January 02, 2007

The Board of Commissioners of the City of Lawrence met in regular session at 5:45 p.m., in the City Commission Chambers in City Hall with Mayor Amyx presiding and members Hack, Highberger, Rundle, and Schauner present. 

It was then moved by Hack, seconded by Schauner to recess into executive session for 30 minutes for the purpose of discussing matters deemed privileged under the attorney client relationship.  Motion carried unanimously. 

The Commission returned to regular session at 6:25 and took a short break until 6:35 p.m. 

The Commission returned to regular session at 6:35 p.m.

CONSENT AGENDA

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Schauner, seconded by Highberger, to receive the Planning Commission meeting minutes from November 13^th -15th, 2006.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Schauner, seconded by Highberger, to approve claims to 215 vendors in the amount of $2,331,029.32 and payroll from December 10, 2006 to December 23, 2006, 2006 in the amount of $1,612,269.24.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Schauner, seconded by Highberger, to approve the Drinking Establishment License to Bottleneck, 737 New Hampshire; Louise’s West, 1307 West 7^th; and Rudy’s Pizzeria, 704 Massachusetts #2; and Cereal Malt Beverage License to Sam’s Food Mart, 1900 Haskell Avenue.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Schauner, seconded by Highberger, to concur with the recommendation of the Mayor and appoint James Dunn to the Human Relations Commission, to a term which will expire September 30, 2009; and appoint Sarah Hill-Nelson to Recycling Resource Conservation Board to a term which will expire December 31, 2009.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Schauner, seconded by Highberger, to concur with the Planning Commission’s recommendations to approve the Final Plat (PF-11-30-06) for Virginia Inn Addition, a 2-lot Commercial project located at 2907 W. 6^th Street; and accept the dedication of easements and rights-of-way subject to the following conditions:

1. Provision of a revised Final Plat with the following changes:

a. A shared parking agreement, which has been approved by the Director of Legal Services, must be recorded and the Book and Page Number noted on the face of the plat.

b. Additional right-of-way dedicated along W 6^th Street for a total of 50’.

c. A note added to the plat stating that the previously conforming structure on Lot 1 will encroach into the required front setback as a result of the additional right-of-way being required,  but will not become a non-conforming structure per Section 20-1503 (a) of the Development Code.

d. List the radius for the existing access drive on W 6^th Street.

e. The Minimum Elevation Building Opening (MEBO) must be listed for Lot 2.

2. Execution of an encroachment agreement with the City of Lawrence for the parking Lot on Lot 2 which is located in the right-of-way.

3. Submittal of sidewalk plans for the City Engineer’s approval.

4. Pinning of the lots in accordance with Section 21-103 of the Subdivision Regulations.

5. Execution of a Temporary Utility Agreement;

6. Provision of the following fees and recording documentation:

a. Recording fees made payable to the Douglas County Register of Deeds;

b. Provision of a completed Master Street Tree Plan in accordance with Section 21-708.3 of the Subdivision Regulations.

Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                          (1)

CITY MANAGER’S REPORT:

David Corliss, City Manager, said the Report highlighted a number of recognitions to various City employees.  The Lawrence Police Department recently honored a number of officers for their outstanding service; and, a number of Parks and Recreation Department employees received the Tom Wilkerson Teamwork Award which was an important recognition. 

He said other information in the City Manager’s Report included: 1) Public improvements were underway including work that was performed annually on the Clinton Parkway Recreation Path where sections of the original asphalt were being replaced with concrete; 2) Work had begun on the reconstruction of Kasold Drive from Peterson Road to the Kansas Turnpike; 3)  Street Division was continuing to seal cracks as the weather permitted; 4) PlaceMakers would hold a weeklong charrette workshop on January 31^st through February 6^th to develop a Traditional Neighborhood Design ordinance, known as the SmartCode; 5)  Staff was developing specific components of an effective Tree Management Program and how staff dealt not only with trees the public owned in City parks and City right-of-way, but also the City’s responsibilities for other trees on private property.

Mayor Amyx said regarding recognition of the City’s police officers and their outstanding work, he thanked Chief Olin and his officers on behalf of the City Commission for the work they performed on a regular basis.                                                                                                 (2)

REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: 

Consider entering into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Kansas Bioscience Authority, the Lawrence-Douglas County Biosciences Authority, Inc., Douglas County, Douglas County Development, Inc., and the Lawrence Chamber of Commerce, for the purchase, financing of improvements, and management of the spec building at East Hills Business Park; Receive a letter of support from LaVerne Epp, President of Lawrence-Douglas County Biosciences Authority, Inc.

David Corliss, City Manager, presented the agenda item regarding a Memorandum of Understanding with the Kansas Bioscience Authority.  He said this project was a good example of the importance of partnership in economic development.  The agreement involved the City’s financial participation in the spec. building, the building that was built on speculation at East Hills Business Park in 2002. The building had been used for some partial tenancies for storage from some of those businesses in East Hills Business Park.  This agreement was for the purchase of the Kansas Bioscience Authority of that building which involved the partnership of the City, County, Lawrence-Douglas County Bioscience Authority and also Douglas County Development Inc., and writing financial participation and the tenant finish of that building if the Kansas Bioscience Authority decided to exercise the option of purchasing that building.  He said there were funds along with other funds that would be used to finish that facility so it could be used for bioscience industry purposes and also having a laboratory that was an important part of the discovery, research and development element, of the bioscience industry.  He said staff was excited about this opportunity because it was something that was different from traditional economic development projects where in many cases the City was asked to consider tax abatement requests.  He said in this case, the City was making an investment in an actual facility with all those other partners so they could enhance the bioscience industry in the Lawrence community.   

Laverne Squier, President and CEO of the Lawrence Chamber of Commerce, said the community had stepped up and pulled together to enhance the bioscience industry and hopefully would this would result in the formation of a biosciences corporation.  He said they had seen and envisioned the need for bioscience space, a place to nurture and develop employment opportunities for the area.

Commissioner Highberger asked if this was one of the most sizeable investments that the Kansas Bioscience Authority had made.

Clay Blair, Kansas Bioscience Authority, said yes.

Mayor Amyx said when bioscience was first discussed, he was a little shaky because of his lack of understanding of the bioscience industry and how important it was to the City of Lawrence’s future, to create good and sound jobs in the community.  He said many planning efforts were made regarding this issue, but it was time for a project to take hold.  The Kansas Bioscience Authority came forward and made a sizeable investment to help this City make sure this project was successful.  He said he recognized what the opportunities were in the biosciences industry and thanked Blair for personally providing all the background information. 

Commissioner Schauner joined the Mayor in thanking Blair and the Kansas Bioscience Authority.  He said this was not a project that was not without risk, but it was an opportunity that the City should participate in.  Ultimately, the community would see this project to be a watershed event in the City’s ability to develop as a bioscience center and to take advantage of the work that was done at KU and some of the other locally established companies.  He said he thought the City Commission was very supportive and thankful for the bioscience commitment to the community and thought the industry would pay a very substantial dividend. 

Vice Mayor Hack said another aspect of this project was the collaborative efforts.  She said working together they could make a mark in the bioscience field to let people know that Lawrence, Douglas County, Lawrence Chamber of Commerce, DCDI, KU, and the Kansas Bioscience Authority really wanted to be in the game and this was the first step.  She thanked the Bioscience Authority for their leadership. 

Mayor Amyx called for public comment.

After receiving no public comment, Commissioner Highberger said while there was a substantial public investment, there was also a public return in the fact that Kansas Bioscience Authority would be paying local property taxes by the enhanced value of the building. 

Moved by Hack, seconded by Schauner, to authorize the Mayor to sign a Memorandum of Understanding for the purchase, financing of improvements, and management of the spec building.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                  (3)

Receive a staff report concerning assembly licensing ordinance.  Receive correspondence from District Attorney Charles Branson concerning Community Prosecution.

Scott Miller, Staff Attorney, presented the staff report.  He said last year when the topic of downtown safety and entertainment venue licensing was initially brought up, it was brought up in a package with several other proposals that were advanced for City Commission consideration.  He said it was his understanding tonight the discussion was to focus on the idea of entertainment venue licensing.  He said not only was this initially presented at a City Commission meeting, but there was a public forum held in August 2006 and was well attended.  He said rather than belaboring all of the information already presented, he would like to ask several questions that would focus the discussion for the remainder of the evening. 

The idea of entertainment venue licensing was certainly not a new one.  Many cities licensed entertainment venues and the closest neighbor that licensed entertainment venues was the City of Olathe.  He said from coast to coast, to one extent or another, there was some regulation on places that had large amounts of people who gather together for the purpose of entertainment.  No two statutorily or regulatory schemes were identical and it seemed important to tailor whatever scheme the City considered adoption of to the specific needs to the City of Lawrence.  Included with the information presented to the City Commission were ordinances from several other cities.  He said those cities might be representative, but were not definitive.  It was important to understand that no ordinance of this type would solve every problem the City had downtown regarding the safety of people.  He said he did not want to oversell the impact of something like this, it was a tool and a very important tool, but again it would not solve every problem. 

