June 2021 Board Meeting Minutes
SRG Monthly Board Meeting
June 16, 2021 APPROVED Minutes
1. Call to Order + Opening Remarks
The meeting was called to order at 7:03 p.m. by Jim Dallas.
Officers and Board Members in attendance when the meeting was called to order were Jim Dallas (President), Michael Pastore (President-Elect), Neil Putz (Past President), Debby Brown (Treasurer), Chris Currington (Secretary), Nancy Kelly, Margi Koors, Nancy Lambert, and Gary Toribio. Karen Moske arrived at 7:07 p.m. Billy Tomber (Editor, The Renaissance) arrived at 7:27 p.m.
Jim Dallas welcomed everyone and thanked them for attending the meeting. Jim also expressed that he thought the Board Retreat was a success and enjoyed the feedback he received. The outcomes of the retreat will help focus on the board; not just the President.
2. Minutes of the Previous Monthly Board Meeting
Chris Currington, Secretary, said that he’d shared the minutes with the Board members via email and there were no changes. Chris then asked for a motion to accept the minutes of the May 26 Board Meeting.
Nancy Kelly made the motion to accept the minutes. Nancy Lambert seconded the motion.
The vote was taken.
Everyone present voted in favor to accept the minutes of the May 26 Board Meeting. No votes opposed.
The minutes of the May 26 Board Meeting were accepted.
3. Financial Report
Debby Brown (Treasurer), and Michael Pastore, (President Elect/Liaison to the Treasurer), gave the financial report together. Debby said that she had checked the bank accounts the previous day and pulled the May 2021 Profit & Loss (P&L). The P&L didn’t show the reconciliation of cash-to-cash or account-to-account from April 30 to May 31.
There was a six-page report with year-to-date financials for July 1, 2020, to June 15, 2021, showing P&L and balance sheet as of June 15 and statement of cash flows year to date. Jim Dallas said he’s imagining something like the 6-page handout to post on the website at the end of June, especially as we ask for the General Membership’s budget vote.
Noticing that there was a $0 for the month’s membership dues, Margi asked why new/renewed memberships aren’t being recognized. Debby said it was because Billy Tomber had recently transferred the dues (reflected in Square) and the dues should be recorded in the final June financials. Debby also said the bank accounts are accurate, and that Dues will be included in the next report, and also on the report put on the SRG Website. Billy will also show Debby how to transfer the dues from Square to Quick Books/bank accounts.
Michael Pastore said he would work with Billy to see if these transfers can be automatic, or that we may need to consider some other source for payments and transfers. Nancy Lambert mentioned that any fees may be waved because SRG is a nonprofit, and that this is worth asking. Nancy also said that Debby and Jim should know what’s happening with the transfers from Square.
Jim turned the meeting’s attention back to the management report and posting it on the SRG website on a monthly basis. Karen Moske asked if this would cause a burden on Debby. Debby said that she pulls the report from Quick Books and makes sure everything is added that needs to be, so it shouldn’t be difficult.
There was a brief discussion about which financial report to post on the website.
For clarity, same topic, but occurred later in the meeting. To the question if money from income in Square can be transferred automatically, Billy replied in the affirmative. To the question about costing more to have this system, the response was no, but there’s no reserve. Michael Pastore asked if money received through square is set up to email the treasurer. Billy responded that he can figure it out and that he will create who gets the emails. Billy suggested that they have a discussion about this topic at the next Communications Committee meeting. Nancy Lambert asked that, when the deposits are transferred from square to Quick Books/bank accounts, if they go away. Billy said they do not.
4. Budget
Jim Dallas said that Linda Howdeshell sent SRG an engagement letter for auditing financial statements, which should begin soon after the new fiscal year. Neil Putz confirmed that it had been several years since SRG had its financials audited. Linda sent a list of information she needs to begin the audit, and a lot had already been supplied for the 2019 tax filing. Linda also has access to Quick Books. The timeline for the audit is July to August. Jim asked Debby Brown to confirm the cost of the audit: $4,850. Michael Pastore explained that the purpose of the audit is to protect SRG so we have everything should anyone ask a question.
