1:34:24>> One of the

1:34:24>> Give us a chance.

1:34:26>> Yeah.

1:34:26>> One thing at a time, right?

1:34:27>> Sure. Um, one of the things that is is

1:34:30part of this bill is the reallocating of

1:34:33unallocated funds. Can you speak to that

1:34:35a little bit?

1:34:36>> Absolutely. And I think this is very

1:34:38very important. So when we talk about

1:34:40reallocated funds and director Jackson

1:34:43made a a reference to this uh among our

1:34:46colleagues uh the 14 of us, we have as

1:34:50of this was Monday or Tuesday more than

1:34:54$5.4 4 million of unallocated STL works

1:34:59funds that as a group as 14 alders we

1:35:02are we are sitting on $5.4

1:35:06million.

1:35:08So when we talk about employing funds

1:35:11and why isn't the paving done us as a

1:35:14group are not helping

1:35:17>> director Jackson and his crew uh get

1:35:22schedule and and get this work done.

1:35:24Now, how does this work? Practically,

1:35:26what the bill says is that each of us

1:35:29has until January 1 of 2027 to allocate

1:35:34our funds. In other words, to identify

1:35:37those projects within your ward that you

1:35:40want to tackle with these and earmark

1:35:43those funds for that project. The work

1:35:45will not be done by January 1. That's

1:35:49not what we're talking about. We're

1:35:50talking about allocation,

1:35:52identification, and specification, the

1:35:55earmarking of funds. But to your point,

1:35:59if those funds aren't allocated on

1:36:01January 1, then on February 1, the

1:36:05controller is directed to move any

1:36:07unallocated funds and alder dramatic sub

1:36:10accounts into the fund. In other words,

1:36:14to give the street the department of

1:36:16transportation control of of those

1:36:18funds. So the direction we pass this

1:36:21bill, the direction that each of us have

1:36:24to have is we need to do our homework.

1:36:27We need to sit down with the department.

1:36:30We need to identify projects we want to

1:36:32tackle and we want to make sure we make

1:36:34that decision before years end. Right

1:36:37now there are two of us two of us that

1:36:41have zero unallocated funds. Two of us.

1:36:44So when I talk about 5.4 4 million

1:36:47that's really 12 alders that accumulate

1:36:50that money because two of us have zero

1:36:53in the account. So the decision must be

1:36:56made and the funds must be identified.

1:37:00>> Very important point. Yes ma'am.

1:37:02>> Okay. Um

1:37:08>> I I I am I think that this is again with

1:37:11you know the previous bill that we had.

1:37:12I think that this is the direction that

1:37:14we we need to be going with decision-m

1:37:17um for for um for major streets for for

1:37:20all street and sidewalk projects. Um

1:37:24you know, and I think that it'll be

1:37:25helpful. One of the things that can be

1:37:26tough with this money is that, you know,

1:37:28it's we have our our um we work with the

1:37:31board of public service for Ward Capital

1:37:33and then St. Louis works funds is

1:37:35administered by the streets department.

1:37:37Um, but we really talk to our liazison

1:37:40with the board of public service for all

1:37:41of the funds that we have, but then it's

1:37:42a different pot and then we're sort of

1:37:44kind of pointed like this for who to

1:37:46talk to about it and when. Um, and that

1:37:48can be incredibly frustrating. So,

1:37:50having that removed um, and only being

1:37:53dealing with word capital, I think would

1:37:55actually be a positive thing. Um, yeah,

1:37:58those are all my questions for now. I

1:37:59appreciate the time you've taken to talk

1:38:01this through with me earlier and I

1:38:02appreciate you bringing this bill

1:38:03forward.

1:38:05>> Thank you.

1:38:06Thank you. Thank you, Alerone. Uh, we do

1:38:08also, um, I'm going to let alone one Cox

1:38:11and Tweet ask questions, but we also

1:38:13have two people not from the committee.

1:38:14Are either of you wanting to ask

1:38:16questions

1:38:19on this bill?

1:38:25Okay. All Coxandry.

1:38:28>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you,

1:38:30Alderman Devote, for bringing this bill

1:38:32forward. I I will echo my colleagues and

1:38:34appreciate your willingness to have

1:38:36discussion on this. I know you and I um

1:38:37just met briefly yesterday um to talk

1:38:40about this bill. Um I'll begin with with

1:38:42with sharing the components I like about

1:38:44it and certainly agree with you and um

1:38:47this suite of topic that we're having

1:38:48today that I think we need to be moving

1:38:50in a direction where we are allowing our

1:38:52experts to um help direct us. Um I don't

1:38:56have a a traffic and engineering degree

1:38:58by any means. I don't think I'm the best

1:39:00person to decide, you know, how to

1:39:02allocate street conditions. Um, I agree

1:39:04that a datadriven approach and an

1:39:06approach that recognizes, you know,

1:39:09streets that are identified on our

1:39:10high-risisk injury network um is one

1:39:13great way to be uh determining where we

1:39:16should be putting our limited resources

1:39:18under the structure that we have now. Um

1:39:20and so I definitely appreciate one um

1:39:22the data driven aspects of this bill and

1:39:25two also the way that you have um

1:39:28directed the three different cost

1:39:29centers that you've identified between

1:39:32transportation you know forestry and and

1:39:34engineering planning and we know that

1:39:36those are three areas that a lot of our

1:39:38residents have been asking us for more

1:39:40resources for. Um so I certainly agree

1:39:42that that that approach makes sense in

1:39:44terms of the way we would be allocating

1:39:47and spreading this money. Uh my my first

1:39:50question for you, you know, pertains to

1:39:52something similar that I know Alderwoman

1:39:53Schwitzer called out, which is just the

1:39:55the disparity of of resources that we do

1:39:58have and and how these funds are being

1:40:00identified. I see here in your bill, you

1:40:03know, you outlined sort of the the

1:40:04evolution of St. Louis works, which is

1:40:06really helpful. Um and for clarity, and

1:40:10you as you were doing your research on

1:40:12this bill, I I saw that you were

1:40:13appealing um a previous ordinance. it

1:40:16was in the 5800s. So, I know we can't

1:40:17look at it, you know, on the digital

1:40:19database. Um, that kind of described how

1:40:21we got there. So, if you could just for

1:40:24uh my understanding and for uh maybe

1:40:26some of my colleagues here outline sort

1:40:28of where and how the St. Louis works

1:40:30resources are identified in the first

1:40:32place just so I'm understanding what um

1:40:34the total amount available that you'll

1:40:36that we'll have here is again.

