COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT, LOUISIANA

MAY 8, 2001

The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana, was called to order by Chairman Joe Shyne at 3:10 p.m., Tuesday, May 8, 2001, in the Government Chambers in Government Plaza (505 Travis Street).

Invocation was given by Councilman Stewart.

On roll call, the following members were Present: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio (arrived at 3:20), Spigener, Shyne, and Burrell. 7. Absent:

Motion by Councilman Burrell, seconded by Councilman Spigener for approval of the Summary Minutes of the Administrative Conference of April 23, 2001 and Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 24, 2001. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Absent: Councilman Serio. 1.

Awards and Recognitions of Distinguished Guests of the Mayor and the Council Which Are Required By Law.

Councilman Burrell: . . . constituents of mine in West Shreveport. If they don’t mind, they might want to stand at this point to recognize them, mine in West Shreveport, around Greenwood Acres.

Councilman Shyne: Councilman Burrell, you are very fortunate. I wished I could get that many of my constituents to come down and smile at me and support me and look so beautiful—maybe I need to do a little bit more handshaking then, huh. Councilman Burrell: Kiss a few more babies. Councilman Shyne: Kiss a few more babies. Are they down for a particular reason or are they just came down to see you in action today? Councilman Burrell: Well, they are down, Mr. Chairman, because of a piece of legislation that on the agenda that has been subject to a prior hearing, that they were not supporting the developments at the outlet mall out there. Councilman Shyne: I see Dr. Joseph Carter and his beautiful wife, good to see you all. You are looking younger everyday, I don’t know what you are doing.

Public Hearing. None.

Confirmations and Appointments. Councilman Shyne: I believe we have some appointments to be added to the agenda today and to be voted on, if it is the pleasure of the Council.

Motion by Councilman Carmody to suspend the rules, seconded by Councilman Burrell. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Absent: Councilman Serio. 1.

Councilman Huckaby: Prior to voting on these matters, I’d like to have the opportunity to look over them and I have not had the opportunity to do so. If it means postponing them until next Council meeting, I’d rather wait.

Councilman Shyne: Do we have any comments from the Administration or does that set pretty well? Mayor Hightower: That’s fine, Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Carmody: While the rules are suspended, I do have a resolution to add to the agenda today.

Councilman Shyne: Before you read that resolution, lets add: Ms. Betty Osborne and Jerome Holland, III to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Councilman Huckaby: What is the motion? Councilman Shyne: To add these names for confirmation on the Zoning Board of Appeals. Motion by Councilman Spigener, seconded by Councilman Stewart to add the names.

Councilman Huckaby: Is this, are we voting on the confirmation? Councilman Shyne: No, we are voting to add them to the agenda. Motion to add the names to the agenda approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Absent: Councilman Serio. 1.

Councilman Shyne: And I believe you requested that we would postpone? Councilman Huckaby: Yes, yes, please. I haven’t had an opportunity to even look at it. Councilman Shyne: And we would vote on them at the next Councilman meeting.

Adding Legislation the Agenda

Motion by Councilman Carmody to add Resolution No. 52 of 2001 by Councilman Carmody: A resolution suspending the effects of certain provisions of Chapter 10 relative to alcoholic beverages and Chapter 106 relative to zoning for the Camelot located at 820 Shreveport-Barksdale for a chilli cook-off and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. Motion seconded by Councilman Stewart.

Mr. Thompson: Does he want to add it so that it can be voted on today. I believe that the matter will occur before the next Council meeting? Councilman Carmody: That is correct and the event is scheduled to be held on May 12, so we would need to vote on this today.

Motion by Councilman Stewart to add a resolution of very similar nature: Resolution No. 53 of 2001 by Councilman Stewart: A resolution suspending the effects of certain provisions of Chapter 10 relative to alcoholic beverages and Chapter 106 relative to zoning for Louisiana Avenue Saturday Night and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. Motion seconded by Councilman Carmody and approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Absent: Councilman Serio. 1.

Mr. Thompson: Is that to be voted on today, also? Councilman Stewart: Yes, with the permission of the Chair.

Councilman Stewart: May I add one oversight to this, please? Councilman Shyne: Yes, sir.

Councilman Stewart: All of the, this is being done by the merchants on Louisiana Avenue and all of the funds that will be collected will be put in the association treasury for improvement of that two to three block area. Councilman Shyne: Beautiful.

Councilman Huckaby: A couple of questions on this. What party or organization will hold harmless the City of Shreveport from any liabilities? Councilman Stewart: On this particular one? Councilman Huckaby: Yes, sir. Councilman Stewart: It would be the Louisiana–I do not know the exact name of the association, but it is an association. Mr. Thompson, do you know the name of it?

Mr. Thompson: I believe that the application was made by Neil Johnson, that is one of the issues that is raised by Mrs. Glass and I think the Administration, Mr. Huckaby, should probably insure that our interests are protected when the contract is entered into. Councilman Huckaby: Correct.

Mrs. Glass: We were given a copy of the application that was made and it contains the hold harmless---there is not separate contract—that was signed by Neil Johnson. But I guess you could just make it known to the Administration that you would like to make sure that other participating organizations also sign that, but that is not made a part of the resolution.

Councilman Carmody: Mrs. Glass, a clarification, I know that one of the points that you’d brought up was that Mr. Johnson, although he is going to hold the city harmless, does not have a license to sell alcohol. Are the other entities that are signing as well, are they the holders of the liquor licenses? Mrs. Glass: The application that I was given a copy of that was signed, was signed only by Mr. Johnson. I was told that, I think Monjuni’s is in the block and that they would do the alcohol sales, which the way the resolution is written, it would allow them to make those sales even though they didn’t sign the application. But that was one of the problems that we saw is that rather than having a umbrella organization, you had an individual or a sole proprietorship, whatever Mr. Johnson’s business is, signing the hold harmless and it was not clear that it covered all of the businesses in the block.

Mr. Thompson: I was told that Monjuni’s would be the one responsible for selling the beer and I would think that they could be added to the application. I think that there is a way that the Administration can insure that we are covered and I believe

that it is the will of the Council that they would make those efforts.

Councilman Carmody: Mr. Huckaby, that is certainly my will.

Councilman Huckaby: Yes. And one other matter, the matter mentioned in No. 6, Mrs. Glass relative to minors coming on the premises. What party would be responsible for? Mrs. Glass: Well, the way I see it in this situation, you have in a normal case where you have an alcoholic beverage establishment for example, the one you did for Tommy’s Place a few weeks ago, the alcoholic beverage retail dealer is the person that is responsible that all provisions are met and in this case, Monjuni’s will be responsible on their premises. But if we close the street and have an entire block party, I don’t think that it is clear that they are responsible off of their premises; so, if there are persons who are drinking who are in the street–which I think is the intent, that it would be similar to a festival. The point was simply that there won’t be a retail dealer whose directly responsible for that. The police could issue a ticket to the underage person that was drinking but they probably would not be able to cite a dealer with a violation unless they catch them selling to the underage person.

Councilman Huckaby: My question is, is Monjuni’s or any of these organizations participating, willing to assume that responsibility, Mr. Stewart? Councilman Stewart: Let me offer a background and I’ll respond to the best of my ability. 1) I received a phone call yesterday. I was told by the gentleman, Mr. Russo who runs Monjuni’s that he in the last three weeks had made three phone calls to the Police Department in an effort to get an understanding of what was needed and finally, got one returned to him on either Thursday or Friday, saying that you needed to get an application and you needed to get the approval of the Council and he called me on Monday. I asked that he fax the information that he had to us and that somebody notify us that that is what they wanted and that I would have it prepared and presented to the Council since he was told that was what was necessary.

I am obviously not an attorney as we all know. From the insurance standpoint, however liquor legal liability as well as commercial general liability is not just limited to your premises. If you serve it on the premises and it is carried off, I believe the responsibility still goes with you. However, it would be inappropriate for me to make a specific legal decision because I am not capable of it. I think that it would be implied that they understood since they are serving it. He did indicate to me on the telephone that he was serving it, that that responsibility would be there. The name also, Village Grill is placed here in Mrs. Glass’ commentary. Village Grill is right next door and they have alcoholic service, beverage service. Jacqueline’s across the street does not, so I would assume the responsibility would go in that direction by virtue of my experiences.

Councilman Shyne: Would you like to have an opinion from the Legal Department? Councilman Huckaby: No. What I want to say is that I think that one or all of these participating establishment ought to ASME the responsibility of being that party subject to being charged if there is alcohol served to minors on the premises. This is somewhat of an unprecedented piece of legislation. It is not a festival, it is a block party using the public street and there should be some responsible parties not only for insurance, but for protecting minors against being sold or served alcoholic beverages and that that can be included in the legislation. (Councilman Shyne: I agree) I have no real problem with it, but I think those two matters need to be addressed in the legislation.

Councilman Stewart: I am comfortable that they be added in the appropriate fashion.

Councilman Shyne: Could we have somebody to take care of that? Mrs. Glass: Mr. Chairman I can do that. Could I clarify something. I had thought when I wrote the memo, well maybe we should write the resolution to say that all of the participants in the block party have to be on the insurance and sign the hold harmless. I didn’t write that into the resolution because I wasn’t sure how many people were involved and whether the lack of getting that would cause the event not to happen. If it is just a few people, that may not be a problem.

Councilman Burrell: The question that Councilman Huckaby brought up, you mentioned "premises." The definition of premises in this case, would be that property that involves the actual businesses that have the liquor license plus the public property which means that it is the street too; that is the definition of "premises" in this case. Mrs. Glass: I think so, that would be how we would write it if we expand that. I guess that leads into my second question which was, I think you have two businesses on the block that have a retail dealer’s license, is that correct? Councilman Stewart: Yes, ma’am. Mrs. Glass: So, would they both assume the responsibility? And, when I say, responsibility, I guess from your earlier comments there are two different parts to it. One is, civil responsibility to, if you know, if someone has been served too much alcohol and causes an accident and they are sued under that type of tort. I would think probably including everyone into the insurance could solve that.

The other one is, the violations of the alcohol ordinance for purposes of license revocation. In other words if we find that there is an underage person drinking, we don’t know who sold it to them, we don’t know if Monjuni’s sold it or the other dealer sold it, so I am not sure how we would resolve that.

And as I said, I don’t think that is absolutely necessary because I think you have situations where you have for example, festivals but I just brought it up because I thought you might want to consider it.

Councilman Huckaby: Then my question is, if you have two retail establishments participating, would these two retail establishments be willing to assume that position subject to being charged if there is found to be liquor served and/or sold to minors, on the premises. Mrs. Glass: It might be that the way to solve that would be state in the resolution that the entire block will be the premises for purposes of violations then it would be a fact question whether we could prove that one or the other of the dealers allowed it, and I am not sure how that would, whether we could or not. But short of that, you’d have to charge them both with it.

Councilman Huckaby: I think they both should be willing to assume that position. Mrs. Glass: Okay; so, we would make the entire block the premises for purposes of this one event, then if something happens its as if it happened on their alcohol premises?

Councilman Huckaby: Yes, do you have any problem with that, Mr. Stewart? Mr. Huckaby, I’m quite pleased to extend it in anyway that would make everyone comfortable from a legal position.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Stewart, I think you are asking us to vote on that, today. Mr. Thompson, could you all get that prepared so we could? Mr. Thompson: Yes.

Councilman Burrell: An extension on that, although we have two businesses that actually have liquor license, in which I can see could possible be held, what about the other businesses that don’t have the license that will be made part of the premises, responsible for the premises too? Will they incur any of these liabilities? Mrs. Glass: Well, the civil liability, if they are all put on the insurance then the insurance would cover it and it would just be a fact situation who was negligent or did whatever. As far as alcohol violations, it would be the persons that has the liquor permits, would be the ones that—because they are the ones that have the prohibitions on them from allowing various things, like underage drinking.

Councilman Shyne: We will have that prepared when we get to that point.

Public Comments

Councilman Shyne: At this point, I’d like for Mrs. Marque Washington to come forward and Mr. Mayor, I don’t know whether you all have talked or not but she is going to talk with us about Louisiana Legislative Day and about the schedule. And, I don’t know how many Council members or who from the Administration has signed up to go down. Mrs. Washington, welcome to your City Council.

Mrs. Washington: Thank you Mr. Chair and thank you City Council members for giving me the opportunity just to stand before you today as the Chairman of Northwest Louisiana Day at the Legislature.

And what I am here for is to extend to you a personal invitation for your participate with us at Northwest Louisiana Day. What we try to do is to go down to the Legislature while they are in session to show a united effort from the Northwest region for various projects that we have going on. And I just believe that until we show up in numbers, that we are not going to be taken seriously.

From the Mayor’s Office, our Mayor Hightower and CAO have already signed up for Northwest Louisiana Day and I noticed that we didn’t have any City Council members on my agenda. And I wanted to make sure that you were aware of Northwest Louisiana Day and I faxed some information over to the Council and you should have had some information that included the registration form along with the agenda so that you will know exactly what’s going on. We have a number of great speakers that are going to speak to us while we are down there. At the same time, we have a reception that we are holding at the Camelot Club where we have not only invited our Northwest Louisiana Delegates, but also State Legislators from all around the state; so, I ask for you support and your participation.

