Good evening.

I'm gonna go ahead and call the April 6th, 2026 Columbia City Council meeting to order.

I'll invite um wait, which order?

All those who are able to stand and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance I Pledge Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

All right, Sheila, will you please call roll?

Mr.

Waterman.

Here.

Ms.

Peters.

Ms.

Buffalo.

Here.

This Carol.

Here.

Miss Elwood.

Here.

Ms.

Sample.

Here.

Mr.

Foster.

Here.

All right.

Peters is here.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Here.

All right.

So just a quick overview.

We started because we have a lot of sometimes new people coming to council meetings.

So just a quick overview of our agenda.

So first items that are currently listed under the consent agenda, except for a couple this evening that we'll be adjusting the agenda.

There's not normally a presentation on those items, and there's not public comment on the consent agenda items.

For items listed under introduction and first read, if they have an asterisk on them, they'll be on consent on the next agenda.

If there's no asterisk, they will be on old business at our next council meeting.

And that means they typically have a presentation from staff and there's opportunity for public comment.

Our rules for public speaking are that you have multiple opportunities to speak at city council meetings.

I do ask people to keep their remarks to the legislation being discussed.

We ask that people state their name and their ward, and that is just for the minutes for Sheila to put in your name in there.

And I ask people to respect our time limits.

We have three minutes for an individual on the discussion.

And if you're a let uh uh organization or business affected by the legislation, you can request five.

Please let me acknowledge that so that Lacey Air Payton can change the shot clock so that you get your extra two minutes.

Um we ask people to avoid demonstrations that might intimidate people from speaking at a council meeting.

We really want people to come and talk at council meetings.

Um we do ask that we address uh issues, not individuals, and that includes not making personal attacks against one another or city staff.

Um, and then disruptions would be addressed with a warning, and if necessary, removal and recess.

So moving on to our agenda, our up first item is our approval of our March 16th, 2026 regular meeting minutes.

I'll make a motion to approve those.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Second by frame Vera.

All those in favor of approval of the March 16th minute say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

Moving on to our agenda, our adjustment of the agenda.

Um, I believe, Jackie, did you have an adjustment?

Yes.

I would like to pull B7826 from consent agenda.

Okay, so that would go to the old business.

Um, and then resolution 6426 has a typo, so we'll pull that from consent and that will go under new business.

Is there any other adjustments to the agenda?

All right, seeing none, I'll make a motion uh to approve the agenda with Bill 7826 being moved to old business and resolution 6426 going to news new business.

Do I have a second?

Second, second second by Nick Foster.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

Moving on, schedule public comment.

Um, so members of the public uh can contact the city manager's office by 5 p.m.

on the Monday, uh, one week prior to the sorry, the Monday, the pro the week prior to the city council meeting, uh, to schedule a five-minute public comment.

Um, public comment cannot be on items that are on the same night's agenda.

And of note, it has been of typical practice of city council to ask for additional follow-up at tonight of staff at the end of the meeting if it's warranted.

And tonight we have two scheduled public comments.

So I'd first like to invite Alex Gordon to please come to the podium.

Yes.

Hold on, move this up a little bit.

Can you hear me?

Oh, there you are.

There we go.

I am Alex Gordon and um just the ward, correct?

Oh, you Alex, you're good.

You're scheduled.

You're on the list.

Okay, we got awesome.

Sweet.

My name is Alex Gordon.

Um, I'm here to discuss uh funding for Vidwest Studios.

Um I'm an overall creative here.

I'm a photographer, videographer, social media manager, I'm very involved in the music community here.

Um, and I've also launched a collective called the Collective Continuum.

Um I say all that to say that had I not had it sounds great now, but I wasn't always in that.

Um I didn't I wasn't always I didn't always have that ability um to where you know I can I can do these things now.

Um I'm a Florida native.

I've been in Missouri for about five years now, and um within these last five years, it's been very transformational, and um my background is in sports management.

Um I moved to Missouri or initially um to pursue a women's basketball college coaching career.

And so I was a grad assistant women's basketball coach at Lincoln University.

That was the first step here.

Couldn't tell you where Missouri was on the map at all, but I was like, hey, this is where I'm supposed to be.

Um within that transitional period, unfortunately, I was going through just a gut-wretching divorce, and so I literally just came here with my car and my clothes.

That's all that I had.

And so um with that in mind, my goal again was to pursue a coaching career.

Um, and I've always known that music and can and creativity was within myself, but I had never had the opportunity and the time to actively pursue that because of the time constraints of college athletics.

And so when I was out here, again, I hit my rock bottom, and I was just having a horrible day, honestly.

And I was in therapy two to three times a week, and I was like, everyone keeps talking about Columbia.

Columbia Columbia.

I'm like, okay, let me just go.

And so I went to Palin Music Store, and I came across a friend, and her name was Augusta Cooper.

She's just a very involved community member within Columbia, and she was like, You should come to Soul Sessions.

And I was like, Soul Sessions is essentially a live music showcase where artists can can come and perform.

Um and I was like, you know what?

I have nothing to lose.

And so from there it was a wrap for me as far as becoming plugged into the music community.

Um within Soul Sessions, they have their monthly social show, their monthly showcases, but within those as well, they they've hosted jam sessions, and jam sessions are essentially when a bunch of musicians come together, they bring their instruments, and they're able to essentially just get together, play, network, and it's just a wonderful time.

Um again, considering my basket my background was predominantly basketball, I didn't have the education.

I just so happened to pick up a camera and I fell in love with it, and I just so happened to stumble across again, VidWest studios where these jam sessions were.

So I say all this to say that VidWest is very, very, very important to our community because it's for people like me who it might not be as dramatic as far as having a rock bottom, but at the same time, um I had nothing to lose.

I didn't know anyone, but I understood I was supposed to be here in Missouri, I just didn't understand what that purpose was.

And so, with being able to get connected musically, um, had it not been for Vidwest and the resources, the equipment, the rehearsal space, the workshops, the education, the mentors, like it goes on and on and on and on.

Like it's so important that we have this here in our community because again, it's for people like me who you know have aspirations and have a purpose and have a why, but don't necessarily know the path to get there.

Um, and so I'm a huge advocate, and you know, I'm now in a position to give back to my community.

So, in the same way of soul sessions and how that was able to introduce me to jams and networking and connecting, um, I'm in a position now where I've created this collective where I can host my own jam sessions, I can um provide my own work workshops and give other people the my friends the opportunity to express themselves.

Um, Vid West is a very, very, very inclusive environment.

Um I grew up in a place where you know being gay, being LGBTQ was not acceptable.

Um and so again, uprooting, trying to find myself, this was a space where I could truly find myself and you know, find a new patch for for myself, even though it wasn't basketball.

And so from there, I just it's so important because everyone deserves to be who they are and who they're supposed to be.

Um, but a lot of times there are spaces where you can't actively uh express that and um in VidWest is very, very important because I don't know where I'm gonna host 45 to 50 people every month.

But um, yes, Vid West, Vidwest, Vidwest, um, please strongly consider.

There's a lot of people that you know need the impact, that need the education, that need the equipment.

Um, our hobbies as photographers, videographers, et cetera, it's not a cheap hobby, but Vidwest gives that access to do that.

Um, and I'm sure there's there's many people that would truly benefit from this.

So if you guys could strongly consider this, that would be wonderful.

Thank you.

Thanks, Alex.

Appreciate it.

All right, next, I'd like to ask Susan Renee Carter to come forward.

Pass around.

It's for you to keep.

So um I'm talking, I'm Renee Carter, and I'm talking about moving forward, promoting equity.

So according to many people, both critics and supporters, Columbia is a progressive city that cares about the marginalized members of our community.

As a whole, this opinion is not true.

Actually, if you read cities, mayors and race relations task force as agents for race-based policy innovations by Richard T.

Middleton I fourth, you'll find that our city is one that maintains the status quo.

What is true with our city is that poverty rates, low wages, racial disparities in ticketing, and high unemployment rates for black families and other marginalized people haven't budged much.

Let's add to that public transportation and pedestrian biking infrastructure, health and social service funding are low compared to the needs of the city.

Our other infrastructure requires significant replacement repair.

Our power plant is nearing the end of its life, our tree canopy is disappearing, and truly affordable housing is available only for a few and mostly in segregated settings.

Meanwhile, utility rates climb, requests for increase for sales tax are on the table, and trivial laws maintain control of certain groups of people.

The windfall we expect from tourism and housing developments has left us with mostly service jobs that do not pay a living wage.

If you look at what REDI recommends for a family, they need approximately $26 an hour to live in Columbia.

And further infrastructure maintenance and expenses have stressed the city budget from expanding our housing developments and our businesses.

And all of this continues to widen disparities for our marginalized members.

What do all these things have in common?

They affect the most marginalized amongst us in meeting their most basic needs.

While we live in a resource-rich town, those resources are not really changing the outcomes for our most marginalized.

When we do not have a plan to raise the quality of life for most of our vulnerable community members, those people cannot thrive and carry the brunt of the sales tax and utility cost of our city, supporting our city.

So how do we promote equity in our community?

The first step is to put equity language in our city charter.

Healthy communities want to take care of their members in ways that facilitates well-being, not by excluding those who don't fit the mole we set.

Secondly, unlike our current goals, we should have more specific measurable goals aligned with how we want to spend our city money to align with resolving disparities and addressing the priorities of our city.

Organizations receiving money should have specific agreements that expect outcomes and data collections that align with those agreements.

Third, we need to recognize that equity line lies in everything we do.

So when we plan projects, we need to make sure that we prioritize by need.

Fourth, the city needs to rid itself of the most of ordinances and processes that reinforce disparities.

So I want to get in this last part, so I'm running out of time.

On April 29th at 6:30 at the Columbia Public Library, Race Matters Friends will have Doug Linkart, their president, present on the Civic Index, which is the book that I gave you, which helps us to analyze our community resources and how to make changes.

Anyway, thank you so much.

Thanks, Renee.

Thank you.

All right, moving on this evening.

Moving on this evening, we have multiple public hearings on uh proposed improvements to the airport.

And because of their nature, I will read everyone individually and we will talk about them individually.

So just as a heads up, I will bang the gavel a lot this morning at the beginning of the meeting.

So, Sheila, will you please read public hearing 826 and the accompanying Bill 6626?

Public hearing 826 is a proposed construction of the improv of improvements to the North Parking Lat at the Columbia Regional Airport.

And Council Bill 6626 is an ordinance determining it is in the public interest to construct improvements to the North Parking lot at the Columbia Regional Airport, approving and adopting plans and specifications, determining that the work shall be done by contract, calling for bids through the purchasing division, providing for payment for the improvement, authorizing the city manager to obtain, execute, and record all documents necessary for the improvement, providing for compliance with the prevailing wage law and state mandated construction safety training, and fixing the time when this ordinance shall become effective.

Second reading.

We have a staff report.

Good evening, Mayor and Council.

Mike Parks, Airport Manager.

Increased flights with American Airlines, the return of United Airlines, and the addition of Allegiant Airlines require staff to significantly increase parking to meet the needs of increased ridership.

The North Parking lot improvements include paving the existing gravel lot and turf areas for a total of approximately 425 spaces, which includes concrete curb and gutter.

The improvement will increase parking by approximately 200 spaces.

The total project cost estimated for design and construction is $3,226,300.

Approximately $550,000 was transferred from two closed airport projects to this project, and the remaining funds will be paid for with transportation sales tax.

An interested parties meeting was held on March 6th with no objections.

Construction is expected to begin this spring.

I'm happy to answer any questions.

Are there any questions for staff on this one?

Jackie?

I can jump in based on what Matthew provided for this.

For fiscal year 26, 29 percent of transportation sales tax will be going to airport capital improvement uh projects, streets and sidewalks operations and capital get 45.8 percent.

He also stated that transit operations are going to get 14.1 percent, and airport operations will receive 10.9 percent for a breakdown, and that's fiscal year 26.

So where are you at as far as the airport of how much you have spent down?

Do you have an idea what that's like?

As of for fiscal year 26, I don't have the specific numbers in front of me now.

That's okay.

Um can you talk about the stormwater management and environmental mitigation plans?

Sure.

So uh in general, there'll be mitigation efforts put in during the construction process that are gonna include erosion control, sediment measures, uh silt fences, compost, filter socks uh will also be used to protect protect the stormwater systems.

And then at the conclusion of construction, of course, there'll be improvements to the ditch areas, seated mulched, and uh it'll be a natural process of filtering that stormwater as the grass grows, then those efforts will be able to be removed from there once we get vegetation in place.

Um discuss a little bit.

You mentioned 200 new spaces, increasing it by 200.

Approximately, yes.

And can you discuss the um ADA spaces?

Um, what number they're gonna be there?

Are there any more added to the other parking lots because you had other parking spaces added?

What does that look like?

Sure.

So this one's a little bit unique because it does go all the way north in front of uh private hangars as well, or hangars that are utilized for charter aircraft.

And so total ADA spaces that will be added with this project or six spaces, four of those spaces will be closer to the north end, uh which can be utilized at that hangar that are used for sports charters uh and other type of charter aircraft, and then two spaces to a lot for the appropriate number for this project will be added close to the terminal.

In addition to that, we're also increasing the ADA spaces in front of the terminal to accommodate not just this project, but also to accommodate that uh parking lot on the south end that we're building as well.

So you'll see uh several new ADA spaces in the primary lot right in front of the new terminal.

All right.

And one more.

Um can you talk about the construction of this or the this particular project and how it's gonna align or not with the new flights that are coming to us in June?

Sure.

We're moving as quickly as possible.

Uh we definitely have the need for parking.

Uh timing now, we're looking at the first phase, which consists of 191 spaces will be completed prior to June, the beginning of June, which is the startup of allegiance service.

Uh with that said, those new those spaces are really new spaces.

So they're in addition to the parking that we currently have.

That will be phase one.

The second phase is completed about two weeks later, so it will be mid-June, and then all of the phases uh together will be completed by about mid-July.

Of course, this is also weather pending, right?

Uh we're crossing our fingers for good weather uh to at least get phase one done prior to the beginning of June.

Perfect.

Thank you very much.

Sure.

Any other questions for staff?

Yeah, Don and then Betsy.

The question was asked actually to I think 6727, whichever one it is dealing with the road construction about uh uh FAA cost share.

And their response was since it's not solely for airport that they wouldn't do it, given that this parking is pretty much solely for the airport.

Was there I tell you what was their response or when we requested uh cost share from the FAA?

You're talking about the for the parking lot for the parking lot, yeah.

So we did not ask for a cost share for the parking.

Uh the challenge with cost share with the parking is that you cannot charge for the parking in the future.

Uh so this parking lot will be utilizing local funds only, which allows the city to determine if they would like to charge in the future, they would be allowed to, whereas across the street where we use federal funding, we cannot charge for parking.

So that will have to remain free.

Okay, thank you.

Betsy, you had a question.

Yeah, I had two.

One was uh have we thought about charging for parking?

I mean, I know people like free parking, obviously, but you know, have we thought about charging for parking?

And then the second one is how many ADA compliant spaces are we supposed to have?

Because you know, when Jackie is bringing it up, then I'm thinking, well, isn't there like a standard number?

And I assume you are meeting that.

We're exceeding.

So we always exceed uh to start off with that question.

We always exceed what we need for ADA parking spaces.

And actually we're getting ready to add more ADA parking spaces just for the current parking lot because even though we exceed it, uh we've noticed that they have filled up, and so just trying to make sure that we have enough.

So with that, we exceed that number that we need.

Okay, thanks.

And then in regards to the other question, yes, uh, the consideration of charging for parking is being discussed and being evaluated.

Uh we're currently working with Wolpert uh on a business plan for the airport.

Part of that business plan is evaluating what revenue would come from parking if there was a phased approach in the future if we do we were determined to charge for parking, what that would look like, whether it would be 200 spaces or 600 spaces, whatever that might look like, and how we how we would accomplish that moving forward.

And then my follow-up for that is just I'm the one who keeps asking you about covered parking and parking garages, because at some point it just seems like we continue to add more gravel or more asphalt.

And I know the asphalt is cheaper, and I guess maybe the gravel is the cheapest of all, but I would think as we grow at some point, you know, you have a half a mile hike in, or you have to have you have to pay a bus service or something to be bringing people in from far parking spaces.

So have you have you all started thinking about that and what that I know you told me I think it was 40,000 per parking space, but that was the most important thing.

I receive for a parking garage.

Right.

So as for covered parking, we've talked about I mean different ideas of what revenue would we would we receive for covered parking versus open parking, and then also our solar uh covered solar type covered parking available also.

So those are the things that we're currently discussing with Wolpert as well is what avenues would we have to make improvements for customers to make the experience more positive, and also a way that we can generate revenue for the airport at the same time.

So those are all part of the conversations that we're having with them.

I look forward to hearing those in the future.

Any other questions for staff on Bill 6626?

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

Would anyone from the public wish to speak on the proposed construction of improvements to the North Parking lot at the Columbia Regional Airport?

Renee Carter second ward.

The only comment I have, because there's quite a few more on here, so I'll just make it once, is that whatever was needed to be done because we expanded to another airline and more or more flights out.

I would have liked to have discussed that at the time we were talking about paying companies to expand their flights like American Airline.

I think it would be good to have those at one time so that we kind of have an idea of knowing how much it's really going to cost us to expand flights or to increase airlines.

Overall, I don't really have any objections to any of this, but I do think it's nice to know up front where we're at.

Thank you.

Thanks, Renee.

Anyone else from the public wish to speak on Bill 6626?

Good evening.

My name is Austin Bevins from the third ward.

And I'll keep this brief and I'll cheat, and I'll also talk about all of them all at once real quick to keep it short.

Um I just want to express that I support all of the proposed improvements uh to the uh Columbia Airport as a uh 2026 Chamber of Commerce uh leadership Columbia participant.

I recently had the opportunity to spend the whole day out there and really learn the value of the local airport and the previous investments that have been put into this in the past that allows us to witness the exponential growth that we're seeing right now.

And so I just want to leave it at that, that I believe it's a great investment for the community and provides access for people to visit Columbia and for other people uh to travel.

I'm looking forward to taking my first flight out of COU here in May.

And so with that, I would just urge you all to continue to make uh this long-term investment because in five, ten, fifteen, twenty years, I believe our city uh will benefit from it in great magnitudes.

So thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Would anyone else from the public wish to speak on Bill 6626?

Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing.

Uh any follow-up council comments or questions that came up?

All right.

Sheila, will you please call roll on bill 6626?

Council Bill 6626, Mr.

Waterman.

Yes.

Ms.

Peters?

Yes.