1:40:38>> Sure. And and first let me give all the

1:40:42uh the uh your your

1:40:45compliment should be directed at Miss

1:40:47Smith because she's the one who did the

1:40:48>> director godwoman Smith. [laughter]

1:40:50>> She's the one that did [clears throat]

1:40:51the historic research which is her

1:40:54wheelhouse as you well know. Um the

1:40:58these funds initially started out uh as

1:41:03um as tax revenue off of

1:41:07um oh man you're going to ask me to to

1:41:10you guys ask me to

1:41:11>> and I can also direct the question to

1:41:12chief director policy

1:41:15>> woman Smith as well if it's helpful for

1:41:16you

1:41:17>> started out initially as taxation on

1:41:20telephone and telegraph um services uh

1:41:25at one joint uh a hospital was sold and

1:41:27the funds from that hospital were also

1:41:29deposited in the account. Of course,

1:41:32things change, technologies change. So,

1:41:35uh a portion of the uh the funds today

1:41:38are through a gas and electric uh

1:41:41franchise fee. So, that essentially is

1:41:44the is where the bulk of these funds

1:41:46come in today. Um when you ask about

1:41:50what happens with the funds today again

1:41:54you know they're they are calculated on

1:41:56an annual basis I know a lot of times

1:41:59here at the board we think in terms of

1:42:00the city's fiscal year. STL works funds

1:42:03are actually January through December or

1:42:06how they how they're calculated. Um

1:42:10today uh the status quo is that again 14

1:42:15time 270 the math in my head is rough

1:42:18about 3.2 million or so is spread among

1:42:21the alders. Uh the rest goes to streets

1:42:25and BPS for capital improvements. So

1:42:28that already happens to a portion of

1:42:30these funds. I think the I think the

1:42:32math is about 45%

1:42:34or so. It's in that ballpark. So, that

1:42:38is how the the ordinances developed over

1:42:42time. Um, if you're going to put me on

1:42:44the spot and said which did what, I am

1:42:46not equipped today to do that for you.

1:42:48But that's generally how things evolved

1:42:50over the course of of these many years.

1:42:52>> Yeah. Well, thank thank you for that. I

1:42:54know I'm not asking you to give

1:42:55everybody a history lesson. I certainly

1:42:57recognize that. Um, but I appreciate you

1:42:59at least outlining that for me

1:43:02because I do think it's one helpful and

1:43:04and you know and many know I I share a a

1:43:08interest in looking at sort of how we

1:43:09ended up in this limited pool of

1:43:11resources in the first place which I

1:43:12think is really important as we talk

1:43:14about and as people hear older people

1:43:16say we we are um limited in the pool of

1:43:19resources that we have. Um, I also

1:43:22raised that because and and one thing

1:43:24that I again will echo that the

1:43:26alderwoman of the first outlined is that

1:43:28with those limited resources, there are

1:43:30pros and cons to having that

1:43:32differentiated smaller pool. Um and and

1:43:35I will share, you know, one one way that

1:43:37I've been using this my ward is that I

1:43:40have um while I have a lot of our major

1:43:42streets and the high density streets

1:43:44that folks know, South Broadway, Fourth

1:43:47Street, Market Street, uh I have Gravoy,

1:43:50I have portions of Jefferson and and so

1:43:52I do have a lot of the streets that

1:43:54would be identified as major. I also

1:43:56have a lot of um side arterial streets

1:43:59that are near our river and port area

1:44:01because I have a very heavily industrial

1:44:03area and we had a crisis just this year

1:44:05where First Street um where we have a

1:44:07lot of our trucking and manufacturing

1:44:09areas uh was so damaged by trucks that

1:44:11we needed to immediately prepare it or

1:44:13else it was going to be detrimental to

1:44:15our transportation. Um and that was an

1:44:17area an example where I used our St.

1:44:19Louis works resources so that I wasn't

1:44:21taking resources away from the

1:44:23neighborhood funds through Ward Capital

1:44:25where I take care of my neighborhood

1:44:27streets. Um, so that's just one example

1:44:29where with a limited pool of resources,

1:44:31having that flexibility is beneficial

1:44:33for an alderman like me that does have

1:44:36such a variety of both industrial and

1:44:38residential street to care for. Um, so

1:44:41to that point, Alderman, I I certainly

1:44:43agree with and hear your um, spirit of

1:44:46direction for this bill, but I do think

1:44:48there are situations where maybe it

1:44:50would be helpful to have more clarity of

1:44:52what do older people like me in the

1:44:54interim with that swath of

1:44:57responsibility and and if we don't have

1:44:59another access and if these funds are

1:45:01locked for major streets for five years.

