More Garden News: Rutledge-Wilson Farm Park Leases Almost a Third of Available Garden Plots

According to an article in the Friday edition of the "Springfield News-Leader," the Springfield-Greene County Parks Department has leased 19 of the 60 garden plots it is making available to the public since kicking off the pilot program last month.

The 8 x 16 and 16 x 16 plots may be leased for $25 and $40 on an annual basis, respectively. Those signing up will have an option to renew their lease annually.

News-Leader reporter Wes Johnson laid out the particulars:

The Park Board provides soil, fencing, water access and a sign for each plot.

All food grown is the property of the plot's renter. Each participant is responsible for maintaining weed control, providing all seeds and other equipment required to grow a garden and removing debris at the end of the growing season.

"The goal of the new Urban Gardens program is to offer a space for people to grow fruits, vegetables or flowers, who otherwise don't immediately have the space available in their own backyard," said Parks Director Jodie Adams.

"They will also offer an opportunity for youth field trips to see and participate in a working garden, along with generally providing fellowship with others and recreational, exercise and therapeutic benefits to our community."

An urban garden program guide and application is available directly on the Park Board's Web site at www.parkboard.org.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

News-Leader Responds with Follow Up to JackeHammer's Breaking Story

It was really nice of the "Springfield News-Leader's" Wes Johnson to follow up today on the story I broke at JackeHammer last Friday.

Wes expressed his appreciation for all the hard work and research I have been providing when I saw him at the last meeting of the Task Force.

"I've been enjoying your reporting on the Urban Garden Task Force. Thank you," Johnson said.

It was the first time the News-Leader was represented at a task force meeting since the group announced their first meeting in early August and the fourth time the group has met.

In the mean time, I had received, along with the Urban Garden Task Force, a response via email to my blog post of last Friday from assistant City attorney Nancy Yendez.

In that response," Yendez indicated she had not researched state statute pertaining to Missouri Court definitions of farms or farming in relation to the sale of vegetables from a residential zoned property.

"Whether someone is a farmer for the state statute if they are selling in front of their residential house where they grew the vegetables has not been researched by me yet and it is not a simple answer," Yendez wrote.

She had anticipated being at the next Urban Garden Task Force meeting but did not realize it would not be held until next Tuesday evening, on September 22, rather than on September 15.

"I now have a conflict with that time period, so I do not know if I will make the meeting. I have talked with [Senior Planner] Daniel Neal today about my research on zoning sales in residential, on streets, etc," Yendez wrote in a later email.

Yendez had previously addressed the task force concerning the bearing Missouri state statutes might have on potential city policy regulating "urban gardens" at the group's second meeting on August 18.

As usual, I will continue to update the blog when I feel I have enough new information to share that it is warranted. At the moment, I am awaiting information which I feel might be pertinent to a clear understanding of the Municipal Code section sited by Ms. Butler in Friday's blog entry and discussed in Mr. Johnson's article in the "Springfield News-Leader" today.

...and Wes, I've been enjoying reading your coverage of the Urban Garden Task Force. Thank you. - Jackie Melton

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

'Sobering' Pension Discussions Deserve a Second Look for Clarification

If you, like me, were intrigued by a few short lines within Wes Johnson's article in today's "Springfield News-Leader": "'Sobering' pension fund issues discussed," then, you, like me, want to know more about Mehlville, Missouri's Firefighter pension fund.

Johnson wrote:

"Task force chairman Jerry Fenstermaker asked Zwiener to explain how one community, the town of Melville, solved its firefighter pension fund shortfall.

Zwiener said the fire district's trustees looked at their funding shortfall and decided to simply stop paying future benefits.

"They switched to a defined contribution plan," similar to a 401(k) , and that switch was upheld in court, Zwiener said."

Well, with a little assistance from a reader of "JackeHammer," what I found out is that "Melville" is Mehlville and it is in Missouri. I read a few articles about the Mehlville suit and decision, and I sent off some questions to actuary Michael Zwiener, thinking there was more to the story than what I, and others, read in the News-Leader this morning.

"The pension fund is sponsored by the Mehlville, Missouri Fire Protection District. What that fund did was cease the future accrual of benefits," Zwiener wrote in an email response. "The benefits of retirees were not affected. The benefits of active members earned to date were not affected. What ceased was the accrual of additional benefits after the change date, which I believe was March 2006 (guessing). In lieu of post 2006 pension accruals, the District installed a defined contribution plan."

Zwiener said Aaron Hilmer was the key player in the changes to Mehlville's pension plan. Hilmer was elected to the Mehlville Fire District Board in 2005, along with Bonnie Stegman, to whom Hilmer gives partial credit for the changes.