Ms.

Buffalo?

Yes.

Ms.

Carroll.

Yes.

Ms.

Elwood?

Yes.

Ms.

Sample?

Yes.

Mr.

Foster?

Yes.

Well, hey, Mike Parks.

Um Sheila, will you please read um Public Hearing 926 and the accompanying Bill 6726?

Public Hearing 926 is the proposed construction of a terminal building passenger boarding bridge project at the Columbia Regional Airport.

And Council Bill 6726 is an ordinance determining it is in the public interest to construct a terminal building passenger boarding bridge project at the Columbia Regional Airport, approving and adopting plans and specifications, determining that the work shall be done by contract, calling for bids through the purchasing division, providing for payment for the improvement, authorizing the city manager to obtain, execute, and record all documents necessary for the improvement, providing for compliance with the 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?

Sure.

Due to the accelerated increase in flights at Columbia Regional Airport, a passenger boarding bridge was included in this year's capital improvement projects to be funded by the FAA.

The total project estimate for design and construction is $1,810,000.

The city is responsible for the design cost of approximately $60,000 plus 10% of the construction cost to be paid for with transportation sales tax.

The FAA will reimburse the city 90% of the construction costs.

It's expected to take approximately 18 to 24 months to construct and install this passenger boarding bridge.

This bridge would be located at gate three in the sterile area.

That's the bridge that was actually left off as part of our construction due to not having the passenger demand at the time when we constructed the terminal.

So we were really waiting to meet that threshold with the FAA before they would uh before they would fund 90 percent of this project.

So happy to answer any questions.

Yeah, Betsy.

First, I'm really happy if the FAA is gonna put 90 percent of the bill.

That's one of the things I heard from constituents was what we're not gonna spend this amount of money.

But the other um two issues or questions I have are why is it so expensive for another bridge and why do we need another bridge?

Sure.

Uh definitely prices have gone up since we built the terminal, so costs for these have definitely went up.

Uh this estimate is really based on costs that we've seen at other airports that have ordered new bridges.

Springfields order new bridges, Kansas City.

This picture here is kind of a stock photo, so we don't plan on getting an all-glass uh passenger boarding bridge.

Uh however, just costs have definitely increased.

Okay.

And I mean, we don't have that many flights going out, do we?

Out of the that we need another bridge, and why is I mean, is there like you expect two hours for every flight that comes and goes or I mean, how do you def decide you need another bridge, or how does the FAA decide you need another bridge?

Sure.

So there's not a specific number uh of passengers or aircraft.

However, uh beginning on April 3rd, we have five flights on the ground overnight.

So we have four parking positions, we have five airplanes beginning on May 21st, we're gonna have six airplanes with only four positions and three uh three passenger boarding bridges.

So the way we currently operate is gate two passenger boarding bridge uh loads the gate two aircraft.

American Airlines pulls the bridge back, retracts it, and then United Airlines takes those controls and moves the bridge over to gate three.

Sometimes we have flights within minutes of each other, so we have to stagger the aircraft to ensure that passenger boarding bridge or gate two and gate three are not timed out at the same time, which is also what we're looking at with the addition of Charlotte as well.

Uh is just making sure that we're positioning aircraft at the correct gate at the correct time to make sure that all the bridges can be utilized efficiently.

But we definitely have the need for a fourth and the FAA were also proposing the idea of adding another one to the South End as demand increases uh if they will fund it.

Okay.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Yeah, Belle.

Yeah.

Um, in light of the comment we had on the last item and kind of generally on these items, I'm curious to what degree would we be expecting these kinds of provements regardless of whether or not we had our most recent additions in flights?

Um recent expansions and flights that were offered or general expansion that has already occurred as well.

So previously, I believe this pasture boarding bridge was about four years out, five years out, as we look at our capital plan with the FAA, and it's really hovered out in that time frame and it continues just to stay about that time uh that period of time out uh for funding, and we really weren't allowed to move forward on it until we could demonstrate the exponential growth of the airport.

So when we were able to demonstrate that United was coming in in September, there was definitely a the need.

Uh we knew that it was probably we were gonna have to move forward with the passenger boarding bridge.

But then as we continue to add new flights, new routes, and new airlines, uh then the FAA was definitely supportive of funding this bridge.

Any other questions for staff on this one?

All right, I'll go ahead and open up the public hearing.

Does anyone from the public want to speak on the proposed construction of a terminal building passenger boarding bridge project at the Columbia Regional Airport?

See none, I'll close the public hearing.

Um I think just oh well, you know, I meant to ask this under the questions part, but it could also just be a comments.

When we were building the new terminal, there were some issues about a new passenger bridge actually making the roundabout turns uh at the overpass over 63.

Do we have any concerns on this one?

And you mentioned that it could potentially take like two years before it actually comes to us.

Sure.

Are we any concerns over the I-70 construction causing issues with us getting the delivery on this equipment?

We definitely have a lessons learned case.

Uh we'll be bringing it in from the South, uh, not from the North.

So I think we we've got a better plan now than what we had originally.

All right.

I just wanted to check on that.

We'll share that with the Shield.

Well, because I'm using the I-70 construction to encourage more people to fly out of COU rather than go to Kansas City or St.

Louis because of that.

So Sheila, will you please uh call roll on bill 6726?

Council Bill 6726, Mr.

Waterman.

Yes.

Ms.

Peters?

Yes.

Ms.

Buffalo?

Yes.

Ms.

Carroll?

Yes.

Ms.

Elwood?

Yes.

Ms.

Sample?

Yes.

Mr.

Foster?

Yes.

All right.

Moving on.

Sheila, will you please read Public Hearing 1026 and the accompanying Bill 6826?

Public hearing 1026 is the proposed construction of a de-icing pad and containment facility, glycol recovery system at the Columbia Regional Airport.

And Council Bill 6826 is an ordinance determining it is in the public interest to construct a de-icing pad and containment facility, glycol recovery system at the Columbia Regional Airport, approving and adopting plans and specifications determining that the work shall be done by contract, calling for bids to the purchasing division, providing for payment for the improvement, authorizing the city manager to obtain, execute, and record all documents necessary for the improvement, providing for compliance with the 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?

Sure.

The FAA has approved 90 percent funding for the design and construction of a de-icing pad and containment facility at the airport.

This system will capture excess de-icing fluid glycol applied to aircraft during inclement winter weather that currently flows into our airport's stormwater system.

The total project cost estimate for design and construction is $4,714,650, and will be reimbursed by the FAA at 90 percent.

The 10 percent local match will be funded with transportation sales tax.

Construction is planned to be completed in the winter of 2026, spring of 2027.

Uh the Airport Advisory Board also unanimously approved moving forward with this project.

The uh just to give you an idea of where this is located, we have the terminal here.

This current de-icing area uh is uh just south of the terminal, and this de-icing pad is located uh just a little bit further south, directly east of the USPS facility.

So the aircraft would leave the commercial terminal, uh, come down here and would be de-iced, and then would be able to exit onto Taxiway Alpha.

All of the glycol that is recovered would be piped underground to the storage facility that's located up in here, and this is the area where trucks would recover that glycol uh to be able to be shipped out.

So happy to answer any questions.

Does council have any questions?

Yeah, Nick.

Well, I asked a little bit about this, but I I uh in previous to the meeting, but I do have kind of a follow-up.

But uh we are doing de-icing now at the airport as you indicated.

And I assume that we have adequate uh resources or facilities for managing that glycol now.

Does that is that area where you pointed out where the glycol will be uh stored?

Is that where it is stored now or how how is it managed now, I guess is my question.

Yeah, so the the we have a 300-foot wide apron.

Everything is uh everything flows to the east, so it flows into the grass.

And so really just a natural filtration that goes into the grass uh into the ditch area and then out through this south ditch area here in Hoff Airport property.

So there is no containment facility currently.

Uh it really just goes through the natural stormwater system, and there's no way to contain it now.

So is this really the result of our increased activity at the airport?

Is uh I mean I guess what we have been doing is adequate and meet standards?

So we've had conversations with uh Department of Natural Resources for several years now about the need to make improvements and capture this glycol.

Ultimately, we were waiting for the FAA to be able to put this into our capital improvement plan for funding at 90 percent.

And so I it was just last year we met with DNR and Macon and gave them an update in their headquarters about just the timeline that we were looking at, trying to make these improvements to improve our stormwater runoff.

Okay, thanks.

Any other questions for staff on this?

Yeah, Valerie.

This may have been in the report, so forgive me if I missed it.

Um how much glycol is recovered or how much glycol is produced during the um de-icing process and how much is recovered.

So right now we don't recover any.

Right.

Uh but how much is used really is debased on the contaminant.

So if it's just frost, uh it's gonna depend on the aircraft type.

And I would be guessing if I if I set a number of gallons exactly what an aircraft uses.

Uh but it really depends on the the type of material they are trying to get off.

If they're trying to get snow off or ice off, it's definitely going to take more than frost.

I've got Ryan Lornton uh from Burns and McDonald here.

He's the one who is actually working on the de-icing project.

I'm not sure if you can answer that maybe a little bit more on the flowage.

Uh Ryan Lord and Burns McDonald.

It really depends the sizing of the tanks, uh, underground storage tanks is largely dependent on not so much that the glycol itself, but the runoff that's going on that would produce the rain or the snow melt that goes into the tanks.

So we're talking some 100,000 gallons of storage that's going to be required.

Um but to Mike's point, the amount of glycol is going to depend on the the year uh the event.

Uh obviously you're going to have more glycol than you did previously because of their additional flights, larger aircraft, um, but largely due to just the fact that you have that many more uh flights at Columbia than you did in the past.

Um so but the the sizing of the tanks is largely driven because of the runoff that you're collecting, which would be allowed to uh we can open those gates up during the summer months to allow those to flow freely into the ditch.

So you're not uh uh acquiring the glycol and in the runoff, but they'll be closed during the winter months when you're when you are de-icing to collect that material.

That helps.

That helped, Valerie.

Yes.

Yes, it did.

Thank you.

Enough information for this project.

Appreciate it.

Any other questions for staff on this?

All right, I'll go ahead and open up the public hearing.

Does anybody from the public wish to speak about the proposed construction of a de-icing pad and contaminant facility at the Columbia Regional Airport?

That's okay.

That's okay.

I'm Carol Thompson.

I'm ward three.

And and I just kinda am confused because glycol is a contaminant.

And we're putting it in our storm water.

Uh to me, that just seems wrong.

You know, when we're worried about the the runoff into the stormwater that the homeless camps create, and now we're doing it on purpose.

That just is confusing to me.

So maybe I need more clarification, and maybe the the City of Columbia needs more clarification on this.

If we're putting it into our stormwater, into our grasslands.

That's I don't know.

We're compute worried about homeless camps creating toxic.

This seems more toxic.

Carl.

Anyone else from the public wish to speak on Bill 6826?

Seeing none, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing.

Um Council comments here, council questions.

Uh yeah, Betsy, and then I was gonna It sounds like our current uh de-icing is going into grass and then a filter more filtered by ground as opposed to directly into the stormwater.

That's correctly.

It's not next to a creek, right?

That's correct.

It goes across fixing this problem by getting this.

Yes.

That's the intent is to capture the glycol before it ever goes into the grass where it's currently filtered through grass and rocks.

And that was considered acceptable when we didn't have as many flights out.

I mean the FAA was okay with that.

DNR was not happy, but not too irate about it.

Well, I think the ultimate goal, right, was to work towards this goal of capturing all this glycol.

That's what everybody wanted.

Uh just due to the expense.

That's why we were working with the FAA towards getting funding for this project.

And this sounds like a pretty rapid turnaround if you're planning to do this this winter/slash next spring.

Compared to a lot of our city projects that linger.

This is.

This is gonna be a fast-moving project, uh, really like the other five.

Uh we're moving quickly because we do want to capture this.

We know that there is additional aircraft, uh, additional flights that will be occurring, so we want to make sure that we we move quickly on these projects to ensure that we're ready to capture the glycol.

Uh definitely since there's more.

We want to do that.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yeah, Valerie.

Yeah, this gets at my earlier question for sure.

I'm obviously going to be um highly in favor of this because I think that we should be capturing glycol, especially as flights increase.

Um this is part of why I'm asking about um how much we produce, um, because I like to get a concept of how much we were releasing.

Um my following questions are do we test soils surrounding?

Um what concentration is the runoff in that we're collecting and how frequently do we collect.

Um I have a concern about the peroxide forming capability of glycol.

And so I would hope that it's diluted as we collect as it runs off, and we have a collection frequency that accounts for that.

Um I wonder if our engineering team can speak to that at all.

So I I'll jump in just real quick.

We do test our uh stormwater runoff and we submit that to the DNR, and we do that after the first de-icing event to make sure that we're capturing an accurate reflection on what would be making it to the free-flowing stormwater right.

So ultimately, after it goes through the grass, a natural filtration of that uh glycol and it goes out down through that ditch area, that's where we capture it and test it.

Uh and we have a contract with engineering company to do that and submit those reports.

Right.

So towards the storage and the peroxide forming.

Do we plan to have this collected?

Do we plan to store them in tanks for greater than three to six months?

I guess the question, I think the frequency is collection.

Your frequency of the trucks coming and getting your glycol that's stored there.

Do you have a plan?

Yes.

Thanks.

So we have the plan is the tanks are sized to account for roughly you know, one month of worst-case scenario with the rainfall events that we have.

We look at the storm events historically.

So they're sized to handle that, and they would have to be pumped out.

And there's also obviously years where you're not going to have that amount of material going in based on the if you don't have a lot of rainfall, for instance.

So it's going to be naturally diluted, and that's how the runoff goes through.

It'll go down the icing pad into the trench drain through the pipe and into the storage tanks.

Um, and then those storage tanks will be pumped out and have to be taken to a wastewater treatment facility.

So it's naturally diluted from rainwater and melting ice.

We don't add any, we don't.

I don't know the process of getting fall off of the case.

Yeah, it's naturally diluted by the rainfall or snow vent melt that gets it to the tank when it gets to the tank.

It will be a combination of glycol and um rainwater.

That one month?

Approximately one month.

Uh worst case, it would be able to store it to that amount where you would have to pump it out after that that point.

And there'll be some years where you know you'll be able to go several months without having to pump those out, but it just depends on the rain events.

Okay.

I would advocate for frequent collection due to increased concentrations of peroxide depending on the concentration that comes off.

Umerry is a chemist.

So yes.

All right, good.

Um, I'm a civil, so I'm not sure.

But yeah, but we we have folks that are are on our environmental group that are that are looking at that and having the conversations with the wastewater treatment plants out there to discuss uh what they can take and what they can't take, or how much what percent of material they can take and how that would affects their plants.

Okay.

Yeah, Vera.

Will we be continuing to test the soils and submit to DNR to ensure this is collecting the correct amount of glycol that it's intended to?

Yes.

So we're going to continue doing stormwater testing in the same locations, still based on that same timeline and are required to submit those to the DNR.

Yes.

Are these tanks shock proof?

Or these are going to be not the because of the way that DNR classifies the materials as they classify or excuse me, Missouri um storage tanks classifies it as non-hazardous material technically.

They it's actually they're allowed to have um non-metallic tank tanks for these.

So that's that's our plan.

We're in about the 90 percent, between 60 and 90 percent on the final design right now.

Okay.

Thanks.

All right.

Any other counsel questions, comments?

All right.

Sheila, will you please call roll on bill 6826?

Council 6826, Mr.

Waterman.

Yes.

Ms.

Peters?

Yes.

Ms.

Buffalo?

Yes.

Ms.

Carroll?

Yes.

Ms.

Elwood?

Yes.

Ms.

Sample?

Yes.

Mr.

Foster?

Yes.

All right.

Sheila, will you please read public hearing 1126 and the accompanying Bill 6926?

Public hearing 1126 is the proposed construction of the terminal building loop road project at the Columbia Regional Airport.

And Council 6926 is an ordinance determining it is in the public interest to construct the terminal building loop road project at the Columbia Regional Airport, approving it and adopting plans and specifications determining that the work shall be done by contract, calling for bids through the purchasing division, providing for payment for the improvement, authorizing the city manager to obtain execute and record all documents necessary for the improvement, providing for compliance with the prevailing wage law and state mandated construction safety training, and fixing the time when this ordinance shall become effective second reading.

We have a staff report.

Sure.

This project includes the full-depth reconstruction of approximately 650 linear feet of the terminal loop road.

This goes from the new terminal out to airport drive, and it is going to replace the failing asphalt and concrete, as well as the installation of pavement markings and roadway signage.

The work will be completed in phases to main share to ensure continuous access during terminal to the terminal during construction.

The total project cost for design and construction is estimated $859,381.

And of that, 90% will be reimbursed by the FAA, with 10 percent being funded by transportation sales tax.

Construction is planned for this summer and the Airport Advisory Board unanimously approved moving forward with this project.

On the screen, you'll see really it starts at the old terminal front, which is where we stop the concrete when we built the new terminal facility.

And with that, that's also going to replace the failing sidewalk here.

And this sidewalk is actually going to be extended out to close to the area where Columbia Jet Center is.

As part of that north parking lot improvement, we're also building a new sidewalk that is going to connect to this to make it easier and safer for pedestrians walking from the north end as well as part of this project.

So I'm happy to answer any questions.

Any questions from counsel for staff?

Yeah, Vera.

I see that the sidewalk is listed as possible.

Is that a guaranteed part of this process or is that potentially going to change?

No, the intent is to is to do the sidewalk.

Of course, it will come back in the bid to make sure that it is a reasonable cost, but there is definitely a need to tear out the failing sidewalk because there is some areas there that need to be improved.

And we have a large number of people coming from that north end with all of that additional parking.

So this was an ad, as you can see, the yellow is just not quite as straight as it probably could be.

This was an ad towards the end of project that we needed to get in there to make sure that people can get to the terminal safely.

Any other questions?

Yeah.

Nick?

Just really curious about this.

The concrete pad removal, what's the what are the per what's the purpose of those concrete pads this right now?

Oh, they're old concrete pads where we used to have uh parking booths and so forth out there.

So those were some of the old pads that still needed to be taken out as part of old projects that were going on.

Booths because we were charging for parking at one time.

Yes, sir.

Yeah, at about 20 years ago we did.

Any other questions for staff?

Okay.

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

Does anybody from the public wish to speak on the terminal building loop road construction project?

See none, I'll close the public hearing.

Uh any additional council comments on this one?

All right.

Uh Sheila, will you please call roll on bill 6926?

Council 6926, Mr.

Waterman.

Yes.

Ms.

Peters.

Ms.

Buffalo?