Gary Toribio said that he understands from previous discussions that there are different levels of audits, and this audit will be the most in-depth, meaning it won’t cost $4,850 every year. Michael also said that if we engage with the same person each year, she won’t have to go back several years because she’ll be familiar with the information. Jim also said the audit may uncover some questions that Linda raises, such as lack of two signatures on checks.
Debby asked if there was a written policy for check signatures. Gary said that he believes there’s something in the bylaws requiring checks to have two signatures. Michael said he has talked to Carrollton Bank to have checks with two signature lines. Nancy Kelly asked if the two signatures was a policy and how it got changed in the last five years. Debby said that previous treasurers changed it based on the amounts of the checks. Jim said we may need a policy and procedure that expands on this.
Board Approved Budget
Jim said that he’d sent a spreadsheet on June 8 with adjustments based on the discussion we had at the May Board meeting. Jim also explained that as of May 26, the numbers presented had a deficit that went down to ~43,600, then we had the budget discussion at the May 26 meeting, and the deficit is now down to ~$27,000. The idea is we want to end up with a projected deficit ~$25,000.
The Residential Promotions budget is $4,200. Because SBA would be coordinating Bastille Day, any associated SRG expenses can be removed. There was also a brief discussion about what to do with the Residential Promotions committee.
Chris Currington mentioned a new committee, Neighborhood Inclusion and Diversity Committee, as a result of the Board Retreat, where events could potentially be included. Nancy Lambert and Karen Moske added that they are interested in inclusion, and Margi said this new committee could include events for children in Soulard. Nancy Kelly said that we should look at removing Residential Promotions and look at a new committee. Jim said that he wanted to confirm that what was formerly Residential Promotions would now be “New Committee” on the spreadsheets presented to the General Membership. Billy Tomber agreed with Jim and then later, we should give more thought to what the committee is called.
In short, $1,200 would be cut for Bastille Day, $500 would be added for administrative, and New Committee will have $3,000 to cover events.
There was a brief discussion about the Fundraising Committee and changes to the budget. Margi explained the changes. Jim also explained the committee’s assumptions for donations and sponsorships to offset the Soulard Concert Series.
Gary Toribio said that the Membership Committee had a line item for an iPad/tablet for $1,000. The Membership Committee wants to improve the SRG website, Square, etc. There was also a discussion about committees and iPads/tablets from the previous budget process. Billy said the iPad/tablet wasn’t necessary and that the SRG iPad has been found and will be used at the Community Party (membership drive). The $1,000 was removed from the Membership Committee, getting the projected deficit down to ~25,000.
Gary asked about the Star Awards and increased costs from $800 to $2,000. Karen Moske said it was because of the price of wood and the previous company that created the awards has closed. Gary asked how many Stars Awards are given out. Karen said that it depends on the year and who’s being considered, plus they’re custom-made, and she wants this to remain in the budget. Billy confirmed that the awards are not given every year. There was a discussion about the necessity of these awards (they’re good for the neighborhood and the Star home award stays with the house) and keeping this budget item in.
Neil Putz also reminded the Board about the process for requesting additional money if a committee needs it. Michael Pastore said he agreed with Neil, and a budget should have flexibility; sometimes we’ll spend a little more, sometimes there will be a savings. If a committee requests additional money, we look at the request and resolve it then.
Jim asked for a motion to approve the budget. Margi moved that the Board accept the proposed budget before it, taking into consideration the changes made this evening, with a final total deficit of $25,093. Billy Tomber secondedthe motion.
The vote was taken.
All voted in favor to approve the motion and the budget. No votes opposed.
The motion to accept the 2021 to 2022 budget passed.