In a "Budget & Tax News" article, published by the Heartland Institute in November, 2007, Hilmer wrote about the case.

"The August 27 ruling by St. Louis County Circuit Court Judge Thea A. Sherry struck down a lawsuit by the local firefighters union challenging the MFPD's decision to terminate its defined benefit plan and put every employee, current and future, in a defined contribution plan," Hilmer wrote.

He also stated the ruling set an important precedent, " for government bodies that hope to reduce pension costs and give employees more control over and flexibility in their retirement programs."

Hilmer wrote, after he and Stegman, of the Mehlville Fire District Board were elected, they began to work toward reforming the pension and disability plan.

"We hired a disability insurance provider to take over the disability portion, and after two years of union-filed lawsuits against that move, the change became final earlier this year when the Missouri Supreme Court declined to hear the case."

An email query to Assistant Fire Chief David Hall has not yet been answered. I will update should Hall respond to my request for a comment.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The New Council: A Chemistry of Respect

Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes....

Okay, I could tell you the cold, hard, factual details about the City Council luncheon today, I've got it on tape and I have most of the handouts that were available but, I'd like to touch on something a little different. Besides, I might follow up on Wes' report after it comes out in tomorrow's News-Leader.

I'd rather look at the attitude and chemistry of the new Council tonight. I like it.

I see a true consideration and respect for other members on the part of our new Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem. Almost a deference to them that can only be described as a humbleness of spirit on the part of the Mayor and his new Pro Tem. It's a refreshing change.

Twice today, I witnessed the Pro Tem defer to Councilman Doug Burlison, who offered some good suggestions, and I think Mr. Burlison has, sometimes, felt a bit shut out in the past.

This is not to say that our past Mayor, Tom Carlson, did not allow other Councilmembers to speak, he did, but, while that is true, there never seemed to be the level of respect we are witnessing on the part of the new Mayor.

I don't really think I am the only one who got a sense there was a certain feeling of entitlement on the part of the old Council. Often, they seemed to decide how they wanted to act, with little regard to the sentiment of the public. I also don't think I am the only person within this city that sensed a certain arrogance on the part of some of the past members. Sure, they were all, personally, likeable people but, they didn't seem to be very approachable to the general public.

Another attitude I like is the respectful but firm manner in which our new Mayor deals with the City Manager. I know it is pretty early to pass any judgement on the way the new Council works but, Mayor O'Neal has already set a precedent of establishing his and the Council's unquestionable authority over Springfield's fledgling City Manager. The effect seems to be a more genuine deference to the wishes of the Council on the part of the manager. He seems a bit more tentative in recommending certain actions and time lines than he has in the past, and I believe, he may be starting to take his place, under the authority of the City Council, a bit more seriously than in his first days as manager.

All this is good news to me, in part, because I am going to be letting go of covering the City Council more and more as time goes by. I'm going through my own changes. The last 4 months has been a transitional time for me. [Really the last year, considering I lost my little dog and my sweet Mother in late December, 2007 and early April, 2008.]

I really enjoyed the work I was doing for the Community Free Press but, it became more and more clear to me that they really needed to use staff personnel for the increasing work load they were requesting of me, if, as it became apparent was the case, they were not willing to pay me appropriately for the work I was taking very seriously and spending more and more time upon. It was good business for them but, not good common sense for me.

Here's the confession: I loved what I was doing, so much so, in fact, I've been doing it for free as I have been slowly and quietly weaning myself from continuing in the same manner as I have been able to perform in the past. You see, I'm not a rich person who can afford to keep sacrificing my time in the endeavor, regardless of how much I enjoy(ed) it and regardless of how much I enjoy(ed) offering information as a community service to those who were and continue to be interested in city business.

Anyway, no promises. I'll write about the city if and when I have time or, if and when I feel like it. There's a big, broad, beautiful world out there and I have interests in other areas too. Life is good.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Recommended Reading 9: CID, TIF, & TDD; Tools in the City's Tool Box

Ibarra, Burlison call for greater CID awareness News-Leader.com Springfield News-Leader

I just have a few points to add to Johnson's article in today's News-Leader. Unfortunately, my allergies have been running amuck and yesterday I didn't feel up to recapping the meeting. So, I'll just add onto Johnson's accurate report.

Mayor Jim O'Neal wants to have a philosophical discussion about the use of community improvement districts (CIDs), tax increment financing (TIF), and transportation development districts (TDDs) before City staff asks for approval of many more projects involving the use of the development strategies.

