November 2021 Board Meeting Minutes
November Monthly Board Meeting
Nov. 17, 2021
APPROVED Minutes
1. Call to Order and Opening Remarks
Jim Dallas called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m.
Board Members present included: Jim Dallas, President; Michael Pastore, President-Elect; Debby Brown, Treasurer; Chris Currington, Secretary; Neil Putz, Past President; Nancy Kelly; Margi Koors; Nancy Lambert; Karen Moske; and Gary Toribio. Billy Tomber arrived at 7:32 p.m.
2. Deb Cottin – Peter & Paul Community Services
Jim Dallas introduced Deb Cottin, director of Peter & Paul Services and explained that Deb was present to discuss the contribution SRG makes and to answer any questions.
Deb thanked the Board for allowing her to the meeting, the partnership between SRG and Peter & Paul Services, and the last 3 years supporting the Clean Team at a generous level. The current state of government funds is making it harder to get emergency funding for the homeless shelter.
The Clean Team generally operates 3 days a week, 2 hours a day, in teams of five. During COVID, the team hasn’t been working at capacity. Gary Toribio asked about the schedules. Deb said they vary. Five is the goal when the shelter is full, but it hasn’t been full since COVID started. But the organization is ramping back up and looking to grow further. It’s time for them to provide more beds, so Peter & Paul Services is looking for a larger shelter. They’ve looked in Soulard, but it’s too developed. The chances the facility stays in Soulard is slim. The church took over the community meals program, so that will stay in Soulard. Peter & Paul Services has looked at other neighborhoods (Benton Park, McKinley Heights) but property prices are high. Neil Putz suggested that lower property values in the Kosciusko neighborhood might present an opportunity for a larger shelter. Deb did not indicate whether Peter & Paul Services has looked at the Kosciusko neighborhood.
Michael asked if there are 5 people, is there also a shift or team lead? Deb said The Clean Team never goes out without a paid staff person. The team is supervised.
Deb wanted the Board to know they’re not leaving Soulard because Peter & Paul Services is unhappy; it’s a capacity and size issue. Because of COVID, the shelter has been at 20 men instead of 60. Because of the vaccination rate, they previously got permission to have more beds filled, and hope to be back to 60 by April.
There was then a discussion about the area that The Clean Team covers: North to Market Square; 7th Street west to Gravois/55; South Pontiac Park includes 7th Street. Margi mentioned that she sees trash on 7th street, and asked if The Clean Team is really picking up trash on 7th. Deb said she’d make a note of it. Karen Moske asked about 7thStreet to Pontiac Park. Deb will check if it’s up to Ann or Shenandoah.
There was then a discussion about Peter & Paul Services trying to do things more professionally going forward. They are also talking to lawyers who want to help. Nancy Kelly asked if there was a template to follow. Deb said they thought so, but it hasn’t evolved, but she’s excited about the future of the shelter.
Jim then told the Board that he told Deb there wouldn’t be a vote or decision this evening. This was just a chance to meet Deb and ask questions. Deb said the business community is funding this, and to make sure The Clean Team cleans around the businesses and Russell. Karen Moske said that the residents are funding this, too. Her issue is the broken glass, and residents should have the same emphasis as the businesses.
Jim then asked when The Clean Team goes out, if Deb can let him and the Board know so we can canvas the area. Deb said Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. However, Deb said that if the Board wants to see what happens, don’t approach the guys. If there are any issues, go back to Jim or Deb.
There was then a discussion about how to get in touch with Deb.
Nancy Lambert then raised the issue about The Clean Team servicing the other parts of the neighborhood. Deb said it remains a challenge.
3. Eliza Coriell – Crow Bar
Jim Dallas said that at the last Board Meeting, he presented a request for the petition for The Crow Bar, and he’s been emailing with Eliza Coriell, the owner, to present to the Board and answer questions.
Eliza (attended this portion of the meeting with her husband and the chef of The Crow’s Nest) said she appreciated the opportunity, and that they own The Crow’s Nest in Maplewood. They just celebrated 10 years there. Eliza and her husband talked about opening a second spot after the pandemic. The former Nadine’s Gin Joint seems like the right place with a big outdoor space, and Soulard was their first thought. Maplewood is a very tight community, and Soulard has the same sense of community.
They do high-end bar food, made mostly from scratch. The Crow’s Nest has a rock-n-roll theme, and does a Metal Brunch that’s very popular. However, the Metal Brunch is not planned in Soulard any time soon after opening.