Yes.

Ms.

Carroll?

Yes.

Ms.

Elwood?

Yes.

Ms.

Sample?

Yes.

Mr.

Foster.

Yes.

All right.

Moving on.

Sheila, will you please read Public Hearing 1226 and Bill 7026?

Public hearing 1226 is the proposed construction of the Terminal Building Production Kitchen at the Columbia Regional Airport.

And Council Bill 20 or Council 7026 is an ordinance determining it is in the public interest to construct the terminal building production kitchen at the Columbia Regional Airport, approving and adopting plans and specifications, determining that the work shall be done by contract, calling for bids to the purchasing division, providing for payment for the improvement, authorizing the city manager to obtain, execute, and record all documents necessary for the improvement, providing for compliance with the 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?

Sure.

So TALWAN's Market has been operating with just walkout technology in the market in the current terminal for almost two years now and has had great success.

Per the agreement between the city and this concessionaire, food and beverage services would be provided in two phases.

Phase one is the market with just walk-out technology that operates 365 days a year and has staffing levels that support that type of passenger activity with that market.

Phase two includes a restaurant area offering a limited hot food menu once the city completes the construction of this production kitchen.

The city will be responsible for the design and construction cost of the kitchen, estimated at a cost of $828,176.

The concessionaire will be responsible for providing all kitchen equipment.

An interested parties equip interested parties meeting was held on March 10th with no objections to the project.

The construction of the kitchen is expected to be completed this summer.

The airport advisory board unanimously approved moving forward with this project.

On your screen, you'll see uh is an example here.

Off to the left-hand side of the screen is actually the TSA checkpoint.

And this is just really that open area that's sitting out there now.

Uh just to the right of screening when you walk in the front doors.

This is the large blank wall.

So this uh picture here kind of gives you an example of the public side seating area that would be installed as part of this construction.

Uh and these red boxes is actually a locker system.

So the intent, because of the size of our airport, we can't support a kitchen that would be able to operate on both the secure side and the public side.

So when the when the terminal was constructed, it was designed to have a kitchen that can support both the public and the secure side.

So the intent here is you would order food from a kiosk on the public side.

That food would be placed in uh in one of those lockers, and you would get a code or however that might work, uh, and you would retrieve your food out of there, and you could sit on the public side.

On the secure side of the terminal, uh, when you walk in that market, off to your left-hand side is all of that seating area off to the left.

There's actually going to be a big window there uh that you can actually go up and order your food, and then you would have that personalized uh contact with an employee there.

So with that said, I'm happy to answer any questions.

Any questions from uh council for Betsy?

Um Do we have any idea how many hours a day this the hot food restaurant part would be open and what are we talking about?

Are we talking about like the Casey's pizza that you get if you go to Casey's or I mean what you know what are we talking about?

Sure.

So right now, I mean they'll they'll establish hours based on flights and demands.

Uh and we do have a representative from from Tailwinds here that can come up here uh and speak on behalf of that.

However, right now there's not a finalized menu, I don't believe designed.

Um I'll let him speak on behalf of the hours.

Yeah, it was mainly the hour, the hours, and then what what are you anticipating having available?

Here, move that up a little bit.

You're taller.

My name is Timothy Timothy Temple.

I'm with Jackson Brothers Ward 2.

Um, so we will run an hour before the flight, so when TSA is allowing passengers to go through to the secure side, and an hour after.

If there are any delays, the team will stay and still provide the same service.

Um, but that's the plan for hours right now.

The menu, like you stated, is not finalized, but it will be a significant upgrade from what is there now and from a Casey's pizza.

Not saying we won't be serving pizza, but it will be an upgrade.

Nora was trying, nor was I trying to do interrogatory.

You're gonna hear from Casey's now.

Probably will, yeah.

Like Casey's P.

Yeah.

You're gonna hear from some constituents that really love Casey's Pizza.

Yes.

Uh is it typical in a contract like this to have the city or the airport put that like upfront construction cost in place?

So the intent of this uh when we did the contract with the vendor was or the concessionaire was anything permanent as part of the terminal uh was going to be the responsibility of the airport.

And so if uh TLNs or Jackson Brothers was to decide to depart from the airport and not do business, we would then be able to bring another concession air in and the restaurant would be ready to operate.

So I I mentioned in there the kitchen equipment, but really anything that they use to operate their specific business, they're responsible to make those investments uh in bring into the airport.

We're only making the permanent investments in the improvements of the terminal.

Any other questions for staff on this?

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

Does anybody from the public wish to speak on um Bill 770 26?

Come back.

Again, my name is Tim.

I'm uh in Ward 2, uh, which I just learned a minute ago.

I did not know that.

Um, yes.

Good evening.

Thank you for your time.

Um Jackson Brothers is a locally owned company.

It's also a veteran and women woman-owned company.

Um we have been had the privilege for many years when it started as vending supporting the airport, and now we run the Amazon Just Walkout store tailwinds.

We're here to support the next phase in all of these upgrades for the airport because we feel like it's an amazing thing for our community in Columbia to see the growth, the growth that has happened over the last couple of years and with especially what's going to happen this year has been phenomenal.

We're ready to move forward as a team.

Our team is already operating at the airport, obviously, and our next steps allow us to deliver a more complete food and beverage experience for passengers, both coming to our city and leaving our city.

We believe this project supports airport growth, all the projects do, and reflect well on our Columbia community.

We're prepared and we support the approval of this project.

And so we can continue to move forward.

Thank you, Tim.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Would anyone else from the public wish to speak on Bill 7026?

Sorry, the construction of the terminal building production kitchen at Columbia Regional Airport.

Seeing none, I'll ask Sheila to call roll on bill 7026.

Council Bill 7026, Mr.

Waterman.

Yes.

Ms.

Peters?

Yes.

Ms.

Buffalo?

Yes.

Ms.

Carroll?

Yes.

Ms.

Elwood?

Yes.

Ms.

Sample?

Yes.

Mr.

Foster?

Yes.

Awesome.

Excited.

All right.

The last one of just this.

Yeah, this part.

Sheila, will you please read public hearing 1326 and the accompanying Bill 7126?

Public hearing 1326 is the proposed reconstruction of Airport Drive at the Columbia Regional Airport.

And Council Bill 7126 is an ordinance determining it is in the public interest to reconstruct airport drive at the Columbia Regional Airport, approving and adopting plans and specifications determining that the work shall be done by contract, calling for bids to the purchasing division, providing for payment for the improvement, authorizing the city manager to obtain, execute, and record all documents necessary for the improvement, providing for compliance with the 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?

Sure.

You must have seen me looking through my notes to see if this is the last one.

It is the last one.

Okay.

Airport Drive is a project that was included in FY25 capital improvement uh project list for design and resurfacing for a total length of approximately 1.3 miles.

The existing roadway is two lanes with open ditch sections, no enclosed storm drainage system, and one crosswalk.

The asphalt pavement is in poor condition with visible cracks, potholes, and uneven surfaces.

This reconstruction overlay project presents an opportunity to improve other features of the roadway by adding a new crosswalk.

Design services also extended also provide a preliminary design of exterior wayfinding signage from Route H to the terminal itself.

The total project cost estimate for design and construction is $1,705,000 and will be funded by transportation sales tax.

An interested parties meeting was held on March 6th with no objections.

The project is expected to be completed by the end of this year.

Answer any questions.

Any questions from council for staff?

Yeah, Jackie.

Again, the transportation sales tax.

We've kind of talked about that and how we've clarified that the FAA will only provide funding if it is something that is specific to only the airport.

So that's why they're not going in on this.

So before I was on council, I remember vaguely talking about airport expansion, and there was discussion of county involvement and Jefferson City involvement and all those kinds of things.

And but my understanding is that the city owns this road, but there's no future potential for additional assistance since people from outside of Columbia use this space for airport.

I'm wishful thinking here, but I'm just kind of wondering what that process looked like.

No, it is a city-owned road.

Uh so the city's taken uh responsibility of constructing and maintaining the road.

Uh with that said, you're you're you are correct.

We've approached the FAA more than once in an attempt to see if we can find a way to uh receive federal funding to make improvements to Airport Drive, to relocate it, uh whatever that might be.

And each time we've contacted the FAA in an attempt to get funding.

Uh really it comes back to the airport roads serves more than just the commercial terminal.

So the airport road, one one that keeps continuing to come up is the postal facility that's past the terminal.

So that road serves past the commercial terminal to the postal facility, which in turn that's another business and which is why the FAA will not support it with federal funding.

So any other questions for staff on this one?

All right.

Um I'll go ahead and open oh, sorry, it's done.

Have we approached those other businesses, the Postal Service and the other businesses about contributing?

Not specifically to this project.

However, their land lease, I I guess I would consider it something uh similar to a driveway going into an apartment complex, right?

Is really we're leasing space out to them, so the intent is they would be under the understanding we would give them access to it.

So approaching them to help pave that road uh has not been done for funding.

Thank you.

You know, a question that came up to me was um uh when we're talking about this, so I'm I'm trying to bring up your discussion.

Can you go back?

Well, actually, no, it's this one, it's a slide.

When we're talking about the additional kind of like pedestrian wayfinding and in the signage as you're coming into this, um at our last council meeting, we approved the purchase of kind of shuttle, like a bus or for you to use as for the outside.

Will that be incorporated in our pedestrian wayfinding so that people know like where a shuttle stop is and like how how to access that?

Is that part of the plan?

Well, yes.

So this design was completed prior to the exact locations of where those shuttle stops are gonna be, but that's something we're gonna have to add in there uh to be able to put signage in because signage is probably one of the biggest uh concerns I hear from passengers as we continue to get more passengers that have not used the airport, and we know that we are, the numbers have continued to increase.

Uh the improvement to signage is is needed quickly.

But yes, uh in regards to the shuttle, we have to fine-tune the plan on exactly where that shuttle is going to stop.

Um as part of that north parking lot, there's a base or uh uh a pad to be able to put a shelter in place is one example to ensure that we're we're prepared for that.

So thank you.

All right.

Go ahead and open up the public hearing.

Does anybody from the public wish to speak on the proposed reconstruction of airport drive at the Columbia Regional Airport?

Renee Carter, second ward.

I did want to clarify when we're talking about a postal business, if they mean federal or private, and if it's a federal probe postal business, why couldn't the federal government help pay for that?

Anyway, just a question.

Thanks.

Thank you, Renee.

Anyone else um from the public wish to speak on Bill 7126?

You know, go ahead and close um this.

I'll probably answer yes, it is the USPS, but I think to your point, they are a tenant of ours, because that is our land.

And so it's about the driveway access.

Correct.

We do a land lease with them.

Yeah.

Any council comments on this?

Um can you just remind us again you said this construction or we have to go out like when the when would we expect the to see these improvements?

Sure.

These as soon as mobilization would occur after a ward, uh, we're planning on these improvements.

So I would anticipate in the June time frame.

Uh we'll be working on this.

Good luck to you.

Good luck to us all.

All right.

Moving on.

Uh oh no, sorry, Sheila.

Will you please call roll?

You see, I almost skipped your last one, Mike.

Sheila, will you please call roll on bill 7126?

Council 7126, Mr.

Waterman?

Yes.

Ms.

Peters?

Yes.

Ms.

Buffalo.

Yes.

Ms.

Carroll?

Yes.

Ms.

Selwood?

Yes.

Ms.

Sample?

Yes.

Mr.

Foster.

Yes.

All right.

Moving on to items under old business.

So Sheila, will you please read Bill 6226?

Council Bill 6226 is an ordinance amending chapter 29 of the city code relating to the definition and zoning designation of a data center use and fixing the time when this ordinance shall become effective.

Second reading.

Do we have a staff report?

Yes, thank you.

Mayor, City Council, I'm Clint Smith, Community Development Director.

Case we have before you tonight is a zoning text amendment.

And I do have a presentation.

A screen always throws me off.

I don't think it's there.

So all right.

So again, a zoning uh text amendment.

So that's essentially what we refer to as anything that's uh revising the language within the uh unified development code, which is the UDC, which is essentially our zoning ordinance.

Uh it uh the request really touches on two sections.

One uh is the definitions section, uh, and the other is the permitted use table.

Uh these are related to data centers uh and how they kind of interact with the IG zoning currently.

Um the purpose really of this zoning text amendment uh was to define data centers right now.

Uh if you do recall from previous conversations, data centers kind of fall within the definition for light industrial.

Um, and that is a permitted use currently within the city.

Uh the purpose then would be to redefine data centers as a standalone uh definition, so a standalone use.

Uh and then when we evaluate how it would be regulated differently than say light industrial.

And we'll we'll get into the details um here in uh just a few slides.

Um really what precipitated this was uh kind of a previous IG rezoning request that came before council.

Uh and it did raise some questions and concerns um about uh IG zoning and data centers in particular.

Uh and this text amendment really was um, I think in response to some of those concerns.

Uh it is a public hearing, did go to Planning and Zoning Commission and was advertised in uh the Tribune.

So a little history back in November, uh there was a case in front of council uh that was a request for rezoning property into IG, that's industrial general.

So that's our manufacturing district, our industrial district, right?

So that's generally uh what you would see light industrial uses uh where they would be located.

Um of the concerns raised there were that if approved, a data center could be located on that property.

Data centers were at that time considered to be allowed within the IG zoning district.

Um at the conclusion of that, it was a I believe a three to three vote, and so it did fail technically uh to win approval.

Uh at the conclusion of that meeting, council did request a report on some of the um, I think uh some of the impacts the data centers could have on the community.

And I think we've all seen a lot of the news over the last few months that this is not isolated to Columbia in itself.

There's a lot of concerns around data centers.

Um that uh us internally as a staff uh discussed after the words is that um that denial uh which uh uh did not allow the IG rezoning to take place uh really kind of clouded the IG zoning.

Uh and so what that meant is that uh future IG rezoning, uh, there could be uncertainty around whether council would be approved that because of one particular use.

And so what that told us was that we need to address that certain use.

Uh we we really don't want to be put in a position where IG uh could not be approved on other sites uh because of the concerns of data centers.

And so that uh at that time we made the decision to go ahead and initiate this text amendment uh that's going to redefine data centers and actually um take it from being permitted within the IG to being conditional.

And we'll talk a little bit more about um that Syria in a second.

So January 22nd, we presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission uh, and there's two specific types of changes that we're gonna talk about.

Um is kind of the importance of the IG.

We do a lot of zoning, residential zoning, commercial zoning.

IG is really uh one of those zoning districts that really touch on the economic impacts of the community.

So it's a lot of areas where jobs are created.

So uh us as staff want to make sure that we are um evaluating, I think the IG zoning to make sure there's enough available uh inventory of IG for that continued growth of that that economic driver within the community.

So I ask what IG stands for?

Uh industrial general.

Thank you.

Yes.

Um at a a local evaluation of industrial sites.

It did note uh this is in the staff report that we have about a two and a half percent vacancy for industrial structures, and that's fairly low.

So that's kind of just again speaks to I think making sure that we have the tools necessary to continue to approve IG zoning.

Uh and by doing that, we're going to remove some of the concerns from the IG zoning.

So two steps really that we took at this time.

One's the definition for a data center.

Uh the second is to reclassify that.

And we'll start with the reclassification.

So this when I talk about a permitted use table, it's literally a table.

So this is in the UDC and it tells everyone who's looking uh to build in the in the community what you can build and where you can build it prior to the amendment, which is the row there that has data centers with the red highlight.

That data center fell into light industrial, which is two below that.

You can see if you go to the column to the right, the P, that's permitted.

So it's permitted in IG.

So someone could get a permit today, a building permit to construct a data center.

There'd be no oversight per se, other than what rules and regulations we have in place for it currently.

So go up to rows, data centers will now be conditional use.

That essentially means that there will be public hearings and council will have to approve each individual request for that type of use within the city.

And there's a few things that go along with the conditional use, but I do want to go before we go that far, go to the other part that we're going to be adding.

So to actually have a data center use on our table, we have to define it.

So we have a definition.

A lot of words.

Our staff actually did a fairly intensive dive.

If you read through the plan zoning report, they they really uh wanted to make sure they were looking at a lot of the relevant communities.

I think specifically looking in that uh kind of Washington, D.C., Virginia area, there's a lot of data centers in that area.

So they looked at a lot of the definitions, how they were defining it to kind of inform how we want to do it.

And they looked at, I think a dozen or so definitions and really identified the core parts of what and how you define a data center.

Uh I think really the first sentence there is doing the heavy lifting.

What's a data center?

This is generally a facility uh for basically storing and processing digital data, right?

That's that's the core.

Uh the second sentence really touches on some of the uh the accessory uses that can go along with that, including power generation uh and other facilities uh such as utility substations.

Uh, and then at the end kind of uh speaks to what a data center is not, right?

So that's kind of the three components.

I won't spend a lot of time in here, but we can go through these and kind of dissect them a little bit more.

There's a lot more evaluation of planning zoning commissions.

If we want to do that, I have some slides at the end, but for this for the time being, um, I think this is the definition uh that went through planning zoning and did receive recommendation.

Uh one thing I want to note when we talk about data centers, a lot of languages in, I think, and some of the concerns are with what they call the hyperscale.

Uh those that can demand, you know, 10, 20 megawatts of power uh from a local uh utility.

Uh but there are different scales, right?

So there's uh enterprise, and that's where essentially one user, one site, right?

Think of a Google data center, it's all for Google.

Even though that whole site is a data center, it's it's for one user.

There's also co-location where one facility could house many different users.

Uh and then on the other end of the spectrum, there's the edge, which is meant to be a little smaller scale, but still uh it's a data center.

So there's a lot of, I think, uh things that come to mind when people talk about data centers.

Uh we're not necessarily always talking about the the scale of the one you see on the screen here.

There could be smaller instances that fall within that data center category.

Um so now what we've done is we've defined it and we've said it's conditional.

So what does it mean to be conditional?

Well, essentially it means that these seven standard six standards, excuse me, on your screen are evaluated when it comes forward.

This is what staff use to evaluate whether or not a conditional use may need some sort of conditions to go along with it to mitigate any of the concerns within this evaluation criteria.

These are our standard criteria, and this is what we use for nearly all conditional uses that come through the city, these these six criteria.

Um we do have uh more specialized criteria when we have certain uses that may have some unique um unique aspects.

Uh one of those, uh one of the ones we have is we have a special conditional use criteria for communication towers.

You know, it's a little more unique, it's not necessarily a specific use that I think is broadly uh utilized within the city.

So it is possible to specialize some of the criteria, but there's a couple things I did want to point out that I think really get to the heart of, I think some of the concerns with data centers, uh, and that's E and F.