"It's (the CID) an interesting political creature and I understand there's some philosophical discussion behind that," O'Neal said. "We'd like to have that discussion before we vote on many of these."

The comment came on the heels of a brief discussion raised by Councilman Nick Ibarra about the transparency, or lack of it, regarding community improvement districts. Ibarra asked Economic Development Director Mary Lilly Smith how the public knows when they are in a CID.

"There's no requirement that they post the sales tax at the register," Smith answered. She explained that the creation of the CID creates a new jurisdiction within the City.

After the creation of the district, those within it can seek an additional sales tax, in this case, The Shoppes at James River would use the proceeds of the sales tax to improve a storm water basin and take over the ongoing maintainence of the basin. The basin is currently the responsibility of the tax payer through the City. Developer Tom Rankin said he would be unable to pay the $300,000 for use of the basin, required improvements to it, and ongoing maintenance of it without an initial 1 percent tax.

"We can't afford to spend that kind of money without getting some return," Rankin said.

Smith explained that those who live within the district would not lose their ability to vote in support or opposition of the additional sales tax. Registered voters who live within the district would vote it up or down. Sometimes the districts, however, only contain the property owners, in which case, only the property owners would vote on whether to place an additional sales tax within the boundaries of the district.

By there being no requirement for the affected business owners to post the sales tax at the register, patrons who enter the district to make purchases within it are usually unaware they are paying a higher tax rate than they would at a store or restaurant not located within the community improvement district.

Councilman Doug Burlison was concerned about the CID's potential effect on any sort of a sales tax which might be initiated as a cure for the police and firefighter pension plan.

"If we're putting in an additional tax here and an additional tax there, that doesn't go unnoticed," Burlison said. He fears adding yet another community improvement district, with an additional 1 percent sales tax, will lessen the chance of passage of a pension sales tax for the pension fund.

The News-Leader article linked above lists the 7 existing CIDs within Springfield and the rate of additional sales tax each district charges.

The passage of Council Bill 2009-095 did not create a new CID. It authorized the Mayor to sign a petition to create the Shoppes at James River Community Improvement District. That step is a necessary, preliminary step for the creation of that district.

As a part of the explanation to the bill, the Planning and Development Department's Ralph Rognsdadt noted: "This resolution merely authorizes the Mayor to sign the petition to establish the CID. It does not establish the CID. The City Council will consider a bill to establish the district at a subsequent City Council meeting." At the time of the Council's consideration to establish the CID, the public will have an opportunity to speak.

The preliminary step was approved with Councilmen Ibarra and Burlison opposed.

City Manager Greg Burris indicated the budget should be the priority for the Council for the time being but, agreed the new Council needed to understand the development strategies.

"You do need to be aware of the tools we have in our tool box," Burris said. Burris said he will have a presentation prepared to facilitate a discussion about the development strategies in the near future.

For more information about Community Improvement Districts, Tax Increment Financing, Transportation Development Districts and other municipal development strategies click this link.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Making Mountains out of Trash Hill Negotiations?

No one wins with this "Springfield News-Leader" article: "Springfield trash agreement made in private," it is a sad and fragmentary(?) story.

"It was a horribly handled process," said Hal Buchert, one of three Citizen's Solid Waste Committee members who volunteered for the put-or-pay subcommittee.

"They didn't want us involved in the negotiations. They knew where they wanted to go. They knew how they would go about doing it. They dressed it up with the task force."

I'm not trying to take the side of "The City" against "The Press," here (and Wes knows I love him) but, geesh, let's get real. I think there could be a more plausible reason for the sub-committee being shut out of the negotiations, a less sinister reason than the one implied(?) in the article, though, perhaps still damaging enough.

According to the News-Leader article:

"Buchert, Dan Hoy and Rusty Worley volunteered to serve on the put-or-pay subcommittee, which the full solid waste committee formed on April 2, 2008."

Here's what I am thinking, and have not confirmed: The News-Leader article is unclear about who requested the "full solid waste committee," to seek volunteers for a "put or pay subcommittee" that was "given the task of working with two major Springfield trash companies," and the News-Leader article first identifies this Solid Waste Committee subcommittee as "a citizen subcommittee." Is a Solid Waste Committee subcommittee a citizen subcommittee? Technically, I just don't know.

I suspect, but, again have not confirmed, someone employed by the City, in their desire to either get public input or be perceived as getting public input into the trash hauler negotiation process, recommended the Solid Waste Committee put together a citizen sub-committee on the trash hauling contract negotiations without realizing the legal ramifications but, I don't know who might have recommended it.

