Springfield City Council DOES Have Input on State and Federal Legislation

At least as long as they retain the service of state and federal lobbyist(s) and Council communicates with legislators

A lot of commentators at the News-Leader's Web site, including the editorial board of the News-Leader itself, are spending time today complaining about a discussion that took place at the City Council meeting on Monday.

The News-Leader editorial board complained that 40 minutes were spent on a topic of discussion that has little to do with Council responsibilities. Commentators chided Councilman Ibarra particularly, and the whole Council in general for wasting time. Most of the commentators are claiming the Council has no input on federal legislation.

This might be a good time to remind the public that the City Council has had paid lobbyists in the past, and may have paid lobbyists today who are tasked with lobbying state and federal governments. Every year the City Council updates and approves a list of your municipality's legislative priorities. The City Council has, and likely still is, using taxpayer funding to pay lobbyists to appeal to state and federal legislators regarding the interests of the City of Springfield, or at least its City officials.

It would be a fallacy to make the claim that our City Council doesn't have any input on state or federal legislation.

Apparently, the City's new legislative priority list for 2010 has not yet been added to the site map at the City's Web site. In 2009, the priority list was introduced, in part, with these words, "The following legislative priorities are established for the 2009 Session of the Missouri General Assembly: Environment and Quality of Life; Economic Development; Finance and Taxation; Municipal Administration and Intergovernmental Relations."

In 2009, I was present at the Finance and Administration Committee meeting when legislative priorities were first discussed. A reduction in the number of lobbyists Springfield retained, due to budget restraints, was also discussed and Springfield's City attorney Dan Wichmer, recommended Springfield not reduce them to zero. I can't remember for sure if Springfield retained one or two (and they called them both state and federal) lobbyists in 2009. I have inquired with the Springfield Public Information Office as to how many lobbyists the City of Springfield is retaining this year, if any. I will update this post when I receive the answer to that query.

In 2006 The Missouri Municipal League (MML) was listed as the client of 3 state lobbyists. In 2007, MML was listed as the client of 2 state lobbyists. The City of Springfield is a member of the Missouri Municipal League (see: National Institute on Money in State Politics). The MML is another way Missouri City Councils and/or City officials have sway over state legislators/legislation.

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

Springfield, We Have a Problem

Internal Auditor Position Should be Filled As Soon as Possible and Practical

If City Manager Greg Burris or City Clerk Brenda Cirtin announced today they would be retiring next week, how much time do you believe would pass before the City Council was discussing how they would go about filling the vacant positions?

Why does it seem the City Council's Internal Auditor position is and has been treated as though it is an unimportant, backburner issue? Because, I propose it has been.

I am fully aware that Ms. Lathrom's passing only occurred one week ago this evening, and I do not mean to sound callous but, I am aware that Ms. Lathrom had been on medical leave for many months prior to her passing, and the internal auditor position, although apparently not as *sexy* as the City Manager position, is an extremely important municipal government position.

I first started writing about the internal auditor position when I was still the City Council/City Government "beat writer" for the "Community Free Press." It's been obvious from the outset that the position simply is not valued in the same way the positions of City Manager and City Clerk are valued and yet, the internal auditor position is one of only three positions whose inhabitor answers directly to the City Council and who the City Council is tasked to hire and fire.

While today's Mayor and City Council look with ingenuity (sic) to a future appointment of a Citizens' Sales Tax Oversight Committee, I wonder when they will fill what I have advocated (in my own way) as a vitally important position within City government that has, in it's very short history, been consistently given only minimal thought and value. Such a position, if utilized properly would make a Citizens Sales Tax Oversight Committee a silly and unnecessary prospect.

Before Lathrom was hired, back in January, 2008, there didn't appear to be much consensus among City Council members as to the potential value of an internal auditor. Councilman Doug Burlison said, "This proposed position (internal auditor) is, in fact, the key to any reforms that City Council may enact in response to the audit." But, then Mayor Tom Carlson, in his State of the City Report, said about the position, "(State Auditors) talked about an internal auditor, and we're going to have one of those, and so, I hope everybody's happy, but it's not that big a deal." (Community Free Press Archive edition June 18, 2008, page 1 article, "City Manager vs. Internal Auditor")

Why is it important?

