COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT, LOUISIANA

SEPTEMBER 24, 2002

The Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana, was called to order by Chairman Roy Burrell, at 3:10 p.m., Tuesday, September 24, 2002, in the Government Chambers in Government Plaza (505 Travis Street).

Invocation was given by Councilman Carmody.

On Roll Call, the following members were Present: Councilmen Huckaby (3:15), Stewart, Carmody, Spigener, Serio (3:20), Shyne and Burrell. 7. Absent: None.

Bid Opening: Receipt of proposals for Banking Services Agreement. Mr. Tom Maddox: The request for proposals for Banking Services was advertised in the legal section of The Times and on our website. Nine firms received the RFP and let the record show, that we received three responses to date by the 2 p.m. deadline. We received one from: AmSouth Bank, Banc One, and Hibernia National Bank, all from Shreveport, Louisiana. The proposal will be evaluated by the Finance Department and a recommendation will be forthcoming to City Council for approval at a future date.

Motion by Councilman Carmody, seconded by Councilman Spigener to suspend the Rules to address Ordinance No. 132 of 2002. Motion passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Stewart, Carmody, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 5. Absent: Councilman Huckaby and Serio. 2. (See Council action under Ordinances on Second Reading and Final Passage.)

Motion by Councilman Shyne, seconded by Councilman Carmody for approval of the Administrative Conference Summary Minutes of September 9, 2002 and the Regular Meeting Minutes of September 10, 2002. Motion approved by the following vote: Councilmen Huckaby, Carmody, Spigener, Serio, Shyne and Burrell. 6. Absent: None. Out of Chamber: Councilman Stewart. 1.

Awards, Recognitions of Distinguished Guests, and Communications of the Mayor Which Are Required By Law. None.

Awards, Recognitions of Distinguished Guests, and Communications of the Council.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Strong, first of all I'd like to apologize for not having an address, I guess I am suffering from the same thing Roy suffers from, from time-to-time. There is a couple that live on Tulsa Street and it is right next to I-49. I will give you that address. I have been told by them, that they have been trying to get in contract with state officials, with their state representative, with their state senator, they have been trying to get in contact with city officials, but for some reason, no one is listening to them. It is not in my district, but I went out and looked at it.

There is a drainage problem and the water is draining off of I-49 and drains up under their house and if you would look at their house, you can tell the house is beginning to pull apart from the results of all of the water that is going up under their. They seem to be about 75 to 80 years old and if I didn't get their age right, I apologize to them because they told me that they would be watching today, but you all get somebody out there to take a look at it. If the state needs to do something, we need to contact the state senator and the state representative in that area orwhoever we need to contact. If it is something that the City needs to do, we need to take care of it because if we don't then in the next two or three years, these people are going to lose their home and they have indicated to me that they have worked all of their lives, they have both now retired and I think both of them are retired on disability.

So, they don't have very much money to go in and do what needs to be done. If the situation is caused by I-49, if it is caused by us, I would appreciate it if we can look at it as, that is what good government is all about. I'll get you the address.

Mr. Strong: Thank you.

Councilman Serio: I've got a couple of items I want to add to the agenda today, but I have nothing else but resolutions to add to the agenda to be voted on in a couple of weeks.

Councilman Burrell: I have one communication, I guess I could either read it now or wait until we get down to that ordinance we introduced the other day. I'll just wait until we get down to the ordinance on the SOB and read this for a constituent that wrote it and asked me to relay it.

Public Hearings: None.

Councilman Shyne: I'd like to recognize Ms. Lynch who is from District F, look like I kind of caught her off guard. She serves on the Library Board out there, she is doing a fine job. And it seems like I had an opportunity to read a few articles that she has written in the Shreveport Times and in the Shreveport Sun-some people agree with her and some people don't. I think you are doing a fine job and good to see you down today, hear.

Councilman Burrell: So, I guess it is worth noting too Mr. Shyne, she worked with our Biz Camp students so we appreciate all the work she is doing with our inner city kids.

Councilman Shyne: Now, Mr. Chairman, I didn't plan for you to go into all of that.

Councilman Burrell: He is so jealous, but anyway, we'll go on from there.

Confirmations and/or Appointments: None.

Adding Legislation to the Agenda. The Council added the following legislation to the agenda.

Councilman Carmody: I believe the Clerk's prepared an ordinance that I would like to add to the agenda today to amend and re-enact Chapter 72 of the Code of Ordinances to provide for effective and extensive regulation of sexually-oriented businesses to reduce the negative effects of such businesses. And I would ask the consideration of the Council, if we could ask Tom Arceneaux to come forward now. I know that he has got another appointment that he has got to be in, in order to apprize the Council of the background of this information of this information as well as procedural questions.

Councilman Burrell: Do we add the legislation first before we get into bringing Mr. Arceneaux forward?

Mr. Thompson: It is really up to the Council.

Councilman Shyne: If he has made a motion, Mr. Chairman, I'll second that and I'll second his motion and I'd also like to comment on it.

I am glad that we are doing it at this particular point and I'd like for Mr. Arceneaux and the City Attorney to probably come down front. I think both of them have done an excellent job.

Tom and I worked together as Council members back during when, it was so long ago until it seem like it might have been during the Depression but you've done an excellent job on this. I have a few questions and I'll let Councilman Arceneaux take the first shot at it.

Motion by Councilman Carmody to add Ordinance No. 153 to the agenda, seconded by Councilman Shyne and approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

1. Ordinance No. 153 of 2002 by Councilman Carmody: An ordinance repealing and replacing Chapter 72 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Shreveport; providing for the licensing and regulation of Sexually Oriented Businesses and Employees, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Mr. Arceneaux: It is a pleasure to be here. Thank you for your kind words. Mr. Shyne, I am glad Mr. Carmody now has that title that I once held, but it was my pleasure to hold it and to serve with you, Sir.

You should have, I think you have been provided two versions of the Ordinance, the text of the ordinance is the same. One of them is annotated in that after each section and in some cases after subsections, it contains an explanation of where the changes are from the existing form of regulation. The second one is just the text of the ordinance itself. The ordinance is 27 pages long and I thought it might be easier if you could kind of get a summary of where the changes were.

What I can do, if you would like, I have provided to Mr. Thompson earlier today, I don't know if he had a chance to get to you, kind of a bullet list of the significant changes in the ordinance over the existing ordinance. If you don't have that, it won't take me very long to go through it, but I'll be glad to do that. First of all the ordinance that's before you. . . .

Councilman Spigener: Do we have that bullet list, or maybe I just haven't found it?

Mr. Thompson: You do not have the bullet list. He e-mailed to me just before the meeting, but I can get it to you in a few minutes.

Mr. Arceneaux: I apologize. I knew there would be some questions and I wanted some notes and I thought it would be easier if I could provide it to you, but let me go over it.

There are two different type of regulations of sexually oriented businesses that are covered by city ordinances, one is in the City Zoning Ordinance and this particular ordinance doesn't do anything to that. Any amendments to that ordinance would be required to be applications before the Metropolitan Planning Commission that we go through their hearing process and then would ultimately come before the Council.

The City already licenses and regulates sexually oriented businesses in Chapter 72 of the Code of Ordinances. Since the adoption of that regulation, there have been a number of court cases that have recognized the authority of municipalities, counties, parishes, to regulate the behavior within the sexually-oriented businesses in order to protect the public against negative secondary effects of those businesses. As you know most non-obscene sexually oriented business activity, is protected by the First Amendment to the United StatesConstitution. I know you are aware of that because of the recent votes in which you all have taken and you are correct in that assumption. However, municipalities states are authorized under the Constitution to regulate the time, manner, and place of that activity and this ordinance that's before you, reflects that time, place and manner of regulation.

What I attempted to do and it was, and I had been asked to speak to the Louisiana City Attorneys Association at its meeting about a week and a half ago, on this topic and so I spent a good part of the summary doing the research and updating the cases and if any of you want to read that paper, Mr. Thompson, I think has a copy of it, I can e-mail you a copy of it. I assure you, if you are really tired one night-Councilman Burrell: We have those changes on our screen.

Mr. Arceneaux: If you are really tired one night, I think it would make very good reading to help put you to sleep, but it does try and go through all the different aspects of regulations and summarize the cases that are there.

What this ordinance does is an attempt to blend recent developments into case law with the existing scheme of regulation that the city already has. So, the first change that it makes is that it does expand the businesses that are covered by the City Sexually-Oriented Business Ordinance For example, after reviewing Chapter 72, I don't know that an adult cabaret, for example, is covered at all by the City may not now be covered by the City Sexually-Oriented Business Ordinance as it current stands. It is not listed in the classifications of sexually- oriented businesses. Adult cabarets will clearly be covered under this ordinance.

Councilman Burrell: For the interest of the public, what is an adult cabaret?

Mr. Arceneaux: An adult cabaret is, the definition of that is: a place where live dancers appear in a state, as the ordinance defines it, a state of semi-nudity which is basically, pasties and a g-string.

It clarifies the definitions and adds some definitions but most of the definitions that are in the ordinance come out of the existing ordinance or they are revised wording, hopefully a little clearer wording of the definitions that are there.

It claries and gives greater detail for the licensing process to comply with recent constitutional pronouncements on licensing. For example, the existing ordinance does not have time delays. It has some subjective factors that perhaps give rise to potential constitutional questions. This ordinance removes those questions and provides for time periods that have been approved by courts as constitutional.

It makes the licensing requirements both more extensive and more specific. There are some, as I said, some subjective requirements. What we tried to do is to take the things that we were trying to look at in that licensing and actually define them so that they would less discretion, which means less chance of the ordinance being unconstitutional.

It changes the licensing renewal dates. Currently, all sexually-oriented business licenses would renew at the same time. That obviously places a tremendous burden on the Police Department to go through the applications. The new process would be issued, each license would renew on its own anniversary so that it is spread out over time in terms of the investigation by the Police Department.

It limits the hours of sexually-oriented businesses to operation between, they can not operate between Midnight and 6 a.m.. They have to stop operating as sexually-oriented businesses now. If, under the Ordinance, if they have alcoholpermit that permits them to be open for the sale of alcohol later than Midnight, they will be able to operate under that permit later than Midnight, but could not provide sexually-oriented entertainment doing the difference in the time period.

Councilman Carmody: Let me make sure that I understand what we got here in our Summary of Basic Changes. There are a number of reference to the end of this particular bullet, 72-13.

Mr. Arceneaux: That's the new Section 72-13 in the Ordinance. It enacts detailed health and safety regulations for sexually explicit films, this is what I call, booth-type. It is not a larger theater. This is for people that have booths, 150 sq. feet, which is 10 x 15 or less and I believe there is, according to the Police Department, perhaps one of those types of business operating within the City of Shreveport.

It adds any loitering and lighting requirements and then it adds regulations for nude performance. First it prohibits all together, nude performances and there is a United States Supreme Court directly on point that permits municipalities to prohibit nude performance.

It expands the distance requirement from a semi-nude dancer or performer in a patron from 6 feet to 3 feet and that dancer or that performer must be on stage elevated at least 18 inches. Now, there is a state statute currently on the books that covers alcoholic beverage permitees and it has the same 18 inch requirement and it has a 3 foot distance requirement.

Councilman Carmody: Let me make sure I understand you correct. It increases the distance to 6 feet from the present 3 feet?

Mr. Arceneaux: Three feet. Our current ordinance has a 3 foot and the state statute has a 3 foot barrier.

Mr. Antee: Mr. Arceneaux, are you sure there is a current 3 foot?

Mr. Arceneaux: I can't, I know that the state statute Title 26, Section 90, has a 3 foot requirement; yes. I've had to look at Chapter 72. I believe Chapter 72 has it, but I'd have to look at it to make sure that that is-I don't remember right off the top of my head, Mr. Antee.

It would prohibit tipping a performer when the performer is semi-nude. It doesn't prohibit tipping, it prohibits tipping while the performer is engaged in his or her performance.

It contains a no-touch rule which applies both to the patron and to the performer. It requires signs to be posted in the establishment that advise the patrons and the employees that these are the regulations and then it requires open visibility which would prohibit closed private rooms. It wouldn't prohibit separate rooms, but it would prohibit, there to be a door on the rooms.

Councilman Burrell: Let me back up to the statement about not tipping in a semi-nude state. Does that necessarily mean that they would have to go and get dressed and then come back and then you give them their money?

Mr. Arceneaux: Correct.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Arceneaux, would you prefer us to wait until you got through?

Mr. Arceneaux: It doesn't matter, Mr. Shyne. I work for you, you tell me what to do.

Councilman Shyne: Well, you are such a nice gentleman. I want to make to the working conditions very conducive.

Councilman Burrell: I will ask this, just as a point of order and the reason why I haven't injected that all comments pass through the Chair, which is normally the order in terms of recognition, as long as you are not bombarded with questions from different ones at the same time, I can permit that to take place, if it is okay with you.

Mr. Arceneaux: That is fine with me. I apologize for entertaining it without going through the Chair.

That really is a summary of the changes there. Obviously there are a lot of smaller changes, but I tried to put the sources from the existing ordinance as well as to explain the changes to you, that pretty much is what it does and I'll be happy to answer any questions that you have and I'll be happy to come back, obviously it is on Introduction today. I think there will be, I've had some discussions with the Police Department representatives and they have some suggestions on some things that they would like to see included and I would anticipate there being some discussions and some proposed amendments relating to those discussions, but we met for the first time just a little while ago and I know they are coming, but I am not sure what they are so I am not prepared to address those right now.

Councilman Shyne: Tom, first of all, I think you put in a lot of research and a lot of hours and a lot of time and I think you have done an excellent job. It was just one or two things that I kind of basically disagreed on and I want to clear it up Mrs. Spigener, it is not because I attend these kinds of clubs, I've gotten beyond that now. Mr. Lafitte, maybe 20 years ago I probably went to one or two of them, but I've gotten beyond that now and I am a born again Christian and I won't dare, I won't even drive by one.

But think what we are doing and government some items have a tendency to overprotect the citizens and I think that is one of the good things about living in a democracy where you have a choice. I mean, we have problems in America but I don't' think there is no greater country on the fact of this earth than America. I think Shreveport is a great city.

I won't want to see us get so restrictive until we can let someone go into business, but we tie their hands so until after while, they'll be out of business. I can understand us maybe kind of overprotecting the public sometimes when it comes to issues that the public probably has no choice in making, but you have a choice to make when you go to an adult club. You can either go in or keep on going. Either you can-you don't even have to go that way and I think what we are doing in this particular case with a couple of these, for an example like expanding the distance and the tipping, that's, from what I can understand that is one way that the dancers can make a living, make a little extra money. That's like when you go into Piccadilly's or you go into these nice restaurants, you want to tip the waitress if they give you good service.

I don't really see anything wrong with that and I think what we are doing, we are being a little hypocritical in this particular ordinance because probably, adult entertainment goes against our morals, for a lot of us, it goes against our morals, for a lot of us. That is just like smoking. I mean I am not a smoker. I could take all of the cigarettes and tobacco and put them in a Red River, I don't know whether it would do any good or not. Same thing with alcohol. I am a non-drinker, and pour it out. But because I am a non-drinker and I am a non-smoker, I don't think I need to tie your hands, I don't think I need to protect you in such a strenuous manner whichit would put these people out of business. I feel the same way about this particular ordinance.

I think you've done an excellent job and I do feel like that there are one or two things in there that we really need to amend in order to make it a little bit more conducive for the business people to generally make a living.

Mr. Arceneaux: Mr. Shyne, I certainly appreciate your comments. As you know my job here is in my capacity as Assistant City Attorney and if you wish to have some amendments prepared, it would be my pleasure to prepare those amendments for the Council's consideration. All of the rest of those things are really policy arguments that are better addressed by people who are making the policy decision rather than me.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Thompson, I would like for you all to prepare a couple of amendment.

Mr. Thompson: We will be happy to, Mr. Shyne. We will get with Mr. Arceneaux and make sure they are in the correct form.

Councilman Shyne: Thank you very much. And Tom again, you've done an excellent job.

Councilman Spigener: Mr. Arceneaux, you have done an excellent job and I believe I will worked with you on this first ordinance we worked with.

Mr. Arceneaux: And actually we did the zoning, I think the Zoning Ordinance, I don't think I did the original Chapter 72, but I've slept since then, so I might not have a good recollection.

Councilman Spigener: And a lot of time and effort was spent and it was an issue that we really didn't want to be dealing with, but knew it was necessary.

I differ with my colleague and the comments that he has made. I don't believe that as long as something is constitutional and you have court cases that back up what you are asking us or proposing to us, I don't think we can be too restrictive in this kind of businesses.

I think we can all look at the distances and the various other things you put in here and it doesn't take a very smart person or a scientist of any kind to understand why these are put in, so I don't' think that we can be too restrictive. We do want it to be constitutional. We want something that can be defended in court, but I think in this kind of situation, this kind of business, and I know that we can't legislate morals and that kind of thing and that is not my intent and not be my intent at all, but I do not think that we can be too restrictive in what we do and I think we've done a fine job. If there is anything that the Police Department, I think, needs to be added I think that we certainly need to take a closer look at it.

Mr. Arceneaux: I have, I think the Clerk or the City Attorney's Office or Mrs. Glass has distributed to you, a copy of a probably one of the most recent 5^th Circuit cases involving Wichita County, Texas. LLEA 18ty versus Wichita County, Texas. I think what you will discover is that most of the requirements that are set forth in this ordinance are requirements that the 5^th Circuit specifically considered and approved as appropriate regulations.

Councilman Carmody: Mr. Arceneaux, I appreciate you doing the extensive work that you've got here. I agree with Mrs. Spigener, that this Council basically was in a situation very recently where I think we all felt like our backs were placed giant the wall and that we in essence had to vote to allow something that maybe we really didn't agree with, but we all at time made the comments that we felt like thatmaybe this will be an opportunity for the City to look at tightening up these ordinances and Tom I commend you as well.

What I would ask though and maybe I would have to instruct the Clerk, if we could get the information for the Council, in the next two weeks, that pertains to each of the footnotes of the cases that are cited here, so that we would have those for review and also to enter into the record when we go to discuss it, I think that it would be beneficial.

Mr. Arceneaux: I do have a source for those and I'll provide it of you.

Councilman Shyne: I would hope that we would take into consideration, just because something is a law, that it is a good law and that it is just. For 400 years in this country, slavery was the law and I think we realize now that, that was really a very bad law.

For 150 years there were laws that pertained to segregation and I hope that we realize now, that those laws were not good. At that particular time, everybody was saying well hey lets abide by the law, lets abide by the law. I see somebody back there saying, come on, come on. I mean, it gets to be ridiculous when it is not in your favor and I can understand it, that is the kind of old attitude that we've always had. Well, come on, come on, come on, lets forget about that.

But we also need to understand that just because something is a law, it doesn't not make it be, it does not have to be a good law and I hope that we would keep that in mind, that all laws are not good laws because if it did, then we wouldn't have the United States Congress and our Supreme Court going back overturning some of these laws. Am I right or wrong, Mr. Arceneaux?

Mr. Arceneaux: Mr. Shyne, I'll agree that there are good laws and bad laws. Sometimes people differ as to which law falls into which category.

Councilman Shyne: That is exactly right, that's the point that I am trying to make.

And, I was looking in the face of one of friends out there and I know he probably figures that this is a good law and I figure that it is really, this part of it is not really good and of course, he thinks that I am way out in left field and I kind of know that he is way out in left field, but I do want us to consider and Mr. Arceneaux is right. We don't generally look at that side of it when we are making laws. We look at it, well, this is the law so it is just naturally good, because it is the law; that is not true. You have good laws and you have bad laws.

I wouldn't want to see us sit here and make bad laws and we might have good intentions. You can have good intentions and you can still make bad laws. So, I would hope that would hope that we would consider that in the process of trying to determine what we need to put into this city ordinance. I hope that we would look at it from the standpoint of, we don't want big brother to get to be too protective. And that happens and that has happened if you are a student of history and if you look back through your history, you will find out that, that has happened. As a matter of fact if you will read some of your current events that is going on now, I mean, some people are saying will hey look lets don't give this up in order to get this and some times people will holler, wolf, wolf, wolf and we will give up some rights that we might not need to give up in order to justify the end result which is not good.

A lot of us don't realize that until it affects us individually. As long as it don't affect us as individual, then we have a tendency not to have any sensitivity toward it. So, I would ask my colleagues at this particular point to please, keep this in mind. Lets make sure that the ordinance that we are putting together is not too restrictive and it is not to protective and just because it is the law, it does not have to be a good law. Because there are a lot of laws that we have on the book that are bad laws, and that is why we go back from time to time and take a look at them and we take them off because they are all not good laws.

Mr. Arceneaux, again, thank you. I think you have done an excellent job. You've done a very fine job and you are a superb attorney.

Mr. Arceneaux: Thank you Mr. Shyne.

Mr. Thompson: I don't believe that any of the matters have been added to the agenda, we may want to do that before we forget them.

Councilman Shyne: Only one has been added.

Councilman Burrell: Okay, this is pertaining to this particular one. This is a letter from Mrs. Brenda O'Brock, 248 Lake Point Drive Shreveport, IA 71109

Subject: Our Children's Designated Park (Cross Bayou Park Project - Bond Issue of 1996.