Instead of that or those City official(s) just owning up to the mistake of forming the sub-committee in the first place, the sub-committee was strung along and not allowed input and not likely given much information but, I think the point is: Any input provided by the committee would have jeopardized the negotiations because the negotiations would then become public information.

According to the News-Leader:

"Using Wright -- and not the subcommittee -- ensured that any talks would not run afoul of the Missouri Sunshine Law, Buchert said.

"The waste haulers wouldn't sit at the table if the press was going to be there and listen to all their business," he said."

Do the citizens of Springfield deserve deliberate and thoughtful decision making that doesn't front load negotiation processes like the trash hauler/City put or pay contract with stupid mistakes that have the potential of being perceived as secrecy on the part of our city government? Yes.

What should have been legally, private negotiations, which should not have been made public until a final agreement was reached in the first place, (and remember, such agreements are never truly final until the public's Council representatives approve them, AFTER the public has had an opportunity for public hearing) are now tainted with suspicion.

If the sub-committee was not mistakenly formed to begin with, there wouldn't even be an issue with whether that sub-committee was involved in the process or bypassed by the Springfield Public Works Department and a contract attorney.

I think it was a stupid mistake on the part of the (I'm assuming) City official(s) who decided to call for a put or pay sub-committee in the first place but, it was more than likely a well intentioned mistake, meant to involve the public in the process.

I suspect, in that particular aspect, a mountain has been made out of the trash hill negotiations.

On the issue of whether it is a good contract and the negotiations were in the best interest of Springfield citizens? That's fair game for discussion.

At the City Council meeting wherein the bill to approve the agreement was first read and the public hearing held, the News-Leader previously reported:

"Only one resident showed at a recent City Council meeting to question the city's proposed new deal with its trash haulers."

It was at that Council meeting the citizens had their first opportunity for input, and then, during the interim before the next Council meeting, scheduled for this Monday, the 23rd, the citizens could, as the last linked News-Leader story indicated, write emails and place phone calls to their Council representatives to let their voices be heard regarding the City's proposed trash hauler agreement. So, the facts are, there was a public hearing and there has been an additional two week's time for the public to personally contact their Council representatives regarding the issue.

I don't mean to sound hard-nosed about it but, the News-Leader did its part to try to make the public aware of questions they might have about the trash hauler agreement, that was the right thing for our daily local paper to do. I would suppose, at Monday night's Council meeting we'll hear from members of the City Council about whether they received public input in the form of emails and phone calls over the last couple of weeks, and, if you don't like the way you are being represented on the City Council, I would appeal to you to VOTE in the upcoming Council election.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

News, Niches and the Nine Percent

Or, Springfield Citizen Survey Says

In a "Springfield News-Leader" article, "Sign project to cost $600,000," Wes Johnson answered questions regarding the Wayfinding Signs Project, which five members of the City Council approved through resolution at Monday night's meeting. A companion "Our Voice" column pretty well drove home any editorial comments I might have on the subject but, you know me, I'm not one to let that stop me from commenting. ;)

Johnson's article provided the sort of "meat" voters need to go with their "potatoes" when making decisions about how to vote on tax measures.

The current, 2008-2013 CIP plan, similar to the previous CIP plan which contained the Wayfinding Signs Project, has 134 pages. I don't know how many pages were in the CIP plan that contained that project but, one could wonder, considering only 17 percent of voters turned out on February 3, after intensive community discussion and promotion of the 1-cent police and fire pension sales tax, how many voters read and understood the previous CIP plan prior to voting in support of the 1/4-cent sales tax which included the Wayfinding Signs Program?

What other $600,000 "surprises" are in store for citizens of Springfield who have, or made, no time to read 100+ pages in the plan? And, I wrote "surprises," in quotation marks because it's doubtful many voters are educated about the projects within any given CIP they have voted to fund with a sales tax in the past. We could even wonder how many of our representative City Council members are educated about the projects within any given CIP, remember, Councilman Chiles didn't even know what "wayfinding" was, even though he had been presented, or had the documentation available to him, at least, by the Thursday preceding that City Council meeting.

The difficulty comes in, for citizen voters and their representatives, when these sort of lengthy plans are developed by City staff (based on public input, mind you) and presented to the City Council with a limited amount of time for discussion. The projects included within the plan are a package deal. The Council approves the whole package, and in the amount of time they are allotted to make a decision regarding such plans, it is doubtful they have adequate time to seriously consider each individual project within it. Is it appropriate to be bound by a plan which spans 6 years while the voters who supported it are cutting back due to economic hard times?