He said the questions that were important to drafting any sort of regulation of that type would be what type of entertainment venues the City Commission was seeking to regulate.  He asked if they wanted to regulate entertainment venues above a certain occupancy or all entertainment venues and if so, what would be the occupancy number.  He asked what were the primary harms the City was trying to legislate against and was the City most worried about criminal activity and if they were talking about criminal activity, were they talking about activity that took place within the licensed venues, around the licensed venues, or neighborhoods around the licensed venues.  He said if security measures or other technical requirements should be included in the ordinance and if so, he asked how they could they be found and how would they set appropriate levels.  He asked if closing times should be specified in the ordinance and should certain types of venues be age restricted.  He said whether the penalty for compliance should be immediate license revocation or intermediate steps to limit the occupancy, hours of operation, increase in security, measures or similar probationary requirements, and then ultimately, to what extent should business owners be responsible for the impact of their businesses, patrons, the surrounding community, and how would they measure that impact on the community.  He said there were other questions that needed to be asked and answered, but with some sort of consensus on those issues would be much easier to draft an ordinance for City Commission consideration. 

Commissioner Schauner asked Miller if he had a workable ordinance that would be a model to begin to have some discussion about the questions asked.

Miller said specifically, regarding the individual security requirements, no.  He said he did not think there was a one size fits all solution.  The threshold determination above everything else was in the first two questions that he asked.  First, how many people had to be in the entertainment venue before the City Commission was interested in regulating it.  He said Olathe, for example, used 350 people.  The other threshold question would be what sorts of entertainment the City Commission wanted to regulate.  He said beyond that, once those two questions were answered, the focus could get more specific on the other subsidiary issues.  He said with the Olathe ordinance, they had never issued a permit under the ordinance.  He said they were not sure how it was going to work in practice because the ordinance was on the books, but there had never been an issue where an entertainment issue had been licensed under the ordinance in Olathe.  He said he could not assess how effective that would be in practice.  He said once getting into other states and cities, it was usually more tenuous.

Commissioner Schauner asked if no permit had been issued in Olathe because no establishment had met the occupancy threshold.

Miller said yes that was what he understood. 

Mayor Amyx said if an individual was inside an “entertainment venue”, he asked how much responsibility the individual had from the time they left that particular venue.  He said the City currently had a nuisance ordinance and asked how much different it would be in establishing, at a commercial level, a similar ordinance.

Miller said a similar ordinance could be attempted.  He said any sort of analysis that an impact had on the community was probably going to be through a public nuisance analysis.  He said there was not a lot of case law in Kansas regarding how businesses were analyzed as a public nuisance unless, for example, they were next to a waterway and would have a bunch of things swept away in a flood.  He said those were the types of things that existed in Kansas of public nuisance, at least recently.  He said he could see some difficulties of using convictions, the way they did in a nuisance house situation, just because of the vast number of people who went through a business as opposed to the responsible people at a house.  He said many of the same principles would probably apply in any sort of licensing scheme the City attempted to enact.

Mayor Amyx said he assumed that every business owner present, wanted to make sure their neighborhoods were safe.  Safety was the utmost concern in every area of Lawrence.  He said there had to be some way to help law enforcement take care of the problems that existed.  He said they could not ask business owners to follow patrons to their cars to make sure those patrons returned home safely or drive them home, but someone was responsible for their safety.  He said additional burden was placed on the Police Department when looking at adding more resources to that department to take care of those concerns, no matter what part of town.  He said the City could write any ordinances they wanted, but that was not going to be the answer to a number of the City’s problems. 

Mayor Amyx asked Chief Olin if there was a disagreement about where the responsibility lies from the business owner to the patron, once the patron left the establishment.

Chief Olin said yes.  He said his department had a different opinion than many establishment owners.

Mayor Amyx said there were many types of things that were needed to take care of this problem and asked if an ordinance would help.

Chief Olin said an ordinance or some sort of a legal framework in which his officers could operate differently might be of assistance.  He said realistically, with 12 or 14 police officers on the street, they were not going to make any dramatic gestures against 200, 300 or 500 people.  He said there had been a number of confrontations with those kinds of numbers.  He said they were very limited in their response when found in that position.

Mayor Amyx said without looking at increased overtime costs and staffing on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday, he asked if they were looking at adding more resources to the department to take care of the existing problems.

Chief Olin said that was one solution.  He said at present time, they had a joint City/County Task Force Operations on I-70 and K-10 attempting to pool resources with Johnson County and the Kansas Highway Patrol.  He said those were all expensive propositions, but worked very well and was not something that could be sustained every weekend or every Thursday, Friday and Saturday night. 

Vice Mayor Hack said when Chief Olin pooled 14 officers to a particular location, she asked where that left the remainder of the community.

Chief Olin said they were only able to respond the way they did because of the excellent cooperation they received from K.U. Police Department and from the County Sheriff.  He said they had occasions, more likely than they would imagine, where the University of Kansas Police may be answering emergency calls in the City because 100% of the City’s force was tied up at a particular location.

Commissioner Schauner said he heard Chief Olin describe that the law enforcement issue was compounded by the number individuals at a single location at a given point and time and the need for additional resources was directly related at that number in question.

Olin said that was directly related to the number of people who might be engaged in breaking the law at that particular point.  He said if he could take another step to explain it, if 12 people were fighting, 12 arrests could not be made and get those arrestees out without some back up.  He said they were limited in the kind of tactical response they could make. 

Nick Carroll, owner of the Replay Lounge and Jackpot Music Hall, said he attended the forum in August. The four issues they discussed were: 1) staggering closing times in downtown venues; 2) imposing an entertainment license; 3) increased police presence at closing time at venues; and 5) dealing with problematic establishments on a one to one basis.  He said he discussed those issues with the Mayor and indicated he would research other towns that he felt were more comparable to Lawrence. 

He said he could not find another City that had staggered closing times, but he was sure that existed somewhere.   He said the problem with that thinking was the last two hours of the night was when an establishment made their money because fixed costs stayed the same, but the revenue increased.  He said without the last two hours of the night, an establishment would be sinking their business. 

Regarding entertainment licensing, most cities had an entertainment license for gambling operations or strip clubs or other venues, but usually live music venues were considered favorably and were considered an asset because they provided culture for the town.  Olathe had an entertainment license and he did a comparison of Olathe to Lawrence.  On a website he noticed there was an article called “Best places to live in 2006” and Lawrence and Olathe scored 50% for the personal crime index and 100% was the national average.  The biggest difference was Olathe had 56% more medium family income and their jobs were up 20% which scored above Lawrence.  Another difference between Olathe and Lawrence was Olathe had two venues that had 60 shows last year and Lawrence had 1,885 shows and 4,712 fans, so those were drastically different towns. 

He said he went to towns that he admired and reminded him of Lawrence and talked to different venue owners in those towns who indicated that when they had a problematic venue, their City was on them immediately and dealt with that particular club on a one to one basis.  He said at one time, regarding one of his establishment, he had a mishap with a bookkeeper where the did not pay a fee on time and his license was revoked and he had to ask permission from the City to give him another shot at his license therefore, he felt the City had the power to take away a City license if they needed to and the City should concentrate on dealing with problematic bars on a one to one basis.  He said he felt Lawrence did not have enough police officers.

He said entertainment venues brought a lot of dollars to this City which was 7 cents on every dollar for entertainment went straight to the City.  He said he understood the City was under pressure to fix those publicized events that happened, but if the City felt a venue was problematic then deal with those venues one on one, take action, and solve the problem.  He said Lawrence was a great place for music and they bring people who fill hotel rooms and bring in revenue. 

Mayor Amyx said if Lawrence adopted an ordinance and a venue never had any problem, then that venue never had to worry.

Carroll said several years ago they had a customer who stepped out of the Replay Lounge, took three steps away, and someone punched that customer and the newspapers blamed the Replay.  He said it seemed there would be a legal process that would protect businesses that were operating safely and were good neighbors.  He said the same bars were going to have problems and those bars needed to be addressed one on one which was a solution. 

Commissioner Rundle asked what the capacity of the Jackpot Saloon was.

Carroll said 267 was the capacity.  He said places like the Granada, Liberty Hall and the Bottleneck, brought in the big fish that made national headlines and people from Iowa, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Colorado all travel to Lawrence.  He said what happened was the smaller venues featured up and coming bands and after those bands get to be known, people flood the town and restaurants and hotels do better and brought a lot of money to the downtown area.  Again, he said if it was one or two businesses that were causing all the problems, those businesses should be dealt with on a one to one basis.

Vice Mayor Hack said every time she had been interviewed, she indicated that Lawrence had extremely responsible bar and venue owners and managers who were making a great contribution to the culture of this community.  She said the City Commission’s charge was not to undo the good that many of those venues had done to enhance the downtown and culture of this community.

Commissioner Schauner said when looking at information that Carroll provided to the City Commission, information was given comparing Olathe and Lawrence and asked what inference he should draw from those numbers and asked what Carroll was trying to suggest.

Carroll said if Olathe had Lawrence’s music scene, instead of 60 shows a year, Olathe would have 4,700 bands a year, they could attract young people and be more prosperous than they were already.  He said currently, Olathe’s average family income was 56% higher and there were better jobs in Olathe.  He said Olathe ranked higher than Lawrence in the quality of life category, but that was because of lower housing prices and better paying jobs.

Commissioner Schauner asked if Carroll was getting at that “best places to live” issue, Olathe versus Lawrence, because of difference in housing stock, prices, income, and so forth.

Carroll said what he was saying was they were using an entertainment license that had worked for a town that had no entertainment.   