Councilman Shyne: Mrs. Washington, see if I really had some power as Chairman then I would appoint everybody to go down, but since I don’t have that kind of power, I am going to leave it up to you all’s pleasure.

Councilman Burrell: Thank goodness, Mr. Chairman, you don’t have that kind of power. The day that it is on, I believe I looked at that and I think I am out of town at that time, what day is that? Mrs. Washington: May 15 and 16. Councilman Burrell: Yeah, I am going to Nashville. Mrs. Washington: Well, we certainly understand that, but if at all possible, if you could work that into your calendars and your schedule, I’d really appreciate the support of our Councilmen and Councilwoman.

The Council considered the CONSENT AGENDA legislation.

INTRODUCTION OF RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES ON CONSENT:

Motion by Councilman Spigener, seconded by Councilman Carmody for Introduction of the Ordinances on the Consent Agenda. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Did not cast a vote: Councilman Huckaby. 1.

RESOLUTIONS: None.

ORDINANCES:

1. Ordinance No. 82 of 2001: An ordinance to create and establish a yield intersection at the intersection of Elgin Street and Gaylyn Drive and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

2. Ordinance No. 83 of 2001: An ordinance to repeal a portion of Ordinance No. 66 of 1963 which created a two-way stop at the intersection of Avery Street and Maryland Avenue, and to create and establish the intersection of Avery Street and Maryland Avenue as a four way stop intersection and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

3. Ordinance No. 84 of 2001: An ordinance to repeal a portion of Ordinance No. 66 of 1963 which created a two-way stop at the intersection of Avery Street and Richmond Avenue, and to create and establish the intersection of Avery Street and Richmond Avenue as a four way stop intersection and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

4. Ordinance No. 85 of 2001: An ordinance to repeal a portion of Ordinance No. 66 of 1963 which created a two-way stop at the intersection of Lawhon Street and Maryland Avenue, and to create and establish the intersection of Lawhon Street and Maryland Avenue as a four way stop intersection and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

5. Ordinance No. 86 of 2001: An ordinance to repeal a portion of Ordinance No. 66 of 1963 which created a two-way stop at the intersection of Lawhon Street and Richmond Avenue, and to create and establish the intersection of Lawhon Street and Richmond Avenue as a two way stop intersection and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES ON CONSENT:

Motion by Councilman Burrell, seconded by Councilman Carmody for Adoption of the Resolution on the Consent Agenda.

Councilman Carmody: Can the Administration clarify, is this for the replacement of the sweeper that was damaged there in the parking garage? Mayor Hightower: Councilman, I really don’t know. I assume so since we don’t have any other sweepers other than downtown and everything else that we do, neighborhood-wise, is contracted out, so. I don’t know the answer to that, but I assume so. Councilman Carmody: Thank you, sir.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Did not cast a vote: Councilman Huckaby. 1.

RESOLUTIONS:

RESOLUTION NO. 49 OF 2001

A RESOLUTION REJECTING BIDS RECEIVED ON IFB #01-020 FOR RIDER SWEEPER

WHEREAS, one bid was received as a result of solicitations for Rider Sweeper IFB #01-020; and

WHEREAS, the City has rejected the bid due to the fact that the bid received exceeded the budgeted amount;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, legal and regular session convened that the bid received on IFB #01-020 be rejected.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any provision or item of this resolution or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items or applications of this resolution which can be given effect without the invalid provisions, items or applications and to this end the provisions of this resolution are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby declared repealed.

ORDINANCES: None.

RESOLUTIONS ON SECOND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE OR WHICH REQUIRE ONLY ONE READING:

RESOLUTION NO. 46 OF 2001

A RESOLUTION MAKING APPLICATION TO THE STATE BOND COMMISSION AND THE LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY FOR APPROVAL OF THE ISSUANCE BY THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT OF NOT TO EXCEED SEVENTY MILLION DOLLARS ($70,000,000) AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF SEWER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2001, IN ONE OR MORE SERIES, FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCING THE COST OF THE CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENT AND EXPANSION OF THE SEWERAGE SYSTEM INCLUDING SEWERAGE TREATMENT AND SEWERAGE DISPOSAL WORKS IN THE CITY; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE CERTAIN APPLICATIONS AND DOCUMENTS; AND PROVIDING FOR OTHER MATTERS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH.

WHEREAS, the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana (the "City") now owns and operates a sewer system, a revenue-producing public utility lying within and without the boundaries of the City (the "System"), and desires to rehabilitate and expand the sanitary sewage collection, treatment, and distribution facilities thereof and to otherwise improve the System (the "Project").

WHEREAS, in accordance with the provisions of Title 30, Subtitle II, Chapter 4 (the "Louisiana Water Control Law") of the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950, as amended, the City intends to proceed with the issuance of not exceeding $70,000,000 aggregate principal amount of Sewer Revenue bonds of the City (the "Bonds"), to be issued in one or more series to finance the Project,

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and the Council of the City, acting as the governing authority of the City, that:

SECTION 1. Preliminary Approval of Sewer Revenue Bonds. For the purpose of financing the cost of the Project, in accordance with the provisions of Sections 2078 through 2088 of the Louisiana Water Control Law, the City intends to proceed with the issuance of the Bonds. The Bonds shall be sold through a private placement with the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality’s Municipal Facilities Revolving Loan Fund (the "MFRLF") and the details of the Bonds shall be established by subsequent ordinance adopted by this governing authority. The proceeds of the Bonds will be used to finance the Project. The Bonds shall be limited and special obligations of the City as issuer of the Bonds, secured by and payable in principal, interest and redemption premium, if any, from sewer usage fees and other revenues derived or to be derived by the City from the operation of the System (after payment of the reasonable and necessary expenses of operating and maintaining the System) or from other lawfully available sources. The Bonds shall not be a charge on the other income and revenues of the City as prohibited under the provisions of Article VI, Section 37 of the Louisiana Constitution of 1974, nor shall they constitute an indebtedness or pledge of the general credit of the City. The Bonds shall bear interest at a rate of not to exceed three and ninety-five hundredths percent (3.95%) per annum (which includes the 0.5% administrative fee for the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality), maturing no later than twenty two (22) years from the date thereof and shall be issued under the authority previously cited in this section.

SECTION 2. State Bond Commission Application. This governing authority hereby authorizes and directs that application be formally made to the State Bond Commission, Baton Rouge, Louisiana for final approval of the issuance of the Bonds by the City within the parameters set forth above.

SECTION 3. MFRLF Application. This governing authority hereby authorizes and directs that application be formally made to the MFRLF on application form CWRF-101 for approval of the financing contemplated by the issuance of the Bonds as set forth above.

SECTION 4. Employment of Bond Counsel. This governing authority finds and determines that a real necessity exists for the employment of special bond counsel in connection with the issuance of the Bonds. Casten & Pearce, A Professional Law Corporation, Shreveport, Louisiana and Crawford & Lewis, P.L.L.C., Baton Rouge, Louisiana are hereby employed as Co-Bond Counsel to perform comprehensive legal and coordinate professional work as Co-Bond Counsel with respect to the issuance and sale of the Bonds. Said Bond Counsel shall prepare and submit to this governing authority for adoption of all of the proceedings incidental to the authorization, issuance, sale and delivery of such Bonds, shall counsel and advise this governing authority as to the issuance and sale thereof and shall furnish its opinion covering the legality of the issuance of the Bonds. The fee of said Bond Counsel shall be fixed at a sum not exceeding eighty (80%) percent of the maximum fee allowed by the Attorney General of the State of Louisiana’s fee schedule for comprehensive, legal and coordinate professional work in connection with the issuance of revenue bonds and based on the amount of the Bonds actually issued, sold, delivered and paid for, plus "out-of-pocket" expenses, said fees to be contingent upon the issuance, sale and delivery of said Bonds. A certified copy of this resolution shall be submitted to the Attorney General of the State of Louisiana for his written approval of said employment and of the fees herein designated, and the Director of Administration is hereby empowered and directed to issue vouchers to said Bond Counsel in payment for the work herein provided for upon completion of the work herein specified and under the conditions herein enumerated.

SECTION 5. Authorizations. The Mayor of the City is hereby authorized and directed for and on behalf of and in the name of the City to execute and deliver the State Bond Commission and MFRLF applications, any other documents required by the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality or any other governmental agencies and any and all additional instruments, documents and certificates which may be required or as may otherwise be necessary, convenient or appropriate to the transactions authorized hereby.

SECTION 6. Publication. This resolution shall be published in The Shreveport Times, a daily newspaper published in Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, and that, as provided by the Louisiana Water Quality Control Law, for a period of thirty (30) days from the date of such publication, any person in interest may contest the legality of this Resolution and the Bonds to be issued pursuant hereto and the provisions securing the Bonds. After the said thirty days, no person may have any right of action to contest the validity of the Bonds or the provisions of this Resolution, and all of the Bonds shall be conclusively presumed to be legal, and no court shall thereafter have authority to inquire into such matters.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any provision or item of this resolution or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items, or applications of this resolution which can be given effect without the invalid provisions, items, or applications and to this end the provisions of this resolution are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all ordinances or resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

Read by title and as read motion by Councilman Burrell, seconded by Councilman Serio for passage.

Councilman Carmody: Mr. Strong, I had requested a report last week during our public hearing for an accounting of the monies that were generated by the last increase in the water and sewer rate and what projects were accomplished with those funds. Do you have that information for the Council today? Mr. Strong: No sir and I apologize but we have not gathered all the information. This is going back to ‘93 of putting all of it together and we have not completed it. We hope to have it completed by Thursday possible, Friday of this week.

Councilman Carmody: Mr. Strong, I appreciate that ya’ll are diligently working to do this. I also recognize that part of this time, you were not with the City. As you and I have discussed, this is an educational process for the public to understand where the money is utilized for the public good. I find it difficult today to not make a motion to defer this particular resolution in that a number of persons have expressed concern on how the money was spent, approximately $48 million dollars, in the last increase.

We certainly understand after last week’s public hearing, where the $70 million will be earmarked and dedicated for and I appreciate that. I don’t think that it is of any purpose today and I think the Administration would ask us not to defer, so I will not make that motion, but it is not the intent of this Councilman to give you anymore busy work knowing that you do handle an awful lot of things and wear an awful lot of hats, but, again I would have certainly appreciated this information so that we could help educate the public again today on the necessity in making sure that municipal funds are spent for what they are told to the public that they will be spent for.

Mr. Strong: And please understand that, I would have loved to have had that report here. It is just that we could not put together in time.

Councilman Carmody: Thank you sir.

Mr. Strong: And I apologize to the Council.

Councilman Carmody: And we can expect the report when? Mr. Strong: If my staff meets the deadline that we are talking about now, that they should be setting in my office (talking about the report) on Thursday of this week. And if that be the case and we get it completed, I can get out to the Council either some time Thursday or Friday at the latest. Councilman Carmody: Thank you sir, I will be looking for it.

Councilman Shyne: Mike, I do accept your apology, hear.

Mr. Thompson: Is this the one where I have amendment? Mr. Thompson: No, it is on the rate increase.

Councilman Carmody: Mr. Thompson, this particular resolution must be approved along with the rate increase in order for the two of these pieces of legislation to be enacted. Should one fail, without the other, both are dead, correct? Mr. Thompson: I suppose that technically you could adopt either one or the other and they would, if one failed then they would, the one that did not fail would be in effect. But I think it is the intention of the Council that they be adopted together, and so you would probably want to go back and reconsider that one that did pass if one fails. Councilman Carmody: Very good, I appreciate that.

Resolution passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Burrell and Shyne. 7. Nays: None.

RESOLUTION NO. 47 OF 2001

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO MAKE APPLICATION WITH THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE , AND OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO

WHEREAS, the Department of Justice has authorized the City of Shreveport Police Department to apply for grant funds for the Highland/Stoner and Queensborough/Ingleside Weed and Seed sites; and

WHEREAS, the award, if approved will be for $225,000.00 per site for a total of $450,000.00, with no cash match required by the City of Shreveport; and

WHEREAS, these funds will be used to strengthen the Weed and Seed strategy currently in place within the Highland/Stoner and Queensborough/Ingleside communities.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, in due, regular and legal session convened, that it does hereby authorize the execution by Keith P. Hightower, Mayor, those grant documents necessary to apply and receive funding established within the program administered by the United States Department of Justice.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any provision or item of this Resolution or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items or applications of this Resolution which can be given affect without the invalid provisions, items or applications and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all Resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

Read by title and as read motion by Councilman Burrell, seconded by Councilman Stewart passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Burrell and Shyne. 7. Nays: None.