The city must project what they believe their sales tax revenue will be from year to year and clearly, they don't have a magic 8-ball which gives them an infallible forecast. Sales tax revenue was projected to be an increased 3 percent for 2008, it has fallen short, in fact, it has decreased rather than increased. So, how can we, as citizens of Springfield, support plans which cannot consider what economic times we may be living in from month to month, let alone year to year?

The Bible says, "You have not because you ask not," our City government seems to have that asking part down pat. Though giving the usual lip service to finding cost efficient or cost free ways to receive public input about why the pension sales tax failed on February 3, there is little doubt a new sales tax measure will be placed on the ballot in an upcoming election.

Councilman Burlison, for some unknown reason, felt he needed to share with the public how he planned to make a motion that a new pension sales tax initiative be placed on the ballot as soon as possible. I'm sort of scratching my head about why he felt the need to share that sentiment publicly. He didn't make the motion so, why tell people, "I was going to make a motion but, now I'm not?" Further, before the vote on February 3, the Council was saying it was up to the voters, the voters should decide. Well, the voters decided but, it would appear that, until the voters decide the right way or the way the City and Council would like them to decide, their decision simply does not count. Now, clearly, and to be fair to Mr. Burlison, that is not to say that some sort of solution to the pension problem must be reached and most people realize that some sort of sales tax will likely, be a part of the mix.

My thoughts are: If the City didn't ask for so many taxes, like the CIP sales tax, the Park's sales tax, and the Transportation sales tax, in most cases for non-core services or lesser priority projects, to later offer $600,000 "surprises," the public might have passed a legitimate and necessary tax like the pension sales tax.

But, all that said, isn't it public apathy that is the problem, in most cases?

I understand, and am even sympathetic, that it isn't just simply a case of apathy, it is often a case of time constraint. How many Joes and Josephines have time to take on the daunting task of reading a 100+ page document to become educated on whether they should or should not support a Capital Improvement Plan sales tax? Should they be required to have to take on such a daunting task in the first place? I recognize they voted on City Council representatives in the hopes that those representatives would take care of such issues for them. After all, isn't that why we have an elected City Council? To represent us in such matters? Aren't they the ones who get paid for that? Well, no, or hell no, depending on your perspective. Much can be said for the public sentiment that the Council volunteered and they knew what they were volunteering for and they shouldn't have volunteered if they weren't up to the task of representing us but, I still think "you get what you pay for."

Neither do I think the media should take the entire blame for not exhaustively educating the public about every detail involved in such a plan. Some people wouldn't read the "cliff notes" version if they were in solitary confinement with nothing but the CIP in the room. The burden of oversight just isn't important enough to them to "waste" the brain cells needed to embrace the information. But, let's say they do spend their time educating themselves about the plan, 1). They might have to quit their day job to make the time. 2). If there are projects which don't meet their approval, their work has just started, now, they have to 3). Take action on what they know by starting to make noise about it. What's the answer? A charter rule against 100+ page governmental documents? A charter rule against 6 year plans?

HOW DO YOU MAKE PEOPLE CARE? Now, there's an age old question. You have the documents available for your perusal. You have the media doing the best they can to give you information about the plan(s) or the tax(es), or the pending legislation, whatever the case may be. You have open Council meetings (According to the 2008 Citizen Survey, 9 percent of you attended them in 2008) and you have a Public Information Office at your disposal, if you care to call with questions. You have City Web sites, City blogs, City Council representatives.

I don't mean to sound cynical but here's the deal, you have an important City Council election coming up in April. For whom will you vote? Will you take the time to even find out about the candidates or, will you sit down in a voting booth (if you bother to even go to the polls) and mark the name you think you might recognize?

Maybe I'm too harsh, maybe I'm too cynical, I don't know but, we'd all like to blame someone else. Joe and Josephine blame the new City Manager, "He has no experience." Pete and Peg blame the City Council, the City Council hired and are charged with the oversight of the City Manager, the City Clerk and the Internal Auditor, that much is true but, NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM arrived in their City Council or Mayoral positions in a vacuum. They were voted there, oftentimes with low voter turnout and sometimes by people who said to themselves, "I think I might recognize that name," or "I got a glossy brochure from this candidate," and we all know glossy brochures make for a credible candidate or an astute Council representative, right?

Bob Mace, veteran columnist for the Community Free Press (CFP), put it this way in the new issue of CFP:

"It truly is past time to realize that it’s less a question of who serves on council than it is putting our collective will to addressing the issue of reorganization of Springfield government. Council has an impossible task when approaching funding priorities because the airport, parks and libraries have their own taxing authority and volunteer boards setting individual priorities.