So E, if you'll notice, uh one of the criteria that that staff, plan and zoning, and city council can use in their evaluation of whether to actually support the permit, the conditional use permit, is whether there is sufficient infrastructure to support the use.

Um again, that being one I think the principal concerns.

Data centers uh based on the research I think we've looked at from a utility standpoint are high uh electricity users and high water users.

Electricity to run the essentially computer servers, which is essentially what then the data center is.

It's a lot of computer servers.

The water is used for cooling that because servers get hot and they must be kept cold.

So those are the two real big impacts to utilities.

So based on this, if council uh determined with consultation with utility staff, obviously, that we had insufficient infrastructure in place to support that use.

Uh council could take several actions.

One is put conditions on that.

Uh staff has looked at some of the conditions that uh other communities have looked at.

You know, they looked at utility studies to make sure we have proper utilities.

Uh they can also deny that permit if they feel like there's insufficient infrastructure.

The second one, and really if I was looking at based on I think our research so far, the two big areas of impacts of data centers.

One is to utilities, and the second is to surrounding properties.

And so F, if you look at that standard is the use won't cause significant adverse impacts to surrounding property owners.

So what that opens the door to is evaluating how that data center is impacting properties within the vicinity.

A lot of the conditions and some of the standards we've seen in other communities are enhanced setbacks.

Right now, IG is typically a standard 25-foot setback, but we could uh we could uh recommend a condition that they have to be set back 50 feet or 100 feet to mitigate uh proposed impacts on surrounding properties, whether it be commercial or other industrial users.

Uh there could also be enhanced screening and buffering.

Umise is also a concern.

A lot of data centers use backup generators that must be turned on occasionally to run the facility, and they do create a substantial amount of noise.

And so that again, I think is when you see those enhanced setbacks, that's speaking to some of the concerns for for those impacts.

Uh but again, we do have some limits already for noise at property lines based on generators from some you know, users like industrial.

So there's six standards that can be evaluated.

Two, I think really touch on some of the things that we've heard are the concerns about at data centers in this community.

So in the staff report, you'll notice we talk about really a two-step process.

Um really shortly after that November meeting uh staff was directed to to begin the work on the data centers.

Um we kind of pulled apart two different things.

One is uh we think we thought it was very necessary to get conditional use, this conditional use amendment before council because it does put, at the very least, it puts uh the requirement that it has to come to council uh on the books, right?

And so we think that addresses really the core concerns um with the IG zoning and some of the the again that cloudedness of of IG, uh, but also gives council the ability to put conditions and regulate those.

Um in I think a uh in in a in a perfect scenario, uh especially like this with the data center, which is a new and unique type of use, we would also apply a couple different things.

And one of those being um use-specific standards.

And we have a lot of those for uses in that table.

Uh think of those as essentially kind of predetermined conditions for uses, right?

It doesn't matter about permitted or conditional, it's just if you're doing this use in in the city, here's a list of conditions you need to meet.

The second part of that is um some tailored conditional use standards just to the data center use.

Like I said, we do have some tailored uh conditional use standards, one's uh communication towers, the other is short-term rentals.

So it's something that uh allow you to say, all right, we've we spent time looking at this.

We think we know what the criteria are that need to be evaluated.

So we're not going, we don't need the general criteria anymore.

We're gonna be more specific.

Um it doesn't mean that the current standards we we have now can't be used to put conditions and deny a conditional use permit uh by council.

What it does do is though it further clarifies, really, I think for the industry coming into the city, if you're a data center user, you can now look at the specified data center or excuse me, cons uh conditional use criteria and use specific standards and understand better the things that you're gonna be asked to to do if you want to build in the city.

So it clarifies things for them.

So it should result in a more efficient process.

If we use the standards, we we can still get to that same endpoint.

It's just going to be more of a case-by-case basis.

And I think working with utilities and working with I our staff, I think we're fairly confident that we kind of understand some of the the issues around data centers and we can still get to that endpoint.

But we do think in this case it's also beneficial to continue on and come back with that step too with with those um conditional use standards and the use specific standards in addition to doing this step.

So with that being said, uh plan zoning did uh hear this again back in January.

They did vote eight to zero to approve the two text changes, uh, and that would be our recommendation to Council tonight, and I'd be happy to answer any questions.

All right, any questions?

I think there's some questions.

All right.

Uh I'm gonna Nick, I saw the hand first out of the corner of my eye, and then I'll come over here to Vera and Valerie.

Thanks for the presentation.

It's well done.

Uh I'm wondering about the uh the specificity that will occur in the uh UDC through the C UP changes there that will be specific to this use.

And I'm thinking about that largely in sense in terms of how there are different kinds of data centers.

I think the one that most people have the most concerned about are the hyper hyperscale data centers, and we've seen some very concerning stories out of other cities like Memphis, for instance.

But I'm wondering if if the CUP language will be so specific as to address each of these kinds of data centers.

I mean, we have data centers in the city already.

There are of these smaller varieties, correct?

I don't know if I could speak to individual data centers.

Again, it's uh I think that they are there is some, and I wouldn't be surprised if something might meet the definition of data center in the city right now, but I think they're probably on the smaller scale.

They may be ancillary to a use, you know, such as a hospital or a question.

Do you anticipate there might be specificity uh in the definition of the C UP provisions that would get to that level of There could be.

Um I think that it comes a little bit to the demands on uh and for uh utility usage.

Uh I think that's kind of play into that.

Um I don't want to go uh too specific into anything we've looked at.

Some of that is working with the utility department as well, so I don't want to speak for them.

And that's something we'll bring forward here hopefully in the next uh few months.

But it's certainly something, yes, I would say it it it could be considered, but I don't uh and we'll be doing that evaluation and we can have something back again in a few months um that might address that.

We would anticipate largely the focus on the utility usage and that being uh utility and then impacts, I think on surrounding property owners and and again, you know, our staff working on it.

Uh you know, I spoke briefly to them right now.

I haven't quite dove into the research, but it's something we'll we'll uh we'll be pulling together.

We we do hope to have those um to planning and zoning sometime in May for a first look.

So it shouldn't be too much longer before we have a little bit better idea of what our our recommendation is going to be.

Okay.

Thanks.

Yeah.

Um thank you for an incredible in-depth presentation.

This was really helpful.

I'm wondering what it will look like between steps one and two as we wait for those use specific standards and condition conditional use criteria to come through.

Does that mean that while we are in step one and we have the definition, we say it requires a conditional use, but we don't have the criteria for what that conditional use look like.

Would any data centers be able to come through the process while we're waiting for those criteria?

How would they be evaluated, or do we need to put in a temporary moratorium while we're kind of figuring out what step two looks like?

I think our approach was such that we we anticipated this would uh I I don't want to say not require moratorium, but it uses the same conditional use process as all the other conditional uses that are allowed in the city right now.

So they go through an evaluation of that criteria.

And it's it's more of a here's things to think about when you're considering approval.

Like do we have infrastructure?

You know, is it having adversant packs?

Is it is it consistent with our comprehensive plan?

So it's not necessarily a specific list of it must do XYZ.

That could be the use-specific standards.

Um we are also, I think, far enough into our research, and if we actually had an application would then also continue to do additional research on the impacts, and those would come out of this in the form of staff recommended conditions, uh, which can absolutely go along with the conditional use as it is under this proposal.

All right, Valerie.

Thanks.

Yeah, you know, I'm going to a similar place that Vera did.

Um I promise there's a question here.

Um I appreciate the first step.

I support the um definition that you're giving us.

Um and I appreciate that it's meant to be followed by specific criteria.

Um I'm concerned about the time between we the point where we have specific use criteria from planning to evaluate.

Um I understand that we do have kind of the generalized use criteria, um, COP criteria that we use for approval of non-specific uses.

Um I worry about what we are flagging to potential applicants.

Um I want to be incredibly clear about what types of conditions we are willing to consider and what types of conditions are going to be highly skeptical of.

Um I also worry uh there are during the crafting of the specific use process.

We typically have stages of public input.

We have additional research.

Studying that, people who are experts in that field.

And so we have the opportunity to hear from our public what their concerns are before they're attached to a specific case.

To me, just for the communication with the public and the communication to potential applicants.

I think that a moratorium on conditional uses would be reasonable.

What I want to know from staff is after we approve a definition, is this the juncture at which we can suggest a moratorium on the conditional use permit and what form that would take?

So Nancy, you want to.

No, no, I'm I'm just thinking about when you so yes.

This would after what once at the end of the meeting tonight uh would be the time when you would make that request to, and we typically call it an administrative delay as opposed to a moratorium because it's an administrative delay in processing applications for a particular type of um event that you're considering adopting additional regulations on.

So that's that's the um the action that's requested.

And that's something that you could do tonight at the end of the meeting.

Yeah, I would be supportive of that.

I don't want to waste any potential applicants' time by not being clear about what our expectations are up front.

All right, other questions.

Yeah, done.

Um thank you for the list of the definitions from the other communities and states and so on observation.

I would have liked a little larger type font, but that's beside the point.

No.

Um developing specific criteria.

Um either going back to these communities or others.

I'm guessing that you're going to be asking going back to other communities that have gone down a similar path and find out what worked best for them if specific criteria worked for them, what would they have done differently, if anything, um, or a more general rather than getting too specific, a more general approach, such as basically we now have the definition, it now requires a CUP, and we could evaluate what we have under the current criteria that you laid out, the two specific ones that would probably be the largest impact of a data center if we were considering it.

Um I guess so.

My question would be then I'm is that something that you were planning to do?

And if not, I would suggest that we again, those that have gone down a path, what worked for you, what would you have done differently, what could you have done better in hindsight, you know, taking advantage of their experience rather than like you said, our staff is working at it, staff's good, but uh let's also try and bring in some outside uh experience.

Yep.

I I think we can do that on talk staff and see where they're at with that.

It's okay.

Yeah, Jackie, you had a question.

Yes.

Um again, I know this definition stage, but in digging into this, re recognizing that there is um a group called Missouri Partnership that has certified some land as data center potential.

Did not know if that information was included.

I'm also pulling information on them, and it's talking a lot about using Missouri's underground natural cave environments for data centers.

And I don't see that included in the definition as far as using any kind of naturally occurring and I don't again, I don't know if we need to get that specific, but I definitely want to speak about that publicly.

And so I would like for that to be part of the conversation moving forward.

I guess my question is were you aware of this group or have you included that information in the development and consideration of the definition up to this point?

No, I don't think I was specifically aware of that group.

And I think your question is did we look at the potential for underground facilities as part of that?

So we'll go back and take a look at that.

Um since we are bringing another set, if we need to tweak that definition as we go, we can do that.

I you know, it's it's not something that's kind of a one and done.

We can revise as we go.

This is a fairly uh you know newer type use, and I think a lot of communities are are doing the same thing.

Yeah.

Uh oh okay, Nick, um back to the table, uh in IG, I think heavy is it heavy industrial is also uh conditional use.

Correct.

D are there uh use specific standards for that.

No, there are not.

So if you look in the far right, we're using the general uh So that's use specific standards.

So again, that uh that pertains to whether it's a conditional use or not.

So it's across the board.

It is a conditional use though, so when they came uh and applied for that use, we would use that conditional use criteria to evaluate it.

So if you look in the right column here, the use specific standards, again, those are kind of standalone specific conditions that are kind of pre-put in the in in the code.

Uh conditional use allows you to put additional conditions on based on certain criteria.

So kind of they work together, but they are kind of distinct.

Think of use specific standards as, well, we've gone through conditional uses and we know these are the conditions we want.

Let's make them part of the code.

So they're they're there for everyone to see all the time.

I'm guessing I guess I wonder I'm wondering whether heavy industry um would be different from what we would do with data centers in that case.

Yeah, heavy industry thinking more extraction mines and uh solid waste facilities, I think is probably within that heavy industry.

So a little bit different from data centers.

But in terms of their consideration, if they if they were if there were someone who would come and they have would the would the process be similar or dissimilar if we are going to further define what a C UP would be in a data center.

The process of applying for a heavy industry would be the same as what we would be going through right now for uh data center.

Yes, thanks.

So um I have just a couple of questions.

Uh so Clean, um so first off, when you say utility, right?

So are those criteria that we have for conditional use permit for what you're proposing, um sufficient infrastructure and um and and adequate utilities.

Do you all and it says like storm drainage, do you include in your in as your staff reviewing of this um like our stormwater utility and the water quality in the MS MS4 permit that we're under in an evaluation over meeting this criteria?

Uh yes.

So generally we would um circulate any plans, a new application uh that came into the city um for this type of use would be circulated to all our review groups or all our departments, all our utilities, and they would have a chance to look at that.

So they would evaluate it to see if it still fits within kind of our I think our typical storm drainage requirements.

I think given uh, say for instance data centers, if it is a high water usage, I think that's going to probably key them in to look at how they are also disposing of that water.

So through the storm drainage uh utility.

So they would be part of that evaluation and review process, yes.

Okay.

And then my second one, and and you started off the staff presentation on this topic.

Um the intent behind why this is coming to us before step two is because of our vacancy.

Can you explain a more our vacancy rate for industrial zoned parcels?

What is it in comparison to our state and kind of average and this is basically I guess I'm trying to figure out is the intent for this coming to us to allow us to rezone to IG without the concerns over data centers because they probably won't yes, that that that's exactly correct.

So I think even if you took away the concerns about data centers, if there is a concern about zoning property into IG within the community, again, that kind of clouds the ability for us to actually look at new opportunities for IG, which which I think is appropriate.

My colleague here would actually uh probably be able to chime in a little bit, uh Mr.

Eisenstein uh with ready uh about I think the importance of having IG ready zoning, uh zone property within the community.

Uh I think based on some of the research we'd had uh we'd seen done here in the community, we have about a two percent vacancy rate.

And for minor saying that's fairly low.

I don't know if Paul can talk about that a little bit more, but I think that uh even outside the data center conversation uh I think would inform us that uh you know we need to be pursuing or not pursuing, but also looking at opportunities for uh increase of that zoning district in particular, given it's important to the I think the economic future of the city.

Okay.

And then I'm assuming Paul's there because he knows what the Missouri Partnership is.

I'm assuming that's also why he's sitting there.

Yes, it is, yep.

Can I answer the question that Jackie had?

Um maybe I'll clarify just Missouri Partnership and certified sites, and then would love to hear that question again if that's okay.

Um so Paul Eisenstein, economic development department director.

And so just to clarify, it's the Missouri Department of Economic Development that certifies sites.

These are sites that could be industrial for commercial uses, 25 acres or more.

So the department, the state agency certifies those.

The Missouri Partnership is a separate organization that markets those sites, and their goal is to help bring industry into our state.

And so if there's a certified site, that just means that those are considered like shovel ready.

These are sites that there's been environmental work, engineering work done.

It's it's seen as a site, it kind of meets a various thresholds.

It's a five-page application where um if a site is certified, it can be seen as a good fit for industrial development.

So I just want to clarify that it's the state, the State's Department of Economic Development that certifies an Missouri partnership will market those sites.

So is the State Department condoning the use of Missouri caves for data centers?

Can you answer that question?

No, I can't speak to that.

I'm sorry.

I didn't figure, but I just kind of want to make that point.

But uh if if you have information, I'd love to see more and would love to discuss.

Okay, thank you.

Yeah, awesome.

Um do you want to speak to the vacation?

What is the average vacancy rate for industrial in the state?

Or I think you said I mean I think I think uh it's on Clint's presentation is 2.5 percent um here locally.

I think that was for Columbia, or was that Boone County?

Uh that is probably Boone County.

Oh no, I think it's a city and national average is seven and a half percent.

Okay.

Um we've got low, and I I'll just I'll just make a point on on sites.

So the Missouri Partnership, which markets um you know, opportunities and their typical industrial uh site that that uh they have they provide requests for information.

They're looking for 65 acres or more, and uh we only have one site in Boone County that actually kind of achieves that threshold.

So we are low on industrial sites.

Okay.

Yeah.

Any other questions for staff before we open up?

Yeah, Mallory.

Yeah.

So I want to focus again on the rationale behind having a definition now.

Um and as you say, part of that is um making it giving the public more confidence in approving IG applications because they know there's a COP involved.

Um the other thing I wanted to ask, you know, this came forward to us because of a rezoning application to IG.

There was a lot of discomfort in the public about that because the feeling was that they never would have found out about the intent to put a data center if it wasn't a rezoning application.

And the landowner said that he wanted to do a data center voluntarily.

Um otherwise that never would have come up.

Um so um by creating a definition and making it a conditional use, does that change when and how the public is notified for of an application for a CUP?

Uh yes, substantially.

Um if there is an existing IG site right now, there would be notification, there's no oversight, and uh a data center could be located on that um property as of right now.

So by moving that into a conditional use status, um that really triggers the entire public hearing process and plan zoning and city council involvement.

So we would be notifying all the property owners within 185 feet of that application.

And again, it would have to come to council and would need approval by council before they could actually implement a data center on any property if this bill were to pass tonight.

Any other questions for staff?

Yeah, done.

Can we go back to the proposed definition?

So I think what we're almost not specifically said, but what we're inferring here is that the primary purpose of this of this structure would be to process data.

Correct.

Okay.

And I could see not putting a percentage, you know there, because then you could work around that.

You know, and yeah.

To the question about do we have a data center?

Yes.

I mean, frankly, our friends down the street, MU.

You know, they have one building where they have all their servers, it's in the basement.

They also have their management.

So it's tech so technically it wouldn't fall into this uh definition that we have.

Um I guess the question would be if we're looking at adopting this definition.

Like I said, it's inferred, and I think we all agree the inference is that it's primarily used for data storage manipul data.

Um would there be any benefit to trying to work language in like that, or is it better just kind of the generic that we've got?

And I guess maybe that's more a question for Nancy, you know, if it came down to a legal challenge.

Going with what we have here, being a little being better than trying to be a little more, it must, you know, if it's over 75 percent has to be data for it to be classified as a data center or something like that.

And I think until um staff has had a chance to actually analyze what those criteria are that we're better off to leave leave this language and analyze them on a case-by-case basis.

That's not the best practice, which is why um staff wants to come back with those more specific those more specific guidelines.

Going forward, yeah.

Going forward.

But this still would allow you the flexibility to approve something if if in fact.

If someone came forward and said that it was going to be a data center, predominantly data, whatever, then we would it would come back to us because they would require the C UP.

Correct.

It would require the C it requires the C UP.

Yeah.

Okay.

So again, I've gone down a couple of wormholes.

Um is this data center definition broad enough to include AI inference centers, which is different than a data center?

It it consumes much more power, is my understanding.