RESOLUTION NO. 48 OF 2001

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT AND THE INDEPENDENCE BOWL FOUNDATION, INC. RELATIVE TO THE PRODUCTION OF THE INDEPENDENCE BOWL AND RELATED ACTIVITIES AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, the City of Shreveport ("CITY") desires to support recreational, cultural, educational, and leisure activity programs which serve the public interest and render a public service; and

WHEREAS, The Independence Bowl Foundation, Inc.("FOUNDATION") annually sponsors the Independence Bowl and related events and activities in the City; and

WHEREAS, the CITY has made significant contributions to the production of the Bowl by providing the use of various City services, employees and facilities; and

WHEREAS, the Bowl has had, and will continue to have, a significant economic impact on the City of Shreveport and surrounding areas as well as focusing national recognition on the City of Shreveport through nationwide television coverage; and

WHEREAS, the Bowl and the Bowl related activities and events provide a benefit to the public; and

WHEREAS, CITY desires to continue its participation with the FOUNDATION in the production of this annual event.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, in due, regular, and legal session convened, that the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute a contract between the City of Shreveport and the Independence Bowl Foundation, substantially in accordance with the copy of said contract which was filed for public inspection with the original of this resolution in the Office of the Clerk of Council on April 24, 2001.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any provision or item of this resolution or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items, or applications of this resolution which can be given effect without the invalid provisions, items or applications and to this end the provisions of this resolution are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

Read by title and as read motion by Councilman Carmody, seconded by Councilman Stewart passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Burrell and Shyne. 7. Nays: None.

RESOLUTION NO. 50 OF 2001

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE SYSTEM SURVEY AND COMPLIANCE QUESTIONNAIRE REQUIRED BY THE LEGISLATIVE AUDITORS OFFICE OF THE STATE OF LOUISIANA AND OTHERWISE TO PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, the City of Shreveport received a questionnaire from the State Legislative Auditor which is to be completed as a required part of the audit for which we have engaged certified public accountants, KPMG Peat Marwick LLP; and

WHEREAS, upon completion of the questionnaire it must be presented to and adopted by the governing body of the City of Shreveport by means of a formal resolution at an open meeting; and

WHEREAS, the completed questionnaire must then be given to the auditor engaged by the municipality who will, during the course of his regular audit, test the accuracy of the answers to the questionnaire and submit to the municipality and the Legislative Auditor a report containing his opinion as to the validity of the answers.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, legal and regular session convened, that the attached Systems Survey and Compliance Questionnaire for the City of Shreveport be and the same is hereby adopted.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any provision or item of this resolution or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items or applications of this resolution which can be given effect without the invalid provisions, items or applications and to this end the provisions of this resolution are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all ordinances or resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

Read by title and as read motion by Councilman Spigener, seconded by Councilman Burrell passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Burrell and Shyne. 7. Nays: None.

RESOLUTION NO. 51 OF 2001

A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE BUDGET FOR THE CADDO-SHREVEPORT SALES AND USE TAX COMMISSION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 2001 AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, the Caddo-Shreveport Sales and Use Tax Commission was created by the City of Shreveport and the Caddo Parish School Board to provide for the joint collection, enforcement and administration of sales and use taxes levied by the City and School Board; and

WHEREAS, the Sales and Use Tax Commission is required to submit its proposed budget for the ensuing fiscal year to the City Council for approval; and

WHEREAS, the Commission has submitted its proposed budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1,2001, a copy of which was filed with the Clerk of the City Council on May 8, 2001.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, in legal session convened, that the total budget of $876,550 proposed by the Caddo-Shreveport Sales and Use Tax Commission for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2001, is hereby approved.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any provision or item of this resolution or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items or applications of this resolution which can be given effect without the invalid provisions, items or applications; and, to this end, the provisions of this resolution are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

Read by title and as read motion by Councilman Serio, seconded by Councilman Spigener passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Burrell and Shyne. 7. Nays: None.

RESOLUTION 52 OF 2001

A RESOLUTION SUSPENDING THE EFFECTS OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 10 RELATIVE TO ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND CHAPTER 106 RELATIVE TO ZONING FOR CAMELOT LOCATED AT 820 SHREVEPORT-BARKSDALE HIGHWAY FOR A CHILLI COOK-OFF AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

By: Councilman Carmody

WHEREAS, Camelot located at 820 Shreveport-Barksdale Highway intends to host a Chilli Cook-off on May 12, 2001; and

WHEREAS, the establishment desires to dispense, and allow the consumption and sale of alcoholic beverages on the parking lot on the left side of the establishment on May 12, 2001, between the hours of 11:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m.; and

WHEREAS, Section 106-130(6) provides that unless otherwise excepted, all uses shall be operated entirely within a completely enclosed structure; and

WHEREAS, any special exception approval granted to the establishment for alcoholic beverage sales, consumption and/or dispensing does not specifically authorize outside sales and/or consumption on the premises; and

WHEREAS, Section 10-80(a) makes it unlawful for any person to sell, barter, exchange or otherwise dispose of alcoholic beverages except within those sections of the city wherein such sale is permitted by the applicable zoning ordinance; and

WHEREAS, Section Chapter 10-103(a)(5) provides that the city council may suspend or revoke any permit if a retailer allows any person to consume any alcoholic beverage on the licensed premises or on any parking lot or open or closed space within or contiguous to the licensed premises without a proper license; and

WHEREAS, activities planned by the establishment for these events are open to the public and will provide an opportunity for both the citizens of Shreveport and visitors to the City to participate in the Chili Cook-off and therefore will provide a benefit to the public; and

WHEREAS, the adoption of this resolution would allow the dispensing, sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages on the parking lot of Camelot, 820 Shreveport-Barksdale Highway, on May 12, 2001 for the Chilli Cook-off between the hours of 11:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m. on both dates.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, legal and regular session convened Section 106-130(6), 10-103(a)(5) and 10-80(a) are hereby suspended on May 12, 2001 for the Chilli Cook-off between the hours of 11:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m. at Camelot, 820 Shreveport-Barksdale Highway.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all other applicable provisions of the City of Shreveport Code of Ordinances shall remain in full force and effect.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any provision or item of this resolution or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items or applications of this resolution which can be given effect without the invalid provisions, items or application, and to this end, the provisions of this resolution are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

Read by title and as read motion by Councilman Carmody, seconded by Councilman Stewart for passage.

Councilman Huckaby: Was not Camelot, the one we had the questions? Councilman Shyne: No, it was the one that was added by Councilman John David Stewart. Councilman Huckaby: That one was the block party. Councilman Shyne: Yeah.

Councilman Huckaby: Who is the sponsor of Camelot? Councilman Carmody: I am.

Resolution passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Burrell and Shyne. 7. Nays: None.

RESOLUTION NO. 53 OF 2001

A RESOLUTION SUSPENDING THE EFFECTS OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 10 RELATIVE TO ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND CHAPTER 106 RELATIVE TO ZONING FOR LOUISIANA AVE. SATURDAY NIGHT AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

By: Councilman Stewart

WHEREAS, businesses and property owners in the 1300 block of Louisiana Avenue wish to hold a block party titled Louisiana Ave. Saturday Night, including live entertainment, on May 12, 2001; and

WHEREAS, the organizers desire to dispense, and allow the consumption and sale of alcoholic beverages on the street and properties included in the block party on that date, between the hours of 5:00 p.m and 8:00 p.m.; and

WHEREAS, Section 106-130(6) provides that unless otherwise excepted, all uses shall be operated entirely within a completely enclosed structure; and

WHEREAS, any special exception approval granted to an establishment for alcoholic beverage sales, consumption and/or dispensing does not specifically authorize outside sales and/or consumption on the premises; and

WHEREAS, Section 10-80(a) makes it unlawful for any person to sell, barter, exchange or otherwise dispose of alcoholic beverages except within those sections of the city wherein such sale is permitted by the applicable zoning ordinance; and

WHEREAS, Section 10-103(a)(5) provides that the city council may suspend or revoke any permit if a retailer allows any person to consume any alcoholic beverage on the licensed premises or on any parking lot or open or closed space within or contiguous to the licensed premises without a proper license; and

WHEREAS, Section 10-190 prohibits the consumption of alcoholic beverages on any public street or sidewalk; and

WHEREAS, this event will be open to the public and will provide an entertainment opportunity for citizens and visitors to the city; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, legal and regular session convened Sections 106-130(6), 10-103(a)(5),10-80(a) and 10-190 are hereby suspended on May 12, 2001 between the hours of 5:00 p.m and 8:00 p.m. to the limited extent necessary to allow a block party titled Louisiana Ave. Saturday Night in the 1300 block of Louisiana Avenue, including the consumption and sale of alcoholic beverages on the street and properties included in the block party, subject to the following conditions:

1. Alcoholic beverages may be dispensed or sold only by a licensed alcoholic beverage retail dealer. The retail dealer shall comply with all other laws and ordinances not specifically suspended hereunder. All persons handling, selling or serving alcoholic beverages at the event shall have a valid alcoholic beverage handling employee card. The retail dealer shall be responsible for obtaining any permit necessary from the State of Louisiana. For the purposes of this event only, the entire area of the block party shall be considered the premises of each retail dealer dispensing and/or selling alcoholic beverages at this event.

2. All business and property owners participating in this event shall provide the following to the office of the Chief Administrative Officer:

a. Evidence of insurance coverage in the same amounts and under the same conditions as required by the city of persons operating city sponsored fairs and festivals.

b. An agreement to indemnify and hold the city harmless in the same form as required by the city of persons operating city sponsored fairs and festivals.

c. A site plan showing the area in which the alcoholic beverages will be sold, served or consumed. Said area shall consist of property the dealer has permission to use, either by ownership, lease, or other permit or written permission.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all other applicable provisions of the City of Shreveport Code of Ordinances shall remain in full force and effect.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any provision or item of this resolution or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items or applications of this resolution which can be given effect without the invalid provisions, items or application, and to this end, the provisions of this resolution are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

Motion by Councilman Carmody, seconded by Councilman Stewart to postpone consideration of Resolution No. 53 until later in the meeting. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

Mrs. Glass: What we have done is prepared a substitute resolution. And, we are playing with our new technology, we’ve sent it to you in a message. If you want to, I’ll tell you in a minute what it says, if you can’t find it on here, but just see if we can do it. At the bottom of your screen there is the picture with the little people, and if you click on that. Art, do the message pop up? Councilman Spigener: They popped up. Mrs. Glass: It should be there in front of you. What it does in paragraph 1—Councilman Shyne: Can you pop it up on the big screen, too? Mrs. Glass: I don’t know how to do that. We’ll learn that for next time. You want me to just explain what we did.

In paragraph 1. What we had done was first say that this was already in the resolution that: 1. Alcoholic beverages may be dispensed or sold only by a licensed alcoholic beverage retail dealer. We added the underlined language that now says that: For the purposes of this event only, the entire area of the block party shall be considered the premises of each retail dealer dispensing and/or selling alcoholic beverages at this event. That addressed the first issued that we talked about.

The second change is in paragraph 2 where we stated that: 2. All business and property owners participating in this event shall provide the insurance coverage, the hold harmless agreement and the site plan.

Councilman Shyne: Let me apologize to the audience for not being able to see that. That’s modern technology and some times we are a little bit behind.

Read by title and as read motion by Councilman Stewart, seconded by Councilman Carmody for passage.

Councilman Shyne: Councilman Huckaby, you are satisfied? Councilman Huckaby: Yes, sir.

Resolution (substitute) passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Did not cast a vote: Councilman Serio. 1.

Councilman Shyne: Councilman Huckaby, I realize I serve at the pleasure of the Council members and I want to make sure that everybody is satisfied. Councilman Huckaby: That’s awful courteous of you, Mr. Shyne.

Councilman Shyne: I want to continue to be known as a very compassionate and a very caring person. Councilman Huckaby: Very brief.

INTRODUCTION OF RESOLUTIONS: None.

INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES:

1. Ordinance No. 87 of 2001: An ordinance amending the 2001 Airports Enterprise Fund Budget, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

2. Ordinance No. 88 of 2001: An ordinance amending the 2001 Retained Risk Budget, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

3. Ordinance No. 89 of 2001: An ordinance amending the 2001 Community Development Special Revenue Fund Budget, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

4. Ordinance No. 90 of 2001: An ordinance amending the 2001 Sportran Budget and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

5. Ordinance No. 91 of 2001: An ordinance amending the 2001 General Fund Budget and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

6. Ordinance 92 of 2001: An ordinance levying various totaling twenty and seventy-eight one hundredths (20 and 76/100ths) mills dollar on all property subject to ad valorem with the City of Shreveport for the Year 2001 in the amounts and for the purposes described herein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

7. Ordinance 93 of 2001: An ordinance levying a tax of thirty and fifty-four one hundredths (30 and 54/100ths) mills dollar on all property subject to ad valorem with the City of Shreveport for the Year 2001 for the purposes of paying principal and interest on the outstanding general obligation bonds of the city of Shreveport, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Read by title and as read motion by Councilman Carmody, seconded by Councilman Spigener for Introduction of the Ordinances to lay over until the May 22, 2001 meeting. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE:

1. Ordinance No. 33 of 2001: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning property located on the NE corner of Greenwood Road and Marston, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from B-1, Buffer Business District and B-3, Community Business District to I-1, Light Industry District, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on March 27, 2001 was read by title and on motion ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Huckaby, seconded by Councilman Burrell for adoption.

