All right.

Well, good evening.

I'm gonna go ahead.

Hi.

I think we're hearing one A and one B in our speakers.

That was fun.

I'm gonna go ahead and call to order our March 2nd, 2026 Columbia City Council meeting to order.

Sounds like they're having more fun in the back room, but we'll let them come out here soon.

All right, um, and I'll ask all those who were able to please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

And to the Republic from which stands one.

One nation under Doctor Individual with Liberty and Justice First.

Sheila, will you please call roll?

Ms.

Sample.

Here.

Mr.

Foster.

Here.

Mr.

Waterman.

Here.

Ms.

Peters.

Ms.

Buffalo here.

Ms.

Carroll?

Here.

Miss Elwood?

Here.

Well, good evening and welcome.

I'll I do a quick little overview of our agenda for those of this is their first city council meeting.

Uh and I'd like to give a quick special uh welcome and shout out to some of our visiting scholars visiting with Mizzou's uh Asian Affairs office.

So welcome to us.

You don't have to stay till the end, but I sure hope you appreciate it.

So on our city council agendas, you will find um multiple opportunities for people to speak.

Uh one note I do say is that there's a part of the agenda called the consent agenda, and those are items that we don't usually have presentations on, uh and they're usually then just consent approved at the end.

Um and then I'll point out the items that are under introduction and first reading, the ones that have an asterisk would be on consent at our next meeting.

The ones that do not have an asterisk would be on old business at the next meeting.

And I say that to say people have multiple opportunities to speak at Columbia City Council meetings.

You have opportunities during our um scheduled public comment, during old business, during new business, uh, and then at the end of the council meeting as well.

Um so one of the items that I'll talk about is that uh when you are speaking under public hearings, old business or new business portions of the agenda.

Um keep your remarks to the specific item being discussed.

At the end of the city council meeting, you can talk about anything you want to talk about.

Uh and then we'll ask people to state their name and their ward or address when speaking, so we have it for the minutes.

Individuals are allotted three minutes for speaking each item.

Uh and representatives of organizations um can request five minutes if they're uh addressed by the the legislation being discussed.

We do ask to limit one speaker per group for that five minutes, but multiple people from a group can speak, but they would just get three minutes each.

Um I ask people to respect the time limits for fairness to give everyone an opportunity to speak.

Um we do these rules so that as many people that want to speak can speak, uh and so that I'm not keeping you here till Tuesday.

Um I also ask that we avoid demonstrations that might intimidate your neighbors from speaking.

Uh we will address in uh issues, not individuals, and refrain from personal attacks, including on city staff.

Uh and then if we do have any sort of disruptions, they would be addressed with a warning and if necessary, removal and recess.

So moving on in our agenda that we have posted is the approval of the minutes.

So I'll make a motion uh to approve the February 2nd and February 16th, 2026 regular meeting minutes.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Second by Nick Fauster.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

Moving on, are there any changes to the agenda?

I have one.

Um I'll I'm gonna make a motion to table B 3726 to the May 18th, 2026 City Council meeting.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Second by Don.

Any discussion on that?

All right, all those in favor of tabling Bill 3726 to the May 18th, 2026 City Council meeting, say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right, so now do I have a motion uh to approve the agenda as amended?

I make the motion to approve the agenda as amended.

Do we have a second?

Second.

Seconded by what's kind of okay.

Second by Don Waterman.

All those in favor as the agenda uh as amended say aye.

Aye aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

Moving on, our first item we have on our agenda is a special item.

And this is the presentation of our um fiscal year 2025 financial audit.

So I'll ask for Matt Lou, our finance director, to start us off and to introduce um our guest.

Uh yes, we have uh two members of my GH here today, and it looks like Don is gonna speak.

So uh he will be speaking to our financial audit and uh the findings and the outcome of that audit.

Thank you, Matthew.

I'm Jonathan Nybarker with AGH, and I was one of the officers that were in charge of the audit this year.

I'll briefly go over our reports and then answer any questions that you may have.

Um starting off, the first report that we issue is a separate report from the financial statements and our auditors communication letter to those charged with governance.

It's about a six or eight-page letter that uh all of you should have a copy of.

And um we'll just kind of hit some of the key points in this letter this evening.

Um the first being towards the middle of the first page and discusses implementation of new accounting standards.

There was new accounting standard, one new accounting standard that was required to be implemented by the city this year, which was a governmental accounting standards board statement 101 related to compensated absences.

The city implemented and adopted this standard this year, and essentially what that relates to are accrued uh vacation, sick leave, and other PTO liabilities called compensated absences.

The city was recording those previously, but this standard really just kind of uh more clearly defined what should be recorded and how across all governmental entities.

Um the next uh point that I wanted to point out on the first page is um that we did not uh identify any significant unusual transactions during our audit.

And then towards the bottom of that first page and continued on to the next page, discusses accounting estimates.

Not all numbers in the financial statements are easily determinable.

Some amounts have to be estimated.

The city's estimates included the claims liabilities, allowances on receivables, the net pension liability, other post-employment benefits liabilities, the landfill liability, and then the fair value measurement of investments.

And then towards the bottom of the second page, I'm happy to report that we did not find or have any difficulties in dealing with management while performing our audit.

The third page of that letter discusses several adjustments that we noted during our audit, as well as um several amounts called uncorrected misstatements.

Um these are really past adjustments that the city decided to pass on recording.

Um they're not material to the financial statements overall and don't affect our opinion to the financial statements.

However, we do have to list those for for all of you.

And then the fourth page talks about internal control matters related to the audit.

We did have one finding related to our audit this year.

Um there's two levels of findings that we can have as auditors.

The highest level is a material weakness, and I'm happy to report that we did not have any material weaknesses that we noted as part of our audit.

The lower level of uh deficiency that we're we're able to note is a significant deficiency.

And we did have one finding that qualified at this level and was related to the city's preparation of the schedule of expenditures of federal awards or CIFA.

Ultimately, we recommend that the city um strengthen its CIFA preparation and review process to ensure that all amounts in the CIFAR are properly recorded at year end.

Um in the city's financial statements, uh, the first few pages are the auditors report.

Um, the auditors report includes standards that we use for the audit, and then most importantly, the opinion that we issued.

We issued an unmodified opinion on the city's financial statements, which can be found in the first section of the auditors report.

An unmodified opinion is the highest and best opinion that we're able to issue as auditors and always speaks very highly on the financial management of any entity receiving that.

Ultimately, the goal for our financial statement audit is to determine if the city complies with laws and regulations.

Uh, do the financial statements accurately reflect the books and records of the entity that we're auditing?

And are internal controls in place surrounding financial statements and operating effectively?

And I'm happy to report outside of the uh CIFA preparation comment that we had, um, the answer to all of those questions is yes.

Separate then also um from the financial statements is uh our single audit report.

Um the city is required to receive a special audit over federal expenditures, often called a single audit.

Um this year, because the city expended more than a million dollars in federal awards, um, we were required to perform the single audit.

And the major programs that we audited were the home investment partnership program, the airport improvement program, and the federal transit cluster.

Again, we issued unmodified opinions and did not have any findings on any of these grants, um, which also speaks very highly on the grant management of the city.

Then finally, uh, we issued a report on compliance for the passenger facility charge program.

Um this report includes a schedule of revenues and disbursements along with the change in cash balance for the passenger facility charge program.

We also issued an unmodified opinion on um this schedule as well, which again is the highest and best opinion the city can receive.

In closing tonight, I would like to thank all of the city staff for their help with the audit.

An audit is always a very large undertaking for any entity, and we appreciate all their assistance and cooperation in completing the audit.

So thank you for your time and I'm available for any questions that you may have for me.

Any questions for Jonathan from council?

Um I guess I have a question.

Um you mentioned um the report and for the findings of like the filing of adjustments of the information that was reported, I think the SAFA report or the CIFA report, yes.

Yeah, sorry.

Yeah, no, that's fine.

Um so would would you say that that's common practice then for um uh in organization then to create then kind of the do a toolkit or the pathway of how they're gonna then make sure that they're following it compliance for moving forward?

Um right.

So the it within that report um there should be a corrective action plan that the city um issued and should outline how they intend to respond to that comment.

And then as part of our audit next year, we'll audit to ensure that that was implemented.

Yeah, and I don't know, Matt, if you want to speak to that, because you talked about that, and you guys have kind of like your guidelines for what how you're gonna do for the reporting of that going forward?

Yes, so um for this next fiscal year, we're doing some extensive training uh with the few departments on uh what is needed for finance to complete uh the audit, and we're going to also do a reconciliation mid-year and then a reconciliation at the end of the year.

So hopefully with all of those changes, um this this will not happen again.

So yeah, Nick.

Matthew, are you ultimately uh you're ultimately responsible for that?

Do you oversee that process or does somebody else within your office do that?

Uh someone else does, but ultimately it rolls up to me.

Okay.

Any other questions for Jonathan?

No, appreciate Jonathan.

Matthew, do you want to share anything from um finance departments in the that Jonathan didn't cover or um expand upon anything?

Well, uh just that this is another clean audit that the city has received.

Um we take our financial preparations very seriously.

And I mean, I'd like to thank the auditors for coming in.

Um again, this is a this is an independent audit.

This is not something that we do internally.

Uh this is something they they have complete autonomy from the city.

And so this is their opinion that we do have a clean audit and that our finances are in order.

And this is something that's often reviewed by um our finance advisory and audit committee.

Did they have any feedback on the audit from their meeting?

No, but they did approve the approval of the audit coming toward coming forward.

Uh they did speak with the auditors.

Uh we had a meeting today and they discussed the audit, every everything that you all just discussed, just in a little deeper fashion.

Okay.

Any other questions?

Yeah, Valerie.

Yeah, I was wondering if you'd be able to speak to the pros and cons of having an external contracted auditor versus having an internal auditor position as we have had in the past.

So this is completely this is a different situation.

Uh you have to have an external audit uh by an external auditor each year.

And so the internal auditor function basically uh looks at processes and procedures uh while this looks at internal controls and the actual financial numbers that go into the document.

Okay.

So for our processes and procedures, do we have that done?

Do we still have that done currently via contract at a separate time during this year now?

Yes, we contract with Reuben Brown uh for those audits.

Um for that type of audit.

I think it's kind of uh it it's more up to the the staff and the council on what the best option would be for that.

Uh I would say this that if we were to bring those activities in-house, uh it could be it could get pretty expensive uh as that's not a one-person job.

Uh and the price for an auditor uh could easily exceed 100,000 in salary.

Uh then you would have to have a few other people to to help that person along as well.

So uh we pay well under that for the audits that we get now through Ruben Brown.

So uh I just think it's more efficient for us to use uh external auditor to contract for those external auditing needs.

Interesting.

So we still have a vacancy for an internal auditor that we decided not to pursue.

That's correct.

That's just for one position.

That's one position, yes.

And our previous one, did they have people that helped them?

I'm I'm not sure.

It was before I was here.

Yeah, every yeah, I think it's always just been the one.

Yeah.

A lot of work.

Yeah.

Okay.

Thank you.

Any other questions for Matthew on this?

I think the only thing I'll notice is that and I think most of the years you come, I appreciate we always get a clean audit.

So those those are my favorite.

Um I feel like we always, though, see something that's related to grant reporting.

So, you know, you and and I know part of this is influx of a lot of federal funds coming to us and influx and changing, um shutdown, all these things can affect.

And I think probably going forward thinking about those best practices for how we're using our grants administrator and and staff to monitor that.

And I know you've mentioned before multiple people have kind of calendar reminders about the reporting on, and just I appreciate the input from the external auditors on um noting those best practices and then the fact that you follow up with it next year.

Uh and I know that you kind of did that with this one as well.

So I appreciate that.

So all right.

Well, thank you, Matthew.

Thank you, um, both of you for coming over from Overland Park to visit with us.

Appreciate it.

All right, moving on uh to schedule public comment.

So members of the public can contact the city manager's office by 5 p.m.

on the Monday, one week prior to that tonight's city council meeting uh to schedule a five-minute public comment.

So scheduled public comment cannot be on items that are on the same night's agenda.

Uh and of note it's been a typical practice of city council to ask for additional follow-up of staff at the end of the council meeting if it's warranted.

So tonight we only have one scheduled public comment.

So I'll ask uh Matt Shack to please come forward to speaking.

Hello, my name is Matt Chacht.

I live at 211 North Ant Street.

I'm here to speak about Vidwest.

Uh you've heard from us regularly, pretty much every meeting.

And our goal is to stay in your vision because we want to make sure that community media doesn't disappear.

Uh that's the danger right now.

Uh in these discussions, sometimes you might get like annoyed with us or like exasperated that we keep coming to you.

And so I just want to remind everybody that nobody gets up in the morning thinking that they want their community to be less rich, less creative, less inspired, uh, less trained, less empowered, right?

Everybody gets up in the morning and all want our community to be a better place.

Uh in your planning documents, you've listed your two strategic goals, which I think Vidwest lines up quite well with, which is creating a resilient economy as well as an inclusive and equitable economy or community.

Uh VidWest is providing uh high-level training, access to equipment to individuals, small businesses and nonprofits.

And you've heard some of those stories.

It it's truly life-changing for some of these individuals who can go from working at Walmart or working at a warehouse to being able to start their own business.

Here are I know you guys have asked, like, what exactly is community media?

What do we do?

So I just wanted to provide like some actual visual visualizations for that.

Um we do youth engagement, we're supporting entrepreneurs, uh, we're connecting community members in third spaces, which allows them to take care of each other and learn about each other.