Before you (our city council) ponder on how the Deja Vu, Larry Flint, et aI, can operate, please take measures to determine how the Deja Vu gained its municipal approval in the first place. At what point and whose decision was it to put our children's park (Cross Bayou Park Project) on the back burner? A Bond Issue was voted on and passed in 1996 for this park. Some $5O,000.00 plus has already been spent on this park and its location and an art rendering was displayed in the foyer of our Government Plaza and was seen by hundreds of our citizens. If the doors of Deja Vu, operating as Larry Flint et al or any other outfit precludes our children's park from existing, how can the citizens ever trust bond issues and tax proposals to accomplish their mission?

Please give this old business issue (the Park) your careful consideration. There are many who feel our children have been robbed of their park to play in and our taxpaying citizens are being robbed for personal gain of a few.

I personally want a refund on my taxes of the Bond Issue of 1996 if the doors of Deja Vu, operating as Larry Flint, et aI, ever open.

2. Ordinance 154 of 2002: An ordinance amending the 2002 Water and Sewer budget and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

3. Resolution No. 134 of 2002: A resolution authorizing the employment of special legal counsel to represent SShreveport Airport Authority of the City of Shreveport and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

4. Resolution No. 135 of 2002 by Councilman Serio: A resolution suspending the effects of certain provisions of Chapter 10 of the City of Shreveport Code of Ordinances relative to sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages on October 16, 2002 for the Tony Romas Restaurant sponsored "Kick Off Party (Special Event)" in conjunction with the Shreveport/Bossier Mudbugsorganization and to o otherwise provide with respect thereto.

5. Resolution No. 136 of 2002 by Councilman Serio: A resolution suspending the effects of certain provisions of Chapter 10 and Chapter 106 of the City of Shreveport Code of Ordinances on October 18, 2002 for the Louisiana State University Shreveport "Chancellor Fish Fry" and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

6. Resolution No. 136 of 2002 by Councilman Serio: A resolution suspending the effects of certain provisions of Chapter 10 of the City of Shreveport Code of Ordinances relative to sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages on October 25 and 26, 2002 for the Louisiana State University Shreveport "Fall Festival" and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Motion by Councilman Shyne, seconded by Councilman Carmody to add the legislation to the agenda. Motion passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Out of Chamber: Councilman Stewart. 1.

Public Comments.

Councilman Shyne (to Ms. Earnestine Coleman): Since what you are talking on is in Councilman John David Stewart's District, I think that it would be very beneficial to you, if you would wait until he would come in, so he could heard.

Mr. Roy Thigpen (Highway 509, Mansfield): I am here representing Robert R. Jackson who owned the Petroleum building and I am semi-retired from the real estate business and have been assisting them with the building.

When the original Entertainment District was contemplated, Hilry Huckaby asked for my opinion based on the fact that I'd owned two dozen restaurant and bars over the years in a number of states. And I explained to Hilry that I built a club in the present location of the car museum in `74 based on the assumption that track patrons, as the track was opening then would float in to see big name entertainment, but we found that no one in Shreveport supported the club and we closed it at the end of `74, revised the concept, re-opened it in `75, operated it until the end of `75 and when it was obvious it was not feasible, we gutted the building and auctioned the contents. There just was not a market for such a club in Shreveport.

I also built a club at 415 Spring Street during the same time, adjacent to Shreve Square. Again, after r six months, we closed the club, gutted it and we auctioned the contents and there have been six or eight clubs open and close at that location since then.

I am very afraid that it is going to be evident in the very near future that casino patrons will not be overly supportive of the entertainment district and Shreveport residents will only support facilities on the weekends and the big dollarrents being charged can not support the operations which are going to lead to closures and secondary or lesser clubs, being opened.

When the matter of funding the money for the entertainment district first started, I helped Hilry draft an ordinance which would have given personal guarantees and bank-type requirements for the money that being spent on the entertainment district, but his ordinance received no consideration. But, I am certain based on what is developing that his ordinance would prove to be correct and would save the City lots of money.

I am not here today to ask the Council to vote for or against a club that is being proposed at Milam and Spring. If the Council feels that a gay bar in this location is in the best interest of the City, it should be allowed. You should not and can not by virtue of law prohibit the club due to sexual preference. However I hear lots and lots of talk about sexual activity and my impression is that it will be more sexual activity in this place than all of the other clubs put together.

And also, these sexually oriented business law being considered should be for male dancers as well as female dancers as perhaps this if club wants to have male dancers, it will be out from under the sexually oriented business law.

At this point, we've sold enough years in our building that we have already realized a profit and even though we were planning to own a 6200 foot unit on the top we can reconfigure that, and sell that out and if there is a club across the street, such as this, there is no way I'd let my in-laws live there in a permanent basis; so, you vote today will just really tell me which way to go.

I would point out that you have a great Fire Department, great Police staff, you have a wonderful Downtown Development Director, a great Planning Commission manager, and I would hope you would listen to them because they have the best interest of the City on a long term basis, at heart. I have brought probably six businesses to Shreveport to try to move people in here. I brought a major import-export company here last week that was going to take space in my building. We met with the Port Authority, the Mayor's Office, Mr. Taft, et cetera and that is---I would suggest that you listen to your Downtown Development Authority Director, et cetera, they have the best interest of the City at heart. And, I will make my plans according to whatever way the City Council decides to vote and that will be the end of it.

Councilman Huckaby: Mr. Thigpen, did I understand you to say that, this is going to be a gay bar?

Mr. Thigpen: I have talked to numerous people that have talked to the people that are developing the bar and its, while I have not talked directly, I am well satisfied and have no doubt that it is going to cater to gay patrons.

Councilman Huckaby: Would it proper to ask Mr. Kirkland, from Zoning?

Councilman Burrell: Yeah, but let me caution as the Chairman that, just for the benefit of the City, I know we have great lawyers, but you may want to stay away from this sexual orientation issue. He is only speculating.

Mr. Thigpen: Mr. Burrell, I believe I mentioned that the Council should not and can not vote against the club because of sexual preference.

Councilman Burrell: I know, but again, you have-you have to get legal counsel. If you may be prejudicing the Council based upon the fact that you are saying that it is one or the other, I don't know unless you have some facts associated with it other than what you just said, I heard so and so, then I am just cautioning the Council. You can say what you want in a public forum (Mr. Thigpen: Right.) that as long as you have the pockets to defend it, that's the important thing. I just don't want, from the standpoint. . . .

Mr. Thigpen: I was only giving my opinion and in order that the Council would not be, have a problem with what I said, I made it very clear that Council should not and could not vote against this based on sexual preference, so I did not intend to make that any kind of requirement or something that was saying it was wrong or right.

Councilman Burrell: I understand that Mr. Thigpen. It is just from where I stand, as Chairman of this Council and we addressing those issues, I am just throwing the caution out because we have not been addressed by our Attorney whether or not it will be a problem with us on a legal basis. Council can still speak on the issue in whatever way they want, but again from my standpoint as the Chairman, I wanted to just put that out to make sure that we are away of that situation. One thing for you to say it, it is another thing for us to say it.

Mr. Thigpen: Right. So that I did not cause a problem, I tried to emphasis that it should not be an issue whether or not it is approved or not.

Councilman Burrell: Okay, I understand that.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Thigpen, I have the utmost of respect for you and I appreciate you coming back and giving it a different spin. But not only from a legal standpoint but from a moral standpoint. I mean, we have gays who are judges. We have gays who are in Congress. We have gays who are ministers. The next time somebody will come up and say it is a club or whatever it is going to be for, black folks.

So, from a moral standpoint and I would just hope and I can understand how you feel because you are getting your point over. I don't know whether it is by accident or whether it was one of those, accidents on purpose. But I can not sit here as a representative of the people and be a part of this because I have people in my district, of course I don't know whether they will, Mrs. Lynch, whether ya'll will get a chance to vote for me again, but I have people who voted for me in my district, it doesn't matter to me whether you are heterosexual or homosexual. When you go in that booth and pull that lever, I mean, they don't, there is nothing up there that says, what your sexual preference is. So, I can not afford to sit here in clear conscious and be a part of anything where somebody would make a designation to somebody else, because next time, the designation might be me. You know, we don't want that club there or we don't want that business there because, you know, black folksgoing to be running it. That has happened in the past. I wouldn't want it to happen in the future, but I know it will be but I just don't want to be a part of it and I have the utmost of respect for you and I appreciate that. And, like I say again, I am not worried about it from a legal standpoint because I didn't say it, you said it.

I am concerned about it from a moral standpoint. It goes against my moral values to discriminate and make those kind of innuendo statements about people.

Mr. Don Knipe (1401 Hudson Lane, Monroe, Louisiana): I represent J. Hardeman Company, L. L. C. I am here again, I was here two weeks ago and it is relative to BAC-67-02.

If the Council will recall, I believe that the action by the Council on that item was postponed for an opportunity to conduct additional research with respect to some questions that were raised. Again, because of my unfamiliarity with the format, we had a form filled out. I spoke extensively last week. I am here to answer questions should you have any. If it is more appropriate for me to wait until this matter comes up, that is fine as well. I didn't want to lose an opportunity to answer questions or provide any clarifications if necessary.

Councilman Burrell: You are addressing the Hardemans?

Mr. Knipe: The Hardeman Company, L. L. C. I think it is listed as BAC-67-02.

Mr. John Milkovich: Is this on the gay bar or on the strip club regulatory changes?

Councilman Burrell: You have two issues that you are trying to address?

Mr. Milkovich: Yes sir, I just found out a moment ago, I did not know that the ZBA had passed a, authorized a gay club in downtown Shreveport that has got a show cage. I just found out about that moments ago, so I do want to speak in opposition to that. I also want to speak for a minute, I don't if you give us 6 minutes or you give us 3 minutes, I don't know, just whatever.

Councilman Burrell: I have one here on the SOB Ordinance, which is the first ordinance that was addressed, so, I will let you speak on that for 3 minutes because we have so many that are here.

Councilman Shyne: I thought we made it clear, John-I am not, I speak the King's language pretty well. I thought we made it clear that its not the right thing to do, it is not the Christian thing to do, for a speaker to come up and denote whether it is gay or black or white or whatever it is.

If you have some objections to the bar, I wish you would make your objections to the bar not so much of it as being gay bar. Now, if you have some objections about a gay bar, you let me know and then I'll do like Councilman Stewart, I'll walk out and I'll blow my nose and wait until you get through talking about a certain group of people and then I'll come back in. I don't think that is the Christian---Councilman Burrell: Alright, Councilman Shyne.

Councilman Shyne: Wait a minute, Mr. Chairman. I have the floor now.

Councilman Burrell: I understand that.

Councilman Shyne: I have the floor. Let me finish now, I have the floor.

Councilman Burrell: Mr. Shyne, you are making insinuations about a fellow Council member and I don't think that that is appropriate.

Councilman Shyne: I am not making an insinuation. I am talking to. . .

Councilman Burrell: I understand.

Councilman Shyne: I said Councilman Stewart is, out of the Chamber and he is.

Councilman Burrell: Well, let me get a clarification.

Councilman Shyne: Would you let me finish, Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Burrell: No, Sir because I am directing this meeting. You are here to talk on SOB.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Chairman, I have the floor at this particular time.

Councilman Burrell: It is not the gay bar issue at this time and that is what he is up here for and again, we will not address it. And I think Councilman Shyne has made it rather clear and I think I have too, we will talk about bar at a location but not any insinuations of what particular type of bar, it is.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Chairman, let me finish. And John, I hope you understand what I am saying. I mean this is nothing personal, but when you get into situations like that and I know you are running for Congress and you want people to vote for you and it doesn't matter whether they are heterosexual or homosexual. And I would prefer that when you come before this body, that you would not use that type of terminology. You have a right to feel like you want to in a person manner.

Councilman Burrell: Let me set a couple of ground rules here. First of all, I am the Chairman of this Council. Secondly of all, I try to be lenient enough that there is some flexibility unlike some who have sat in this seat because I know many of these issues are emotional and some times these issues are rather pointed, but we try to get to keep it from being too pointed for the benefit of the public. So again, I am going to try to keep it to the agenda if at all possible. And I pray that our Council members will also respect me for where I am. I am trying to be very civil about this, I can be very uncivil, if necessary and I'm trying not to; so, please don't touch that button.

Councilman Carmody: I appreciate your position Mr. Chairman and I applaud you for it.

I did have a question and I know that Councilman Shyne had asked the City Attorney to come forward. As a point of information, I was curious. I understand that the four years that I've been on this Council, I have heard many distasteful and what I would consider, politically incorrect things said at that microphone. But what my question is to the City Attorney is, under the Freedom of Speech provisions of our form of government, isn't a person that addresses us in a public forum for Public Comments entitled to state what he would like to state?

Mr. LaFitte: Yes, sir.

Councilman Carmody: Thank you, Sir. That is all I wanted to know.

Councilman Burrell: But even under those circumstances then, does the Chair have the discretion, hopefully, to try to keep it within certain guidelines.

Mr. LaFitte: Absolutely.

Councilman Burrell: Or do we have a free for all that where we can say any and everything that we want to say?

Mr. LaFitte: You are charged with, I guess with, the chore of keeping some decorum and order during all Council meetings.

Councilman Burrell: And under those circumstances, I plan to do so and I am hoping everybody will respect that position. Mr. Milkovich will you come back again please, and I am expecting you to address the SOB ordinance.

Mr. Milkovich: Okay, Sir and the only point of order I was asking, you Mr. Chairman about is, I had filed notices to speak on both issues but you want me speak at this point about 3 minutes on the sexually oriented business?

Councilman Burrell: That is the order in which your first comment came up so, I would like for you to state your name and address for the records and you have 3 minutes.

Mr. John Milkovich (656 Jordan, Shreveport, Louisiana, 71101): I thank Mr. Arceneaux for revising the regulations that govern sexually-oriented businesses in Shreveport. And I just want to encourage you, Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council to enact anything that will make it less welcome for Larry Flint to do business in Shreveport. Anything that can be legally done to make Mr. Flint and Deja Vu to feel less welcome, is welcomed to the people of Shreveport.

Anything you can to that would encourage Deja Vu to reconsider locating in Shreveport, will be appreciated by myself and I dare say, tens of thousands of Shreveport citizens. I think it is especially salient to strictly regulate Deja Vu and I hope they are regulated out of town, frankly.

It is especially salient now that new questions and information are coming to the light about who actually is Deja Vu. We now have discovered in disposition as of about one week ago that Gus Mijalis' girlfriend, Stacy Anderson, has an ownership interest in Deja Vu. We did not know that when the City Council was asked to vote on it, to my knowledge.

We've also received information that Larry Flint, the Publisher of Hustler magazine who I believe has a conviction for pandering and is now financially interest in Deja Vu especially in light of what has come to, what has been revealed about the ownership of Deja Vu, it is now more important than ever that the Deja Vu be strictly regulated and if possible, regulated out of town.

Now, if I might close with a question simple: Mayor Hightower, who owns Deja Vu?

Mayor Hightower: I don't know the answer to that.

Mr. Milkovich: With respect Mayor and members of the City Council, I really feel that the citizens should have known who the ownership structure was before the decision was made to allow them.

Councilman Burrell: Mr. Milkovich, do you know who owns Deja Vu?

Mr. Milkovich: No, my best. I'll give you the knowledge that I have and we found some of this in discovery.

Councilman Burrell: My question is, do you know? Unequivocally, do you know?

Mr. Milkovich: This is what I know. Gus Mijalis has testified under oath that his longtime girlfriend, Stacy Anderson, has an ownership interest in Deja Vu. We know that Harry Mooney was instrumental in bringing Deja Vu to Shreveport. We know through reports published in The Times that Larry Flint.

Councilman Burrell: I don't think that is my question.

Mr. Milkovich: Well, that's what I know, that's the most I know.

Councilman Burrell: We appreciate that, because I don't want, if you have some facts, I would prefer having those than suppositions and I am not exactly saying that you are just speculating, but I don't hear anything that you are stating that: Councilman Burrell, this is a fact, I know this person owns---and that is what I was asking.

Mr. Milkovich: I think it was a group of people. I know that Gus Mijalis has testified under oath that his girlfriend has an ownership interest in Deja Vu. That I know because he testified, so testified under oath approximately 10 days ago, that's what I know. And I understand the Shreveport Times is reporting that Larry Flint is someway financially interested in the Deja Vu and that club may be now called the Larry Flint Hustler club, that is what I know. And beyond that, Sir, it is correct to say that I do not have definite information, that is one reason way I was interested to ask the Mayor if he could favor us with, who the owner is.

Councilman Burrell: Well, that is the reason I was asking the question because it appears that you wanted him to tell you.

Mr. Milkovich: If he knows.

Councilman Burrell: And he did not know. And then I wanted to ask you, did you know. And what you are telling me is what you heard someone say.

Mr. Milkovich: Testify under oath. What someone has testified under oath. I've told you what I know. And I am trying to find out more and I have got a pending discovery motion to the City's lawyers to have them tell who owns Deja Vu Corporation and the Deja Vu Club.

Mr. Leon Daries (5763 Anchorway Drive): I was asked to speak for you with regard to the night club going in at the corner of Milam and Spring. I developed some apartments on Crockett Street, the old Salvation Army building.

We had a similar incident of a nightclub being within close proximity to a residential development and I am neither for nor against the club. I think that you should have some accurate information of what can happen and does happen in situations of having night entertainment in residential, within close proximity.

On my particular incident we had a club that had opened at one time, at the Capri, it had closed and it had re-opened and at some point what you have with thenight time activity people are parking. As you might imagine, city lots, you can't effectively park everybody on site where their building is, so they may be parking two and three blocks away going to that location. There are some difficulties within having the residential tenants wanting to enjoy quiet and peace at home, and at the same time people coming in night clubs at 10 and 11 and 12 at night. You have congregating people outside that is never is great. Typically they will sit in cars, listen to music, people back and forth into club.

What I found that it is an unfortunate situation for everyone involved, everyone being the landlord of those residential units. He feels somewhat helpful in the fact that he can't control what goes on outside of his property. The nightclub owner feels somewhat helpless. He, as you might imagine, has his hands full with the operation of what is going on on the inside, has little ability to control what goes outside of the business and then in addition to that, the adjacent owners have somewhat of a helpless situation in knowing that they clean their property up, try to keep it nice and through no fault of their own they find debris all over the parking lot and such from patrons of whatever clubs might be in that area, not necessarily one club or the other.

In addition to that, the police feel somewhat helpless because you get them involved when you have the night time activities going on, the residents can't sleep, you have the police coming out. I know on Milam for example, at some point that became a cruising scene, people up and down the street and they were actually closing the street Friday and Saturday nights; so, you have got now, traffic congestion.

There are some difficulties to consider. I am not against this club. I think that downtown should have entertainment. I just think that there should be a careful consideration of all aspects and not so much of what will happen in this particular location, but those people going to this location and what, if any disturbance, it will cause in the immediate area. I wanted to share that with you through personal experience I had of mine.

Councilman Carmody: Mr. Daries, I wanted to compliment you on your development. I thought it was very well done.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Daries, I want to compliment you on your remarks. That is the way professional people, and people who say that they are Christians. I mean, if I am really my Brothers' keeper and I am not going to come down and run him down. I am going to give my side of it, but I am not going to give my side and try to run him down. I appreciate your professionalism in coming forth and saying what you had to say.

Ms. Mary Cunningham (214/216 Texas Street): My opposition to the 600 Market Club, comes purely from hindsight and foresight. We lived downtown for 2 years. We live in the middle of all the chaos, we get to see all of it, we love it. We love what is happening downtown, love all the clubs, all the restaurants, and everything else. My concern is, where are we going. You start putting big clubslike this all throughout our business district and I am not sure that a lot of you are aware of what goes on in all the middle of all of this.

We live there, we watch it on our balcony. We stay out until all hours in the middle of it. We literally have thousands of people downtown right now, coming up Texas Street. Spring Street is closed off many times and blocked with traffic from all ready the clubs that are going on right now. We only have 4 to 6 police officers that are capable, right now, that we are hiring to work down town. Do we have the police force or the money to be able to hire more police to go out through all of downtown for clubs this size or even to have clubs all though out this? We are residential. We had since we've been here, we've had gunshots go off both on Texas, Spring Street. We had a man killed in front of Lacy's. Again, that was because we didn't have police down there at that time. We didn't even have their presence available. We've had bullets land in our front yard, in our back yard, which is the front of Texas Street and the alley. The young lady was killed two blocks away over at Expo Hall. We've had shootings on Spring Street from the club that is there. You are talking about opening up another club with that many people, over there. Who are going to take care of the citizens that go to it?

And then you have the trash concept. If you get here after 6:30 or 7 o'clock, you have no idea what it looks like out there. It is a trash pit. It is horrible. It is unbelievable what these people leave out there. Well, this is a business district. These people are going to be coming to work, that work down here now, and this is what they are going see. There is no way. We don't have the people to clean up after all of this.

So, my concern is, who is looking after downtown Shreveport. Where are we going? Are we going to just come one pick drunk fest for all of downtown and what businesses are we discouraging by letting all of these clubs come in away from the entertainment district and that's my major concern. I would like everybody to get along, I would like to have different kinds of clubs downtown, all different kinds of restaurants, but we need an infrastructure first and that is really, really scary for the citizens.