Councilman Burrell: Could I get Charles to come up on this again to make sure that we have that covered. Councilman Huckaby, we worked together on this particular business because over on Greenwood Road, we are trying to beautify the Greenwood Road, being one of the corridors that lead into the City and we’ve been working very, very hard to try to improve the look of Greenwood Road, all the way from out Greenwood past Greenwood Acres Baptist Church and I think I see, Pastor Caldwell out there, and they have a beautiful facility further on out on Greenwood Road.

And as part of our Greenwood Road Corridor Association of, which I happen to be President of, we are working on this. And those businesses that are coming into that area, we are trying to make sure that their businesses are aesthetically pleasing because there are a number of businesses that are along there, since this is an industrial area, light industrial area too, that really violates a lot of the ordinances that we have now, but they are pretty much grandfathered in so we are working with them to try to beautify their place. So, this just happened to be one business that happened to be in Councilman Huckaby’s area, but it is on Greenwood Road and it adjoins my Council district. So, I appreciate Councilman Huckaby working with us on that.

Mr. Kirkland, would you specify the changes that was made from the original ordinance that was put forth. Mr. Kirkland: Yes, and I think it would be in order, Mr. Huckaby, if you would acknowledge that the site plan dated May 7 and received is the final site plan subject to whatever the ordinance is that are on the books. But if I may have the document scanner I could reference it easier, Mr. Burrell that way.

What Mr. Burrell and Mr. Huckaby and other members of the Council, with a body repair operation, typically the most unsightly part of that business are the damaged vehicles that are waiting for repair some of which remain on site for quite some time. What in this case, Mr. Thomas, the applicant has agreed to do is have only four vehicles parked in this immediate area, on site, at any given time. Those will be screened by a 7 to 8 foot high fencing and the reason we are saying 7 to 8 foot is that some times, solid wood can be purchased just as inexpensively at 8 foot. Seven (7) foot will screen the vehicles with gates on both ends so that vehicles can be pulled in our out, but that would be the only place on site that damaged vehicles can be stored waiting for repair and that those gates will need to be closed.

The other is vehicles awaiting customer pickup and that is what these four spaces by the side of that, that’s where those repaired vehicles would go. The other space is in front would be the customer parking, and most of the blue area you see, there are two bays there, it is an old service station that any repair work will be screened with doors down. In the back, there is a third bay that is the actually painting booth as required by Louisiana local law.

The balance of the tract in the rear, would be all green space. He does not have any use and I know Mr. Burrell, you had indicated to him that you would have a concern with the storage of insurance damaged vehicles awaiting resolution of insurance claims and he is aware that he can not use that for anything unless further review and approval is given and I will be the control on that. And I will not do so without putting it back in front of the Board, quite frankly; so, I think that summarizes.

He knows he still will have to do some landscaping improvement in the front, but that deals with what potentially will be unsightly about the business.

Councilman Burrell: On that, we are not trying to harm any business, we are trying to work with them as much as possible. But many times when you have these cars stacked back into those areas, it generates or should I say, it draws small varmints as well as many of them hold water and you have mosquitoe problems.

Similar situation is what too at the Sheraton that we just recently tore down, there and thanks to the Mayor and his efforts and thanks to the Council who helped appropriate the money to tear Sheraton down, we had a middle school right next door to it and you had wild dogs that passed through there and rodents that were going over to the school, so if you don’t control this type of unsightly business development, then you will create that same problem at this location.

So, we appreciate your efforts Charles, in trying to work with that business and Councilman Huckaby to try to keep the Greenwood Road looking sightly, I’ll put it that way.

Councilman Huckaby: I’m satisfied that the site plan is conducive to Mr. Burrell’s overall goal in that area and I have no objection to passage of this legislation.

Ordinance passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

2. Ordinance No. 70 of 2001 by Councilman Stewart: An ordinance to amend and reenact Section 2-106 of the Code of Ordinances relative to indemnification of officials and officers and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on April 24, 2001 was read by title and on motion ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Carmody, seconded by Councilman Stewart adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

3. Ordinance No. 71 of 2001: An ordinance amending the 2001 budget for the Riverfront Development Special Revenue Fund and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on April 24, 2001 was read by title and on motion ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Burrell, seconded by Councilman Huckaby adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, and Shyne. 6. Nays: Did not cast a vote: Councilman Burrell. 1. Nays: None.

4. Ordinance No. 72 of 2001: An ordinance amending the 2001 Capital Improvements Budget and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on April 24, 2001 was read by title and on motion ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Spigener, seconded by Councilman Huckaby adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

Motion by Councilman Carmody to reconsider Ordinance No. 72, seconded by Councilman Stewart to consider an amendment. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

Mr. Thompson: You might want to ask Mr. Dark to explain the amendment.

Mr. Dark: I just want to apologize, we—its on the electronic agenda, but apparently Ms. Lee didn’t have the paper copies. Mostly it is adding a little bit of money to CDBG Overlay Project, creating a couple of new Airports projects for some new grant revenue that they’ve gotten. It is something that came in after we put the ordinance together. It is pretty much routine, other than that.

Councilman Shyne: I’m for it because I hope some of it is in my district. Mr. Dark: I think it is, sir. Councilman Shyne: Thank you.

The Council considered the amendment:

AMEND THE ORDINANCE AS FOLLOWS:

In Program C (Street Improvements):

Increase the appropriation for 2001 CDBG Overlay (01-C005) by $95,800. Funding source is CDBG.

In Program H (Airport Improvements):

Increase the appropriation for Part 150 Noise Acquisition - Regional Airport (95-H003) by $3,674,900. Funding sources are Shreveport Airport Authority $334,100, State Grant $334,100 and Federal Aviation Administration $3,006,700.

Decrease the appropriation for Land Acquisition for Security Purposes (99-H002) by $39,100. Funding sources are Shreveport Airport Authority $3,500, State Grant $3,600 and Federal Aviation Administration $32,100.

Establish a project entitled Access Control System Upgrades (01-H001) at $321,200. Funding sources are State Grant $29,200, Shreveport Airport Authority $29,200 and Federal Aviation Administration $262,800.

Establish a project entitled  Parallel Taxiway to Runway 14/32 (01-H002) at $1,308,700. Funding sources are Shreveport Airport Authority $119,000, State Grant $119,000 and Federal Aviation Administration $1,070,700.

Establish a project entitled Acquire LADOTD Property (01-H003) at $347,000. Funding sources are Shreveport Airport Authority $31,500, State Grant $31,500 and Federal Aviation Administration $284,000.

Motion by Councilman Huckaby, seconded by Councilman Carmody for adoption of the amendment. Amendment adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

Motion by Councilman Huckaby, seconded by Councilman Carmody for adoption of the ordinance as amended. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

5. Ordinance No. 73 of 2001:An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning property located on the north side of Bert Kouns Industrial Loop, 1650 feet east of Kingston Road, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from B-2-E, Neighborhood Business/Extended Use District (Skate Park) to B-2-E, Neighborhood Business/Extended Use District limited to a "lawn and pool business with outside display" only, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on April 24, 2001 was read by title and on motion ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Serio, seconded by Councilman Burrell adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Did not cast a vote: Councilman Serio. 1.

6. Ordinance No. 74 of 2001:An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning property located on the northeast corner of Kings Hwy. and Southern, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from SPI-4, Kings Highway Overlay District and R-3, Urban, Multi-Family Residence District to B-1-E, Buffer Business/Extended Use District, limited to "a grocery store with a pharmacy pick up window" only, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on April 24, 2001 was read by title and on motion ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Burrell, seconded by Councilman Carmody for adoption.

Councilman Stewart: I believe that we have an amendment, is that correct? Ms. Lee: Not that I am aware of? Councilman Stewart: Is that correct, Mr. Thompson. Mr. Thompson: I believe that the second ordinance that was done by Mrs. Glass or by Mr. Kirkland, is the amendment; so, technically we do have an amendment to this one, Dianne. Ms. Lee: So that would substitute the pages? Mr Thompson: Yes. Ms. Lee: Two pages, one? Mr. Thompson: What I am passing out now is the final amendment that was done by Mr. Stewart.

Councilman Stewart: I would move that the amendment be added.

Motion by Councilman Stewart, seconded by Councilman Huckaby for adoption of the amendment. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Did not cast a vote: Councilman Serio. 1.

Motion by Councilman Stewart, seconded by Councilman Huckaby for adoption of the ordinance as amended.

Councilman Stewart: I believe that what we are voting for here and I appreciate and would hope to have the support of everyone makes it a very positive statement in the right direction for development of facilities by national firms that are progressive, user friendly, attractive, and are not obtrusive in the neighborhood.

We’ve some people with us today and I’ll acknowledge their presence: Mr. Joshua Swess who is the Real Estate Coordinator for the Southern Region for Albertson’s. Mr. Larry Smith Real Estate Manager for Northeast Texas and North Louisiana for Albertson’s. Mr. Chris Anderson, Executive Vice-President of Calloway Architects in Dallas. Mr. Leon Backus, President of Provident Realty in Dallas, and Mr. Williams C. Nichols, who represents Provident Realty.

This project is over three years old and I think we owe them a sincere debt of thanks and gratitude for their special efforts. They have worked long and hard to develop this according to the request from myself and others, especially Mr. Kirkland and members of the Metropolitan Planing Commission that it immolate and reflect developments in the Highland Park area in Dallas. They have also agreed and have optioned properties on the west side of Barrett Street and for those of you who do not know, those are rental properties in very bad disarray abutting the east side of Wilkinson Terrace. They have optioned them and they will be turned into green area and swapped for the acreage in the park and it will remain a park in a very high quality fashion.

The big box theory that we’ve all have heard discussed many times, particularly, those big boxes that have been abandoned recently will not be present in this particular facility. The efforts by Mr. Kirkland, the members of the Metropolitan Planning Commission as well as the applicants will provide a very unique and I believe to be visually appealing and certainly an asset to this community. It will occur on Kings Highway and is already in the process of having direct impact on another development that Mr. Kirkland has also assisted with me by another national firm. And I am happy to report that I received a phone call message that another national firm will now be in our presence two days a week for development of the properties in this same area with this same sort of influence. I appreciate your patience in allowing this to be placed on records. I do believe this maintains what we are trying to achieve in terms of quality of life.

And last, but certainly not least, from the beginning, they made the commitment and it still stays in effect in assisting the citizens in the Wilkinson Terrace area with an opportunity for a job in their specific responsibilities. I certainly thank them individually and collectively as well as Mr. Kirkland and I would appreciate your support.

Councilman Burrell: I would also like to commend Councilman Stewart on his effort to bring this project there. As you know, we are trying to save many of our inner city neighborhoods and I know people don’t like to consider that area as part of the inner core, you may call it center city or whatever, but when you really look at it, that’s part of the core area of the City. And we are not finding too many developments or new developments that are taking place in some of these neighborhoods that are on decline.

And although it is on the peripheral of neighborhoods that are on decline, I think it would be a great shot in the arm. I would have loved to have had it over in my district, a little further over in the inner core, but even at that being that close, many of those who are in those inner core neighborhoods, can also benefit from going to shop there and hopefully the prices will be good and the product will be even better. So, again, I commend Councilman Stewart for working with it, the Administration, as well as Mr. Kirkland on this development.

Councilman Shyne: Gentlemen, I think we voted on to add the amendment, lets vote on the amendment.

Mr. Thompson: For clarity, I think it might be well if we would explain exactly how this differs from what was adopted by the MPC. With your permission, I will do that. Councilman Shyne: You have my permission.

Mr. Thompson: It’s the same as the ordinance that was approved by the MPC except for two stipulations and that would be Stipulation No. 1 and Stipulation No. 3. I’ll read Stipulation No. 1 as it will be approved, if adopted by the Council today, as proposed by Mr. Stewart:

1. Development of the property shall be in substantial accord with the site plan and other related site development exhibits submitted by the applicant on April 18, 2001, and approved by the City Council. Any changes shall require a vote and approval by the Shreveport City Council.

3. The final Landscape, lighting, signage, and amenities shall be reviewed and approved by the Shreveport City Council prior to permits being issued; so, those are the changes that this amendment will bring about.