We should be able to postpone park projects in order to deal with high priorities of the pension shortfalls and a hiring freeze for police and firefighters. Our approval of earmarked taxes and allowing municipal departments to have autonomy from the general fund budget leave council with hands tied."

I'd have to agree with Mace, voting away money to fund lesser priority services for a period of years during times of feast has it's downfall when the famine hits. In the end, however, the voter is the one who decides (and sometimes decides and decides and decides until the City likes and agrees with their decision) but, until a greater number of voters and potential voters in the City of Springfield take more of an interest in how the City is spending their hard earned dollars, it is doubtful it will change.

The Community Free Press has an new Managing Editor. He's trying to find his niche. I wish him luck. Council members would like to hear from the public too but, based on the fact that only 9 percent of respondents to the recent 2008 Citizen Survey had even attended a City Council meeting in that year, I'd say he may have a hard "row to hoe" in getting that elusive public input regarding what they'd like to read about. My natural inclination at the moment would be to suggest more frivolous topics which take little thought and bear little consequence to future generations, that way, you could appeal to 91 percent of the population rather than 9 percent. Then again, on the other hand, the media has a responsibility to report on City, State and Federal government issues whether the public bothers to read it or simply uses it to line their bird cages and mulch their gardens.

The times are hard but, I'm hopeful. Some people are waking up and asking, "How did we get here???" If you are one of those people, welcome to the 9 percent.

City Council and Mayor Candidates as of September 26

The Springfield News-Leader published the list of names of those who had picked up petitions to run for the City Council and Mayor as of Friday, September 26:

Candidates for city positions

People who have taken out petitions to run as of Friday:

General A
Robert Stephens
Tom Martz
Jeff Paul

General B
Frank Howey
Scott Bailes
Fred Ellison
Jason Lillard

Zone 1
Denny Whayne
Nick Ibarra
Cameron Eaton

Zone 4
Scott Bailes

Mayor
James O'Neal
Sandra Queen Noble
Christopher Donegan
Derek White
Jack Bresee

(Thanks, Wes!)

In the interest of including all the facts: Council Bills 2008-208, 209

In, "Council to consider tax breaks for BKD building," The Springfield News-Leader's Wes Johnson wrote:

"The council will consider giving several tax breaks to facilitate a $21.5 million industrial revenue bond for the 109,600-square-foot BKD headquarters building at 910 St. Louis St.

The site currently is a parking lot owned by John Q. Hammons, just south of the Jordan Valley Car Park.

Tonight's discussion is a first reading of the proposal, and the public will have an opportunity to speak about it. A final vote is likely within two weeks."

Johnson was writing about, one must assume, Council Bill 2008-208.

However, the Resolution, Council Bill 2008-209, will be read tonight and, as a Resolution, only requires one reading. Citizens may speak but the Council may, and most likely will vote tonight, either for or against approval of the City acting as necessary to issue its Industrial Development Revenue Bonds in a principal amount not to exceed $21.5 million to finance the costs of Opus' building of the "BKD" office building.

If the Council approves the Resolution, the City will become the owners of the property and will lease it to Opus, with Opus having an option to buy the property and its improvements. You can read the terms for yourself under both bills.

Johnson failed to note that, so I thought I would.

The original agreement Council approved, which was negotiated with Hammons on the former arena site/parking garage, stipulated that Hammons would sell the property, which Hammons owned and is currently a parking lot, to Opus for the purpose of developing an office building which would be leased, in part, to BKD.

Council approved the option of the bond issuance as a part of the authorization they gave the City to negotiate a development agreement with Opus on June 30. Whether they realized the option of a City ownership, finance and City bond issuance was approved because of the City's inclusion of RSMo Chapter 100 being cited or not, I do not know. I haven't taken the time to find out yet.

16. RESOLUTIONS. CITIZENS MAY SPEAK. MAY BE VOTED ON.

17. COUNCIL BILL 2008-209. (Carlson)A resolution approving a plan for an Industrial Development Project for 910 Springfield, L.L.C., and determining the official intent of the City of Springfield, Missouri, to issue its Industrial Development Revenue Bonds in a principal amount not to exceed $21,500,000 to finance the costs of such project

Tight-fisted City (and Councilman?) make it Difficult

To provide depth, scope, and understanding on the part of the media, on the topics that they're covering? (see: Mayor Carlson: Excerpt from the State of the City Report)

In Salary ranges recommended for next city manager, Wes Johnson wrote for the Springfield News-Leader:

"Mayor Pro Tem Gary Deaver, who chairs the effort to find a new city manager, said the City Council and Arcus search firm can use the pay study to evaluate what to offer a prospective candidate.