I had this weekend, we have a constant problem of people parking in the alleys. I had to call a police officer to come haul off another car. It takes an hour. That police man had to sit there for one hour to get a tow truck to come out there to move a vehicle so I could park in my parking place. Well, that takes one of those four to six police officers away from that area. You have still got 10,000 people running around over there, and they all have other things to do. Now, what if you have something going on here, something going on here? Well, you have got a disaster on your hands. I just, through all of the people that are going to come down there, downtown is future, I think their safety needs to be considered.

Councilman Shyne: Again, I would like to let you know, I appreciate your presentation and I like the way you did it. You gave us some concrete reasons on why it doesn't need to be downtown and you didn't try to run one group of peopledown. I appreciate that, this is what it is all about. God bless you.

Mr. Andy Taft, Executive Director of the Downtown Development Authority (401 Edwards Street, Suite 205): This is an important matter. I am speaking on the club at 600 Market Street. As you know, in the Riverfront District, the bars have been made a use by right. They don't have to go to the ZBA, they don't have to come to the City Council, they can open up as a use by right. That was approved recently because of the large amount of activity, bar activity on the riverfront.

In the core of the Central Business District, it is still a special exemption use that requires approval by the ZBA and that also requires public hearing where the neighbors can be heard. The neighbor, that special exemption has sat there because the City of Shreveport knows that bars have caused some difficulty depending on the environment that they are around.

In this particular situation we have a major furniture and office supply business, two residential developments right across the street. We have an office building and a parking lot that goes with that office building right across the street. A bar has absolutely nothing to do with the activities immediately surrounding it, and as a matte of fact, in this particular location is going to make leasing and resales of the condominiums, that much more difficult.

It is a special exemption use. This is a perfect example of where a special exemption use should not be allowed in downtown Shreveport. A couple of blocks away, maybe if there are no surrounding uses that are going to be negatively impacted, but in this case, we have dramatic impact on the kind of development that the City Council and DDA and the Chamber of Commerce and everybody has been working toward and that is residential development in downtown.

I think Leon said it very well, there are negative effects that bars have. Leon was being very polite with regard to the kind of trash was generated at the Capri Theater on Milam. Let me just say, that are crews are responsible for picking up that trash and dealing with the property owners on a daily basis who are very upset to find bodily fluid, all manner of waste product, beer bottles thrown threw windows, those sorts of things that happen typically with the later crowds.

In downtown Shreveport, bars are allowed to be opened until 6 o'clock in the morning. I would submit to you that that is not the kind of environment that we want to create in the Central Business District. In the Entertainment District, makes a lot more sense. You have bars surrounded by bars, and that's the environment that we are trying to create. In the core of downtown, it doesn't make sense. Bona fide restaurants make sense, but stand alone bars truly do not, especially in this location.

So, I would tell you that the ZBA gave the green light to this for 2 years. Both the property owners and the DDA unanimously agrees, by the way, that that should be rescinded, that this property owners should immediately be told, well, not property owner but the tenant that has leased this property, should be told that he should stop demolition work on the interior of that, that this is an unacceptablelocation and that the property owners and the kind of development that is happening around it, is supported by the City of Shreveport and is supported by the City Council. So, I have an aerial photograph showing the surrounding properties and what is going on out that.

Councilman Shyne, I'll direct this to you. The deliberation on the part of the DDA has been solely limited to the provision of alcohol at this location. There has been no discussion about any sexual orientation or any sort of patronage at this bar.

The property owners, to my knowledge there hasn't been any discussion based on that. This Is strictly an issue of about insulating a Central Business District in a residential development that we finally have going in these empty buildings from a special exemption approval in the core of downtown where it has nothing to do with the investments that are going on around it and that is what we hope you will look for.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Taft, I appreciate you saying that because I grew up during time, because I might be a year or two older than some of these people, but I grew up during the times when I couldn't sit at the front because, I was black or I couldn't go in an use a restroom no matter what kind of tight I might have been in. I couldn't go in just because my skin is black. It wasn't because I was dirty or I was un-educated, the only reason why I couldn't go in there was because, I was black.

And I vowed that if the good Lord would let me live, I would never be a part of anybody's free speech when they are running somebody else down. Now, if they want to do that, then what I would do is just get up and walk away because I truly do not believe that that is Christian way to do things and we say that America is a Christian country and then we talk about our morals on one side, as long as it is an advantage for us, but when it is not an advantage for us, then we are not our Brothers' keeper.

So, I appreciate what you presented. I appreciate what some of the others have presented. Just to be truthful with you, I can not in good conscious be a part of anything where you are running somebody else down because I've been on the other side. I've been where I couldn't go to that school just because I was black or I couldn't go and sit in a movie and sit downstairs where I could really enjoy it. The only reason was, because I was black. The money that I had, was the same color as the other money.

And if you've never been in that situation, Mr. Taft, you don't really understand. Now, maybe some people it might not have impacted them because maybe they felt that they were not good enough and they should have been denied from going in. I never had that kind of feeling so that is why I don't want to ever be a part of anything where somebody is running somebody else down.

So, I appreciate the statements that you made. You have given us some reasons from a good solid standpoint not because blacks going to come in this club. We had that to happen one time before, a club that was closed because somebody supposedly made statement that we got to get those N-s out of our neighborhoods. I don't want anybody, I don't want to be a part of anybody coming down here saying that, we don't want to have this club because gay people there. Who knows, my uncle or my auntie or I might have a son or I might have a daughter. I don't want to get into that. I appreciate the factual information that you brought down and that's the way it ought to be. We need to keep these discussions on a high plane, I appreciate that.

Councilman Burrell: Mr. Taft before you go, I do have a couple myself and it has to do with planing issues. Is it appropriate for us here in the City or on this Council to work with you on plan development?

Plan development is one of my pet peeves simply because if you don't have a plan to go by then you can possible discriminate against individuals not necessarily by race. It can be by not be a part of a certain group or click or what have you or part of any particular business. But I have not seen, I know we are trying to develop the riverfront and we were allowing certain development just to get development down there, and we just wind up with a hodgepodge of different type of developments but I have yet to see where we are moving, well where we have a concrete plan-type development that we can adhere to that would give us more teeth to say well, a club shouldn't be in this area here not because of any particular reasons other than the fact than a person can afford to go there, and that really should be the reason unless it is a planned type of development. Where we are on that or do we have anything of that nature?

Mr. Taft: I would tell you that the, Shreveport Master Plan, is a good document. It hasn't been updated in quite a while but the codes that we have in place today reflect the Shreveport Master Plan. Ultimate responsibility for planning falls on the MPC and we work closely with the MPC.

And I'll make two related comments. First of all, we do have a plan for the DDA and for downtown, it is called Downtown 2010 and I've shown it to all of the City Council members here and you approved it. And so we do have a plan of action going forward.

The kind of micro-management that perhaps you suggested where we would say, we don't want this here and we don't want that here, but we do want this here, my personal opinion is that it is too restrictive. There are some tweakings of the City Code with regard to downtown, that I think might be appropriate, but in this particular case, with bars for instance, the fact that the Codes sets them up as a special exemption use allows the market to determine where they are going to be and it allows the ZBA and the City Council an opportunity to say okay, we've got this proposal in front of us. The property owners around it don't mind and it is not going to bother anybody, that's the perfect place for a bar and you get to weight those things and make a decision.

In this particular case, we've got the same thing but it is sitting in the middle of a redevelopment area, with offices around it and residential and in this case, it is a perfect example of where the Code provides the kind of flexibility and thedirection to you, where you can make an informed decision after reviewing the Code and after listening to the neighboring property owners. I would not submit to you that you want to change the City's plan to the extent that it is so tightens and regulates the market that you and the property owners and the people who might want to move into Shreveport don't have some flexibility. I personally think the plan that is in place, is pretty good.

I don't agree that we have terrible hodgepodge on the riverfront. I think we are getting a better balance of retail and restaurant and family-oriented venues down there. They could all co-habitat. The bigger planning issue is, parking and we are starting to address those now and generating a kind of revenues that will provide solutions to those parking problems.

Councilman Burrell: Well, again, in conjunction with that, my only concern about the downtown development is that we do have a road map that we can follow that will give us more of a position that we can take on these issues and hopefully it will be free from, as best as possible, from prejudicial considerations where maybe you don't want one at this location and we go a block over, and say okay, well it is fine for you to put it there, but we still have the Entertainment District down there where we say we want to put all of our bars there. One day we make this decision, this way and the next day we make it, another way. I don't think that our citizens would like us to be that selective on these issues. And if you had something, although we do have a master plan, I have never seen yet and I've been here 8 years on the Council and even prior to that, that we really follow that plan that closely. As a matter of fact, I think I've seen several master plans.

Mr. Taft: There is actually only, one. There has been lot of redevelopment plans that have been done and sit on the shelf. There is only one and it was done in 1980 and the update the you seen, the Downtown 2010 is an update to that plan and we have been actually working on the 1980 Plan and then the current Zoning Codes I think have been updated.

Councilman Burrell: Well, I would prefer basing my decision more on that plan than just maybe subjective type of input.

Mr. Taft: If I may, one observation and I would be kicking myself tonight if I didn't make this response to what you just said. It is entirely within your purview to draw a line and say no bars from this point to this point, you can do that. I am suggesting to you and I've been to these zoning seminars in other city and conferences, you don't want to do that. There is going to be a certain degree of subjectivity and we are going to, as citizens, we are going to rely on your wisdom to make the call. We are going to rely on you to listen to the property owners who are going to be affected by the decisions that you bring that you are going to make.

You don't want to create the kind of restrictive environment that is going to be definitive and that is not going to allow for a certain amount of subjectivity or wisdom to be overlay. In this case, in my opinion, and in the opinion of the people who are going to be negatively affected, a bar is a completely inappropriate use atthat location. Two blocks away, it might be a perfectly legitimate location. You always going to want to maintain that flexibility.

Councilman Burrell: Well, and this is my last comment, I guess if I wouldn't have been a part or should I say, been here long enough to see where there was certain businesses that were discriminated against in the downtown area which was perfectly legitimate business and upstanding citizens, but for some reason, we don't even have to go into up here, that these businesses are not allowed to go there to appreciate the diversity that our City had.

Mr. Taft: Well, hopefully we are passed that.

Councilman Burrell: Well, we say that. We say that, kind of tongue in cheek and it has been our experience and I know it has been mine, that that hasn't happened. And I want to make sure that before I leave the Council, that I address that issue and will put it before you or anyone else that come before because I have seen what has taken place and I appreciate what's there now, but I want to make sure, it is open and more objective-type of selection criteria, then I can deal with that issue from the stand of government because I represent all of Shreveport not in one community or the other, not in one economic group or other. So, I am depending upon you, as the Downtown Director to help us enforce that type of business.

Mr. Taft: I will tell you this, that I will pledge right now, that we will be more than happy to participate in that kind of dialogue with you.

Councilman Burrell: Thank you.

Ms. Earnestine Coleman (2513 Huston Street): I represent District One United Council of Hope. This organization consists of Christian men and women, they are Eastern Stars and Masons. I want to say before I go off any further that, we are governed by bylaws and constitution that date back in the early 1900s. We can not sell alcohol.

We try to do that and this is not the reason why I am here today but I would like to give you some information. I had the secretary of this organization who will come after me and give you a more detail.

We have purchased a building at 4458 Linwood Avenue, well it is a block, two buildings exist there. The larger building has an auditorium. To help pay for this building we rent out the auditorium, but the other remaining part of that building, that is where we are holding our meeting. The public do not have access to that and I am sure that all of you know that the Eastern Stars and Masons have their own secret lessons.

We have engaged into the community, walked that community. I would like to go on record to say that, we went to Linwood Baptist Church and I spoke to the Pastor there. He has no objection. We went to the Security Company over there, they have no objection. We been to the Fina Station and also the little village on our left, all of which I have submitted signature from these persons, a petition, have their signature and telephone numbers. We walked the community. We gotcommunity, the residents. They also have signed this petition and gave their telephone number.

We ask the City Council to give us permission to hold public activity. The things that we are looking at now is to rent to-out clients will be for weddings, weddings receptions. Wedding receptions, I have not attended one that did not serve wine. At which time, we made this known to the pastor of that church and he understood that if it is a wedding reception, they are going to have wine. But then birthday parties and family reunions. We have not had an incident there.

We do have a contract that you must have security. We will not rent without the security, so we have taken all means to be law abiding, to protect not ourselves, but also the client. I've gone to the state department at which time they said we did not need a permit, only the person that was serving it would have to have that, so we wanted to protect ourselves and also our client when we ask for the permit to serve alcohol, we don't do it, but we rent the place out to the public. And that is why I appear before you now to ask your permission to grant us this permit that we can hold public activities. Most of our renters they are public, they come from the public and we want be able to rent the facility to them and we also had planned to so some community activities that is designed for that community as workshops and seminars.

Gentry Gamble (414 Unadilla): I am building a nightclub at the corner of Market and Milam. And I want to show respect to everyone's opinion about what I am doing there, they are fears. But I would like for them to understand that they are misled of what I am doing down there. And I would also like to allow anyone that has any opposition to what I am doing to go ahead and speak before me and then allow me to speak after if that is something comfortable with the Council.

Councilman Spigener: We'll do that, we have several others, I believe to speak to this issue and you haven't spoken a minute, so we will respect that.

Charles Walters, Jr. (7335 Graywood): On September 10, 2002 I stood before this City Council and voiced my beliefs that the Zoning Board of Appeals decision on BAC-67-02 should have been reversed because of the laws of Shreveport.

I stand before you again making this request and I have much more to add to my reasons. Let forget for a moment the mistakes the City has made in the recent past and concentrate on the zoning laws of Shreveport.

I shall refer to specific parts of the Code of ordinances of the city of Shreveport and if you do represent the laws of this great city and not the beliefs of a few select individuals, you will make a decision to reverse the Zoning Board of Appeals decision on this case. I have indeed faxed copies of all of these ordinances to you as I refer to them.

Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances specifically deals with zoning issues in our city. On pulling this chapter I was amazed how easy a denial decision of this, should have been. The very first line, the very first line of Chapter 106 stipulates the need in Zoning to cross reference to Chapter 10 of the Code of Ordinances aswell as other chapters of the Code of Ordinances. If you don't know it, Chapter 10 deals with alcohol issues. The Metropolitan Planning Commission, the Zoning Board of Appeals, this Council and any other agency must follow these ordinances prescribed in their entirety. This Council must make a decision based on those ordinances.

Section 3 of Chapter 106 deals in interpretation of Zoning laws. In simply term zoning shall be determined not only by Section 106, but I shall read a section from Section 3: . . . whenever other applicable statutes, ordinances, or regulations require higher standards than the provisions of this chapter, such other applicable statutes, ordinances, or regulations shall govern.

Certain Council members refer to the fact that this is a police matter. Sorry Council, I correct you. It all starts with Zoning and when a law is applied as required by Section 3, it ends with zoning. The Police Department is not the zoning agency. Chapter 10 is not a police chapter, it is a city chapter.

On September 10^th, a Council member thought that the zoning should be denied and let the police handle the issue. Sorry Council members, but the Code of Ordinances is a set of law that we all must abide by.

Liquor sales are and must be considered as a land use issue. Section 11.7 of Chapter 106 Zoning, deals with this issue. Legally permitted areas within the Zoning district, alcohol sales, Special Exception use requiring the approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Zoning Board of Appeals, must make their decision based on Chapter 106 and any and all laws, statutes, and ordinances listed in the Code of Ordinances. Section 3 of Chapter 106 requires the Board to do this.

I must refer to a second and third words of Section 11 and 27, those words are legally permitted. Chapter 10 proves that the location in question can not be legally permitted and the Zoning Board of Appeals did not even consider that by Section 3 of Chapter 106 Zoning, they must, by law follow Chapter 10 in their decision.

Now, it comes to Chapter 10, Section 83. We all heard the lawyer representing this case speak to you on September 10^th. In the legal section of the Shreveport Times, dated Monday, September 16, 2002 page7C, the attorney's word as represented in the paper and I quote: "And so, based on that agreement, this application was submitted in July of this year but be considered under what I call the old ordinance (the ordinance that existed prior to May 1999). And so the Zoning Commission did consider our application under the old ordinance and it was passed." The original ordinance did not allow the sale of premises alcohol consumption where gasoline was dispensed. No where on the lot could liquor be sold. So, if you abide by his request you have to deny, that wasn't done.

Secondly, the new ordinance, specifically states that the location must have a certificate of occupancy, zoning approval, and applied for a liquor license if zoning was approved. The only thing this attorney has stated is that they applied to zoning prior to May 15. No way they could have held a liquor license application nor couldhave had their occupancy. So again, by either standard, they should have been denied.

Section 16 of Chapter 106 Zoning states that: No land shall be used or occupied except in conformity with all regulations established in 106.

Section 17 of Chapter 106 Zoning states that: No zoning certificate or other permit, license, or other document shall be certified by the zoning administrator unless the establishment in question is in full compliance.

Mr. Kirkland, I applaud most of the efforts that you and the Zoning Board make when it come to our City, however, in this case I do not believe that the Zoning Board of Appeals made a thorough and proper decision in this case. Alcohol sales can not be considered good land use at this establishment and there are laws strictly forbidding on premises consumption. The Board of Appeals must consider any and all ordinances in their decision, Chapter 106 requires them to do so.

In closing, Council members. I urge you to follow the guidelines as set forth in our Code of Ordinances. I repeat what I said September 10^th: If this Council does not overturn the decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals and instruct the Board to follow these laws, then I have got to have reason to believe that there is some type of serious inconsistency in the way this Council and the City does business. Do the right thing and overturn BAC-67-02.

Connie Thigpen: . . . clarify what my husband said earlier. He made absolutely no objections to bar catering to gays. His statements were made as fact. Not as an attempt to downgrade the specific clientele or any specific group. We're not making the gay bar issue. What we are here about today, we are primarily concerned that if the bar becomes a Sexually Oriented Business, it would be illegal, because it is within a thousand feet of an existing Sexually Oriented Businesses and also the museum.

Also I'd just like to say that my parents were planning, my family is planning on moving into the building across the street and this is just not what we'd want to be in our neighborhood where we live. We don't object to bars being downtown, just in the residential area. I think Mr. Taft has made some wonderful comments and he's done a lot of study on it and I'm baffled by why the Zoning Board didn't listen to the Downtown Development Authority. And just wish y'all would reconsider what they've done and think about the direction our City is going in. Thank you.

Tommy Brooks (8609 Glenhaven): I'll make this very short. I'm here regarding BAC 67-02. It's the liquor sales on premise with gas sales on North Market Gas station. All I'm asking the Council for is consistency. We were here two years ago. We reviewed this issue, this Council sitting said passed ordinances and re-passed ordinances saying we don't want this. It's not appropriate. I'm just asking you to be consistent. You upheld that 2 ½ years ago. Gives us the rules, let us play the game, but don't keep swish swashing on us; that's all I want.

Michael Larrey (243 Egan) I've been hired as the General Manager of the Club that we've been talking about at 600 Market Street. I came in front of the Council today and in front of the public behind me to assure everyone that we're going to run, I'm going to run a very respectable business.

Day- to-day operations fall under my responsibilities. I've heard things over the radio and I've seen things in the paper as to what allegedly what we're going to do with this club and they are very unfounded. We're going to run a very respectable night club. We're not catering to either sex, but to both sexes nor to any one certain person or any certain color. Proper adequate security will be provided upon the lot and downstairs. We want to be a member of this community in good standings. If I see that the street is getting trashed, its gonna be picked up, okay, that reflects badly upon my club as well as the people around me. When you drive past the business, and you see nothing but garbage, it doesn't look good. Those are the things, I'm blown backwards by the things that I've heard that might happen in a business that we are trying to open here in the City of Shreveport.

The owner of this club is a local man, which is good for our community. Unlike a lot of the things that are in the Downtown District where rent is absolutely absurd and local people can't open anything there. We have a local man here, all the profits are going to stay right here in this town, that's going to generate tax dollars that we need to hire more officers for that downtown community. We want to occupy a building that has not been occupied since I believe the late 1980s. This is a building that will begin generating sales tax revenues for the City as well as property tax revenues.

We're in a B-4 district which is a multi-use district, the Downtown District. As I understand, a district is or was . . .its purpose was so that everyone could have a little place. There is not such thing as a residential area. There is no such industrial markers. It's the B-4 district, everything. (I don't want to say blow and go), but it was a place where residential area and business districts and the industrial people could all live in one spot.

Just in closing, we have not, will not, or have not intentions of applying for an SOB license at this location. There will not be any semi-nude or unclothed clientele allowed on the lot or under the lot under any circumstances. I do understand that there are two residential buildings going up across the street from us. We have a built in--we're underground, which will be a great thing for us in that the music that we do play underground won't be out and about and keep these people awake at night either. I want to close with that and I do want to thank y'all for your time.

Councilman Burrell: That brings us to Mr. Mr. Gentry Gamble.

Mr. John Milkcovich: Mr. Burrell, he had asked to speak last and I know that I had filed a card to speak in opposition.

Councilman Burrell: Please by all means, allow him.

Mr. John Milkcovich: And I don't mind following him, I just want to make surethat my. . . and I'm fine with whatever Mr. Gamble's preference is.

Mr. Gentry Gamble (414 Unidilla) Comments being made about my business that I'm constructing downtown in Shreveport makes me want to go and hug my mom to know that I outdid Larry Flint with opposition.