Ordinance as amended approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

6. Ordinance No. 75 of 2001:An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning property located on the west side of Youree Drive, 250 feet south of Ardmore, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from SPI-3 (B-1), Commercial Corridor Overlay (B-1, Buffer Business) District to SPI-3-E, Commercial Corridor Overlay/Extended Use District limited to "a residence and retail sale and repair of clothing store" only and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on April 24, 2001 was read by title and on motion ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Carmody, seconded by Councilman Huckaby adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

7. Ordinance No. 76 of 2001:An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning property generally located on the south side of Standard Oil Road, 625 feet west of Jewella, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from R-1D, Urban, One-Family Residence District to B-3, Community Business District, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on April 24, 2001 was read by title and on motion ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Burrell, seconded by Councilman Carmody for adoption. The Deputy Clerk read the follow amendment:

Amend Stipulation No. 1 to read as follows:

1. Development of the property shall be in substantial accord with a revised site plan (to be approved by the Planning Director) showing landscaping and an 8' high metal fence along the south property line and approximately 325' along the west property line, with wrought iron fencing for the balance of the west side, with any future additions or expansions requiring further review and approval by the Planning Commission.

Motion by Councilman Spigener, seconded by Councilman Carmody for adoption of the amendment. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

Motion by Councilman Spigener, seconded by Councilman Carmody for adoption of the ordinance as amended. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, and Shyne. 6. Nays: None. Did not cast a vote: Councilman Burrell. 1.

8. Ordinance No. 77 of 2001:An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning property located on the south side of Cleveland, 600 feet west of Jewella, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from R-1D, Urban, One-Family Residence District to R-1D-E, Urban, One Family Residence/Extended Use District limited to an "elderly day/health care facility" only and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on April 24, 2001 was read by title and on motion ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Shyne, seconded by Councilman Carmody adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Carmody, Spigener, and Shyne. 4. Nays: None. Did not cast a vote: Councilmen Stewart, Serio and Burrell. 3.

9. Ordinance No. 78 of 2001:An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning property located on the southeast corner of Broadway and Cleveland, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from R-1H, Urban, One-Family Residence District to B-1, Buffer Business District and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on April 24, 2001 was read by title and on motion ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Shyne, seconded by Councilman Carmody adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, and Shyne. 5. Nays: None. Did not cast a vote: Councilmen Stewart and Burrell. 2.

10. Ordinance No. 79 of 2001:An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning property located on the east side of Lakeshore Drive, 500 feet south of Dilg League Drive, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from R-1D, Urban, One-Family Residence District to R-3-E, Urban, Multi-Family Residence/Extended Use District limited to a "housing shelter for homeless families with children (transitional)" only, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on April 24, 2001 was read by title and on motion ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Burrell, seconded by Councilman Spigener adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Did not cast a vote: Councilman Stewart. 1.

11. Ordinance No. 80 of 2001: An ordinance amending Chapter 94 of the Code of Ordinances relative to water and sewer charges, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on April 24, 2001 was read by title and on motion ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Burrell, seconded by Councilman Carmody for adoption. The Deputy Clerk read the following amendment:

AMEND THE ORDINANCE AS FOLLOWS:

Establish the following section in Chapter 94 of the Code of Ordinances:

Sec. 94-169. Payment Assistance Program

(a) A fund is established to assist needy low income persons who live within the boundaries of the City to pay water and sewerage bills. Said fund is established at a minimum amount of $375,000, and shall increase to a minimum amount of $475,000 in 2003, and to a minimum amount of $500,000 in 2004.

(b) The City shall enter into contracts with non-profit organizations which have the desire, capabilities, and locations need to administer said funds.

(c) Eligibility requirements and guidelines for assistance will be established by resolution of the City Council, or in the absence of said resolution by the Chief Administrative Officer and included in the contracts with the non-profit organizations that administer the funds.

Motion by Councilman Huckaby, seconded by Councilman Carmody for adoption of the amendment.

Councilman Huckaby: The amendment codifies the $375,000 that is already set aside to assist low to moderate income persons to pay their water bill. And it increases that amount by $100,000 when this increase goes into effect in the year 2003 and increases by another $25,000 in the year 2004 when another increase goes into effect to make the total amount $500,000.

My concern is that persons of low to moderate income will not have to decide between medicine and water or food and water, that we give some assistance when needed especially to elderly and senior citizens who may be on a fixed income and not able to pay their water bill. I think that this amendment addresses those concerns and I would ask that my colleagues vote favorable on this legislation.

Councilman Shyne: Piggybacking on those same remarks, Mr. Strong I wish you would continue to work to make sure that the computer mistakes, I am going to blame it on the computer, the computer mistakes that have been made with people getting outrageous water bills, that we would work very hard to make sure that those mistakes would be corrected. And, we would inform those people that have to deal with that, that we are a customer friendly city and we would want them to go out of their way to make sure that they are extremely nice, very compassionate to those persons who call in with those high water bills.

Councilman Burrell: Since on several occasions I’ve gotten personally involved in these high water bills, one of the things that we found that worked real well was that for many of our, especially our elderly people, they keep a lot of those records and they were able to reproduce those records or bring them up and then I had them to take them to Mr. Thompson. Mr. Thompson looked at them and established a history although our computer system should have their history in there, but it would always be good to keep your own records, just as a matter of public information.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Burrell, would you be saying that because I keep up with my records, that I am a part of the elderly? I’m just kidding. Councilman Burrell: Well, I won’t comment on that Mr. Chairman. Councilman Shyne: I’m just kidding. Councilman Burrell: I don’t want to incriminate you.

Councilman Spigener: So, I am reading this correctly, that this is increasing the current amount such that we have for this purpose, $200,000 for a total of $500,000? Councilman Huckaby: No ma’am, it is increasing it by $125,000. It is already $375,000.

Councilman Spigener: That’s right. Councilman Huckaby: And it goes up to an additional $100,000 in 2003 when the first increase goes into effect.

Councilman Spigener: And then $25,000 after that; okay. Councilman Huckaby: A total of $500,000 so it is an increase of $125,000.

Amendment adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

Motion by Councilman Carmody, seconded by Councilman Huckaby for adoption of the ordinance as amended.

Councilman Carmody: For those Council members that took the time and were able to make the public hearing last week, I appreciate ya’ll doing that as well as the public that was able to come, I think that we all got a very valuable lesson in the expense involved in trying to stay in compliance with the Clean Water Act as well as the EPA and the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality regulations regarding our water and sewer system.

At that meeting, I certainly felt like it was shown to us the necessity to do this increase. I personally am not favorable on increasing anybody’s burdens. I appreciate Councilman Huckaby amending this ordinance to provide for those people who can not afford to pay for it, providing them an opportunity to seek some relief.

I would ask the Council members to continue to consider as well as the Administration to continue to consider utilizing all available funding capacity that the City has in instances where it is prudent to help offset the cost to the public when we have to increase these rates. The bottom line is, the most democratic way this can handled is, that each of the users pay for what they use.

I am 40 years old. I hated to see the water increase the last time. I hate to think about it increasing again, but it is all a part of the cost-of-living. We are all familiar with increased rates on utilities and again I think that this Administration has been diligent in trying to make sure that we are ahead of the curve. I commend them for that. I commend Mr. Strong for that as well. I think that it is the responsibility of this Council to do the correct thing and to approve the rate increase. I be it begrudgingly, but again I would ask that this Administration and all future Administrations look for possibilities to utilize the City’s debt capacity to help offset these necessary costs.

Councilman Huckaby: I certainly don’t like voting for an increase in utilities, such as water. Water is basic. We might be able to get along without electricity or even gas, but we can’t get along without water.

But I am convinced that we need to tackle this problem at this time and I commend the Mayor and the Administration and Mr. Strong for taking on this problem. It is something that we’ve overlooked or ignored for a number of years. Pipes are deteriorating, pump stations need to be improved and there is one particular problem in the Martin Luther King area that I’ve concluded or been told by Mr. Strong, will be fixed with this money or with part of this money. So, while we must increase the rates to do the things that we need to do to live up to our commitment to provide clean and safe water and to avoid fines from certain regulatory agencies, I think that we have shown some compassion by making available a half million dollars to help persons who need assistance in paying their water bill. And so with those considerations, I will vote favorable on this legislation.

Councilman Burrell: I also echo those sentiments. I know especially, in the Queensborough and the Lakeside area, because of the topography of those areas where you have a lot of hills, when we had the heavy rain, we wind up having sewer on top of the ground in many places in those areas. And it is my hope and my understanding that some of those conditions will also be eliminated. It is nothing worse than having raw sewer sitting on top of your ground, especially when you have children playing in the raw sewerage. And although we put a temporary fix on it, we need to do something permanently and hopefully this will help in that situation also.

Councilman Shyne: Charles, it looks like we have a lot of folks who are going to be running for re-election now. I likes that. Mr. Mayor, I think that this is a bold move. I think this is something that we needed to do. Some of us that are on the Council now, we might have been a part of the problem. No politician likes to spend money that is going under the ground but you have to do it because you can’t see it and point to it and say that, that is where your dollars wen to; so, it is an extremely bold move on the part of the Administration to make this commitment at this particular time.

Ordinance as amended adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

12. Ordinance No. 81 of 2001: An ordinance to amend the 2001 budget for the Shreveport Redevelopment Agency Special Revenue Fund and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on April 24, 2001 was read by title and on motion ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Burrell, seconded by Councilman Serio adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Did not cast a vote: Councilman Serio. 1.

The adopted Ordinances as amended follow:

ORDINANCE NO. 33 OF 2001

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 106 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT ZONING ORDINANCE, BY REZONING PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NE CORNER OF GREENWOOD ROAD AND MARSTON, SHREVEPORT, CADDO PARISH, LOUISIANA, FROM B-1, BUFFER BUSINESS DISTRICT AND B-3, COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT TO I-1, LIGHT INDUSTRY DISTRICT AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO

SECTION I: BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, in due, legal and regular session convened, that the zoning classification of property located on the NE corner of Greenwood Road and Marston, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, legally described below, be and the same is hereby changed from B-1, Buffer Business District and B-3, Community Business District to I-1, Light Industry District:

Beginning 60 feet east and 350 feet south of the NE corner of Lot 21, Marston Park Subdivision, Unit #1, run thence east 100 feet, thence south 231.4 feet, thence west 100 feet, thence north 256.4 feet to the POB, being in the SE/4 of Section 8 (17-14).

SECTION II: THAT the rezoning of the property described herein is subject to compliance with the following stipulations:

1. Development of the property shall be in substantial accord with the site plan submitted, with any additions or expansions requiring further review and approval by the Planning Commission.

2. An alternative compliance landscaping plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Zoning Administrator prior to the issuance of any permits.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that if any provision or item of this ordinance or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items, or applications of this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provisions, items, or applications and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that all ordinances or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

ORDINANCE NO. 70 OF 2001

AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REENACT SECTION 2-106 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES RELATIVE TO INDEMNIFICATION OF OFFICIALS AND OFFICERS AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO

WHEREAS, the Shreveport Redevelopment Agency, ("SRA") was established by Resolution No. 226 of 1980 under the authority of Act 179 of 1968 ( a special act of the state legislature pertaining to the City of Shreveport); and

WHEREAS, under the authority of R.S. 33:4625(0), the general state law relating to redevelopment, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 338 of 1980 authorizing the Shreveport Redevelopment Agency to exercise the functions of the agency created under R. S. 33:4625 (E); and

WHEREAS, the Shreveport Redevelopment Agency was created to assist in eliminating slum and blighted conditions in areas within the City of Shreveport, and for reasons further stated in said act, for the social and economic well being of the City of Shreveport.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, in due, legal and regular session convened that Section 2-106 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Shreveport is hereby amended and reenacted by adding subsection (a)(5) to read as follows:

Sec. 2-106. Indemnification of city officials and officers.

(a) As used in this section, "official" or "officer" means:

* * *

(5) the members of the Shreveport Redevelopment Agency, created by Resolution No. 226 of 1980 and further authorized by Ordinance No. 338 of 1980.

* * *

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that if any provision or item of this Ordinance or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items or applications of this Ordinance which can be given affect without the invalid provisions, items or applications and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that all Ordinances or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

ORDINANCE NO. 71 OF 2001

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2001 BUDGET FOR THE RIVERFRONT DEVELOPMENT SPECIAL REVENUE FUND AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, the City Charter provides for the amendment of any previously-adopted budget; and

WHEREAS, the City Council finds it necessary to amend the 2001 budget for the Riverfront Development Special Revenue Fund, to appropriate funds to match a Federal grant for commercial district revitalization and for other purposes.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, in legal session convened, that Ordinance No. 184 of 2000, the 2001 budget for the Riverfront Development Special Revenue Fund, be amended as follows:

In Section 2 (Appropriations):

Decrease Operating Reserves by $300,000.

Appropriate $300,000 to Transfer to Community Development Fund.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the remainder of Ordinance No. 184 of 2000 shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that if any provision or item of this ordinance or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other sections of the ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provisions, items or applications; and, to this end, the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared to be severable.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that all ordinances or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

ORDINANCE NO. 72 OF 2001

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2001 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS BUDGET AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, the City Charter provides for the amendment of any previously-adopted budget; and

WHEREAS, the City Council finds it necessary to amend the 2001 Capital Improvements Budget to correct errors in the adopting ordinance and for other purposes.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, in legal session convened, that Ordinance No. 175 of 2000, the 2001 Capital Improvements Budget, is hereby amended as follows:

Program A (Buildings and Improvements):

Correct the "2001 Budget" appropriation for Multi-Cultural Center (96-A002) to read $2,877,900.

