The first meeting of the newly seated Jefferson County Council started efficiently enough, but soon turned contentious and less productive.
That Jan. 9 meeting was the first for newly elected Shannon Otto (District 3, Arnold) and Bob Tullock (District 7, House Springs). The council also has a vacant seat that’s been occupied for 12 years by District 2’s Renee Reuter, who now is a member of the Missouri House of Representatives.
The new council took no time to elect Charles Groeteke (District 4, Barnhart) as its new chair and Tullock as its vice chair, both by unanimous votes and with little discussion.
After that, though, there was a protracted discussion about how to proceed with the consent agenda – a group of routine, day-to-day operational items.
Since the council was first seated in 2011, members had read a paragraph about each item on the consent agenda, which typically includes 15 to 20 items at each meeting, before taking a single vote on all of them.
However, at the Dec. 27 meeting – the last one with Reuter, Phil Hendrickson (District 3, Arnold) and Vicky James (District 7, Cedar Hill) – the council passed new rules, and one of them dispensed with reading the first paragraph of each bill.
However, as one of his first actions as chair, Groeteke, who had voted for the rules changes, asked that each item be read, as they were in the past.
“I appreciate trying to expedite the meetings,” Groeteke said, “but I believe it was the intent of the Charter Commission (which drew up the county’s charter that voters approved in 2008) for the citizens of Jefferson County to review the bills on the consent agenda. When we drew up the original rules of procedure (for the first County Council in 2011), we had lengthy discussions. For the citizens who are here tonight and are watching this meeting on video, I think it’s important for them to know what these bills are.”
Paper versions of the agenda are available at each meeting and it is posted online, along with the complete bill for each item.
County Counselor Wes Yates, who said he’s been involved with government meetings since he was 13 and working for a radio station, was not pleased with Groeteke’s motion.
“This is the only body I’ve ever seen to do it this way,” Yates said. “It’s a waste of time.”
“We’ve been doing it this way for 12 years,” said Groeteke. “Who’s to say that this body isn’t doing it right and everybody else is doing it wrong?”
“It’s not a matter of doing things right or wrong,” Yates said. “I can tell you that nobody else does it the way we’ve been doing it.”
Yates said that if the council insisted on reading each item on the consent agenda, he would direct staff to make sure each bill was no longer than two pages, which would mean the entire bill, not just the introductory paragraph, would have to be read aloud.
“We will sit here for five hours,” he said.
After more than 19 minutes of discussion, the council ended up voting 4-2 to approve the consent agenda as a package.
Kimmswick pavilion
However, one item concerning the construction of a pavilion on the Kimmswick riverfront was removed for a separate vote and was not approved.
The pavilion would be part of a county park to be built near the dock for riverboat cruises at Kimmswick. Plans for the park also include a playground and amphitheater.
Council members were asked to award a $172,341 contract to No Limit Contracting of De Soto, the lowest of four bidders, to build the pavilion.
County Parks Director Tim Pigg said the project would be covered with funds from the $43.6 million the county received through the federal American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA). The previous County Council approved the expenditure, but not the contract, at a meeting in November.
The 30-by-22-foot, open-air pavilion would be built south of the old boathouse on the Mississippi River. It would be metal.
“I would never put wood in an area that could be flooded,” Pigg said.
The roof of the structure would have four decorative features that resemble steamboat smokestacks.
“We don’t have a drawing because this is a design-build,” in which the selected contractor employs a design firm, then builds to its specifications, Pigg said.
Groeteke questioned why restrooms were not included in the plans and raised concerns about vandalism.
“The Police Department in Kimmswick is a slim operation and they already have their hands full,” Groeteke said. “I’m concerned that it will cost the taxpayers more to keep this pavilion up to snuff. While this seems to be a worthy project, I’m afraid it will cost us more in the long run.”
Pigg said it’s possible restrooms could be added to the pavilion.
“If they (the council) want to put the money toward it, I’m not opposed,” he said.
County Executive Dennis Gannon noted that the county has pavilions without bathrooms at other parks.
Groeteke said he also was concerned picnic tables at the pavilion would float away during a flood.
Pigg said each of the eight concrete tables would weigh about 2,000 pounds and would be anchored to the concrete floor in at least two places.
“Nobody will be able to move them,” he said. “I don’t think they’re going to float away.”
The council deadlocked at 3-3 on the proposal, so it did not pass.
Groeteke, Tullock and Otto voted against the pavilion contract and Brian Haskins (District 1, High Ridge), Scott Seek (District 5, Festus) and Dan Stallman (District 6, De Soto) voted for it.
Pigg said he hoped the council would reconsider the issue.
Open Door welcome center
The council also deadlocked on a rezoning request from the Open Door Animal Sanctuary in House Springs.
The nonprofit agency is asking the county to rezone a .96-acre vacant lot at Hwy. MM and Duda Road that would allow the animal shelter to build a two-story office building to serve as a welcome center.
The previous council gave a thumbs-up to the rezoning request on Dec. 27, the first of three required votes.
Tullock, whose district includes the site, noted a discussion at a Dec. 15 county Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, when a neighboring property owner, Jason Lindsey, said he had an easement through the Open Door lot where the agency plans a driveway.
Tullock said he wanted the council to hold a public hearing to gather evidence about any easement.
However, Yates said easements are civil matters between two property owners and are not part of the planning and zoning process.
Tullock’s motion to hold the public hearing failed since the council again tied 3-3 with Groeteke and Otto joining Tullock in voting to have the hearing and Haskins, Seek and Stallman voting against it.
The vote to advance the rezoning for the welcome center also stalled, with another 3-3 vote along the same lines. Haskins, Seek and Stallman voted to advance the request to a third and final vote and Groeteke, Tullock and Otto voted against it. That means the request is “in limbo” until the council either votes to move it to a third vote or passes a resolution to deny it.
New leaders
Groeteke is taking his second turn as the council’s chair, after serving in that capacity in 2019. He also has been the vice-chair four times (in 2011, 2017, 2018 and 2021).
“I thank the council for its vote of confidence,” Groeteke said. “There will be a lot of challenges ahead. The master plan revision is coming up, and we need some revisions to our codes.”
He also said he wanted to form standing rules and budget committees, and also have council representation on a committee of county officials that reviews applications for ARPA money.
Outside of the council’s first year, 2011, when Reuter was chosen chair and Groeteke vice chair, a council newcomer has not been elected to a leadership slot until Tullock was voted vice chair.
“I look at it as an honor and a challenge,” he said. “But I have previous legislative experience (he served six years on the Manchester Board of Aldermen), so I’m familiar with the process. And I’ve spent the last five months (attending council meetings) and studying what’s been going on here.”