We're providing siv uh resources for civic participation.

So in your own elections, we have been providing A V equipment for the venues so that you guys can be heard when you're talking to your constituents and so forth.

So we're really active in the community and we find a way to provide uh our resources to help a lot of different causes.

Uh we think that spending is gonna equate to your values.

So if you truly do divide uh desire a resilient economy and a connected community, we would like you to think of community media as part of that plan, as one of your tools so that when you invest in it, we're not just asking for something that's nice.

We're asking for something that's strategic that represents the things you're already trying to do.

Uh I like to take inspiration from great people, and I think that Colin Powell said some nice things about cognitive dissonance and public service.

So if this is a hard conversation, finding money for community media.

If it's hard hearing from constituents, I just want to reiterate that that's normal.

These are hard conversations.

And then if you're accustomed or tired of people like bringing you their problems as as leaders, well, that's just what leaders do.

That's what Colin Powell says they do.

So take some heart in the fact that if we're bringing you the problems, it means we think you can solve those problems.

It means we believe in you.

I'm going to try to speed through some of the things that are most important.

So Vidwest has been caught in a bit of a communication loop with city staff, and we've heard some things that we think are untrue or misleading.

I want to bring those to your attention so that as you have conversations with staff, you can get to the heart of the matter and not have to chase some of these wild goose trails.

So the city told us that it no longer receives money for peg channels.

This is not exact entirely accurate.

It still collects hundreds of thousand dollars in cable franchise fees.

What it's really saying is that they don't want to pay for a public access television channel, which we agree with.

Again, not entirely accurate.

What happened is that state law reduced the amount that you can charge in cable franchise fees, but it did not reduce that funding.

And even with reduced uh fees, there's still hundreds of thousands of dollars collected by the city.

The city suggested that Vidwest uh use your grants programs for funding, and we're not allowed to do that because your grants programs don't provide for administrative or labor costs.

Uh also wouldn't help us with rent and utilities and the things we need for a community media center.

So that's not an option.

Um and then the city can't earmark funds.

We're we're not asking for earmark funds.

We're asking for an RFP or an RFQ so that we can apply for it.

Uh and then lastly, uh we've been told that we need to go to the UAL for uh for support, and then the city staff say that you uh or you have told us that we you need the city staff to uh give you a proposal and so we feel like we're caught in a loop where uh the city council say they're waiting for to hear from city staff, and the city staff say they are waiting to hear from city council, and we're gonna meet with some city staff members.

We're gonna try to meet with you all so that we can kick ourselves out of that loop and get somewhere.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Matt.

All right.

Moving forward, we have um a couple of public hearings this evening.

Up first, public hearing 526.

Sheila, would you please read that?

Public hearing 526 is the proposed construction of the quail drive phase two stormwater improvement project.

Do we have a staff report?

Yes, good evening.

Uh Aaron Keys, Utilities Director with me.

I have Tom Rotterman, the assistant director for the slideshow presentation, Aaron.

I believe I do.

I'll make sure that Dalton hears us say his name, because then when you say his name, the magic happens on our screen.

See, it just did it.

There.

All right.

It showed up on my screen.

So interesting.

Okay.

Well, someday it will for ours.

Go ahead.

There we go.

So this is the public hearing for the proposed construction of stormwater improvements on the eastern end of Quail Drive.

As shown in the project graphic, this project proposes to replace and improve failing stormwater drainage infrastructure in the area.

The existing storm system includes uh currently includes a collapsed corrugated metal pipe and an undersized street inlet.

Uh this project will reduce the incidence of street and yard flooding, uh, reduce the incidence of potential garage flooding and reduce erosion issues.

Construction will include installation of approximately 180 feet of new stormwater pipe and four stormwater structures.

If directed to move forward with design, staff will complete a substantial design of the improvements and describe the necessary easements for construction.

Easements will be required to construct this project.

Staff will return to council with an ordinance to acquire those easements if easement acquisition ordinance is approved.

Staff will contract for appraisals for the value of the easements plus any damages including trees, and we'll provide that offer to the property owners.

Following easement acquisition, staff will return to council with an ordinance authorizing construction of the project.

An IP meeting was held on November 12th, 2025.

One nearby resident attended the meeting.

Uh all affected property owners have been contacted.

Staff have not been made aware of any opposition to the project.

Uh the cost estimate for this project is 130,000, and I'm willing to attempt to answer any questions.

Are there any questions from council to staff on this one?

No?

All right.

I'll go ahead and open up that public hearing.

Does anybody from the public wish to speak on the proposed Quail Drive Phase 2 stormwater project?

Seeing none, I will close the public hearing.

Any council comments come to us.

No, I'll just I'll say I appreciate the improvements.

I actually remember during the pandemic, we held an event here to try to get people interested in our energy efficiency programs and and recycling and all of that.

And they talked about the flooding issues that they had a lot of the renters around that area.

So I appreciate seeing this project move forward.

We've done some significant work in this neighborhood.

We did a very large project on Quail Drive just west of this location.

And we just recently completed a uh regional detention basin just behind the properties on Quail Drive as well.

So lots of improvements in this neighborhood.

Definitely.

Thank you for that.

All right.

Um I'll make a motion to um give staff to proceed with the final design for the proposed construction of stormwater improvements on Quail Drive phase two.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Second advice.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

Thank you.

Up next, we have public hearing in 626.

Sheila, will you read that as well as the accompanying Bill 4526?

Public Hearing 626 is the proposed construction of the of improvements at Rothwell Park.

And Council Bill 4526 is an ordinance determining it is in the public interest to construct improvements at Rothwell Park, approving and adopting plans as specifications determining that a portion of the work shall be done by contract, calling for bids for a portion of the work through the purchasing division authorizing a portion of the project may be done by city employees providing for pay payment for the improvement project, amending the FY2026 annual budget by appropriating funds in the amount of $40,000 authorizing the city manager to obtain, execute, and record all documents necessary for the improvement project, providing for state for compliance with prevailing wage law and state mandated construction safety training and fixing the time when this ordinance shall become effective.

Second reading.

Do we have a staff report?

Yes, thank you, Mayor.

Gabe Huffington Parks and Recreation Director.

Rothwell Park is located at 309 Rothwell Drive in Columbia's fourth ward.

We have park sales tax funding totaling 200,000 for this project.

This includes an additional 40,000 appropriation related to the playground improvements, and I'll go through that here in just one second.

Our improvements to the park include replacement of the playground, and it's about 26 years old.

We also plan to remove the wood fiber mulch and go with a port in place rubber safety surface for this playground.

Also, we have trail improvements and the installation of a single table shelter adjacent to the playground.

We held community engagement in a couple different fashions.

This picture depicts the event that we had at the park on September 9th of 2025.

We also collected online comments from August 27th to October 15th, and then we held a public hearing at our parks and recreation commission meeting on October 16th of 2025.

We will also replace the surfacing that is underneath it.

And then depicted in the green rectangle is a single table shelter.

And so this was something that we wanted to add in terms of accessible space for shade.

The only other existing seating area in the park is actually located across the bridge into the woods, and it's not an accessible site.

This is the existing playground.

Along with playground replacement, we will also replace the retaining wall that is around it.

And then kind of right here in this bottom right-hand corner is where we'll place that one table shelter that will be adjacent to the playground.

In addition to the playground improvements, the other major input that we receive regarding the park was improvements to the trail.

So we will do a couple different things to make improvements.

One is to replace a section of gravel with concrete.

This is about a 40-foot section that consistently washes out.

We also will go through and do some pretty expansive invasive species removal.

We've talked to some different volunteer groups to assist with this, but also to start in that trail corridor and then spread that out as we go.

It's about a 0.4 mile trail that goes through the woods of the park.

So staff is requesting approval legislation this evening authorizing the proposed improvements to Rothwell Park and appropriating the additional park sales tax funding for the project.

I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

Are there any questions from council to staff?

I think Gabe, there were a few um questions in there about some of like the sort of brush removal and some of those things.

Are those expected when you do that trail construction to kind of take care of those?

Yes.

So typically that's not part of a capital project, but it was kind of the theme of public input that we received.

Lots of neighbors use the trail, so we'll incorporate that as we regrade the trail, but also we'll do that invasive species removal.

Yeah, Nick.

I went and visited the park today, and it's a lovely uh little park.

And I'm wondering about the volunteer part of that.

You say you've talked to a couple of uh volunteer groups of those neighborhood groups that are interested.

Because I know that at least two of the comments were about participating in clearing uh the invasives.

Yep.

So there is a pretty active neighborhood association kind of group around there that has asked us about some additional volunteer events.

And then also we've been discussions with Missouri Conservation Corps.

They've assisted with some other projects about future projects and where those may land.

And we also have discussed this as a for Columbia project as well.

Okay, great.

Any other questions for staff?

Yeah, Vera.

I just have to say this was some of the best public comments I've ever seen.

So uh I'm curious if you'll be incorporating the life-size statue of Jar Jar Binks into your plans.

So I didn't know if it'd be my place to bring that up, but this was the best public input we had ever received.

Um so if no's not seen this, we had four or five um young kids show up and they had designed the park for us.

And so they provided us with some it basically drawings.

I I didn't promise a volcano, nor did I promise Jar Jar Binks, but we did land on yellow and purple as the main colors for the playground from their input.

What about the moat with sharks?

Was that one agreed to?

Uh we heard from risk management earlier today, so I don't think that's gonna be possible.

Can I just what about the very, very spinny thing?

Yes.

Uh we may see how we can incorporate some spinning.

That sounds really good to me.

All right.

Um I'll go ahead and open up the public hearing.

Would anyone from the public wish to speak about the proposed improvements to Rothwell Park?

Um I'll just say the only comment I got from somebody was like if swings can be there, they'd be very happy.

But I think we'll see what the design ends up being.

Um any follow-up council comments.

All right.

Uh Sheila, will you please call roll on bill 4526?

Council Bill 4526, Ms.

Sample?

Yes.

Mr.

Foster.

Yes.

Mr.

Waterman?

Yes.

Ms.

Buffalo?

Yes.

Ms.

Carroll?

Yes.

Ms.

Elwood?

Yes.

All right.

Moving on to our old business.

As a reminder, 3726 was tabled to the May 18th City Council meeting.

So I'll go ahead and have Sheila read Bill 3826.

Council Bill 3826 is an ordinance amending chapter 5 of the city code relating to animals and fowl and fixing the time when this ordinance shall become effective second reading.

Do we have a staff report?

Yes, Rebecca Rosslett, public health director.

Um just a brief overview of kind of the history of how we got here.

Um and then I'll turn it over to Kevin Myers, Animal Control Supervisor, to walk through some of the changes.

And we do have a presentation as well.

So council might remember that in December of 24, the Board of Health brought forward a request that they be directed to review Chapter 5 Animals and Fowl of the City ordinances.

Council approved that request, and then the board spent the majority of 2025 taking a thorough look at all of Chapter 5.

Dr.

Tom Rose, who's a veterinarian on our board, is also here in the audience tonight.

Should there be any questions for him?

All right, you've had to do a lot of IT help tonight.

Sorry about that.

So in looking at Chapter 5, you know, the majority of these ordinances were written in about 1964 and haven't have only been touched sporadically since that time.

So the board took a very systematic approach at looking at the entirety of Chapter 5 and pulling out some of their suggested changes that they thought the um community might want might have the most public input on or the greatest interest in.

A lot of the areas in in the chapter 5 were really just updating some language.

So throughout Chapter 5, we reference Columbia Police K9s, and we changed that to law enforcement canines because you could have a dog from the Sheriff's Department or MU or the Highway Patrol, and we just wanted that language to be more generic.

But then a few things.

Um four key areas really where we thought there would be more public discussion.

The first one was the change um some changes to the Feral Cat ordinance.

The second one was um changes to the dangerous and aggressive animals.

And that was really looking at adding a um hearing process for that determination, similar to what the county does for county dangerous and aggressive animals.

The third one was looking at the limitation on the number of cats and dogs that be could be kept by a household.

And then also looking at um some specifics related to animal tethering.

So in the presentation tonight, Kevin is gonna walk through, he's gonna go a little deeper in those primary um categories that we talked about.

It's the same presentation that we presented at pre-council.

Um we can he can go deeper into any of the other semantics if council wishes.

So if you'd like, we'll just get started with this.

I do want to mention really quickly as far as how we promoted these discussions.

Everything was shared on B heard.

We intentionally posted agendas that said we are just talking about feral cats tonight.

And then at the next meeting, we are just talking about the number of dogs and cats in a household.

So that we really kept it within those boundaries so that if that was the topic that you really wanted to give your input on, you would know to arrive at that meeting.

But of course, we accepted public comment at every meeting through B Heard, and then we also um gave updates through social media.

So I'll let Kevin get started.

Okay.

Good evening.

Um to start, we have three definitions that will need to be added just to go along with those amendments and additions.

The first one being the addition of a definition for dangerous or aggressive animal advisors.

So that's basically a board of people that would hear a hearing contesting the uh charge of dangerous and aggressive that may be declared on somebody's animal.

Um we'll go more into that in 5-5-7 for dangerous aggressive animals, but this basically just defines who that board is made up of and what their purpose is, basically.

Um second one would be for feral cat colonies, and it's basically just describing them as uh five or more feral cats that are being just uh cared for at a single location.

And third would be a definition of a health official.

Um it's mentioned in the ordinances at least once, so it's just good practice to define that.

So we didn't have that before.

So uh starting out with section 5 3 for dispositions of biting animals.