A March 4, "Springfield News-Leader" "Our Voice" editorial column pointed out the City will lose $63,000 in taxpayer money by holding the CIP tax renewal election in June rather than including it in a legally mandated, already existing, April election. The editorial also pointed out that by skipping over the mandated April, 2010 election and opting to put the measure on a June ballot, it will cost OTC an extra (estimated) $32,000 because they are on the ballot alone.

City leaders gave the "News-Leader" a few reasons for holding the election in June rather than April but, admitted they could have prepared for it and put it on the April ballot if they had chosen to do so. In other words, they could have saved the taxpayer and Ozarks Technical Community College about $95,000 in combined funds.

Apparently, Mayor O'Neal didn't know putting the CIP sales tax question on a June ballot was going to cost the City taxpayers $63,000 more than if they had scheduled it for the April ballot. That alone is, to borrow a phrase from KSGF's old radio talk show host Vincent David Jericho, asinine stupidy...how could the Mayor not know that!? Why wasn't he told!? Would an internal auditor have made a difference? I'd like to think so, IF that internal auditor was valued, with his or her services properly utilized.

I hate to keep repeating the same information but, people! In Section 2.15 of the City Charter it describes the "Investigator," or Council's internal auditor:

"The council may appoint an investigator who shall serve for such term as the council may prescribe. He shall be a certified public accountant or a person specially trained and experienced in governmental or business investigation or administration. His duty shall be to keep the council informed as to the work performed, methods, and financial affairs of the city. He shall not be responsible for the keeping of accounts. He shall make such investigations of the work of all departments of the city and such reports to the council as it shall require. He shall make such other investigations as the council may direct. He shall have access to all books and records of all departments of the city. If the council desires, he shall certify to the correctness of any or all financial reports before the same shall be regarded as official."

After April Lathrom was hired, she wrote her own Policies and Procedures. They were adopted by the City Council on November 10, 2008, (see Council Bill 2008-322/Special Ordinance number 25510) but, even as late as March of last year (2009), then Council candidate Nick Ibarra questioned the efficacy and transparency of the internal auditor's position, and also in March, 2009, Councilman Burlison said, "...we do not interact with April enough, however, that is an issue I'd rather attack with 4 or 5 fresh faces. I'm not suggesting that there is any kind of communication problem, I just feel like we are not doing enough of it. If I was April, I think I would want more contact with my bosses, as well."

Today, I heard from Chair of the Finance and Administration Committee Dan Chiles. The Finance and Administration Committee is the Council Committee that was tasked with oversight of the internal auditor. Chiles seems to still have a bit of appreciation for the position that no one, to date, other than the occupant of the position, has taken very seriously at all, that is if we judge by actions instead of words.

"We haven't talked about a replacement for April. There is a hiring freeze, but I will make the case to hire an internal auditor," Chiles wrote in an email response to my query. "We promised the voters we would create and fill that position, so that is what we should do."

I would suggest to the Springfield City Council that you consider the position not as merely something you promised the voters but, rather as an invaluable and essential asset that you cannot function well without. You wouldn't try to do your job without a City Manager. You wouldn't try to do your job without a City Clerk. Why do you undervalue the essential job of the internal auditor?

The internal auditor in Kansas City, Missouri is known as the "City Auditor." His name is Gary White and he has his own Web page.

"Our goal is to conduct audits that answer questions that matter to people outside of City Hall; that enable the city to reduce, avoid or recover costs; and to alert city officials to potential problems that could undermine the public’s trust in City government," the Web page boasts, among other things.

Just including and since November of 2009, KC's City Auditor has filed two audit reports and two survey memos on his Web site. The documents are available to the public and include: Resolution Tracking, This audit was conducted in order to determine whether city staff are implementing resolutions adopted by the City Council; E-Service Systems Security, This audit was conducted in order to determine the security of the City's e-service systems; Fiscal Year 2010 Second Quarter Citizen Satisfaction Survey Results, This memo reports the second quarter results of the Fiscal Year 2010 Citizen Satisfaction Survey and; Fiscal Year 2010 Third Quarter Citizen Satisfaction Survey Results, This memo reports the third quarter results of the Fiscal Year 2010 Citizen Satisfaction Survey.

