FEBRUARY 2023 BOARD MEETING MINUTES

February Board Meeting

Feb. 15, 2023

DRAFT Minutes

Board Members present included: Michael Pastore, President; Abbey Bethel, President-Elect; Debby Brown, Secretary; Chris Currington, Secretary; Jim Dallas, Past President; Margi Koors (via Zoom); Nancy Lambert; Craig Markham; Karen Moske; Stephen Shuman; and Gary Toribio. 

Special Guest included: Walker Hamilton, Chair of SRG’s Plan Review Team Committee; and Peter Hoffman, Managing Attorney, Legal Services of Eastern Missouri. 

Michael Pastore called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. and thanked attendees. Michael turned the meeting over to Abbey Bethel, President Elect, to run the agenda. 

1. Legal Services of Eastern Missouri

Abbey introduced Walker Hamilton and Peter Hoffman. Walker is the chair of the PRT Committee, and also works for the city. He works with Peter Hoffman, Managing Attorney for Legal Services of Eastern Missouri (Legal Services), a nonprofit that serves 21 counties and provides assistance to low-income residents in civil matters such as evictions, public benefits, protections from the social safety net, domestic violence, and orders of protection. 

Peter said that his team manages the neighborhood vacancy initiatives. There are about two dozen of them in the city and one outside of the city. The organization helps them improve the quality of life; one of the more persistent problems is a large number of vacant and abandoned properties. Soulard has been revitalized, but not all neighborhoods are in a similar position. Legal Services works on the vacancy prevention side, but then helps organizations deal with abandoned properties. Some neighborhoods have more power than they realize. 

Legal Services has a program dedicated to vacant and abandoned properties, but it costs a lot to take care of abandoned properties. When properties reach a certain condition, such as a number of citizen complaints, then there are routes the city can go through to issue fines and citations. However, there are some caps of what the city can do with the fines and other fees. Some properties are owned by an LLC or a shell company, or the owner is deceased and heirs cannot be found, requiring other interventions. 

SRG has the ability under the law to enforce code, and some claims can compel an owner to fix a property and bring it up to code. 

There was a question about who files suits. Peter said it would be a neighborhood or nonprofit specific to preserving property values. There was a question about how successful suits have been. Peter said this is all he’s ever done; probably handled 1,000 cases at this point and every single property has been brought to minimum code compliance. Sometimes relief goes beyond this, like when owners are shell companies. There are receivership and expedited receiverships. But those suits are different than nuisance lawsuits. For receivership, the suit wants to take control away from the owner and give it to the neighborhood or third-party receiver to make sure the property is taken care of. However, the owner can come back – quite often, when the owner knows the property can be lost, they show up. Often, the cases settle, and the owner agrees to fix or sell the property. If a property is truly abandoned, then there is course to transfer title after the association has made changes. The property has to be abandoned for six months and no taxes paid for 12 months. With abandonment cases, Legal Services has brought more than $5 million in investment. 

There was a question about a property that looks like it’s been abandoned for well over eight years. The owner pays his taxes, has been to court twice, pays the fines and walks away. Peter said this is a stalling point for the city. The fact that the property is current on taxes is not the basis for any of the lawsuits. The code violations are what gets the case to court. There needs to be a way to site the code violations on these properties. 

Jim Dallas said that he appreciated Peter coming to the meeting, but asked Walker what he has in mind specific to Soulard and SRG and how we work with Peter. Walker said that he wanted to have Peter introduce himself and Legal Services so SRG knows there are options to fight blight or speculators. In Walker’s opinion, the most egregious issues aren’t necessarily housing related; they’re vacant lots that the city can’t maintain often enough. There are few properties left in Soulard that are truly vacant, and the neighborhood has tools to use to see them at least maintained and reflect well on Soulard. 

Jim asked Walker if there were projects for the Board to work on with Peter, or would those projects be for Peter and the PRT. Walker said he’d talked to a couple people in other associations that had done an audit of properties, and he wanted to see what Soulard had. He doesn’t think PRT has a role other than reviewing construction plans if they were to come from any of the work with abandoned properties or those that don’t meet code. The SRG Board has to be the one to agree to take the legal routes. 

Michael asked if SRG would contact Peter (Legal Services), given the address, and say how long the property had been abandoned. Peter said addresses are good, but then they have to research any conflicts of interest, who has legal interest in the case, and other matters. Peter said that Soulard is not a focus area for Legal Services; they go where the need is. Soulard is not in high need. Legal Services would look at the case, determine if there are funds to pay the lawyer (by knowing what money SRG has) before taking the case. 