1:45:04>> Well, I well that that's an interesting

1:45:07question. Um I I think two points along

1:45:09that line. Uh point number one would be

1:45:12that we we need to recall that that this

1:45:17work is going to be done. Paving work

1:45:21and and street work, transportation work

1:45:24is going to be used or these funds are

1:45:26going to be used for that. Uh it's not

1:45:28as if they're being reallocated to some

1:45:31other use. They will be used for major

1:45:34streets. Now I guess to your point with

1:45:36respect to well what about things like

1:45:38the alleys or the small streets? How do

1:45:41I handle those? Um it's an interesting

1:45:43question and frankly it's one I haven't

1:45:45faced in a year and a half be because

1:45:49frankly the kind of streets that I'm

1:45:51paving with this are the big boys.

1:45:54They're Mlin Avenue through two

1:45:56neighborhoods. They're Pernade between

1:45:59Hampton and Kings Highway. Um, so they

1:46:02they are the streets that fall within

1:46:05the cracks and then along the way I pick

1:46:08up an alley or two because I've got

1:46:09$11,000 left over. Right. So it's an

1:46:13interesting question. Um

1:46:17I think in the meantime you look at

1:46:20where your funds where you have right

1:46:22now. Um

1:46:25the the street department can can tell

1:46:27you exactly what you need to allocate.

1:46:29you can identify those resources and you

1:46:32can push that funds out. Let's talk in

1:46:35terms of mechanics. Um right now when I

1:46:40uh allocated funds toward Mlin the

1:46:43direction was alderman will be lucky if

1:46:45that's paved by the end of 27. Most

1:46:47likely we're moving into 28 before Mlin

1:46:50Avenue is touched. Um the

1:46:55you so there there is a certain

1:46:57caterpillar effect where there's enough

1:46:59in the pipeline that many of these

1:47:02things can be done. Beyond that what

1:47:05you're doing is you're beating on the

1:47:07drum or for the next 5 years we're

1:47:10working on the major streets which as a

1:47:13city where we're putting our our

1:47:14resources. I understand your question. I

1:47:18don't know that I've got a a an answer

1:47:20that's going to make you feel good.

1:47:22Frankly, it's what is our priority? What

1:47:25are we going to do with these funds? And

1:47:27who's going to employ them? And how are

1:47:29they going to be employed? Experts

1:47:32databased on major roads where folks get

1:47:35the most use. I don't have a better

1:47:38answer to you than that.

1:47:40>> Okay. Well, thank you alderman for at

1:47:42least speaking to the question and and

1:47:43as I shared with you and I'll share here

1:47:45publicly, I certainly agree with with

1:47:48the direction and the idea and the

1:47:49thought process here. I think it is to

1:47:51your point a transition to datadriven

1:47:54results is is certainly where we need to

1:47:55go as a city. I think my hesitance with

1:47:58with this piece of legislation in its

1:48:00form today is that I do think the timing

1:48:02element is one that I don't have all the

1:48:04answers to and I would appreciate more

1:48:07time and being able to work with you on.

1:48:10Um I understand here you're asking for

1:48:12folks to allocate their available funds

1:48:14by January 1. Um but as I mentioned that

1:48:17are in positions with words like mine

1:48:19that is a really complicated question to

1:48:22be able to answer in the time frame that

1:48:23you're asking for. I'll also say second

1:48:25to that point, I think there are little

1:48:27areas within the bill um where maybe

1:48:29some of the clarity which you've shared

1:48:30with us here could be improved. And so

1:48:33again, I certainly think this is a piece

1:48:35of legislation that I would love to be

1:48:37able to support. Um but my ask here and

1:48:39I know you're going to ask us for a vote

1:48:41is that um we we have more time to work

1:48:43with you. We hear it again and we answer

1:48:45some of those bigger questions because I

1:48:46do think they would be very important

1:48:48for us as colleagues to be able to

1:48:50deliver this in the way that you want it

1:48:52to be. Um, and I think certainly it is

1:48:54an important piece of legislation for us

1:48:56to get done. I just want done right. So

1:48:58that's my stance for you. That's my

1:48:59honest answer with how I'm feeling. Um,

1:49:01but I appreciate that you've been

1:49:02willing to have a conversation with me

1:49:03about it. I know I've shared these

1:49:04concerns to you. Um, but that's just a

1:49:06really important element for me.

1:49:08>> And let me just say I appreciate your

1:49:10question. Uh, I don't know that there is

1:49:13a satisfactory answer available to the

1:49:15the most recent one. Let me just be

1:49:17frank.

1:49:22Thank you. And uh last offer for any of

1:49:24the alderman not on the committee. Any

1:49:26questions? If you could alike.

1:49:32>> Thank you, Alderman uh Browning. I

1:49:35really do appreciate allowing the other

1:49:36alders. I'll keep it short because I

1:49:38know you alo two other pieces of

1:49:40legislation. Um I think uh you know when

1:49:43it comes to this um I think piece of

1:49:46legislation I kind of fall in the space

1:49:48of all the woman boy and a little bit of

1:49:51all the woman uh Cox Antweet. I will say

1:49:53it almost feels like a little bit of a

1:49:56if this were a move of punishment

1:49:57because I think the two alers that have

1:49:58used all that money is you and myself.