Jerry Wells, Lawrence, said he was appearing as a concerned citizen.  He said he read in the newspaper that Lawrence had some violent confrontations and found weapons in cars in the downtown area.  He said as being a former prosecutor and General Counsel for a crime commission, they conducted approximately 10 years of research on violent culture in this country, particularly youth gangs and other violent organizations, alarm bells went off.  He said a result of what he learned in his 23 or 24 years of experience, was what Lawrence was facing, was not the crowd at Replay Lounge or others, but as a basic problem were members of a violent subculture.  He said that was a very small percentage of people, but those people had impact disproportionate to their size.  He said those were people who might come from outlying areas like Kansas City or Topeka, or even from Lawrence.  He said they had certain characteristics in common which were: 1) confrontation in their nature; 2) violent people; 3) a tendency to live for the moment; 4) react violently to any slight, real or imagined; and 5) most seriously had weapons with them and were very dangerous.  He said if he read correctly into the reports he had seen and heard, there were a certain number of those people who were in the downtown area after midnight, perhaps into the 2:00 a.m. bringing those tendencies and weapons with them. 

He said he was sure there were a number of business owners who would confront this problem as a police problem.  He said it was not a police problem, but a community problem that would be solved as a community problem.  He said he thought it was important to remember that Lawrence had a police force that was second to none in this country, in his experience.  He said any police department, although they might have prevention programs, they were like all law enforcement, reactive in nature.  In other words, something had to happen before law enforcement was involved. 

He said he was certain that City staff would draft a suitable ordinance.  He said there was a lot of precedent in a lot of cities, Olathe being one, but the ordinance would need to be tuned to Lawrence’s particular situation and the uniqueness of this community.  He said a balance had to be maintained between the rights of the business owners and their investment, which was significant in this community, and the rights of health, safety and welfare of this community in which the City Commission was responsible as well as this community. 

He said in his view and opinion, when there was a bar that knowingly gets out late, and there was not a bar owner that did not know that when there was a certain cadre of people that had dangerous tendencies, which were common factors, and those people get out to a parking lot and had confrontations in that bar and continued the confrontations outside that bar with access to weapons and with the tendencies that, in his opinion, he believed those people had, that perhaps the balance tipped.  He said those particular owners had to take some responsibility.  He said he was not accusing anyone or any bar owner because he only knew the facts that he read in the paper, like everyone else.  He said what he had read told him there were bars in Lawrence that perhaps needed to take a harder look about how they managed their constituency. 

He said his humble opinion to the City Commission, was this City had a very dangerous situation and Lawrence needed to move as a community with great urgency to solve this problem.  He said as Chief Olin acknowledged, it would take more than his officers to solve this problem because Lawrence did not have enough officers on the street.  He said it would take a good ordinance and had no doubt that ordinance would come about, but asked if the ordinance would cover and prevent a dangerous confrontation.  He said he hoped and prayed that he would not read in the newspaper there were a couple of bodies on the sidewalk.  He said he urged the City Commission to move forward with a sense of urgency in a deliberate nature.

Rick Marquez, Downtown Lawrence, Inc. read the following statement, “Downtown Lawrence, Inc. would like to state its support for efforts to ensure a safe environment for the downtown business and residential area.  We are appreciative of the City’s work to identify methods to address this issue and the willingness of downtown business owners to participate in the discussion.  Downtown Lawrence continues to be a wonderful business and community center and close attention to anything that serves to detract from this is well worth the endeavor.  Through frank discussion and informed decision making, a long-term solution can be found.  We would like to offer our assistance in determining the best way to achieve that goal of a safe and inviting experience in Downtown Lawrence for everyone.”

Ted Boyle, President North Lawrence Improvement Association, said he would like to say that North Lawrence had a unique situation.  He said he had some phone calls from residents and communications from people about downtown.  He said North Lawrence had been putting up with that type of behavior for over 10 years with Club 508.  North Lawrence residents wanted to know why everyone was in an uproar of this behavior happening in the downtown area, but not too much had been done in North Lawrence.  He said the North Lawrence Improvement Association and residents of North Lawrence had been very persistent with their issue.  He said this problem bar was in a residential neighborhood and was less than a block from Woodlawn School.  He said there were all those symptoms of weapons being discharged, shots through residences, garages and fences, stabbings, fights outside, overflow of patrons outside and in the street which had been reduced to Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights, but it was, at one time, 7 days a week.  He said it was still the same old story.  He said the North Lawrence residents wanted to know if they were going to be included in the City of Lawrence when it came to law enforcement or codes and regulations pertaining to bars. 

He said two years ago, North Lawrence indicated they did not want to see North 2^nd Street become a strip of bars and clubs, but at that same meeting, the City Commission granted a license for the Gaslight Tavern which was suppose to be a wine and cheese shop, but now it was a bar with an entertainment venue seven days a week.  He said North Lawrence would like to see stricter regulations on bars and wanted to know who was responsible for those people who block the street, vandalism, and threaten their neighborhood.         

Commissioner Rundle asked if Boyle knew the capacity of the Club 508.

Boyle said he did not know, but it had a first floor and a basement.

Brent Mosiman, owner of the Bottleneck, said his employees were scared to go home on Saturday night after work. He said everyone knew the problem would not be fixed by broad brushed ordinances.  He said the Director of the ABC could be notified and ABC could declare that venue to be a public nuisance and that venue surrender their license.  He said the music and culture scene in Lawrence was second to none and Lawrence was the envy of every college town in America from Austin to Minneapolis and Chicago to Denver.  He said other college towns did not have 1/10^th of the shows that came to Lawrence, Kansas.  He said when discussing regulating venues, they might as well substitute the word extinguished because no one was going to those other places because there was no music culture in those places.

Mayor Amyx asked Mosiman his involvement in helping crowd control.

Mosiman said their bouncers had to escort bartenders to their cars at night because it was dangerous.  He said again, the whole police force was not showing up at Liberty Hall or the Bottleneck on Friday nights.  He said the City Commission knew what the problem was and if the City Commission did not fix this issue, the music scene and culture would be extinguished.  He said he could not do anything with his neighbors and was not going to be a vigilante, all he could do was tell his staff and patrons where to park.  He said downtown was busier at midnight than at noon.  He said those venues produced a lot of jobs and tax revenue, and frankly their businesses paid seven times the tax rate of a retail business to Lawrence and Douglas County.  He said in some ways, they were the most valuable commodity in the community.  He said talk of this ordinance was jeopardizing the music scene.  He said he had been in this business for 22 years and had done a number of shows at Liberty Hall.  He said he called for an officer once or twice a year and one officer was plenty to get rid of the problem.

Vice Mayor Hack asked why the Bottleneck did not need 14 police officers when there was some type of problem.

Mosiman said he agreed with Wells in that there was an element that was dangerous and they did not want that element in Lawrence, Kansas.  He said he read there were guns and fired shots, but he was not seeing very many convictions and thought that would send a strong message that those people were not welcomed in Lawrence.  He asked about the convictions for all of those illegal guns and people firing shots in crowded bars.  He said it seemed Lawrence was barely slapping those criminals on the hands as they came to Lawrence.

Vice Mayor Hack said she knew that not all venues required 14 officers on Thursday, Friday or Saturday.

Mosiman said it was a matter of clientele.

Jackie Becker, owner of a production company, said she was different than the independent concert promoter, which meant she put concerts on from every level from the Replay to the Bottleneck, to the Granada, to Liberty Hall.  She said she did at least 20 concerts a month in this community.  She said she also did concerts in Oklahoma, Iowa, Nebraska, and Missouri.  She said she just got back into town today and heard about this issue.  She said it was scary to her because the majority of what she did was in Lawrence, Kansas.  She said if the City passed an ordinance that could potentially take away the license of any music venues, it would eliminate her business and she would have to move away and put her business in another city. 

She said she read in the paper and found it ironic that people could carry concealed weapons and when turning to the entertainment section of the Lawrence Journal World, there was always entertainment in the community.  She said she could not speak for the bar owners, but if there was additional police protection or training available to bar owners or promoters, she would be willing to be part of the solution to help keep it safe.  She said to pass laws that could potentially allow the City to take away the rights for places to have live music, would take away a lot of jobs and culture. 

Mayor Amyx asked as an independent contractor in putting bands in those venues, he asked if Becker would accept the responsibility of safety of those performers.

Becker said absolutely.  She said she paid a lot of money to ensure her company took responsibility for events that occurred.

Mayor Amyx said a suggestion was made to go after the “bad apples” and asked if Becker agreed.

Becker said she thought it was interesting the comment about the number of people who had been prosecuted for shooting those guns.  She said there were bad people everywhere and if something bad happened outside a Wal-Mart, would the City Commission want to place an ordinance on Wal-Mart.  She said she did not have the numbers in front of her for the number of police calls, but she knew the number of events that she put on across the City and knew that 99.9% of them were safe and they did the best job they could to take care of those kids and everyone was feeling safe.  She said the Bottleneck, Granada, Liberty Hall, Jackpot, Replay, Jazzhaus, and Fatsos, did a fantastic job of having music all the time and were working to keep this community culturally alive.

Gwen Klingenberg, President of the Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods, said their neighborhoods had small bars and venues and to walk away from a discussion just because there were only one or two “bad apples” was not a reason to walk away.  She said the problem needed to be addressed and research was necessary.  A lot of other communities had been fighting this issue and so far there had been a death and injuries in this community.  She said she understood that City licensing was more a tax issue and not a license the City had control over in whether a business could have a drinking establishment or not.  She said the community needed protection and hoped the City Commission would not walk away from this problem, direct the city staff to look toward a way to handle the one or two “bad apples” or some solution that might take care of those issues across the board because if another issue came up down the road, the community needed some protection and licensing abilities to deal with that situation.