Margi asked what the food services hours would be. The Crow’s Nest is until midnight, but Eliza said they don’t think they’ll start with that in Soulard. They’ll follow a business model of 10 to 11 p.m. on weekdays, 11 p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays, and modified hours on Sundays. Gary Toribio asked if it would have a 1 a.m. call. Eliza said it would be 1:30 a.m. Jim asked about the outside area. Eliza said there are intermediate plans, and then long-term plans to develop. For now, they’ll be adding a storage room that will take up 2 of the dining room tables. Outside, they eventually would like a structure with a real roof. They plan to do this incrementally.
Margi asked when The Crow Bar will open. Eliza said they haven’t taken possession yet; it’s contingent on the liquor license. Once they verify signatures, then Eliza can take possession. Margi asked if it would be by Mardi Gras. Eliza said it’s iffy right now.
Nancy Kelly asked if they’d have the same menu as The Crow’s Nest. Eliza said no, there will be some crossover, but not a carbon copy; that’s why it’s a different name.
Michael asked what the three best sellers are. They responded: hot honey chicken; cheese curds; and poutine. They also do seasoned waffle fries. Michael said that the neighborhood would welcome something a little elevated. Eliza said that a lot is made from scratch, but nothing is over $15.
Jim then asked Eliza what SRG has been asked to sign. Eliza said it was the petition for the liquor license. They’ve already exceeded the signatures they need. Karen Moske asked if the place will be family friendly. Eliza said they will have highchairs and booster seats, but the sign will say 21+ after 10 p.m. The Crow Bar will not be family oriented, but will accommodate families.
Margi asked about the wine selection. Eliza said they don’t do a lot of wine sales given the atmosphere, but they do go through a case week. They just don’t know what they’ll do until they open.
There was then a brief discussion about following Soulard’s historic codes and limits on decorations. Eliza then said everything they currently do in Maplewood has to be approved. There has also been talk about a soft open with Soulard’s involvement.
Jim thanked Eliza, her husband, and the chef for coming to the meeting.
After they left the meeting, Jim asked if he should sign the petition on SRG/Board’s behalf. Karen Moske suggested we sign based on the representation given by Eliza. Neil Putz agreed.
Karen Moske made the motion to sign The Crow Bar’s petition for a liquor license as presented this evening. Billy Tomber seconded.
The vote was taken. All voted in favor of Jim signing the petition. No votes opposed it.
The motion passed.
4. Minutes of the Previous Monthly Board Meeting
Chris Currington said that he’d sent the link to the October Board Meeting Minutes on the SRG Cloud. Only minor changes were received. Chris asked for the motion to accept the October Board Meeting Minutes as final.
Karen Moske made the motion to accept the minutes. Margi Koors seconded.
The vote was taken. All voted in favor of accepting the minutes. No votes opposed it.
The motion to accept the October Board Meeting Minutes as final passed.
5. Financial Report
Debby Brown said that net income is~$5,000 and the current cash balance is ~$79,000. Nearly $5,100 has already been deposited for Parlour Tour sponsorships, but there are no expenses yet. Debby asked if there were any questions. Hearing none, Jim moved to the next agenda item.
a. Budget items
i. Insurance
1. Special event insurance for Parlour Tour; Insurance renewal in December; Over budget
Jim Dallas said that the insurance renewal comes up on Dec. 5 for commercial, property, and liquor liability. There was $3,933 budgeted for insurance in FY 2022. It appears that for the full fiscal year, SRG is going to exceed the budgeted amount.
We had to pay two special event insurance costs for the Concert series, which has already been charged to this fiscal year ($684). When we renewed last December, because of Covid, we did not pay for the event insurance. Plus, using the fact we have held special events this fiscal year, we should pre-pay for up to four events next year. Since we did two events, they’re invoicing us not only for commercial liability, but also charging for two events we’ll have next year. We have to pay for the Parlour Tour this year soon because it happens the day before the renewal. John Shandley is trying to convince the underwriter it’s one event. Since they sent us an invoice as of Dec. 5 with two next year, and then since we have two before Dec. 5. Then there are going to be two for next year (2 concerts; 2 days of Parlour Tour).
The Outlay on Dec 5 will be $5,126; $4,442 for commercial and property (total of four events next year); plus $455 for liquor liability policy; plus $684 for this year’s Parlour Tour (worst case scenario). We are going to go over budget for insurance payments.