1:50:00Um I take those um understanding that we

1:50:04have to stretch pennies to get stuff

1:50:06done um very seriously. I don't I may

1:50:09not have the um one of the things you

1:50:12said is you know you you focus a lot of

1:50:13yours on main streets. Um but the

1:50:16reality is in areas in like in my ward I

1:50:20have to focus a lot of those on side

1:50:22streets and I think that's kind of what

1:50:24Aldwoman Cox's ante was getting at. Yes,

1:50:26we should make sure our main streets are

1:50:28are drivable, but you know, as I do love

1:50:30driving through uh some of my

1:50:32colleagues, ward as I was over in the

1:50:34hill yesterday, you know, I don't have

1:50:36the same uh preview one to have nice

1:50:38side streets, let alone sometimes you

1:50:40see the side streets are like painted or

1:50:42in the Shaw neighborhood. And um I I I

1:50:47get what we're trying to do with this

1:50:48legislation and I and and yes, the

1:50:50street department are the experts and we

1:50:52probably should not be making these

1:50:54decisions um because we're not an

1:50:56engineer. Um I try my best to as I drive

1:50:58through see which one's got the most

1:51:00potholes and I don't like patching side

1:51:02streets because probably in a year and a

1:51:04half that pothole comes up and then they

1:51:06got to get patched again. And that's not

1:51:07even us as a street um the mayor side,

1:51:10but then why not just repave it? Uh when

1:51:12I look at the bill, I I get where we're

1:51:15going with this, but I think there's a

1:51:17problem with how we're looking at it in

1:51:20an equitable way. I have the utmost

1:51:23faith in our our street director and as

1:51:26if this move, I would love to talk with

1:51:28him of what that looks like of putting

1:51:30that attention to North St. Louis. Um,

1:51:33as we always say, like, uh, you know,

1:51:35the north side are the the probably the

1:51:37most dangerous streets, um, or streets

1:51:40that have high fatality because, you

1:51:42know, this investment is not happening.

1:51:43And I get that's what uh potentially

1:51:45this bill and the bill that Alderman

1:51:47Browning is trying to do. But also don't

1:51:50have the faith at this moment that if we

1:51:54were to take some of these funds main um

1:51:57the funds from the city works which is

1:51:59not war capital that those dollars as

1:52:02you say at least in the first 5 years of

1:52:03going to main streets. I need help on

1:52:05some of these side streets that I'm like

1:52:07playing whack-a-ole to make sure that uh

1:52:11me and my residents are hitting these

1:52:12potholes. Like I think if we move in

1:52:14this direction, um we also need to look

1:52:17at how work capital is done equitable

1:52:20because there are some wards throughout

1:52:22the city that needs more attention than

1:52:24others and and doing it in an equal way

1:52:26where we just take everybody money. um I

1:52:31think continues to in my opinion not

1:52:35help the wards that need the help the

1:52:37most. And I don't and I know that's not

1:52:39your intention. Um but I can see this

1:52:43heading in a a direction where um

1:52:47some of those wards and it's not just

1:52:49north side. But I mean it's some areas

1:52:50in this state streets and in Dutchtown

1:52:53that just don't get that same attention

1:52:55to be honest at certain parts of my ward

1:52:57like downtown or central west end and

1:52:59some of those communities have a little

1:53:00bit more support through SIDS. There's

1:53:03probably not a SID in North St. Louis

1:53:05where they can use some of those funds

1:53:06for infrastructure uh stuff, not

1:53:08necessarily streets, but um I would also

1:53:12kind of just echo all the woman coxan

1:53:14tweet that it's a really tight deadline

1:53:16that you you're basically saying

1:53:18incumbent which mine is gone so I can't

1:53:21uh do anything by January and then by

1:53:23January second if not then you know we

1:53:25just sweep the money and this will be

1:53:26the new direction moving forward that

1:53:28that money will not be coming to alers.

1:53:30Just a quick comment and I do look

1:53:33forward to continuing to talk with you

1:53:35about uh this legislation and just

1:53:37making sure we get it right, especially

1:53:39with an equitable lens on how we want to

1:53:42support our transportation department,

1:53:44but also how we want to make sure that

1:53:46we are intentionally looking at wards

1:53:48that have not got that same love and

1:53:50support as areas in your neighborhood

1:53:52that you have five and I have uh 11. and

1:53:56and and I think that that is where you

1:53:58and I have a very different view of this

1:54:00with respect to the equitability because

1:54:03I think the very purpose of this bill is

1:54:06to create a more equitable system that

1:54:09that spreads the funds out throughout

1:54:12the city without a determination on

1:54:16what's the ward and that's the only

1:54:18determination. Um I made the comment and

1:54:21I hate to repeat myself. made it to

1:54:23older woman boy. To me, the system as it

1:54:26is today is inherently inequitable. As

1:54:30the alderman of the fifth who represents

1:54:32only four neighborhoods, I'm standing up

1:54:35here and I am saying I am willing to

1:54:37push my chips into the pot and let the

1:54:42the work be done on a gray databased

1:54:46system. And frankly, I can't think of a

1:54:48better way to do that. But having said

1:54:51that, I can't speak to past wrongs. Uh I

1:54:55I can't speak to past slights. I simply

1:54:58cannot do it. With respect to the

1:55:00timing, I think your question does bear

1:55:02uh does beg for an explanation why those

1:55:05dates. Um you are uniquely qualified to

1:55:09understand the dates because of your

1:55:11budget chair. You are well aware of the

1:55:13work that goes and and to educate

1:55:15everybody else who might not sit budget.

1:55:18But very early in the year as you know

1:55:20Alder uh work is done on the financial

1:55:23side to put together the budget for the

1:55:25city both in terms of what the general

1:55:27budget is but also with respect to the

1:55:29capital expenditure from a planning

1:55:32perspective. The idea behind the the

1:55:35funds moving on on on February 1 is the

1:55:39is the the the notion that the

1:55:42comproller would know as of February 1

1:55:45for fiscal year 28 planning how would

1:55:49those funds be be uh aortioned and

1:55:52developed in essence to help director

1:55:54Jackson uh and and his crew uh dictate

1:56:00how are we going to plan for these funds

1:56:02because that's another element to this,

1:56:04right? U to help the street department

1:56:07identify projects and and and and put it

1:56:10into place. So that's that's why the

1:56:13timeline is what it is. I know your

1:56:16question wasn't directly on that, but I

1:56:17hope that provides some

1:56:20uh some context on on how we came up

1:56:22with that.