The Springfield City Council, if it ever decides to take the "investigator" or internal auditor position seriously, will have an invaluable oversight tool for assessing the operations of Springfield City government but, on this account, I'm afraid their eyes will continue to be wide shut.

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

Missouri State Rep. Burlison and Springfield City Councilmen Ibarra and Burlison to Hold Town-Hall Meeting Discussing Community Improvement Districts

A City news-release was generated to announce Councilmen Nick Ibarra and Doug Burlison, along with State Rep. Eric Burlison, "will co-host a Town Hall meeting focusing on the topic of Community Improvement Districts [CIDs] on Monday, Oct. 19."

The meeting, which will be held at the Brentwood Library, is open to the public. Doors open at 6 PM with the meeting scheduled to start at 6:30.

From the news-release:

Rep. Burlison, R-136, will open the forum with background on the state's role in CIDs, followed by Councilmen Ibarra and Burlison discussing the City of Springfield's involvement in CIDs....

The Councilmen will discuss proposals for signage notifying patrons at locations where CIDs are in effect in Springfield and Rep. Burlison will talk about ideas he is considering for CIDs at the state level.

There will also be a question and answer session at the end of the meeting.

The news-release advises, if you have questions about the meeting, you should contact Zone 1 Councilman Nick Ibarra at 773-9441.

The City also provided a link where you can find more information about the CIDs in Springfield.

The Brentwood Library is located at 2214 Brentwood Blvd.

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

Missouri House of Representatives Addresses Springfield Urban Garden Questions

How does Springfield's original intent line up with Missouri State Statutes?

When the staff of the City of Springfield presented an ordinance to the City Council on May 18 of this year, I'm not sure they knew the level of interest that would be inspired by its passage.

The one reading consent agenda description simply read, "a resolution to initiate an amendment to the Springfield land development code, article I, zoning ordinance, division IV, that all zoning districts shall permit urban garden uses. (planning staff recommends approval.)" However, the next day, a news release from the City's Public Information Office pointed out that permitting urban garden uses in all zoning districts wasn't all the Planning and Zoning Commission (P & Z) would be contemplating.

We now know, at a recent public hearing, P & Z tabled the amendment that had been drafted, with the intention of asking the City Council to form a citizen committee to study the issue of urban gardens.

Now that you've been reminded of the background on the issue, let's move forward.

I asked Councilman Nick Ibarra to assist me in finding out what State statutes, versus the City's proposed intent, had to say about the issue, as one State statute, in particular, raised questions when it was discussed at the public hearing with P & Z. Ibarra was able to provide the following information, which he received directly from the Missouri House of Representatives.

----------------------------------------------------

(A) constituent stated that Springfield is considering defining “urban garden” and requiring a business license and conditional use permit (for selling items from the garden). The constituent then noted the following apparent confusion or conflict regarding Missouri statutory provisions and the proposed municipal urban garden regulation.

Section 71.630, RSMo, prohibits cities from collecting a tax or license from a farmer or producer for sales of produce raised by the farmer or producer from the farmer’s or producer’s wagon, cart, or vehicle. Springfield ordinances currently authorize license taxes and regulations “upon all lawful objects of taxation” and then have a long list of examples of the types of occupations and businesses that would be taxable. Finally, section 71.010, RSMo, provides that charter city ordinances must not conflict with state statutes upon the same subject.

So, as I understand it, the constituent basically wanted to know whether an urban garden was a lawful object of taxation under city ordinance given the prohibition contained in section 71.630. Stated in this way, the question mixes apples with oranges. The issue of requiring a business license to sell produce, etc. grown in an urban garden is a separate, distinguishable issue from whether Springfield can define “urban garden” and regulate such through its zoning ordinance.