Hubbard Collingsworth, Lawrence, said he had spent the majority of his life in the northeast segment of Kansas.  He said before he moved to the Lawrence/Douglas County area, he was living in Olathe and Overland Park.  He said he drove a cab for over 20 years in the Greater Kansas City area and was never robbed because they were heavily regulated.  In looking at statistics, cab drivers ranked No. 3 as one of the most dangerous jobs. 

He said he agreed Lawrence had a great music scene, but he had not seen facts and figures on the number of jobs that music scene was creating in the Lawrence community versus other businesses in Olathe and Overland Park because Johnson County was ranked in the top 10 richest counties in the U.S.      

Vice Mayor Hack said she could not give Collingsworth exact numbers, but her daughter had spent a lot of time and worked in those venues and knew a number of young people  supported their education on the jobs they had at those venues.  She said surprisingly, it was a large number of young people anywhere from the security people to bartenders in those venues.  She said this was the industry that not only created a number of jobs, but generated a lot of money in this community.   

Collingsworth said he drove a cab from Johnson County to Westport and made a lot of money, but he would like to see some facts and figures of what was being generated in Lawrence.

Philip Bradley, Executive Director of the Kansas Licensed Beverage Association, said statewide, the hospitality service industry was considered the number one job creator and had the most number of jobs in the State of Kansas.  He said those were entry level jobs, for the largest part, because many of those were young people re-entering the market or secondary incomes, or husband or wives needing a flexible schedule.  The surprising trend not seen in the newspaper was many of those jobs were becoming like the Free State Brewery, where that venue offered health benefits and those jobs were not just entry level and could become lifetime or long time jobs.  He said that had become the newest trend in the industry.

He said he did not have the experience or the depth of experience as Wells, in those specific areas, but there was a difficult criminal element that needed to be dealt with.  He said he had a great respect for the law enforcement community and their responses when they were called and assigned to those areas and thought law enforcement did a fine job. 

He said Westport a few years ago was having a huge problem and he contacted someone in administrative law enforcement department in Westport.  He said they worked with their problem in enforcement and dealing with it as an area of presence.  He said the person from Westport asked if Lawrence had special alcohol funds in the state and there was a special alcohol tax that was a 10% drink tax and of that 10%, 70% went back to the local community and some of the tax went to park funds and other places, but as he understood 4% went to prevention and programs.  He suggested to the City Commission they had discretion of what would happen to those funds.  He said the City Commission might consider that some of those funds go into law enforcement for prevention and safety programs like hiring fully qualified officers to help and train and work in those areas. 

He said one of the reasons why the downtown problems were getting so much worse in a very short period of time was that all the parking was public parking and none of the parking was controlled in the downtown area by the businesses themselves.  Other cities had the same situation, but because the patrons park on private property, it then allowed the businesses more responsibility and opportunity to control what would happen after they leave the inside of the venue and go on the outside.  He said in the Minneapolis district, they had to work much more with public presence in those areas because it was public parking and had live music. 

He said in the meeting in August, they talked about a variety of different responses and the licensing was just one of them.  He said he was hoping the discussion would come to the level of the City Commission looking at some of the other responses they had discussed at that time and other options they had to try to address and not just a licensing scheme. 

He said Commissioner Rundle asked specifically about the occupancy of Club 508 at 267 and Boyle had mentioned another club right across the bridge that had occupancy of 39 and had perceived to be a real problem with the residents of North Lawrence.  He said when looking at licensing and placing a level of where problems occur, that level might not be right.

He said there were also public venues of churches, alumni, and temporary functions, not unlike the Chamber of Commerce and their fall mixer for teachers that happened on private property that had a liquor permit and served alcohol on that premises, and certainly there was going to be more than 350 people at that event and was that going to be one of the venues that were considered. 

He said criteria was pointed out that it would be some type of live entertainment, DJ’s, recorded music and other entertainment venues whether it was athletic events that were played over the air and those types of things.  He said it had broad implications and the discussion points brought up by the City’s counselor were extremely broad and just did not deal with the live music venue.  He said he hoped the City Commission would take consideration of all those things.

He said in the future if those discussions go further, he would ask to be allowed the opportunity to work with staff and any task force or groups the City Commission put together.

Commissioner Rundle said one speaker had a brilliant suggestion to work closely with Alcohol Beverage Control since they were the primary licensing agency in the State and have any problem venue’s license revoked.  He asked if Bradley knew what constituted reason for revoking a license.

Bradley said license to serve liquor in the State of Kansas was a privilege, just like a driver’s license and could be revoked for any reason.  If the reason did not seem to be sufficient enough, the former licensee had the right to sue or ask to go through and appeals process.  He said the base answer to Commissioner Rundle’s question was it could be for any reason.  He said even a single violation for a minor in possession, if egregious enough, could be a right for them to revoke that license.  He said what they needed to remember to separate the two situations.  He said because they were using the same term “license” over and over again, they tended to co-mingle them.  He said it was not just an alcohol issue, but occupancy, a venue, a business issue.  The license issued had nothing to do with alcohol, as he understood from the discussion from the staff and had everything to do with a permit to operate the business in that manner.  He said when talking about licensing, he would ask that they talk about all businesses and not just those businesses who were dealing with alcohol.  The City did not have the right to revoke an alcohol license because it was a State license, but he had known in the past the ABC had been very receptive in working with cities with problems.

First, he said the City Commission could ask for an immediate hearing and the ABC could call a hearing.  Second, if there was any violation outstanding in the process which might take months and months to resolve, at the time of that violation resolution the City could have input as well.  Third, at an annual renewal date which was the most common, the ABC had the right at any time to revoke an alcohol license from the State of Kansas.

Vice Mayor Hack asked if that request would come from the City.

Bradley said the request could come from the City. He said ABC would entertain requests from individuals, but did not treat those requests the same.

He said the City controlled CMB licensing and was a different track.

Vice Mayor Hack said she agreed they were not talking about an alcohol problem.  She said the City Commission was trying to gather tools to make downtown safer and use whatever they could to make that happen.

Bradley said he hoped the Commission would gather those tools to make it safe.  He said he knew that other cities used other tools about businesses, zoning, occupancy, and safety requirements and achieved the same purpose in a fairly timely manner.  He said he wanted to make sure those tools received due consideration.

Jesse Jackson, Lawrence, said he promoted shows in Lawrence for 10 – 15 years.  In listening to what had been said today and reading the paper, it made him nervous because this ordinance, when discussing clientele, bad elements, and crowds of people coming in from Kansas City and Topeka, could look like racial profiling and that was what made him nervous about it.  He said no one wanted that type of profiling.  He said a lot of African American friends felt that it was racial profiling and even a discussion about it and how it was not really mentioned, but the clientele that went to that club and the clientele that this whole issue was brought up about were black people, African Americans.  He said that was the majority of the people that go to this club.  He said he had promoted shows at the Club 508.  He said a person could say there were problems and the problem needed to be addressed, but it made him nervous those words that for African Americans were code words.  He asked how they could do that in a way that was culturally acceptable and officially sanctioned, which was what he wanted to avoid.  He said that was how a lot of African Americans felt.

Mayor Amyx said the City had excellent owners of venues in Lawrence that made sure they were promoting a safe place for their patrons to come and go.  He said when looking at the neighborhoods throughout the community, including downtown, he would like to look at the police calls received at various venues.  He also suggested using Bradley’s suggestion of asking for ABC hearings for specific locations.  He said the City Commission received calls and read the newspaper concerning various problems in this community, but the City Commission also received information from the Police Department.  He said Lawrence had a music scene and cultural diversity and was second to none.  He said Lawrence had laws in place and Miller brought up the point that ordinances were not going to be the answer to everything.  He said Lawrence already had a number of laws to take care of the problems that existed.  He said the City Commission might need to strengthen some of those ordinances and this City might end up with some type of licensing requirement, but he did not think licensing was the answer to the problem and thought the City needed more police presence and be willing to help fund that department.  He said he might need to ask business owners to participate in additional funding for the police department, but thought they had to look at those types of issues if they were going to be looking at public safety in downtown, North Lawrence, or wherever public safety might need to be addressed.  He said the City Commission took an oath to promise and uphold public health, safety, and welfare of this community.

He said the City Commission had to look at every ordinance it had for the safety of this community on a long term basis.  He said the City Commission needed to look at the community prosecution program and its possible positive outcomes.

Commissioner Highberger said he was glad Jackson put that issue of profiling on the table, but he did not think that was anyone’s intent.  He said he did not want to keep anyone type, persuasion, skin color or anything from coming downtown, but wanted to keep people with guns coming to downtown bars because that was the main reason for this discussion.

He said he loved the music scene in Lawrence and was glad that scene was present in Lawrence.  He said he was concerned that if the City Commission did not do something to address this problem, the overregulation could kill the music scene and not doing anything could kill the music scene and make people too scared to go downtown and go to the venues.  He said he was willing to look at some community prosecution options or looking at the ABC options, even though the ABC had not been useful in the past; but he would not mind exploring it before they go to some venue licensing.  He said if the City did go to a venue licensing system that system would impose minimal requirements and costs for business owners to start with but it there were problems, it would ratchet up quickly.  He said they could take action to stop the bad apples and there were a few.  He said it was not just a downtown problem, but as pointed out, a problem in North Lawrence who had been waiting a long time for solutions to a particular problem.  He said he would give tentative support to an assembly licensing ordinance that gave minimal impact to the average business owner, but gave the City Commission the authority to move quickly and deal with the bad apples.  He said he did not think the City Commission had that ability under the current law.