I'm opening up a nightclub strictly to cater to my taste. I'm a 45 year old successful businessman. I date a beautiful lady, I have two beautiful sons. My father was an oral surgeon here generated a million dollar educational chair at LSU Medical Center. My uncle Dallas Green would pop me upside the head if he thought I was doing what the people are saying. He was the Fire Chief for a while. My 94 year old grandmother in Minden would be offended by what these people are saying.

I'm opening up a nightclub that would cater to the downtown business people. Providing live music starting at around 7;00pm. I like Bill Bush. I like to dance with my lady. I enjoy good conversation. I'm in bed by 11:00 at night. I don't want to wait up until 10 or 11 and go to listen to live music. I like good fidelity. I like good quality sound and this is what I'm doing down there.

I understand the importance of Market and Milam. Its not the corner of Market and Spring. It's the old Commercial National Bank drive thru where my father and I used to go and make a bank deposit and we'd go to the bank barbershop and I'd get my head shaved as a child, I know this location.

I found this location on the Internet up in Utah. It was for sale. It was for lease. It's been for sale, it has been for lease and I'm taking a very strong personal pride in creating something that would be good for the City. I don't care to go to a Mexican Restaurant to listen to live music. I like nightclubs. I like dancing. I don't want to dance with young people and I don't want to do it at 11 o'clock at night.

I can understand and appreciate all my neighbors' concerns. I've tried to be open, tried to communicate with `em. All I've gotten is doors shut in my face and again I can appreciate that. That's their opinion, that's their right. If they would take a moment of their time and come down and look at what we're doing, its just demolition and they'd be quite impressed with it.

As far as concerns about the business being successful, about what type of clientele is walking in the door, I wasn't raised to be that way a nd I'm not a judgemental person. If you Sir, wanted to come into my nightclub, if you Sir, if you Sir. . . I don't have a homophobic meter, I don't have a gay meter, I don't want one. I want to produce a nightclub that will attract professional people. Whether one is an African-American, one is Jew, one is a Catholic, one is Gay, whatever these people are afraid of, I don't know. I've never been attacked by anybody. I've never been offended by anybody, so I don't know, how I will offend somebody. . .

Well, I just would like to have the privilege to create a nice nightclub, generate good tax dollars for the downtown area and for Shreveport and allow myself to generate an income. I thought I was in a country that I have the right to do that. And I apologize if I offended anybody in the process of it, but I will do my bestto ease their minds if they'd just give me a moment of theirs.

Mr. Todaro: Mr. Burrell, excuse, I did file a sheet asking to speak on this topic please.

Councilman Burrell: What is your name Sir?

Mr. Todaro: T-O-D-A-R-O.

Councilman Burrell: Mr. Todaro, we have your sheet. Okay, yes sir, you had 7C.

Mr. Todaro: I may have filled it out incorrectly sir, but I did wish to speak.

Councilman Burrell: Okay, as your name comes up, I will call you. We are with Marilyn Norman. I know some of you are getting impatient, we've had a lot of speakers today and I'm trying to facilitate it the best I know how.

Marilyn Norman (3818 Claiborne Ave): Well, my topic is not like the others, I work with the City of Shreveport, the Department of SPAR and I wasn't prepared to come here today, but right before Council Meeting, I found out that my job is being eliminated; So, please allow me to get myself together.

Its just the manner in which it was done. I just wanted to say, I've been with SPAR for nine years and I know it may not seem too long for some people who have been on the job for 20 or 30 years, but nine years is a third of my life, so if you can calculate, you could probably guess how old I am. I do want to say that out of the nine years, I've never received a bad evaluation or anything negative or anything like that. And though Mr. Norman did speak with me about it, you know, why he had to select me as one of the people being laid off, I just wasn't satisfied with it and I'm still not. And I wouldn't be able to sleep tonight knowing that I didn't say something to address the Council on the issue.

Councilman Burrell: Are you finished Ms. Norman?

Ms. Norman: Yes, basically.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Norman, would you please come up? And let me clarify this Tom, they are not related. They both have the same last names, and I don't know whether I picked up a little look on his face and . . . .mmm, I wonder if they're cousins. Ken, I'll tell you in South Louisiana, you might have that situation, but up in North Louisiana, Ken, we don't have that kind of situation, do we? I mean, in South Louisiana, you have cousins on both sides.

Mr. Norman, I can understand how Ms. Norman feels. It's a very traumatic experience when you lose your job. I understand the situation that you're in. Sometimes you have to be able to make tough decisions and sometimes its hard for you to live with tough decisions because you know you've made a decision that is going to interrupt somebody's life. I know Ms. Norman and I know she has always been a hard worker. I asked her if she had ever gotten any kind of reprimands from her job and she said no, that she had always gotten good evaluations. She comes from a good family and I know a lot of folks that do, but I would hope that you would do everything in your power in order to make sure that Ms. Norman can be placed somewhere else in the City, even if you have to cut your budget back and Iknow sometimes, you've got some mean people who will make you cut your budget back, (I'm just kidding about that), but I do know that you have to cut your budget back, but I would hope that you and Mr. Antee could find somewhere for Ms. Norman. It is a very traumatic experience when you lose your job and especially, ( I was going to say, especially at a young age, but at any age when you lose your job.

Mr. Antee: There are throughout the various departments certain jobs that are being eliminated. Each of those employees that currently hold those jobs we are working with them to relocate them to another position within the City. So that we can eliminate the positions and fill other vacancies. It may not be in SPAR, it may be in SPAR, it may be in DOS, it may be in Community Development, but we are working with each one to at least give them the opportunity to transfer into another position and then if they chose not to, and if they've got something else that they can go to, then obviously that's their choice. But we'll get with Ms. Norman, and find out what job she's qualified for and we'll find a place in the City that meets those qualifications as well as the current pay scale, within a range, so that we can try and move here. Because when we do have good employees, just because we have to shrink the department or do away with some jobs, we don't want to get rid of good employees if we can use `em in other places.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Antee, I appreciate that and Marilyn would you get with the two of them and this is what good city government is all about. I appreciate that.

Ms. Norman: Even though, I know that my job is being eliminated with SPAR, there are still other people that don't know, you know. I don't know if it's the City's policy to just allow City workers, "dedicated"City workers to work until the end of the year before they let `em know; so, I was concerned about that also. I know, I'm speaking on behalf of myself, but I did want to mention about the other staff members also.

Councilman Burrell: Well, I think from where we stand, we will more than likely get a report on the cuts and where they are and how severe they are. Because I've heard that there were some changes being made, but there is nothing that I know that has been brought before the Council and a lot of times, we get involved in those issues too, before its over with or maybe we will, or maybe we won't, some of us will or will not be on the Council.

Councilman Shyne: Speak for yourself, Roy.

Councilman Carmody: Mr. Antee, this is the second instance that I've heard of this taking place. Can you elaborate on the number of employees that are going to be affected by these changes?

Mr. Antee: If Mr. Lunt was here, he could give you the specific numbers, but my understanding is that we're talking within the 20-25 range.

Councilman Carmody: City wide?

Mr. Antee: City wide.

Councilman Carmody: And off 20-25 will be offered the opportunity to change positions with the same salary and pay grade that they were previously. . . ?

Mr. Antee: That's correct. And I know we have worked on specific instances where we've made sure that we had a place for them to transfer to and took that to `em at the time we let them know that the job was being phased out.

Councilman Huckaby: I'd like to ask Mr. Antee, what is the policy for informing the employees that they will be terminated? Is there a time frame, two weeks notice or a month's notice?

Mr. Antee: There is a difference in notifying an employee that he is terminated or she's terminated and that their job is being phased out of next year's budget.

Councilman Huckaby: Okay, well, lets take the job. . .

Mr. Antee: And in each of the cases when they are terminated, I mean we had a PDC the other day and I fired him on the spot and today we had an appeal to the Personnel Board. In a job like where we're doing a way with a position and offering another position, it varies. We don't want to come in today and say "as of tomorrow, you don't have a job". We're not doing that and if that took place, we want to know and we'll deal with it but what we want to do is look at the background, look at the experience, and then the department head is working with Mr. Lunt in Personnel to find a similar type position somewhere else within the City. And a lot of times, that work is done prior to notifying the employee that their current job is being done away with.

So to give you an exact time period, two weeks, three weeks, one month, two months, I. . .there is no set time period.

Councilman Huckaby: I understood Ms. Norman as saying that you weren't informed timely, is that what you. . . ?

Ms. Norman: Well, I don't feel its so, because I mean, I'm thinking that the budget may have gone up, well, its been in the processing from my understanding. And I've had two, well today was the third meeting with Mr. Norman. The other two, I was pretty confident that everything was fine, that, you know, I still would have a job with SPAR, so. But as of today, he did explain to me that as of December 31st, I mean, that's basically it. I'm just really concerned with the guidelines that they used.

Mr. Norman: Could I address that just a second. We have had several meetings and I apologize to Ms. Norman if maybe I didn't explain it maybe in a manner that was a little more clearer.

Again, we just had a meeting and evidently I didn't explain it again to her. If she does not have a job in another department on January 1, we're not going to cut her job out. We're going to continue to work to try to find her, as well as other employees that are affected by this, a place to be employed. I did not promise her that it was gonna be within SPAR. I did say to that I don't hold a crystal ball. I don't know what's going to happen with our department. We have people that move. Wehave people that die. We have people that retire and you know all of those situations that open up positions within our department that could affect her employment with us if we have another position that is open. And we certainly. . . Marilyn has been a good employee with SPAR and I'm gonna be very strong support for her in other places and if a position opens up within ours that's comparable to what she does, I will be happy to support her in that position.

So, it's a very difficult decision, at the very least, to have to make when it deals with other people's livelihood and their families and all and its certainly something that we don't like to do and we are trying to do everything that we can to give them maximum notice.

Y'all have not even received the budgets at this point. I mean, the budgets are in the process of being finalized for submittal and approval. I know y'all are gonna to have a lot difficult decisions and its affecting a lot of other departments, not just SPAR but we are all working and are committed to try and find positions for our employees and continue to do that. We are very fortunate that we have a number of open positions that we have not filled, that we've eliminated to make up a lot of the ground that we had to do, but unfortunately we can't get their without affecting real people.

Councilman Burrell: Okay, Ms. Norman, I don't know if it's a matter of comfort, you know many times, there are changes, that take place within companies or even in government and if what I'm hearing, Gary say that they are trying to locate another position hopefully, it will fit your background because I know how difficult it is to go into another job and you don't have the skills for that job, its almost like putting you in a position to fail. And I don't think that, I hope that wouldn't be the case. And I think if you're concern would be anything, its to at least to maintain a job, even in this dire situation that we're are in now. Everything, with business going out, I know with stock dropping, and all that and still maintaining a job, if there is an opportunity there, it may be an opportunity for you to move up. You know some of these jobs are pretty dead end. So, sometimes, it may be a blessing in the sky is what I'm saying. But I know it doesn't give you any comfort at this point.

Ms. Norman: I can respect that Mr. Burrell, but like I say, the guidelines that were used, I don't know if they were fair.

Councilman Burrell: Well, as long as they are being applied to everyone and everyone fairly, I think that's where we sit to hopefully insure that they are applied fairly. Although the Administration, they deal with that, but if it comes to our attention that they aren't fair, then I know that this Council will address those types of issue because they've addressed before.

Councilman Shyne: Before we close, again, Mr. Norman and Mr. Antee, I would appreciate it if you all would do everything in your power in order to find Ms. Norman a job with the City, I think she's been a very loyal employee and I'm gonnaask her to keep in touch with you all to make sure that it stays on your mind and you all will not forget her. Marilyn, appreciate it.

And Mr. Norman, again, before you go, I was wondering why over the last month or so, it seems like you kinda look like a college kid, I don't know whether you've taken some of the gray out of your hair or you've gotten a haircut and I think somebody told me you got married a day or two ago.

Mr. Norman: I did sir, I was very lucky. I found somebody that would have me.

Councilman Shyne: Well, I just want to say congratulations and if you get a chance, tell Roy what you did and how you did it, because I think he's looking for a wife.

Councilman Burrell: Don't worry, I'm about as secured as I want to be.

Mr. Keith Todaro (608-618 Market): I own the company, M. L. Bath Company located at 608, 610, 612, 614, 616 and 618 Market Street. I've got to admit, that I'm a little bit chagrined as I stand before you today having to defend my property and business rights in front of this august body.

In my view, the process so far has failed to address two issues that are most significant to me. One of them being the greater good of downtown Shreveport, the second being the interest of the businesses and property owners who invested their time, their money and the histories of their companies in downtown Shreveport. Ladies and Gentlemen of the Council, if you don't protect our property rights, I'm not sure who will.

I'm here today, holding the firm belief that the Zoning Board of Appeals overlooked the input and the opinions of the downtown property owners that are potentially affected by their decision. They chose to grant a special exemption despite the fact that there was significant opposition present at the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. Significant opposition. Interestingly, while there were several downtown business owners and property owners represented at the ZBA meeting who spoke in opposition. I don't recall one property owner or one business owner who rose at the ZBA meeting and spoke in favor of it, and yet the Zoning Board still voted to approve.

My neighbors and I spoke in unison and with great passion and vigor against this request to be disregarded by the Zoning Board. The DDA, the single body whose task is to be most involved with redevelopment in downtown Shreveport spoke. Their Board spoke unanimously in opposition to this special exemption request and they were disregarded by the Zoning Board of Appeals also.

The DDA's action was a logic that was crafted in an attempt to safeguard a stable living and business environment in downtown. A bar located on one of the business thoroughfares in downtown Shreveport only serves to destabilize that environment in downtown.

(If I could use the overhead for just a second.) I sent to each of you a package that contained photographs that I personally took of downtown Shreveportthat showed in stark reality the affects that bars can have on land adjacent and continuous to them. I ask each of you to stop for a moment and ask yourselves, why should a business that's been in downtown Shreveport for 97 years have to endure what you see in these pictures. Why?

The two year exemption is an insult to me as a downtown business owner and a downtown property owner. In two years, the 600 block of Market Street can be decimated. My business can be destroyed. I'm not an opponent of downtown development nor am I against alcoholic beverages (been known to be seen in a bar when I was younger.) But I believe that the City owes it to the downtown property owners who have survived to only allow redevelopment that is appropriate. A special exemption in the 600 block of Market Street is not appropriate. We've set aside the entire Red River District for them, are we going to give them the entire downtown area?

The potential damage to my business and the properties that are being developed around us, directly across the street from us, the multi-million dollar investment that is going on in the Crystal Oil Building, in Mr. Thigpen's building, the concerns that George Mills who owns the Post Office building and parking lot behind me. The concerns of all those people need to be taken into consideration and I urge you , I beg you to overturn the special exemption that was granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Thank you very much.

Ms. Rosetta Seymour (3555 Cedar Creek Drive): I am speaking on behalf of District One United Council of Hope. HOPE meaning helping other people every day. Our mission is, we are a non-profit organization who comprised of persons with spiritual value but it is not a religion. It is an organization composed of people with deep spiritual conviction. It is open to all faiths except non-faith. The organization is designed to recruit men and women with high moral and social character who will contribute much time, energy, and wisdom to order with charity, truth, and love for the good of mankind throughout the world. There is fraternal bond that exists among the members. The wholesome relationship of brothers and sisters. Love brought about through high principle, exemplified in the lives of memberships, makes us near and dear to each other.

On behalf of Sister Coleman and what she spoke of, we are chartered under Chapter 2, Title 12 of Louisiana which is a non-profit corporation law and being chartered under this, our main purpose in this area is social programs, senior citizens, and after school programs, cooperation to engage in community programs and services. We have installed computers in our building to have after school programs for the children. It is not about, we would like to have the permission to have the liquor licenses to obtain other revenues to govern us and to help and assist in the community.

John Milkvoich (656 Jordan): Mr. Todaro, I would be glad to give you my three minutes, if you would chose, sir. After 97 years of that business. I am against the bar at the corner of Milam and Market that was previously referred to asperhaps as being frequented by gays. I have no prior knowledge of this establishment prior to this meeting nor do I think the majority of the City does.

What I do know is that this is a 14,000 square foot proposal based upon what Mr. Kirkland was kind enough to share with me and also if you look at the plans, I understand that the owner saying this is going to be a clean establishment, if you look at the plans of this establishment, it has got a show cage. I don't know, maybe somebody can help me with what a show cage is and what that business, has doing in the middle, not of our riverfront which has now been overrun with casinos, strip clubs, and bars and was supposed to be our family area of our city but now we are going to have a show cage in downtown Shreveport, show cage, that's what I on the plans submitted to the City and approved by the ZBA.

Let me tell you, it is disconcerting and belief me, if the other citizens knew what was going on today, there would be another packed house. I am sorry that they were not better informed, but we have already seen that the long time business owners and the families and the Christians and the people that life wholesome lifestyles have been basically ushered out of the riverfront. Who wants their children or their family to be downtown now with our 25,000 square foot Deja Vu upscale strip club. Who wants their family downtown?

Now, we are moving that element of business out of the riverfront, which has now been overrun, into the business area against the interest of businesses that have been there. We've heard of the M. L. Bath Company that has been there all most a century. And nothing against this gentleman that want to come into this area, but my question is, where is the balance of competing interest? A business owner who has been there, a business that has been in downtown Shreveport for almost a century, stands to lose its business opportunities and have to shut down because of someone wants to have a club that may or not may not cater to gays and has a show cage and a 14,000 square foot night club in a business area.

Councilman Burrell: Now, Mr. Milkovich you are stepping on my last nerve.

Mr. Milkovich: Okay, sir.

Councilman Burrell: I respect you, I have addressed this issue once before. Now whether you say, may or may not in your dealing with issues of sexual preference, we will not allow that here. Now, if you can not make your statements without involving that, that won't be permitted any more then I will ask you to, sit down. It has nothing to do with religion, it has nothing to do with my views on those type of issues, but I think under the circumstances, we don't want the issues clouded by commenting on those type of issues. So, I would appreciate it, if you would adhere to my request.

Mr. Milkovich: Mr. Burrell, I can't-I don't belief that I am trying o be unkind to any person or group of persons, but I am addressing something that affects the wholesomeness of our city for the citizens. And what I am suggesting to you sir, and I appreciate the abstention that you made on the Deja Vu vote, I am still thankful for that, but what I am suggesting to you is that a wholesome environment for familiesin this city has been left out of the calculations and considerations in some of the zoning decisions that have been made about the shape of downtown.

And yes, when citizens in this city consider going downtown for festivals for fairs or revels or parades, I believe that the activities that are going downtown do have an impact on whether the citizens and families of Shreveport are still going to feel safe and protected downtown.

Councilman Burrell: Mr. Milkovich, let me make a clarification. I am not bringing up the objection because of what you are saying there. I have a strong offense against making reference to sexual preferences, race or things of that nature because just as you are talking about sexual preferences, you could be talking about race and you will definitely, hit the last nerve if that will be a case. Not that it will be in this issue but I put them in the same category, so I would appreciate it if you could keep it above board. I think you understand, you are a very, very intelligent attorney. You've made a very good case on Deja Vu, I still stand where I am, well matte of fact, I am not going to say where I stand on that issue, but I can understand that issue. But under the circumstances that we have now, I would appreciate it if you would just keep it to the point.

Mr. Milkovich: I think I have concluded my remarks, Mr. Burrell..

Councilman Burrell: I don't want to make it an issue, I respect you wholeheartedly, from that perspective.

Mr. Milkovich: Thank you very much and I simply ask the Mayor and the City Council to respectfully say, no to this nightclub proposal down off the riverfront but in our downtown business area in Shreveport.

Councilman Burrell: We will take that under advisement.

Councilman Shyne: I just want to make this statement, not that Mayor can't make it for himself but I believe that these issues are voted on by the Council. Mr. Mayor, I don't think you have a-I don't even think you have a button over there to vote on anything, do you?

Mayor Hightower No sir, I don't.

Councilman Shyne: I didn't think so, so I didn't know whether John was coming down and giving you some influence that you really did not have . The seven Council members that you see up here, will be the ones that will vote on this zoning issue not the Administration.

Lewis McDaniel (2111 Staggers Circle): I faxed a letter to Mr. Thompson. I retired and am a member of District One United Council of Hope. And we are a non-profit organization made up of Masons and Order of the Eastern Star trying to put something back into the community.

I have a question for the Council here, how many of you lately have had daughters or sons to get married? Well in the last seven years, I've had one son and three daughters and to find a decent reception play hall for them, and these are young people in they 20s, to have their reception, a decent place. I mean, just looking over the city, the prices is ridiculous. I mean, I been hearing young peoplewith the average is trying to have a nice reception with all they friends there and everything and trying to start out a life together and then they getting to looking at $6- and $7- and $800 dollars just for four hours for a reception and so, this is one thing that made us come up with this place. And all we are asking, for the opportunity to do like some of the other lodges and social clubs in the city and the surrounding area, is to be able to have the opportunity to not to sell it, but for people to, if they bring it on, to protect ourselves if they bring it on the premises. And it give people an opportunity to be able to afford a decent place to have something from time-to-time.

Like I say, I got three more daughters to get married and I look at regret, what will have to be paid out for a reception. And really it will put them in the poor house, really, if you look at the type of job and then they try to have a nice time. And if you look at, as we say Masons and Eastern Stars, the standards of our organization, basic the wrong crowd, as some people might refer to us, it is not going to (inaudible) because those are Masons there, we don't need to go there. And so, really our organization and where we are sitting is a basic place to give back to the community because we want, and like Sister Coleman and Sister Seymour said, we are trying to create revenue to pay for the building and so that is why we can say, you can have your wedding reception here and you won't have arm and a leg put in it.