As to the issue of whether section 71.630 prohibits requiring a license to sell produce grown in an urban garden, the Springfield assistant city attorney is cited in the Springfield News-Leader as stating that 71.630 “applied to sales from ‘wagons, carts or vehicles,’ not from gardens.” I believe this is an accurate interpretation of the plain language of that section and it corresponds to the discussion of this statute in case law.

There is, however, another statute that could prohibit requiring a business license to sell produce from an urban garden. Section 150.030 provides:

"Any farmer residing in this state who shall grow or process any article of farm produce or farm products on his farm is hereby authorized and permitted to vend, retail or wholesale said products, free from license, fee or taxation from any county or municipality, in any quantity he may choose, and by doing so shall not be considered a merchant; provided, he does not have a regular stand or place of business away from his farm; and provided further, that any such produce or products shall not be exempted from such health regulations or police regulations as any community may require."

The question then becomes whether an urban garden would be considered a farm under this section and whether the owner of the urban garden would be considered a farmer. In the one case I found construing this section, a family corporation operated a nursery upon a 7-acre tract within Kansas City, which operation included the sales of flowers, shrubs, etc. that were grown on the tract. The Missouri Supreme Court declared that the family corporation was a “farmer” and a producer of “farm products” under section 150.030 such that an occupation license tax based upon gross receipts could not be collected for the products grown on the tract and sold there.

Another case discussing the definition of a farm (albeit in another context) also is helpful in this situation. That court was deciding whether a parcel of land between 5-6 acres within the corporate limits of the city of St. Louis upon which there was a house, a stable, and other outbuildings and which land the tenant cultivated as a truck farm constituted a farm or “lands devoted to agricultural purposes” in order to invoke the longer notice period required by statute to terminate a tenancy from year to year. The Missouri court approvingly cited four case law definitions of “farm” or “farming” from other jurisdictions, and a Webster’s dictionary definition:

“A farm may be of any size, of any shape, of any boundaries; may include less than one lot, or comprise several lots or parts of lots.”

“a farm, ‘in the ordinary sense, implies land cultivated-used in some way for the purposes of production by the owner thereof, . . .’”

“farming, “. . . is understood to mean the business of cultivating land, or employing it for the purposes of husbandry, and a farm is a tract devoted to cultivation under a single control, whether it be large or small, isolated or made up of many parcels.’”

“the modern definition of farm is given as follows: ‘Any considerable tract, or a number of small tracts of land, set apart for cultivation by a single occupant, whether as a tenant or owner, and upon which he resides.’”

“Webster defines a farm to be ‘any tract of land devoted to agricultural purposes, under the management of a tenant or owner.”

The nursery case construing section 150.030 and the approved definitions of “farm” stated above would clearly support a court finding that an urban garden is a farm for the purposes of section 150.030, and therefore a license, fee, or tax cannot be collected for the sales of products grown in that urban garden.

As noted before, however, this prohibition against a license or tax for sales of products from an urban garden would not prevent the amendment of the zoning ordinance to define and regulate urban gardens. Zoning is a land use tool and not a revenue production tool. (Note that a license or tax is an ongoing cost whereas a conditional use permit is a one-time fee.)

----------------------------------------------------

Note from "a constituent:" A big thank you to Councilman Ibarra for assisting "JackeHammer" in providing this information to the public!

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

Breaking: Council Members Issue Formal Request for Ordinance

Ordinance request seeks more transparency regarding sales taxes charged at businesses within the City

Councilmen Nicholas Ibarra and Doug Burlison issued a formal request to City Manager Greg Burris, City Attorney Dan Wichmer and other members of City staff in Springfield on Monday. The request calls for more sales tax transparency within the City of Springfield on behalf of their constituents.

In a post at Mr. Ibarra's Web log, "Zone 1 Matters," he noted the discussion needs to be more than a secondary issue when the Council is faced with other issues, "...the following was submitted to City Staff this morning, taking the first step in bringing this topic to the table as a debate in and of itself, rather than a side conversation while dealing with other topics as the basis of conversation," Ibarra wrote.