Um we would make some different changes to how the quarantine would be held for when an animal bites someone.

Um it's a 10-day quarantine, and basically, as it's listed currently, a person has to have a current rabies shot, a current city license at the time of the bite, um, and then their dog has to have no history of running at large for them to quarantine at home.

And they have to take their dog to a vet at the end of that 10-day quarantine to have it cleared from the quarantine, basically say it doesn't have any signs or symptoms of rabies.

Um so we're wanting to change it so that basically you do have to have that current rabies shot at the time the bite occurs, but we're giving people the option to purchase that city license within three days of the bite occurring.

So a lot of people get hung up on that, so they end up having to pay uh large amount of sum of money to hold their dog at a vet or with us, um, and we just want to change that so there's more option for them to quarantine and they're getting a license at the same time.

Um the other thing that we added that's not actually on this slide is we would want uh both a veterinarian or animal control officer to be able to clear the quarantine.

So it says currently that just a veterinarian can clear the quarantine.

We would like to add it that an animal control officer can also clear that quarantine.

That's mirroring the counting, it's something we already do in the county.

Um animal control officers are very aware of the signs, symptoms of rabies, and um it's easy for us to clear a quarantine as it is for a vet.

So uh I will also mention before I move on, we don't have it in the slide, but under section 5-5 for redemption, um, we are striking out running at large for uh animals impounded that we would charge for.

That seems like nothing, but a lot of times we do have officers go out in the middle of the night to pick up dogs that were um the owners were arrested by the police for one reason or another, and they're getting those dogs back for free currently because they weren't running at large at the time we picked them up.

Now we would be able to charge them an impound fee specifically for that.

It still has the director has the ability to waive that fee.

So if something, some kind of exit of circumstances that's still in place.

So moving on to 5-6 for animal abuse.

Um so firstly, we would add a B to that um 5-6 section that defines animal neglect.

So this would specifically say um or be a charge for animal neglect that describes what that is.

It's very similar, as you'll see to the unlawful confinement ordinances, um, but this speaks to more the condition of the animal when we find it.

Currently, that's um unlawful confinements, that section is for dogs that are you know in a fence yard, something like that, and we can see their area that they're in in this case.

If we picked up a dog that was clearly being neglected, um and we had proof of that from vet telling us that this dog didn't receive the care it needed, then we could issue a citation based on that animal neglect ordinance.

Whereas we'd use that unlawful confinement specifically in those cases where we can see the habitat the dog is living in.

Uh-huh.

And then moving on to the section for tethering, which would now be moved to E.

We want to add an eighth section to that that says no animal may be tethered out during any inclement weather warning or advisory issued by the National Weather Service without providing adequate care as defined in subsection B, which is that animal neglect ordinance we're adding.

So this is specific to dogs tied outside.

This is already set up for dogs that are in a fenced yard.

So if you put a dog out during this inclement weather warning or advisory, you have to have all those things that are in there for unlawful confinement at that time.

Okay.

Moving on, 5-11.

This one we're simply taking out section B that says the city or the health department will give information to sellers of reptiles to distribute to people buying them for safety of uh the risks of owning those zonotic risks.

So this kind of takes the city out of the equation.

Um if the people selling the reptiles are doing their job, they're probably giving out that information.

This keeps the city from getting employed in any kind of led um legal action that may occur.

Um, and it's just hard to enforce, difficult for us to watch and low impact on public safety.

So moving on to that dangerous or aggressive animals in 5-5-7.

So we're trying to mirror the county's ordinances on this.

They currently have it set up to where we would do an investigation on a dangerous or aggressive dog in the county.

Um we would find evidence, collect evidence, we'd put together a statement, give that to the director of the health department, and then the director would designate if that dog should be deemed vicious or nuisance.

This is the same thing, but in the city, so they would declare them either dangerous or aggressive.

Um, and then the owner of that animal would then have the right to request a hearing where they can contest that charge or appeal it.

Um so this kind of lines up with the county and it gives animal owners a due process.

And this would be where that board would come in that we talked about.

They would meet if they requested that hearing, and they would hear from both sides.

So and the director would take any kind of recommendations from them and then make a total determination at that point.

Okay, let's move to 5-60.

So limitation upon number 50.

Kevin, can I ask you a quick question really quick on five dash five seven.

Um earlier you mentioned uh about kind of just putting law enforcement agency rather than the complete the Columbia Police Department.

Yes.

On the edit, we have in the second, like the second part of that, it says both.

Is there any conflict there, or is that just kind of a cleanup that needs to happen?

At least what's attached to the agenda.

That's a cleanup.

Okay, okay.

So yeah, just pointing that out.

It looks like you corrected it in the first part of that line, but the second part of it has both things.

Yeah, that that comes up a lot.

I mean, that Columbia Police Department needs to use a whole lot in these ordinances.

So will that be, and I guess that'll be a clarification for Sheila or Nancy if we need to like make that motion to do that cleanup, or if that's the sort of thing that we can be like that sort of knowledge, you know, any time that this happens just to replace it with law enforcement agency.

It's on page 10.

Where we have a strike through of the Columbia Police Department in the first sentence under three, um, but then in the sec the second part of that sentence, it says both.

I'll have to wait for an answer.

Okay, all right.

We'll come back to the background.

Okay.

So for five uh section five-six zero for limitation upon number of pets kept.

Um we are suggesting to add a uh permit, an annual permits for owning over the number of uh the limits, which is four adult uh combination of dogs and cats over the age of six months.

So once you have one more than that, you would have to purchase an annual permits.

There would be conditions set upon the purchase of that permit, um, one of which is that they do have to have a current rabieshot, current city license, and be spayed and neutered.

Um that goes for all the animals in the household, including the fifth one or the ones over the limit, I should say.

Um that permit would be annual.

It would go from January 1st to December 31st.

Anytime it's purchased within the middle of the year, it would go until December 31st, and it would be repurchased or re-upped at that time as long as they've kept in compliance with everything.

Um we would suggest that be $50 for each animal over that limit.

So and there's a set of criteria there that we've written for getting that.

It would have to be in writing to the director of the health department who would make that consideration.

And then moving on to feral cat colony caretaker permits.

Um this is for sections 112 through 114.

Um so we just tried to streamline this.

We're keeping the same sort of process.

We still want to permit to care for feral cat colonies, um, but this takes a lot of the barriers, um, mostly um monetary barriers out of it, as so it used to be you'd annually have to trap each cat in your colony, you'd have to get them a current vaccination, rabies shot, you'd have to test them for feline leukemia, um, and then you would it's just a whole lot of stuff to do, a lot of things that cost money.

And it's almost impossible to catch a feral cat after you've caught it the first time in a trap.

Some of them may not be smart enough that they'll go in more than once, but the majority are going to avoid the trap after they've been caught once.

So in this case, we're just looking for them to have one rabies vaccination in their lifetime.

So that would be the first time you catch them to come into compliance with the care of this colony.

And then you would um you'd basically, once you had that first established rabies shot, that does give um guidance from the um National Association for Public State Veterinarians to quarantine the cat in a certain manner instead of having to basically euthanize it and send for rabies testing if it were to bite someone, which we'd like to avoid.

Um yeah, those are the main things with that.

And through this, we're establishing responsible community cat management with our partners.

And I think that pretty much covers it.

So uh before we move on to questions, I just realized when Kevin was walking through this, and I apologize.

We put page numbers on here so you could easily reference it, but the page numbers were for the entirety of chapter five.

They did not align with the draft ordinance.

So I sorry about that.

If anybody was trying to follow along, that's what happened.

Questions for staff on this.

I have a clarifying I do I just have a quick clarifying question.

We have earlier when it talks about having a permit for um number of cats over four that has an annual permit cost of fifty dollars per permit.

What is the fee for a feral cat colony permit?

And like do they count them?

And then it's fifty.

You know, it was how how does the logistics of that?

Yeah, it's well, so it's a totally separate ordinance.

There is no fee for the feral cat colony caretaker permit.

There never has been and never will be if I have anything to say about it.

I just wanted to clarify on that one.

I'm trying to imagine counting this cat that won't be caught.

So all right.

Questions for staff on this?

Yes, Nick.

I'm just wondering about tethering, and I'm actually looking at the at it right now, which may have the answer.

So I apologize.

I haven't looked at this before.

But what are the general requirements for tethering an animal other than it's okay to tether an animal?

I assume there are other limitations on how you can do that, though.

Yeah, so you can only have them tethered out if there's a responsible person there at the home.

Um they can only be out for 30 minutes, or I think it I don't know what it says exactly.

I think it's time to go to the bathrooms how we usually look at it.

Um, but we would say 20, 30 minutes without providing that food, water and shelter.

Or well, let's just say water and shelter.

Food is provided at regular intervals.

We're not as worried if it's not out there with the animal if they're in good condition.

Um so those are kind of the main things.

They have to have a certain type of tie out, can't be like a logging chain.

Um yeah.

Okay.

All right.

Thanks.

Yeah, Vera and then Bell.

Because I know that we've we've received some questions from the public about this.

Can you talk about the limitation on dogs and cats and how that applies to community members that are fostering animals that are up for adoption?

So the limit to dogs and cats has not changed, and we're not proposing a change.

It's been the limit since probably 1964.

So animals under six months of age do not fall into that maximum for animals, animals over the age of six months do.

There are some exceptions in here, such as if somebody is a commercial facility or if it's a facility that's attached to a veterinary clinic, if you're a breeder, those things, I think breeders in there.

I don't think breakers in there.

Okay, I apologize.

Um but it that's always been the rule.

So this would still apply if it's an animal over the age of six months.

Yeah, the ordinance has specifically always said um keeper harbor, basically at one location.

So you would be keeping your harboring if you're fostering technically Yeah, Valerie.

Yeah.

Did the commission have any discussion about fostering and I don't know, potential um different structures of the ordinance that would take fostering into account when it comes to the fee?

I don't remember that being part of the discussion.

I don't know if Dr.

Rose has a different memory.

Yeah.

Because again that that's always been in there and we weren't making any recommended changes to the maximum number of dogs and cats that a household can have.

So have we always I understand that it's always been in there.

Have we collected the fee for people who are fostering, or is it based on complaint?

There's never been a fee before.

So the other distinction is you know, these are complaint driven.

I mean, animal control responds to complaints from residents and community members.

They're not staffed to drive around and look for issues that may be happening.

So oftentimes we're all Kevin's only going to encounter that when this could be an a dog that they own personally, or they could be fostering when there's excessive barking or there's issues with a neighbor, or the animals are running at large.

So we're not even going to be made aware of a fostering situation unless there's been some type of a citizen complaint in most cases.

I can't say that we already benefited from a work session on this.

And when you came to us the first time, I thought these were fabulous amendments.

Um, but I don't have all the lived experiences of a foster host.

Um I'm wondering if maybe we do need a carve out for fostering.

Um I understand that it's commuted, um, it's complaint-based and it's unlikely to come up, but I hate to have a situation where we're basically advising people to not follow this unless someone complains.

Um I don't think that's how we want to build this.

If we want fosters to be able to operate well, maybe that's something we need to reinvestigate.

Are there questions for I think I have a question in you can remind a little bit of the history why the Board of Health looked at this was to see about if there were what options we had to allow people to go over the limit of the four.

Is that that was that was really the our basic impetus from that, correct?

Like to give a pathway to compliance for those who have more than four?

Yes, because there are some occasions where Kevin and his team will encounter a pet owner that has five dogs or three cats and two dogs, whatever the makeup is.

And oftentimes what they hear is well, that was my dad's dog, and he's gone to a nursing home, or that was my son's and he's his landlord said he couldn't have it.

So it's not even always that they sought out to have six animals.

Um it just by happenstance they end up with more than four.

And this and currently the way it's written, there isn't there is not an exception.

There is not an exception process.

And this is allowing um individuals under those nuance um occasions to be able to come into compliance.

They can demonstrate that they've met the requirements within the ordinance and purchase the the pet um permit and now they are in compliance.

But this is gonna always be kind of an unusual situation.

Um typically, you know, when you live in a city in a neighborhood, neighbors have feelings about you know how many animals you own.

Um so that's really kind that was very much the impetus of it.

In the ordinances, you know, it allows the public health director to make exceptions for things like goats, but it didn't allow for exceptions to dogs.

So that was pretty unusual.

Jackie I apologize if I if this is in here and I didn't find it.

Um kind of building off the discussion regarding the foster animals.

So the permit, is there like a minimum amount of time that the animal has to be in the home before the owner has to request or seek out a permit for those additional animals?

That was not part of our discussion.

Okay.

So because fostering, I mean, hopefully the point is that they're only in this foster homes for a short amount of time.

So if I don't know that we need that date in there, but that might be, I guess, part of the exception process.

Uh-huh.

If they are only there temporarily versus full time.

Anyway, okay.

Valerie, you had a follow-up.

Yeah, Jackie did go down exactly the same line that I was thinking.

Um, what I wondered was if we have any information or data from agencies that um work with fosters as to how long a typical foster stay is that could help us predict what would be needed to accommodate fosters.

That would definitely be a question for the Central Missouri Humane Society.

Okay.

So we don't have that, right?

No, I think we could do that with the case.

No, again, this was not part of the discussion with the Board of Health.

I do want to know several dogs that have been fostered for life.

But they're rare occasions and they're unfortunate occasions, but maybe that's good too, because I found out.

Foster failures.

Yes.

Basically.

Is that a thought that staff has discussed?

It has not been a thought we've discussed, but if that's council's direction, the the board will happily take that on.

Okay.

Okay.