Councilman Shyne: Councilwoman Spigener, that one reason why I am not married because I can't find a good place to have a wedding reception. They are too expensive.

Mr. Antee: You can use my house, Mr. Shyne.

Councilman Burrell: If we can get rid of him just by doing that, you can have mine's too.

Mr. McDaniel: We'll have you a decent price and a nice building.

Mayor Hightower: I have to respectfully step out but before I left, I did want to, I don't know if everybody realizes, there has been an addition to the City Council I think over the last week.

Councilman Burrell: You are stealing my thunder.

Mayor Hightower: Well, go ahead. I just wanted to give him. I happened to have a Rose on my lapel today and he told me his daughter's new name so I wanted to give it to him so he could take it home and give it to her. But again, Thomas, congratulations.

Councilman Carmody: Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. I appreciate it.

Councilman Burrell: Yeah, we have a new father here. And again, Thomas I had mentioned to you earlier, I don't know where I got the information, someone told me you had six kids already. He is might young to have six kids. I know he is a good Catholic and all, but that was a little ridiculous.

Dennis McCray (1628 Fulton Street): Councilman Shyne: You used to be one of my students. Mr. McCray: Sure did. Well, I am before the Council once again. Idon't believe either one of you was here before when they turned down this first ordinance, by I am before the Council again. I

live there, 1628 Fulton Street. This Hope Council, I don't have a problem with them, Mason people are some of the best people in the world. My daddy been a Mason over 50 years, I have good friends that are Masons, I don't have a problem with the Mason. The problem comes when they rent that building to the public, that is when the problem comes when they get to drinking. I am an ex-Caddo Deputy. I've dealt with people drinking. I know what I am talking about. Just as sure they have alcohol there, just as sure as I stand before you, there is going to be altercation and there will be gunfire. That gunfire, who knows where that bullet is going to land? I got a 14-month old baby, I want to be here for him and I want him to be here for me, so I ask you once again deny this, deny this. We are not taking about Southern Trace, Plantation Trace, Golden Meadows, but we are talking about my house, a place where I call, home.

So, if you would respect our wishes. I don't have a problem with them having wedding receptions, I don't have a problem with that. Mason people are some good people. My problem is not with them. I hope them all of the success-rezone it for a school, something that is going to better the public. Having alcohol there is not going to better the public, that is going to bring more downfall, gunfire. Just as sure as I stand before you, there is going to be a altercation there, there will be gunfire.

Councilman Shyne: Dennis, I think the last time I saw you, you had a whole lot of hair on your head and now you are kind of getting like I am, but you are still a nice looking young man.

CONSENT AGENDA LEGISLATION:

INTRODUCTION OF RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES ON CONSENT:

RESOLUTION: None.

ORDINANCE: None.

ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES ON CONSENT:

RESOLUTIONS: None.

ORDINANCES: None.

REGULAR AGENDA LEGISLATION:

RESOLUTIONS:

RESOLUTION NO. 121 OF 2002

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO NEGOTIATE TERMS AND CONDITIONS, AND EXECUTE ALL CONTRACTS BETWEEN THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT AND STATE OF LOUISIANA, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO

WHEREAS, the City of Shreveport (City), through its Department of Community Development, Bureau of Workforce Development, administers the Louisiana Job Employment and Training (LaJET) Program under the State of Louisiana, Department of Social Services (DSS); and

WHEREAS, the purpose of the LaJET Program is to mandatorily place able-bodied food stamp recipients in educational and/or work-related activities that will increase their chances of obtaining regular employment, and thus, reduce their need for public assistance; and

WHEREAS, the City has received an award from DSS to continue to operate the LaJET Program for federal fiscal years 2003 through 2005, with approximately $302,161.00 per year; and

WHEREAS, the LaJet Program will serve a public purpose and provide a public benefit.

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 authorized to negotiate terms and conditions, and execute all contracts between the City of Shreveport and State of Louisiana, Department of Social Services.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that if any provision or items 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 Shyne, seconded by Councilman Spigener passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

RESOLUTION NO. 122 OF 2002

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A COOPERATIVE ENDEAVOR AGREEMENT WITH THE CADDO-BOSSIER PARISHES PORT COMMISSION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF THE SOUTHERN LOOP WATER MAIN

WHEREAS, the City desires that a new water line be constructed along Leonard Road from Louisiana Highway 1 to Ellerbe Road and from Ellerbe Road to Norris Ferry Road, to eliminate certain dead end water lines, improve water flow in the city's water distribution system, and generally improve water quality in the system;

WHEREAS, the Caddo-Bossier Parishes Port Commission ("the Port") desires that a new water line be constructed so as to provide a backup water supply source for the Port and its industries;

WHEREAS, the Port will finance the construction of a water line which will serve the purposes described above, according to terms and conditions set forth in the attached agreement;

WHEREAS, the City shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of the new line, and will make monthly payments to the Port in an amount sufficient to cover the Port's loan payments;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, legal and regular session convened, that the Mayor is authorized to execute a Cooperative Endeavor Agreement with the Port, substantially in accordance with the draft thereof filed for public inspection with the original of this resolution in the Office of the Clerk of Council on August 27, 2002.

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

RESOLUTION NO. 123 OF 2002

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO A COOPERATIVE ENDEAVOR AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF LOUISIANA FOR THE PURPOSES OF CONSTRUCTING I-49 AT SOUTHERN LOOP INTERCHANGE AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, in due, legal, and regular session convened, that the Mayor is authorized to enter into cooperative endeavor agreement with the State of Louisiana for the purposes of Constructing I-49 at Southern Loop Interchange.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be filed andrecorded in the official records of the District Court of Caddo Parish, Louisiana.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any provision or item of this resolution or application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items, or applications of the 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 declared severable and repealed.

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

The Deputy Clerk read the resolution by title: Resolution No. 124 of 2002: A resolution authorizing the exchange of certain surplus public property and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Read by title and as read motion by Councilman Carmody, seconded by Councilman Serio to postpone the resolution until the October 8, 2002 meeting. Motion passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. None.

RESOLUTION NUMBER 125 OF 2002

A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE CITY'S INTEREST IN A CERTAIN ADJUDICATED PROPERTY AS SURPLUS AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, there are numerous parcels of property which have been adjudicated to the City of Shreveport and Caddo Parish for non-payment of ad valorem taxes; and

WHEREAS, the City of Shreveport has entered into an intergovernmental agreement with Caddo Parish under which Caddo Parish will undertake to sell or donate said properties as authorized in R.S. 33:4720.11 or R.S. 33:4720.25; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26-294 of the Code of Ordinances, the city's interests in said properties can be sold after the City Council declares them to be surplus; and

WHEREAS, the purchasing agent has inquired of all city departments regarding the property described herein and has not received any indication that it is needed for city purposes.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, regular and legal session convened that the following described property is hereby declared surplus:

Lot 55, Hopewell Subdivision Geographic Number 171305-075-0055

Municipal Address: 2124 C. E. Galloway

Council District "C"

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any provision or item of this resolution or the application thereof be 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 Huckaby passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

RESOLUTION NUMBER 126 OF 2002

A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE CITY'S INTEREST IN CERTAIN ADJUDICATED PROPERTIES AS SURPLUS AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, there are numerous parcels of property which have been adjudicated to the City of Shreveport and Caddo Parish for non-payment of ad valorem taxes; and

WHEREAS, the City of Shreveport has entered into an intergovernmental agreement with Caddo Parish under which Caddo Parish will undertake to sell or donate said properties as authorized in R.S. 33:4720.11 or R.S. 33:4720.25; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26-294 of the Code of Ordinances, the city's interests in said properties can be sold after the City Council declares them to be surplus; and

WHEREAS, the purchasing agent has inquired of all city departments regarding the properties described herein and has not received any indication that they are needed for city purposes.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, regular and legal session convened that the following described properties are hereby declared surplus:

Lot 9, Block 1, Mayfair Subdivision Geographic Number 181435-078-0009

Municipal Address: 1831 Garden Street

Council District "A"

Lot 12, Block 15, Parkview Subdivision Geographic Number 171402-017-0012

Municipal Address: None

Council District "A"

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any provision or item of this resolution or the application thereof be 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 Huckaby, seconded by Councilman Spigener passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

RESOLUTION NUMBER 127 OF 2002

A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE CITY'S INTEREST IN A CERTAIN ADJUDICATED PROPERTY AS SURPLUS AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, there are numerous parcels of property which have been adjudicated to the City of Shreveport and Caddo Parish for non-payment of ad valorem taxes; and

WHEREAS, the City of Shreveport has entered into an intergovernmental agreement with Caddo Parish under which Caddo Parish will undertake to sell or donate said properties as authorized in R.S. 33:4720.11 or R.S. 33:4720.25; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26-294 of the Code of Ordinances, the city's interests in said properties can be sold after the City Council declares them to be surplus; and

WHEREAS, the purchasing agent has inquired of all city departments regarding the property described herein and has not received any indication that it is needed for city purposes.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, regular and legal session convened that the following described property is hereby declared surplus:

Lot 38, Winborough Subdivision Geographic Number 171403-030-0038

Municipal Address: 2818 West Caperton Street

Council District "G"

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any provision or item of this resolution or the application thereof be 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 Burrell, seconded by Councilman Carmody passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

RESOLUTION NO. 128 OF 2002

RESOLUTION STATING CITY OF SHREVEPORT'S ENDORSEMENT OF SOUTHERN FOODS GROUP, L.P. TO PARTICIPATE IN THE BENEFITS OF THE LOUISIANA ENTERPRISE ZONE PROGRAM AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, the Louisiana Enterprise Zone Act of 901 of 1981, Act 337 of 1982, Act 433 of 1987, Act 1024 of 1992, Act 581 of 1995, Act 624 of 1997, and Act 997 of 1999;

WHEREAS, the Louisiana Enterprise Zone Program offers significant incentives for economic development to some of the most distressed areas in parish, and

WHEREAS, SOUTHERN FOODS GROUP, L.P. is located in Census Tract 236.00 Block Group 4 , which is a designated Enterprise Zone, and

WHEREAS, said business will employ a minimum of 35% of its employees from the distressed groups targeted by the Enterprise Zone, and

WHEREAS, the City of Shreveport states this endorsement is in agreement with the Overall Economic Development Plan for the City of Shreveport, and

WHEREAS, the attached Enterprise Zone map is marked showing the location of the business being endorsed, and

WHEREAS, in accordance with the Louisiana Enterprise Zone Program requirements the City of Shreveport agrees:

1. To participate in the Enterprise Zone Program

2. To assist the Department in evaluating progress made in any Enterprise Zone within its jurisdiction.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Shreveport, in due, regular, and legal session convened that SOUTHERN FOODS GROUP, L.P. and their project 2002 - 2004 EXPANSION, Enterprise Zone Application # 20020331, isendorsed to participate in the Louisiana Enterprise Zone Program.

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: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

RESOLUTION NO.129 of 2002

RESOLUTION STATING CITY OF SHREVEPORT'S ENDORSEMENT OF CITIZENS BANK AND TRUST TO PARTICIPATE IN THE BENEFITS OF THE LOUISIANA ENTERPRISE ZONE PROGRAM AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, the Louisiana Enterprise Zone Act of 901 of 1981, Act 337 of 1982, Act 433 of 1987, Act 1024 of 1992, Act 581 of 1995, Act 624 of 1997, and Act 997 of 1999;

WHEREAS, the Louisiana Enterprise Zone Program offers significant incentives for economic development to some of the most distressed areas in parish, and

WHEREAS, CITIZENS BANK AND TRUST COMPANY is located in Census Tract 230.00 Block Group 3 , which is not a designated Enterprise Zone, and

WHEREAS, said business will employ a minimum of 35% of its employees from the distressed groups targeted by the Enterprise Zone, and

WHEREAS, the City of Shreveport states this endorsement is in agreement with the Overall Economic Development Plan for the City of Shreveport, and

WHEREAS, the attached Enterprise Zone map is marked showing the location of the business being endorsed, and

WHEREAS, in accordance with the Louisiana Enterprise Zone Program requirements the City of Shreveport agrees:

1. To participate in the Enterprise Zone Program.

2. To assist the Department in evaluating progress made in any Enterprise Zone within its jurisdiction.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Shreveport, in due, regular, and legal session convened that CITIZENS BANK AND TRUST COMPANY and their project CITIZENS BANK & TRUST OF VIVIAN SHREV BR, Enterprise Zone Application # 20020317, is endorsed to participate in the Louisiana Enterprise Zone Program.

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

INTRODUCTION OF RESOLUTIONS:

1. Resolution No. 130 of 2002:A resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign an agreement between the City of Shreveport and KPMG for an external audit of the City of Shreveport for fiscal year January 1, 2002 through December 31, 2002, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

2. Resolution No. 131 of 2002: A resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute the Second Amendment to the Intergovernmental Solid Waste Agreement with Caddo Parish of 1996, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

3. Resolution No. 132 of 2002: A resolution authorizing the employment of special legal counsel to represent the City of Shreveport and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

4. Resolution No. 133 of 2002: A resolution authorizing the Mayor to donate motorcycles listed in Appendix "A" to the Bossier Parish Sheriff's Office of Bossier Parish, Louisiana and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

5. Resolution No. 134 of 2002: A resolution authorizing the employment of special legal counsel to represent Shreveport Airport Authority of the City of Shreveport and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Read by title and as read motion by Councilman Shyne, seconded by Councilman Serio for Introduction of the Resolutions to lay over until the October 8, 2002 meeting. Motion passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES:

1. Ordinance No. 141 of 2002: An ordinance amending the 2002 budget for the Fleet Services Internal ServiceS Fund and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

2. Ordinance No. 142 of 2002: An ordinance amending the 2002 General Fund Budget and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

3. Ordinance No. 143 of 2002: An ordinance amending the 2002 budget for the Riverfront Development Special Revenue Fund and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

4. Ordinance No. 144 of 2002: An ordinance to amend Chapter 10 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Shreveport relative to alcoholic beverages to add Section 10-54 and to otherwise providing with respect thereto.

5. Ordinance No. 145 of 2002: An ordinance to repeal an existing speed limit ordinance for the Clyde Fant Memorial Parkway Ordinance No. 6 of 2000 and amend and reenacting a portion of Section 90-198 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Shreveport pertaining to the maximum limits on Clyde Fant Memorial Parkway, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

6. Ordinance No. 146 of 2002: An ordinance to create and establish a no parking anytime zone on the north side of the 1500 block of Garden street beginning at Allen Avenue and extending west for 100 feet and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

7. Ordinance No. 147 of 2002: 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 Youree Drive, 50 feet north of Stratford Avenue, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from SPI-3 (B-1) Commercial Corridor Overlay (Buffer Business) District to SPI-3-E (B-1) Commercial Corridor Overlay (Buffer Business) Extended Use District limited to a "hair salon & boutique" only and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

8. Ordinance No. 148 of 2002: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning Lots 17-24 and Lots 26-37 of University Terrace Unit #6, located on the northeast corner of East Bert Kouns Industrial Loop and Millicent Way, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from R-1D, Urban, One-Family Residence District to B-2, Neighborhood Business District and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

9. Ordinance No. 149 of 2002: 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 West 84^th Street, 700 feet west of Harding, 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 office/community center for use by residents of the Bayou Pointe Subdivision on, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

10. Clerk's Note: C-44-02, A & A Auto Sales was inadvertently assigned Ordinance No. 150 of 2002.

11. Ordinance No. 151 of 2002: 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 Jewella and Huston Street, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from R-2, Suburban, Multi-Family Residence District to B-2, Neighborhood Business District and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

12. Ordinance No. 152 of 2002: 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 Monkhouse, 1300 feet south of Greenwood Road, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from B-1, Buffer Business District to B-2, Neighborhood Business District and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

13. Ordinance No. 153 of 2002 by Councilman Carmody: An ordinance repealing and replacing Chapter 72 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Shreveport; providing for the licensing and regulation of Sexually Oriented Businesses and Employees, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

14. Ordinance 154 of 2002: An ordinance amending the 2002 Water and Sewer Enterprise Fund Budget and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Read by title and as read motion by Councilman Shyne, seconded by Councilman Stewart for Introduction of the Ordinances to lay over until the October 8, 2002 meeting. Motion passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE:

1. Ordinance No. 130 of 2002: An ordinance authorizing the donation of certain city-owned property to the Red River Waterway District and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on August 27, 2002 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: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

2. Ordinance No. 131 of 2002: An ordinance amending the 2002 budget for the Police Grants Special Revenue Fund and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on September 10, 2002 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: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

3. Ordinance No. 132 of 2002: NINETEENTH SUPPLEMENTAL ORDINANCE - A Supplemental Ordinance amending and supplementing Resolution No. 131 of 1984 (the "General Bond Resolution") adopted on June 12, 1984, as amended; providing for the issuance of $45,000,000.00 principal amount of Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 2003 Refunding Series A, of the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana, pursuant to the General Bond Resolution; approving and confirming the sale of such bonds; prescribing the form, fixing the details and providing for the payment of principal of and interest on such bonds and the application of the proceeds thereof for refunding certain bonds issued for the purpose of constructing and acquiring extensions and improvements to the City's combined waterworks plant and system and sewer plant and system (the "System") of the City; making application to the State Bond Commission; and providing for other matters in connection therewith.

Mr. Lee Ressler, Morgan Keegan: Mr. Thompson is handing out somebooklets which I will very briefly run through for you all. It is a very happy day for the City of Shreveport, we were able to refinance one of your outstanding bonds and it is a Water and Sewer issue, so it will create some additional funding that is now going to pay bondholders that will be available for system improvements.

On page 2, is a list of the professionals that were involved with the transaction for your review.

On Page 4 is the report from Moody Investor Service which again is a credit rating agency which gave the City an A-2 rating, the city finances are held in high regard by investors and this is an indication of that, based on the rating that Moody's gave. You are also able to get AAA bond insurance at a cost effective price which increased the savings.

On page 6, you will see that interest rates have declined over the last several months. We started this process several weeks ago, a couple of months ago and rates have continued to declined and it was the feeling at this point and time in the bond markets, that 44 year lows as far as interest rates, this is a good time to lock in rates and lock in the savings.

We also have some other market reports from Bloomberg, from Morgan Keegan and from Ratacheck, an economists showing that we feel like rates are about hitting bottom, we don't see them going a whole lot further down.

On page 14, which is the most important page, this shows the savings on the refinancing. Right now, you only have 5.95% bonds outstanding which is not the high of an interest rate, but we were able to refinance those with an overall borrowing cost of 3.66% and the savings are shown on page 14, totaling $3.6 million dollars. About $3.2 million of that is in the first four years. The present value is over $3.3 million which is over 8% percent of the amount of bonds we were refinancing.

As we worked very closely with Mrs. Washington, who is trying to maximize the savings for the City and were able to go above the threshold levels that we had originally talked about and pushed as high as we could above the 8% level. I'll turn it over to the attorneys, they have some legal documentation for you all to approve. I appreciate you all moving this up on the agenda. We have some antcy investors that would like to confirm bonds to and also there is a hurricane headed straight to New Orleans, we'd like to get back to town before it comes but appreciate your involving us in this transaction and I'd like to turn it over to the legal team to discussion the documentation.

Councilman Burrell: It appears that you'd be heading out of the way from a hurricane rather than going into it, I don't know how smart that is.

Mr. Jack Brown: Actually, we had two underwriters involved in the project, Tom Burbank and Charlie Sizer with Stevens, they were co-underwriters with Morgan Keegan. And actually at this time, hearing what Mr. Keesler said, we would like to have the ordinance moved on and at this point, we'll sign a Bond Purchase Agreement and it will be locked up at that rate.

Mr. Thompson: If there are no objections, the Council could act on this todayand if so, it would be necessary to, it has one amendment (we could read it) and it has one amendment. There's a new ordinance with all of the numbers in it and we would need to amend the ordinance that is on the agenda, to substitute the new one with all of the numbers in it.

Having passed first reading on September 10, 2002 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 for adoption. The Deputy Clerk read the following amendment:

Delete the ordinance as introduced and substitute the attached ordinance in its final form.

Motion by Councilman Carmody, seconded by Councilman Spigener for adoption of the amendment. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Out of Chamber: Councilman Serio. 1.

Motion by Councilman Carmody, seconded by Councilman Huckaby for adoption of the ordinance as amended. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Out of Chamber: Councilman Serio. 1.

4. Ordinance No. 133 of 2002: An ordinance closing and abandoning a 4 foot-wide utility easement located at the rear of Lots 16 thru 26 of Block 22 of the Morningside Subdivision in SW/4 of Section 14, (T17N-R14W), Caddo Parish, Louisiana, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on September 10, 2002 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 Spigener adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

5. Ordinance No. 134 of 2002: An ordinance to amend Chapter 10 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Shreveport relative to alcoholic beverages to add Section 10-86 and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on September 10, 2002 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 Carmody adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne andBurrell. 7. Nays: None.