The request is not very specific or detailed regarding the way in which the sales tax notifications to the public might be posted at Springfield businesses and, while Ibarra did not want to be perceived as speaking on behalf of his fellow Councilmember, when questioned about the lack of specific details regarding placement of the notices in the ordinance request, Ibarra indicated his understanding was that Burlison has had difficulty moving ahead on proposed legislation, in the past, when he has been overly detailed in his requests for action on issues affecting Springfield and its citizens.

"When Doug and I started these discussions, he pointed out that when he has tried to get something done, the more detailed he is, the harder time he has getting anywhere… so we figured ambiguity in the beginning would be good given he is on the committee that will discuss this proposal," Ibarra wrote in an email.

The request, which Ibarra has identified as a "Transparency in Taxation Initiative," as submitted by the Councilmen on Monday, June 29:

FORMAL REQUEST FOR ORDINANCE DRAFT

Mr. Burris, Mr. Wichmer, and other appropriate City Staff:

Since the new Council has taken office in April, a consistent and contentious discussion has been that of Capital Improvements Districts (CIDs). While the philosophical value may vary from council member to council member as to the appropriateness of CIDs, the consistency of much of the discussion has been regarding the transparency to the customers (citizens) paying the additional tax.

While we understand that The Mayor and Council will have to charge the appropriate committee to review a request for an ordinance and the ordinance itself, this letter is a formal request to begin the process of bringing two different proposals to Council:

> The first request is one that would require any business that sells goods or services at the retail level, is part of a CID, and charges sales tax to display signage that notifies the consumer of such goods and services in an adequate manner that they are shopping in a CID and how much the CID tax amount is.

> The second request is one that would require any business inside the city limits of Springfield that sells goods or services at the retail level and charges tax to its consumers to display signage that notifies the customer of the amount of tax being paid as a patron.

As public servants, we believe that the number one duty in preserving trust with the people we serve is to offer transparency.

As a City with nearly a dozen CIDs either in place or in the works to be put into place, offering the citizens notice whether or not they are shopping or receiving services in a CID is not only about transparency, but also about honesty. Whether it comes to
fruition by way of CID-only signage or city-wide signage, to offer these two proposals to the citizens of this community for discussion and debate is the appropriate step to take at this time.

We look forward to working with Council and City Staff on this issue, and are available for questions, comments, or concerns at any time.



Respectfully Submitted,

Nicholas Ibarra, Zone 1 City Councilman

Doug Burlison, General C City Councilman

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

Update on CU Deadline to Submit Application for Stimulus Funds

City Utilities (CU) gave a narrated powerpoint presentation to the Springfield City Council at their Tuesday meeting, before taking questions from the City Council. (Watch for the powerpoint at "CityConnect," they will likely post it, at some point.)

The subject of the deadline for the submission of CU's application, which I wrote about Monday night, came up as the Council questioned CU officials and employees.

After Councilman Nick Ibarra requested a copy, on behalf of the City Council, of the "something in writing," which CU General Manager John Twitty had earlier stated called for their application for American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds by June 15, Twitty answered by reading from what he said was an FTA letter.

"Let me just read from it, and this is from FTA in Kansas City: 'With regard to ARRA funding, while CU has discussed the possibility of funding some costs related to a downtown transfer center with ARRA formula funds, FTA questions whether there is sufficient time to do so,' and this is written after we've given them an update of where we are, literally, right now," Twitty said. "'Grant applications must be submitted to the regional office by June 15, 2009 to assure timely completion of processing,' and, again, you may not have been here, I think, maybe, the information that you had was on Department of Labor (DOL) funds and these are Department of Transportation funds, and perhaps those agencies have some...."

Ibarra interjected, "Is there any way I could get a copy of that?"

Twitty: "Sure."

JackeHammer plans to request a copy of the document as well, not that I doubt Mr. Twitty's word but, it would be nice to know the particulars of the letter, the date and such, and to share that information here. So, more to come....