All right.

Well, I will go ahead and come to public comment since a member of the Board of Health just stood up.

Uh want them people to come to a microphone.

Um, so I'll go ahead and open up public comment um for um B3826.

If anybody from the public would wish to speak, please come forward to the microphone.

You might need to adjust it because that was very tall.

Yeah.

Uh my name is Kim and I live in ward one.

Hi, Valerie.

Um, so obviously I support the idea of amending the current limit of four pets per household in 5-60 by allowing a variance for responsible and qualified pet owners.

Not every household with more than four animals is a problem.

In many cases, those additional pets are well cared for, healthy, and living in stable homes with responsible owners who provide proper care.

Sanitation and supervision and a variance would allow the city to evaluate situations individually, ensuring that animals are properly cared for while still addressing legitimate concerns such as neglect, noise, or insanitary conditions.

A variance option is also especially important for residents who help with animal rescue and fostering.

Many compassionate people in our community temporarily take in animals from shelters or rescue groups to provide safe homes until those animals can be adopted, including myself.

These efforts directly help reduce overcrowding in shelters and save the city resources while improving animal welfare.

A flexible variance supports this community, those community members while still maintaining oversight.

However, I would respectfully oppose the proposition of a charge of a $50 sanction for each animal after the first four, which will only punish honest responsible pet owners like myself.

While it may seem like a simple way to regulate pet ownership, this type of sanction can unintentionally discourage responsible people from properly registering their animals or from helping rescue animals in need.

It'll also create an unnecessary financial burden for responsible pet owners who are already paying for food, veterinary care, vaccinations, and spare neuter services like myself.

Responsible ownership should be measured by the quality of care provided, not simply by the number of animals in the home or the ability to pay additional fees.

A variance that evaluates cleanliness, proper care, and responsible ownership would be a far more effective way to ensure animal welfare and neighborhood quality of life.

In my case, this sanction would total almost 1,000 per year on top of the annual licensing fee, rabies shots, and my daily care.

The sanction would take a huge chunk of money I need for continuing caring for my cats.

This money is taken from my vet bills, food bills, litter bills.

I came to this city and asked for help because I wanted to make a positive difference.

It feels like the city is now trying to use my love for my cats as a way to make a buck and financially extort me.

Licensing offers a service and it only costs five to ten dollars.

What service is being offered for the $50?

Because it doesn't make any sense to charge 10 and 5 times more for something that does not even offer a service.

No one is going to volunteer to pay $50 extra per animal.

So again, it will only affect and punish honest, responsible pet owners like myself.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Anyone else from the public wish to speak on Bill 3826?

Yes, thank you.

I agree with Kim.

Most of the proposals in this in this package of ordinances are very good and very positive.

I especially Dan, will you say your name for the record?

I beg your pardon.

I'm Dan Viets, 15 North Tenth Street.

I especially appreciate the proposals that will make it easier to participate in Faral Cat Colony caretaking.

The lowering of barriers for participation make perfect sense.

There are compromises, of course, involved.

There's a balancing test of concerns.

But I think overall, this is a very good idea, except for the $50 a cat business.

That is just impractical.

I will tell you, I'm I'm representing Kim in regard to an ordinance violation case.

I'm not charging her a penny to do that, and nobody's paying me to speak here this evening.

But I do feel very strongly that people like Kim Olson are doing a tremendous service to our community.

We should pay her for what she is doing.

We should not charge her money.

We should appreciate the fact that someone like Kim Olsen is willing to provide care for the cats in our community who don't have homes, at least temporarily.

But it's just not feasible, it's just not practical for someone like Kim to pay $50 for every cat and kitten who comes through her home.

I've been to her home.

I will tell you, it is incredibly clean and well-ordered.

Her house is a model of caretaking.

She has an incubator for the kittens that she takes in and places in other homes when they are old enough and healthy enough to do that.

But again, she's doing an incredible service for our community.

We should do everything we can to encourage that conduct and not to discourage it.

One point that came to mind from the comments made by others earlier is that the enforcement is complaint-driven from people who are residents and community members.

If if that were the only people who uh whose complaints were acknowledged, that would that would make kind of make sense.

But I'll tell you, there are people from Pennsylvania who, for pure spite and ironess, have made complaints about Kim, and they've never been anywhere near her home.

So I suggest we narrow the complaint basis to those who really are residents and or community members, similar to what we did with the uh Citizens Police Review Board uh several years ago when we had people from outside the state uh making complaints uh about police misconduct.

But um I I just want to say again that I appreciate uh the great amount of work and thought that's gone into drafting this, and and the only thing that I think is really problematic is the idea of charging $50 per cat.

Thank you, too.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Would anyone else from the public wish to speak on Bill 3826?

Eugene Elkins, I can ward just wanted to put a two cents of my opinion.

Uh the $50 is very, very, very expensive.

Where is the money going?

Is it going to the Central Missouri Humane Society, the City's general revenue?

Please bring that up for discussion.

And I learned that because the neighbor is dealing with lots of cats, she will be paying $20 for an abortion.

I don't know much about the that side of the story, but a stray cat is the reason I'm injured today.

Thank you.

Would anyone else from the public wish to speak on Bill 3826?

Hi, my name's Christina, and I'm requesting five minutes as I'm speaking for Columbia Second Chance.

Okay.

Over the past five years, I've helped TNR more than 700 cats and kittens and brought more than 300 into rescue and fostered.

Approximately 80% of the caretakers I assist are renters.

I'm currently managing and have fixed 17 cats in my immediate area and fixed more than 60 within two blocks.

Almost all under the same landowner spread between various caretakers.

As a renter, I cannot obtain a permit because my landlord will not sign, even though he has no issue with the feeding or the TNR work being done.

Research shows that between 7 and 26% of residents feed stray or community cats.

Based on Columbia's population, that equates somewhere between 9,000 and 34,000 people, yet only one permit is in place.

This demonstrates that the permit system is not functioning as intended.

Even with proposed revisions that remove testing, chipping, and annual revaccination, the core issue remains.

The permit structure is difficult to enforce and creates barriers that discourages compliance.

Feeding bans have consistently proven ineffective in other cities.

When food is removed, the cats do not disappear.

Many community cats in urban areas have been raised with consistent caretakers.

They are not fully self-sustaining hunters.

In densely populated city environments, natural plug is limited.

When feeding is suddenly stopped, these cats do not relocate far distances.

They either suffer through gradual decline, compete more aggressively for scarce resources, or move to the next property in search of another person willing to feed them where someone won't complain.

The city does not reduce the or this cycle does not reduce the population.

It simply shifts the feeding location and often increases complaints.

In addition, if food from caretakers is removed, cats who are able to hunt will end up hunting more wildlife and are forced to unable to survive.

A managed feeding and TNR approach keeps cats healthier, stabilizes populations, and reduces pressure on local wildlife.

During one of my educational seminars, I spoke with representatives from Best Friends Animal Society.

They explained that feeding bans and permit systems are often unenforceable.

Also, many individuals get around the permit by claiming ownership of only one or two cats while stating the other simply steal from the bowl.

This leaves animal control responding to complaints without meaningful tools for resolution.

Instead of a permit and proposing a clear enforceable TNR ordinance, this ordinance would require that any cats regularly feeding at a location within city limits be neutered, tipped, and vaccinated for babies.

If someone sets food outdoors that community cats are consuming, they would be required to bring the food inside or ensure the cats are fixed.

Failure to comply could result in citations.

Data collection would not rely on voluntary permits.

Rescue shelters and neuter clinics already track TNR surgeries, providing far more accurate data than a permit system currently provides with our one permit holder.

The current ordinance changes also requires landowner signatures and assigns liability for colony care to them when the tenant moves out.

Many colonies exist in rental in lower income areas where turnover is frequent and landowners may not live locally.

This creates a barrier in the very neighborhoods where TNR is most needed.

When colonies are properly managed through TNR, complaints decrease.

Sterilized cats fight less, roam less, and stop reproducing.

Numbers stabilize.

However, when people avoid the permit and continue feeding without TNR, the city is left with ongoing complaints and no effective resolution.

Columbia does not euthanize feral community cats.

Without enforceable TNR, the only outcome is stagnation.

Additionally, approximately 80% of kittens born outdoors do not survive.

This makes TNR easier and enforceable, prevents suffering and reduces intake pressure on rescues and shelters.

I'm asking the council to consider replacing the permit requirement with a clear enforceable TNR ordinances that provides uh prioritizes sterilization, accountability, and practical enforcement.

I also ask that wording is added to protect rescues, shelters, and trappers.

This approach protects the city, supports animal control, supports the rescues and volunteers who are already doing the work.

Um, and then I have a handout that shows examples of an ordinance that would cover all of the above, and then a picture of the data that I keep for all the TNRs that I do under second chance.

Um if you want to hand out you can give those to Sheila over here.

And then that's all that I had.

But if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer.

Thank you.

But anyone else from the public wish to speak on proposed changes to chapter five.

My name is Janine Johnston.

My address is 1408 St.

Andrew, Ward 4.

First, I'd like to say thank you because I do know that the Department of Health has done a lot of work with this.

Um, I know Kevin has been very willing to listen to those of us who are very passionate about TNR, which is trap neuter return.

Thank you.

That's trap neuter return.

That is the most important thing.

We trap them, we spay and neuter them, we do the vaccinations, we return them.

As long as we are returning them to their location, typically those animals are healthy.

Most animals have been in that community or that area for a significant period of time.

And so the people who are taking care of them are doing this out of the goodness of their heart because it's what we're passionate about, but it's also coming out of their own pocket.

We are the ones who are out there or with the help of rescues and TNR groups, um, trapping these cats.

We are feeding them on a regular basis.

We are not asking for any community support.

Um, but we are we are doing that.

If an animal is injured, it is also that TNR caretakers' responsibility to go make sure that that animal is receiving care.

So that has been very important.

I the permit is very hard to enforce for TNR.

One of the things that we have had people say to us is that they do not want to do the permit because then they're afraid that their name, and Kevin, you guys might be able to clarify this, Rebecca, that their name and home address or the address of where the cats are is going to be open to public information, which then puts the cats at risk because there are people who want to go and poison the cats or or take care of the cats, or that person may be getting comments or threats themselves.

And so that has come from other communities, and then whether that is accurate or not for our community, there are people who have not done the permits specifically for that reason.

But I want to thank you very much for pulling the requirement of the yearly rabies and the testing, because as Kevin says, they're smart.

Barrel cats are savvy, they have learned how to survive.

And so to think that I'm getting any of my cats back in the trap is probably not going to happen.

But I do think this is an important factor without TNR.

If you can only imagine how many cats you would have in this community, cats can get pregnant as early as three to four months of age, and they're gonna have probably three litters or more in that year.

Okay, and then those kittens have two or three litters, and then those kittens have two or three litters.

So we are really doing the work of maintaining reducing that population with the help of the TNR groups in the community.

Thank you very much.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Anyone else from the public wish to speak on Bill 3826?

My name is Pat Fowler.

I live at 606 North Sixth Street, and until this conversation started, I'd forgotten that I live among a cat colony on my street.

But because Eli, Elizabeth, Micah, and Jesse have separate territories and they respect each other's boundaries, we don't have a problem with them.

We just know their names and we know what their territory is.

But the success story I really want to talk about is a former city employee named Amanda Wilroth, who used to work for Parks and Rec, who was a foster across the street from me in a single family house.

And Amanda performed a valuable neighborhood service.

If there was a lost dog, we texted Amanda and she brought the scanner out, and she found out whose that dog was and she reunited them with the neighbor.

There were endless numbers of litters of puppies that she brought home with her, took care of for a period of time, let us interact with when she was introducing them to their forever families, and she added to the quality of life in our neighborhood.

I got to spend time with nine beagle puppies one afternoon while my full grown beagle watched me from the window, the glass door on my porch.

And that kind of joy that a well-run foster brings to a neighborhood is immeasurable, particularly in a close-knit community.

So I think there's some work to be done in encouraging and enabling and helping the fosters work well in their neighborhood.

Perhaps we could have a community mediation program if there is a situation that needs attention because there are too many animals and they're too loud or they're causing any other problems.

But in my experiences living downtown for 16 years and in the neighborhood I lived before then, where I live next to yet another foster household that had a succession of puppies that we got to interact with.

These are civic goods.

These are things that are necessary and important for our community and things that we should encourage.

Please rethink that part of whatever regulation you're going to do with regard to foster homes and foster families.

Thank you.

Thank you, Pat.

Anyone else from the public wish to speak on proposed changes to Chapter 5?

Yes.

The thing I wanted to bring up is I remember when the Humane Society was here and they were talking about how much money they needed to expand and to, you know, get a new facility because their facilities are falling apart.

And so I have to wonder if we could a $50 charge on foster.

How many people are going to be willing to do that and what's going to happen to those animals?

Because a lot of times the fostering, it may be just to enrich that animal's life, or they don't fit in.

But a lot of times they're over their limit on pets at the humane society.

And so I have to wonder what's going to happen to them.

And I think it's a good idea to have a discussion about fostering versus permanent pets.

And also, you know, how long is a foster?

I mean, a forever foster, of course, doesn't fit in, but short-term fosters are a good idea.

And then I had one other question is that, you know, I understand vaccinations are very important, but I'm just curious as to why a rabies vaccine once is accept, you know, acceptable.

Like why would you even bother to have that done just once if you're going to take that off?

So that would be a question I'd like you to ask.

Thank you.

Anyone else from the public wish to speak on Chapter 5 Bill 3826?