5. In-person General Membership Meetings
Jim Dallas said that he’d done some research on different locations for future, in-person General Membership meetings, the first of which will be July 7. The American Legion will be $50 for facility costs, but seating inside the Legion is tight if we get a good turnout; or maybe the meeting could be held outside. This venue also has sound and is audiovisual-equipped.
The Franklin Room is very spacious but there’s a charge ($300) for the facility that could be recouped with beer, wine and liquor sales after the meeting, something like $10 per person for beer and wine; $11 if liquor is added. For this venue, we’d also have to bring our own sound/AV equipment. Karen Moske asked if SRG would have to commit to a guaranteed number of attendees, and Jim said he didn’t know that. But figuring 30 people at $10 each, that would be $300.
Another option for these meetings is the South Broadway Athletic Club, which would be $50 for the bartender, a cash-bar and snacks. This venue has ample seating, but we’d have to bring sound/AV equipment.
Nancy Kelly said that she had a concern with mixing up the meeting locations, especially since the meetings have been at the American Legion and it’s adequate for the number of attendees. Nancy thinks it’s good to have a place and stick with it. Margi Koors agreed with Nancy about continuity, but also there’s the issue of changing the signs that are put out in the neighborhood to publicize the meetings. Margi also mentioned the $50 stipend for the socials after the meetings (i.e., $50 goes to the location to supply food for SRG members who gather there). Michael Pastore said he thinks the American Legion is a fine location. Also, in July (7th), there may not be that many attendees given the holiday.
Jim confirmed that we should have the July 7 meeting at the American Legion. Gary Toribio said that after the meeting, the Membership Committee should determine after-meeting socials, activities and venues.
Nancy Lambert suggested SRG could do something very nice during the holidays at the Franklin Room. Jim said that this would also allow time to publicize this event.
Margi then said that she will make the recommendation to the Membership Committee to stay at the American Legion afterward for the July 7 meeting, and they’ll use the $50 stipend to find some food/snacks.
It was also mentioned that The Blaster needs to include that SRG is going back to in-person meetings and remind those who are not fully vaccinated to wear a mask and socially distance.
6. Presentation of SHARE
Jim Dallas mentioned the issue of potentially supporting a new non-profit taking over the Soulard Concert Series, and the Boards’ vote at the April Board Meeting. At that meeting, the Board approved a motion that SRG does not object to another nonprofit exploring taking on responsibility for the Soulard Concert Series with SRG consideration being taken into account.
Jim then invited Christopher Schwarz to present (via Zoom) about that non-profit (slides had previously been shared with the Board).
Christopher Schwarz than presented his concept for “Soulard Heritage Arts Revitalization and Education, Inc.” (SHARE). Currently Christopher and his team are looking to organize the nonprofit; they have put out the charter and looking at filings as well as bylaws.
The goal will be to produce an annual, free festival, which has been labeled “The Soulard B3 (Blues, Brews and Bites) Festival.” This will include concerts and shows. A winter event will also be opened to a Booster Club—neighborhood based—and a new SHARE board will be seated each winter.
With the B3 Festival, there is anticipation for two music stages, live acts, with beer and vendors. This could grow to something like the French Quarter Festival (New Orleans). Attendees move from one stage to another, visit bars and rest in between, and then shut down at 7 p.m. and turn events over to the neighborhood. At the beginning, the venue will be at the market, then in three years, expand to Pontiac Park, then perhaps expand to the park near NGA.
Christopher explained that his team is trying to put SHARE together with the support and help of SBA, SRG, MGI and neighbors. It will form a 501(c)(3) (or other entity) and try to bring money from inside and outside the neighborhood, with some major sponsorships to get people into the neighborhood. Christopher said this new entity will need independence for contracting, insurance and hiring people—other organizations have limited ability to do this.