Mayor Amyx said if the ABC acted on requests from this governing body or from individuals, he asked how many requests the City would make on an annual basis.

Corliss said the City had not made any requests to the ABC in some time.  He said the City was one of the authors of the state law that allowed them to have hearings regarding nuisance issues and violations of various state laws.  He said it was important to note the violations of laws he understood the ABC would be able to enforce would be the laws in which the actual establishment had violated liquor laws so if they had underage or dangerous situations within the establishment, they would be able to act upon the State Drinking Establishment License regarding that establishment.  He said it was his understanding the ABC did not have the ability to consider the revocation of a DE license for an establishment based upon complaints or convictions of situations that were outside of their establishment.  He said he thought it was an important distinction as they looked at the number of concerns they had.  He said a number of their concerns were not with the conduct or the behavior or illegal activity that was occurring within the establishment it was the attractive nuisance of the establishment and problems that were associated with it by patrons or desirous patrons who could not even get into the establishment who were outside the establishment.  He said he did not think the ABC had the authority essentially beyond the licensee’s walls.  He said staff would follow up on those issues and was not sure that it would be a complete solution to the situation.

Commissioner Schauner said the City Commission had discussions about the 508 Club in North Lawrence and what he thought he remembered in those discussions was they had very little success through the City’s current nuisance ordinance in improving the circumstances that surround that club.  He asked Corliss what the City’s experience had been in applying the nuisance ordinance to that particular operation.

Corliss said in the late 1990’s or early part of this decade, the City sought to place conditions on the drinking establishment which was called Los Amigos at that time, but still had the same ownership.  He said City went through some hearings under their ordinance at the time and eventually reached an understanding with the owners that they would do certain things, like close the gate in the back and general work around the establishment.  He said he had not received a number of complaints recently regarding that establishment and did not know it was as much of a concern that it had been in the past and that might be because that the establishment was not opened as frequently.  He said staff would look at the reports to see exactly where the City was regarding that establishment. 

He said the establishment was located immediately adjacent to a residential neighborhood and he knew those residents had problems in the past and the City had attempted to respond.  One concern was there was a dual licensing scheme for drinking establishments where there was a State DE license and a City DE license.  He said given recent court actions regarding what other communities had done in the area of liquor, such as the uniformity issue and the retail liquor law issue and some experiences the City of Wichita had regarding drinking establishment licensure, he said municipal lawyers in the state did not believe that cities had the ability to place extra, more stringent conditions on drinking establishment licenses and the state only had that ability and the City’s $250 license was simply an occupation tax that was collected.  He said there was language in the City Code that allowed staff to place additional code restrictions which was from a day when they thought they had that authority.  He said he did not think the City had that authority now, but could test it and see whether or not the City did.  He said at one time the Commission and staff believed they did and they could proceed with it.  He said staff was more comfortable with a licensing ordinance for entertainment venues, structured not in a way that would penalize the establishments that did not have conduct problems, but only those venues that did have problems.

Commissioner Schauner asked if it would be a fair statement the City’s nuisance ordinance had not been particularly effective in dealing with places such as the 508 Club for example.  He said there had been a long history of complaints and apparently there were still issues surrounding their operation.

Corliss said he said he would agree with that statement.

Commissioner Schauner asked if that would be a tool to refine or amend.

Corliss said some communities had all drinking establishments be on a special use permit basis and had taken the opinion that with a new license, if those establishments lost their non-conforming status and everyone was under a special use permit which would give the community the ability to revoke the special use permit for a particular establishment.  He said the Johnson County cities used that permit process as a land use tool.  He said they practiced that from the traditional night club bar situation to the Pizza Huts and Applebee’s that had to have a drinking establishment license as well to sell beer with the meals. 

Commissioner Rundle said he wanted the City Commission to take some action and did not want to wait until some tragic incident occurred.  He said he appreciated Boyle reminding the City Commission that this was a long standing problem and needed to find a way for people to peaceably enjoy their homes and businesses free from the noise and disturbance that would protect the safety of others.  He said he was a little leery of the licensing just from the concern of having any unintended consequences.  He said many people have spoken about that issue, but he did not think it hurt to reiterate the importance of the music scene and frankly that went back historically before most people came to Lawrence.  Lawrence became a stop over because of some entrepreneur’s activity when people were traveling across the country.  He said it went back a long ways and it was important culturally, through sales tax, from the economic development point of view.  He said there were all sorts of publications that talked about the kind of atmosphere, community and culture that attracted people to a community.  He said it was certainly an important component of it.    

He said he would like staff to find out from ABC if they could work more effectively together.  He said it seemed to involve taxes and minors in possession.  He said if there was anything in the current code and occupancy that was relevant that they were not using effectively, he thought that should be done.  He said he was supportive of pursuing this strategy if they could not find recourse in other means.

Vice Mayor Hack said the most important thing was to not walk away from this issue.  She said she would take responsibility of placing this issue on a back burner when the City Commission had asked staff and others to address that issue.  She said her goal in having the conversation was not to put anything in place that would unduly jeopardize legitimate businesses from existence and certainly did not want to make it impossible or next to impossible for the wonderful music scene in Lawrence to exist and continue to thrive.  She said Commissioner Highberger made a good point in that if there was not a safe downtown, there would not be safe music venue either and it was a community problem. 

She said she would ask staff to look at ABC enforcement and to look at additional police resources wherever problems were occurring.  She said if there was a seriousness of activity like there was downtown in any other place, the Commissioners would not be doing their job if they were not doing whatever they could to protect the safety of this community. 

She said this issue was not site specific and not directed at a particular group of people or a particular venue.  She said the City Commission needed to make sure they were careful however the City Commission needed to look at their toolbox so they could continue to maintain downtown and in the way everyone wanted downtown to be.  She thanked everyone for their comments because they were so important and vital to the community.

Commissioner Schauner said he did not have a lot to add, but the thing he took away from what had been said that struck him as the most intuitive comment was the one Commissioner Highberger made.  He said having a thriving music scene would in many ways depend upon whether it remained a safe scene.  He said one of the things he thought was predicted a couple of years ago when the Hobbs Taylor project was first thought about being built, what was beginning to happen downtown was they were seeing a lot more people living downtown and beginning to see the demographics of the group of people who lived downtown change and thought it would be an interesting challenge to have the music scene as they knew it existed in downtown now peacefully coexist with the expanding body of folks who lived in the downtown community. 

He said the City’s killing was not at the one location that had been mentioned tonight, it was north on Massachusetts.  He said he did not think, in his mind, this was related to a specific issue, but what he would like the City Commission to seriously consider was not to throw the baby out with the bath water because this issue was clearly an important activity in this community.  He said the City needed to be proactive in creating a reasonable set of rules that did not unduly punish anyone for operating a legitimate business, including those music venues.  He said he did not want to get in the business of censorship of what was played, who played, or who would go or not go because that was not appropriate for this Commission.  He said it was important that businesses understood what was expected of them and they be given a full range of due process that the law provided to anyone who owned a business or operated a business.  He said the balancing difficulty for this Commission was how they balanced the public health, safety and welfare issues of their community with the rights of those people who run legitimate businesses.  He asked how they would deal with those people who were not following the rules and were not operating in a way that protected the health, safety and welfare of the community.  He said he thought that was where the difficulty arose.  He asked how the City Commission could narrowly tailor an ordinance as to do no harm to those legitimate businesses and at the same time take appropriate corrective action for those against those who did not follow the rules and who created an attractive nuisance or menace to Lawrence citizens’ safety.     

He said he did not know if the Olathe ordinance was one the City Commission wanted to adopt and thought that Olathe had some particular issues they had do deal with and thought there were some killings outside some large assembly businesses and suspected one of the reasons they did not have anyone who applied for that ordinance now was because those people did not think they would get that occupancy or assembly ordinance. 

He said the City Commission ought to move forward with looking at two or three different kinds of things.  He said they needed to see what they could do to fix the current nuisance ordinance and what would be the lightest touch on an additional tool on the assembly ordinance.  He said he was not prepared, at this point, to support any particular ordinance and would like a thorough staff report on what other places had done that had good, strong music venues.  He said there were tons of college towns around that had live music venues that have experienced some of those same problems.  He suggested learning from others so they did not need to reinvent the wheel.  He said he thought it would be great if they had 6,000 bands next year, but wanted bands that brought a quality audience and maintained a high level of safety and performance the City had come to expect.  He said there was a lot more work to do regarding this issue.

Mayor Amyx said there would probably be an assembly licensing ordinance that would be put into place.  He asked if a couple of Commissioners would volunteer to work with staff, bar owners, law enforcement, and bring back information to the City Commission within 30 days

Vice Mayor Hack said she would volunteer.

Commissioner Rundle also volunteered.

Moved by Schauner and seconded by Hack, to receive a staff report concerning assembly licensing ordinance; receive correspondence from District Attorney Charles Branson concerning Community Prosecution; and to direct staff to work with Vice Mayor Hack and Commissioner Rundle and a small task force and bring back a report within 30 days.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                                (4)

Commissioner Schauner said the issue with Club 508 might be a slightly different issue in terms of how it was addressed than a larger assembly venue and he did not want that issue to get lost in the mix of that discussion.

Receive a City/University of Kansas Transit Cooperation Study .