Program B (Recreation Improvements):

Correct the initial "2001 Budget" appropriation for Independence Stadium Expansion (00-B001) to read $26,253,600. Increase the appropriation for this project by $349,500. Source is 1999 Stadium Bonds.

Program C (Street Improvements):

Correct the "2001 Budget " appropriation for Shreve Park Industrial Campus

Roadways (95-C003) to read $5,943,000.

Increase the appropriation for 2001 CDBG Overlay (01-C005) by $95,800. Funding source is CDBG.

Program D (Drainage Improvements):

Correct the "2001 Change" appropriation for Purchase of Flood-Prone Properties (97-D002) to read $163,200.

Correct the "2001 Budget" appropriation for City-Wide Drainage Projects (96-D005) to read $1,541,200.

In Program H (Airport Improvements):

Increase the appropriation for Part 150 Noise Acquisition - Regional Airport (95-H003) by $3,674,900. Funding sources are Shreveport Airport Authority $334,100, State Grant $334,100 and Federal Aviation Administration $3,006,700.

Decrease the appropriation for Land Acquisition for Security Purposes (99-H002) by $39,100. Funding sources are Shreveport Airport Authority $3,500, State Grant $3,600 and Federal Aviation Administration $32,100.

Establish a project entitled Access Control System Upgrades (01-H001) at $321,200. Funding sources are State Grant $29,200, Shreveport Airport Authority $29,200 and Federal Aviation Administration $262,800.

Establish a project entitled  Parallel Taxiway to Runway 14/32 (01-H002) at $1,308,700. Funding sources are Shreveport Airport Authority $119,000, State Grant $119,000 and Federal Aviation Administration $1,070,700.

Establish a project entitled Acquire LADOTD Property (01-H003) at $347,000. Funding sources are Shreveport Airport Authority $31,500, State Grant $31,500 and Federal Aviation Administration $284,000.

In Program L (Transit Improvements):

Increase the appropriation for SporTran Maintenance Center (96-L002) by $225,800. Funding sources are $201,600 from FTA/FHWA Grant and $24,300 from General Fund.

Decrease the appropriation for 1997 SporTran Capital Improvements (97-L001) by $120,800. Funding sources are $24,200 from General Fund and $96,600 from FTA/FHWA Grant.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that all other sections of Ordinance No. 175 of 2000 shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. Totals and subtotals shall be adjusted accordingly.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that if any provision or item of this ordinance or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items or applications which can be given effect without the invalid provisions, items or applications; and, to this end, the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that all ordinances or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

ORDINANCE NO. 73 OF 2001

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 106 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT ZONING ORDINANCE, BY REZONING PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BERT KOUNS INDUSTRIAL LOOP, 1650 FEET EAST OF KINGSTON ROAD, SHREVEPORT, CADDO PARISH, LOUISIANA, FROM B-2-E, NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS/EXTENDED USE DISTRICT (SKATE PARK) TO B-2-E, NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS/EXTENDED USE DISTRICT LIMITED TO A "LAWN AND POOL BUSINESS WITH OUTSIDE DISPLAY" ONLY, AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO

SECTION I: BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, in due, legal and regular session convened, that the zoning classification of Lot 2, South Ridge Business Park Unit #2, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, property located on the north side of Bert Kouns Industrial Loop, 1650 feet east of Kingston Road, be and the same is hereby changed from B-2-E, Neighborhood Business/Extended Use District (skate park) to B-2-E, Neighborhood Business/Extended Use District limited to a "lawn and pool business with outside display" only.

SECTION II: THAT the rezoning of the property described herein is subject to compliance with the following stipulation:

1. Development of the property shall be in substantial accord with a revised site plan showing outside display of lawn equipment limited to 8 pieces to be displayed on concrete pads in front of the building and pool display to be located on the side of the building, to be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director, with any substantial changes or additions requiring further review and approval by the Planning Commission.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that if any provision or item of this ordinance or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items, or applications of this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provisions, items, or applications and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that all ordinances or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

ORDINANCE NO. 74 OF 2001

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 106 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT ZONING ORDINANCE, BY REZONING PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NE CORNER OF KINGS HWY AND SOUTHERN, SHREVEPORT, CADDO PARISH, LOUISIANA, FROM SPI-4, KINGS HIGHWAY OVERLAY DISTRICT AND R-3, URBAN, MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT TO B-1-E, BUFFER BUSINESS/EXTENDED USE DISTRICT LIMITED TO "A GROCERY STORE WITH A PHARMACY PICK UP WINDOW" ONLY, AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO

SECTION I: BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, in due, legal and regular session convened, that the zoning classification of property located on the NE corner of Kings Hwy and Southern, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, legally described below, be and the same is hereby changed from SPI-4, Kings Highway Overlay District and R-3, Urban, Multi-Family Residence District to B-1-E, Buffer Business/Extended Use District limited to "a grocery store with a pharmacy pick up window" only:

A 6 acre tract of land located in Section 12, T17N, R14W, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, being more particularly described as follows:

From a found ½ inch iron rod marking the NE corner of Lot 1, Huckaby Subdivision, measure along the west R/W of Barret Street S0°1'50"E a distance of 88.53 feet to a found 1 inch iron pipe and the POB.

From the POB continue along the west R/W of Barret Street S0°1'50"E a distance of 283.76 feet to a found ½ inch iron rod;

Thence leave said R/W measure N89°31'22"W a distance of 205.85 feet to a point in a concrete ditch;

Thence S3°34'6"E a distance of 135.33 feet to a point in a concrete ditch;

Thence N89°31'22"W a distance of 23.98 feet to a found concrete R/W monument located on the east line of Lot 11 of the Bienville Subdivision;

Thence S3°5'59"E a distance of 79.97 feet to a set ½ inch iron rod;

Thence N82°28'0"W a distance of 154.70 feet to a set ½ inch iron rod;

Thence N74°45'33"W a distance of 288.82 feet to a set ½ inch iron rod;

Thence N6°6'53"E a distance of 162.81 feet to a found concrete R/W monument on the east R/W of Southern Avenue;

Thence along said R/W N14°59'16"W a distance of 104.82 feet to a found concrete R/W monument;

Thence along the arc of a curve to the right having a radius of 5699.57 feet for an arc distance of 141.92 feet (called 142.20 feet), chord bearing of N2°55'58"W a distance of 141.92 feet to a set ½ inch iron rod;

Thence leave said R/W S89°27'44"E a distance of 461.24 feet to a set ½ inch iron rod;

Thence N0°25'49"W for a distance of 1.72 feet to a set ½ inch iron rod;

Thence S89°31'22"E a distance of 204.78 feet to the POB; this parcel contains 6 acres or 261,367 sq. ft.

SECTION II: THAT the rezoning of the property described herein is subject to compliance with the following stipulations:

1. Development of the property shall be in substantial accord with the site plan and other related site development exhibits submitted by the applicant on April 18, 2001, and approved by the City Council. Any changes shall require a vote and approval by the Shreveport City Council.

2. The MPC staff is directed to work with the Department of Operational Services on the issues of traffic calming and "No Thru Truck" traffic from the north property line of Albertson’s to Rendall Street.

3. The final Landscape, lighting, signage, and amenities shall be reviewed and approved by the Shreveport City Council prior to permits being issued.

4. There shall be a left turn lane on Barret Street at the south entrance driveway; there shall be a "porkchop" (or other device required by the Department of Operational Services) at Kings Hwy to force right turn only.

5. Truck routing shall be as shown on the site plan.

6. Pharmacy pick up window porte-cochere to be architecturally compatible with the building facade.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that if any provision or item of this ordinance or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items, or applications of this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provisions, items, or applications and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that all ordinances or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

ORDINANCE NO. 75 OF 2001

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 106 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT ZONING ORDINANCE, BY REZONING PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF YOUREE DRIVE, 250 FEET SOUTH OF ARDMORE, SHREVEPORT, CADDO PARISH, LOUISIANA, FROM SPI-3(B-1), COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR OVERLAY (B-1, BUFFER BUSINESS) DISTRICT TO SPI-3-E, COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR OVERLAY/EXTENDED USE DISTRICTLIMITED TO "A RESIDENCE AND RETAIL SALE AND REPAIR OF CLOTHING STORE" ONLY, AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO

SECTION I: BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, in due, legal and regular session convened, that the zoning classification of Lot 421, Broadmoor Subdivision, Unit #2, and an 8 foot strip adjacent on the rear, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, property located on the west side of Youree Drive, 250 feet south of Ardmore, be and the same is hereby changed from SPI-3(B-1), Commercial Corridor Overlay (B-1, Buffer Business) District to SPI-3-E Commercial Corridor Overlay/Extended Use District limited to "a residence and retail sale and repair of clothing store" only.

SECTION II: THAT the rezoning of the property described herein is subject to compliance with the following stipulations:

1. Development to be in substantial accord with a revised site plan showing compliance with the Landscape Ordinance to be submitted to and approved by the Zoning Administrator, with any additions or expansions requiring further review and approval by the Planning Commission.

2. Hours of operation limited to 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that if any provision or item of this ordinance or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items, or applications of this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provisions, items, or applications and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that all ordinances or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

ORDINANCE NO. 76 OF 2001

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 106 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT ZONING ORDINANCE, BY REZONING PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF STANDARD OIL ROAD, 625 FEET WEST OF JEWELLA, SHREVEPORT, CADDO PARISH, LOUISIANA, FROM R-1D, URBAN, ONE-FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT TO B-3, COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT, AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO

SECTION I: BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, in due, legal and regular session convened, that the zoning classification of property generally located on the south side of Standard Oil Road, 625 feet west of Jewella, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, legally described below, be and the same is hereby changed from R-1D, Urban, One-Family Residence District to B-3, Community Business District:

Lots 16, 17, 18, and 19, Jenkins Acres Subdivision, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana;

Being described as a 0.230 M/L acre tract of land out of Lot 47, Jenkins Acres, being more particularly described as follows:

Beginning at the NW corner of said Lot 47, run thence S88°32'13"E along the north line of said Lot 47 a distance of 100 feet to the NE corner of said Lot;

Thence S0°56'2"W along the east line of said lot a distance of 100 feet;

Thence N88°32'13"W a distance of 100 feet to a point on the west line of said Lot 47;

Thence N0°56'2"E along the said line a distance of 100 feet to the POB and containing 0.230 acres, M/L.

SECTION II: THAT the rezoning of the property described herein is subject to compliance with the following stipulation:

1. Development of the property shall be in substantial accord with a revised site plan (to be approved by the Planning Director) showing landscaping and an 8' high metal fence along the south property line and approximately 325' along the west property line, with wrought iron fencing for the balance of the west side, with any future additions or expansions requiring further review and approval by the Planning Commission.

2. Development of the property shall be in substantial accord with a revised site plan showing landscaping and additional 6' wood screening fence along the west property line of the larger tract and surrounding the smaller tract (south, east, and west sides), to be submitted to and approved by the Zoning Administrator, with any additions or expansions requiring further review and approval by the Planning Commission.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that if any provision or item of this ordinance or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items, or applications of this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provisions, items, or applications and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that all ordinances or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

ORDINANCE NO. 77 OF 2001

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 106 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT ZONING ORDINANCE, BY REZONING PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF CLEVELAND, 600 FEET WEST OF JEWELLA, SHREVEPORT, CADDO PARISH, LOUISIANA, FROM R-1D, URBAN, ONE-FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT TO R-1D-E, URBAN, ONE-FAMILY RESIDENCE/EXTENDED USE DISTRICT LIMITED TO "AN ELDERLY DAY/HEALTH CARE FACILITY" ONLY, AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO

SECTION I: BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, in due, legal and regular session convened, that the zoning classification of the east 137.25 feet of the south 140 feet of the north 170 feet of Lot 2, Hollywood Subdivision, Unit #1 and Lot 14, Floral Heights Subdivision, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, property located on the south side of Cleveland, 600 feet west of Jewella, be and the same is hereby changed from R-1D, Urban, One-Family Residence District to R-1D-E, Urban, One-Family Residence/Extended Use District limited to "an elderly day/health care facility" only.

SECTION II: THAT the rezoning of the property described herein is subject to compliance with the following stipulations:

1. Development of the property shall be in substantial accord with the site plan submitted, with any significant changes or additions to be submitted to and approved by the Planning Commission. Approval is for the accessory structure only.

2. Hours of operation are limited to 6 a.m. to 7 p.m.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that if any provision or item of this ordinance or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items, or applications of this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provisions, items, or applications and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that all ordinances or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

ORDINANCE NO. 78 OF 2001

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 106 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT ZONING ORDINANCE, BY REZONING PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SE CORNER OF BROADWAY AND CLEVELAND, SHREVEPORT, CADDO PARISH, LOUISIANA, FROM R-1H, URBAN, ONE-FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT TO B-1, BUFFER BUSINESS DISTRICT, AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO

SECTION I: BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, in due, legal and regular session convened, that the zoning classification of Lots 1 and 2, Mooretown Annex Wing 1, less the west 8 feet thereof, and all that part of Cleveland Avenue, abandoned in Conveyance Book 220-283, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, property located on the SE corner of Broadway and Cleveland, be and the same is hereby changed from R-1H, Urban, One-Family Residence District to B-1, Buffer Business District.