Christopher then said he understands concerns about the growth of SHARE, and there are controls in place to ensure it grows at the right pace. SHARE will be structured with a 12-person Board of Directors and looking for SBA and SRG to contribute 3 members each to the Board. These positions will also be staggered for 3-year terms. This is similar to how MGI is set up. There will also be an Advisory Council, surveys, forums, and informal booster club; basically, as much of a partnership as possible and keeping a pulse on the neighborhood so they don’t lose control. Christopher said SHARE hopes to please most people while addressing concerns of others. This is also going before SBA’s board. Christopher also hopes to file paperwork in July, and then organize the way forward. Christopher then said SHARE is not asking SRG for money; only consent, and then he opened up the discussion for questions.
Gary Toribio asked Jim Dallas if there was any specific recommendation or action that needed to be taken during the meeting. Jim said that this was purely informational, and then asked Christopher to confirm his timing. Christopher said SHARE wants to submit paperwork by mid-August and he’d like SBA and SRG on board.
Nancy Kelly queried about blessings and consent of SRG and SBA, and then asked if by giving consent, if Christopher plans to use SRG, SBA and MGI as steppingstones for fundraising—because SHARE will have the backing of these groups and can seek corporate sponsorships. Christopher said fundraising will come from events, and that SHARE is not looking for SRG funds. Nancy then said that they’ll be using the SRG name to promote fundraising efforts and get corporate sponsorships. Christopher said he doesn’t foresee using SRG’s name; only that he’s looking for SRG’s approval.
Debby Brown said she’s worked for a nonprofit, and that SHARE’s board members will need to write bylaws. Gary said the articles are written in the bylaws and asked how the bylaws will be passed. Jim then asked Christopher what the process will be to establish SHARE, or if we’re putting the cart before the horse. Christopher explained that SHARE will be its own entity and the organizers of the organization will set it up. They’ll be naming SHARE’s board in December, and they’ll be seated in January. Christopher also said the charter is written and bylaws are written.
Michael Pastore said he’d like to move the discussion of SHARE to the next month’s Board Meeting. There was a lot of information to digest, and this discussion could go on at length.
Jim then asked if there were any additional questions. Debby said she’s not comfortable agreeing to an organization that doesn’t exist. Christopher said that SHARE can be formed very soon by filing with the state of Missouri and getting a tax ID. However, before doing this, SHARE is giving SRG all of the information that’s available.
Nancy Kelly then asked why SRG is part of this right now—SRG can agree now to be part of this and be on SHARE’s board or not. Would it be possible for SRG to sit back and see how things progress with the proposed nonprofit and leave the door open for membership and participation? This seems to be rushed, and it feels as if SRG is in a position to “get on or get off,” but this could be a false interpretation. Christopher explained that he’s not forcing a decision from SRG; this is an offer. If SRG doesn’t want to be a part of SHARE, he and his team can still form the nonprofit and move forward. If SRG is not interested, they can also take that into account, but it is hoped that SRG will participate.
Nancy Kelly then asked what the response has been from SBA and MGI. Christopher said that SBA has been positive about bringing people into the neighborhood, and they were enthusiastic when Christopher spoke to them. Gary then said SHARE has not been brought up to MGI and they have not taken a position. Christopher said he has not talked to the Boards of MGI or SBA but has spoken to individuals. Gary also talked to Christopher about the process for incorporating SHARE and the steps involved. Christopher said the state does not require bylaws to file the paperwork. Jim then asked Christopher if he can put everything down on paper, and then fold in, “if SRG decides to participate,” “if MGI decides to participate,” and “if SBA decides to participate.” Christopher then said that the draft of SHARE’s bylaws already have spots reserved for SRG and SBA.