David Corliss, City Manager, said back in late November a study session was conducted with Dan Boyle who walked staff through the findings of the final report on the City/University of Kansas Coordinated Transit Study.  He said the City Commission did not have the opportunity to formally receive that report.  He said the City Commission would not be approving all of its recommendations or approving the consolidated plan or scheme.  He said staff wanted to discuss with the City Commission any comments on the report, particularly the executive summary.  He said staff thought the report was helpful, but did not agree with all the recommendations on how the system ought to be merged if that was something they eventually wanted to do.  He said they did agree with the next step, which was what staff was recommending which was to begin discussions with the students and the University of Kansas about possible coordination and consolidation opportunities.  One of the important things the City Commission needed to do with the budget cycle, since it was a new year, was to think about the budget cycle again and if the City was going to do something in 2008 that required the City to spend more or less, or anything that was set out in the study, they needed to have some agreement as to what that would be early enough to give the City Commission options as to whether or not the City Commission wanted to consider it on the 2008 budget. 

He said as the City Commission reviewed the report, there was a diagram that set out some clear milestones on when KU’s student body contract with KU on Wheels expired and when the City’s current contract with MV Transportation expired.  He said there was substantial lead time that was necessary in acquiring busses and all those things.  He said it was a multiyear effort to even consider a merger.  He said staff wanted to see if the City Commission wanted staff to begin those discussions with K.U, but not make commitments and see if there was something that needed to be studied further.

Mayor Amyx asked if KU on Wheels broke even.

Corliss said KU on Wheels received a substantial operation from the KU Student Center and students also pay a fee to ride so in that sense it did not make money, but the City’s transit system received federal and city dollars.  He said he did not know if it made money.  He said public transportation did not make money.

Mayor Amyx said he understood that public transportation was an alternative transportation.  He said as they looked at the transportation system growing and looking at the need to combine the two bus services in Lawrence, he said his concern was the cost seemed to get greater and greater. 

Corliss said if that was the option that came back to the City Commission, the Commission would have the opportunity to look at that.

Mayor Amyx said he did not want to get so far down the road that the City had to buy into it because people had done all this work and people made commitments.

Corliss said he did not think that was the case.  He said staff had the information and had a good study that gave the basis for discussion.  If they were not able to come back with viable options, the City Commission would tell them that, but that was clearly their charge to come back with viable options.  He recalled the conversation in November where Commissioner Schauner said it was counterintuitive if they merged systems together and had economies of scale, they would need to place more public resources into it.  He said it was a challenge on how they could combine systems, get a better product, and find ways for pumping in public resources.  He said staff wanted to engage in a discussion and give the City Commission the full plate of options.  He said it would not be a burden on staff if the City Commission decided they did not want to spend that money because it was part of the budget process on the City Commission deciding on fiscal priority.

Commissioner Rundle asked if it was anticipated that the KU on Wheels student subsidy would go away if the systems would merge into one.

Corliss said whether it was a subsidy directly from students or whether it was students that were directly paying, there were a number of different options, but staff anticipated the University, through the students, provide appropriate subsidy.

Commissioner Schauner said in looking at the executive summary, he was struck again by the increasing funding as a percentage being greater than the increase in the service level.  He said the answer from the consultant was welcome to mass transit.  He said it was a nice flip answer, but it did not make him feel better about spending more money on a system. 

He said he could support what they proposed which was a merged system, with longer services hours for less money.  He said if that could be provided, he could not imagine why they would not want to support it.  He said he sensed they would need to find a bigger rabbit or bigger hat or both to accomplish that and did not think it was very realistic.  If it came back the way he would anticipate at some additional service with a merged system and required greater fiscal dollar subsidy from the City, he had a very difficult time supporting that. 

He said another concern was if they had a better transit system, a more convenient transit system with longer service hours that was extended further into the community, what he thought that tended to enable was sprawl.  The more they placed student population away from campus, the easier and cheaper it was to get to campus.  The greater incentive was to build apartment complexes in or near neighborhoods that might be inconsistent with the long term housing strategy for student.  He said he wondered if that was an unknowable consequence of an extended service plan. 

He said at some point, mass transit was going to be more important than it was now.  He said the question then became did they begin spending significantly more money every year to develop a transit system now or did they wait for some future event or tipping point occurred. He said right now it was hard to support an additional $338,000 over current expenses for package one.  

Vice Mayor Hack said one of the things Cliff Galante, Transit Administrator, had accomplished was what the City Commission had asked him to do which was to investigate a way to blend the two systems because that was certainly something discussed the first time she ran for City Commission.  In a town this size, having two bus systems, seemed ludicrous and she appreciated Galante’s work.  She said Galante was the first to admit that until they made the system quicker for people so their turnaround time was not 45 minutes waiting, but the trips across town could be done quickly and efficiently that it would continue.  She said she hoped they would pursue this issue to make sure they had explored the cost benefit of combining those systems because if it was more efficient, perhaps more people would use the system.

Commissioner Highberger said busses could prevent sprawl if done right.  He said his understanding of the report was one of the major status quo situations was substantial equipment replacement costs from both systems.  He said he did not think the study compared what the costs were for not merging the systems with the status quo as compared to a merged status quo.

Cliff Galante, Transit Administrator, said the challenge was they wanted to see ridership grow.  He said the City had done a great job of providing service to help the transit dependent in the community to help people go anywhere they wanted to go in town.  He said the “T” provided great service.  He said when conducting surveys they hear from the public that they liked where they were going, but would like it to be more often.  The issue was if the community wanted to grow the system, in order to attract choice riders, there were two options.  One option was to increase frequency by either cutting back the service area and not go to as many places in the community that they currently provided access to or they were going to allocate more resources to provide the frequency which meant more busses, drivers, fuel, and more operating costs.  He said if the goal of the City Commission was to look at opportunities that made sense to grow the system that were fiscally responsible, there were lots of challenges that would be faced in weighing out priorities.  The reality of public transportation was it did cost a lot of money to operate, but there were a lot of benefits and it was just a matter of what the City Commission wanted to make this transit system be.  He said if the goal was to provide a service to help the transit dependent, then mission accomplished, but if the goal was to change people’s lifestyles, then it would take more resources.

He said people in San Francisco used the transit system because parking was $43 a day, and it was a nightmare to find parking.  He said fortunately, Lawrence did not have those problems, so for the city to attract choice riders, it would mean making the service more convenient and unfortunately, that took more resources.

Commissioner Schauner asked what would be the benchmarks against a cost benefit analysis in order to attract that choice rider.  He said parking was not going to be much more difficult downtown with their employers in the next 10 or 15 years and gasoline might be a driver at some point.  He said it would not take an hour to get from one part of town to the other in the next 10, 15 or 20 years.  The headways would need to be significantly reduced before attracting choice riders on a regular basis, unless there was more than one factor that had been added to the negative equation.

Galante said one of the tipping points that were discussed besides fuel was going to be the baby boomers generation.  He said everyone assumed they were going to drive forever, but the reality was no one would drive forever and at some point when the baby boomer generation gets to that age where they could no longer drive, that was when they were going to hear the outcry because the baby boomer generation was really the first generation that had the luxury to have the independence to come and go when they wanted.  He said he found it hard to believe that come 20 years from now, they were going to sit back and say they were happy sitting at home and getting out once a week.  He said the question was did they wait for 20 years to make that investment then or make that investment now. 

He said there were things that could be done better with the University that would come out in additional costs.  He said there were a lot of opportunities to work with neighboring communities in terms of transit to help this City economically in that regard of bringing people to Lawrence for employment or vice versa.  He said it did not hurt to explore and find what opportunities were out there.  He said at the end of the day it was the City Commission’s decision and if they did not move forward with something, there was still a great transit system in place and had done remarkable things in a five or six year period.

Commissioner Schauner said he was not averse to knowing more about how they could improve the efficiency and cost effectiveness of the system.  He said he knew if faced with a dilemma of where to find another $400,000 in the budget next year that would be a very tough choice to make and support essentially a half of mil in increasing taxes to support and effort to attract choice riders.  He said he did not think this City was yet in terms of the big city mentality of it being a whole lot better, easier and cheaper to ride a bus than get into your car and ride some place.  He said he did not think this City was there as a Midwest community, baby boomers and all, it was everyone from his age to kids who just first learned to drive.  He said one of the things that he thought would make a lot of sense to him was how they could better provide bus services for school kids K-12. 

Galante said that was one issue that came out of the study was they asked the consultant to look at their times.  He said the public talked to them about their concern being able to get to their employment on time and match up with the public school schedules.  He said they asked the consultant to look at that and it would not cost them anything to make a schedule change.  He said there were some things out of the study that they could pull out of it that could be improvements to the system.  He said route alterations could provide some more direct access to the University, if they could have the ability for the public to have access to the KU on Wheels routes and to work out something in terms of fares where they could have universal access between the two, then it made sense.  He said it was working out all the details.  He said there were things in the report he agreed with and things he did not agree with, but they would work with the university.  He said one thing that had been really good about the process with the University was it got them all thinking in seeing how they could improve things in the community and on campus to make Lawrence a better place.

Mayor Amyx said as was suggested by Commissioner Schauner, he appreciated the work done and did not have any problem with having discussions with the University of Kansas.  He said what Galante stated made a lot of sense and thought Galante was absolutely right that he always had a car available to since he was 16 and it was going to be tough giving it up. 