I don't know what an AI and can you expand upon what that is.

It's it's basically the AI generation.

I'll read the definition.

Um sometimes called AI factories or inference clusters or specialized type of facility purpose-built for running AI models, specifically the process of inference, which means taking a trained AA model and using it to generate responses or predictions in real time.

And it talks about there's a difference in hardware, different in workload, um, dramatically more power per square foot than a traditional data center.

Yeah, I I would think that that's gonna fall.

I think I think you're hitting on it though.

I think that is where we've seen this dramatic uh increase in attention to data centers.

We've had data centers around for a long time.

You know, think of cloud computing.

Um, but now AI has really changed the scale of data centers because they are using dramatically more power for the same, I think, area than what data centers previously have been using.

But to answer the question, absolutely.

I think anything to do with AI, if it is digital data, and and this falls under uh anything necessary for the the digital data operations, I think that speaks to AI.

I mean, that is essentially what they're doing.

They're training the AI model and they need massive amounts of computing power in which to do so, that absolutely I think would fall within this definition.

All right.

Any other questions for staff on this?

All right.

Would anyone from the public wish to speak on Bill 6226?

I feel like I should be like step one.

Uh my name is James Gordon, and I'm speaking on behalf of Missouri Rural Crisis Center.

So if we could have extra time.

Yes, they'll add the two if they don't already.

They did.

Um so we are a statewide member-based organization with a four-decade record of advocating for policies that preserve family farms and independent livestock production, promote stewardship of the land, support safe, affordable, high-quality food supply, and defend justice and economic opportunity for both rural and urban communities.

Columbia is and always has been our hometown.

So last fall, of course, we were proud to show up in solidarity with farmers and other Columbia residents to sound the alarm about the risk of allowing new data center development to proceed unabated.

Once again, we thank the members of this council for listening to our urgent concerns and directing further research into this emerging issue.

We also command the city staff and our planning and zoning commissioners for their diligent follow-through.

We support this proposal, which adds data center as a defined industrial land use if for no other reason then we will have better notice next time.

We support requiring conditional permitting for this newly defined use.

And we look forward to the next phase when we can all dig into the nitty-gritty criteria of use specific standards for these facilities.

Because we are in the middle of this legislative process with the most critical and detailed work still ahead of us, and because we're already in the midst of a data center development frenzy, we believe at this time it would be wise for this council to approve a temporary moratorium on this new type of land use in our community.

This moratorium should remain in effect until we have common sense safeguards and that are fully in place.

We need tight restrictions on the duration, time of day, and type of fuel allowed for on-site power generation.

We are concerned that our current restrictions are not sufficiently clear and strong, and they absolutely need to be.

Data centers are bottomless energy pits, and their operators will take the quickest, cheapest electrons they can get.

Usually this means deploying their own diesel or methane-powered turbines, which will be loud, will pollute our air, and will erase all progress our cities climate on our city's climate action plan.

I believe Councilman Foster mentioned what was been going on down, what has been going on down in Memphis, and that's exactly what's on my mind.

We also need to protect our water.

The cooling systems and AI data centers need massive amounts of water, and that water is when it is discharged is often superheated and or polluted with contaminants that cause cancer and other health health issues.

Finally, we need to protect Columbia's taxpayers and utility customers from bearing any cost to build and operate data centers.

These facilities are privately owned and they are operated primarily for the benefit of multinational corporations.

They need to cover, and so they need to cover their own operating expenses and they need to be good neighbors.

They do not have a right to raid our public goods, wreck our natural resources, and leave us to pick up the TAV and clean up the mess.

That's not the sort of economic development that any of us want.

In closing, let me reiterate MRCC supports our city's progress on this urgent issue, and the most critical steps of this process are still ahead of us.

You have the opportunity tonight to allow more time for city staff and our appointed commissioners and your fellow council members to finish this job thoughtfully and carefully.

You can vote tonight to simply hit pause on risky data center development until we can proceed with the full confidence of having a tight permitting process.

Thank you again for your attention and diligence and responsiveness on this issue.

I'm happy to address any questions you have at this time.

Thanks, James.

Thank you.

Would anyone else from the public wish to speak?

Good evening.

My name is Tyler Travers here tonight to speak on behalf of Renew Missouri, if I may please have five minutes, Madam Mayor.

Thank you.

Renew Missouri is a nonprofit based here in Columbia up the road.

We promote renewable energy and energy efficiency across the state.

We are supportive of implementing this definition and we appreciate the council for bringing this forward.

Recognizing, of course, this is step one out of two, and that at a future date we will come back and establish specific use standards for this definition of a data center.

Within those specific use standards, we would recommend that Columbia take a step forward as an example for the state and recommend that renewable requirements be placed in.

We mentioned Memphis earlier, Memphis.

They use dirty gas plants because it was uh one of the strongest forms of power, but also it pollutes their community and hurts their health care.

Um I also uh on behalf of Renew, we recommend that consumer protections like the previous witness recommended.

Um these centers require a lot of energy that's very expensive, and we don't want that to be passed on to other ratepayers in the city.

As a municipal utility, we have a um a very unique circumstance where we control our own utility and we can implement these standards.

Um we also, as I said, we're just up the road in Columbia.

We have attorneys who've worked at the public service commission previously, and uh we'd be happy to be a resource.

Um, furthermore, we also would echo the sentiments from the previous speaker that we would support a temporary moratorium until those use standards are in place.

Um we think that that it might be a simple uh stop gap just until those are implemented.

And I might recommend that you do have the ability to do that now here on this motion.

Article 2, Section 2-58 of the city code does allow you to amend this motion here on the dais instead of waiting until the end of the meeting.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Would anybody else from the public wish to speak on Bill 6226?

Hello, my name is Kevin Hall.

Uh I have property in Ward 3.

I agree with all of the concerns.

I agree with the excuse me.

I agree with the um that maybe need to be taken.

Um I have and I have a couple of questions because my property has been certified by the state of Missouri as a data center property.

I don't know if my grant my property would grandfather in without having to have these new restrictions or definitions.

Um I think the city was involved in this as well as far as certifying a site for data center.

And I'm not sure, but I think possibly the city or myself and the city needs to meet to talk about some of these issues.

Uh maybe more of an individual setting than tonight.

But I have I have the same concerns.

The power, I'm not sure, or I don't hear anyone talking about the availability of power cells.

Uh there's a new company in Canada that has uh a power generation cell about the size of a pickup, and you can stack them.

They would from my understanding, uh, you would be able to generate enough power to power the city and the data center and another city the same size as Columbia with a stack of these about the size of one acre.

Um I'm not very familiar with them, but I do know there's a can a company in Canada that is inventing this type of a power cell.

There's one here in the states as well.

I just read about it earlier today.

So the power concern for the data center in Columbia, I think with a lot of uh research could be uh a nothing because the data centers I believe have been uh recently um instructed or required to provide their own power by the federal government.

Uh I think that the president signed a bill most recently that is going to require the data centers to provide their own power and maybe even enough power to uh provide power back to the grid and overproduction of power.

Uh so the power issue, the water issue.

Uh I would think that it would be depending on uh site specific, because sites can build lakes that hold millions and millions of gallons of water that they can draw from and recycle through.

I get it.

Yeah, thank you.

But I think we'll probably have staff follow up with you after this as well.

I think that would be great.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

Okay, Kevin.

Yeah.

Would anyone else from the public wish to speak on Bill 6226?

Eugene Elkin's second ward.

We're hearing a lot of details tonight, and I sure appreciate each one of you speaking up because the more questions you ask, you will eventually get common sense.

It might be time to stop the train before it runs off the tracks.

Recently in the last week, someone came on late night radio talking about this very concept and how it currently is in a very best word chosen, dumb situation at this time.

I don't know how it's going to all turn out.

But my point is let's not focus on light industry, but accept the fact it could very well be heavy industry.

Why would I say that?

Heavy usage of water, heavy usage of electricity.

Columbia is known for having electricity go off quite often.

You're trying to spend all this money on the South End for new electricity.

What if what you're up to does not prove to be enough to generate to keep this thing going?

Yes, we're learning tonight there's different levels of them.

I say go zero.

Show the nation that you all really don't need one because it's not job creating, it's inside that building until we don't need you.

How many jobs are going to get eliminated when Columbia needs all the jobs it can get?

The actual exposure to high levels of electricity does cause cancer.

Previous speakers just said it's going to generate cancer-causing situations.

This thing has got all the remnants of fast sale.

Somebody's going to make a big dollar, and uh the rest of America will never know what we just did.

Please use your common sense to shut her down.

Thank you.

Would anyone else from the public wish to speak on Bill 6226, the UDC text change for defining data center?

Not general public comment yet.

Yep.

All right.

I'm going to come back to uh council council comments, council questions on this.

Um do you want to speak first to the question about the certification again on that, or do you want to just follow up with the um the quote the person who asked the question?

Yeah.

We can probably just follow up.

I think we follow up.

Yeah.

I would like to understand more.

Yeah, well, I think that would be useful.

Yes.

Thank you.

Additional, yeah, Nick.

After we had that vote back in November, I went to the National League of Cities meeting, both Don and Betsy were there too.

And Betsy and I attended a session about data centers.

Uh there was someone there from Memphis, and I kind of felt sorry for him.

Uh and I think there are several things that stood out to me about that.

One is they they have a program down there they called Digital Delta, which is a program to encourage tech sector growth.

I think that's part of the reason that, you know, uh X was drawn to the area was to do this exactly.

Um data centers can be built by right in heavy industrial zones, and that's where that was happening.

This the um I guess it wasn't the license, but the um It was approved in 10 days once it was once it was uh proposed.

It was approved in 10 days, and the reason for that was they were fast tracking these kinds of things.

My suspicion is you'll find a lot of people in Memphis who really regret that and wish that they hadn't done what they did in the way of setting this thing up in a way that it would.

One of the things I like about this is there's no question but that it would slow down the development of a data center in our uh community.

Uh so it's it's easy to be supportive of this uh and uh learning the lessons that others hopefully are are uh can teach us about this and that others will pay attention in a similar way.

I had a question.

Nancy, can you speak to the our potential like kind of this is one step of this, but also the conversation over an administrative delay and how how to make that request?

Yes, I um I had typed up kind of a motion for administrative delay.

And what it is is basically administrative delay is a request or an it's an it's an entire separate ordinance that we would draft, setting out the background and criteria for what it is and the rationale for directing staff not to process applications for either conditional use permit or a building permit uh in those areas which may already be um adequately zoned for for a uh a data center.

Now, what this does is it puts in a conditional use requirement, but if someone were to try to make the argument that they should just be able to get a building permit, it would also we would we would lay that that on to in the ordinance as well.

So, and it delays it for a set period of time, um, which is important.

We can't just be from administrative delay purposes because you are um basically stopping an action.

You're you're trying to while um while you're considering what those additional regulations would be.

And so what you want to do is is put a pause or a pin in it while um you develop those additional regulations so that you maintain the status quo.

That's the whole purpose of an administrative delay, is not really to permanently stop, but to put a pin in it while you consider what additional regulations go in.

So you say for a period of time in you in Clinton, you referred to that this will be coming back to the Planning and Zoning Commission from staff to them, you know, which is just in one month.

And you know, when we talked about administrative delays a few years ago, Nancy, you kind of gave the recommendation of like a six-month of that.

Is that an expect time that we could expect something to come back to council for approval so we would have those?

Because I I think my concern is what if we do this and we're we're working through the process and then administrative delay goes, I don't I uh you know, worst case scenario.

We can always come back to you and say staff is working on this, we've had hiccups, it's gonna take longer than what we thought.

We'd like to extend it longer than six months.

I mean, we want we want a a reasonable expectation of what it would be.

You don't want to overestimate because you are actually dealing again with property rights.

So you want to just you want to try to figure out what that what that sweet spot is.

Um but we have had administrative delays in the past where we have extended them.

We've come back to council and say, you know, we're still working on this, we need some additional time.

Here's what we anticipate it it being.

Did you want to speak to that?

Yeah, I'd say six months is a minimum would be um a good estimate for us.

There is some additional work that needs to be done.

We'll have a work session with planning and zoning again, hopefully in May.

Uh we we anticipate, I think given the interest here, there would likely be uh be heard opportunity to provide feedback, public hearings and planning zoning and then commission.

So six months I think is a reasonable estimate for us right now.

But you know, to Nancy's point, if there are delays or if there's additional steps we want to go through that we may come back and ask for extension lab.

So I have two questions.

Um my first question, as opposed to setting a six-month delay, is it reasonable for us to set an administrative delay on processing COPAS until such a time that the CUP criteria is approved by council?

You actually have to have an expiration of the administrative delay in order to make it valid, but it can it can be set out as far as you know, six months, nine months.

That it will take to bring back those regulations for council to consider.

And it can be extended.

So that's the key, but it does have to have a date certain at the end.

I have some experience on administrative delays while CUP criteria is out.

Um that was extended once and then expired before we approved the criteria.

Um I'm not saying I want to overestimate um, but I am urging um expeditious review.

Um well, to that point, I mean, and Clint, to your the expectation of time, would you recommend a nine-month or you know what I mean?

Would you recommend what would be your recommended time that you think realistically the criteria could come back for council approval?

Uh I think that six months again, we discussed that internally today that that's um kind of a reasonable expectation.

But again, there's so many variables uh that go into this that I can't I can't be for sure.

So there may be an extension needed at some point.

This is not the only thing we've talked about in six months.

So I think come October we might be asking for just to clear, you know what I mean, have maybe even September an update on whether or not we need to have that come back to us for an extension and just make sure it's put into the kind of council tracker that we don't drop that one.

Um She was nodding her head and she won't let us forget.

My second question um was about the timing of the motion.

Um this is a second motion and not a amended motion.

Is there any reason since it's related to this agenda item, we can't make the motion for administrative delay or to request an administrative delay now because the people who came out to hear this agenda item are here now, and I don't want to keep them here all night.

We've done that before.

We did that when we requested the cops you kind thing to come back to us a few years ago, like right after the agenda conversation around.

You could do it after you've taken the vote on this if you want to instead of pushing if the council wants to.

I mean, typically we do those at the end of the meeting, but um, if it if council is agreeable to take that item up, that's something that you can do as a council.

Pretty long agenda.

What you can't do is you can't actually if you if you change the substance of this bill, um, there is a separate city code provision, which is section 2-85, and it's a if it's a change in substance of the bill.

Um it's required, this particular bill is required to lay over for an additional week, so you would not be able to actually vote on it this evening.

So that's one reason why we we try not to um add those kinds of items the night that you're um considering passing.

Right, because that hasn't been advertised as well.

Correct.

I'm hearing a lot of support for the actual bill that's in front of us.

Any other council comments?

Yeah, done.

Just a couple points of clarification.

If regarding the administrative delay.

Um you mentioned the C UP process.

Would that also would it just be for a C UP for a data center, or would it be any C UP?

No, this would just be I have a vision just for this.

Yes, okay, good.

And it might be worth yeah, clarifying it's a moratorium on processing building permits and conditional use permits for data.

So that okay.

So are so then are we suspending all building permits?

No.

Just for example.

And we have we don't have a motion on the table.

So I understand that.

I just want to make sure it's clear because the way she said it, you could interpret it as if it's if it's rezoned IG, good luck, you're sitting there for six months.

Yeah.

No.

Okay.

Conditional use permits for the operation of data centers.

Okay is the way that we're gonna do that.

As long as we're clear and specific on that because I get your concern.

Yeah.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Any other council comments or questions on this one?

Yeah, Jackie.

I'm going back to word choice because that seems to be one of my roles on this council.

Um, so does when we say administrative delay in Columbia, is that equal to moratorium?

Um in Missouri, Missouri, there is uh case law in Missouri that says that moratoriums are not lawful in the state of Missouri.

So what we use is we use the phrase administrative delay.

So that is my preferred language.

If you all want to insist on moratorium, we can use moratorium, but I really would advise you to use the phrase administrative delay.

I appreciate the clarification because I was worried about the the where the council input comes in because the administrative delay is a little bit more flexible and city staff can kind of make decisions without council input necessarily, where a moratorium requires council vote.

No, they both do.

They'll both require council vote.

Right.

Okay.

So we'll get it before it would expire.

What the administrative delay does is it makes it clear that you are really restricting staff's ability to take administrative action to process a um a building permit or a conditional use permit.

It won't even get to you as a body.

But the administrative or a data for a data center.

Yes.

And it is it is it is for those specific purposes.

And so all that gets spelled out in a um ordinance that comes before you, and you'll be able to see that language very specifically.

So what you would do this evening is direct staff to come back with an ordinance which would then enact that administrative delay.

So there is still a delay before when that's going to happen.

So staff has got to have the opportunity to draft that ordinance and bring it back to you for consideration.

So all you're all you would be doing tonight is providing direction via motion to come back with an ordinance.

Thank you.

Any other comments on the definition that is in Okay.

Um Sheila, will you please call roll on bill 6226?

Council Bill 6226, Mr.

Waterman.

Yes.

Ms.

Peters?

Yes.

Ms.

Buffalo?

Yes.

Ms.

Carroll?

Yes.

Ms.

Elwood?

Yes.

Ms.

Sample?

Yes.

Mr.

Foster.

Yes.

All right.

Before we move on, um, there's been discussion over a motion.

So uh I'll make a motion for staff to bring back an ordinance imposing an administrative delay on the processing of any applications for issuance of conditional use permit and or building permit for construction or operation of a data center for a six-month period in order to maintain the status quo while specific use standards are being developed and come to council.

Do I have a second?

Seconds.

I'm gonna give it to Vera.

You didn't say anything earlier.

I'm just kidding, Betsy.

I'm trying to be helpful.

Any discussion on the motion on the table.

All right.

Uh yeah, Nick.

Is is this gonna be is this this will cover all types of data centers then?

That fall within the definition that we just gave.

So we just approved.

Okay.

Right.

All right.

So we have a motion and a second.

Any more discussion?

All right.

All those in favor of the request for staff to come back with an ordinance, say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

Appreciate that.

Thank you for this.

Thank you for for everyone.

All right.

So moving on.

Sheila, will you read Bill 7726?

Council Bill 7726 is an ordinance authorizing a memorandum of understanding with the curators of the University of Missouri on behalf of the University of Missouri Columbia and Downtown Community Improvement District associated with the block by block ambassador program.

Amending the FY2026 annual budget by appropriating funds in the amount of 168,130 and one cent and fixing the time when this ordinance shall become effective.

Second reading.

Do we have a staff report as soon as my computer loads, sorry.

It locks every time I close it.

Which is a great cybersecurity measure.