1:56:27>> Alder,

1:56:28>> thank you. Um, I did just want to thank

1:56:30Alderman Devote for taking the time to

1:56:32meet with me to talk about this bill.

1:56:34Um, and I'll just be honest and say, uh,

1:56:37as alderman, you're familiar, you know,

1:56:39I'm a woman who does not agree with the

1:56:40status quo and probably challenges it

1:56:42every time I get. Um, and I think that

1:56:44change is really difficult for people.

1:56:46Um, and I think that there are a lot of

1:56:47people whether or not a system serves

1:56:50them system that, you know, and as older

1:56:52people, we figured out how to navigate

1:56:54this system that's in place. I still

1:56:56think, you know, ultimately we have

1:56:58ineffective systems. The fact that older

1:57:00people are needed so much to move so

1:57:02many of these individual means that you

1:57:04have an ineffective system because a

1:57:05system would mean that it worked

1:57:06regardless, you know, we would be

1:57:08interchangeable and it wouldn't matter.

1:57:10Um, I just would add just to the

1:57:12conversation that, you know, one, I

1:57:15really appreciate both you and Ottoman

1:57:17Brown and Ottoman Schweitzer and just

1:57:18all the work that has gone into kind of

1:57:20getting the city to think broader about

1:57:21a department of transportation and think

1:57:23broader about how to empower departments

1:57:26and how to empower staff. I think some

1:57:28of the comments I'm hearing are about

1:57:30the delicate balance of what does it

1:57:31look like. You know, I would say I think

1:57:33the bill leaps us there and I think

1:57:35maybe there's a desire from some of our

1:57:37colleagues to kind of walk there and I

1:57:40think there's just a tension between

1:57:41that and real fiscal budget deadlines

1:57:43and you know things that have to happen.

1:57:45Um, but yeah, I just wanted to add like

1:57:48I do appreciate the the conversation and

1:57:50I appreciate the work that you're doing

1:57:51because I think even if don't um land

1:57:54where we want to land and I've even had

1:57:56a bill fail on the floor before, I think

1:57:58that these conversations help us get to

1:58:00where we need to be. Um, they open up

1:58:02the public to other ideas. They get all

1:58:04of us to talk about it. Um, you know,

1:58:06we've got cool pilots and things going

1:58:07on. And so I think all of these things

1:58:09are really needed for us to go in a

1:58:11different direction. And I really dream

1:58:12of us being an efficient city that

1:58:14really works for residents and you don't

1:58:15have to call or email your alder to get

1:58:17what your tax dollars are supposed to

1:58:19allegedly already pay for. Um but then

1:58:21also, you know, I have a city works

1:58:23list. I got a $1.6 million list for my

1:58:2650-50 sidewalk. I do usually give my

1:58:28paving money sometimes directly um to

1:58:31it. And so I would say I think there's

1:58:33multiple conversations that should

1:58:34happen. And you know to Alderman

1:58:36Aldridge, I would personally encourage

1:58:38you to maybe we need to have a

1:58:39conversation about equitable war capital

1:58:41again. Um I also hear you know something

1:58:44in the bill that caught my eye was that

1:58:46you have no rollover capital. You know,

1:58:48I think that's a conversation we need to

1:58:49have more broadly is like should there

1:58:52be a like a four-year cap of something

1:58:54of how long war capital should be able

1:58:55to sit in any capital war capital

1:58:57account before it goes over because I

1:58:59think there are just a lot of cases

1:59:01where the system we have now there are

1:59:03alers who invest and spend their war

1:59:04capital. There are general services that

1:59:06go to the whole city but not every alder

1:59:08is putting money into those things. And

1:59:10so I think just these bills kind of

1:59:13remind us and bring to the forefront of

1:59:14these complexities and things that are

1:59:16tied together. But I really respect your

1:59:18leadership and digging in and getting

1:59:19straight to it and bringing a hard

1:59:21conversation forward and sitting with

1:59:22the departments and bringing a proposal

1:59:24forward with saying, you know, this is

1:59:25how it should be and I look forward to

1:59:27having conversations whether it's in

1:59:29this committee again or on the floor

1:59:31about, you know, how we can go in this

1:59:34direction.

1:59:35>> Well said. Thank you.

1:59:39>> Thank you. Um I'll try to keep my

1:59:42remarks short because I know we're after

1:59:43five now. Um but Alderman,

1:59:48would you say that this bill helps us

1:59:50get to a paving plan or at least start

1:59:53one?