Tom Rose speaking, I guess, on behalf of the Board of Health and our process here of discussions.

Just to the last point, it's very important to at least have one rabies vaccine that does offer a decent amount of immunity versus none.

As far as number of animals are concerned.

I think I spoke to this at the pre-council meeting.

Of course, it depends upon whether you're talking great Danes or cats.

And trying to come up with a number that's appropriate or that fits that is difficult.

So I think you know the four number, it has been on around for decades, and just trying to figure out the leeway to a lot of more animals.

When we first looked at this at the Board of Health, I have to tell you, uh, we looked at it and had discussed it and given leeway to the health director to make decisions on individual cases as to extra animals in the household.

We had that discussion with no fee attached to that.

And then we got recommendations from the legal department that we needed to add parameters to it.

So I think the board this the $50 fee was something that was uh proposed.

I think it's up to the City Council to decide how much they think might be appropriate.

There are funds that are used to help uh uh it includes the licensing fees that are utilized to help with animal control staff, which I think they're a little understaffed sometimes, so you know the fees go to that.

Um but uh it is difficult to determine what number is an appropriate number.

Uh if you have somebody that's fostering, we we did not discuss that or consider that, but it's something to consider.

You have to consider what type of animal they're fostering.

Again, are you fostering two great Danes when you already have four great Danes?

Are you fostering, you know, four cats when you have, you know, just three.

So uh it's hard to make limitations on that and considerations for that and how long you're gonna be fostering.

So those are things that we could re-evaluate if you would like us to.

Um the uh feral cat colony ordinance that we have in place, I think it was the best way to uh try to I wasn't out on the board when that first came about, but the best way to try to to manage public health as far as uh what might be happening out there with feral cats.

I don't know that we were actually approached with an actual TNR ordinance to look at, and we would have to compare the per compare the pros and cons of that to the feral cat ordinance if that was something that we wanted to re-evaluate as well.

So those are my comments.

I don't know if anybody has any questions for me.

They might they might come up after.

I'll go let the other people from the public wish to speak and then you thank you, Tom.

Anyone from the public wish to speak uh to the proposed.

Maybe don't go back to your back seat just in case Board of Health member.

Anyone else from the public wish to speak on the proposed changes to Chapter 5?

All right.

Seeing none, we'll come to council uh questions or council comments.

I I think first I I might actually just direct a staff if there's any additional responses based on some of the questions that you heard uh if you wanted to uh discuss or respond to those I don't know why TNR workers would want their work regulated.

Um I think that they do a lot of good work and there are no laws really pertaining to their work.

Why should there be any that would limit their work?

So that's my main thing about that.

I think the the whole thing with the feral cat colonies is really a smaller scale um issue than people look at it.

It's people that are having issues with neighbors who are feeding large number of cats and they're not managing those number of cats, they're not doing that TNR type stuff that is already required.

So they're having issues in contacting animal control with those issues, and then we're speaking to the owner about the correct way.

Maybe not the best way to word it, but the best way to care for these cats that they're getting the best for their health, and they're cutting down on issues those neighbors might be having without totally removing them from the situation altogether, because that's all we would do all day and all night, we'd be out picking up cats if there were ordinances about you know cats running loose, which we just don't want.

All right, questions.

Yeah.

Hell or yeah.

Okay.

Um maybe my understanding here is weak, but um, based on the comments that you just had, would the a TNR work?

Would the cats that someone who's doing TNR cares for, would that fall under a feral cat colony, or is that something completely different?

Would feral cat colony in any way limit TNR work?

No, to me it's two separate things totally.

Um I mean, TNR is just that, trap neutral returns.

So that's you have a goal, you have a purpose at the end of that process, just to return them to the area.

Now, maybe if you're continuing to care for them at that point, you might need the feral cat colony caretaker permit.

Um but as far as the TNR work goes, there's there's no laws about that.

I mean, people have tried to argue that putting food in a trap is feeding feral cats, and I've never seen it that way.

I don't interpret it that way.

So to me, it's two totally separate issues, and we shouldn't be limiting what the trap needor release community is doing.

Okay.

Also, would sorry.

Um we redeveloped these, we were trying to better match them up with how TNR works.

So we removed the microchipping.

You know, we're just doing one trapping, you know, instead of the annual trapping like we had.

So we were trying to mesh it with how TNR is done anyways.

So they're doing that same sort of thing.

I'd like to revisit or potentially consider waiving the $50 fee for foster situations for temporary housing of foster animals.

And I'm wondering if that's something your department would be like amenable to picking back up or working with the commission on as well.

You comment on that one, Variga?

Yeah, can I ask uh a clarifying question on that?

So this is this $50 fee would only be for animals over the four.

So it would only be for the fifth animal and then so on and so forth.

And it would be about the number of animals currently in the home.

So if I have is that so if I have three animals and I'm fostering one, that one gets adopted, and then I bring in another to foster.

You're saying four.

So I've only had four the whole time.

So it's not that every single time I bring in an animal, I'm paying $50.

It's in the moments where I have more than four in my home.

Correct.

Does that clarification help?

It helps a little bit, but I also like given that we have limited capacity that we have a need to grow our animal shelters and they work with individuals in the community to foster.

I don't know why we want to charge for those who are doing the fostering.

Because we my knowledge, and I could be wrong, um, or misunderstanding, we would pay animal control to house them.

Um I still, even with the $50, whether it's essentially one spot that could rotate.

I s I still wonder if that's something that we want to have a fine for since it's a service to the community.

So is your recommendation I mean, your first recommendation was originally just to remove the $50 fee altogether if if fostering or is it do you want to refer this back to staff or board of health to come up with like what would a foster what would a foster situation look like?

I'd rather refer it back to staff and board of health because the the conversation about what a foster situation would look like and how to best work with people who are fostering like it sounds like we need to get back in contact with some of the agencies that work with fosters just to get a little more information.

It it kind of feels like a separate topic to me.

And it sounds like from staff from your comments and Board of Health, is they didn't come up in that conversation.

So it now is obviously coming up in our conversations.

Yeah, Nick.

I'm still unclear the purpose for the $50 fee is what's the rationale for that?

So part of it is it's additional staff time because they are going to need to check on these animals and there's the gathering of information on the front end.

Um it's I don't I don't have anything to tell you beyond that.

It is additional resources that are required from our department.

All right, sorry, I didn't know you Vera was not done.

Vera and then Jackie.

I I mean mine is uh more on the council comment rather than question, um, which is just to say I learned about the animal limits first when I adopted from and became a foster for the Central Missouri Humane Society, um, where they talk about these limits.

And perhaps it's because they are so closely integrated with our animal control.

Um, but I always knew that fostering with them I would not have more than four animals in my home.

Um I suppose just uh uh um note that there are fosters in the community that are um already aware of and working within the limit.

And it also appears to be not the case for every organization.

So there appears to need to be a larger conversation, but um at least one agency is working within those limits.

Becky.

Yes, so um just wanted to provide some comments.

So I am well, and recently have fostered through two different agencies within town and um have had two foster failures, I think.

So um understand that as well.

My just to provide anecdotal information on length of stay of foster animals.

We fostered dogs and um we had three of our own at the time, and the only time we'd have more than four would be if we took in a mama and her new litter and under six months don't count.

So that's good to know.

Um I would say the longest we ever had a dog in our home would be like if they had a new litter and we would have them in our home for eight weeks, and then they usually were I can't remember a time that I ever had.

Any foster animal in my home that lasted longer than eight weeks.

Kind of thinking outside outside the box, I I hope.

The lady that spoke first with the large number of cats.

Is there a provision in the code for a designation and what would it entail for a pet boarding?

Be designated as like a pet boarding facility.

Is there I know understand there would be a business license, but inspections just kind of a spitball thought uh as a way to kind of work around the you know, fifty dollars in a non-foster situation.

You know, somebody that has a large, you know, has opted to take on a large number of cats.

Our board of health member has to give you a quick answer to that as a veterinarian.

This person is not a boarding facility does not have them for an extended period of time.

This person has those.

Okay, okay.

And I I understand that's the that's the idea.

That's the idea behind a boarding facility.

But like I said, I'm just kind of trying to think out of the box of possible solution to a you know a difficult situation.

Um the current ordinance, the existing ordinance does specify um that it doesn't try and thought it doesn't apply.

Thank you.

Apply to uh small animal hospitals, uh commercially owned kennels, um, the city pound, that kind of thing.

Um or people that are caretakers for feral cats.

So it is in there, but there's a whole like you said, there's a whole lot to that to become a commercial kennel.

I mean, you've got to get zoned um, you know, business, there's all kinds of different things that were required to get that status.

And in some places you just don't apply for it.

I mean, you just you can't be zoned business if you're in a residential area.

Okay.

Thank you.

So I have a few um kind of follow-up questions for some of the questions that came up.

One of the first ones is can you remind us the cost of a dog license and a cat license?

Um so it's five dollars a year for anything that is less than one year old or any uh dog or cat that is spayed and neutered, dog cat affair, I should say.

Um that's spayed or neutered, it's fifteen dollars for any dog cat or fair over the age of one year that is intact.

So there is a uh little cut in price there for being spayed or neutered So and I know um Rebecca, you said part of the fee, you know, might have come because of uh discussions around the the demand on staff time for this.

Um if the recommendations for this were to be more in line with the cost of the license, would that still I mean that kind of brings down the cost?

It allows you uh a mechanism of which to kind of track and measure.

Did that discussion come up when talking about the sort of dollar amount?

Yes, I trust you.

Board of Health.

This is me speaking personally too, and I think maybe with the as the board might have thought it those recommendations kind of came to us later.

Late The dollar amount you maybe.

The dollar amount.

Yeah.

And uh we didn't really have a good discussion about that.

And I can uh I think I commented at the uh pre-council meeting that this would be pretty steep and difficult for anybody to do that might have a number of animals.

And so that could be something to discuss again.

Certainly.

The the fee amount.

We did not have the discussion at all on the board.

So yes.

Is it a question for Tom?

Or no.

Okay.

So that so that that is a very important thing.

I appreciate that, Tom.

And we can the question about the fostering, I can ask maybe answer that too.

There again looking at the you know the type of animals that you are fostering and the length of time that you're fostering.

And uh we could have that discussion again.

You know, we we certainly don't want to inhibit that.

We gotta remember that the Board of Health and the reasons for these ordinances is for public health.

And you can get into a problem sometimes when you have somebody that's a hoarder.

And and and so we have to have some mechanisms in line to help control that.

That's why we have the minimum animals, you know, the the control for that.

So with leeway, always leeway, even in what we're proposing for the health director to make decisions that might be appropriate to that.

So that's something that we certainly we didn't really discuss, but we could discuss, but we would look at all those parameters.

Again, we have a directive to look on the side of public health.

Right.

In the city limits.

Okay.

Thank you, Tom.

I think so what I'm hearing is pretty um consistent questions from council members on especially this this discussion about um uh what would the process be?

And I assume it would be some process where you would look at they would have we would have to officially know that they were fostering um with humane society, second chance, whoever it is, like what would that process be?

Um but I'm hearing kind of pretty consistent questions from council asking to refer this back to the Board of Health for review over discussion around um foster permit or what that process would be as well as the review over the fees, maybe more in line with the licensing fees so that they kind of go together in that understanding.

Is is that kind of what I'm hearing from your questions?

Is there anything else in directions to ask for?

And I'm um I would make a proposal for this and we would be voting up or down on it.

But there are any other um potential directions towards if we refer this back to Board of Health beer.

I I just really love Jackie's idea about becoming a licensed foster home rather than having like that paperwork mountain of every single animal that comes through your house over the five.

Um and that in that way, there could potentially still be some like even as a foster here as a perhaps more reasonable limit.

And um I know foster homes are already pretty pretty watched over by the organizations they are fostering through, so I don't know that it would require additional regulation from us.

Um the idea of like the the number that you said of the it would be a thousand dollars a year, that would also be many, many, many times that you are having to fill out that paperwork online.

Yeah.

Well, uh I want to remind us that the reason that all of these are coming to us is to re reduce barriers for exactly this kind of circumstance.

And so I'm grateful for that.

Uh I I think the $50 fee is legitimate.

And I also think that it might be in this sense that when for some it might be more legitimate than others.

When we're talking about staff time, we're talking about staff time for those that are problematic.

And some are and some are not, correct?

And so I wonder whether it couldn't be approached from that perspective somehow.

But sending it back to the Board of Health, I think is a really good idea.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Mallory.

I want to say that I think this is both a step in the right direction.

It sounds like we've had a long time since we've visited this.

Um so I'm glad that we're revisiting this.

Um I know a lot of work went into it.

Um you know this is the first time we visited it in a long time, and we're hearing considerable public input.

Um and I also want to acknowledge that we do need animal control.

Um we don't want hoarders.

Um and we're trying to um make room for situations that are not hoarders, but are also not the same thing as one additional animal over and over.

Um I'd like to identify those things and send it back on again.

Yeah.

Don, did you have something?

No.

Okay.

And so oh board Board of Health question coming.

You want clear direction when we're referring to the question.

There was also comments about the feral cat ordinance in TNR.

Do you guys want us to look at that again?

I think it's good for review for that and recommendations if there's anything.

Yeah.

There are a lot, there are a lot, there are some are you wanting to take a look at this as a whole again?

There were other aspects that weren't under discussion.

You don't want to approach the question.

I don't want you guys to come back.

I don't want it to be another year long before you come back with multiple things.

I think the direction we're giving here is to review the opportunity.

Yeah, opportunity for a foster licensed household, whatever that is, the review over the fees.