Margi Koors asked about next year’s budget. Jim said insurance is charged on a cash basis. We’ll pay on Dec. 5, unless we set up a receivable that charges to next year. Insurance coverage year does not coincide with SRG’s fiscal year. Jim also said the insurance company will make us pay the cash but if we want to charge it to next year’s fiscal year, we’d need to set up a receivable. Debby Brown said she doesn’t recommend we set up the receivable. Jim said it would complicate things unless there’s a really good handoff to a Treasurer. Margi agreed we have to pay the money and she doesn’t want to add any more work.
Karen Moske asked Jim if he’s comfortable that this is a legit insurance charge. Jim said yes. Nancy Kelly asked if there’s a financial consideration for payment. Jim said he could talk to John about not prepaying for the events. However, we may run the risk they raise the rates.
Michael Pastore said he doesn’t think we should pay for two events for next year and the insurance company sits on it. He’d rather pay more in August.
Billy asked that, if for some reason the events did not happen, would there then be a refund. Jim said he would ask about the implications of not having the event.
Neil Putz asked if we require event insurance for the Membership Party in May or the Garden Tour in June. Jim said we don’t.
Nancy Kelly asked Jim if he’s spoken to John about insuring the exterior at the Soulard Station. Jim said he’s had that conversation, but it’s not in the current quote. Nancy said she was referring to the works of art at the Station, and should we insure them.
Billy Tomber said that if the president and treasurer think this is the right thing to do, he supports it. Nancy Lambert asked if it’s been a while since SRG has gotten insurance quotes. Billy said it’s been 6 or 7 years.
Karen Moske asked if we need a motion to amend the budget. Jim said he thinks so. Debby reminded everyone that we voted for the insurance at the Concert. Karen asked if the motion is to amend a budget item, how much would it be. Jim said he needed to add up the amount. Karen also said that we shouldn’t have events without insurance coverage. Billy suggested we pay the bill as invoiced.
Jim calculated the invoice. We would be $1,100 over budget when the bill is paid Dec. 5.
Debby Brown made the motion to increase the budget $1,500 to cover insurance. Karen Moske seconded.
The vote was taken. Nine voted in favor. One abstained from the vote.
The motion to increase the budget for the insurance payment passed.
Jim then said he would check with John to see if we get refunded, and that his preference is SRG doesn’t prepay for anything. Debby asked if we prepay, we need to make sure we get money back, if possible, and her guidance is not to prepay anything. There was then a brief discussion about Directors and Officers insurance of $495 due in May.
6. By-Laws Review
Gary Toribio sent out an email with some comments about the draft by-laws review. Jim Dallas said he posted updated documents on the SRG Cloud. The issues raised by Gary concerned: Executive Director; Committee renaming; Simplifying parliamentary procedures; Adding general provisions; Policies and Procedures (Ps & Ps); Proofreading.
Jim said he had proofread the document again and found a couple typos and a reference that needed to be changed. Jim opened the floor to Gary to explain some of his suggested changes.
Gary ran through his changes quickly. For the Executive Director possible position, there were a fair amount of changes and Gary didn’t want us to get locked into them with the by-laws; he doesn’t want something to come in the by-laws that we then have to go back and change, but with rewording, there may be limited concern here.
With the name changes to committees, Gary wasn’t aware this was happening. Margi Koors said she was opposed to changing committee names. Nancy Lambert said she noticed these changes, too. There was then a discussion about what the name changes mean. “Development” instead of “Fundraising” opens up the committee and is more encompassing. The description for the Development Committee has also changed from the Fundraising Committee description. The Soulard Station committee name is also changing in case there are other properties under SRG management in the future. There was also a discussion about the original working group, and Neil Putz said that when we’re reviewing the by-laws revisions, we’re reviewing all of their work in a consolidated manner; the rationale was important. Margi said that after the discussion, it showed merit and she would go along with the committee name changes.
As for parliamentary procedures, Gary said he had a recommendation. With parliamentary procedures and Robert’s Rules of Order (RRO), there are sections where RRO covers organizational issues. Gary said he wasn’t sure where the by-laws revisions draw the lines. Jim said that Gary made some great points about parliamentary procedures, and he and Gary are working on changes to the by-laws.
For the general provisions in the by-laws, Gary said that there are better alternatives to compensation and conflicts of interests than what we have in place. Karen Moske said this shouldn’t be in the by-laws, but in the Ps & Ps, and asked if there should be something in place for emergency situations, like a pandemic (something to vary from the by-laws if needed). Debby Brown asked if we would have to define “emergency.”
Gary asked if there was anything in the by-laws about when the Ps & Ps need to be together and in place. Jim said we have a year after the by-laws are voted by Membership. There will be several things we’ll need to develop Ps & Ps for.