Abbey Bethel asked what the typical cost would be. Peter said a private attorney will give a range; he knows one attorney who started to take cases on a fee basis. Walker said that, if there was a property, SRG would pay based on its wherewithal. Karen Moske asked if there was a sliding scale. Peter said no. Debby Brown asked, for properties that are in receivership or abandoned, who the title transfers to. Peter said the court is taking away control, but the title remains in the name of the owner, control transfers to the HOA or receiver, and once improvements are made, then the title is severed. 

Walker said that, based on personal experience, he has gone to meetings of another association that has assigned properties and tried to find people in the community who are vetted, fixes up the property and acts as the receiver, and end up with the property at the end of the two-year period. 

Walker said he wasn’t sure what the next steps are, but Soulard has a vacancy problem with 62 parcels with varying degrees of problems. There are tools at SRG’s disposal, but beyond that, he’s not sure what the next steps are other than making sure the Board is aware.  

Gary Toribio asked if this is something that PRT would want to take on and come back to the Board with recommendations. Walker said maybe, or there could be a separate working group. Stephen Shuman thanked Walker for bringing this up and having Peter at the meeting to explain. Perhaps this can be done on an ad hoc basis, such as finding the first property and see what can be done. 

Abbey asked if there were any final questions. There weren’t any. Everyone thanked Peter and Walker. 

There was a brief discussion about other properties (pergola at the The Doghaus; driveway across from the Great Grizzly). Walker said that timely notification is very important; if two years goes by and SRG decides there’s an issue, there’s nothing that can be done. Walker said to file a Citizen Service Bureau Request on the city’s website. There are situations where Walker knows the requests go to the right person and are handled the right way. Karen asked if this is something that should be promoted in The Renaissance (SRG newspaper) – how the process works. Walker said it could also be promoted on the SRG website. 

Walker and Peter left the meeting. 

Abbey asked the Board if it wanted to discuss this any further. It was decided to table and leave these issues with the future SRG Board. 

2. Mardi Gras Beer Booth Update

Jim Dallas said that it looks like the weather will be good for Mardi Gras (to be held the coming Saturday), so good sales at the SRG beer booth are anticipated. SRG will use Julie Price’s location at 11th and Russell; volunteers will have access to her apartment for breaks and to get warm. Thirty-seven people to this point have signed up to volunteer, plus Michael Pastore and himself. There have been two training sessions: 1) tips, and 2) how to handle inebriated patrons. There were 10 others in the training, plus Michael and Jim. Michael also went to Horseshoe Casino for the Mardi Gras Inc. (MGI) training (when beer will be delivered, how to run the iPads, etc.). 

Karen Moske asked if the booth will accept cash payments. Jim said it will. There will also be a limited selection of drinks. 

Michael said that MGI is coming in and setting up for the beer booth. This is a lot less work but will result in less profit and less stress. Karen asked about the tips and if SRG keeps all or a percentage. Michael said SRG keeps all the tips. Karen asked if MGI will send a check for the tips received on the iPad. Jim said yes; tips are recorded on the iPad and MGI will send SRG the tip money. Margi asked about tip jars. Jim said he bought them that day. 

There was a discussion about volunteer t-shirts, the limited quantity on hand, and how to handle additional shirts. There will be a sign-up sheet for volunteer t-shirts. There’s $700 left over in the budget for t-shirts. There doesn’t need to be approval of any additional budget at this point. 

3. Community Involvement and Events (CI&E)

Abbey Bethel asked Stephen Shuman, Board Liaison to the CI&E Committee, to give an update. Steven said that there was inaccurate information about someone who was potentially interested in chairing this committee. This person is very interested in participating on the committee, but not chairing the committee. Chris Currington has expressed interest in being chair of this committee after his Board position as Secretary is completed. Abbey, as President of SRG, could pursue this and Chris would be the chair. Stephen said he wanted to bring this up as a path forward; we’re getting to a point where we need to get people’s attention so we have coordinated action in May, June, July and forward. 

Chris said he’s very interested in chairing the committee and because he was a part of forming the mission for the current committee, he has a good vision about what it could be. 

4. Treasurer’s Report

Debby Brown said that more than $10,000 was deposited as a result of SRG’s participation in Oktoberfest. However, SRG has ~$88,000 and having trouble using it. This does not include The $10,000 received from Luke Reynolds (co-owner, Molly’s in Soulard) for the Beautification Committee’s art installment (TBD). There was a discussion about the interest earned on the $10,000 received by Luke. For tax-reporting purposes, it needs to be included as income. 