6. Ordinance No. 135 of 2002: An ordinance levying various taxes totaling Twenty and Seventy-Sixth One Hundredths (20 and 76/100ths) mills per dollar on all property subject to ad valorem taxation, within the City of Shreveport, for the Year 2002 in the amounts and for the purposes described herein and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on September 10, 2002 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: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

7. Ordinance No. 136 of 2002: An ordinance levying a tax of Thirty and Fifty-Four One Hundredths (30 and 54/100ths) mills per dollar on all property subject to ad valorem taxation, within the City of Shreveport, for the Year 2002 for the purpose of paying principal and interest on the outstanding General Obligation Bonds of the City and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on September 10, 2002 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 for adoption.

Councilman Carmody: These are renewals of existing millages that the Council had passed before. These are actually corrections of some wording in that legislation.

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

8. Ordinance No. 137 of 2002: An ordinance levying a tax of Seven and Ninety-Nine One Hundredths (7 and 99/100ths) mills per dollar on all property subject to ad valorem taxation, within the bounds of the Downtown Development District of the City of Shreveport, as defined by Act 554 of 1978, as amended, for the purposes as set forth herein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on September 10, 2002 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 Stewart adopted by the followingvote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

9. Ordinance No. 138 of 2002: An ordinance authorizing the donation of city owned properties acquired under the Department of Housing and Urban Development One Dollar Home Program and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on September 10, 2002 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 Carmody to postpone the ordinance until the October 8, 2002 meeting. Motion passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. None.

10. Ordinance No. 139 of 2002: An ordinance authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement with Glock, Inc. for the exchange of properties and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on September 10, 2002 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 Carmody to postpone the ordinance until the October 8, 2002 meeting. Motion passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. None.

11. Ordinance No. 140 of 2002: An ordinance amending the 2002 budget for the Community Development Special Revenue Fund and otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on September 10, 2002 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 Stewart adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

The adopted ordinances, as amended, follow:

ORDINANCE NO. 130 OF 2002

AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE DONATION OF CERTAIN CITY-OWNED PROPERTY TO THE RED RIVER WATERWAY DISTRICT AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, the City of Shreveport ("City") has developed and desires to implement a comprehensive plan ("RiverView Project" or "the Project") to revitalize the urban riverfront on the Red River; and

WHEREAS, the Project will directly and substantially enhance both recreation and commerce on the Red River; and

WHEREAS, the Project will be accomplished with substantial participation from the Red River Waterway District ("the District") and the United States Army Corps of Engineers ("the Corps"); and

WHEREAS, the District has agreed to design, plan, engineer and construct the Project on the City-owned property (the "Property") described in Exhibit 1, and the Corps has agreed to construct a visitors center on other City-owned ("Corps Land") property located near the River as described in Exhibit 2; and

WHEREAS, neither the Property or the Corps Land is currently needed by the City for a public purpose; and

WHEREAS, the commitment from the District and the Corps is conditioned upon the City's transfer of all of its rights, interest and title in the Property and the Corps Land to the District; and

WHEREAS, the City acknowledges the benefits of having the RiverView Project and the visitors center located along its downtown riverfront area;

WHEREAS, City further acknowledges that the Project and the visitors center will provide recreational opportunities and entertainment for the citizens and visitors of the City, thus making a valuable contribution to the quality of life of the City, which is a public purpose; and

WHEREAS, City confirms that the transfer of title to the Property and the Corps Land is in the public interest and constitutes a cooperative endeavor between City and District for a public purpose as provided under Article VII, § 14 (c) of the Constitution of the State of Louisiana.

WHEREAS, LSA-R.S. 33:4712 requires that notice of this ordinance be published at least three (3) times within fifteen (15) days, one week apart.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, regular and legal session convened, that the City of Shreveport is authorized to donate the immovable property described in Exhibits 1 and 2 herein to the Red River Waterway District in further of the development of the RiverView Project, and the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute, after review and approval by the Office of the City Attorney, an Act of Transfer or other such document, assigning, conveying and delivering all of the City's rights, title and interest in and to the aforesaid property to the District for this purpose.

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 resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

ORDINANCE NO. 131 OF 2002

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2002 BUDGET FOR THE POLICE GRANTS 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 desirable to amend the 2002 budget for the Police Grants Special Revenue Fund, to shift expenditures within an existing grant and for oth er purposes.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, in legal session convened, that Ordinance No. 159 of 2001, the 2002 budget for the Police Grants Special Revenue Fund, be amended and re-enacted as follows:

In Section 2 (Appropriations):

From 2001 and Prior-Year Receipts:

From Block Grant 2001, decrease Materials and Supplies by $31,100 and increase Contractual Services by $31,100.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the remainder of Ordinance No. 159 of 2001 shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect and that 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 sections 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 to be severable.

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

ORDINANCE NO. 132 OF 2002

Offered by Councilman Carmody and seconded by Councilman Huckaby:

NINETEENTH SUPPLEMENTAL ORDINANCE

A Supplemental Ordinance amending and supplementing Resolution No. 131 of 1984 (the "General Bond Resolution") adopted on June 12, 1984, as amended; providing for the issuance of $40,735,000.00 principal amount of Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 2003 Refunding Series A, of the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana, pursuant to the General Bond Resolution; approving and confirming thesale of such bonds; prescribing the form, fixing the details and providing for the payment of principal of and interest on such bonds and the application of the proceeds thereof for refunding certain bonds issued for the purpose of constructing and acquiring extensions and improvements to the City's combined waterworks plant and system and sewer plant and system (the "System") of the City; making application to the State Bond Commission; and providing for other matters in connection therewith.

WHEREAS, the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana (the "Issuer") owns and operates a revenue-producing public utility comprised of a combined waterworks plant and system and sewer plant and system (the "System"); and

WHEREAS, the Issuer is authorized to borrow money and issue revenue bonds, payable solely from the income and revenues to be derived by the Issuer from the operation of the System to refund the Issuer's outstanding Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1986 Refunding Series A, which were issued to refund certain bonds previously issued under the General Bond Resolution, pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 14-A of Title 39 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950, as amended (R.S. 39:1444-1455) (the "Act"), and other constitutional and statutory authority; and

WHEREAS, the Issuer adopted Resolution No. 131 of 1984 (the "General Bond Resolution") on June 12, 1984, as amended and supplemented, authorizing the issuance from time to time of Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds of the Issuer on the terms and conditions set forth in the General Bond Resolution; and

WHEREAS, the General Bond Resolution provides that the details of the Bonds of each Series of Bonds issued thereunder shall be specified in a supplemental resolution adopted by the Issuer authorizing the issuance of such Series of Bonds, subject to the terms, conditions and limitations established in the General Bond Resolution; and

WHEREAS, the Issuer proposes by this Nineteenth Supplemental Ordinance to authorize the issuance of not to exceed $40,735,000.00 principal amount of its Bonds to be the Eighteenth Series of Bonds issued under the General Bond Resolution and to be designated "Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 2003 Refunding Series A (the "Series 2003A Bonds"), and to specify the terms and conditions of the Series 2003A Bonds; and

WHEREAS, the Issuer has heretofore issued $40,940,000 original principal amount of Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1986 Series A (the "Series 1986A Bonds") pursuant to the General Bond Resolution and the Third Supplemental Resolution; $31,080,000 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1986 Refunding Series B (the "Series 1986B Bonds") pursuant to the General Bond Resolution and the Fourth SupplementalResolution, $45,595,000 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1986 Refunding Series C (the "Series 1986C Bonds") pursuant to the General Bond Resolution and the Fifth Supplemental Resolution; $11,568,877.37 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1989 Series A (the "Series 1989A Bonds") pursuant to the General Bond Resolution and the Sixth Supplemental Resolution; $11,125,333.62 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1990 Series A (the "Series 1990A Bonds") pursuant to the General Bond Resolution and the Seventh Supplemental Resolution; $4,623,201.02 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1990 Series B (the "Series 1990B Bonds") pursuant to the General Bond Resolution and the Eighth Supplemental Resolution; $7,187,914.56 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1991 Series A (the "Series 1991A Bonds") pursuant to the General Bond Resolution and the Ninth Supplemental Resolution; $3,106,823.80 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1992 Series A (the "Series 1992A Bonds") pursuant to the General Bond Resolution and the Tenth Supplemental Resolution; $40,153,936.80 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1992 Refunding Series B (the "Series 1992B Bonds") pursuant to the General Bond Resolution and the Eleventh Supplemental Resolution; $10,290,000 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1993 Series B (the "Series 1993B Bonds") pursuant to the General Bond Resolution and the Twelfth Supplemental Resolution; $28,100,000 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1994 Series A (the "Series 1994A Bonds") pursuant to the General Bond Resolution and the Thirteenth Supplemental Resolution; $6,060,000 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1997 Refunding Series A (the "Series 1997A Bonds") pursuant to the General Bond Resolution and the Fourteenth Supplemental Resolution; the $10,210,000 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 2000 Series A (the "Series 2000A Bonds") pursuant to the General Bond Resolution and the Seventeenth Supplemental Resolution, the $21,169,624 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 2003 Refunding Series A (the "Series 2003A Bonds") pursuant to the General Bond Resolution and the Eighteenth Supplemental Resolution; and the $40,735,000 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 2003 Refunding Series A (the "Series 2003A Bonds") pursuant to the General Bond Resolution and the Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution.

WHEREAS, Financial Guaranty Insurance Company (the "Bond Insurer") is issuing a policy of municipal bond insurance which insures the payment of principal of and interest on the Series 2003A Bonds (the "Bond Insurance Policy (Series 2003A)"); and

WHEREAS, Bonds may be issued pursuant to the General Bond Resolution which shall constitute Prior Lien Bonds provided certain conditions are met as provided in the General Bond Resolution; and

WHEREAS, said terms and conditions shall be satisfied prior to the issuance of the Series 2003A Bonds and, accordingly, the Series 2003A Bonds shall constitute Prior Lien Bonds;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Shreveport, Louisiana, acting as the governing authority of said City, that:

ARTICLE I

Definitions; Findings and Interpretation

Section 101. Definitions. Unless the context shall clearly indicate some other meaning, all words and terms used in this Supplemental Resolution which are defined in Resolution No. 131 of 1984 adopted by this Council on June 12, 1984, entitled: "A resolution authorizing the issuance from time to time of Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds of the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana, prescribing the form, fixing the details and providing for the payment of principal of and interest on such bonds and for the rights of the holders thereof, as amended and supplemented by Resolution No. 152 of 1984 (the "First Supplemental Resolution") adopted on July 24, 1984, Resolution No. 160 of 1985 (the "Second Supplemental Resolution") adopted on July 9, 1985, Resolution No. 170 of 1986 (the "Third Supplemental Resolution") adopted on August 26, 1986, Resolution No. 180 of 1986 (the "Fourth Supplemental Resolution") adopted on September 9, 1986, Resolution No. 252 of 1986 (the "Fifth Supplemental Resolution") adopted on December 9, 1986, Resolution No. 147 of 1989 (the "Sixth Supplemental Resolution") adopted on August 22, 1989, Resolution No. 118 of 1990 (the "Seventh Supplemental Resolution") adopted on July 24, 1990, Resolution No. 193 of 1990 (the "Eighth Supplemental Resolution") adopted on November 27, 1990, Resolution No. 78 of 1991 (the "Ninth Supplemental Resolution") adopted on May 28, 1991, Resolution No. 1 of 1992 (the "Tenth Supplemental Resolution") adopted on January 14, 1992, Resolution No. 43 of 1993 (the "Twelfth Supplemental Resolution") adopted on May 25, 1993, Resolution No. 44 of 1994 (the "Thirteenth Supplemental Resolution") adopted on May 25, 1994, Resolution No. 153 of 1993 (the "Fourteenth Supplemental Resolution") adopted on September 28, 1993, Resolution No. 58 of 1994 (the "Fifteenth Supplemental Resolution" adopted on April 26, 1994 and Ordinance No. 76 of 2002 (the "Eighteenth Supplemental Resolution") adopted on June 25, 2002, shall, for all purposes of this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution, Ordinance No. 132 of 2002 (the "Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution") adopted on September 24, 2002, shall, for all purposes of this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution have the respective meanings given to them in the General Bond Resolution, as amended. In addition, unless the context shall clearly indicate some other meaning, the following terms shall, for all purposes of the General Bond Resolution, First Supplemental Resolution, Second Supplemental Resolution, Third Supplemental Resolution, Fourth Supplemental Resolution, Fifth Supplemental Resolution, Sixth Supplemental Resolution, Seventh Supplemental Resolution, Eighth Supplemental Resolution, Ninth Supplemental Resolution, Tenth Supplemental Resolution, Eleventh Supplemental Resolution, Twelfth Supplemental Resolution, Thirteenth Supplemental Resolution, FourteenthSupplemental Resolution, Fifteenth Supplemental Resolution, Eighteenth Supplemental Resolution and of this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution or of any resolution or other instrument amendatory thereof or supplemental thereto have the following meanings:

"Bond Insurer" shall mean Financial Guaranty Insurance Company, or any successor thereto.

"Bond Insurer Policy" shall mean the municipal bond new issue insurance policy issued by the Bond Insurer and guaranteeing payment of principal of and interest on the Series 2003A Bonds.

"Fiscal Agent" shall mean the Bond Insurer's fiscal agent or its successor.

"Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution" shall mean this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution as the same may be supplemented or amended hereafter.

"Redemption Price of the Refunded Bonds" shall mean a price equal to 103% of the principal amount of the Refunded Bonds.

"Refunded Bonds" shall mean the Issuer's outstanding Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1986 Refunding Series A issued pursuant to the General Bond Resolution and the 2003A Supplemental Resolution.

"Regular Record Date" shall mean with respect to the Series 2003A Bonds, the fifteenth day of the calendar month next preceding each Interest Payment Date.

"Series 2003A Bonds" shall mean the not to exceed $40,735,000.00 principal amount of Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 2003 Refunding Series A issued pursuant to the General Bond Resolution as amended and supplemented to the date hereof.

"Underwriters" shall mean Morgan Keegan & Company, Inc., New Orleans, Louisiana and Stephens, Inc., Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Unless or except as the context shall clearly indicate otherwise or may otherwise require in this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution: (i) all references to a particular section, paragraph or subdivision of the General Bond Resolution or this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution, as the case may be, are to the corresponding section, paragraph or subdivision of the General Bond Resolution only, or this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution only, as the case may be; (ii) the terms "herein", "hereunder", "hereby", "hereto", "hereof', and any similar terms, refer to this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution as a whole and not to any particular section, paragraph or subdivision thereof; (iii) the terms "therein", "thereunder", "thereby", "thereto","thereof", and any similar terms, refer to the General Bond Resolution, and to the General Bond Resolution as a whole and not to any particular section, paragraph or subdivision thereof, and (iv) the term "heretofore" means before the time of effectiveness of this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution, and the term "hereafter" means after the time of the effectiveness of this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution.

Section 102. Findings and Determinations. The Governing Authority hereby finds and determines:

(a) The Issuer is authorized under the Act to issue its revenue bonds in such amounts as may be necessary for the purpose of refunding the Refunded Bonds, and is further authorized pursuant to the General Bond Resolution, as amended and supplemented to the date hereof, to issue the Series 2003A Bonds for such purpose by means of a Supplemental Resolution adopted pursuant to and in accordance with Sections 204 and 205 of the General Bond Resolution.

(b) The Issuer has sold the Series 2003A Bonds to the Underwriters all in accordance with the terms of the Bond Purchase Agreement dated September 24, 2002.

(c) The Series 2003A Bonds, when issued, shall constitute Prior Lien Bonds as provided in the General Bond Resolution, as amended.

(d) It is anticipated that the Refunded Bonds will be redeemed on June 1, 2003 and will be payable on such date solely from proceeds of the Series 2003A Bonds, which amounts have been calculated to be sufficient to pay the Redemption Price of the Refunded Bonds.

Section 103. Interpretation. In this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution, unless the context otherwise requires, (a) words importing persons include firms, associations and corporations, (b) words importing the singular include the plural and vice versa and (c) words of the masculine gender shall be deemed and considered to include correlative words of the feminine and neuter genders.

ARTICLE II

Authorization and Details of Series 2003A Bonds

Section 201. Authorization and Designation. Pursuant to the provisions of the General Bond Resolution, as amended, this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution and the Act, there is hereby authorized the issuance of not to exceed Forty One Million Seventy Five Thousand Dollars ($40,735,000.00) original principal amount of Series2003A Bonds of the Issuer to be designated "Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 2003 Refunding Series A for the purpose of refunding the Refunded Bonds and paying costs of issuing the Series 2003A Bonds. The Series 2003A Bonds shall be special obligations of the Issuer payable solely from the Revenues, shall be entitled pursuant to and in accordance with the General Bond Resolution, as amended, to the pledge and lien created thereby and shall be otherwise entitled to the security and benefits thereof. The Bonds shall be issued in the form set forth in Exhibit A hereto.

The Series 2003A Bonds, together with the Series 1992B Bonds, Series 1993B Bonds, the Series 1994A Bonds, the Series 1997A Bonds, the Series 2000A Bonds and the Series 2001 Bonds and the Series 2002A Bonds are payable as to both principal and interest solely from the Revenues to be derived from the operation of the System, subject to the prior payment of the reasonable and necessary expenses of operation and maintenance of the System and the Bonds do not constitute an indebtedness or pledge of the general credit of the Issuer within the meaning of any constitutional and statutory limitation of indebtedness.

Section 202. Principal Amount Date and Type. The Series 2003A Bonds shall be issued in the aggregate principal amount of not to exceed Forty One Million Seventy Five Thousand Dollars ($40,735,000.00) and shall be issuable solely as Current Interest Bonds.

Section 203. Denominations, Dates, Maturities and Interest. The Series 2003A Bonds are issuable as fully registered bonds. Interest on the Bonds (payable June 1 and December 1 of each year, commencing June 1, 2003) is payable by check mailed to the registered owner. The Bonds are in the denomination of $5,000 each or any integral multiple thereof, and in fully registered form.

The Series 2003A Bonds shall mature on the dates and shall be in the aggregate principal amounts set forth below:

Due (December 1)	Aggregate Principal Amount	Interest Rate	Price or Yield
12/01/2005	$6,080,000.00	4.00%	2.280%
12/01/2006	6,320,000.00	4.00	2.610
12/01/2007	5,790,000.00	4.00	2.900
12/01/2008	4,895,000.00	4.50	3.180
12/01/2009	3,635,000.00	4.50	3.370
12/01/2010	2,390,000.00	4.75	3.570
12/01/2011	2,570,000.00	4.75	3.670
12/01/2012	2,745,000.00	5.00	3.770
12/01/2013	3,020,000.00	5.00	3.900
12/01/2014	3,290,000.00	5.00	4.010

The principal of the Bonds is payable at the principal corporate trust office of Bank One Trust Company, N.A., in the City of Baton Rouge, as Paying Agent and Bond Registrar with respect to the Series 2003A Bonds upon surrender thereof.

Each Series 2003A Bond shall be dated the date of delivery. Except as otherwise provided in this Section, the Series 2003A Bonds shall bear interest from the date thereof or from the most recent Interest Payment Date to which interest has been paid or duly provided for, as the case may be. However, when there is no existing default in the payment of interest on the Series 2003A Bonds, each Series 2003A Bond executed after the Regular Record Date for any Interest Payment Date but prior to such Interest Payment Date, shall bear interest from such Interest Payment Date provided, however, that if and to the extent that the Issuer shall default in the payment of the interest due on any Interest Payment Date, then all such Series 2003A Bonds shall bear interest from the most recent Interest Payment Date to which interest has been paid or duly provided for, unless no interest has been paid on the Series 2003A Bonds, in which case from the date of delivery.

The person in whose name any Series 2003A Bond is registered at the Regular Record Date with respect to an Interest Payment Date shall in all cases be entitled to receive the interest payable on such Interest Payment Date (unless such Series 2003A Bond has been called for redemption on a redemption date which is prior to such Interest Payment Date) notwithstanding the cancellation of such Series 2003A Bond upon any registration of transfer or exchange thereof subsequent to such Regular Record Date and prior to such Interest Payment Date.

ARTICLE III

No Redemption Prior to Maturity

Section 301. No Redemption. The Series 2003A Bonds are not subject to redemption prior to maturity.

ARTICLE IV

Application Of Proceeds of Series 2003A Bonds

Section 401. Obligation of the Issuer in Connection with the Issuance of the Series 2003A Bonds. This Governing Authority hereby binds and obligates itself and the Issuer to use or cause to be used the proceeds derived from the sale of the Series 2003A Bonds to refund the Refunded Bonds and to pay costs of issuance associated withthe Series 2003A Bonds. The Director of Finance is authorized to pay costs of issuance upon receipt of appropriate invoices.

ARTICLE V

Execution and Form of Series 2003A Bonds

Section 501. Execution and Form of Series 2003A Bonds. The Series 2003A Bonds issuable hereunder shall be executed by the Mayor, Clerk of Council and Director of Finance, respectively, substantially in the form set forth in Exhibit A hereto, with such necessary or appropriate variations, omissions and insertions as are required or permitted by law or by the General Bond Resolution, as amended and supplemented by this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution. The Series 2003A Bonds shall be lettered "R" and shall be numbered separately from 1 upward.