He said when looking at the Lawrence Coordinated Transit Funding and Governing Transition Plan, he asked at what point would that item come back to the City Commission, from the time of adopting the interlocal agreement or would there be decisions that had to be made prior on whether or not the City Commission was going to move ahead.

Corliss said the first decision was whether or not the City Commission wanted staff to have discussions with KU and then staff would provide the Commission with status reports as to what they thought they were being able to move forward on.  He said in building that 2008 budget, the City Commission would talk about if they wanted to enter into a formal agreement with KU which was an interlocal cooperation agreement to proceed.  He said they would want to flush out the price tag and have a good articulation of the benefits.  He said there might be some smaller things beyond the $400,000 that could be done or make a strong case and state they wanted to recommend that it was a high priority and wanted to proceed.  The consultants work had been completed now the City needed to own the issue and see whether or not they could find opportunities for better cooperation and consolidation.     

Galante said one of the challenges was not just on the operational side, but the capital side, too.  He said busses were costly and it was the nature, but thought there were opportunities out there and it was a matter of investigating those opportunities and having further dialogue.

Commissioner Rundle said the City Commission needed to proceed especially with the charrette process that would be conducted on traditional neighborhood design.  He said transit oriented development was one of the planks of that whole approach and they could not build a transit oriented development without a transit being part of it, too.  He said they needed to be super aggressive in pursuing opportunities especially the potential free electric busses that might be available.  He said overall, it was a transportation system that was not just roads, but had to be the sidewalks, bike lanes, transit and roads that serve the cars.

Vice Mayor Hack said for so many years they had asked KU to come to the table and now they were at the table, and they could not tell KU to go away because the City could not make the jump.  She said the City Commission really wanted to pursue this transit issue to the extent they could. 

Galante said it needed to be a win-win situation and what he was striving at when working with the University in trying to find what could be the compromise that would help the University and the community and made sense financially for both parties.

Mayor Amyx said after all the analysis had been completed, if Galante felt the City should not get into this transit issue then he wanted to know that. 

Commissioner Schauner said the answer to the question regarding if the City should be in or out would depend on the City Commission’s goal.  If the goal was a transit dependent system only, then he thought the Commission could stop that discussion today.  He said Galante indicated that the City was running a fine transit dependent system today.  If wanting to do a broader, different system, then there would be a different cost benefit analysis that had to be conducted and that would have a dollar figure and the Commission would have to decide if those dollars were justified to accomplish whatever it was that modified system would provide the City.        

Galante said since he had come on board he was given the task to grow the system and he could grow the system in a verity of different ways, but he did not know what the expectation was of the City Commission of what was the acceptable level of growth.  He said for the last six years they had annually double digit growth.  When the national average was a 3% growth for the entire country for transit, that was good and the City was doing double digit growth.  He said at some point that growth would level off and there was only so much of the population transit dependent that could be captured.  At that point, the choice rider would need to be gone after and that was the million dollar question in transit which was what needed to be done to attract a choice rider.  On the east and west coast was traffic, high cost of parking, and limited parking.  Transit in the Midwest was a much harder sell than on the coast, but that being said, that did not mean transit was not needed.  There was always a role for transit, it was a matter of what was the expectation of the City Commission and what role did they want transit to play.  He said when talking about traditional neighborhood development, transit had a role in that development.

Mayor Amyx said as this was not a growth issue, but this was a way to combine competing interests.  The question was if they merged, was it in the City’s best interest financially over the long term.  He said he hoped Galante would indicate all those reasons for support, but at the same time, if the analysis was not good, indicate that to the City Commission.                  

Commissioner Schauner said he would like the City Commission to look and see if there was better value in buying a stronger bus that would have a longer lifetime and/or alternate fuels, bio-diesel or some other fuel that might be more reasonable as a future fuel source.     

Galante said the challenge with the smaller busses was that if going to a bus that was less than 30 feet in length and it was like comparing apples and oranges in terms of busses, their dependability, and overall durability.  A bus that was 30 feet or longer could typically last up to 12 years, 500,000 miles, where a bus that was less than 30 feet in length, would be a lighter duty bus.  He said the City’s busses were operating 16 hours a day, 6 days a week which was heavy duty.  He said they could go with smaller busses, but they would burn through those busses quicker and were constantly going to have to be replacing those buses as opposed to buying a bus that could last 12 years.  He said the busses right now were medium duty busses and what they were facing now was replacing engines.  He said the name of the game in transportation was, “reliability” and if you’re not going to be there when you say you’re going to be there, people won’t use you. 

Commissioner Schauner said he wanted to know the value as compared to the price.

Corliss said in a few weeks they would see Galante’s plan for bus replacement, which needed to be integrated into discussions with KU because if the City wanted to pursue something with KU it was a different path.  He said later this year, staff would ask for City Commission authority to purchase some busses.  There were capital equipment reserve funds for that purpose and staff was pursuing earmarks for busses.  He said as staff made that order they would be responding to the durability, size, and sustainability issues.  He said it was tied to those discussions with KU, but if they decided not to proceed with KU, they still needed to make some decisions.

Commissioner Schauner said even though the City would end up with running two kinds of busses with all those extra costs, some of those routes were so lightly traveled that a significantly smaller bus might be an acceptable use rather than trying to put the same size bus on every route.

Galante said there was some argument for that idea.

Commissioner Schauner said he recognized that smaller bus would need to be replaced more often, but that bus would be cheaper to purchase and would probably have better fuel economy.  He said it would create in the minds of the traveling public that was seeing empty busses, less frustration with a system that was creating a fair amount of money that was not producing a lot of return on investment.  He said if he saw a small vehicle with not very many people on it, he felt one way, but if he saw a big vehicle with not very many people on it, he saw it a different way in being sponsored with tax dollars.  He said he was not just saying that for appearance reasons, but there were a whole slough of reasons why, on some routes, a smaller bus would make more sense on less traveled routes. 

Mayor Amyx called for public comment.

Hubbard Collingsworth said he sat on Mid America Regional Council years ago which dealt with interval transportation.  He said he and a bus operator from the Metro in Kansas City, had a major disagreement on the size of busses and routes.  He said Kansas City, Missouri was running big busses in Grandview, Missouri and ridership was complaining they were not being serviced so they drove their cars.  At that time, he proposed that he and his drivers run a feeder route into Grandview, pick up people, and bring them to a central location to transfer to one of the larger busses which made it a win-win situation because everyone would make money and it would be more efficient use of capital and city funds.  He said since they were looking at two different areas, there was a major difference of opinion.  He saw that scenario occurring in Lawrence except the City had three bus routes, not just one.  He said there was a possibility of using cabs to run to specific locations to feed the mass transit system to grow that system in a more efficient way because cabs were efficient.  He said using cabs also played into the wear of the streets because they would not be running a heavy vehicle on the streets. 

He said they could have other discussions, but this issue needed to proceed in a logical manner. He suggested bringing everyone to the table and go with the easiest and most efficient manner.

Mayor Amyx suggested the City Commission direct staff to proceed with discussions with KU to find out whether or not the two systems could merge in a successful manner.  He said this was probably their only opportunity to look at combining the two systems because it was favorable at this time. 

Moved by Hack, seconded by Highberger to receive a City/University of Kansas Transit Cooperation Study and directed staff to proceed with discussions with University of Kansas officials on possible next steps.  Motion carried unanimously.                                              (5)

Discussion of pilot program involving a substitution the third week each month of a Thursday morning meeting for the Tuesday night meeting.  Thursday morning meeting would involve approval of matters routine in nature and may be followed by a study session. 

Vice Mayor Hack said she thought the Commission could use this regularly scheduled once a month Thursday morning meeting to discuss some long range planning issues and policy issues and thought the City Commission did their best work when they had time to discuss those issues. 

Secondly, the City Commission had big issues to discuss regarding the Matrix study, reorganization, and the potential of combining planning and neighborhood resources departments.  She said the City had good City staff and they did not necessarily get the opportunity to work on those issues that the City Commission delegated to staff.  She said she was not asking for this change to be permanent, but she would like to see a 3 month pilot program to see how it worked, evaluate it, see what they did and did not get done, ask staff their feelings and know that they would be honest on how it had worked or not worked for them, and then the City Commission could make a decision at the end of that time.  She said if staff had any comments now, she would appreciate it. 

She said the concerns that she heard regarding her pilot program was that it would stifle public comment, but there was no attempt to do that.  She said they would not do anything on a Thursday morning that would generate public discourse and if there were something someone would want to have pulled, notify staff or the City Commission, pull it and it would go on the next week.  She said she thought they could organize their meetings to be efficient with three meetings a month and would give staff a little room to breathe.

Commissioner Rundle suggested that staff create an agenda for such a meeting for the City Commission to look over and see if it would help save time. 

David Corliss, City Manager, said he envisioned something similar to last Tuesday agenda which was pay bills, approve the consent items, and place adopted first and second readings of ordinances that were previously approved.  He said he created the agenda and had different responsibilities for over 16 years and he was not any better of guessing when the meetings would get over than he was 16 years ago.  He said he did know with some good prediction about what was likely to draw a lot of public comment and public interest.  He said sometimes he says the most important things to do was pay the bills and payroll of employees, but that was usually a ministerial item; something the City Commission had to do that was important, but not something that required public comment.  He said he thought they could be wise about which items to place on that agenda and they always had the opportunity that if they placed something on a Thursday agenda that needed to draw public comment, they could just defer it until there was an evening meeting.