And then if there are any recommendations to TNR, I mean, but I I appreciate I appreciate Kevin's comment about like not creating additional bureaucracies and barriers if you're doing the right thing, but just make sure that we're not affecting them negatively from the efforts that they are doing.

Jackie and then Nick.

Additionally, if you can define or think about defining discuss defining the length, what foster means?

From ownership.

Yes, and I tell you what, we do a lot of research, and I know Kevin does a lot of research and finding uh pre uh other entities, other uh municipalities that tackle these things.

And so we'll we'll look into that as well.

Because it may or may not be defined.

Okay.

Yeah.

Just a point of order.

Are we able to pass most of these recommendations tonight and then just hold on to the first thing?

Certain sections that you may not want to do.

I guess that's a question I'll have for Nancy.

And I do know for one moment, like I in my motion about removing the one note about the Columbia Police tomorrow.

It doesn't need to happen right now.

It can come back whenever you bring back anything.

I think it would be difficult to parse out and just do bits and pieces of it given the fact that we have something even as basic as the application fee that's still under discussion.

So I'd like to, I mean, I'd like to find a path forward for you to be able to do that, but I don't see where um adopting part.

It would be difficult because of the continuation on the same pages.

So it's not like I can just pull out the um the nuisance sections.

Unfortunately, because it is an ordinance all put together.

Um if we want, I mean, one of the recommendations that we could make is to refer those sections that we're asking to to the Board of Health.

And at the same time, for some of the things related to um animal abuse or neglect, tethering, some of those aspects we can request for health.

You can come back with those approved changes to Chapter 5 or recommended changes to Chapter 5 that we can um uh we can adopt or vote on at a an upcoming sooner meeting right while we're waiting on the other aspects to go to Board of Health.

Is that possible?

And you could even do those tonight if you want to.

I think that's to Nick.

But it'd be difficult.

I I don't know that I would have all the numbers in front of me, and since I'm the one signing my name onto it, uh along with Sheila, I might just recommend that for staff to come back to us with the suggested changes to Chapter 5 that are not affected by the recommendations that we had.

Comment on that?

Yeah.

Aren't all of the pieces that we're talking about referring back under 560 limitation on dogs and cats?

One of those and then the other might be the uh feral cat colony.

So could we just accept out 560 limitation on dogs and cats and five 112 feral cat colony and approve 5153, 56, 511, and 557?

I think that's the question.

Right.

And I think my more nervousness is that I don't want us to have missed something similar to how we lost like Columbia Police Department as a scratch through.

So rather than trying to wordsmith it from here, asking you to come back with a clean amendment to chapter five that does not include the aspects that we're referring back to Board of Health.

We can adopt those at an upcoming meeting, and then we'll wait for the Board of Health report back on those two chapters uh that you just mentioned sections.

Okay.

That's it.

Mm-hmm.

Do I need to make a motion to this, Nancy?

So I think what we would want to do at this point would be to withdraw this ordinance and come back with two separate ordinances.

One that has your non-controversial that's not going back to the Board of Health, and then a second one that will cover the items that are going back to the Board of Health.

Okay.

I just wonder, do they have do you have enough direction in that way, Rebecca?

I do.

Okay.

All right.

Any questions on this?

Um so then for this, am I making a motion to withdraw?

Correct.

Okay.

Um I'll make any other council comments on this.

I've we didn't talk about chickens, so like this is a record meeting.

Our gerbils.

Um, so I'll make a motion uh to withdraw a bill 3826 from discussion here and request for two separate bills to come back to us after one goes to the Board of Health.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Seconded by Jackie.

Any discussion on that?

All right.

Uh all those in favor of withdrawal from Bill 3826 say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

Uh and we'll look to you to when that can go to Board of Health and come back to us and all of those things.

So I did not put a date on it for a reason.

Thank you.

All right.

Moving on.

Are we?

That was Bill 38.

All right.

Sheila, will you please read Bill 3926?

Council Bill 3926 is an ordinance establish establishing local regulations on hours of operation of business licensed to businesses licensed to sell intoxicating liquor by the drink at retail for consumption on the premises for the duration of the 2026 fee for World Cup tournament and fixing the time when this ordinance shall become effective second reading.

Do we have a staff report?

Yes, Amy Schneider, Director of the Convention and Visitors Bureau.

The memo that we provided gives you an overview of Missouri House Bill.

This bill became effective on August 28, 2025 and will expire July 20th of 2026.

This bill allows bars and restaurants who are licensed to sell liquor by the drink to operate from 6 a.m.

until 5 a.m.

the following morning during the 2026 FIFA World Cup, which is an event that lasts from June 11th to July 19th.

The bill states that establishments are subject to any local restrictions on hours of operation as provided or additional conditions for compliance under any applicable local laws, ordinances, rules, or regulations.

Any city, county, district, or other political subdivision may exempt itself by ordinance or may modify the applicable hours.

A little background information.

At the December 20th, 2025 meeting, City Council expressed a desire to opt out of HB 1041 because of the strain it could put on public safety resources.

Opting out would mean that the city would not have a citywide authorization of allowing establishments that sell liquor by the drink to stay open from 6 a.m.

to 5 a.m.

the next day.

At the same time, the council also expressed interest in supporting FIFA related activity and giving businesses the flexibility for operation outside of regular hours.

Because of this conversation, staff is proposing that the city opt out of Missouri House Bill 1041 and continue to regulate extended hours of operation through the city's established special events permitting process.

Business can apply for a special event permit to operate outside regular hours during the World Cup.

Applications would be reviewed by the Special Events Committee, which includes but is not limited to public safety, Columbia Police Department, FIRE, Mizzou Special Events, Boone County Office of Emergency Management, and more.

This would ensure public safety officials were informed and had input before sending it to the city manager's office for final approval.

This would support businesses in the World Cup events while protecting public safety.

It would define guardrails via existing process.

And it would align with House Bill 1041.

In order to make sure that we communicated this correctly, we would release a press release after the we would release a press release after tonight's meeting to with the final um just left me with the final um decision from the council.

We would put online information on Como.gov.

We would process with screenshots and frequently asked questions.

We would put it on our Kit Go on Co Kick It and Como site, which is a site that we have specifically for the FIFA World Cup, and we would link it to the special events permit.

We would process for special event permit with uh oh so to assemble we would get the process for the special event permit with pro with screenshots to make sure that it was clear to the public, um put the frequently asked questions together and copy for the Como.gov special events site.

Other information distribution would go through our industry partner message that we send weekly.

Um we would work with our partners at the Missouri Restaurant Association, ask them to put it in their newsletter so they could um give it to um uh uh other establishments and through social media.

Um that's I believe all I have right now.

All right, questions for staff from council.

Yeah, Valerie.

Yeah.

Um I'm wondering if it would be reasonable and achieve the same aim if instead of having them do a 100 permit for each night that they intend to have extended hours, if we have them do a permit for the duration of the event and alert CPD to what nights they intend to be open for extended hours.

Does that achieve the goals that you were looking for?

I think it could.

I think really what what we're doing here tonight is is our first our first try at this, bringing it to council and then asking for you all to give us your uh thoughts and to give us some feedback.

Um so absolutely I still think it should go through the special event process through the permitting process, because um not only do we need to reach Columbia Police Department, but we need to clean reach Columbia Fire Office of Emergency Management.

So that's a great way to get all of those um entities in the same room.

Um I think you know we got some feedback today and yesterday.

Um what I'm trying to achieve with this is to limit the paperwork burden for some of our smaller local businesses who may want to participate.

Absolutely if we can do that and still achieve the I don't know, public safety aims that we were looking for, then that's what I'd like to pursue.

I I I think I my question um uh can you speak to you know um the concerns from Angela, I noticed that you're there.

So um Chief Schlute, um do you respond to the questions over or concerns that public safety has with um with um just allowing the state statute to go as written without us doing a local special events permit process?

So the length of time that the statute allows for is problematic for us on a lot of levels because in theory, if we do nothing, any establishment in town could just say we're gonna stay open till 5 a.m.

every day.

And even if it's only a handful, that handful spread around town and and something I put in the notes from earlier was the way we staff is really tied to, especially on night shift is tied to bar closing.

So that swing shift that we added is from 3 p.m.

to 3 a.m.

specifically to kind of cover that bar close and getting everybody home and hopefully not fighting and they eat a burrito and they're happy and they get an Uber.

And if we don't keep with that staffing model, we staff down our our slowest time a day historically by call volume is after 3 a.m.

till about 10 a.m.

So during that time, minimum staffing for us right now is eight officers.

And most days that's where we're at from 3 a.m.

to 10 a.m.

So pushing that and keeping the bars open even later, I think that's the time when those officers usually have downtime to do reports, and so it just kind of keeps snowballing on itself, I guess if you will.

So one of the suggestions that I offered that I think kind of goes in tandem with what uh councilwoman Carroll suggested was it for my chair too, if this is really about the World Cup, and I'll be very transparent.

That's my concern is that we're gonna have establishments that this isn't about the World Cup, it's just about staying open till five in the morning and serving booze.

And so there's only seven matches that fall during a time where it could potentially, and I'm being very generous because I I had to Google how long a soccer match lasts because I have no idea.

Um with all the breaks and everything, and I would assume with TV timeouts and all that, two and a half hours is being pretty generous.

Um so the latest ones start at Sheila's making a face, so she may know better than I do, but um 10 p.m., 11 p.m.

are the latest start times.

So even at that, I think you could say, hey, on these dates, we'll we'll do bar close at 2.30 or 2 o'clock, and that would allow us to plan for those nights rather than this kind of ambiguous, well, somebody wants to stay open on a random Friday night, and we're like, why there's no soccer matches that last that late?

Really, most of them fall within normal operating hours.

So can I ask to clarify um would that be captured then as part of the instructions in the special events permit that the date of which they're entering it in would have to coincide with a match?

Like so they couldn't say you you mentioned some of the dates like Saturday the 13th, but if they were to enter in June 12th, that would automatically kind of reject that permit.

I would say unless and and so I was thinking about kind of what the city's talking about doing with the what's the kick it in como event.

That's more that's more of like an around like daytime kind of it's not really set up to be when the match time is.

And so I was trying to think of well, why would you need to have a World Cup event on a day where there's not a match, but also after 1.30 in the morning, and I couldn't come up with a great reason.

So I I think that's pretty reasonable.

And I think if if they if a business wants to say, hey, we want to have we want to stay open every one of these nights, there's an actual match, I don't have a problem with that because I can at least plan for that.

So then, Nancy, to to Valerie's uh kind of question on this, would it be possible that we had just kind of one, you know, you you have to list the dates of which you are going to be requesting those special hours and then the special events committee is then crosswalking it with dates of matches in their approval process?

Is that guidance we could give?

Yes, we can add that as a parameter or review uh part of the review process and try to come up with some quick language for that.

And then my question would be so would you also be looking at limiting the extended hours until a set time so it doesn't go until 5 a.m.

Like limiting it until 2 30, 2 o'clock.

30 in extending opening time.

Okay.

Can we leave that open to CVB in their review?

We should put it in our ordinance, because otherwise, if it's following the state statute, I think you have it written as like the basically 23 hours is the way that it is now, but we could limit it to like 2 a.m.

or 2 30 or whatever it is you said.

Sure.

So so like uh like Chief Schluddy said, the latest match, central time starts at 11 p.m.

Um a match is 90 minutes divided into two 45 minute periods with a 15 minute stoppage of play.

There could be extended um some additional time added on for stoppages of play.

But the longest World Cup game was 117 minutes.

That makes sense.

So that will give you a little bit of of kind of insight into some of the parameters that you might want to be looking at if you wanted to put some additional parameters onto the hours of operation.

So when we think about this allowing people to allowing bars to stay open 23 hours, I think that my guess is that likely mimics the practice in other places around the world who deal with this all the time.

We don't.

And my concern is is is exactly the kind of thing Chief Schlute is talking about.

So there's got to be some sort of compromise in between there.

I I think the reason for stay open past the time of the end of the game is probably to celebrate.

Sure.

And again, it's about having the resources to be able to maintain and um adjust and respond to that celebration in our city.

So if if we can limit it to a particular time period, I'd be I'm open to that.

And if especially if the police department is aware of it and all that kind of stuff.

But I the other the only other option I would think of would be perhaps to limit the number of um the number of licenses that would be uh provided.

Um so you just limit the number of bars that would be able to do it.

Yeah.

Um this is a question for CVB, I assume.

Ums have you heard from that were potentially interested in this?

I haven't heard from any, but I've read the news and seen the news, and so I know there's probably a handful.

Um I don't want to answer for my establishments here in town.

I do know that there would probably be concern for staffing during that time.

So um I I'm not sure how many would take us up on this, so to speak, but um there probably would be some.

Yeah.

A lot of the people that I talked to had concern for staffing, and I wonder if that would limit the number of people that participate more than us limiting license would be.

Um I don't know if Jill has an like recommendation on a number of licenses we should limit to.

I hate to pick winners and losers like that.

I think that's tough.

I think that puts staff and you all in a tough position.

I think us just knowing and being able to plan, because I think Amy's correct, I don't think there's a lot of places that will necessarily want to do this or have staff.

I mean, a lot of places are staffed down because college students are gone.

I think uh my hypothesis is the folks that want to do this and want to have like a World Cup night, it'll be at hand half dozen places and that's where everybody will go.

And that'll make it much more manageable for us.

Yeah.

Yeah.

That sounds right to me.