ARTICLE VI

Sale of the Series 2003A Bonds

Section 601. Sale of Bonds. The sale of the Series 2003A Bonds to the Underwriters is hereby in all respects approved, ratified and confirmed and after their execution, the Series 2003A Bonds shall be delivered to the Underwriters or its agents or assigns, upon receipt by the Director of Finance of the Issuer of the agreed purchase price. The execution and delivery on behalf of the Issuer of the Bond Purchase Agreement dated September 24, 2002, is hereby approved and ratified in all respects. The Mayor and Director of Finance of the Issuer are each hereby empowered, authorized and directed to execute and deliver or cause to be executed and delivered all documents required to be executed on behalf of the Issuer or deemed by them necessary or advisable to implement this Supplemental Resolution or facilitate the sale of the Series 2003A Bonds.

Section 602. Official Statement. The Governing Authority hereby approves the form and content of the Preliminary Official Statement dated September 19, 2002, pertaining to the Series 2003A Bonds submitted to the Governing Authority and hereby ratifies its prior use by the Underwriters in connection with the sale of the Series 2003A Bonds. The Governing Authority further approves the form and content of the final Official Statement dated as of September 24, 2002 and hereby authorizes and directs the execution by the Mayor or Director of Finance of the Issuer and delivery of such final Official Statement to the Underwriters for use in connection with the public offering of the Series 2003A Bonds.

ARTICLE VII

Notice of Events of Default

Section 701. Notice to Bond Insurer. The Trustee hereby agrees to give immediate notice to the Bond Insurer of the occurrence of any Event of Default under the General Bond Resolution, as amended and supplemented to the date hereof, including, without limitation, this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution.

ARTICLE VIII

Municipal Bond Insurance

Section 801. Municipal Bond Insurance. The Bond Insurer has committed to issue the Bond Insurance Policy (Series 2003A) with respect to the payments due for principal of and interest on the Series 2003A Bonds to the Paying Agent. Upon issuance, the Bond Insurance Policy (Series 2003A) will be on file and available for inspection at the principal office of the Paying Agent. The summary of the form of policy relating to the Bond Insurance Policy (Series 2003A) is hereby authorized to appear on the Series 2003A Bonds, substantially in the form set forth in Exhibit A hereto.

Section 802. Payments to Owners under Bond Insurance; Subrogation of Bond Insurer. For so long as the Bond Insurance Policy (Series 2003A) shall be in full force and effect, the Issuer, the Paying Agent and the Trustee agree to comply with the following provisions:

(i) If, on the third day preceding any interest payment date for the Series 2003 A Bonds there is not on deposit with the Paying Agent sufficient moneys available to pay all principal of and interest on the Series 2003 A Bonds due on such date, the Paying Agent shall immediately notify the Bond Insurer and the State Street Bank & Trust Company, N.A., New York, New York, or its successor as its Fiscal Agent (the "Fiscal Agent") of the amount of such deficiency. If, by said interest payment date, the Issuer has not provided the amount of such deficiency, the Paying Agent shall simultaneously make available to the Bond Insurer and to the Fiscal Agent the registration books for the Series 2003 A Bonds maintained by the Paying Agent. In addition:

A. The Paying Agent shall provide the Bond Insurer with a list of the Bondholders entitled to receive principal or interest payments from the Bond Insurer under the terms of the Bond Insurance Policy (Series 2003 A) and shall make arrangements for the Bond Insurer and its Fiscal Agent (1) to mail checks ordrafts to Bondholders entitled to receive full or partial interest payments from the Bond Insurer and (2) to pay principal of the Series 2003 A Bonds surrendered to the Fiscal Agent by the Bondholders entitled to receive full or partial principal payments from the Bond Insurer; and

B. The Paying Agent shall, at the time it makes the registration books available to the Bond Insurer pursuant to paragraph A above, notify Bondholders entitled to receive the payment of principal of or interest on the Series 2003 A Bonds from the Bond Insurer (1) as to the fact of such entitlement, (2) that the Bond Insurer will remit to them all or part of the interest payments coming due subject to the terms of the Bond Insurance Policy (Series 2003 A), (3) that, except as provided in paragraph (ii) below, in the event that any Bondholder is entitled to receive full payment of principal from the Bond Insurer, such Bondholder must tender his Series 2003 A Bond with the instrument of transfer in the form provided on the Series 2003 A Bond executed in the name of the Bond Insurer, and (4) that, except as provided in paragraph (ii) below, in the event that such Bondholder is entitled to receive partial payment of principal from the Bond Insurer, such Bondholder must tender his Series 2003 A Bond for payment first to the Paying Agent, which shall note on such Series 2003 A Bond the portion of principal paid by the Paying Agent, and then, with an acceptable form of assignment executed in the name of the Bond Insurer, to the Fiscal Agent, which will then pay the unpaid portion of principal to the Bondholder subject to the terms of the Bond Insurance Policy (Series 2003 A).

(ii) In the event that the Paying Agent has notice that any payment of principal of or interest on a Series 2003 A Bond has been recovered from a Bondholder pursuant to the United States Bankruptcy Code by a trustee in bankruptcy in accordance with the final, nonappealable order of a court having competent jurisdiction, the Paying Agent shall, at the time it provides notice to the Bond Insurer, notify Bondholders that in the event that any Bondholder's payment is so recovered, such recovery, and the Paying Agent shall furnish to the Bond Insurer its records evidencing the payments of principal of and interest on the Series 2003A Bonds which have been made by the Paying Agent and subsequently recovered from Bondholders, and the dates on which such payments were made.

(iii) The Bond Insurer shall, to the extent it makes payment of principal of or interest on the Series 2003 A Bonds, become surrogated to the rights of the recipients of such payments in accordance with the terms of the Bond Insurance Policy (Series 2003 A) and, to evidence such subrogation, (1) in the case of subrogation as to claims for past due interest, the Paying Agent shall note the Bond Insurer's rights as subrogee on the registration books maintained by the Paying Agent upon receipt of proof of the payment of principal thereof to the Bondholders of such Series 2003 A Bonds and (2) in the case of subrogation as to claims for past due principal, the Paying Agent shall note the Bond Insurer's rights as subrogee on the registration books for the Series 2003 A Bonds maintained by the Paying Agent upon receipt of proof of the payment of principal thereof to the Bondholders of such Series 2003 A Bonds. Notwithstanding anything in this Bond Resolution or the Series 2003 A Bonds to the contrary, the Paying Agent shall make payment of such past due interest and past due principal directly to the Bond Insurer to the extent that the Bond Insurer is a subrogee with respect thereto.

ARTICLE IX

Amendments to the General Bond Resolution

Section 901. Effective Date. The provisions of this Article IX shall be effective on the date of issuance of the Series 2003A Bonds.

Section 902. Amendment to Section 504 of Article, V of the General Bond Resolution, as Amended to the Date Hereof. Section 504 of Article V of the General Bond Resolution, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows:

"Section 504. Deposit and Disposition of Revenues. From the Revenue Fund, the following payments shall be made at the times, in the amounts and in the order as follows:

"First: To the Issuer the monthly amount sufficient to pay Operating Expenses of the System.

"Second: To the Issuer for deposit in the Debt Service Fund and the Debt Service Reserve Fund as follows:

"(1) On the twenty-fifth day of each month there shall be deposited in the Debt Service Fund to the credit of the Prior Lien Interest Account hereby created therein (the 'Prior Lien Interest Account') an amount computed by(i) deducting the amount of moneys then in the Prior Lien Interest Account from the interest next due on the following Interest Payment Date on an Outstanding Prior Lien Bonds, and (ii) multiplying the difference by a fraction the numerator of which is one and the denominator of which is the number of months, from and including the month of computation, to and including the month prior to the month in which such interest is due.

"The Issuer shall transfer from the Prior Lien Interest Account to the Trustee, at least two (2) Business Days prior to any Interest Payment Date, immediately available funds sufficient to pay promptly the interest so falling due on such date on all Outstanding Prior Lien Bonds. Moneys so transferred shall be applied by the Trustee solely for the payment when due on the interest falling due on the Outstanding Prior Lien Bonds.

(2) On the twenty-fifth day of each month there shall be deposited in the Debt Service Fund to the credit of the Prior Lien Principal Account hereby created therein (the 'Prior Lien Principal Account'), after giving effect to moneys then on deposit therein, the following amounts: (a) commencing 12 months prior to the next principal payment date for Prior Lien Bonds, an amount computed by multiplying the amount of the principal payment due on all Outstanding Prior Lien Bonds, on the next succeeding principal payment date on which such principal falls due whether at maturity or by virtue of mandatory redemption requirements by a fraction the numerator of which is one and the denominator of which is the number of months, including the month of computation, to and including the month prior to said principal payment date, together with such additional proportionate sum as may be required to pay said principal on said principal payment date. The Issuer shall transfer from the Prior Lien Principal Account to the Trustee, at least two (2) Business Days prior to any principal payment date, immediately available funds sufficient to pay promptly the principal so falling due on such date on all Outstanding Prior Lien Bonds. Moneys so transferred shall be applied by the Trustee solely for the payment when due, of the principal on all Outstanding Prior Lien Bonds as aforesaid.

"It shall be the duty of the Trustee to make such arrangements with each Paying Agent as will, to the extent of the moneys in the Debt Service Fund, assure the prompt payment when due of all Bonds and the interest thereon.

"(3) On the twenty-fifth day of each month there shall be deposited with the Trustee in the Debt Service Reserve Fund to the credit of the PriorLien Reserve Account hereby created therein (the 'Prior Lien Reserve Account') an amount at least equal to 33-1/3% of the total of the amounts payable on such date into the Prior Lien Interest Account and Prior Lien Principal Account, which amounts shall be paid for so long and resumed as often and to the extent only as may be necessary to create and thereafter maintain a balance in the Prior Lien Reserve Account at least equal to the Debt Service Reserve Fund Requirement (Prior Lien Bonds).

"If on any Interest Payment Date the amount in the Prior Lien Interest Account or Prior lien Principal Account shall be less than the amount required to be on deposit therein, the Trustee shall apply the moneys in the Prior Lien Reserve Account to the extent necessary to make up such deficiency (or the entire amount in the Prior Lien Reserve Account if less than sufficient). In the event any funds are so withdrawn from the Prior Lien Reserve Account to correct any such deficiency, such withdrawn amount shall be replenished from Revenues after making the deposits required by (1) and (2) above. Whenever the amount in the Prior Lien Reserve Account exceeds the Debt Service Reserve Fund Requirement (Prior Lien Bonds), the Trustee shall withdraw from the Prior Lien Reserve Account the amount of any excess therein as of the date of such withdrawal and deposit the moneys so withdrawn into the Revenue Fund.

"Moneys on deposit in the Prior Lien Reserve Account shall be used to remedy deficiencies in the Prior Lien Interest Account or the Prior Lien Principal Account, as the case may be, with respect to the Prior Lien Bonds.

"Third: All moneys remaining on the last day of each month in the Revenue Fund, after making the deposits required in paragraphs First and Second above shall be regarded as surplus and may be used by the Issuer for any lawful purpose; provided, however, any such surplus moneys in each Fiscal Year, unless otherwise consented to by the Bond Insurer, shall remain on deposit in the Revenue Fund and be expended only for lawful purposes of the System until such time as the Issuer shall have met the bond service requirement for such Fiscal Year as set forth in Section 902 hereof."

ARTICLE X

Miscellaneous

Section 1001. Publication of Resolution. A copy of this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution shall be published in the Official Journal of the City of Shreveport. For a period of thirty (30) days from the date of such publication any person in interest shall have the right to contest the legality of this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution and of the Series 2003A Bonds to be issued pursuant hereto and the provisions securing the Series 2003A Bonds. After the expiration of said thirty (30) days, no one shall have any right of action to contest the validity of the Series 2003A Bonds or the provisions of this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution, and the Series 2003A Bonds shall be conclusively presumed to be legal and no court shall thereafter have authority to inquire into such matters.

Section 1002. Supplemental Resolution to Constitute Contract. In consideration of the purchase and the acceptance of the Series 2003A Bonds by those who shall hold the same from time to time, the provisions of this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution shall be a part of the contract of the Issuer with the holders of the Series 2003A Bonds and shall be deemed to be and shall constitute a contract between the Issuer, the Trustee, the Bond Insurer and the holders from time to time of the Series 2003A Bonds. The provisions, covenants and agreements herein set forth to be performed by and on behalf of the Issuer shall be for the benefit, protection and security of the holders of any and all of the Series 2003A Bonds and the Bond Insurer.

Section 1003. Filing of Resolution. A certified copy of this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution shall be filed and recorded as soon as possible in the Mortgage Records of the Parishes of Caddo and Bossier, Louisiana.

Section 1004. Employment of Bond Counsel. The employment of Casten & Pearce, A.P.L.C. as Bond Counsel to the Issuer in connection with the Series 2003A Bonds, is hereby approved, confirmed and ratified. The fee of such Bond Counsel for the Bonds shall not exceed eighty percent (80%) of the fee prescribed by the Attorney General of the State of Louisiana plus out-of-pocket expenses and expenses incurred with respect to the Series 2003A Bonds. A certified copy of this resolution shall be forwarded to the Attorney General of the State of Louisiana for his approval in the manner required by law.

Section 1005. [RESERVED]

Section 1006. Paying Agent. The Issuer hereby appoints Bank One Trust Company, N.A., in the City of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, as Trustee and Paying Agent, subject to the conditions set forth in Section 1110 of the General Bond Resolution. The Paying Agent shall designate its Principal Office to the Trustee, the Bond Insurer and the Issuer and signify its acceptance of the duties and obligations imposed upon it by this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution by executing and delivering a writteninstrument of acceptance to the Trustee, the Bond Insurer and the Issuer. The Paying Agent is a commercial bank or trust company having a capitalization of at least $25,000,000 and authorized by law to perform all duties imposed upon it by this Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution.

Section 1007. Tax Covenants. The Issuer covenants and agrees that it will not permit at any time or times any of the proceeds of the Series 2003A Bonds or any other funds of the Issuer (including proceeds of any obligations of the Issuer) (i) to be used, directly or indirectly in any manner which would adversely affect the exclusion of interest on the Series 2003A Bonds or any Prior Lien Bonds heretofore issued (other than the Refunded Bonds) from gross income of the owner for federal income tax purposes or (ii) to be used directly or indirectly to acquire any securities or obligations the acquisition of which would cause the Series 2003A Bonds or any other Prior Lien Bonds heretofore issued (other than the Refunded Bonds) to become "arbitrage bonds" within the meaning of Section 148 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"). The Mayor, Director of Finance and/or Clerk of Council are hereby authorized to execute such documents and take any and all such actions as may be required by this Section.

Section 1008. Rebate Fund. In connection with complying with the Code in order to maintain the tax-exempt status of the Series 2003A Bonds, there is hereby authorized and ordered established with the Paying Agent a special trust fund to be designated as the "Rebate Fund (Series 2003A)." The Issuer hereby covenants and agrees that it will make or cause to be made all "rebate" payments to the Rebate Fund (Series 2003A) attributable to the Series 2003A Bonds which are required to be made in order to comply with Section 148(f) of the Code. The Rebate Fund (Series 2003A) shall be maintained with the Trustee and used to receive any amounts payable by the Issuer to the U.S. Government pursuant to Section 148(f) of the Code and invested and applied as described in a letter of instructions delivered by special tax counsel or bond counsel to the Issuer and the Trustee on the date of original issuance and delivery of the Series 2003A Bonds, as such letter may be supplemented or amended from time to time. The amounts on deposit in the Rebate Fund (2003A) shall be payable to the United States in such amounts and at such times as provided in said letter of instructions and as provided in Section 148(f) of the Code.

Section 1009. Amounts Not Security. It is hereby recognized and understood that moneys of the Issuer deposited in the Rebate Fund (2003A) and any earnings thereon do not constitute Revenues of the System, and such amounts are not and never shall be pledged to the payment of or be security for any Bonds, including, without limitation, the Series 2003A Bonds.

Section 1010. Employment of Underwriters. The employment of Morgan Keegan & Company, Inc. and Stephens, Inc. as Underwriters of the Bonds is hereby approved and ratified.

Section 1011. Information to be Furnished to the Bond Insurer. The Bond Insurer shall be provided with the following information:

(i) Within 120 days after the end of the Issuer's fiscal year, a budget for the new year, annual audited financial statements, and a statement of the amount on deposit in the Debt Service Reserve Fund as of the last valuation, and, if not presented in the audited financial statements, a statement of the Revenues pledged to payment of Series 2003 A Bonds in such fiscal year;

(ii) An official statement or other disclosure, if any, prepared in connection with the issuance of additional debt, whether or not it is on a parity with the insured issue within 30 days after the sale thereof;

(iii) Notice of any draw upon or deficiency due to market fluctuation in the amount, if any, on deposit in the Debt Service Reserve Fund;

(iv) Notice of the redemption, other than mandatory sinking fund redemption, of any of the Bonds, including the principal amount, maturities and CUSIP numbers thereof;

(v) Simultaneously with the delivery of the annual audited financial statements:

A. The number of system users as of the end of the fiscal year;

B. Notification of the withdrawal of any system user comprising 4% or more of system sales measured in terms of revenue dollars since the last reporting date;

C. Any significant plant retirements or expansions planned or undertaken since the last reporting date; and

(vi) Such additional information as the Bond Insurer may reasonably request from time to time.

Section 1012. Notices. Any notices to the Bond Insurer and the Fiscal Agent shall be sent as follows:

Bond Insurer Financial Guaranty Insurance Company

125 Park Avenue

New York, New York 10017

Attention: General Counsel

Fiscal Agent State Street Bank & Trust Company, N.A.

61 Broadway

New York, New York 10006

Attention: Corporate Trust Department

Section 1013. Continuing Disclosure. The Mayor, Director of Finance and/or Clerk of the Council of the Issuer are hereby empowered and directed to execute an appropriate Continuing Disclosure Certificate (substantially in the form set forth in Appendix "G" of the Official Statement issued in connection with the sale and issuance of the Series 2003 A Bonds) pursuant to S.E.C. Rule 15c2-12(b)(5).

EXHIBIT "A" TO THE

NINETEENTH SUPPLEMENTAL RESOLUTION

(FORM OF BOND)

NOTICE: Unless this Bond is presented by an authorized representative of The Depository Trust Company to the Issuer or its agent for registration of transfer, exchange or payment, and any certificate issued is registered in the name of Cede & Co. or such other name as requested by an authorized representative of The Depository Trust Company and any payment is made to Cede & Co., ANY TRANSFER, PLEDGE OR OTHER USE HEREOF FOR VALUE OR OTHERWISE BY OR TO ANY PERSON IS WRONGFUL SINCE THE REGISTERED OWNER HEREOF, CEDE & CO., HAS AN INTEREST HEREIN.

No. R--Principal Amount: $________

Maturity Date: ________ 1, _

Interest Rate: ______%

Bond Date: _______________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

STATE OF LOUISIANA

PARISH OF CADDO

WATER AND SEWER REVENUE BONDS, 2003 REFUNDING SERIES A

OF THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT, STATE OF LOUISIANA

The City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana (the "Issuer"), promises to pay, but only from the source and as hereinafter provided, to

Cede & Co., Inc.

or registered assigns, on the Maturity Date set forth above the Principal Amount set forth above or upon earlier redemption, the Principal Amount as set forth above, upon presentation hereof at the principal corporate trust office of Bank One Trust Company, N.A., in the City of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, or any successor thereto (the "Trustee" and "Paying Agent/Registrar"). Interest on this Bond shall accrue from the date hereof and be payable on each June 1 and December 1 commencing on June 1, 2003.

REFERENCE IS MADE TO THE FURTHER PROVISIONS OF THIS BOND SET FORTH ON THE REVERSE HEREOF WHICH SHALL FOR ALL PURPOSES HAVE THE SAME EFFECT AS THOUGH FULLY SET FORTH HEREIN.

This Bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose or be entitled to any security or benefit under the Bond Resolution until the certificate of authentication hereon shall have been signed by the Trustee.

It is certified that this Bond is authorized by and is issued in conformity with the requirements of the Constitution and statutes of the State of Louisiana. It is further certified, recited and declared that all acts, conditions and things required to exist, to happen and to be performed precedent to and in the issuance of this Bond and the issue of which it forms a part to constitute the same legal, binding and valid obligations of the Issuer have existed, have happened and have been performed in due time, form and manner as required by law, and that the indebtedness of the Issuer, including this Bond and the issue of which it forms a part, does not exceed the limitations prescribed by the Constitution and statutes of the State of Louisiana.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Council of the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana, acting as the governing authority of said City, has caused this Bond to be executed in its name by the facsimile signatures of the Mayor, Clerk of Council and Director of Finance, and a facsimile of the corporate seal of said City to be imprinted hereon.

CITY OF SHREVEPORT

STATE OF LOUISIANA

__________(facsimile)______________	__________(facsimile)______________
Clerk of Council	Mayor

__________(facsimile)_________

Director of Finance

(SEAL)

* * * * * * *

(FORM OF REVERSE OF BOND)

This Bond is one of an authorized issue of Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 2003 Refunding Series A of the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana aggregating in principal the sum of Forty One Million Seventy Five Thousand Dollars ($40,735,000.00) (the "2003A Bonds"), said Series 2003A Bonds having been issued by the Issuer pursuant to Resolution No. 131 of 1984 (the "General Bond Resolution") adopted by the governing authority of the Issuer on June 12, 1984, as amended and supplemented to the date hereof, and Ordinance No. 132 of 2002 (the "Nineteenth Supplemental Resolution") adopted by the governing authority of the Issuer on September 24, 2002 (the General Bond Resolution, as amended and supplemented, being herein called the "Bond Resolution"). The Series 2003A Bonds have been issued by the Issuer under the authority of Chapter 14-A of Title 39 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950, as amended (R.S. 39:1444-1455) (the "Act"), and other constitutional and statutory authority, for the purpose of refunding the Issuer's outstanding Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1986 Refunding Series A.