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

Recommended Reading 13: Councilman Ibarra on the Memorial Day Weekend

Zone 1 Matters: Remember the Reason

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

Councilman Nicholas Ibarra Explains Vote Against use of Stimulus Funds

"At this time, I believe that accepting any stimulus funds will be a detriment to our sovereignty as a city...."

If you haven't taken a look at Councilman Nick Ibarra's Web log, "Zone 1 Matters," you are missing out on some true transparency on the part of an elected official.

After the discussion in Council chambers last night about three bills concerning improvements to the intersection at James River Freeway and National Avenue, Mr. Ibarra and Mr. Bailes voted against the second in a series of three bills related to the issue (see: Council bills 2009-115, 2009-116, and 2009-117).

2009-116, which still passed with a majority of Council voting to support it, authorized the City Manager to enter into a cost participation agreement with the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission (MHTC) for the intersection improvements. Part of that money will be received from the federal government's American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). Under 2009-116, the City, by it's approval, has agreed to abide by the provisions of the ARRA.

Ibarra laid out the reasoning behind his legislative decision to vote against Council bill 2009-116 in an entry at his blog, this morning.

For future reference, a permanent link to the Councilman's Web log is in the sidebar here. There is also a permanent link to Councilman Robert "Bob" Stephens blog in the sidebar, however, Mr. Stephens is not updating his blog as regularly as Mr. Ibarra.

Related: "Donations extend pools' hours News-Leader.com Springfield News-Leader"

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

Springfield-Branson National Airport: Poised to Seize the Lion's Share of Federal Aviation Stimulus Funds Available in Missouri

It's unclear how many of the 125 temporary jobs created will benefit local workers

The Springfield News-Leader article in today's issue, covering the City Council's majority decision Tuesday to approve an emergency bill in a special Council meeting, for the purpose of accepting over $14.8 million in Federal Aviation Administration grant monies to build a new taxiway at the Springfield-Branson National Airport, includes information on why Councilman Nicholas Ibarra was the lone Councilmember to vote against accepting the grant. I have been unable to, for reasons I won't go into right now, contact Mr. Ibarra to discuss his reasons with him, personally.

I believe, since joining the City Council in April, Ibarra has voted against the use of any stimulus funds from the federal government, for any reason, within the City of Springfield.

In the past, Ibarra's reasoning for voting against the use of stimulus funds has included the complaint that the projects brought forth by the City do not serve to fullfill the intent of the stimulus funding to facilitate job creation.

According to the News-Leader, Ibarra noted the jobs would be temporary jobs and would end before Christmas, 2009.

Thanks to Councilman Scott Bailes, we also know the estimated 125 jobs created will not all benefit local construction workers.

"Gary (Cyr), I think when we spoke, you had mentioned 125 employed with this stimulus money, and then you mentioned Illinois Paving, do they bring their own employees from out of state?" Bailes asked.

Cyr, the airport manager, was unable to give a clear estimate on the number of local workers who would be employed on the project, citing the fact that there are many components to the project.

"They have some out of state (employees), and then local talent," Cyr said. "When I say 125, that's probably the average of a month's time frame. They may exceed that at certain points when we're doing multiple tasks out there....We did an analysis this morning with our consultants to, what do we think would be a benchmark number on average, per month, of employees that will be working out there."

Further, Cyr added, airport administration will update the number of jobs created.

"We'll be doing updates on a weekly basis on the number of employees that are on the job," Cyr said. He described the components within the project as involving dirt work; lime treated sub-grade; asphalt; concrete; lighting; painting; and striping. "We're anticipating that, probably, we're going to average somewhere with 125 plus employees during the course of this project."

Of the $28 million in aviation stimulus project funds, allotted to the state by the federal government, Springfield will bring home the lion's share.

City Manager Greg Burris said this was due to Cyr and his staff's preparedness.

"The reason that the Springfield-Branson National Airport is getting such a large percentage of these monies that are available in Missouri, is a direct result of Gary and his staff, the airport board, being exceptionally well prepared to do this. I mean, they had done the planning, they were ready to move forward on this," Burris said.

Cyr said the airport had not expected to be able to go ahead with the project until 2010.