Karen Moske then asked if Christopher is asking SRG to be members of the board, but also to sponsor, or just have representatives on the board. Christopher said that if the organization is stood up and to ensure it is connected with the neighborhood, they feel that SBA has the interests of neighborhood businesses and SRG has the interests of the residents. By including three board members on SHARE, there will be a say within the nonprofit, represented by neighbors and residents more specifically. Christopher has a good idea what SHARE will look like, and make sure SRG’s interests are covered for, say, the next one, three and five years, and get input on what’s envisioned. Christopher is trying to make this a smooth transition to a new organization, and that the concerns of SRG’s Board are taken into consideration. Christopher also said he doesn’t know if SHARE wants to move forward without SRG’s approval.
Nancy Lambert then asked about the genesis of the idea and where the money will go. Christopher said, since SHARE will be a nonprofit, the concerts will be free, and the money raised will go to the concerts, festival and staff to put it on. If there is extra money, it would be redistributed. SHARE’s board will not be paid, and Christopher will not be paid, but there will be some employees who are paid. If there is surplus money, it will go back to the community. Michael Pastore asked Christopher to explain that further. Christopher said SHARE’s board will decide how the money is redistributed to the community, but SHARE is not looking at raising a lot of money. They’re more focused on putting on the concerts and ensuring they have a good product. But, because SHARE will be a nonprofit, Christopher can’t guarantee how the money goes back to the neighborhood, but SRG and SBA are most in line with the needs of the neighborhood.
Nancy Kelly thanked Christopher, and said he’s given SRG a lot to think about—a large vision and something to consider.
Christopher said he’d looked at this as an expansion of SRG before Covid, and this was already a planned SRG event and the opportunity to expand in the neighborhood. Gary then asked Christopher’s recollection of the B3 Festival and proposed $25,000 to the SRG budget. Neil Putz said SRG was aggregating a larger event at that time. Gary also said that he feels Christopher and SHARE are going about this the correct way—getting incorporated, then bylaws with clauses for amendments and who is included on the board. Gary also said he’s comfortable that Christopher is proposing three SRG members on SHARE’s board so we have a voice, and he doesn’t think SRG is being pressured into taking any action.
Nancy Kelly then asked Christopher, if SRG was not interested, would he rethink this. Christopher said he would be hesitant to move forward without the blessings of SBA or SRG.
Michael Pastore then asked why this will be a nonprofit and not a business. Christopher said that was their choice because it will be something that strengthens the neighborhood, businesses and residents. If it makes money, then it will be missing the point.
Gary then asked if Christopher and SHARE will try for grants, thus the reason for the nonprofit. Christopher confirmed this, and said they don’t necessarily need the grants, but that could relax the pressure on having sponsors—with more than one funding source, SHARE won’t be relying on any one single sponsor.
Jim then asked Christopher to clarify MGI’s involvement. Christopher said that MGI has three board members from SRG and three members from SBA. Gary then said if there are questions of MGI, those on the board will ask the questions and find out their interest. Christopher then clarified that for SHARE’s board, SRG and SBA would have guaranteed spots.
Neil then said he looks with respect and gains confidence of the viewpoints of Billy, Nancy and Gary because they are the three SRG board members on the MGI board. The insights they have help us understand and the mechanism Christopher is proposing, and if Billy, Nancy and Gary are confident, Neil is confident, and this enables his support that this will work.
Nancy Lambert then said she is more comfortable than Nancy Kelly, and she sees this as a model of MGI. It’s also important that SRG have a voice and is heard in order to help SHARE make decisions. Nancy Lambert said she understands some of the trepidation because there are questions that can’t be answered right now. Nancy Lambert also said she agreed with Gary that it’s very different than a business, and SHARE doesn’t need a business plan for this situation. For now, there has to be an organization that has to be agreed on at some point. But at least there is structure, and the SRG Board has asked Christopher to bring us bylaws and articles of incorporation. Nancy Lambert also said she understands Debby’s concerns and that perhaps Christopher needs to think about the questions people have asked. Maybe Christopher should get these people in the same room, perhaps a couple of SRG Board members, SBA representatives, so everyone is together and comfortable going forward. Nancy Lambert then asked the same question of Nancy Kelly—where are you going to put the money back into? Maybe Christopher should look at something like MGI does with grants and how money will be disseminated.