Gary said that proofreading the final by-laws revisions document shouldn’t fall to Jim; it should fall to others.
Nancy Lambert asked for more information from Gary about the Executive Director position. There was then a discussion about the Executive Director responsibilities (accepting membership applications, keeping updated membership lists, tracking dues payable, collection of dues, providing each member with by-laws and membership list, periodically updating the list, etc.). That information was removed in the by-laws revisions. Margi asked if the Executive Director should report to the president and the board. Jim said the Executive Director would serve at the discretion of the Board. Billy reminded everyone that this was written in case the Board ever decided to hire such a position. Michael Pastore said it should be clear the Executive Director works for the SRG Board.
Karen asked if we should say “in consultation with” and “under the supervision of” the president. Gary said he didn’t want to box the Board in with an Executive Director that we haven’t thought through. Perhaps we get to that point, hire someone, and then work it out. Nancy Lambert said more specifics should be in the Ps & Ps.
Gary asked why the Executive Director would have to be a member of SRG and a voting member. Margi said that the by-laws revisions say voting member or non-voting member. Karen said that, in looking at other organizations, having someone a member generally means they have the interest of the organization. Gary said he didn’t want to limit it. Margi said that it was a matter of $20; maybe membership would be automatic for the Executive Director. Gary said that it would be good for the authority of the board, but it should be brief. Margi said if SRG did hire an Executive Director, it would be for a fairly specific purpose, or group of purposes that are specific. Karen disagreed; the purpose would be for expanding and day-to-day operations, so the president isn’t so bogged down with SRG business. Jim agreed, and said if SRG hires an Executive Director, it would be long term. Billy made a recommendation about what to remove from the by-laws. Gary then mentioned the number of contracts that MGI enters into (with an Executive Director) without the president getting bogged down in the details.
Nancy Lambert asked about the conflict of interest in the by-laws. Jim said he took Gary’s advice. Neil said that conflict of interest, recordkeeping, and whistleblowing are separate Ps & Ps and not required in the by-laws. Jim said that Gary is suggesting we take SHARE’s conflict of interest and put it in the by-laws. Neil said it wasn’t needed. Gary said he respectfully disagreed; there is a national bar association that has standard set of by-laws and included in that conflict of interests and compensation. It should apply to committee chairs, the Board, president, etc. What is suggested is being applied to employees only. Neil said he would defer to someone who has legal specialization in nonprofits. Gary said that he did research and there are standard clauses that should be in the by-laws. Neil asked if they were national or State of Missouri. Gary said they were from the National Bar Association and certain clauses should be included, and if they’re in the SRG by-laws revisions, then SRG will be covered. Karen agreed—if they’re in the by-laws, then the organization is covered. There may also be some grant or something we want that a conflict-of-interest provision is included. Neil said we need to check with the law. Jim said it’s been included, but hasn’t been sent broadly, but we’re going to go from here, and that he can make the changes to the by-laws revisions, and we can vote at the Dec. 15 meeting.
Nancy Lambert asked if we should proofread the by-laws revisions. Gary reminded the Board that there may be some things that come from Membership when they review. Jim said that his plan, at this point, is for Membership to vote in March. Margi asked if we could put this in front of membership at the December meeting. Michael asked if there was a rush. Margi said that people need extra time to look at the by-laws. Jim said that he doesn’t want the by-laws revisions to carry over to a new board; we’d be running into an election the old way where the Editor of The Renaissance is still an appointed position.
There was then a discussion about reviews, timing, and let membership know. It was decided that Nancy Kelly and Chris Currington would provide a final edit of the by-laws revisions, the vote would be taken by the Board via email about accepting the draft of the by-laws revisions, Jim would then have them added to the website, and make the announcement at the next General Membership Meeting that the by-laws were ready for Membership review.
7. Memorials
Jim Dallas said that, in the last Sept. 2020 Board Meeting minutes, it was stated that, “To fulfill the Board’s 2018 resolution to plant a tree in memory garden for this Bastille employee who was murdered in May 2018.” It appears that the 2018 Board had actually voted to give this gentleman (Payton) a tree. Jim said that he was still trying to find the 2018 Board minutes that state that exactly what that board voted. Gary said that he has three Board Meeting minutes from then for June, July, and August. Michael Pastore said that we talked about this at the last meeting, the Board is heartfelt, and we’re doing a commemoration with a good heart, even if it’s not exactly what was decided. He made the recommendation that we go forward with the motion that was passed at the previous Board meeting. Billy Tomber and Margi Koors agreed.