I'm not talking bad about it.

So staff is requesting council to approve authorizing the city manager to execute this MOU, and it's between the city, the downtown CID, and the University of Missouri to establish shared governance and cost participation for the downtown ambassador program and appropriate for funds for first year cost.

The downtown CID is actually entering into the contract with block by block.

This is just an MOU between the three of us for the cost sharing and kind of how the program will work.

It's renewed.

We're not locked in for five years.

It's kind of a year by year.

There's a 60-day with 60-day notice we can pull out and then just pay a prorated amount.

So it's definitely not something we're locked into.

The downtown ambassador program is meant to supplement.

It's non-law enforcement public safety and intended to enhance the safety, security, and overall visitor experience in downtown Columbia.

It's designed to support and supplement existing law enforcement services rather than replace the efforts of the Columbia Police Department or MUPD.

Representatives from the city, downtown CID, and University of Missouri discussed the possibility of adopting this program after attending the Columbia Chamber of Commerce leadership visit in Columbia, South Carolina in October of 2025 and hearing about the long-term success the program had in that community.

Program will consist of uniformed ambassadors employed by block by block who will patrol the downtown area, interact with businesses, residents, and visitors, and serve as additional eyes and ears for public safety concerns.

So some of the key functions was there's an actual longer list in one of the exhibits, but some of the key functions are conducting walking and bicycle patrols throughout the service area to provide visible presidents and deter unwanted activity.

Perform public relations checks at downtown businesses, providing a regular point of contact for safety and community concerns.

Conduct outreach with homeless individuals in order to connect them with appropriate service providers.

Address quality of life issues such as public intoxication and open containers, trespassing and similar minor offenses through education and voluntary compliance.

Provide after hours safety escorts for downtown employees or visitors as requested.

Share safety and security information with local law enforcement and provide documentation of incidents or concerns.

Delivering hospitality and visitor assistance, acting as friendly, approachable representatives for the downtown district, and documenting items such as non-working lighting, graffiti trash, or other concerns and forwarding to the appropriate party.

So under the MOU, the CID is going to serve as the primary program administrator and manage day-to-day operations.

They will provide quarterly reports to the city and MU.

The City and MU will each contribute one-third of the program's annual costs, supported the program financially while CID manages implementation through the block-by-block contract.

This program's been in Columbia, South Carolina, I believe, since 2002, and there's several other cities.

There's actually a map on the website, but there's several other what I would consider university-based cities that have been using their services for some time.

And I am happy to answer any questions.

Excuse me.

Any questions for staff on this?

Yeah, Valerie.

Yeah, I'm pretty excited about this.

We talked a bit about how our efforts downtown are addressing both the perception of safety as well as public safety itself.

I think this is a good program for both.

I asked earlier in the council questions about how long the term of the contract of the MOU would be and where in the budget it would come from if we renew for additional years.

I'm just wondering if you could repeat that for me so the public hears.

Sure.

So we're asking for the first year to come out of the general fund reserves, and then after that, we would just ask that to be added to the police department's budget every year as an extra line item.

Thanks.

Any other questions for staff on this one?

All right.

Does anyone from the public wish to speak on Bill 7726?

Come on up to the podium.

Hello, I'm Laura Pieper.

I am the chair of the district downtown CID board, speaking on their behalf.

Downtown has grown, and with that growth comes a responsibility to evolve how we support safety with our residents, businesses, and visitors.

Tonight we're asking that you support a partnership between the City of Columbia, the University of Missouri, and the district to bring the block by block safety ambassador program to our community.

This is a shared investment, each partner contributing one-third, creating a stronger, more coordinated approach to downtown safety.

This program places six safety trained safety ambassadors on the ground during our busiest hours, Thursday through Sunday, 5 p.m.

to 3 a.m., serving as additional eyes and ears for the Columbia Police Department.

They are not enforcement, they are prevention.

They assist with safe rides home, ensuring lighting issues are reported, and help with permanent activity like food carts, and most importantly, they address small issues before they become larger ones.

In addition, this program includes a full-time outreach ambassador, expanding on over 10 years of work the district has already been doing to support individuals experiencing homelessness and mental health crises with compassion and consistency.

This program allows our police officers to focus on enforcement and emergencies while ambassadors handle the everyday issues that build into bigger problems.

And it works.

Block by Bach operates in over 170 communities across the country.

We've seen it firsthand in places like Columbia, South Carolina and New Orleans during major events like Mardi Gras.

What makes this even more impactful is the partnership.

The City of Columbia and the University of Missouri working together as true partners, demonstrating a shared commitment to safer, stronger Columbia.

That is what collaboration should look like.

We will manage this program locally, ensuring full transparency and provide regular public reporting so our community can see exactly how this program is working.

To the public listening tonight, this program is for you.

For your employees leaving late shifts, for your customers enjoying downtown, for your families who deserve to feel safe here.

This is proactive, this is collaborative, and this is the next step forward for downtown Columbia.

If we want a safe downtown, we can't just react.

We have to show up before problems start.

And we are ready to launch within six weeks of approval.

We respectfully ask for your support.

Thank you.

Thank you, Laura.

Would anyone else from the public wish to speak on Bill 7726?

Jill, can you advance the slide one just so we're not talking about P and Z or never mind.

Sorry, Matt.

There you go.

Speaking on behalf of the Columbia Chamber of Commerce.

Uh just about this time last year, uh, the Columbia Missouri Chamber of Commerce chose Columbia, South Carolina as the location that we would like to study.

The city was selected because we wanted to understand how other communities approach public safety and crime prevention uh in a coordinated manner.

Our group of 70 had the opportunity to see firsthand the success of the block by block program, how this program supports law enforcement and the social service community while increasing perception of safety in a unified manner.

Um we we came to understand that this program was a best practice.

Uh we got to see firsthand the successes that came out of Columbia, South Carolina, and we support this wholeheartedly uh in support of the downtown and our business community.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Would anyone else wish to speak to Bill 7726?

Seeing none, uh go to council comments or additional follow-up questions if anyone has.

Yeah.

Valerie?

And I'll give some comments as well afterwards.

Um I've heard some back and forth on the time that's planned to operate.

Um initially you wanted to avoid, I want to say, some of the later hours of downtown evening.

Um I think now we're shifted a little bit more towards the 5 to 3 a.m.

Um and I want to know more about um what the thought process is behind that shift and if we're able to like does our contract specify times or are we able to adjust as need?

Um if we're able to like does our contract specify times or are we able to adjust as need.

So the contract that block by block and CID have, there is some flexibility in there.

It lays out some ways they can go about adjusting the times, but I think that's a topic that will be regularly revisited based on our feedback and then the feedback of the ambassadors.

I think that could also be seasonal from my view and kind of the way the cycles run downtown.

You know, initially when this program was brought up years and years ago, we were very hesitant.

And I think it has become so prolific in so many cities, frankly, cities that are much larger than ours and have larger downtowns.

I think the training that the folks get and the fact that they are clearly not police officers gives me less pause about the hours.

Uh and obviously having officers downtown will help that as well.

But I think it'll be a watch and see kind of approach, especially with the data collection that's coming in.

If there's just not that much activity that they're engaging in at a certain time, we'll be able, I think, adjust those hours.

The question about officers downtown brought me to another question.

Uh, where are we on our downtown precinct?

I think we were considering that as we were increasing staffing.

The downtown unit?

Yes.

So uh unfortunately, not unfortunately for them, but we've had some retirements in the past couple months.

And we've also had some extra people out on military leave and injury leave status.

So we're not we my ask of my folks as always, I don't want to do something and then have to undo it four or five weeks later because of we can't answer 911 calls.

And I also feel very strongly with the downtown unit that it can't be two officers working together.

They really need to have a team to make this work.

Um I'm not big on doing things halfway when it comes to things like this.

Um it won't be perfect, it won't be the number of people we'd probably ideally want, but I'd really like to have six officers and a supervisor to make it work.

And so since we're not going to be there this summer, uh Assistant Chief Fitzgerald has made a recommendation that I'm planning on accepting as far as in the interim, upstaffing the downtown beat during the bar hours is like we call them.

Uh so in the interim, adding more officers to what we call beat 70 D is in David, which is the downtown district, uh, to assist during those times kind of as an interim step with the hope that when the current crop of folks that gets out of the academy and training in the fall/slash winter will be able to revisit that again.

Thanks.

You want to make your comments now too?

Um I'm really excited to see this come forward.

Um I think we've been talking about it for a long time.

Um the comments that Laura made about this being a collaboration really hit home for me.

Um I think this is an important step as a collaboration between the CID and the city as well as the university.

Um this is one of the more concrete and positive things that I've seen come from this collaboration.

Um I think it has the ability to um really improve uh how people feel about downtown and improve experiences.

I look forward to having interaction with business owners, having people to walk to cars available.

Um I think that's all very important.

Um so I'm excited to further that collaboration.

And I hope that we um, especially between the city, myself and the CID uh continue to keep those communication lines open.

The other counsel, yeah, Betsy.

Sort of have a question and then well, mainly probably a question.

Um 5 p.m.

to 3 a.m.

Thursday, Friday, and Saturday nights is what that we're starting with.

What about the rest of the week?

Do we will we have no one or will they be shorter times or they're actually full-time employees, so those the sample schedule that's in the contract is four tens.

Um and I think they were looking, I think they put on their Thursday through Sunday.

That would not probably be my recommendation.

I would probably put Wednesday through Saturday.

But that's not a con that's not a concrete schedule, it's just kind of an example.

Where we start and then see Yes.

And I think we're gonna have quite a bit of flexibility in that.

The other thing is too, you know, depending on the night, the the officers at work downtown know certain nights, certain areas are busier than others.

And so getting them and engaged in, okay, this night this bar is busier, and then after bars, this is where everybody goes and eats, and so you kind of got to shift.

And I think they have as part of the budget as well, like a uh ATV type vehicle that they're going to utilize as well, I think was in there.

So lots of options as far as that goes.

But the schedule is very flexible, and I think we're going to have a lot of input into that based on our observations.

Okay.

Thank you.

Other questions first?

Yeah.

Or comments too.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Mine is just a comment, which is to say I am incredibly excited about this program, both the collaboration piece of it.

Um, but I think Laura hit it right hit the nail right on the head when she said it is a focus on prevention, not enforcement.

And that is one of the things that we have heard from the community over and over and over that they want to see downtown, um, that they want to see people stepping in before it rises to the level that CPD is having to step in and enforce something.

Um, that we want to see people building relationships with the businesses and also building relationships with our constituents that are frequentors of downtown on the weekend evenings.

Um building relationships to help connect people to the services that they need to help prevent that interaction with law enforcement from happening in the first place is gonna make everyone safer.

Um also as someone who've spent about a year managing a store downtown, I would have been very grateful to have someone to walk me to my car on those evening shifts.

So I'm personally grateful for that one.

Yeah.

Any other counsel comments, questions on this?

All right.

Sheila, will you please call roll on bill 78 Oh, sorry, 7726?

Council Bill 7726, Mr.

Waterman.

Yes.

Ms.

Peters?

Yes.

Ms.

Buffalo?

Yes.

Ms.

Carroll.

Yes.

Ms.

Selwood?

Yes.

Ms.

Sample.

Yes.

Mr.

Foster.

Yes.

All right.

Appreciate that.

Thank you all.

All right.

So moving on, we had one item pulled from the consent that wins to go into old business.

So Sheila, will you please read Bill 7826?

Council Bill 7826 is an ordinance approving a First Amendment to redevelopment agreement with Broadway Lodging to LLC and Columbia TIFF Corporation to relating to the Broadway Hotel Phase 2 redevelopment plan and project.

Authorizing the issuance of tax increment revenue notes to provide funds to finance and refinance certain redevelopment project costs and approving certain actions in connection with the issuance of the notes.

And fixing the time when this ordinance shall become effective second reading.

Yeah, Jim McDonald assistant finance director.

So this is basically just an amendment to the ATIF agreement that was approved by council in 2018.

Essentially the developers successfully completed the redevelopment project in accordance with the agreement.

However, they did not request the issuance of the notes at that time, and the developer is now requesting that the city issue the notes to finance and refinance the project's cost.

And I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Yes.

So I just think it's because this feels like a little bit of a different conversation regarding money.

First things first, this is not taxpayer money that is being sent.

Yeah, that's correct.

No city money is going to this.

Okay.

So I wanted to clarify that first.

But then just some additional questions.

So does the original uh 2018 agreement obligate the city to pay back all of the interest in this situation, or is this a new thing that we're doing?

It's it's a new thing, but at the request of the uh developer to uh the structure of the loan, yeah.

Okay.

Um I can clarify that as well.

Um so had the developer um requested um or the notes issue kind of periodically throughout the process, the developer would have been entitled to the interest from the date that the that those uh requests for reimbursement were made via TIF notes.

Excuse me, I'm sorry.

It's always so it's always 100% of whatever interest is gathered.

Correct.

And so it was contemplated that that was what was going to actually occur along the process.

It's just that the developer failed to do that and is and has requested that it go back to the date of the expenditures.

I think that's yeah, I think that's the word that's hanging me up, the word failed.

Right.

Um and so it makes it sounds like and I don't think this happened, I'm I'm not insinuating this happened, but it makes it sound like they didn't follow directions and that money's been gathering all this interest.

And so is that causing further future developers to say, hey, that's what I want to do, and I want this money to sit there and gather interest so I get more money out of it.

That's my that's the concern.

Well, no, it would have been gathering interest already.

Those notes would have been gathering interest had they actually been issued.

Um because they were entitled to be issued.

When I say they failed, they I don't I didn't speak with them, so I don't know if if they forgot, if it was their intention all along, if it was just their normal practice to normally request the issuance at the end of the project.

Um but I know from my experience in other communities that it typically those notes will issue kind of throughout as progress payments are made.

They don't wait until the end.

Until the end.

Okay.

Um see.

Yeah, I think that that basically covers it.

I my questions.

I just wanted to I was just curious about if this was a common practice for the city to for developers to wait and let that interest accrue and if that had any pact on impact on taxpayer money, which I'm hearing it does not.

Sure.

And in this particular instance, um the developer is not likely to be reimbursed completely for their expenditures just due to the um number of years that this particular TIFF has been in effect for the phrase activated or it be it became affected in 2018 and they have 27 years to uh reclaim all the all the money from the loan.

And so they're already almost uh they're eight years into that.

So their ability to reclaim this is pretty unlikely based on the fact that they have a a much significant significant less time to collect on that.

And and so the clock is ticking, they're limited to 23 years.

In a typical TIF project, um that clock doesn't start ticking until those um notes get issued, or until you get farther along in the process and it's it's been completed.

And so the developer typically would have a full 23 years.

This one, because it was done, uh the original Tower one was constructed, and then the Trevor Burrus, this agreement came into place.

The my the little bit of understanding, I'm I was never a part of these in the details, but then COVID kind of hit right when they were about to start the uh the second tower and that delayed it by several years.

So that's kind of the reason for the delay on the developer's end.

Um but the TIFF did take effect after the council approved it in 2018.

Right.

Perfect.

Fascinating.

Thank you.

I appreciate that.

All right.

Betsy and then none.

It's for 23 years or 27 years.

23 years?

Okay.

Yeah.

Sorry, I misspoke on that.

That's okay.

I'm just I was paying attention.

Yeah.

Right, Don?

Going forward, if we enter into another TIFF agreement, can it be structured that they get periodic payouts, or is it always on demand and they can do it whenever.

So that we kind of to Jackie's point.

It's like any it's like any um yes, yes that can be done, and they can request the notes sooner.

Um it's like anything else, you don't start paying interest until the note gets issued, right?

No.

Right.

So that's but we can structure it that any interest payments due to the developer is paid out annually, biannually, whatever.

Trevor Burrus, Jr.

Well, and it is added as part of the notes.

That's the terms of the notes.

Go ahead.

No, I was just gonna say it's all depends on the TIFF agreement that you have.

So it's right.

So it'll be built into the agreement.

It's part of negotiating processes we're trying to develop out that agreement.

So I mean there's some TIFS where that they don't they don't actually draw down on uh on uh a bond a note where they just get part of the pilots or eats as they move forward.

So it really depends on the agreement that you have and what's that structure.

But no, the terms or pace of the negotiation process.

Okay.

So that kind of I think hopefully addresses Jackie's concern going forward.

Uh Valerie.

Yeah.

If we're ex if we were expecting for these to be requested periodically throughout.

Is there anything that would motivate us to prompt them?

Um I I worry that they're not experiencing the benefit that was expected from the TIFF in this case.

You know, not really.

I mean, honestly, from a staff's perspective, to have it all occur at the end is is administratively more streamlined.

Yeah.

It would make it more complex to be able to do more so from our from our perspective, we would not been have been looking and trying to to encourage them to do this sooner.

Okay.

Any other questions?

All right, does anybody from the public wish to speak on bill 7826?

See none.

Any I think I think the only odd thing that kind of to Don's question brings me up is you know, last fall we had that presentation on TIFFs at a work session.

And I think we talked about the potential of how do we put together our expectations for the sort of if anything were to be proposed we want to see in those agreements.

So I'd be interested if if there's any update on that.

You don't have to give it at this moment, but unless you have that off the top of your head.

No, but we are in a process of actually hiring a consultant to help us with those development projects.

And so part of that will be developing those plans for when those projects come forward.

How do we evaluate the other?

I think that's that's probably some of the things in the past that we kind of may have had a disconnect on.

Is that we didn't drive the bus, we kind of let the developer drive the bus.

And we need to have a little bit more.

Yes.

So they haven't met since 2017.

So when you're talking about when was this one issued, well, the commission reviewed it in 2017.

So I appreciate that.

All right.

Uh Sheila, will you please call roll on bill seventy-eight twenty-six?

Council Bill 7826, Mr.

Waterman.

Yes.

Ms.

Peters?

Yes.

Ms.

Buffalo?

Yes.

Ms.

Carroll?

Yes.

Ms.

Elwood?

Yes.

Ms.

Sample?

Yes.

Mr.

Foster.

Yes.

All right.

Moving on to the consent agenda.

Excuse me, Sheila, will you please read the items on the consent agenda twice and call roll?

Items on the consent agenda include bills 63 26 64 26 65 26 72 26 73 26 74 26 75 26 76 26 79 26 and resolutions 58 26 59 26 60 26 61 26 62 26 63 26 65 26 66 26 67 26.

Bill 63 26 64 26 65 26 72 26 73 26 74 26 75 26 76 26 79 26 and 50 in resolutions 58 26 59 26 60 26 61 26 62 26 63 26 65 26 66 26 and 67 26 Uh Mr.