"This was designed and talked about 4 years ago," Cyr noted. "The funding was not there, in place, to do it at that time....The stimulus money is allowing us to jump ahead and address this with the support of the FAA because it is a safety concern."

Although the explanation for Council Bill 2009-108 included the original estimate of $18.6 million and a net expenditure adjustment to approximately $14.9 million, it did not include a list of bidders for the project.

Related: CityConnect: "City Council Approves Airport Stimulus Project"



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

A Timeline of the Police-Fire Pension Fund Citizen's Task Force Selection

Via emails, and even a couple of phone calls, it has come to my attention there was some confusion regarding the process of selection of the 6 final members of the Police-Fire Pension Fund Citizen's Task Force (or 7, including the Chair and Vice Chair selections).

I tried to clarify that process to the best of my ability in this previous entry but, I still received another phone call Friday evening from a citizen who had a lot of questions. He felt it might be helpful to have the Second-Round Applications list posted and still, further clarification.

I went directly to a newly elected member of the City Council to fill in some of the blanks on the process, and to assist in clarifying the issue, which appeared to revolve around whether all of the applicants were included in the process of selection undertaken by our newly elected and ongoing members of the City Council.

Councilman Nick Ibarra thought the confusion might be due to multiple lists, the original, plus the list of new applicants generated by the reopening of the application process for a brief window of time, immediately after the election of the new Council.

"The confusion, I believe, may be that there were two lists distributed. The lists were separated with one list being the original group of applicants, and the other being the new group. But all applicants, both old and new, were given to Council to be considered," Ibarra wrote in an email.

Based on information received in City news releases, from CityConnect entries, my own past reporting and information provided by Mr. Ibarra, this would be the timeline of the process:

Police-Fire Pension Fund Citizen Task Force Selection Timeline

> February 26, 2009, applicants were solicited for the purpose of forming the Task force, with a deadline of 5 p.m. March 9. (City news release, "Police Fire Task Force and Voter Survey")

> March 10, the City's Web log, CityConnect, posted an entry stating the first application period was closed, along with a memo sent from City Manager Greg Burris to the City Council with recommendations for the selection process. (CityConnect: "Burris Memo - Task Force Recommendations")

> March 24, CityConnect issued another entry specifying the City Council, prior to the election of April 7, would choose part of the task force but, reserve some selections for the Council which would be voted in on April 7. (CityConnect: "Council To Begin Task Force Selection Process")

> March 31, at a City Council luncheon, City Manager Greg Burris made his recommendations to the (previous) City Council regarding applicants. Also included was a draft "charge" of the task force. Council could either approve Burris' recommendations or chose their own from the list of applicants for the task force. The City Manager requested they turn in their selections by 5 p.m. April 3. (CityConnect: "Burris Recommends Task Force Members")

> April 7, eleven applicants were approved to sit on the task force. (JackeHammer: "Police-Fire Pension Citizen's Task Force Approved at City Council Luncheon") Two of the members were later disqualified, due to conflicts of interest, leaving 9 approved members. Those disqualified were Carol Mihalevich and Matt Morrow.

> April 9, the new City Council was sworn in. (City news release: "City Council Swearing-in Ceremony")

> April 10, the pension task force application process was reopened with a deadline for applications of 5 p.m. on April 16, 2009.

An April 20 deadline was set for the incoming and ongoing City Council members to turn in 6 more recommended members each for the police fire task force, so that the results could be tallied in preparation for discussion and selection of 6 more members at the following day's City Council luncheon, April 21.