"It's a benchmark tool they can use to understand what wages and compensation is in like-sized cities," Deaver said. "We want to be competitive, but not pay too much."

Though he agreed it was a public document, Deaver asked the News-Leader not to publish the subcommittee's pay-range study....*

He acknowledged the search committee and City Council weren't bound by the pay range included in the study."

Then, Johnson (and the News-Leader) provided the link to the City Manager Compensation Recommendations, I do not know if this is the actual "study" Deaver asked the News-Leader not to publish: Salary ranges recommended for next city manager.

I hope Mayor Carlson is proud of Mr. Johnson for providing such depth and scope, indeed, such understanding of the issue.

CFP requested meeting minutes from all of the City Manager Search Committee meetings and Sub-Committee meetings, including the Compensation Package Sub-Committee. Note was made that at the time of publication of CFP's (June 18) current issue:

"The minutes of the February 1 (Compensation Package Sub-Committee) meeting indicated there would be a "brainstorming meeting" held on February 15. Minutes to that meeting, if it took place, were not submitted to CFP and a response to a follow up request for that information did not come in time for inclusion in this publication." (see: Online Supplimentals to the Print Edition).

CFP got a response, on June 18, from City Clerk Brenda Cirtin about the February 15 meeting referred to during the course of the February 1 meeting. The Administrative Assistant for the Committee was out of her office and unable to respond so I had forwarded my query to the City Clerk:

"I have checked our files and there was no meeting posted for the Compensation Package Sub-Committee on February 15." Ms. Cirtin wrote in an email.

Granted, my query specified a particular meeting in this instance, however, originally, I had requested all meeting minutes regarding the committee from Ms. Smith and there were no other meeting minutes beyond the February 1 meeting of the Compensation Package Sub-Committee included with those minutes.

At the online supplimental page at CFP you can read, under the heading of "The Four Sub-Committees of the City Manager Search Committee," the information I (or CFP, through me) was provided regarding meetings held by the the over-all city manager's search committee and the sub-committee meetings.

Interesting. Apparently, all of that study and preparation necessary to create the Sub-Committee's recommended salary ranges was accomplished with one meeting of the Compensation Package Sub-Committee.

At the first meeting of the City Manager Search Committee, on January 14, 2008, Mayor Pro Tem Gary Deaver stressed that the Committee needed to make the search process as open and transparent to the public as possible.

I signed up for news-letters from the City regarding the progress of the search. I can't remember the last time I received one, seriously.

"It's not like it used to be, there's not the depth, there's not the scope, there's not the understanding on the part of the media, on the topics that they're covering.... It makes it very difficult to get your message out." - Mayor Tom Carlson in his state of the city report.

Maybe you're placing the blame on the wrong people, Mayor Carlson? Just a thought.

*emphasis mine

Will McGowan Carry the City's Heer's Deal Baton?

Darin Bridges of Springfield had a reader letter in the News-Leader today: Relay incident memorable, in which he recounts dropping the baton (he's writing as though to Coach Vaughan, who was recently honored at the dedication at Shumate Stadium):

"It was the All-City Meet. Our (Hillcrest) mile relay team was favored to take the gold or at least the silver. I was your lead-off guy, and during my fourth stride out of the blocks I dropped the baton. It tumbled all the way to the edge of the track. It was awful....

You called us all together in the middle of the field and we could tell you were fuming. You then yelled for the equipment manager, "Let me see that baton!" It scared the poor kid to death. For a moment I was afraid you might beat me with it. Instead you threw it on the ground and stomped on it. Right there in the middle of JFK. You then picked it up, looked at it, and scolded something like, "I never want to see another one of these NEW batons in the hands of one of my track members again! Do you hear me?" Then you yelled at the other coaches, "Look at how light these aluminum batons are! My boys have been practicing with nothing but steel and on the day of the race we put this #$&! in their hands?!"...

Yeah, the baton was new, lighter aluminum, but we all knew that had nothing to do (with) my dropping it. We knew exactly what you were up to, but no one ever brought the subject up again. We simply moved on to the next race. (Emphasis mine)

The strategy and timing of your demonstration was pure genius. You could have "called-me-out" for such a bone-headed move, but you knew that would hurt our team, and I think you knew what it would do to me...."

I have a purpose for bringing up Mr. Bridges' sports story. I want to apply it to the City of Springfield regarding Park Central Square. Wes Johnson's story in the News-Leader seems a bit like grasping at straws to me, I mean, I'm being honest here.