Waterman.

Yes.

Ms.

Peters.

Yes.

Ms.

Buffalo.

Yes.

Ms.

Carroll.

Yes.

Ms.

Elwood.

Yes.

Ms.

Sample.

Yes.

Mr.

Foster.

Yes.

All right.

Uh moving on.

We had one item that had to be removed from consent for new business for typo.

So Sheila, will you please read resolution 6426?

Council Bill 6426 is a resolution authorizing a special event operations agreement with mid-Missouri Peace Works for the 2026 Columbia Area Earth Day Festival event inclusive of temporary street and parking lane closures setting forth a conditional for approval.

Right.

And um the reason why this was is because uh it said that the blue note was putting on the Earth Day Festival, which I'm sure Peaceworks would gladly have somebody else coordinate for this.

Um but do you want to No it's just a simple typo?

We pulled up an old template and missed a uh miss changing the name in the second section.

So it is uh removing FPC Live to uh and changing it back out with Peaceworks.

Okay.

In section two.

And section two.

Is there any questions for staff on this one?

Would anyone from the public wish to speak on the special events permit for the Earth Day Festival?

You don't have to.

Yeah.

All right.

Um so I'll make a motion um uh to amend R 6426 by replacing FPC Live LLC in section two with Mid-Missouri Peace Works.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Second minute, Foster.

All those in favor of the amendment say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right, Sheila, will you please call roll on resolution 6426 as amended?

Council Bill 6426 as amended, Mr.

Waterman.

Yes.

Ms.

Peters?

Yes.

Ms.

Buffalo?

Yes.

Ms.

Carroll?

Yes.

Ms.

Elwood?

Yes.

Ms.

Sample?

Yes.

Mr.

Foster.

Yes.

All right.

Moving on.

Um to introduction and first read.

Um Sheila, will you please read the items under introduction and first reading?

All bills are introduced by the mayor unless otherwise indicated.

Bills 80, 26, 81, 26, 82, 26, 83, 26, 84, 26, 85, 26, 86, 26, 87, 26, 88, 26, 89, 26, 90, 26, 91, 26, 92, 26, 93, 26, 94, 26, 95, 26, and 9626 first reading.

Appreciate that.

Now on to our reports.

Um our first report is 1826.

This is the business loop CID annual membership.

This is required to come to us for their CID.

And if if we're agreeable, I would like to reappoint Darrell Bascom, Michelle Beatty, James Bayless, and Mary Groupie to terms ending April 19th, 2029, if I have the consent of counsel.

Is there no objection?

No objection.

I appreciate that.

All right.

And then moving on, our next one is report 1926.

This is a rental inspection frequency, community feedback and next steps as requested by council.

Do we have a staff report?

We do.

Thank you, Mayor.

Council.

So this report is a follow-up to our November 17th council meeting where we were asked to look at potentially moving to a tiered system for rental inspections.

To that end, we conducted community engagement early this year to obtain feedback from the community.

So we had a public meeting on February 10th at the ARC and 66 people attended.

And 11 participants filled out the survey.

All together between the two with the public meeting and be heard, we had 143 responses.

And we provided a breakdown among the respondents in the report.

And the results of the survey indicated that 61% supported a tiered system.

Some additional uh results uh from this engagement was that there was support from owners and managers to provide incentives for well-maintained properties.

And uh there's also um support for providing education to tenants to potentially head off potential issues up front.

Um so if the council would like us to move into a tiered system, um, you know, staff uh recommends that it's fair and objective.

Um some possibilities would be uh requiring additional inspections for properties of municipal courts in which a conviction occurred.

Um, you know uh doing um other things like looking at um life safety issues, uh those would be something that we would uh be concerned about.

Or if we had to go back two or more times uh to do um an additional inspection during the licensing uh process because things weren't right and we had to keep going back out there, or if the rental license has lapsed uh more than 60 days from the previous expiration.

Um we also would recommend that increase in the frequency based on tenants alone, or I'm sorry, a tenant complaints alone would not be something we would advocate for that may increase retaliation against the tenants.

And uh what we would like to ask council is to determine if they want us to proceed with drafting changes to the ordinance for the rental uh unit conservation law.

And we'll be happy to answer any questions you might have.

Questions for staff on this?

Yeah, Betsy, welcome back.

Do we have a feel for how many tenant how many landlords this would impact?

I mean, to increase this because the you know I hear our complaints about oh that you know, terrible landlords, and that's fine.

I mean, we need to be on, we need to look after them more often.

But you know, do we have a lot of rental properties where there's more than half of the smoke detectors don't work or the CL monitors don't work or about half the time, is that right?

Not quite that many.

We don't really have we don't have the answer to that.

So we don't know whether this would increase, really increase the inspections or not.

Sounds like it might more than I think it would, though.

Um and then if they've been convicted in municipal court of a problem with their with their rental property, is what I assume we're referencing.

Then they would have to be inspected every year, every two years, or you're or that's the kind of thing that you're going to develop.

That's the kind of thing we would develop.

Yes.

Okay.

And then folks that pass their rental inspection without a problem, it's still five years as it has been.

So we're not increasing their costs of doing business or their tenants' cost of living in the property.

Right.

Okay.

Thanks.

All right.

Yeah, Jackie.

Um you explain how tenants are provided with the information that they can call code enforcement, since this is going to be largely complaint-driven, right?

How are they giving information of who they need to call to report it?

Any any issues they have?

Yeah, it's the regular process that they have now to call and complain for, you know, or request a city service.

You know, there may be some things that could be done ahead of time, like they first rent a unit that maybe there's some information that could be provided to them to contact us, so that's something that we can look into.

Is there a specific um like city contract that is given to landlords for them to utilize in the renting of their spaces?

Or is it dependent on the who the owner of the landlord?

It's dependent on the owner and landlord.

So there's not a city template that we could add that to or something.

No, there's not.

Okay.

Um what was the other one?

Oh, and are um when charges are filed or the prosecuting takes up prosecutor takes up charges for a landlord, are they required to appear in court?

Yes, they are.

Okay.

They do they are okay.

Thank you.

Great.

Valley, I know this is uh report at your request.

So you have lots of questions and I didn't have many questions actually, but now I do.

Um yeah, towards Jackie's question, um, I just wanted to make sure that we're understanding this well.

Um my understanding is that this process is specifically not complaint driven, that we're not suggesting that we increase inspections based on complaints.

Rather, if violations are found, uh a certain amount or type of violations are found, or there's existing action in the courts potentially, then we would that may trigger Yes.

Yes.

It's not gonna be solely on complaints alone.

Solely or at all?

Not solely.

Like it won't be.

So complaints could trigger increased inspections, or is it violations due to complaints?

I would say it's violations due to complaints.

I mean, we have to find the violations.

It's because we get a complaint, doesn't mean the complaint is substantiated.

Yeah.

Interesting.

Um, I I also understand this to be um something that's going to be determined in next steps that right now this was public input on whether or not this type of structure should be pursued.

Um honestly, I saw tremendous amount of support for this.

I was shocked by how much support there was.

And from the 77 people who identified themselves as landlords or property managers on B herd, 41 of them supported the tier system.

So that's 53% of landlords and property managers supported the tiered system.

Um that was I'm kind of flabbergasted.

Um I think this says something about our ability to incentivize um well-maintained properties and um property managers who are following the rules.

Um I I think it's great for us to have an avenue to um I don't kind of separate the pack.

Um if you are historically following the rules and you have no violations, I don't think we should set up anything that makes any new hurdles for you.

Um simultaneously, I would hope that this doesn't affect the cost of living since it shouldn't for the regular folks who stay in five year shouldn't increase fees or rates of inspections.

Um so I think it's really a smart method to pursue.

Um I want to say when I considered this my concern was that um tenants are unlikely to complain and that they fear retaliation, and therefore I felt that it was smart for us to have some kind of mechanism where we have the opportunity to reinspect properties where we think there may be an issue.

Um I wanted to take the focus off tenant complaints.

Um the question that I had regarding sharing information, and I think this could be part of um tenant education.

Do we require them to have a lease addendum with their occupancy information with the occupancy sheet for leases?

I'll have that before I'll talk to you.

Yeah.

Are you talking about when you say occupancy about overoccupancy about the number of people that are living there just general?

I mean, do we do we require landlords to provide any information along with their lease, not provide them the lease they should use?

But is there any information?

There's no requirement for that.

Okay.

And that could be one avenue.

Just keep in mind that when people sign leases, there's a lot of paper, a lot of fine print.

And I so that would be adding to the stack.

So there's probably some other avenues that we could pursue on the tenant education end.

Yeah, the stack is enormous.

And I I don't know, I may be going above and beyond, but the EPA led-based notification is like two-thirds of the stack by itself.

Okay.

I was thinking that that would be a place where we can at least prompt them to hand out a sheet that has phone numbers on it.

Umbers for education or neighborhood services.

So towards Jackie's comment about how do we let them know where to complain if they have a complaint?

Um I do suspect that there are very few bad actors, but I think that a bad actor that's bad enough and allowed to persist for five years can be a very, very dangerous situation.

Um that's why we have tiers.

Um and I also acknowledge that this is the first step of input that future steps are to determine what's reasonable to put in a tier.

Um so we can't really know the details until you've fleshed out ordinance changes.

Are there kind of questions on this?

Yeah, Don and then Nick.

Not so much a question, but more of a comment.

I had a couple of constituents reach out with basically the argument that we just changed to the five-year a year ago.

You know, is there data?

There isn't enough data yet.

Do we really need to get into the tier system?

You know, and you know, to Valerie's point, yes, 53% said yes, but there were 47% of the property owners, managers that said either no or they weren't sure.

So it, you know, it's close.

But yes, the majority did say yes, that they would support a tiered system.

But I guess my question is or my comment is that I do have to agree.

It's only been a year that we went to the five-year system and seeing maybe give it a little more time and see if it's having the effect that we thought it would when we voted it in.

Nick, you had a question?

I just wonder if staff has any response to that comment and whether or not you feel confident about what we know so far from the new the new system.

I would say that uh rental inspections have a lot of nuance.

It's hard to measure the impact.

One of the reasons we changed from that three-year cycle to a five-year was first to have more frequent inspections, but also just to simplify our ordinance.

And I would say our inspection inspectors would say that you could inspect a property often and you're gonna find issues.

And so that makes it difficult to come up with the answer to that question and know what impact more frequent inspections make.

Certainly identifying properties that could benefit from more frequent inspections is is why we are sharing that idea.

Can I I ask Lee?

Um, can you speak to or or Bill?

Sorry.

Usually you're just yeah.

Um can you speak to the questions that were kind of raised?

Uh so I guess first point, there's three points to this.

First, this is just suggesting then for an ordinance to kind of come back to us with recommended changes.

You know, so you would have maybe some additional kind of thoughts on how you'd implement in the education on any changes.

My second one is those who are currently on a five-year, like it doesn't change for them.

Right?

Those who have a five, right?

Those who have a right, those who have a five year doesn't change unless we have one of these violations that causes a requirement for a re-inspection, and then it would trigger that.

So most of those good landlords should not be affected by this, hopefully.

And then my third is how do you get to you just mentioned you uh uh inspection, you could inspect daily and find something else.

What how that's more of like an administrative, like understanding the flexibility.

You know, we've heard stories of the tenants took the battery out of the smoke alarm in the kitchen because it was going off.

And like that could be risk of not passing your inspection.

So you know how how would you like to respond to kind of like what your thoughts are on how staff would approach that?

So a couple thoughts, I guess.

On this, is that uh well-managed properties and uh those property managers are going into those units before the inspection and they're checking those things, right?

So that's one thing.

And then during the inspection, they have with them batteries, smoke detectors, carbons.

You know, they're prepared for the inspection.

So that shows that they're being proactive, they're trying to resolve these things, they uh respect the ordinances and what they're being asked to do.

So that's a different picture than let's say an instance where a property owner or manager is not even showing up for the inspection, or they're not registering their property, or they don't have any of those devices or batteries with them.

So you know that would be the contrast.

So I think we understand, our inspectors understand that there are gonna be times when alarms are missing, batteries are missing, the alarms aren't working, but are they showing a good faith effort to comply and make sure those safety devices are in place?

Appreciate that.

Uh any other questions for staff on this.

Did you want to make a motion related to, or do you want me to read what it says?

Okay, hit it there.

Thank you.

Yeah.

So staff's recommendation is that we direct staff to proceed in drafting an ordinance.

Um drafting ordinance changes to the rental conservation law found in chapter 22.

Um moved.

We have a motion.

Do we have a second?

Second.

Second by Vera.

Um, all those in favor of um the motion on the table.

Or is there any discussion?

All right.

All those in favor of the motion on the table say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Nay.

All right.

A motion passes.

There was only one nay, right?

Yes.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh moving on to our next item is the report 2026.

This is the city council requested fiscal year 24 to 25 outsourcing comparison.

Do we have a staff report?

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Members of City Council and Madam Run and the Deputy City Manager.

I do not have a formal report.

I'm here just to convey uh your thoughts and additional questions uh to staff so that they can prepare additional answers.

We spent a good time this morning answering some of those.

I think you got them this afternoon.

So any thoughts or other uh direction you want to you want to provide would be much appreciated.

I appreciate that.

Um this was a report requested by council member um Elwood.

So Vera, I'll let you kick it up with questions.

Yeah, absolutely.

Um most of these are questions that I have uh previously sent via email with one new question that was brought to me by a constituent, but I let the department head no.

So I'm just kind of speaking some things that I have already talked to staff about onto the record.

Um first of all, I want to say thank you so much for all of the staff time that went into putting together this report.

Um it was incredibly comprehensive and yet pretty easy to look at and understand.

And I know that that could not have been an easy process to put together.

Um I think my my first question will be um I noticed that there were a couple of categories that when things kind of when you add all of the bits and pieces together, they came to pretty large sums.

And the one that stood out the most, it looks like we're spending about $310,000 outsourcing mowing and landscaping.

Um so if we could understand a little bit better uh why it is the the fiscally responsible choice to outsource that rather than doing that in-house.

I think uh there were some uh answers to that regard uh this afternoon.

Um there are instances in uh our mowing our right-of-way, maintaining our right-of-way where they're uh dangerous uh in the sense that there's an incline, uh they're close to traffic or in between lanes of traffic, uh instances like that where we just don't feel comfortable putting our staff on there with uh the equipment that we have, where specialized equipment or sp staff who've been specially trained uh would be the right choice in those instances.

So that's that's some of them.

Um Public Works and Park staff are happy to look at each individual uh contract and provide you more details if that's your desire.

Um another one that I noticed was um uh a pretty huge uh amount for various concrete work.

Um about $2 million, $2.1 million spent on sidewalk curb ramp improvements, replacements, service cut, and repair services.

Um I know that I got a pretty lengthy response from public works, but if we could just speak to um are there aspects of this that are a specialized service, are there aspects of this that we can be doing in-house?

Are there steps that are being taken to make this an in-house service?

I think PublicWorks has taken uh up that banner and and has proposed um doing some more in-house.

As far as utilities go, um, that's really outside.

I don't want to speak for Aaron, but you know, they're in the business of uh doing things other than working with concrete um for the most part, doing flat work.

So this is something that really is best uh sent to um a third party to help them with.

So when they dig up the street or the sidewalk, um it's a it's a third party that's coming to fix it if it's not public works doing it, and public works is busy doing uh their own repairs.

So that's the that's the method and means for you know why you the utilities department is is using that.

But again, uh I can have Aaron uh compose a more thorough and complete answer.

If she's not if she unless she's here.

I didn't see her in the in the room, I'm sorry.

Sorry about that.

Aaron Keys, Utilities Director.

Uh yes, what Matt said, uh you know, staff is we want staff to focus on their core service, which is replacing lines and repairing and that sort of thing.

Um so for efficiency of service, we have them doing those kind of work that kind of work, and then uh the contractor comes along behind and does the the concrete repair.

Uh there are times I know um some of the utilities are able to do their own concrete work when it makes sense.

So but typically it's just more efficient to have uh the contractor come behind and finish so that our staff can focus on that core service of providing utility work.

While I have you up here, I'll do my other utilities question.

Sure.

Um, which was specifically looking at um the sewer cleaning that we are outsourcing.

Um I know that I had a constituent who also works for the city tell me that he he was concerned that he felt that was a job that could very easily be done by employees that we currently have, that it's work that they are capable of doing, they have the infrastructure to do, and we're concerned that it was being given to outside contractors.

Sure.

Um that started back around 2020 when we had a lot of vacancies, and we weren't keeping up with the sewer cleaning that uh that we want that we expect so that we can keep those lines clear of grease and oil and sediment and that sort of thing uh to prevent backups in both uh basements and manholes.

Uh so that's why we clean.

And so we like to try to clean those lines that would impact someone's basement at least once every five years.

With all the vacancies we had, we weren't keeping up with that.

And so we hired a uh the contracting service to assist us with that.

Uh as time has gone on, we've used them to help us catch back up to to where we need to be as we've become more fully staffed.

So as we become more fully staffed, we may use that less.

Uh, but our staff is uh is performing as much of that work as they are able.

Thank you.

Um I I had two more questions.

That's good.

Okay.

Front load them all.

Um so one of my other questions is on fleet maintenance.

Um we have two really huge sums.

Um I believe.

Sorry, scrolling through different notes.

I believe we had 444,000 contract with Cummins and a $359,000, almost $400,000 contract, or sorry, almost $360,000 contract with John Fabic Tractor Company.

Both for fleet maintenance.

Um I was just wondering, I know in the response it said that we could work on getting a more detailed explanation of what maintenance services are being provided under those contracts.

Yes, ma'am.

Perfect.

I will be looking forward to seeing that.

Okay.

Um and understanding that that's not going to be in my inbox tomorrow.

That's going to take some time.

I appreciate that.

Thank you.

And I think the last question I had was specifically about the contracts or the services for contract with people source for temporary employment services.

If you could talk about what kind of temporary employment services are being provided under that contract.

People ready.

Thank you.

Like I said, bouncing between notes.

Sure.

So people ready is used by the Solid Waste Department as a temporary service.

As we've moved to automated trash collection, we've we are using them less and less and using them mostly just on the recycling trucks since they're still picking that up by hand.

So that that cost has decreased over time.

We also use people ready at the landfill.

They are required to keep litter picked up around the facility.

And people ready assists with that.

Since in 2024, uh the landfill did hire a full-time permanent employee.

They're uh I think it's I'm looking for the title.

I think it's traffic operations uh traffic operations position.

Uh that person also helps with the litter pickup.