1:59:54>> Yes. And then this bill, I think we're

1:59:57calling it a transportation improvement

1:59:59plan, but uh I'm going to call it TIP uh

2:00:02for short, but um I think we're going to

2:00:04get there uh in a place where the more

2:00:08equitable results do happen because we

2:00:11have that plan in front of us. It's

2:00:13brought in front of us every year. And I

2:00:15can see that's a requirement of this

2:00:16bill as well that they need to update us

2:00:18on that transportation improvement plan

2:00:20every year uh in a way that helps us

2:00:24understand what is getting done and

2:00:25what's not getting done. So if there is

2:00:27a equitable result um that all the

2:00:30person can come and yell at the

2:00:31department if they want to. Not that we

2:00:32ever want to yell at you but um you know

2:00:35that that is meant to be that feedback

2:00:37loop that exists because we do represent

2:00:39the people and we're closest to the

2:00:40people as uh as representatives. So we

2:00:42have to do that. Um the other thing I'll

2:00:45add is that uh approaching this in a

2:00:48more scientific way with datadriven

2:00:51allows us to really treat the streets

2:00:53that need it the most. Uh it is true

2:00:56that some of us have more streets in our

2:00:58ward, but it's also true that some of us

2:01:00have streets that are more heavily

2:01:02traveled than others or might be

2:01:05different kinds of traffic like trucks

2:01:07which do a lot of damage. Every single

2:01:10year, Sarah Street in my ward gets it

2:01:12feels like we pave it every few years

2:01:14and every few years it gets bad again

2:01:16because there's a grain a giant grain

2:01:18silo on that street that big large

2:01:20trucks drive on all the time. Uh so

2:01:24evaluating in a way that we are really

2:01:27assessing the condition of streets and

2:01:29understanding what kind of traffic they

2:01:31see especially major streets uh in my

2:01:34ward since we're all saying I have

2:01:35forest parkway it's in terrible

2:01:38condition right now. I know it's in

2:01:39terrible condition. I don't have the

2:01:41money to pay for it. It's huge. It's

2:01:43it's six lanes wide goes several blocks

2:01:46and it's heavily trafficked because it

2:01:47has a major hospital. So, this is

2:01:50getting our city to a place where we can

2:01:52start addressing streets like that and

2:01:54making sure that where the traffic is,

2:01:56where the damage is to the streets, uh

2:01:59where the safety needs to be improved.

2:02:01Uh I think between the two of our bills,

2:02:03we're taking a significant step forward

2:02:05for the Department of Transportation and

2:02:07I appreciate your uh your piloting of

2:02:09this bill and you bringing this forward

2:02:11today. Um I I'm already as a co-sponsor,

2:02:14but uh I really just again want to

2:02:17affirm my support for this. I think we

2:02:19have to take these small steps forward

2:02:21if we really want to get to a place

2:02:22where we do see better results than we

2:02:24see today because one thing we can all

2:02:26agree on is that our current system is

2:02:29Thank you, Alderman. And uh with that,

2:02:32I'll uh see if Director Smith would like

2:02:36to say anything.

2:02:37>> Hello, uh Caitlyn Smith, policy adviser

2:02:39and mayor. I was just going to add that

2:02:42um I think it was two weeks ago at the

2:02:44complete uh streets committee they

2:02:46published this year's tip transportation

2:02:50or infrastructure priorities. Um so

2:02:53that's where you can see um right now

2:02:54we're not at a point where we can put

2:02:56years on when those uh streets will be

2:03:00paved. Um but there is a priority hour

2:03:03out there and it is public. Um so you

2:03:08all can see what are priorities. It is a

2:03:11draft at this point to be finalized with

2:03:13the um full

2:03:16uh capital committee is what will

2:03:19finalize that. So um just wanted to make

2:03:21sure everyone knew what was out there.

2:03:22So when we're talking about what streets

2:03:24would be paved, that's what would be

2:03:27covered under this fund.

2:03:29>> Thank you. I appreciate that. Uh if any

2:03:32members don't have any more questions,

2:03:34uh I'll see if we have any public

2:03:36comment.

2:03:37>> We do. I'm going to move her over now.

2:03:39She's over. Nora,

2:03:41>> thank you for staying with us all this

2:03:43time.

2:03:43>> Miss Norah, if you would turn your

2:03:44camera on and your mic, please.

2:03:46>> Oh, sure. Um one second.

2:03:53>> Can you see me?

2:03:55>> Not yet.

2:03:56>> Um I just see audio uh on Zoom. I don't

2:03:59see anything for camera control.

2:04:04>> It should be right next to the mic.

2:04:07>> It's not.

2:04:14Um,

2:04:18>> she been moved over as a panelist.

2:04:19>> Participant video. Show nonparticipant

2:04:22video. Um,

2:04:25sorry. I see audio chat lower hand

2:04:26transcript show caption settings and

2:04:28leave.

2:04:39>> That's all I got.

2:04:40>> Give us a second and we're we're looking

2:04:42into it.

2:04:48Maybe try moving her back over and then

2:04:51again. Okay.

2:05:02Um

2:05:04>> there you are.

2:05:05>> All right. Uh you will have three

2:05:08minutes. Please proceed when you're

2:05:09ready.

2:05:10>> Sure. Yeah. So at first I did want to

2:05:11ask if if uh general public comments on

2:05:14infrastructure and utilities topics um

2:05:16that aren't on the bills um discussed

2:05:18were were fine and if so when's the time

2:05:20to do that? But um I did actually have

2:05:22things to say about like some of the

2:05:24points that were made in general um like

2:05:26um so like mechanisms for accountability

2:05:28reports on um annual basis and create

2:05:31having a more efficient city. Um so I

2:05:33just wanted to kind of plant this seed

2:05:35and ask you know have you considered

2:05:37using GitHub? Um like a lot of

2:05:39programmers use GitHub which supports um

2:05:42version control. Um all text files on it

2:05:44are basically like living documents

2:05:46which means they can be viewed really at

2:05:48any time. um it it has threading. So

2:05:52basically um anytime somebody makes like

2:05:55um an adjustment to it uh it's

2:05:57preserved. So like say I make a change

2:05:59to something on Friday um that will be

2:06:03recorded and it will be like redlined as

2:06:05an update in in GitHub. So um you know

2:06:08it's free. People use it all the time.

2:06:10It can support CSV text files. Markdown.