8. Nominating committee
Jim Dallas said that the by-laws state that a Nominating Committee is supposed to form by December 1, and it should consist of at least 5 voting Members of SRG who don’t plan to run for any position. The slate of nominees is then to be announced at the February General Membership Meeting—two months prior to the April meeting. If a Nominating Committee member decides to run, then they have to drop off the committee.
Jim said that he and Michael Pastore have started discussing this, and they’re not sure they’ll have it formed by the December Board Meeting. Jim asked if anyone felt like being on the committee or wait for Michael and Jim to make the recommendation. Michael said that there will be some turnover on the Board, but for those who are staying, they want a strong and vibrant Board. It’s in everyone’s best interest to gather the people in, so they will need the names of those running for the Board and Officer positions. Karen Moske volunteered to be part of the Nominating Committee.
9. Additional Committee Reports
a. Beautification
Karen Moske, Board Liaison to the Beautification Committee, said that she didn’t have anything to report.
b. Communications
Billy Tomber, Board Liaison to the Communications Committee, said that ComCom is asking for an extra $350. The committee has spent $750 on Facebook ads and has more requests for ads than before. They have recently boosted the Fundraising Committee’s fresh wreath sales, Parlour Tour, and Smarty Gras. There was the membership party last May, so the committee is asking for the extra $350. Margi Koors asked if the money is specific to Facebook ads. Billy said yes.
Michael Pastore made the motion to approve the additional $350 for Facebook ads. Karen Moske seconded.
The vote was taken.
All voted in favor. No votes opposed it.
The motion to approve the additional $350 for Facebook ads passed.
c. Community Involvement and Events
Jim Dallas said that he and Chris Currington discussed how to staff the committee and if they wanted to start some events. Chris asked about the Santa Comes to Soulard Event and if the Board wanted to do that. Nancy Lambert said that the event in the past has been held at the Soulard Station on a Friday evening around the second week of December from 6 to 8 p.m. There were a lot of kids that showed up if the weather was decent. Usually, the Station was decorated, and there was some kind of gift to give to the kids. Pictures would be taken and posted in The Renaissance. There was also hot chocolate and marshmallows. However, because of the number of events that SRG has recently hosted, it was decided not to have the Santa Comes to Soulard event for 2021.
d. Fundraising
Margi Koors, Board Liaison to the Fundraising Committee, discussed the Christmas/Mardi Gras wreath sales, and that Christopher Schwarz is working on the giveaway T-shirts. Other than that, there was nothing to report.
e. Historical
There was no report for the Historical Committee.
f. Membership
Gary Toribio, Board Liaison to the Membership Committee, said that there was no committee meeting last month. The wine-tasting event went well, and it doesn’t seem that there’s an issue needing any budget amendments. The next meeting is the next Tuesday and they will get fleshed out expenditures for the wine-tasting event and follow up with Debby Brown.
Jim Dallas brought up that the Board approved $5,000 for the Membership Party, and we thought that expenses would hit in May. However, the party didn’t happen until June 28, so expenses for that event fell in the next (current) fiscal year (2021/2022). The Board has given the committee $7,000 for next year’s party that should be in May. Already, on paper, $2,800 has been spent for the Membership Party (because expenses hit in this fiscal year for last year’s party). Michael Pastore said that, in his opinion, the budget and line items need to be moveable; the Board needs to be able to adjust as long as we’re being responsible. Jim said that by bringing it up now, and when Debby sees the bills for next year’s budget, it will have already been approved. There’s a need to adjust to $9,800 for that line item (the 2022 Membership party). Gary asked Michael if, as the president next May, if the Membership Party only brings in $4,000 in dues. Michael said he feels not everything is a moneymaking venture. Margi Koors said the Membership Party costs about $25 per person to put on. If we only have 200 people attend, the cost is ~$5,000; if 350 attend, it goes up to ~$7,000. But the committee needs an estimate. It would depend on attendance.
Margi Koors made the motion to increase the Membership Committee’s budget for the annual Membership Party by $2,800 due to last year’s budget being partially spent in the fiscal year (2021/2022). Karen Moske seconded the motion.
The vote was taken.
All voted in favor. No votes opposed it.
The motion to increase the Membership Committee’s budget passed.
g. Parlour Tour
Jim Dallas recused himself from this discussion. His son, Greg, is being considered for entertainment at the upcoming Parlour Tour, and this may require a contract. Michael Pastore took over the meeting.