SECTION II: THAT the rezoning of the property described herein is subject to compliance with the following stipulation:

1. Development of the property shall be in substantial accord with a revised site plan showing the required 6' solid wood screening fence adjacent to residentially zoned properties on the east and south, and compliance with the Landscape Ordinance, to be submitted to and approved by the Zoning Administrator, with any additions or expansions requiring further review and approval by the Planning Commission.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that if any provision or item of this ordinance or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items, or applications of this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provisions, items, or applications and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that all ordinances or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

ORDINANCE NO. 79 OF 2001

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 106 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT ZONING ORDINANCE, BY REZONING PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF LAKESHORE DRIVE, 500 FEET SOUTH OF DILG LEAGUE DRIVE, SHREVEPORT, CADDO PARISH, LOUISIANA, FROM R-1D, URBAN, ONE-FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT TO R-3-E, URBAN, MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE/EXTENDED USE DISTRICT LIMITED TO "A HOUSING SHELTER FOR HOMELESS FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN (TRANSITIONAL)" ONLY, AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO

SECTION I: BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, in due, legal and regular session convened, that the zoning classification of the W’ly 200 feet of Lot 36, Block B, Lake Gardens Subdivision, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, property located on the east side of Lakeshore Drive, 500 feet south of Dilg League Drive, be and the same is hereby changed from R-1D, Urban, One-Family Residence District to R-3-E, Urban, Multi-Family Residence/Extended Use District limited to "a housing shelter for homeless families with children (transitional)" only.

SECTION II: THAT the rezoning of the property described herein is subject to compliance with the following stipulations:

1. Development of the property shall be in substantial accord with a revised site plan to be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director, with any significant changes or additions requiring further review and approval by the Planning Commission.

2. Approval is limited to the housing of a maximum of 5 families only.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that if any provision or item of this ordinance or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items, or applications of this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provisions, items, or applications and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that all ordinances or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

ORDINANCE NO. 80 OF 2001

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 94 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES RELATIVE TO WATER AND SEWER CHARGES, AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, the Mayor has proposed that the water and sewerage charges paid by customers of the Department of Water and Sewerage be increased; and

WHEREAS, these increases are necessary to provide adequate funding for utility operations, maintenance and debt service for the years 2003 through 2007.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, in due, regular and legal session convened that Chapter 94 of the Code Ordinances of the City of Shreveport is hereby amended and reenacted as follows:

Sec. 94-164. Water charges.

The following monthly rates shall be charged for water furnished to residential, commercial and industrial customers:

(1) Monthly water customer charge. The monthly water customer charge shall be as follows:

A. Effective January 1, 1996:

Water Meter Size (inches)	Inside City	Outside City
5/8	$ 2.70	$ 5.40
3/4	3.10	6.20
1	3.50	7.00
1 ½	5.60	11.20
2	7.90	15.80
3	16.75	33.50
4	29.00	58.00
6	57.00	114.00
8	85.15	170.30
10	115.50	231.00

B. Effective July 1, 2003:

Water Meter Size (inches)	Inside City	Outside City
5/8	$ 2.97	$ 5.94
3/4	3.41	6.82
1	3.85	7.70
1 ½	6.16	12.32
2	8.69	17.38
3	18.43	36.86
4	31.90	63.80
6	62.70	125.40
8	93.67	187.34
10	127.05	254.10

Monthly water customer charges for roving and construction meters shall be the same as for regular meters, according to water main size, as provided above.

C. Effective January 1, 2004:

Water Meter Size (inches)	Inside City	Outside City
5/8	$ 3.16	$ 6.32
3/4	3.63	7.26
1	4.10	8.20
1 ½	6.56	13.12
2	9.25	18.50
3	19.63	39.26
4	33.97	67.94
6	66.78	133.56
8	99.76	199.52
10	135.31	270.62

D. Effective January 1, 2005:

Water Meter Size (inches)	Inside City	Outside City
5/8	$ 3.37	$ 6.74
3/4	3.87	7.74
1	4.37	8.74
1 ½	6.99	13.98
2	9.85	19.70
3	20.91	41.82
4	36.18	72.36
6	71.12	142.24
8	106.24	212.48
10	144.11	288.22

Monthly water customer charges for roving and construction meters shall be the same as for regular meters, according to water main size, as provided above.

E. Effective January 1, 2006

Water Meter Size (inches)	Inside City	Outside City
5/8	$ 3.59	$ 7.18
3/4	4.12	8.24
1	4.65	9.30
1 ½	7.44	14.88
2	10.49	20.98
3	22.27	44.54
4	38.53	77.06
6	75.74	151.48
8	113.15	226.30
10	153.48	306.96

Monthly water customer charges for roving and construction meters shall be the same as for regular meters, according to water main size, as provided above.

F. Effective January 1, 2007:

Water Meter Size (inches)	Inside City	Outside City
5/8	$ 3.82	7.64
3/4	4.39	8.78
1	4.95	9.90
1 ½	7.92	15.84
2	11.17	22.34
3	23.72	47.44
4	41.03	82.06
6	80.66	161.32
8	120.50	241.00
10	163.46	326.92

Monthly water customer charges for roving and construction meters shall be the same as for regular meters, according to water main size, provided above.

(2) Quantity charges. The monthly water customer quantity charge shall be as follows:

A. Effective January 1, 1996:

Customer Class	Rate per 1,000 Gallons Inside City	Rate per 1,000 Gallons Outside City
Residential	$ 1.71	$ 3.42
Commercial	1.50	3.00
Industrial	1.38	2.76

B. Effective July 1, 2003:

Customer Class	Rate per 1,000 Gallons Inside City	Rate per 1,000 Gallons Outside City
Residential	$ 1.88	$ 3.76
Commercial	1.65	3.30
Industrial	1.52	3.04

C. Effective January 1, 2004:

Customer Class	Rate per 1,000 Gallons Inside City	Rate per 1,000 Gallons Outside City
Residential	$ 2.00	$ 4.00
Commercial	1.76	3.52
Industrial	1.62	3.24

D. Effective January 1, 2005:

Customer Class	Rate per 1,000 Gallons Inside City	Rate per 1,000 Gallons Outside City
Residential	$ 2.13	$ 4.26
Commercial	1.87	3.74
Industrial	1.73	3.46

E. Effective January 1, 2006:

Customer Class	Rate per 1,000 Gallons Inside City	Rate per 1,000 Gallons Outside City
Residential	$ 2.27	$ 4.54
Commercial	1.99	3.98
Industrial	1.84	3.68

F. Effective January 1, 2007:

Customer Class	Rate per 1,000 Gallons Inside City	Rate per 1,000 Gallons Outside City
Residential	$ 2.42	$ 4.84
Commercial	2.12	4.24
Industrial	1.96	3.92

(3) Contract customers. The city council may authorize contracts with municipalities, political subdivisions, government entities or private firms to furnish water at rates and charges other than those set forth herein.

Sec. 94-165. Sewerage charges.

The following rates shall be charged for wastewater collection and treatment provided for customers served by the sanitary sewerage system of the city. The charges provided in this section are to be for the full payment of the costs of operation and maintenance, including replacement, of the wastewater collection and treatment system.

(1) Monthly sewerage charge. A monthly service charge for all users is established as follows:

Effective Date	Inside City	Outside City
January 1, 1996	$ 2.45	$ 4.90
July 1, 2003	2.70	5.40
January 1, 2004	2.88	5.76
January 1, 2005	3.07	6.14
January 1, 2006	3.27	6.54
January 1, 2007	3.48	6.96

(2) Quantity charge.

A. Residential customers. Effective January 1, 1994, quantity charges for metered residential customers shall be based on 100 percent of water consumption unless the individual customer’s average monthly water usage is less for the months of November, December, January and February, calculated after the month with the highest metered water usage and the month with the lowest metered water usage have been eliminated.

B. Commercial and industrial customers. Quantity charges for commercial and industrial customers connected to the sewerage system shall be based on 100 percent of metered water use; provided that the director of the Department of Water and Sewerage shall be authorized to adjust these charges to account for such factors as product use and cooling tower evaporation. The customer shall bear the burden of proof regarding product use or evaporation when requesting an adjustment.

C. Calculation. All quantity charges shall be calculated at the following rates per one 1,000 gallons of metered water use:

Effective January 1, 1996:

Inside City	User Charge Portion	Capital Charge Portion	Total
Residential	$1.51	$ 0.75	$ 2.26
Commercial Industrial	1.25	0.62	1.87
Outside City	User Charge Portion	Capital Charge Portion	Total
Residential	$ 1.51	$ 3.01	$ 4.52
Commercial Industrial	1.25	2.49	3.74

Effective July 1, 2003:

Inside City	User Charge Portion	Capital Charge Portion	Total
Residential	$ 1.66	$ 0.83	$ 2.49
Commercial Industrial	1.38	0.68	2.06
Outside City	User Charge Portion	Capital Charge Portion	Total
Residential	$ 1.66	$ 3.32	$ 4.98
Commercial Industrial	1.38	2.74	4.12

Effective January 1, 2004:

Inside City	User Charge Portion	Capital Charge Portion	Total
Residential	$ 1.77	$ 0.88	$ 2.65
Commercial Industrial	1.47	0.72	2.19
Outside City	User Charge Portion	Capital Charge Portion	Total
Residential	$ 1.77	$ 3.53	$ 5.30
Commercial Industrial	1.47	2.91	4.38

Effective January 1, 2005:

Inside City	User Charge Portion	Capital Charge Portion	Total
Residential	$ 1.89	$ 0.94	$ 2.83
Commercial Industrial	1.57	0.77	2.34
Outside City	User Charge Portion	Capital Charge Portion	Total
Residential	$ 1.89	$ 3.77	$ 5.66
Commercial Industrial	1.57	3.11	4.68

Effective January 1, 2006:

Inside City	User Charge Portion	Capital Charge Portion	Total
Residential	$ 2.01	$ 1.00	$ 3.01
Commercial Industrial	1.67	0.82	2.49
Outside City	User Charge Portion	Capital Charge Portion	Total
Residential	$ 2.01	$ 4.01	$ 6.02
Commercial Industrial	1.67	3.31	4.98

Effective January 1, 2007:

Inside City	User Charge Portion	Capital Charge Portion	Total
Residential	$ 2.14	$ 1.07	$ 3.21
Commercial Industrial	1.78	0.87	2.65
Outside City	User Charge Portion	Capital Charge Portion	Total
Residential	$ 2.14	$ 4.28	$ 6.42
Commercial Industrial	1.78	3.52	5.30

Sec. 94-169. Payment Assistance Program

(a) A fund is established to assist needy low income persons who live within the boundaries of the City to pay water and sewerage bills. Said fund is established at a minimum amount of $375,000, and shall increase to a minimum amount of $475,000 in 2003, and to a minimum amount of $500,000 in 2004.

(b) The City shall enter into contracts with non-profit organizations which have the desire, capabilities, and locations need to administer said funds.

(c) Eligibility requirements and guidelines for assistance will be established by resolution of the City Council, or in the absence of said resolution by the Chief Administrative Officer and included in the contracts with the non-profit organizations that administer the funds.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that these charges shall become effective with all customer bills rendered upon effective dates..

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that if any provision or item of this ordinance or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items or applications of this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provisions, items, or applications, and to this end, the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that all ordinances or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

ORDINANCE NO. 81 OF 2001

AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE 2001 BUDGET FOR THE SHREVEPORT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SPECIAL REVENUE FUND AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

By: Councilman Burrell

WHEREAS, the City Charter provides for the amendment of any previously-adopted budget; and

WHEREAS, The City Council finds it necessary to amend the 2001 budget for the Shreveport Redevelopment Agency Special Revenue Fund to bring forward the fund balance from December 31, 2000.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT Ordained by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, in due, legal and regular session convened, that Ordinance No. 187 of 2000, the 2001 budget for the Shreveport Redevelopment Agency Special Revenue Fund be amended as follows:

In Section 1. Estimated Receipts:

Increase Estimated Fund Balance as of 1/1/2001 by $47,900 and the total by a like amount.

In Section 2. Appropriations:

Increase Improvements and Equipment by $47,900 and the total by a like amount.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, that the remainder of Ordinance No. 187 of 2000 shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that if any provision or item of this ordinance or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items, or applications of this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provisions, items, or applications; and to this end, the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that all ordinances or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS. None.

NEW BUSINESS:

1. Appeal: BAC-34-01: LARRY’S RESTAURANT & POOL HALL, 7288 Greenwood Rd., Special Exception Use & variance in the hours of operation in a B-3 District; pool hall & restaurant with the on-premise consumption of alcohol operating to 2 A.. M.