Um I want to limit the chances that this goes awry um by people who are not intending to participate in kick it to participate in being open for no reason.

Um but I also want it to be easy for businesses who do want to participate and attract visitors from a paperwork burden.

Um if we can have one license and we can pass that easily tonight.

If we can have one license, one CVB of review, and they alert you to the dates, even if it's 100 per day, if that's the amount of staff time and cost, then yeah, you need to cover that.

Um but whatever we can do to make that less of a paperwork burden, I think would be helpful.

Can I ask you a logistical question?

And Nancy, I appreciate you over there chicken scratching some potential amendments to this.

When looking at the ordinance, you know, I see I see a few sections based on what we're talking about.

So for instance, in section two, something that would be like wordsmithing.

So it would be like each day for which the extended hours of operation is requested shall be included in the application in the application for permit, and so they wouldn't have to have a permit for each one.

My one question is nowhere in the ordinance do I see where I would change what the extended hours are.

So would we do like a definition that's what we're doing?

No, we would just be drafting brand new language as you speak.

Okay.

Okay.

I would be striking the sentence that you just raised and adding additional words.

Okay.

All right.

On that.

Yeah, I I think we do well, I think we'll we'll do additional comments, but I will open it up for is there any additional council kind of questions, comments on this?

Because I would like to open up from the public.

If anyone from the public would wish to speak on the proposed um Bill 3926, feel free to comment on our comments if you followed that.

Um also just kind of like the intent behind it.

Good evening, Madam Mayor, City Council.

My name is Lily White Boyd.

I'm the NRM CEO and president of the Columbia Chamber of Commerce, and I am still the full-time vice president of external affairs for the Columbia Chamber of Commerce as well.

Um tonight there's uh I really rise for informational purposes.

The chamber has not taken an official position on what's in front of you as much to say as you know, we think it's best typically to let businesses decide as councilwoman Carol brought up.

Most of our businesses that have talked to us about this language so far have self-identified that they don't necessarily have the staff to make something like this happen.

However, we do know that we have many areas in town that start to name themselves like the official pub of the official pub of the tigers of the US men's national soccer team.

We do have a business downtown that is where the club for our US men's national soccer team fan site meets for every US men's national game.

I would bet strongly that their group that would um uh participate in something like this.

Um we are happy to lend our voice to communication with the business community as always to help make sure that they are aware of the opportunity for special use permits.

Um as well as anecdotally, um, just again from the businesses.

Many of them have self-identified that they would not take place, but in several of our safety conversations we've recently had with Chief Schlute and other community partners.

We have talked a lot about bar dump at the end of the night.

This could be an interesting opportunity to test if bars were getting out at different times just to see if that would really change the feel uh in downtown for safety reasons.

So just thought we'd add our two cents.

Again, the chamber didn't necessarily take a position on this language, but it is always our position that businesses are gonna make the right decisions for their customers and their staff themselves.

So happy to answer any questions if you have them.

Thank you, Lily.

Thank you.

Would anyone else from the public wish to speak on um the proposed bill 3926?

Being none, did I give you enough time, Nancy, to wordsmith some things?

Um yes, except for I am still trying to come up with the dates.

So if you have the dates, that would be great.

I do have the dates that you wrote down as being those later ones.

I didn't know if you wanted to do specific dates.

Oh, it's for the eligibility.

Okay.

So the dates of which there is a match that is starting at the later time of which would probably impact us the most.

You have June 13th, June 16th, June 19th, June 20th, June 22nd, June 26th, and July 2nd.

And not to be a wet blanket, but technically the opening is the following date.

So that's what I was tracking that.

The dates, yeah, they're quite well.

I would say both the following date.

I also think that we have to be mindful over um, I don't think they have the set schedule for all of do they have the set schedule for the finals and the time to those.

You have the set schedule.

During the day, then we may not have know what teams are playing, but we do know what the set schedule is.

Okay.

Just wanted to make sure we weren't missing any for once it gets down to the finals.

I can send those dates, all of them if you would like me to Well, as long as they're not before 10 p.m.

start time, it doesn't matter for this ordinance.

Yeah.

Okay.

So Nancy, do you have suggested?

Yes.

So to begin with, so in section two, that very first paragraph in section two, we would strike the language which you referred to earlier, which says each day for which extended hours of operation is requested shall require a separate permit and application to be submitted for approval.

So we're just going to strike that.

And then we would add the following language.

And I've got a blank here, blank AM.

And then the dates would be June 14th, which is the day after.

Because the match technically starts on June 13th.

We had to extend hours of operation the 14th.

June 14th, June 17th, June 20th, June 21st, June 23rd, June 27th, and July 3rd.

Quick clarify kind uh clarifying question for you.

Where so I have one that I'm doing the strike through of the sentence in section two.

Where are you adding that that part?

At that same place.

So um after the application fee or before?

Uh before.

Okay.

Same location where we strike.

Okay.

Uh and then uh does that need and and that will then cover the other parts where it talks about extended operations once we put whatever time we're putting in there.

Would you put that in the rest of the sections as well, or does that cover it?

No, that covers it because it would not allow for that special event permit to be granted except for under those parameters and that date.

And if they came forward with an application for something less, they could have something less.

But we would need to know what your stop date, what your stop time is.

Okay.

Um and I know there's discussion you were saying like 2 30, 2, 3.

I heard three different options for this.

Uh and I I I would lean towards recommendation of us of a time.

So technically right now, everybody has to be out of the bar by 1.30.

So most places do last call at one so that people can have their last drink, and then that gives them time to get people out.

So in thinking about that to make it worthwhile, I guess, so to speak, if they if we move last call essentially to two, then they have till 2.30 to get people out.

Because we want to make sure that we're clear with them is like you're not serving the last drink at 2.30, like this is when people have to be out by.

So I think that would be kind of my recommendation from um the police chief is uh for 2.30 to be the time.

Is that there consensus?

So it looks like the recommendations that we have.

There's kind of three major recommendations that we have.

One, rather than an application and a hundred dollars fee for each date, it will be one application per fee of 100, and they will include the dates of which they want to have it.

The second is that it's restricted not for the whole six weeks of of of the tournament, but for those dates of which there is um a a night game, you could say, of which it seems to align.

And then the third um is that it it would be until 2.30 a.m.

we would have a limited time.

Is everyone else is that the understanding that we have from the gist of the recommendations?

And Nancy, that's what your wording has covered?

That's yes.

Okay.

Any council comments on that?

Questions?

Yeah, Nick.

I'll just point out that uh with all due respect to the chamber.

Uh we have not exactly been rushed about this from business owners begging us not to do this.

And I don't I don't think there's going to be a high level of interest here, but I do think if we go to 2 30, it probably is more likely that businesses will do the stretch and do that.

Um but to just that observation.

I haven't received a single phone call, email.

Nobody's grabbed me at the grocery store.

That's not true.

Um kind of.

Wait a minute.

At lunch today, somebody came up to me, you were there and said, whatever we need to do to support the world cup, this is gonna be a real big deal.

So I wouldn't have to non-specific.

I feel like it was specific.

Yeah.

Yeah, Vera.

Yeah, I just want uh as a comment, I just want to particularly thank the commission on substance abuse that came to us at the December 15th meeting and kind of brought forward some concerns that have in part led to this larger conversation.

Obviously, it was it was brought forward by CVB first.

Um, but I really appreciated them.

And uh as a former member of other commissions, I know how hard it can be to uh step up and speak on an ordinance that you may not have been requested to speak on.

So uh I I appreciated their guidance.

All right, so I'm gonna make a mo oh I was just gonna say I think the other thing that this helps support too is we have a lot of restaurants that staff based on bar closing.

And so people them knowing what nights they're going to stay open to support having late night food is helpful because we like intoxicated people to eat and get something in their stomachs and people that drive for ride shares.

So I think this will help everyone plan in that respect.

So I appreciate it.

It's gonna be not every single day for the six weeks.

Right.

Okay, so Nancy, should I make a motion for amendments?

Um do I need to spell them out or can I just say the amendments as proposed by the city councilor?

You don't have to sp you don't have to uh say them again unless someone else wants me.

If you want me to read it again, I will.

I'd be happy to.

We cover the so I'll make a motion uh to amend uh the proposed bill 3926 with the recommendations from our city councilor for the three things that we discussed.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Second by Nick Foster.

Any discussions on that?

All right.

That is with the 230 closing time.

Correct.

230 closing time, the dates of which the applications will be reviewed, and one application for a hundred dollars, but including those those dates in there.

Um we have a motion in a second.

All those in favor of the amendments to bill 3926 say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

Sheila, will you please call roll on bill thirty-night twenty-six?

Council Bill 3926 as amended, Ms.

Sample?

Yes.

Mr.

Foster?

Yes.

Mr.

Waterman?

Yes.

Ms.

Buffalo?

Yes.

Ms.

Carroll?

Yes.

Ms.

Elwood?

Yes.

All right.

I appreciate that.

Thank you for all the work.

All right.

Um, consent agenda.

Sheila, will you please read the items on the consent agenda twice and call roll?

Items on the consent agenda include bills 4026, 41, 26, 42, 26, 43, 26, 44, 26, 46, 26, 47, 26, 48, 26, 49, 26, 50, 26, 51, 26, 52, 26, and resolutions 3626 and 3726.

Bills 4026, 41, 26, 42, 26, 43, 26, 44, 26, 46, 26, 47, 26, 48, 26, 49, 26, 50, 26, 51, 26, 52, 26, and resolutions 36, 26, and 3726.

Ms.

Sample.

Yes.

Mr.

Foster.

Yes.

Mr.

Waterman.

Yes.

Ms.

Buffalo.

Yes.

Ms.

Carroll.

Yes.

Miss Elwood.

Yes.

All right.

Moving on.

We have one item, I think.

Yeah.

One item on new business.

Sheila, will you please read resolution 3826?

Council Bill 3826 is a resolution authorizing the temporary closure of a portion of the sidewalk parking lane and vehicular lane shifting on Stuart Road between Fourth Street and Fifth Street and a portion of the sidewalk on Fifth Street between Stuart Road and Elm Street to facilitate a roof removal and replacement at the University of Missouri Power Plant.

Do we have a staff report?

Yes.

Good evening.

The University of Missouri plans to remove and replace the roof at their power plant.

This requires the temporary restriction of the driving lanes on Stuart Road by shifting them to the south between 4th and 5th streets.

This also results in the closure of the South Parking Lane and the North Sidewalk along Stewart between March 9th and November 1.

MU also requests to close the West Sidewalk along Fifth Street for the same period of time.

MU does own all of the property adjacent to these closures.

Happy to answer any questions you might have.

Any questions for staff on this?

Yeah, checkie.

Well, I would tell you that I could read you what's in the ordinance, but as far as the history on why that's the case, I'd probably see if Nancy has anything she'd want to add there.

No, I'm in it was just part of the ordinance not to require other governmental entities to uh to get a closure or pay the public entity.

How many other public entities may this apply to the county um school district any government ones?

The downtown TCID is a separate taxing entity as well.

So school district.

Yeah, public there are this also applies to public utilities, which is like an electric water districts.

Yeah.

Any additional questions for staff on this one?

All right.

Would anyone from the public wish to speak on resolution 3826?

You know, come back to uh council comments.

Any council comments?

Otherwise, I'll have Sheila call rule.

Council Bill 3826, Ms.

Sample.

Yes.

Mr.

Foster.

Yes.

Mr.

Waterman.

Yes.

Ms.

Buffalo.

Yes.

Ms.

Carroll.

Yes.

Ms.

Elwood.

Yes.

All right.

Moving on.

Uh Shiloh, please read the under items under introduction and first read.

All bills are introduced by the mayor unless otherwise indicated bills 53, 26, 54, 2655, 2656, 26, 57, 26, 58, 26, 59, 26, 60, 26, and 6126 first reading.

All right.

This evening we have two reports on our report section.

So our first one is report 1526.

This is fiscal year 26 uncollectible receivables and adjustments.

Do we have a staff report?

Yes, we do.

Oh, I'll just click it forward.

Oh, is there a thing?

I don't know if you have uh slides.

No, I don't there's no slides.

Oh okay.

Okay, sorry.

I learned the trick is that you just click forward and then they magically pop up.

Apparently.

Yeah, I'll just yeah.

So there this is just the annual write-offs we do every year.

It just lists off the various accounts, utilities, non-utilities, and any uh bank uh bank statement corrections we're making.

I just kind of want to make a couple points.

So for the utilities, the amount was a little under 700,000, which does sound a lot of like a lot of money and it is in certain ways, but it it did only amount to 0.3 percent of the total revenue collected by utilities, so a very small amount of the total revenue we collected, we actually are writing off.

Um and then for non-utilities accounts, um those are managed by the AR department, and they've done pretty good strides in uh kind of uh ensuring collections are occurring and we are seeing a continual drop in our write-offs.

It went from 104 last year to 75 this year, and I think we're continuing to kind of get better at ensuring that we are collecting all the money we're owed on as far as uh those miscellaneous revenues revenues go.

And then finally, bank adjustments, our accounting team has really done a good job of staying on top of those, and we went from a 48,000 dollar write-off last year to just a seven thousand dollar write-off this year, and I foresee that even being much smaller next year.

So any questions for uh staff on this one?

Yeah, Don.

Yeah.

Um, thank you for the information that on the questions I asked earlier, and yeah, it's kind of reassuring.

Like you said, $700,000 is not exactly chump change, but that it's only less than half of one percent.

Um the other question that I had, and this just occurred to me, and I apologize for not asking it earlier.