Nancy Lambert, Board Liaison to the Parlour Tour committee, handed out an updated Parlour Tour budget. Nancy said amounts have changed in certain categories, but the income has already been $5,100. Nancy asked for an approval of column 2 of the budget she handed out. There have been 85 of the 100 Parlour Tour tickets sold. Nancy then went over the line items of the projections of income and expenses. There was a question about the gift for the homeowners. Nancy said the increase in the budget is due to the champagne and entertainment, but it’s only $1,360 more.
The committee has reached out to five groups for entertainment that did not work out. So, they reached out to Greg Dallas’ trio to see if they are available, but at this point, it’s not certain how much they will cost. The entertainment amount for $1,000 has already been budgeted.
Michael asked if the Board had a problem with Jim’s son and the trio being hired to do this. Karen reminded the Board that this is a busy time of year to find entertainers. Nancy Kelly said she didn’t have a problem, but acknowledged that some people might. Michael asked why. Nancy said there could be a perception problem. Chris Currington agreed with this, only because it’s the SRG president’s son, so there should be some record that the Board supports this.
Billy Tomber made the motion to approve the Parlour Tour addition of $1,360. Karen Moske seconded.
The vote was taken. All voted in favor. No votes opposed it.
The vote to approve the Parlour Tour budget addition passed.
Nancy Lambert said she would like to add a comment that following the budget and asking for additional money—line-by-line-is very hard. Every time the committee comes back and wants to make a change. The Board needs to be more flexible. There were rules for a reason, but the Board should be looking at how to make the rules more flexible. Michael said there’s a difference between a tool and rule; the budget is a tool. Jim Dallas said that there will be some growing pains, and the budget document can be modified. The Parlour Tour has been “penalized” because they have a detailed budget.
Gary asked if there were any contracts that need to be approved. Jim said that was why he recused himself from the Parlour Tour discussion. If there’s a vote to be taken about the contract, then that will need to be done without Jim, and this may need to be voted on by email without Jim’s involvement. There was then a discussion about contracts, and it was decided that if there should be a contract with Jim’s son and the trio, and it would be managed via email without Jim’s involvement.
h. PRT
Karen Moske, Board Liaison to the PRT, said that the owner of Bastille is looking to add a New Orleans balcony wrap on the outside of the bar. Jay Gibbs, Michael Pastore, and Jim Dallas met with the owner, and he set forth his plans and presented to the PRT. All members of the PRT committee gave input and rationale; they voted 7-0 against the Bastille owner’s plans because they wouldn’t meet historical code.
Jay proposed a letter from Jim Dallas with the rationale that the proposal does not comply with current code; there’s no evidence that a wraparound wrought iron balcony would have ever existed at the building and there’s no model example in Soulard.
Nancy Kelly asked for clarification if the letter was signed on behalf of the Board. Karen said no; the letter is from the PRT. Nancy asked when the letter would be sent. Jim said he got the draft this day. Nancy said that this has been a widely discussed issue, and a lot of people have seen this online. Then she asked if we just want to send a letter from the president and the Board without bringing it up at the next General Membership meeting and tell members what’s happening and that we’ll be sending the letter. There was then a brief discussion about the letter, and that it would be sent and covered in the PRT report at the next membership meeting.
i. Safety
There was no Safety Committee update, but Andrea Maddox-Dallas, committee chair, has the camera program on her radar.
j. Soulard Station
There was a discussion about insurance (see notes above about insuring items on the exterior). There was a working group in June to discuss the short-term plans to increase the visibility of the Soulard Station and increase activities, and the committee is working on how to phase in a long-term plan. There is also the Mardi Gras event (to engage residents who want to participate in the upcoming parade) the next Friday.
10. New Business
Michael Pastore brought up the new dog waste receptacles that had recently been placed in the neighborhood. It’s a great concept. However, the sign and posts are less than desirable. Terry Hoffman came to the Board and talked about wanting to emulate Lafayette Square with historical signage. And then they installed the receptacles that don’t look historical. Michael has spoken to Terry about this, but there’s been no action. Terry said that he’s willing to investigate.
Nancy Lambert brought up an issue about emails going to junk, or simply not getting them. Billy Tomber said he’ll check the accounts, but mark any junk mail and add them to the contacts.
11. Adjourn
Nancy Lambert made the motion to adjourn the meeting. Nancy Kelly seconded.
The vote was taken.
All voted in favor of adjourning the meeting
The meeting adjourned at 10:25 p.m.