And so since that time, they've been able to decrease the amount of money they've spent on people ready by having that permanent position.

Uh but there are times of the year that that that position can't keep up with the litter.

And so they'll bring people ready in, you know, on the days that they need to to do the additional litter pickup.

And then I apologize I didn't send this question in advance.

Um but as we're looking at things like the temporary staffing with the people ready?

People ready, um, and things like the sewer cleaning.

When we are hiring or contracting out labor, do we work with prevailing rate wage in those contracts?

Are we ensuring that we are not undercutting our own employees?

That sounds like a purchasing question.

And I don't think I came prepared to answer that today, but I I can get you an answer.

Thank you.

Any other questions for Yeah.

Did you have a response to Carlin?

Not for that question.

I do want to say that.

No, I think if you look at how we've outsourced in the past, part of our issue was we had a huge process or a huge issue with being able to hire employees.

And for the longest time, we could not hire.

And because we could not hire, because some of our processes were a little cumbersome, we end up having to outsource a lot of our work.

And the last few years, as we've been able to increase staffing, we've been able to reduce the amount of projects that are being outsourced.

I mean, uh solid waste is a huge example.

No switching from that manual pickup to uh uh the automatic um the automatic um refuse pickup.

We've slowly reduced that amount from almost a half a million to 30,000.

And that's just because we've been able to change our processes.

Uh when we talk about the uh concrete work, one of the things you will see hopefully in this upcoming budget, depending on uh how we're able to uh propose some projects is to buy additional equipment so we actually can have a concrete crew that can help us do some of that work.

I mean that's our goal.

Our goal is to try to bring some of this work in-house, but we have to have the right equipment and the enough staff in order to do that.

But that is our goal.

If I can just say that was one of the things the the concrete truck specifically was one of the things I was most excited to see in some of the responses that I got.

So I'm I'm really excited to see the city working towards that goal in the future.

Any other council comments on this one?

No, appreciate all the work uh into this as well.

And I appreciate um especially on the report section where you showed the decrease and those percentages going down, and I know that'll be um hopefully part of the budget discussion going forward as well.

Thank you.

All right.

Our final report of the evening is the monthly finance report.

So report 2126.

Do we have a staff report?

Yes, Jim McDonald, Assistant Finance Director.

So this is our monthly finance report.

The main re feature of this particular month is the quarterly revenue and expenditure report for the general fund for the first quarter of FY26.

I'd be happy to answer any questions about that or the memo.

Any questions from uh council on this?

No, appreciate it.

I appreciate seeing uh the increase in some sales tax numbers.

I would like to see that number continue.

And we did it was I we did get the numbers this week for April, and they are up a little bit too, 2.7 percent.

Um right now we're on track to probably get close to what we got in 24, which if you remember 25, we were down a bit.

So we're looking on pace to kind of be in the range of where we were in 24 for sales and use tax.

I appreciate that.

Yeah.

All right.

Well, thank you, Jim.

I appreciate that.

All right, moving on.

Uh would anyone from the public, we're down to general comments.

Would anyone from the public wish to speak at council?

Come up to the podium.

Oh, wait, Eugene, we have a newcomer.

Eugene, you can show how to do it.

I told another gentleman.

Oh, Eugene Alkin, second word.

Told another gentleman, yeah.

I get irate sometimes, but we do refrain from cussing.

I am a person that does not cuss.

Tonight's subjects are several, and I hope I can make sense of my notes that you will understand.

The ground I'm covering is homelessness.

We apparently have an old oats bus.

The shuttle bus is a reference.

It has now got no AC, no heat, and has lots of mechanical leaks.

Something for someone to look into.

This past Sunday at the Wilkes Church, we had a baptism.

In all my years, I've never seen a baby being raised in the homeless setting.

This was quite a thing to see the mother take the baby forward to have it baptized.

If you think about that, the child grows up and looks back at the past.

Mom, you say you baptize me, but that church don't exist anymore.

I would hope someone would start to look into the fact that we're about to lose that entity.

Yes, I've been there for several years.

But why can't you someone provide religious aspect?

We all know everyone has a different faith.

Let it be non-denominational or whatever.

Let it happen.

For all these years going by, I've seen a lot of them go forward.

They want to turn their lives.

Some of them will have done that that Sunday.

We'd never see them again.

I think they actually head down the road to begin their new life.

If we're once have ways of moving through here.

We have no plans in the ready position.

We have no plans for the Wilkes Church, I've just been told.

This is a suggestion outside Columbia Transit could travel from the bus station to the airport.

If nothing else, maybe para transit could transport people on more of a local basis to the new airport where you're in the middle of trying to have a full-time restaurant and many other things that people could go and enjoy.

The poor are continuing to suffer from high rent.

I just seen $55 gas to fill up my vehicle.

I like to flipped.

I had said in the past I got $29 as a Social Security increase.

But the first $50 is my rent increase.

I ain't talking about gasoline and groceries.

This is not just me.

This has got to be several hundred people inside the city.

There's been a lot of city money gone through recently as I run out of time.

Thank you, Eugene.

Hopefully, the daily struggle of the homeless will come to everyone's attention.

Thank you, Eugene.

Would anyone else from the public wish to speak?

And please say your name and the ward you live in.

Okay.

You can say your name and you can follow up with it.

We have your we have how to spell your name.

Okay.

My name is Shannon Glasgow.

Um I'm the man that was wrongfully arrested in Boone County.

Um I got all the paperwork right here.

I'm suing the state right now as we speak for uh I'm suing the state and Boone County Sheriff's Department, everybody else who was involved because I was put over the news and in the newspaper for numerous drugs and a firearm.

Um I spent 21 months incarcerated, false statements wrote evidence was planted on my person.

Um the charges dismissed.

Um the uh driver of the vehicle, she told multiple different lies that night.

And um nobody ever said anything besides me.

Uh I'm the only person that stood up and said anything or still says anything.

Um I filed a motion on the behalf of my innocent, which was a deposition on eight, seven, two thousand eighteen.

It's right here.

I got all the documents as well.

Uh I represent myself.

My name is Shannon Glasgow.

I was indicted as well, right here.

Uh I just served attorney general's office of summons.

I got all my paperwork right here.

I got a federal court date.

I gotta be in Jeff City at seven on 729, 2026.

I had to file motions to let them know I'm be ready to go to trial on the behalf of all of this, so I could put this stuff behind me, move forward with my life because this girl, she was driving a vehicle, she lied to the police.

They believed her she messed up my life.

Now I had to do all this stuff to try to get my life back on track.

Uh I'm 35 years old now.

When this happened, I was 27.

Um, but I filed my 1983 when I was in prison.

Um I haven't been in prison for a long time.

My witness is the parole board.

I have uh parole uh documents as well.

Um I got out and I was demanding a million dollars in 2019, uh right here on this document, which is my 1983 uh September 24th.

I have documentations as well.

The judge, which is Judge Boo, the same judge I got right now in my federal case.

Uh he told me to admit my complaint.

I never got that piece of mail, and then I was taken back into custody for aggravated assault, which was uh I was innocent on that as well because I filed a 120 speech trial and the parole board asked me how do I want to plead.

I told them I'm I'm not guilty.

I just beat the state when they said I had numerous drugs and a gun, and uh they asked me, do I want to cross-examine the victim?

I said yes.

We called the victim.

She said she made it all up.

She lied on me, she was intoxicated.

The parole board gave me immediate outdate.

I came home.

I didn't know my lawsuit was closed until 2023 when the Boone County Sheriff's Department broke the sunshine request, which is right here.

Um I paid for two of my documents.

They told me I can come and get them.

Then I only receive one at that time.

But uh, yeah, my name is Shannon Glasgow.

I'm I'm the man that was wrongfully arrested.

Um I'm handling all this stuff myself.

Uh I'm not asking for any help or anything.

I just wanted to tell my story so I can move on with my life.

Thank you, Shannon.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Would anybody else from the public wish to speak?

See none will come to uh our council comments.

We'll start with Don.

Uh the only thing I've got is tomorrow is election day.

Uh polls open at 6 a.m.

close at 7 p.m.

And if you haven't taken advantage of early voting, please go vote.

Betsy.

You know.

Besides wards one and five, there's also a school board up.

Let's all practice our civic duty and get out there.

Um we approved the um Lake Broadway um PD plan today.

Um it was on consent agenda.

Um I think this was a great plan as it moved from an older CP to a newer PD under our current code and has less impervious pavement and has the opportunity for more housing.

Um I did get some um emails from constituents that I wanted to acknowledge.

Um they didn't have the desire to come speak tonight since it was on um consent agenda.

Um, but I believe that there's some interest in looking into traffic calming on Pershing.

Um and I I can commiserate with having seen flipped over cars um at the intersection of Pershing and Ash.

And so I'll give that some acknowledgement during closing comments tonight.

And I appreciate the work that was done here.

I will I will add on to uh the importance of the election tomorrow.

Uh no matter where in Columbia you are, you've got something on your ballot and local elections matter so much.

Um if you want to see your sample ballot or find out where your polling place is, you can go to Boonmo.gov and they will have all of that information for you.

Um so if you have recently moved or um you aren't sure where your polling place is, that's where you can find that information.

Um and then just uh a pitch for coming up soon in Columbia.

We have the Unbound Book Festival, a totally free literary festival and one of my favorite days of the year here in Colombia.

There are some incredible authors this year, many of whom are local, um, some even local, specifically to Columbia who have published books within this year.

Um it's an incredible schedule, an incredible lineup, and it's totally free.

Okay.

Um again, please vote.

Plan make plans to vote tomorrow.

Um I did have a question, actually, this came from a constituent, and I thought this was a really good question, but I'm gonna wait until DeKarlin's done talking with Barbara to ask it.

Okay.

Um so the question that the constituent posed was in regards to the opportunity campus and the business loop and the concern of the lack of sidewalks.

And have we done any kind of proactive thinking on pedestrian management if we are anticipating increased pedestrians in that area of the business loop?

Yep.

Um Shane Creech, Public Works Director.

Um the easy answer is yes.

Um there's several segments of missing sidewalk on business loop that's in the city's sidewalk master plan.

Um the study that we're currently doing, the reconnecting communities and neighborhoods grant study, um, kind of gets us to preliminary plans.

And as part of that, that study will include sidewalks on both sides of the road as far as immediate sidewalks everywhere.

That's that's currently not the case.

Um it's gonna take a pretty substantial um construction project down the road to make those things a reality.

Um of that kind of thing.

And so the construction of sidewalk too early would result in some redo of that.

Um so I mean I think I think that gets the most of what you were asking, but I might be missing something.

So yes, it does.

And I I know that the design plan is going on, I don't expect immediate sidewalks.

I think the constituents' concern was more what do we do in the meantime?

Um, you know, is it a is an outreach?

Um, is it working with the opportunity campus to talk about reinforced safe places to cross?

Um what does that look like?

There was just concerns for pedestrian safety.

We know sidewalks aren't gonna be there tomorrow, but if we are expecting increased pedestrian traffic, are we doing anything in front of that to address that outside of putting in sidewalks, which we know we can't do right now?

Right.

Um I know as part of Modot's improved I-70 project, um, what they're proposing to do with the intersection of Paris and Business Loop is make that an at grade intersection.

And so there's we're talking about what pedestrian um accommodations are going to be in that intersection, and that's within a property of the opportunity campus, which will have sidewalk.

So really I think the gap coming from the east to the west is significantly reduced when that project occurs.

So I think a lot of that is in place.

That doesn't necessarily mean there won't be um a gap, but the gap is reduced with that with the improved I70 project where they've got that proposed.

So thank you.

I appreciate that.

Um another question I had.

Another question I had.

I know.

I'm not sure.

Don't let us have too much of a discussion if you want to ask for the report.

Yes, that's that's next.

DeCarlin, I think you and I I asked this can't this question to you before, but I just wanted to revisit.

Are we gonna be able to let the um financial audit advisory commission take a look at the budget before we get it so they can develop questions that we should be asking?

Yes.

We have to figure out a process to do that.

Uh what we don't want to do is get in front of our process.

So it's no, when do you have a work session that will allow them to review the budget and have make those comments?

And it's trying to align our process to kind of add this additional layer in.

Uh we have the calendar kind of built out that calls out uh the when we're gonna have our work sessions, we will have our public comments and that process, so it's adding an additional layer before he gets to you guys.

And so what's that timing?

So that's something I asked Matt uh Lou to look into.

So that's what he's trying to develop out.

When does that fit into the calendar?

Okay, that would be great.

I just we appoint these people and they are that's their area of field.

That's their field of study, so I would love their input before it comes to us.

But okay, thank you.

Um then my other thing that um I wanted to talk about was um or ask about, was looking at our boards and commissions, and this has been an ongoing discussion, um, shorter discussion than what I had originally planned.

Um, but I would like to um ask for some of our commission's groups departments to look at the need for the addition of a mental health commission to specifically involve our mental health um providers here in town, as well as loved ones of persons who have uh mental health conditions and people who are living with mental health conditions.

Is that something we need to do as a city?

Is it something that could be folded into additional commission?

It can it be a subcommittee?

And so my request would be that that question or those questions be referred to the Disabilities Commission, the Human Rights Commission, um, and the public health department potentially substance use prevention commission, just to gather their input before we would make a decision as a counsel whether or not to move forward with that request uh to staff with if council consent is to have staff um refer this to their boards, those four boards and commissions um for feedback.

So disability because Board of Health and potentially also substance use and what disabilities and human rights commission uh for that, whether or not it would be uh clarifying incorporated into their whether they could.

If they if they feel it's needed and if they feel it could be incorporated into their current commission or as a subcommittee to another commission, you know, what are their thoughts?

What would they advise us if we were considering the potential of adding a mental health commission?

What would their advice to us be on how to do that?

Is that clarified good good yeah, Nancy?

I would just say so so maybe have them look at suggested roles and responsibilities, where it might be housed, things like that, their recommendations.

Yes.

Is there any uh concern from council on that if we make that request?

The Carly and does that feel uh comfortable with the direction?

It it does.

I I I think we have um I know the public health board probably would be probably the most uh that may have the most comments about it, but yeah, that's something we could definitely do.

Appreciate that.

All right, thank you.

Okay, anything else?

Okay.

Don't let me talk too much.

All right, Nick.

Uh last week I had the opportunity to visit the MERS Goodwill Excel Career Center.

Um as well.

And uh you know, there are a number of folks in town and and organizations groups that I think would say they're Columbia's best kept secret.

That's certainly true for this group.

But they're they're providing opportunities for adults to get high school diplomas who don't have them.

And we were able to hear from a number of the their students and one graduate.

It was just very encouraging, and I want to encourage everyone here.

If you have not had the opportunity to tour that to ask them, I'll give you the contact information.

Valerie can do that as well.

Um I was pleased about the uh uh panel that's that presented at the quarterly membership breakfast for uh the chamber on Friday uh in front of business leaders to hear the really the sweep of the of the challenges that we're facing in terms of housing.

I think that was an important audience to hear that con hear that conversation.

And the panel was excellent.

They did a very good job of presenting what they did.

Again, it was an encouraging moment.

Uh the Back Resource Center op reopened today after moving from their old uh digs over on Vanderburg over to their new building, which is next to what is going to be become the Opportunity Campus when that opens in a few months.

And uh this is gonna just enhance their services and enhance what uh people are able to receive in our community in the way of help in that way.

I want to make you aware of the fair housing event that's going to take place on the 15th of this month.

Uh if you're not familiar with fair housing rules and fair housing regulations, this is an important part of what uh we have to keep in mind and what God's our efforts in providing housing in the area.

That's going to be in this room uh on the 15th from 11 to 13.

Um then I want to just mention the passing of Lee Lockhart.

Uh Lee started and maintained Maine Squeeze, which in my mind is an iconic restaurant in our community that closed uh recently.

But uh Lee was a really a force of nature and someone that I was pleased to know and that many in our community were uh and her passing just all too soon at the age of 61 is a sad event.

But I'm very grateful when we think of the passing of these kinds of people that we can be reminded of all that they contributed and their legacies that remain uh uh once they are gone.

Thank you for bringing that up.

Um I think I have just uh a couple of comments.

Um so one quick note um that I'll make is that um and and this is gonna be a request um for staff to reach out to the organizers for um the Earth Day Festival about the changes and things we're having with the short temporary license fees and also our application fees and find where we can make sure that it makes sense for what it is we need, but not at the burden of like a very institutional standing festival in our town.

Because that what I don't want to do is like we then make it so hard for these things to happen that we then don't have them.

So um I'll ask if that with council consent for staff to reach out because that was brought to our attention.

And then in light of that, I'd also like to make a request on intro in first read this evening was bill 8126.

This is amending chapter 13 for the temporary business license that related to the fees.

I'd like to request for that to be pulled from consent and be on old business so we can talk about it at the next meeting.

According to this, I don't see anything else on, so it would be the only thing on old business.

So hopefully it wouldn't take up a lot.

But I think it'd be good just to kind of talk about the history of the temporary business license fees and like what it is that we're trying to get done.

Trying to get done with it.

I think that would be a good conversation to have.

Absolutely.

Okay, awesome.

And that's all I have.

So DeCarlin, I'll kick it to you.

Actually, I just want to have uh Mike Parks come up real quick and kind of give a quick update.

We haven't seen you enough this evening, Mike Parks.

Hi.

Introduce yourself.

Sure.

Mike Parks, airport manager.

Just wanted to share uh happily share that we've accomplished the uh new master plan for the airport, recently have received approval from the FAA.

Uh wanna say thank you to many people who helped uh develop that plan uh and take part in those meetings uh to create that short, medium, and long range uh comprehensive plan.

So with that, uh we are we've already started working on the projects, obviously tonight.

We we actually had three of those projects are actually listed in that new master plan.

So we're working towards that.

And our last master plan uh was approved in 2009.

So it's been quite a few years and it's time to work on uh the new project.

So with that, we are not asking for any council actions uh tonight on this master plan.

Uh we do have a uh work session planned for April 13th uh that we'll be discussing a lot of the outcomes with the master plan.

We have to have this read by then.

It's pretty interesting.

So it might be interesting, but you know, is it also available online or on the city's website or will it be?

It's going to be.

It's not completely.

You'll see a few chapters on there now.

I don't think they posted everything yet, though, but they are working on posting the entire master plan online.

Yes.

Thank you.

Oh, yeah.

Mike, can we have a digital copy of the master plan?

We can get a link sent out.

Yes.

Excellent.

Thank you.

Yes.

Anything else?

That's it.

All right.

Nancy, anything from you?

Nope.

Sheila, anything from you?

All right.

Well, thank you, and I'll go ahead and adjourn.