Jim Dallas asked if the taxes (2021/2022) had been filed. Debby said they were filed in September. 

Michael Pastore said that, in the current issue of The Renaissance, there’s the Lift for Life Academy’s Profit and Loss, and asked why they’re putting their financials out but SRG isn’t putting anything in The Renaissance. He suggested that SRG do the same thing. Craig Markham said this was an excellent idea. Debby said she had no problem putting that information in The Renaissance. 

5. General Membership Meeting Minutes 

Gary Toribio said that Chris Currington mentioned something last month and asked if the General Membership Meeting minutes are approved by the General Membership at the meetings. Karen said that years ago, at General Membership meetings, the minutes would be printed and put on the tables. Then there would be a motion at the meeting to approve the minutes. Michael said he thought that was a waste of resources (paper). Stephen Shuman said he was looking at the bylaws, and they don’t say that minutes need to be approved. If there’s a Policy & Procedure in the manual that states they need to be approved, then they should be, but this doesn’t appear to be so. Abbey suggested this conversation be tabled for the moment and the approval of General Meeting minutes be confirmed at the next Board meeting. Karen said there’s a difference between publishing minutes, voting on minutes, and approving minutes. As long as the minutes are published to the membership, then the obligation has been met. Abbey said she would research this and validate it at the next meeting. 

6. Soulard Station 

Gary Toribio said that Bonita Leiber, Soulard Station Committee co-chair, is retiring from her profession and will soon be going on an extended vacation for a month. Laura Grace, co-chair, will fill in for Bonita. 

Jim Dallas asked if there were any solid bids on the fence (extending the fence at the Station to create a safer yard area). Gary said there were a couple bids, but he’d have to check his email and texts. Margi Koors asked if SRG has any idea of the fence expense. Jim said that the grant to the Mardi Gras Foundation (MGF) asked for $10,000, but the cost will more likely be $13,000-$15,000. Gary said that on Jan. 18, Bonita sent a note that the amount would be ~$12,000 for the fence. Margi asked why SRG couldn’t do the project itself and wait for the MGF grant. Gary advised not to “jump the gun” right now, but SRG can check on this. MGF is going out with another grant request because there were projects approved pre-pandemic that weren’t accomplished. Michael said he doesn’t think SRG should spend the money and then hope it gets it. Abbey said the Board needs to receive one more quote, but the current quotes will expire the first week of February. Action will probably be after June and the new Board’s budget approvals. 

7. Parlour Tour

Nancy Lambert, Board Liaison to the Parlour Tour Committee, said the committee held their post-Parlour Tour meeting. The committee may be looking for new members, and perhaps new successors for the responsibilities. The Parlour Tour is a lot of work for a small group of people. The committee is also discussing what to do next year, and they will be looking for a new volunteer coordinator. Michael said that limiting the event to one day has been positive and takes a lot of stress off the homeowners. Nancy said that going forward, the party afterward (Fete de Noel) will be limited to volunteers only. The Franklin Room is already booked for 2023. 

8. Board Candidates

Abbey said that the slate of candidates for the upcoming Board election has been announced. The bios have been sent to Brenton Henry, Communications Committee chair, to be posted on the SRG website. There will also be information in the Blaster (email newsletter/communication) before the March meeting. Abbey needs to contact Billy Tomber about managing the electronic election. 

Stephen Shuman said he noted that in the bylaws, electronic voting is clear, but in the Policy & Procedure, there’s a stipulation that electronic voting is tied to the pandemic. The Board may need to come with something and pass it to allow electronic voting. Karen Moske said there are still many things related to the pandemic under federal guidelines. Abbey said she would take on reviewing the existing Policy & Procedure, make suggestions, and send out in the next couple weeks. It will then be addressed at the next Board meeting. Michael asked about the timing allowed for electronic voting. Stephen said there’s no hard and fast rule, but about 10 days. There was a discussion about when to open the voting. Abbey said we could potentially open it March 29, the Wednesday before the April meeting, and then close voting by 8:15 p.m. at the April meeting; close the meeting; tally the votes; and communicate the new Board. 

9. Departing Board

Gary Toribio asked if at the April Board meeting, there would be outgoing Board members and new Board members. Abbey suggested that at the March Board meeting, there be a brief business session, and then dinner as a Board one last time. The Board can decide by email where we meet and eat; March 15 is the next Board meeting. 

10. Adjourn

Abbey Bethel made the motion to adjourn the meeting. Craig Markham seconded the motion. 

All voted to adjourn the meeting at 8:41 p.m.