Commissioner Schauner said he thought a lot about this item.  He said the consent agenda was a pretty short piece of work and did not think those activities lengthen the evening meetings.  He said he would prefer starting the meetings at 5:00 instead of 6:35.  He said one of the concerns he had about taking a Thursday morning and making a City Commission meeting out of it was it would essentially reduced a fair amount of staff’s workday because they were not going to be at a work day, but at a Commission meeting instead of doing whatever it was they would be doing during that morning.  He said he was not persuaded that if they were going to defer important issues because it might be something the public wanted to talk about, then they just put that back on the evening meeting anyway.  He said if all they were going to talk about were things that were not going to incur public comment or interest, then they could have a study session if it was something they wanted to talk about as a philosophical matter and not take a vote.  He said he was not convinced that he knew enough about what this would look like that he could support it.  He said he valued the thinking outside the box to consider this, but did not believe, in the long run, it either shortened the evenings or added to the quality of the discussion about important public issues.  He said he would prefer that if they wanted to make a change, they start the Tuesday night meetings once a month earlier when they would have a light agenda.

Commissioner Rundle asked if staff or Vice Mayor Hack could give an example of something they might discuss or take time that was not something on the consent agenda.

Vice Mayor Hack said she would not have any action items.  She said she thought they had some conversations about transportation, demolition by neglect kinds of ordinances, and safety concern downtown were examples of some study session types of joining those two things together.  She said other items that they would see that could perhaps go on this Thursday morning agenda would be some other vacation of right-of-way or benefit districts that could be combined together.  She said those do not necessarily take a lot of time, but if they would have three or four of them on a Tuesday night, it was half an hour, perhaps, by the time they get through those.  She said she was trying to think in a three month trial.  She said she thought it would be something interesting to try to see if it would work if it helped the City Commission and staff, and if they find out it did not, they could go back to business as usual and stick with Tuesday nights.

Commissioner Schauner said he had a full time job and study sessions occasionally were one thing, but if they were going to add another guaranteed morning where he essentially could not go to work until noon that would be a concern.  .

Mayor Amyx said that was one of the questions he planned on asking was if it presented a hardship for anyone on the City Commission.

Vice Mayor Hack said that was why she suggested Thursday because those were the times the Commission was set up for study session anyway.

Commissioner Schauner asked about the status of improving the televised version of the current meetings.

Corliss said he and Lisa Patterson, Communications Coordinator, had discussions with Patrick Knorr at Sunflower Broadband and they were trying to work out some cost issues and trying to find some efficiencies and earlier cost proposals to see if they could get that at a good price tag and make a recommendation to proceed.  He said staff was interested in trying to televise those meeting because it would not only be good not only for the City Commission, but he was interested in trying to televise the Planning Commission as well.  He said one of the values of televising those meetings was that it could be a video on demand. 

Mayor Amyx called for public comment.

Gwen Klingenberg, Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods President, said she used the City Commission video on demand feature already, especially when she was trying to get exact wording.  She said televising those meetings would be a great thing and would love to have Planning Commission meetings televised.  She said there were a lot of issues when talking about long range planning that were very important to the public.  For instance, the issue of the bus transit information that was previously discussed.  She said if that was an action item in the morning, it would not be fair or accessible to the community. 

She said if they were going to use the consent and bill paying issues, they were looking at one entire Tuesday worth of public information, public commenting that they would now have to shove into the other three nights which meant they were automatically lengthening the City Commission meetings.  She said she knew she could not make it to a meeting on a Thursday morning which would mean they would have to find someone else to do it and they would be adding a hardship on people to get groups and organizations to find someone to make sure they would make those meetings so they make sure they do not miss anything that was discussed.

Commissioner Highberger said he really appreciated the idea and it was something he was concerned about since his first day on the Commission.  He said their job as the City Commission was to look at the long term best interest of the City and they spend almost all of their time talking about day to day details.  He said he thought they would do their jobs better if they, as a group, had public discussion about big picture issues.  He said he very much liked that aspect of it.  He said he was concerned about Thursday morning and would rather do it Tuesday evening, but he was not totally opposed to experimenting.

Commissioner Rundle said it was very attractive to the concept of having three meetings a month on Tuesdays that were not longer.  He said it was hard for him to get his mind around that concept, but they could keep exploring.

Mayor Amyx said when he was on the County Commission, they met three mornings a week, Monday, Wednesday, and Thursday.  He said he had a great idea that they go to two days a week, a Monday morning and a Wednesday evening.  He said on Monday morning they did general business and it would give them the opportunity to have discussions about things that were extremely important and gave the opportunity in public setting to go ahead and visit about a number of things.  He said they did not have a problem and if they did, it was automatically transferred to a Wednesday meeting.  He said he thought it might work and did not have any problem trying it.  He said a meeting on Thursday mornings would create a hardship because it took money out of his pocket, but at the same time, he knew he could make it work.

Vice Mayor Hack said she received emails from people that said it would be nice to have a morning meeting because they could not get there in the evening.  She said there was that population that did not work the traditional 9 – 5.  She said she was not asking for a permanent change.  She said there were concerns about it and perhaps had not articulated what she was trying to do for the City Commission and primarily staff because she believed the City Commission wanted a lot from staff in terms of information, but perhaps the City Commission did not give staff adequate time.  She said she was just suggesting a trial period might work and if it did not, they could go back to the regular meetings.

Mayor Amyx asked what additional information Commissioner Rundle needed.

Commissioner Rundle said he would like to see some concrete idea of what one of those meetings would entail.

      Mayor Amyx said this item would be deferred indefinitely.                                                (6)

      PUBLIC COMMENT

      Dan Owen, attorney in Kansas City, said he would like to comment on the long term approach on alcohol regulations of drinking establishments.  He said he had represented bar owners over the years in various situations, but he was not representing a bar owner tonight in his comments.  He said he could recall 20 years ago when Commissioner Highberger and he were in undergrad school and Commissioner Rundle was learning to dance, the same problems were occurring.  He said there was a problem bar and the Commission tried ordinances to step down on this particular problem.  He said he wanted to encourage the City Commission in order to not be doing this 20 years from now, the City Commission should take a longer term approach by doing something other cities had done or had been lucky enough to occur without legislative action which was to create a longer term plan to push drinking establishments or large entertainment venues into one or more than one particular district.  He said they could look at large cities that had tremendous problems with the public vice of drinking.  He said in order to deal with it, they push it into one area where they could use their zoning power, special use permit, closing times, and all sorts of other ordinances on the stick side and then a carrot side as well by creating a district where those things were actually favored and use some of the tax dollars generated by the liquor taxes to encourage this district.  He said he did not know where it needed to be, but he did know if they would study it and take a long term approach, they might not have to be here in 20 years because pushing things in entertainment into one district, the way New Orleans did on Bourbon Street and other cities had done.  He said cities in Europe where they have tremendous vices like needle drugs and prostitution, they push it into one area, an entertainment district, where it made it easier for police and kept it away from neighbors and neighborhoods.  He said he would encourage the City Commission, in addition to trying to immediately stamp out that problem, to take a long term view and study the idea of creating an entertainment district.

Commissioner Rundle asked if he could describe the type of entertainment he would put in this district and if it included just the large venue or something that would include all the bars they had.

Owen said he thought it was primarily based on alcohol, but it might not be entirely, but might be based on large venues.  He said the City had tremendous power in terms of their zoning and special use permit authority, but it could only be exercised very slowly over time which was why no one Commission had really dealt with it.  He said he was encouraging the City Commission to start something that might take decades to play itself out, but the free market alone would not achieve this result because it took government intervention.  He said it was whatever uses the Commission thought that ought to be concentrated in the entertainment district.  He said the variety of human vice that went on in Bourbon Street in New Orleans to say nothing of red light districts in European cities and even in the United States was way beyond what they have to deal with in Lawrence, but it was easier to deal with because it was confined in one area.

      Hubbard Collingsworth had a question about mass transit.  He asked about creating a community wide benefit district to benefit mass transit.

Mayor Amyx said they did and it was called ad valorem taxation.

FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:

1/9/07	· Public Hearing on Neighborhood Revitalization Act for 800 Pennsylvania project · Discussion of domestic partnership registration proposal · Commissioner Hack will be absent
1/16/07	· 5 p.m. study session with Douglas County Commission and Lawrence Chamber of Commerce on Economic Development · Ordinance creating City Auditor position (revised per Commission direction)
TBD	· Salvation Army Site Plan and Rezoning; · Retail Marketing Analysis Code provisions · Implementation Report for Matrix Report Recommendations on Development Process · Staff Recommendation on the Reuse of Old Fire Station No. 2 (Mass. Street) and Old Fire Station No. 4 (Grover Barn / Lawrence Avenue).   Staff is recommending that both facilities be kept in public use.

COMMISSION ITEMS:

Moved by Schauner, seconded by Hack to adjourn at 9:50 p.m.  Motion carried unanimously. 

APPROVED:  

_____________________________

Mike Amyx, Mayor

ATTEST:

___________________________________                                                                        

Frank S. Reeb, City Clerk

CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 2, 2006

1. Final Plat (PF-11-30-06), Virginia Inn Add, 2907 W 6^th.

2. City Manager’s Report.

3. Memorandum of Understanding – KS Bioscience Authority for spec bldg.

4. Assembly licensing ordinance discussion

5. Kansas Transit Cooperation Study.

6. Pilot Program – 3^rd Thursday morning each month – deferred indefinitely.

7. Public Comment – Creating an entertainment district.