2:06:12Markdown also supports math equations

2:06:14and other cool things. Um and you know

2:06:18it allows you know even it even allows

2:06:20the public to make like recommendations

2:06:22to things so and like comment on you

2:06:24know things that they would change. So

2:06:26um you know really don't want to speak

2:06:29too much about the bills um themselves

2:06:32but I did kind of want to bring that

2:06:35potential resource that has the late the

2:06:37this kind of latent potential to kind of

2:06:41make a lot of the legislation creation

2:06:43process transparent. uh to your

2:06:46attention um and consideration. And

2:06:48that's kind of the main thing I wanted

2:06:50to get out there besides my previous

2:06:52point just asking about when it's okay

2:06:55to ask about things unrelated to the

2:06:57bills mentioned. But that seemed to be

2:06:59like the most pertinent thing I could

2:07:01think to to bring up um based on the

2:07:05what I've been you know observing here

2:07:07today. Um, first time speaking here by

2:07:11the way, so that's I just want to keep

2:07:13it short, but thank you. That's it.

2:07:16>> Well, thank you and welcome. Um, I'll

2:07:18answer that question about when it's

2:07:20appropriate to speak on something not

2:07:22the bills. So, typically the way the

2:07:23process works is that uh the bills each

2:07:26have a public comment section and uh

2:07:29people speak to that bill. There's

2:07:31generally not a time in the meeting to

2:07:34speak generally. However, if there's a

2:07:36committee discussion on a subject, then

2:07:39sometimes we will have that ability and

2:07:42uh I think we will have that opportunity

2:07:45uh in the coming weeks on October 7th.

2:07:48Right now, we have a planned meeting and

2:07:51um it I it may change, but I think it's

2:07:54it right now we've got it set for

2:07:55October 7th. uh same time 3:30 p.m.

2:07:59we're going to have this committee

2:08:01meeting uh public infrastructures and

2:08:03utilities uh here in this room and we're

2:08:05going to hear from the department on the

2:08:07DOT transition and the steps that are

2:08:10being taken. Uh so what that is supposed

2:08:13to do for everybody is provide an

2:08:16opportunity for people to hear and

2:08:18transparently see what's happening in

2:08:20that transition. Uh to hear the plans

2:08:23that are being put in place and then

2:08:25we'll have public feedback so that the

2:08:27public can say hey you know I didn't

2:08:30hear something I was expecting to hear

2:08:32or I heard something that was concerning

2:08:34or I heard what you said and it was

2:08:36great. We'd love to hear whatever

2:08:38feedback you have because this

2:08:40department is really supposed to be much

2:08:43more responsive uh much more uh just

2:08:47increasing people's safety uh as they

2:08:50use our streets. And I consider the

2:08:52foremost experts on people's safety to

2:08:54be the people themselves. Uh where do

2:08:57you feel safest on our streets? Where do

2:08:59you feel least safest? So that's

2:09:02something we really want to hear from

2:09:03people and there will be an opportunity

2:09:05to do that. uh on October 7th in that

2:09:08meeting uh where we're going to hear uh

2:09:10that information. So um with that uh we

2:09:15uh will let Alderman Dvote close on uh

2:09:20board bill 78.

2:09:23No se yeah 78.

2:09:25>> Uh well chair and committee again I

2:09:27appreciate your attention. Thank you for

2:09:29the very thoughtful questions and I

2:09:30would ask for favorable consideration

2:09:33with respect to board bill 78. Thank

2:09:36you. At this time, I would accept a

2:09:39motion uh to pass board bill 78 at

2:09:42committee with a pass recommendation.

2:09:44>> So move.

2:09:47>> Second.

2:09:48>> Uh moved by the alderoman from the 10th,

2:09:50seconded by the alderman from the 5th.

2:09:52Madame clerk, please call roll.

2:09:54>> Alderwoman Boyd.

2:09:56>> No.

2:09:58>> Alderwoman Clark Hubard.

2:10:00>> I.

2:10:02>> Vice Chair Whiter. I

2:10:05>> alderman Devote.

2:10:06>> Hi

2:10:08>> Alerwoman Cox Santo.

2:10:11>> I'm sorry.

2:10:15>> Chair Browning

2:10:16>> I

2:10:18>> one present four I one no.

2:10:22>> Thank you. With that uh we have passed

2:10:24board bill 78 out of committee.

2:10:25Congratulations alderman. And uh with

2:10:28that we will move on the agenda. don't

2:10:30come back to the desk because you're

2:10:32going to be up for board bill 71 and

2:10:34we're going to try to move this bill

2:10:36quickly. So,

2:10:37>> absolutely.

2:10:38>> All please take it away.

2:10:40>> Thank you. So, board bill 71 deals with

2:10:42the installation of speed humps in three

2:10:44different locations in fifth

2:10:47>> and I would appreciate your favorable

2:10:49consideration.

2:10:50>> Do the committee have any questions on

2:10:52board bill 71?

2:10:55>> Seeing none, do we have any public

2:10:57comment on board bill 71? No.

2:11:00>> Alman, you may close.

2:11:03>> Thank you for your attention and again I

2:11:05appreciate your favorable consideration

2:11:07on board 71.

2:11:08>> Thank you. I would move that we pass

2:11:10board bill 71 out of committee with a

2:11:12due pass recommend.

2:11:15>> Moved by myself, the other one from the

2:11:179th, seconded by the other one from the

2:11:19eth.

2:11:21Madame clerk, please call ro.

2:11:24>> I'm sorry. Who made the who made the

2:11:25motion? I made the motion the 9th and

2:11:28the 8th seconded.

2:11:29>> Okay. Alderwoman Boyd

2:11:32>> I.

2:11:33>> Alderwoman Clark Hubard

2:11:35>> I.

2:11:35>> Vice Chair Schwitzer.

2:11:37>> Hi.

2:11:38>> Alderman Devote.

2:11:39>> Hi.

2:11:40>> Alderwoman Cox Santo.

2:11:41>> Hi.

2:11:42>> Chair Brownie.

2:11:43>> I.

2:11:43>> We have six I votes.