In Back to square one? Johnson puts forth the challenge of whether Lawrence Halprin can be considered the designer of the square when another architect working in Halprin's firm was responsible for the majority of the architectural drawings. Well, that would be akin to saying that an architect hired by Butler Rosenbury to do work for Butler Rosenbury under the Butler Rosenbury stamp and seal isn't really Butler Rosenbury. It's quite a stretch but I appreciate the sentiment.

I noticed Vincent David Jericho was asking if those who wanted to see Halprin's work preserved could be blamed for a Heer's deal bail out by McGowan's exercise of their put option if the square renovation wasn't on schedule (as specified in their contract on the Heer's with the city) due to the question of the historic value of the square. Well, I don't really think so, these matters should have been considered long ago, before the contract with Kevin McGowan included the stipulation that the square would be remodeled by a certain date, actually, it should have been considered more critically whether it was a good decision for the city to take possession of the Heer's Tower way back when, but we are where we are and sometimes the best thing to do is to take our frustrations out on the aluminum baton rather than the player(s) responsible for the fumble.

Sometimes the best thing to do is to build up the team. I don't disagree with that but I also think that honesty, honesty from the start to the finish, is the best policy. The coach facilitated a "face" save for a young high school team player. It'd be nice if Wes Johnson could facilitate a "face" save through his article, or, if Butler Rosenbury, by stretching to suggest that a signed and sealed Lawrence Halprin design wasn't really a Halprin design because someone else in his firm drew the plans, could pull the city out of this mess but let's not forget that the high school boys on the team, including and especially the young man that dropped the baton knew what the coach was really doing. Our collective intelligence demands it.

We all want to be good team players. We all want the best for Springfield, Missouri and we all understand that we cannot afford to own the Heer's Tower anymore but this bed has been made and it'll be played out and City staff and City Council aren't high school age students dropping a baton at a sporting event. Still...the best thing for Springfield is that Kevin McGowan not exercise his put option even if the play turns out to have been made poorly. We'll just have to see how it comes out and hope that it turns out well in the end. A lot of it depends on Mr. McGowan, will he be a team player? Will he stomp on the baton or will he take his ball and go home? I remember McGowan making comment before the City Council at the public hearing of the Heer's deal on August 27, 2007:

"We're committed to this project and we're committed because we've formed some relationships here in Springfield. We're very much looking forward to get going...."

He said he was committed to renovating the Heer's Tower. Now would be the time to hope he meant it.

"...we believe the city could improve," Spokeswoman for the Missouri State Auditor's Office said

Wes Johnson quoted the spokeswoman for the Missouri State Auditor's Office, Samantha Brewer, in State to unveil Springfield audit:

"The audit has recommendations in areas where we believe the city could improve," Brewer said. "We don't have enforcement powers. We cannot make the city implement the recommendations contained in the audit. That part is up to the citizens who need to go to meetings and make the city respond to them."

Wouldn't it be awesome if more citizens of Springfield would go to meetings and "make the city respond to them?"

I notice there are some in the blogosphere and elsewhere who would have you look to them to disseminate information gathered at meetings. Nah, you don't have to be there, this one or that one will take care of your civic responsibility so you don't have to.

Certainly, it is nice to read news articles and reports about what transpired at this meeting or that meeting. It's nice to read this blogger or that blogger's take on events but if I could do anything through this blog it would be to somehow encourage citizens to show up in person. You don't have to be there? No, no one is going to make you take an interest in getting your information first hand. Someone else will always be happy to tell you the high points from their vantage point if that's what you want. Will you be more sympathetic to the opinion of Tony Messenger, Vincent David Jericho or a smorgasbord of bloggers and reporters who will comment on the report? Will you read everything written and then decide based on what was important to this person or that person from their vantage point? Will you trust others with that information gathering for you?

As a person who has attended many meetings involving City Council I can tell you that you don't get all the information shared at any given meeting. Reporters, journalists, radio talk show hosts and bloggers pick and choose what they will include in the discussion, it isn't necessarily intentional, it's just that space and air time is limited.

Sometimes you miss some of the quirky facts because there simply isn't room or air time to include everything. Those to whom you hand over responsibility to inform you can't possibly tell you every minute detail of every meeting. So, I would encourage people to attend every meeting they can attend, realizing it isn't likely anyone can attend all of them. I don't get to attend every meeting in the city either, but we could all do better with Samantha Brewer's charge to "go to meetings and make the city respond to them."

Reminder: Vincent David Jericho will be interviewing State Auditor Susan Montee tomorrow morning (Friday) on KSGF.

The audit report will be heard at City Council chambers tonight at 7:00 p.m. The address is 830 Boonville Avenue.