Jim then told Christopher that he’s gotten feedback from SRG’s board and SHARE will be an agenda item for the upcoming July Board Meeting. For now, this is still in the exploration phase, but we’d like to keep the discussion going, with a possible meeting where other organizations are present. Christopher agreed with this assessment.
(Note: Christopher Schwarz remained on the Zoom call for the below agenda item 7. Consideration of Setting Up Beer Tents at Two Upcoming Concerts. The following notes up to agenda item 7. are the notes from the Board discussion about SHARE after Christopher dropped off the Zoom call.)
Gary asked if SRG should create a subcommittee to look into SHARE, or if the whole Board should be involved. Jim said we should consider a subgroup or subcommittee to work with Christopher over the next month.
Nancy Kelly said there was a discussion years ago about having a money-making event and this B3 Festival feels similar, so she’s trying to figure out the genesis. Billy said that previous money-making event referred to was never designed to be a moneymaker. Two years ago, before Covid, there was the idea pitched about having a festival with multiple acts and multiple stages during May of 2020. The event is not a new concept; SHARE is the new concept. Nancy Kelly then asked why MGI doesn’t organize the B3 Festival. Billy said this isn’t in MGI’s mission. Nancy Kelly then asked if the neighborhood will be reaching an event saturation point. Billy said it will be an expansion of the existing concert series, and this could be a huge expansion. Nancy Kelly said this is what makes her leery. Billy explained this is why the growth plan is so important. Michael Pastore then said he’s concerned about street closings, no parking, thousands of people, and asked if we need other big events like Mardi Gras. Billy then asked how SRG feels about three votes on the board, if we accept SHARE’s proposal. Margi Koors said SRG needs to be at the table.
Jim then said he would follow up with SRG Board, via email, about the formation of a subcommittee/subgroup.
7. Consideration of Setting Up Beer Tents at Two Upcoming Concerts
Jim Dallas asked the Board if it wants to set up beer tents at upcoming concerts, and a confirmation of the revenue from previous beer tents. The revenue has been about $200 to $250 per concert. Billy said it’s wise to budget these revenues lower, and then excited if revenues are higher. Michael Pastore suggested not having the beer for sale since it’s not a moneymaker. Margi then asked if anyone else will have a booth at the concert. Billy said there wouldn’t be, and if there’s anyone selling beer, it should be SRG. Jim said he liked the idea of selling beer, and Christopher Schwarz said the Fundraising Committee will handle the beer booth. The budget has that this committee will purchase the beer to sell. Billy also mentioned that if the beer doesn’t sell, SRG can just use it at the next social event.
Jim told Christopher Schwarz to get the beer permit, and Billy said it costs $62.50. Karen Moske suggested Christopher check with Civil Life and Four Hands since they’re smaller breweries and they may make a donation to SRG.
Gary then said the bill for the liquor liability has been received and is being paid.
8. Presentation of File Storage System
Jim Dallas introduced Megan Mehrle, who joined the meeting in person, to talk about the SRG Cloud storage solution that the Communications Committee has been working on. A couple meetings previously, the Communications Committee appointed Megan for the cloud storage solution and its implementation. The email for the SRG cloud is cloud@soulard.org. The tool is Google Workspace for nonprofits. SRG is getting this for free. With the SRG Cloud, we have 1,000 shared drives and there is no terabyte or gigabyte limit. However, we can’t put more than 400,000 files and no one user can add over 750 GB in a day.
Users of the SRG Cloud will need their own gmail account or use another email account to create a Google Account. Megan will add and remove users on her end. Once a person is added, they’ll get an email explaining what they’ll have access to. Megan asked that we do not use any @soulard emails.