2:11:45>> Thank you. Uh with that we'll move on to

2:11:48uh the next bill and that is board bill

2:11:5169. Alderwoman Sier you are recognized.

2:11:57And thank you for everyone's patience.

2:11:58It's been a unusually long public

2:12:01infrastructure and utilities meeting,

2:12:02longer than our normal meeting. Uh but

2:12:05we really got some important discussions

2:12:07today and I really appreciate

2:12:08everybody's time. Other one.

2:12:12>> Thank you, chairman, members of the

2:12:14committee. Good evening, late into the

2:12:16evening. Uh board bill 76 uh is three

2:12:20speed humps, a three speed hump request,

2:12:23one in Bonen Park West, one in the gate

2:12:25district, and one in Tower Grove East.

2:12:28Um you know, I think we all know what

2:12:30speed humps are for. We just had some

2:12:31conversation around speed humps, but

2:12:33just a reminder, I do have a process in

2:12:36um the seventh ward where we have a

2:12:37traffic calming form where people are

2:12:39able to submit requests. Although Miss

2:12:43I don't think he had 76 wasn't known or

2:12:46he had 69 and the

2:12:48>> 69 69.

2:12:50>> Yeah,

2:12:50>> this is 69.

2:12:51>> 69 did.

2:12:52>> Oh, you say I thought you said 76.

2:12:55>> Okay, thank you. If I did my mistake um

2:12:58but yes and so this is from that process

2:13:01and we are trying to get these speed

2:13:03hump sands to slow down traffic.

2:13:05>> Thank you. We appreciate that. I'll look

2:13:07around and see does any member of the

2:13:09committee have any questions on board

2:13:10bill 69?

2:13:13Seeing none, uh any public comment on

2:13:16board bill 69?

2:13:17>> We have none.

2:13:18>> Okay. And uh with that, Alone, you're

2:13:20recognized to close.

2:13:22>> Thank you. I ask for your favorable

2:13:24consideration for the three speed hump

2:13:2674.

2:13:27>> Thank you. I will go ahead and make the

2:13:29motion to pass board bill 69 out of

2:13:31committee with the pass recommendation.

2:13:33>> Second.

2:13:34>> As moved by myself. It's seconded by

2:13:37several people, but I'm going to give it

2:13:39to the the fifth uh

2:13:40>> previous row.

2:13:41>> Call for previous role from the all from

2:13:43the 10th hearing. No objection.

2:13:46Congratulations, Alderwoman. We passed

2:13:47board bill 69 out of committee with a

2:13:50due pass recommendation. And that

2:13:52concludes the agenda for board bills

2:13:54today. Uh we do not have any resolutions

2:13:57for review.

2:13:59Oh, wait. She's coming back.

2:14:03>> Did you have an amendment that you

2:14:04needed to make? I have a committee

2:14:05substitute that I need to

2:14:06>> Okay. Um in that case, uh I will make a

2:14:10motion to reconsider board bill 69

2:14:13having been on the prevailing side

2:14:16and need a second.

2:14:17>> Second. Uh moved by the myself to

2:14:20reconsider, seconded by the armed on the

2:14:225th to reconsider board bill 69. Uh and

2:14:26uh alderman, you are now recognized on

2:14:29board bill 69.

2:14:30>> Thank you. So uh the initial board bill

2:14:3269 was once behind the committee

2:14:34substitute is three. So I ask for the

2:14:36committee's favorable consideration to

2:14:38adopt the committee subst.

2:14:40>> Thank you for that. Um I would uh move

2:14:45that we adopt the committee substitute

2:14:47for board bill 69.

2:14:49>> Second.

2:14:50>> Previous role

2:14:51>> moved by myself seconded by the alderman

2:14:54from the 10th and a call for previous

2:14:56role from the alderman from the 5th.

2:14:58Hearing no objection, we've adopted the

2:14:59committee substitute. Uh and uh rolling

2:15:03through, we have to do the process

2:15:05again. I'm sorry everybody, but um any

2:15:07questions on the committee substitute

2:15:09for board bill 69? Seeing none, any

2:15:13public comment on the committee

2:15:14substitute for board bill 69? Although

2:15:16you're recognized to close.

2:15:17>> Thank you. I ask for the committee's

2:15:19favorable consideration of board bill

2:15:2069, committee substitute. And I move

2:15:22that we pass board bill 69 committee

2:15:25substitute out of committee with a due

2:15:26pass recommendation.

2:15:28>> Second

2:15:29>> previous

2:15:30>> seconded by the honorable from the 10th.

2:15:32Call for previous role from the

2:15:33honorable from the fifth hearing. No

2:15:35objection.

2:15:3669 committee substitute is passed out of

2:15:38committee. Thank you alderwoman.

2:15:41And with that we have no resolutions for

2:15:44review. Nothing on the committee

2:15:46discussion agenda. Any written

2:15:49testimony? Madam clerk?

2:15:50>> We have none. Thank you. Does any member

2:15:53of this committee have any

2:15:54announcements?

2:15:56I just have the one announcement that we

2:15:58will have on October 7th a public

2:16:00infrastructure and utilities committ

2:16:02meeting uh at which we will discuss the

2:16:05Department of Transportation uh

2:16:07transition. That'll be at 3:30 p.m.

2:16:09October 7th here in this room and

2:16:11online. Thank you all for your time

2:16:14today. Really appreciate it. Uh there is

2:16:17no need to excuse any members. All

2:16:18members who are present. Uh and with

2:16:20that uh I'll accept a motion to adjurnn.

2:16:24>> Second.

2:16:25>> Moved. Seconded. Moved by the eth

2:16:28seconded by the 10th. Call for previous

2:16:29roll from the all from the fifth.

2:16:31Hearing no objection. We are adjourned.