The City news release, again, dated April 10, stated, "Mayor-elect Jim O’Neal said the new Council will be asked to select six individuals from the new applications, the remaining applicants in the original group of 54, and others who have been recommended by Councilmembers. Individuals who have already submitted applications do not need to re-apply if they still wish to be considered for service on the Task Force." (City news release: "Pension Task Force Applications Re-opened" (JackeHammer: "Pension Task Force Application Process Briefly Re-Opened")

> April 13, a CityConnect entry reminded citizens they had another opportunity to apply to be a member of the task force. (CityConnect, "Pension Task Force Still Taking Applications")

Author's note: For further insight, I asked Councilman Ibarra what he could tell me about the process between the reopening of the application process on April 10, and the April 21 meeting, in which the Council approved 6 new members to the force:

"The deadline for the second application process was the 16th of April at 5:00 p.m. The following day (April 17) the applications, both old and new, were delivered to me with my regular information drop off from the clerk’s office." Ibarra replied on April 27 (emphasis mine). "Additionally, Mr. Burris had attached a note requesting that Council have their choice of six candidates turned in for a tally by the following Monday at 5:00 p.m. (April 20) to ensure that the list of successful applicants could be discussed at the Tuesday luncheon."

> On April 21, our current City Council members selected 6 more applicants to sit on the task force. The following "Second-Round Applications" list was distributed to the City Council members, (asterisks marking details added by author for clarification):

Police-Fire Pension Fund Citizen's Task Force

Second-Round Applications*
4/21/2009 (Numbers in parenthesis represent the number of votes the applicant received from the currently sitting City Council. If no number appears, the applicant was a new applicant who had applied between April 10 and April 16 but, who received no votes from the current City Council.)

Charles Wayne Bair
Nathan Baker
Lorenzo Baldwin (3)**
Thomas Billings (1)
Burl Brown (1)
Becki Carr
Gordon Elliot (4)**
Fred Ellison (2)
Jerald Fensterbaker (2)
Ed Griesbaum (1)
Louis Griesmer (1)
Donald Gutierrez (1)
Doug Harpool (1)
Jack Hembree (2)
Carl Herd (3)**
Bob Horton (5)**
Nancy Howard (1)
Denny Hyde (5)**
Chris Jackson
Joy Jones
Glen Larson
Michael Lumby
William Mabary
Joe Passanise (1)
Brian Perdue
Mike Ramon (2)
John Reed (1)
Steven Reed
Micah Scott (1)
Mark D. Steele
Andy Stewart
Larry Stock (1)
Bradley Stokes (2)
Brad Sturges
Steven Thomas
David Trippe (5)**
Katherine Trombetta (1)
Derek White (1)
Daniel Williams

*My understanding is, this list represents all of the new applicants who applied after the new City Council reopened the application process, whether the applicants received any votes or not. Applicants from the previously known list of applicants were included on the "Second-Round Applicants" list only if they received a vote from the current City Council, which would have been turned in by the City Council by 5 p.m. on April 20, in preparation for the luncheon on the 21st.

**Mr. Burris recommended the 6 names which received 3 to 5 votes from the current City Council, be approved and added to the existing 9 task force members to make a force of 15. Councilman Doug Burlison made a motion Burris' recommendation be accepted and those 6 recommended applicants were approved unanimously by a voice vote of the City Council. (JackeHammer: "Police and Firefighter Pension Task Force Selection Complete")

> On April 22, Mayor Jim O'Neal announced and introduced the Chair and Vice Chair of the police fire pension task force as Jerry Fenstermaker and Jerry Harmison. Fenstermaker will be a non-voting member, according to the City's news release.

The official charge for the task force was posted at CityConnect and a video of the news conference, held by Mayor O'Neal, was aired by the City's TV23, it can also be viewed online by selecting it from the "Special Programming" category link. (City news release: "Police-Fire Task Force Chair, Vice-Chair Named") (CityConnect: "Pension Fund Citizens Task Force Now Set") (JackeHammer: "Updates: Special Council Meeting to be Re-Scheduled; Chair and Vice Chair Appointed to the Pension Task Force")

> April 24, the City announced the first meeting of the task force would take place from 6 to 8 p.m. on April 27. The meeting is open to the public and will be held in the 4th floor conference room at the Busch Municipal Building and will also be accessible for viewing online at TV23's Web site.

Following is the tentative agenda for the first Police-Fire Pension Fund Citizen's Task Force:

TENTATIVE AGENDA

1. Individual introductions
2. Assign members to three teams
3. Deliverables / Assignments
4. Task force communications
5. Next steps

(City news release: "Pension Task Force First Meeting Date")

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