Councilman Shyne: While he’s doing that, let me recognize two of my friends. I see Ms. Bradford, who works for Senator Mary Landrieu who is a product of Mooretown. And I see the Honorable Michael Walker who is a produce of Allendale and Lakeside, Booker T. I’m sorry–Stoner Hill. You spend so much time over there in Allendale and Lakeside. Good to have you all down.

Councilman Burrell: On this particular issue here, first of all, again I would like to recognize some of the people here. Although we can speak on this issue, should I say, they can not speak on this issue, just want to recognize some of the persons who have come in opposition to this. I see Pastor Caldwell, from the Greenwood Road Full Gospel Baptist Church. Pastor Caldwell is back there, some of his, members of his church and also, persons from the Timberline Subdivision, which is adjacent to this property and the Greenwood Acres Subdivision, which is also there. So, if it okay, would you mind letting them stand (persons stood in opposition).

Councilman Shyne: I made a mistake last time, I only asked for persons that was in opposition. This time, if we have any persons here who are in favor of this, would you please stand (persons stood in support). I don’t want to be accused of being biased and some times I have been accused and Dr. Carter, I might have been guilty, you know how it is. Very few people who are perfect and I just happen to be one of those that will fess up from time-to-time, Judge Walker, that I might not be perfect. I heard an amen. Mr. Mayor. The Mayor and was at a church, I won’t say whose church, but it has been a little while ago and I think we stayed so long until he and I both had to kind of pull our shoes off, but we said, amen.

Councilman Burrell: Since we on the Council are the only ones that can speak to this issue, the concerns that have come up about this particular development really started back when a proposed truck stop was to go into this area. Many of those from that area feel that this would diminish their quality-of-life although now we are change it from a truck stop to a restaurant with alcohol, being able to serve alcohol.

Another concern was the fact, than the traffic in the area, was also the video poker, although it is not being applied for at this time, the concerns of those who are in that area that this is the ultimate purpose for these establishments. And these persons who are represented here that are in opposition, has been fighting for some time to maintain some quality-of-life out in that area. Although it sits outside of our central city area, they are very concerned about lessening their quality-of-life there. And, just to give an example, on the south side right across from where this establishment is, it was before my time but they established a truck stop there that has video poker. Now the quite, what used to be a quite quaint neighborhood with a lot of elderly people in that area is not being overrun by drugs and prostitution. The concern that many of those are having there, that the same possibility lies in a situation here. I know there is argument that these facilities or these businesses will be on the inside of a mall area, but also the truck stop would have been there also.

So, I have spoken with them and their concern has been registered overwhelmingly that they would like to maintain the quality-of-life there in the Timberline Subdivision, in the Greenwood Acres Subdivision, as well as for the benefit of those who have to get off the interstate at this location, and go to the Greenwood Acres Baptist Church, which is doing a wonderful job out there in their efforts to develop that area in trying to be involved in the livelihood of that old neighborhood out there in trying to provide some leadership in that area. So, I ask that the Council would consider opposing this appeal at this time.

Councilman Shyne: I agree with you and I know this is in your district. I basically kind of look at it as a moral issue because I think what we are doing is eventually putting a lot of gambling into our neighborhoods and I have no objections to gambling, but I think it needs to be kept down on the riverfront. Eventually, what will happen, we will have these little spots all over our city and it has a way of diminishing the quality-of-life that we have within our residential neighborhoods. A lot of times the only place that you have, where you can have some peace and quietness and rest is in your neighborhoods. And, after you have spent most of us, are only able to pay for one home, and ‘course some of us Dr. Carter are not able to pay for one. We are just able to live in it for a little while and we at least want some peace, while we are there and this is what we are seeing. We are seeing that our neighborhoods, it seems like everybody see a way to make a lot of money out of gambling; so, anytime they can put anything up where they can make some extra money, it happens. It is kind of a funny thing about it, most of these people who want to put this up, they don’t put it in their neighborhoods and I don’t know why, it’s a puzzle to me, Chief why, if it so good, why you won’t put it in your neighborhood. It doesn’t have anything to do with anything, but it is a moral issue and it is a quality-of-life.

I think we have got to send a message, we don’t have anything against gambling, just keep it down on the riverfront, but please, let keep it out of our neighborhoods because we don’t know how an individual might feel that would go out and loose $3-, $4-, $500 dollars. You know sometimes you feel despondent, you feel depressed. You don’t know what you might do. We wouldn’t want to see that in our neighborhoods. Please, I am asking my colleagues, to please, let make a statement. Lets keep the gambling down on the riverfront and I have nothing against gambling and a lot of times, and I am not saying that people who gamble are might be undesirables, but a lot of times, you know people who do these out in the neighborhoods, might attract some undesirable people. And, we don’t want that coming through our neighborhoods. I am not making this personal and I am not really talking about anybody, so if you gamble I don’t want to say that you are undesirable, I am not saying that. But I am saying that we have a tendency to have undesirables from time-to-time, so I am asking my colleagues, please lets take a second look, lets take a strong look. We need to make a stand, right now and say, lets keep gambling down on the riverfront.

And remember now, this is a moral issue, we need to be about being our brother’s keeper if we really believe that we are our brother’s keep. Now, if we don’t believe in it, then I understand but if you really believe that you are your brother’s keeper, you won’t let a few dollars come in between you being your brother’s keeper.

Councilman Spigener: What was the Zoning Board of Appeals’ vote on this? Mr. Kirkland: One member was absent. Of the total 7, the vote was 5-1 to approve on both cases.

Councilman Burrell: I want to just state for the record, I am not anti-business. Matter of fact, this establishment here, I was out there for the opening, not these businesses, but the mall itself and it was my understanding at the time that we were going to try to put businesses in there in the support of the neighborhood that were around it and they worked with them very closely then.

I think that it is important that we try to work with many of our neighborhoods and listen to some of the things that they have to say also. Some times we have those neighborhoods that may not have the leadership like, in this area has been until the Greenwood Road Full Gospel Church moved there and create a lot of leadership in addition to what was already there, because these areas out here, they did not have a lot younger people. You had many of, people who were older, but as time go by, many of our younger people are staring to move back into these outlying areas away from our more urban settings and they are now getting more involved with what takes place out in these areas and we do have some young families in there, now, in which I’m glad to hear. The Timberline Subdivision there is a well respected subdivision. You have middle to upper class families who live there and they have been very, very concerned about what will take place at this development.

Again, I think you made a point, many people will support things in your area that you represent, but will not accept them in their areas and that is a problem to me, but then this is politics. But at the same time, I am asking that they respect the wishes of the people who are there, that’s in opposition to these development because of their concern that this is sort of a situation where we will establish a business with alcohol and then later on bring video poker into the area. Again, I am like you, I don’t really have problems with you gaming or video poker, but everybody don’t feel the same way and I support their quality-of-life in this area over that situation there. So, again, I am asking for the Council’s support on this.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Burrell, thank you but I want to make it clear, I am anti-business when it is going to have a negative effect on the neighborhood. If it is going to disrupt and disturb a neighborhood, I think we have to take a stance. I think we have to reach a point where we have to say, no. Mr. Burrell, what is the pleasure of this Council?

Councilman Burrell: First I would like to get a direction on the yes and no vote on this issue, so we won’t be cloudy. A yes vote means, that you uphold the appeal? Mr. Thompson: This is not an ordinance, it is-- you can make any motion you want. You can move to reverse the decision of the ZBA and to deny the application. You could move to approve the decision of the ZBA and grant the application.

Motion by Councilman Burrell, seconded by Councilman Shyne to deny the application. Motion denied by the following vote: Nays: Councilmen Stewart, Carmody, Serio and Spigener. 4. Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Shyne, and Burrell. 3.

Mr. Thompson: Because that motion was not adopted, I don’t believe that we have a decision on BAC-34-01. The motion was to reverse decision of the ZBA and that motion was not adopted. This is not the normal ordinance/resolution vote that we have where the motion is to approve.

Councilman Shyne: So, we need a motion from a council member for the approval. Mr. Thompson: That is correct, to get a decision. If we are to get a decision on this issue.

Councilman Burrell: Clarification. You just confused me, say that again. Councilman Shyne: You need a motion to approve. We need a motion now from Council member to approve of the BAC-34-01.

Councilman Serio: Charles, one question and that is that when the Council approves a business, a B-3, that does not approve a gaming license, does it not? Mr. Kirkland: Absolutely not, it has nothing to do with it.

Councilman Serio: It just approves a business license for a B-3 kind and what they can serve? That business has to operate, open and then appeal it to the state is that my understanding correctly? Mr. Kirkland: That is correct. All this is about is the alcohol and whether they want video poker at a later date, is up to them, between them and the state.

Councilman Serio: Video poker is a state issue. The City of Shreveport has nothing to do with that, whatsoever? Mr. Kirkland: It has nothing to do with this case.

Councilman Serio: I thought I was correct on that. So, the issue is, do we open the business up or not and allows them to 2 a.m. so that they can operate at 2 a..m. Mr. Kirkland: And it allows them to sell alcohol for consumption on premise.

Councilman Serio: Very good.

Councilman Shyne: And Mr. Burrell, I hope you would make it clear thorough, that without the ability to sell alcohol, they would not have the ability to request from the State to have video poker?

Councilman Burrell: Well, that’s the point that is not being discussed and that is the point. And, I think some times we have a tendency to not (inaudible) and if the public doesn’t know that, they need to be educated to that extent and I think basically that is what we have here, this is why there is a concern. When you move from a truck stop to a situation where you can provide video poker based on the fact that you have consumption on the premises then we are saying something different or we are coloring it a different color, but it is the same animal so that is what we are facing at this point.

Now, back to Mr. Thompson, you say that we still have to have approval, a motion to approve? Mr. Thompson: No, I say we don’t have a decision.

Councilman Shyne: At this particualr point. Councilman Burrell: That’s correct. Councilman Shyne: We would need a motion for approval. If we do not get a motion for approval, then we will have to move on, no decision has been made.

Motion by Councilman Stewart, seconded by Councilman Serio to approve the application. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Stewart, Carmody, Serio and Spigener. 4. Nays: Councilmen Huckaby, Shyne, and Burrell. 3.

2. Appeal: BAC-35-01: CACTUS JACK’S, 7288 Greenwood Rd., Special Exception Use and variance in the hours of operation in a B-3 District; restaurant with the on-premise consumption of alcohol operating to 2 A.M.

Motion by Councilman Burrell, seconded by Councilman Huckaby to postpone the application until the May 22, 2001.

Councilman Burrell: The reason why I am trying to postpone this, maybe if the group out—it is my understanding that no one has really talked to them about either of these situations. It is just unfortunate that on the Council, in this case we have a majority, and naturally the majority win and we respect that, but at the same time, I think there is a human element there that if given the opportunity, bringing these groups together there may be some sense of compromise, so this is why I am asking for a postponement at this time.

Motion to postpone the application failed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Stewart, Carmody, and Serio. 3. Nays: Councilmen Huckaby, Shyne, and Burrell. 3. Did not cast a vote: Councilman Spigener. 1. (vote did not register.)

Motion to postpone the application denied by the following vote: Nays: Councilmen Stewart, Carmody, Spigener, and Serio. 4. Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Shyne, and Burrell. 3.

Motion by Councilman Stewart, seconded by Councilman Serio to approve the application.

Councilman Stewart: I voted to disallow truck stop at this location in a prior debate. I think there is a big difference personally between a restaurant particularly in this area and a truck stop. I say that only for those who might not understand my opinion. I think that restaurants are a much different issue. In the Highland area and I have a significant number or restaurants, all of which have video poker and while I don’t participate in it, it is just part of the community situation.

Councilman Burrell: While I know that we could argue about this issue, but again, it is a situation where you have the people who are in that area, who live in that area that is being forced to accept something that they don’t want because they have seen their neighborhoods deteriorate. And in our democracy, definitely majority wins, maybe at some point and time, given different circumstances they would probably have their rights protected moreso but at this juncture, I think it is a clear situation where these persons who are in this area that is opposed to these establisments for fear of diminishing their quality of life are being imposed upon and forced to accept something that they don’t want to accept. But in that light, again, this is a democracy and we have to do whatever our conscious lead us to do. With that, we may as well move on with the vote.

Councilman Shyne: I agree with you and probably some of those persons that live in Highland, if they had had choice, they would have not favored video poker to move in. You could be looking at different situation. These people come from neighborhoods where you have a lot of people who own their own homes. In Highland, you have quite a bit of rental property, so it is not really a true comparison between the two neighborhoods.

Motion to approve the application passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Stewart, Carmody, Spigener, and Serio. 4. Nays: Councilmen Huckaby, Shyne, and Burrell. 3.

REPORTS FROM OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMITTEES. None.

CLERK’S REPORT:  None.

COMMUNICATIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS.

The Council resolved itself into Committee of the Whole on motion by Councilman Spigener, seconded by Councilman Carmody. Motion adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

There being no report from the Committee, the meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m.

/s/Joe Shyne, Chairman

/s/Arthur G. Thompson, Clerk of Council