Megan said that most drives will have a PDF about how to keep the space organized, but it will be up to each committee and group to make folders and what makes sense for them. Jim asked how many committees can access the SRG Cloud. Megan said as it’s rolled out, she’ll have a check-in with anyone managing the drives, and if a committee wants to appoint someone else, they can.
Megan’s role is with the rollout of the SRG Cloud and to clarify functionality. The Communications Committee imagined use cases, and more will come up over time that they’ll need solutions for. Megan said she’s committed to being a partner and making sure this works. She will also communicate guidelines and best practices. She has also asked for a couple of days to respond to emails.
Jim said that the file sharing/cloud option should cut down on the emails and attachments, and he has asked Megan to participate in the July 14 training session (i.e., check requests and payments, etc.). Neil Putz said the training may be too much for committee chairs and probably the most challenging committee for storage will be the Historical Committee.
Margi Koors said she looks forward to storing a lot of information on the cloud and added an example of people being on the Garden Tour and keeping track of them for future events.
Neil gave an example of what’s possible for the Historical Committee. Jay Gibbs has every issue of “The Renaissance” and “The Restorationist” digitized and made available to SRG. Also, there are Mardi Gras posters catalogued by year.
Gary Toribio asked about limitations on who can add and delete files. Megan said she’d rather give committees the control rights. Billy added that there will be rules and violation of those rules will be grounds for removal from the system. Gary then asked if someone not tech savvy moving things that can then no longer be found. Billy said that the Cloudmaster will be able to see it. Nancy Lambert suggested that the more the system is limited, the busier one might be. However, there will be restore points if something needs to be found.
Jim asked if the Board is prepared to accept the recommendations about the SRG Cloud and how to roll it out. Billy said the Communications Committee can prepare a timeline, and then commended Megan for doing a great job on the SRG Cloud.
9. Other/Quick Hits
a. Request to Change Sept Board meeting to Sept 22
Jim Dallas said that he would be traveling the week of Sept. 13, 2021, and asked if the Board would approve having the meeting Sept. 22.
Everyone agreed with the request, and Jim moved to the next agenda item.
b. Training session on July 14
Jim Dallas said that he sent a “Save the Date” to committee chairs to hold July 14 for a meeting to present two budget-pertinent procedures that the Board has previously passed. However, it’s still not certain if the SRG Cloud (see above) training will happen at the same meeting, or if there’s another way to roll that training out to chairs and their committees because it’s a different depth of training.
Margi Koors said she has a couple of ideas to share, and Neil Putz invited them so the agenda for the class can be formalized, and Neil said the committee chairs should have a notebook. Neil said he would send out a meeting note to get something set up. Nancy Kelly said that it has come to her attention that Laura Grace (co-chair of the Soulard Station Committee) will be in San Diego and won’t be at the July 14 meeting, but it’s possible Bonita (co-chair of the Soulard Station Committee) will be there.
Neil asked about a makeup date for training for committee chairs who cannot make it on July 14. There was a suggestion to change the meeting date, but Jim said that all committees need to be educated, and it may be best to see who shows up on July 14 and determine if another meeting needs to be scheduled. Karen Moske suggested that another meeting be anticipated anyway because the SRG Cloud may require its own meeting session(s). Gary Toribio asked if the SRG Cloud training could be July 26, and then we go into the Board meeting at 7 p.m. Chris Currington made the suggestion to schedule the SRG Cloud training, and then for the previous hour, set a meeting for anyone who wasn’t able to attend the July 14 meeting about the other training session (budget and check requests).
Jim said he would take the ideas under advisement and moved to the next agenda item.
c. Payment/Membership processing update
Jim Dallas asked about the buttons on the website and notifications when memberships are renewed. Billy Tomber said the fix was available, and that a separate email has to go to the member, and he offered to do the follow up. Neil Putz said that this fix is an iteration, and we need to adjust processes. Billy explained that this process is a manual send, but he knows what memberships came through, and that the Membership Committee and the Board Member serving as the liaison to the Membership Committee are fine with this.
d. Memorials for Members Who Have Passed
SRG has had a recent request from Gayle van Dyke about when we plan to hold any memorial services. Neil Putz said he would email an update to the Board.