You said it stays after this write-off, it still stays with the debt collection until it's paid off.

If they don't pay it off, but they move back to town.

Is their name flagged in the system that let's say somebody moves back in seven years, so it's been written off.

Is their information somehow flag tagged, whatever, so that if they move in and that we could say, hey, we'll hook you up, but you owe us this first.

Yeah, I believe well, um I don't want to give exact I believe they're kept on files for a certain amount of time afterwards.

We do try to keep our files clean because of de data reasons.

So if they're still on the file when they come back in, they would get asked to pay that amount.

Yes.

Okay.

But we don't keep accounts in there forever because any other questions?

No.

I appreciate the report and the information on it and uh the additional measures that you've taken to also improve, hopefully.

Um and then last, you should still sit in there because it's our monthly finance report.

Do you have a staff report on this one?

Yes, we do and it was uh this month was uh a little short.

I I don't know if anyone else noticed, but we we moved it from the last meeting, last council meeting of the month to the first.

Uh and that was just uh uh a timing issue with us.

And so we expect to have the the first quarter general fund um report next next month.

Uh but I did want to mention for Kale that this month March is public procurement month.

And so I just wanted to recognize our procurement department as well.

Public procurement month?

Yes.

Are they trying to take away from International Women's Month?

I don't know.

I'm sorry.

I'm not, I mean, no shade.

I'm just wondering.

It was a proclamation of the state.

And so he he asked me to say something tonight.

Well, we appreciate our purchasing agent and their qualified staff.

I think the one thing I will just notice on this on the on the monthly finance report is you're talking about the business license renewal.

And I know that we're also in the process of reviewing those for the implementation.

My assumption is we're still are we still remaining on the freeze that we currently have while we're evaluating the services, or do we expect um kind of the previous or not the f but we we haven't escalated it.

You said you're getting ready to kind of talk about.

Are we continuing where it was flat?

Yes.

Yes, it it is uh basically stuck where it was last year.

Um hopefully we'll have the uh cost of service.

Well not I guess that's not a cost of service.

That is more of a uh a fee review.

Uh that will be completed hopefully within the next month or two uh along with our cost of service study that we're doing in-house.

And so all of that will come forward to you all to to review and we can discuss at that time.

And then a question related to that.

Um you had mentioned um that um is something going to be coming to council related to um temporary business licenses?

Yes, that's correct.

What is that that's going to be coming to council?

Uh so currently our temporary business licenses are tied to uh the normal business licenses, and so they're tied to that that uh the base fee, and that base fee right now is $100, and that is something we do not want to charge a temporary uh license for.

And so we did some research um and landed on $35 for that fee.

Uh and that $35 basically uh is for a 14-day or two-week period of time, and it lasts for I think they can get one a quarter or something like that.

And so basically, if you if you take that that multiply that over the year, it's about the same amount as they would pay for a normal business license if they were to get one.

So it kind of we kind of we want to if they're if they're going to have more than one or do more than one event or even one event a quarter, we we would rather push them towards the uh receiving a full business license and and this is sort of a mechanism to do that.

Okay.

Don, did you have a question?

Yeah.

Um you're talking about the to the previous business license fee review.

Yes.

Um is that going to include or will you be including whatever consultation review workshopping, whatever with the chamber since they represent the business community?

Yes.

We we have uh a piece to speak with the chamber as well during the review.

Yeah.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yeah, Nick.

I have a question about utility assistance.

And uh, you know, I'm pleased to see that there are utility pledges from outside entities that exceed what the city has has paid in these.

And you know, that's great.

It's a community effort.

But I know that we increased the amount of money that we were going to make available for the for utility assistance, and I'm wondering if we have an idea about where we are with that and would has that money proved to be adequate and do we anticipate it will?

Um I believe it will be.

We still have uh a little additional money uh remaining.

Uh one thing we are doing that will come forth to the council uh hopefully in April is we're doing an audit of the utility assistance program.

And so that's one of our internal audits uh that we're doing.

And so uh just to look at that program, make sure we we're doing the right thing, see if our procedures and policies align with uh practices that are done throughout the state.

So that'll come to you all hopefully sometime in April.

Okay.

Thanks.

That's a clarifying question on that, and it's probably not within the scope of an external auditor for those sorts of reviews.

But you know, one of the conversations that we had um this is like a decade ago, um, was about for properties where the same address is requesting utility assistance regardless of the the occupant of it, um, whether or not we've tried to connect them with the home rehab programs that we have so that rather than continuing to pay just for the utility bills, we're actually improving the space.

Can I ask that, like as that report is kind of finishing up, that maybe it kind of go to the staff for maybe thinking about if there are same places keep requesting that we're maybe looking into or making a recommendation to how we might be more proactive with letting them know about improvements that can be made.

Well, I I think that's a good idea, and that is something that uh I think it would be appropriate to address during that time as well, because I think this is a time where we could kind of craft and recreate the utility assistance program.

Yeah, yeah.

Well, thank you, Matthew.

Thank you, Jim.

Appreciate it.

Um would anyone from the public wish to speak.

No.

This seems weird.

This is a trick.

No, I'm just kidding.

Um, it's like don't it's fine.

All right.

Well come to council comments then.

Uh we'll start with Jackie.

Don't know that I have anything.

Let's continue this.

Oh good.

Nick.

Uh I have uh uh I have some stuff.

That's okay.

That's okay.

Um is kind of lighthearted, but I got an email from uh public health and human services about a uh response to a call in the dark of night in the late night in the early morning hours of someone who had a bat in their home and uh called and received a response from uh public health and human services, and they were just very effusive in their praise of how that was handled.

Um someone in my ward, so I was really pleased to see that wherever it would have happened.

Um there's gonna be a meeting on Thursday that I'm really pleased about.

The Office of Violence Prevention is going to be hosting our consultants who are working with them.

That's gonna be an all-day event.

It's a it's an invitation event, I think, to all the uh interested parties in the community who are going to be a part of that.

Uh so that that's a big deal.

This is something we've been working towards for a long time.

And so I I look forward to just dropping in and say hello, saying hello, but uh look forward to the results of that of that meeting on Thursday.

Um then uh I want to note two things that come together, I think.

Uh there was a Coma to Zero uh plan update last week where members of the public were able to come and uh give input into what the plan is and and where it is and additional input as to where it goes from here.

Uh that's important.

This is our comprehensive plan to address safety along the roadways and the pedestrian ways, bicyclists and so forth.

Uh and so I was grateful that that that happened.

And I mentioned this also in light of the fact that we had a pedestrian death last night uh on I-70.

While I don't know the details, I don't think the details are fully um out there yet.

Uh it's it's a tragedy to lose someone this way who is apparently trying to uh transverse I-70 from north to south near rangeline road.

Just a reminder about how important uh these safety measures are and even tonight uh or today, earlier today, and I think one of the day this week, Modot was hosting um an opportunity for people to give input on their plans for the I-70 for the I-70 chain uh improvements that are happening there.

And though really the one thing that I wanted to say to the two people that I spoke to there, two or three folks, is that my interest is and there continues to be a high level of interest within the community that we provide for safe transition from one side of I-70 to the other, regardless of the mode of travel.

And so I know there's still a lot of work to be done in that area, and we're hopeful about some things that we can add to what uh MODOT is already planning to do.

Uh but just wanted to mention that that that important process is going on.

Don, anything from you?

Yeah, just a couple of things.

One um we've got our community summit uh the Saturday the 14th before our next council meeting uh right here in uh City Hall and I believe I believe in these chambers, 8 to 12.

Um for the department heads, uh I know be prepared.

Uh if last year was any indication it was we got quite the turnout.

And uh so hoping to see a lot of people here again.

Um70, Como to Roachport.

Uh the MoDot is doing a they're doing a couple of uh public hearings.

Uh obviously they didn't check with us because the first one was tonight.

But uh the second one is gonna be Wednesday um at the uh midway golfing games.

Uh I think it starts at five o'clock.

Uh it's gonna be just tables.

Uh there's not gonna be a formal presentation.

Come in, take a look at what uh their points and uh to gather input.

Um and everybody's favorite time of year?

Saturday night, Sunday morning.

So stand by to lose an hour of sleep.

Maybe we could do that on a Monday on council meeting.

Anyway, never mind.

Anything else done?

That's it.

You can remind people to change their batteries and their smoke detectors at Daylight Savings.

That's the fire department does.

Uh Valerie.

Yeah.

Um Monday last week, I hosted my Let's Talk Local.

Um I wanna thank community members who came to attend um and also staff that came to attend.

There was a lot of staff in attendance, um, and I appreciate your support so much.

Um we shared a lot of support for neighborhoods and a lot of the struggles that neighborhoods are dealing with right now.

Um, you know, in the past week, as I've been sending out my summaries and my notes from this and responding to needs that neighbors had.

Um I've had some really productive conversations with housing and neighborhood services.

Um so you know, I'd really like to thank you for that support um and the time you put into that.

Um, I think um we really are working to serve the public um and meet needs as we hear them.

Um I'm appreciative of um public coming to share their needs um and trusting us to take them up.

Um so um I'd also like to call out that we have the um Love Your Block Um grant um mini grant process coming up soon, already started.

Um applications are due March 15th.

Um there will be two more work sessions.

One this Saturday um March 7th at Boone Electric from noon to 2 p.m.

and one on March 14th at the community summit um from 9 a.m.

to noon.

Um these are times that you can work on your application, talk over um items in your application with staff and get some feedback.

Um I'd also like to call out that on tonight's agenda we got another $60,000 um grant to support a second staff fellow um under Love Your Block program.

Um I think that's really excellent.

The groups that I heard from during the last cycle that had Love Your Grant projects and work directly um with Love Your Block Fellows really appreciated the fellows that they got to work with.

Um and I really appreciate those kind of direct touch points with our citizens.

Um I also encourage citizens if you're thinking about applying um just apply, just do it.

You don't have to be a nonprofit for this.

Um this is an opportunity to raise a need that you think you see in the city that you want to volunteer to work on and potentially receive some funding to help make that happen.

Um I love that we can forward projects that are citizen-led um as opposed to um telling citizens what we think they need.

We can do what you want.

Um thank you, everyone involved.

Vera.

Uh continuing kind of a theme of the night.

I want to bring attention to some events coming up in the community.

Uh I also wanted to mention the community summit, which is coming up.

Um it's an incredible opportunity uh and many reasons to attend, not the least of which that I am very jealous of Councilmember Foster's cool socks that he got last year.

Um if you have not stopped by Daniel Boone Regional Library to see their Americans in the Holocaust exhibit yet.

It is an incredible exhibit from um the Smithsonian and the American Library Association, I believe.

And it looks at what American citizens actually knew during World War II and what we found out after and how that influenced our decision making process.

Um absolutely fascinating.

We are also coming into my favorite season in Columbia, which is festival season.

Um this weekend starting on Thursday through Sunday, we will have True False Film Festival.

The first showing of the festival actually happens just for our sophomores here in Columbia Public Schools and also Columbia Independent Schools.

And they get to see the first film of the festival.

And then next month in April, we will have the Unbound Book Festival, Gracing Downtown as well.

Two great opportunities for incredible awareness of the world and opportunities to engage with literature and film that you don't get in in other communities and that help make Columbia special.

And if you are out enjoying our festivals downtown, um I think we can all take to heart the incredible advice we got from Chief Schlute today, which was uh after you enjoy yourself at the festival, eat a burrito, be happy, and get an Uber.

All right.

I think the only thing I was gonna draw attention, because most of it has been drawn attention to, uh, is just that something that was under consent agenda that we talked about at the last one was the formation of a communications department.

I'm just really excited to see this move forward.

Uh it's it's we've been prioritizing communications and we've seen the effectiveness of it with things like the community summit, the community engagement that we've been doing, and just the let's talk locals, all the additional outreach.

So really excited to kind of see that as we move into being a full city who have the professionals on staff doing this work.

So just appreciative of that.

Um I think the only thing I'll do is I'll kick it to staff.

Uh and I believe Matt Unrine, you have an update on the planned renovations to this room and a request.

I do.

I do have a request that we cancel the July 6th uh council meetings so we can accommodate the A V remodeling update project.

The planning and zoning commission have already canceled their meeting that was in that same general times time frame.

So the request would we would have our two meetings in June for normal, we'd have our regular second um our third Monday, as well as the additional budget work sessions we have in July would still all take place, but just not have that July 6th City Council meeting.

Because then we're making this a professional city council chambers.

Do you need a motion to for that, Nancy?

Or okay.

I'll make a motion uh to cancel the July 6, 2026 Columbia City Council meeting.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Second by Nick.

Is there discussion on this?

Just a little clarification that work will begin before that.

Previous to that, right?

I mean, I assume right after our first our last council, I guess, P and Z meeting that was in GMC.

In June, yeah.

So we'll go through that period of time.

So it'll be a period of weeks of the work we've been going on.

Okay.

Will we still be able to have our pre-council in 1A1?

No, they're doing also.

I think they're doing both.

They're doing those.

Yeah.

Yeah.

All right.

All right.

Um, all those in favor of the canceling of the July 6th, 2026 uh Columbia City Council meeting and pre-consul meeting, say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

Any other staff updates?

One last thing.

The community summit is from 9 a.m.

to noon.

Oh, not eight.

It's from nine.

Okay.

It's our calendar invite has us coming early, apparently.

I want you to hear earlier for donuts.

Oh.

All right.

Any other staff ideas?

Sheila, anything from you?

Nancy, anything from you?

All right.

I'll go ahead and adjourn us at 9 38.