After no further discussion, Jim Dallas moved to the next agenda item.
e. Electricity costs and the solar panels
Jim Dallas opened the discussion about whether the solar panels (at the Soulard Station) are working, and how we know that we are saving money. Jim said that he and Michael Pastore get emails about electricity costs and asked if the solar panels are working. Billy Tomber said they are. Debby Brown mentioned that the electricity bill was at the meeting, to be paid. Billy offered to prepare a presentation for the August Board Meeting.
Hearing no further discussion, Jim moved to the next agenda item.
f. Reform St Louis presentation at July 7 meeting AND the request from Planning & Urban Design Agency (PDA) at the City of St. Louis
Jim Dallas said that there were two requests to present at the July 7 General Membership meeting, and that Gary Toribio had forwarded some notes about them. Before the Board agrees, however, Jim wanted to know if it would be best for them to present at a Board Meeting, or maybe sit down with the individuals and talk over their plans. Gary explained that one of the two organizations need to get signatures on petitions before the end of July, and we don’t usually have speakers at meetings. Karen Moske said we have allowed these types of presentations at General Membership meetings, and Michael Pastore concurred. Margi Koors suggested that Jim sit down at a lunch and talk over the proposals, and that the City Planner should meet with the Board (or member(s)), and the ballot initiative should be presented at a General Membership meeting.
Jim agreed and said he would have lunch with the appropriate representative(s) at Planning and Urban Design Agency. Nancy Kelly said that it should be fine to have Reform St. Louis at a General Membership meeting.
10. Additional Committee Reports
Membership Committee
Jim Dallas said that Julie Price is requesting additional money for the Community Party. Currently, The Pedestrians are set to play, and there was a discrepancy in the total amount of the cost for them. However, because the Community Party was only 10 or so days away, they would still be cheaper than finding an alternative. There was also a discussion about the cost of the alcohol that would be served. Billy Tomber asked if it was advertised as unlimited drinks included with membership fees. Margi Koors said yes, it was, and the band and alcohol have been requested and porta potties would also be on site.
Karen Moske moved to increase the budget for the Community Party to $1,500. Billy Tomber seconded the motion.
The vote was taken.
Everyone voted in favor to increase the budget for the Community Party. No votes opposed it.
The budget for the Community Party was increased.
Parlour Tour
Nancy Lambert said the Parlour Tour Committee held their first meeting (since Covid) the previous Tuesday, and that Jeanne would like the Board to know that they’re moving forward with: 1) the in-person Parlour Tour; or 2) the backup plan which is a combination in-person and virtual tour. Nancy also said that if anyone is interesting in participating and willing to have people in their homes to please contact parlortour@soulard.org.
Michael Pastore said the committee is also considering having fewer people on the buses during the tour, perhaps increasing the number of buses and running them more frequently. There may also be a small increase in the charge to attend.
Safety Committee
Nancy Lambert also reported that several lights have been fixed in the neighborhood, and that Andrea Maddox-Dallas will be providing information in The Blaster about how to report lights that are out and assigning zone captains to follow up regarding fixes as a result of the Safety Walk. Foliage issues should be addressed by June 24.
11. Executive Session
There was a motion made to move to Executive Session. Gary Toribio seconded the motion.
The vote was taken.
All were in favor of moving to Executive Session at 10:30 p.m.
Executive Session lasted approximately five minutes.
Billy Tomber made the motion to exit Executive Session. Michael Pastore seconded the motion.
The vote was taken.
All were in favor of exiting Executive Session.
12. Adjourn
After Executive Session, Billy Tomber made the motion to adjourn the Board Meeting. Michael Pastore seconded the motion.
The vote was taken. All were in favor of adjourning.
The meeting adjourned at 10:36 p.m.