The Series 2003A Bonds are issuable only as fully registered bonds in principal amounts of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof. As provided in the Bond Resolution, and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, the Series 2003A Bonds are exchangeable for an equal aggregate principal amount of bonds of the same maturity of any other authorized denomination.

Subject to the limitations and upon payment of the charges provided in the Bond Resolution, the transfer of this Bond may be registered on the registration books of the Paying Agent/Registrar upon surrender of this Bond at the principal corporate trust office of the Paying Agent/Registrar, duly endorsed by or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer in form satisfactory to the Paying Agent/Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or his attorney duly authorized in writing, and thereupon a new Series 2003A Bond or Bonds of the same maturity and of authorized denomination or denominations, for the same aggregate principal amount, will be issued to the transferee. Prior to due presentment for transfer of this Bond, the Issuer and the PayingAgent/Registrar may deem and treat the registered owner hereof as the absolute owner hereof (whether or not this Bond shall be overdue) for the purpose of receiving payment of or on account of principal hereof and interest hereon and for all other purposes, and neither the Issuer nor the Paying Agent/Registrar shall be affected by any notice to the contrary.

Upon any such registration of transfer or exchange, the Paying Agent/Registrar may require payment of an amount sufficient to cover any tax or other governmental charge payable in connection therewith. The Paying Agent/Registrar shall not be required (a) to issue, register the transfer of or exchange any Series 2003A Bonds during a period beginning at the opening of business 15 days next preceding any date of selection of Series 2003A Bonds to be redeemed and ending at the close of business on the day on which the applicable notice of redemption is given or (b) to register the transfer of or exchange any Series 2003A Bonds so selected for redemption in whole or in part.

The Series 2003A Bonds are not subject to redemption prior to maturity.

This Bond and the issue of which it forms a part, together with the other Prior Lien Bonds hereinafter defined, are payable as to both principal and interest solely from the Revenues (as defined in the Bond Resolution) to be derived from the operation of the System, subject to the prior payment of the reasonable and necessary expenses of operation and maintenance of the System, all as provided in the Bond Resolution, and this Bond does not constitute an indebtedness or pledge of the general credit of the Issuer within the meaning of any constitutional and statutory limitation of indebtedness. The governing authority of the Issuer has covenanted and agreed and does hereby covenant and agree at all times to fix and collect rates and charges for all water and sewerage services furnished by the System sufficient to provide for the payment of all reasonable and necessary expenses of operation and maintenance of the System, to provide for the payment of interest on and principal of all Series 2003A Bonds and other Prior Lien Bonds payable therefrom as and when the same shall become due and payable and for the creation of a reserve therefore. For a more complete statement of the Revenues from which and conditions under which this Bond is payable, a statement of the conditions under which additional Prior Lien Bonds may hereafter be issued pursuant to the Bond Resolution, and the general covenants and provisions pursuant to which this Bond is issued, reference is hereby made to the Bond Resolution. If an Event of Default (as defined in the Bond Resolution) occurs and is continuing, the principal of all Outstanding Series 2003A Bonds may be declared due and payable upon the conditions and in the manner and with the effect as provided in the Bond Resolution.

This Bond and the issue of which it forms a part are issued on a parity with the outstanding bonds of the Issuer's Prior Lien Bonds, consisting of Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1993 Series B, Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1994 Series A, Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1997 Refunding Series A, Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 2000 Series A Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, Series 2001A, B and C, Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, Series 2002 and Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 2002 Refunding Series A.

The Bond Resolution permits, with certain exceptions as therein provided, the amendment thereof and the modification of the rights and obligations of the Issuer and the rights of the owners of the Series 2003A Bonds as provided in the Bond Resolution.

* * * * * * *

(FORM OF TRUSTEE'S CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION)

(To be Printed on all Series 2003A Bonds)

This Bond is one of the, Series 2003A Bonds referred to in the within mentioned Bond Resolution.

BANK ONE TRUST COMPANY, N.A., As Trustee

By: ________________________________

Authorized Officer

Date of Authentication: _____________________

(FORM OF ASSIGNMENT)

(To be Printed on all Series 2003A Bonds)

FOR VALUE RECEIVED, ________________, the undersigned, hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto _____________________ the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and hereby irrevocable constitutes and appoints _______________________ attorney or agent to transfer the within bond on the books kept for registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the premises.

Dated: ___________________________

__________________________________________

NOTICE: The signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as it appears upon the face of the within bond in every particular, without alteration enlargement or any change whatever.

(FORM OF LEGAL OPINION CERTIFICATE)

(To be Printed on all Series 2003A Bonds)

LEGAL OPINION CERTTFICATE

I, the undersigned Clerk of Council of the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana, do hereby certify that the following is a true copy of the complete legal opinion of Casten & Pearce, A.P.L.C., the original of which was manually executed, dated and issued as of the date of payment for and delivery of the Bonds of the issue described herein, and was delivered to Morgan Keegan & Company, Inc. the original purchaser thereof.

(Bond Printer Shall Insert Legal Opinion)

I further certify that an executed copy of the aforesaid legal opinion is on file in my office, and that an executed copy thereof has been furnished to the Paying Agent/Registrar for this Bond.

_____________(facsimile)_____________

Clerk of Council

City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana

(FORM OF STATEMENT OF INSURANCE)

STATEMENT OF INSURANCE

Financial Guaranty Insurance Company ("Financial Guaranty") has issued a policy containing the following provisions with respect to the Bonds, such policy being on file at the principal office of Bank One Trust Company, N.A., as paying agent (the "Paying Agent"):

Financial Guaranty hereby unconditionally and irrevocably agrees to pay for disbursement to the Bondholders that portion of the principal or accreted value (if applicable) of and interest on the Bonds which is then due for payment and which the issuer of the Bonds (the "Issuer") shall have failed to provide. Due for payment means, with respect to principal or accreted value (if applicable), the stated maturity date thereof, or the date on which the same shall have been duly called for mandatory sinking fund redemption and does not refer to any earlier date on which the payment of principal of the Bonds is due by reason of call for redemption (other than mandatory sinking fund redemption), acceleration or other advancement of maturity, and with respect to interest, the stated date for payment of such interest.

Upon receipt of telephonic notice, subsequently confirmed in writing, or written notice by registered or certified mail, from a Bondholder or the Paying Agent to Financial Guaranty that the required payment of principal, accreted value or interest (as applicable) has not been made by the Issuer to the Paying Agent, Financial Guaranty on the due date of such payment or within one business day after receipt of notice of such nonpayment, whichever is later, will make a deposit of funds, in an account with State Street Bank and Trust Company, N.A., or its successor as its agent (the "Fiscal Agent"), sufficient to make the portion of such payment not paid by the Issuer. Upon presentation to the Fiscal Agent of evidence satisfactory to it of the Bondholder's right to receive such payment in Financial Guaranty, the Fiscal Agent will disburse such amount to the Bondholder.

As used herein the term "Bondholder" means the person other than the Issuer or the borrower(s) of bond proceeds who at the time of nonpayment of a Bond entitled under the terms of such Bond to payment thereof.

The policy is non-cancellable for any reason.

FINANCIAL GUARANTY INSURANCE COMPANY

ORDINANCE NO. 133 OF 2002

AN ORDINANCE CLOSING AND ABANDONING A 4 FOOT-WIDE UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED AT THE REAR OF LOTS 16 THRU 26 OF BLOCK 22 OF THE MORNINGSIDE SUBDIVISION IN SW/4 OF SECTION 14, (17N-R14W) CADDO PARISH, LOUISIANA AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, the City of Shreveport received a 4 foot-wide utility easement located in the Morningside Subdivision on May 25, 1942 as recorded in Book 450, Page 155-157 of the conveyance records of Caddo Parish; and,

WHEREAS, today the Property Management Section of the Department of Operational Services has received a request to close and abandon the above identified easement; and,

WHEREAS, City of Shreveport Engineering has reviewed this request and has no objections to the 4 foot - wide utility easement being closed and abandoned.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, legal and regular session convened, that the 4 foot-wide utility easement received by the City of Shreveport and recorded in Book 450, page 155-157 of the recorded and as shown on the plat attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby closed and abandoned.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that a certified copy of this ordinance be filed and recorded in the official records of the District Court for Caddo Parish, Louisiana.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that if any provision of this ordinance or the application is invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items or applications of this ordinance which can be given effect without 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 resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herein are hereby repealed.

ORDINANCE NO. 134 OF 2002

AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 10 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT RELATIVE TO ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES TO ADD SECTION 10-86 AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, in due, legal and regular session convened that Chapter 10 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Shreveport is hereby amended to add Section 10-86 and now reads as follows:

Section 10-86. Alcoholic Beverage Sales Locations: Riverfront Area

Any retail dealer engaged in the sale, barter, exchange or dispensing of alcoholic beverages of high or low alcoholic content for on-premise consumption, located within that portion of the B-4 Central Business District which is bounded by the south bank of Cross Bayou on the north, the north side of Lake Street on the south, the west bank of the Red River on the east, and the east right of way line of Spring Street, not to include any sidewalk or pedestrian thoroughfare parallel and adjacent to Spring Street,on the west; and further includes, Block 48 of the City of Shreveport, known as Festival Plaza, and subject to the provisions of Section106-1127(6) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Shreveport, may do so from an area adjacent to their building and under their control pursuant to lease or ownership. Said area shall be permanently marked and readily identifiable as a portion of the leased or owned premises.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that if any provisions 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 resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed

ORDINANCE NO. 135OF 2002

AN ORDINANCE LEVYING VARIOUS TAXES TOTALING TWENTY AND SEVENTY-SIX ONE HUNDREDTHS (20 AND 76/100THS) MILLS PER DOLLAR ON ALL PROPERTY SUBJECT TO AD VALOREM TAXATION WITHIN THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT FOR THE YEAR 2002 IN THE AMOUNTS AND FOR THE PURPOSES DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due and legal session convened, that:

An ad valorem tax of Twelve and Thirteen One Hundredths (12 and 13/100ths) mills per dollar of assessed valuation be and the same is hereby levied on all property subject to ad valorem taxation within the City of Shreveport, for the year 2002; for the purpose of general operating expenses of the General Fund.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that an ad valorem tax of Ninety-eight One Hundredths (98/100ths) mills per dollar of assessed valuation be and the same is hereby levied on all property subject to ad valorem taxation within the City of Shreveport, for the year 2002; for the purpose of operating and supplying recreational facilities and appurtenances and maintaining the same, title to which shall be in the public, in accordance with the results of a special election held July 19, 1997.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that an ad valorem tax of One and Seventy-three One Hundredths (1 and 73/100ths) mills per dollar of assessed valuation be and the same is hereby levied on all property subject to ad valorem taxation within the City of Shreveport, for the year 2002; for the purpose of providing revenues sufficient to enable the City of Shreveport to provide a three-platoon system in the Police Department, now in effect in the City of Shreveport in accordance with Act 323 of the Legislature of Louisiana for the year 1936.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that an ad valorem tax of One and Thirty-one One Hundredths (1 and 31/100ths) mills per dollar of assessed valuation be and thesame is hereby levied on all property subject to ad valorem taxation within the City of Shreveport, for the year 2002; for the purpose of improving, repairing, and maintaining the streets of the City of Shreveport, title to which shall be in the public, in accordance with the results of a special election held July 19, 1997.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that an ad valorem tax of One and Thirty-one One Hundredths (1 and 31/100ths) mills per dollar of assessed valuation be and the same is hereby levied on all property subject to ad valorem taxation within the City of Shreveport, for the year 2002; for the purpose of continuing the salary and wage schedule of City employees, in accordance with the results of a special election held July 19, 1997.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that an ad valorem tax of One and Thirty-one One Hundredths (1 and 31/100ths) mills per dollar of assessed valuation be and the same is hereby levied on all property subject to ad valorem taxation within the City of Shreveport, for the year 2002; for the purpose of police and fire personnel and allowance for uniforms and equipment for said departments in accordance with the results of a special election held July 19, 1997.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that an ad valorem tax of One and Ninety-nine One Hundredths (1 and 99/100ths) mills per dollar of assessed valuation be and the same is hereby levied on all property subject to ad valorem taxation with the City of Shreveport, for the year 2002; for the purpose of providing funds for the City's portion of pensions, employee life insurance and hospitalization plan for City employees in accordance with the results of a special election held July 19, 1997.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that this ordinance shall be full authority to the Tax Assessor of Caddo Parish and the Tax Assessor of Bossier Parish to extend said taxes on the assessment rolls of the City of Shreveport for the year 2002.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the Director of Finance, Ex Officio Tax Collector of the City of Shreveport, be and she is hereby empowered, authorized, and directed to cause said taxes, as herein above set forth, to be spread upon the tax roll of the City of Shreveport for the year 2002, to collect said ad valorem taxes for and on behalf of said City, according to law, and to place the same to the credit of the funds described herein above as authorized by law. The taxes herein levied shall become a permanent lien and privilege on all property subject to taxation as herein set forth, and the collection thereof shall be enforceable in the manner provided by law.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the Clerk of Council shall provide a certified copy of this ordinance to the Tax Assessor of Caddo Parish and the Tax Assessor of Bossier Parish immediately after its final passage by the City Council and approval by the Mayor.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that if any provision or item of this ordinance and the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items or applications and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that Ordinance No. 46 of 2002 is hereby repealed.

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

ORDINANCE NO. 136 OF 2002

AN ORDINANCE LEVYING A TAX OF THIRTY AND FIFTY-FOUR ONE HUNDREDTHS (30 AND 54/100THS) MILLS PER DOLLAR ON ALL PROPERTY SUBJECT TO AD VALOREM TAXATION WITHIN THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT FOR THE YEAR 2002 FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON THE OUTSTANDING GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT, AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, regular and legal session convened, that:

An ad valorem tax of Thirty and Fifty-four One Hundredths (30 and 54/100ths) mills per dollar of assessed valuation be and the same is hereby levied on all property subject to ad valorem taxation within the City of Shreveport, for the year 2002, for the purpose of paying the principal and interest on the outstanding general obligation bonds of the City of Shreveport, and creating a reasonable reserve for the payment of such principal and interest as the same respectively become due and payable, and this shall be full authority to the Tax Assessor of Caddo Parish and the Tax Assessor of Bossier Parish to extend said tax on the assessment rolls of the City of Shreveport for the year .

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the Director of Finance, Ex Officio Tax Collector of the City of Shreveport, be and she is hereby empowered, authorized, and directed to cause said taxes, as herein above set forth, to be spread upon the tax roll of the City of Shreveport for the year 2002, to collect said ad valorem taxes for and on behalf of said City, according to law, and to place the same to the credit of the funds described herein above as authorized by law. The taxes herein levied shall become a permanent lien and privilege on all property subject to taxation as herein set forth, and the collection thereof shall be enforceable in the manner provided by law.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the Clerk of Council shall provide a certified copy of this ordinance to the Tax Assessor of Caddo Parish and the Tax Assessor of Bossier Parish immediately after its final passage by the City Council and approval by the Mayor.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that if any provision or item of this ordinance and the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items or applications and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared severable.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that Ordinance No. 47 of 2002 is hereby repealed.

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

ORDINANCE NO. 137 OF 2002

AN ORDINANCE LEVYING A TAX OF SEVEN AND NINETY-NINE ONE HUNDREDTHS (7 AND 99/100THS) MILLS PER DOLLAR ON ALL PROPERTY SUBJECT TO AD VALOREM TAXATION WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT AS DEFINED BY ACT 554 OF 1978, AS AMENDED, FOR THE PURPOSES AS SET FORTH HEREIN, AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, regular and legal session convened, that:

An ad valorem tax of Seven and Ninety-nine One Hundredths (7 and 99/100ths) mills per dollar of assessed valuation be and the same is hereby levied on all property subject to ad valorem taxation within the bounds of the Downtown Development District, as defined by Act 554 of 1978, as amended, for the year 2002, and to be expended by the Downtown Development Authority for administration, operational expenses, capital improvements, project expenses or the retirement of bonds or other evidences of indebtedness, all in accordance with the results of a special election held November 20, 1999 and this shall be full authority to the Tax Assessor of Caddo Parish to extend said tax on the assessment rolls of the City of Shreveport for the year 2002.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the Director of Finance, Ex Officio Tax Collector of the City of Shreveport, be and she is hereby empowered, authorized, and directed to cause said taxes, as herein above set forth, to be spread upon the tax roll of the City of Shreveport for the year 2002, to collect said ad valorem taxes for and on behalf of said City, according to law, and to place the same to the credit of the funds described herein above as provided for and authorized by the special election held on November 20, 1999. The taxes herein levied shall become a permanent lien and privilege on all property subject to taxation as herein set forth, and the collection thereof shall be enforceable in the manner provided by law.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the Clerk of Council shall provide a certified copy of this ordinance to the Tax Assessor of Caddo Parish and the Tax Assessor of Bossier Parish immediately after its final passage by the City Council and approval by the Mayor.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that if any provision or item of this ordinance and 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 Ordinance No. 48 of 2002 is hereby repealed.

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

ORDINANCE NO. 140 OF 2002

ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2002 BUDGET FOR THE COMMUNITY 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 2002 budget for the Community Development Special Revenue Fund, to shift funds between expenditure categories 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. 157 of 2001, the 2002 budget for the Community Development Special Revenue Fund, as amended, is hereby further amended as follows:

In Section 1 (Estimated Revenues), under Fiscal Year 2002 Funds, appropriate $6,400 from Private Donations.

In Section 2 (Appropriations), under Housing and Business Development, decrease Personal Services by $16,000. Increase Contractual Services by $15,000 and Transfer to Fleet Services Fund by $1,000. Increase Housing Programs by $6,400. Under Codes Enforcement, decrease Personal Services by $75,000 and increase Contractual Services by $75,000.

All totals and subtotals shall be adjusted accordingly.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that if any provision or item of this ordinance or the application thereof shall be 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 to be severable.

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

UNFINISHED BUSINESS:

1. Discussion and/or Action Relative to the Public Safety Committee. (F/Shyne) (Tabled on Oct. 23) Remained tabled.

2. Alcohol Retail Permit: Mr. Alton Ross (2911 Milam Street - New Nat Café) (Tabled on July 23, 2002)

3. Alcohol Retail Permit: Ms. Deborah Hawkins [Employer: 2901 Milam St. [Take-A-Bag Grocery] (G/Burrell) (Special Meeting scheduled for Thursday, Thursday, October 10, 2002 at 1:30 p.m.)

NEW BUSINESS:

1. ABO Card appeal: Ms. Doneka Garner (Residence: D/Serio - Employer: Johnny's Pizza (C/Carmody) (Postponed until Sept. 24)

Councilman Burrell: We did receive that letter. If you all on the Council would look, Ms. Garner did supply the letter that we had requested on yesterday.

Motion by Councilman Shyne, seconded by Councilman Spigener to approve the request and approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 6. Nays: Councilman Serio. 1.

2. BAC -67-02, THE J HARDEMAN COMPANY LLC, 1111 B North Market, Special Exception Use in a B-3 District, Restaurant with the on-premise consumption of alcohol. (A/Huckaby) [Postponed on Sept. 10]

Councilman Carmody: I will vote to deny this application for the following reasons:

1. Section 10-83 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Shreveport prohibits the sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises of any place where gasoline is sold, unless the alcoholic beverage consumption premises and gasoline sales premises are at least 200 feet apart.

Councilwoman Huckaby and I held a meeting with representatives from the police department, the City Attorney, the MPC Director and others yesterday. The police department representatives believe that Section 10-83 protects the public and should be enforced. I agree. I also note for the record that Section 6.6 of the Bossier City Code of Ordinances also prohibits on-premise consumption of alcoholic beverages at places where gasoline is sold.

2. This applicant does no meet (or fall under) the Grandfather provisions that were adopted when this ordinance was amended by Ord. No. 53 of 1999. The Police Department and Assistant City Attorney Julie Glass both agree with this conclusion.

3. The provisions of Section 10-83 should be the overriding factor in determining whether a special exception use should be granted to a restaurant, located in a B-3 District, for on-premise consumption of alcohol. By enacting Section 10-83, the governing authority has already determined that it is not proper land use to allow the sale of gasoline and the consumption of alcohol on the same premise. And, it does not matter if that decision is codified in the zoning ordinance or in chapter 10 of the code.

It will be an abdication of our responsibilities, and it will be confusing to the police department and to the public, if we grant this request and pass it on to the police department for the department to deny the applicants request for a liquor license.

By the adoption of Section 10-83 of the Code, the Council has already made the land-use decision and the policy decision.

Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I move that the application (BAC -67-02) by THE J HARDEMAN COMPANY LLC, 1111 B North Market, for Special Exception Use in a B-3 District, Restaurant with the on-premise consumption of alcohol be denied, and I request each member to vote for this motion.

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

Councilman Burrell: The motion carried.

Councilman Shyne: No, Mr. Chairman, it isn't.

Councilman Burrell: The motion carried.

Ms. Glass: That is correct, it doesn't take five vote on a ZBA appeal, you might be thinking of an MPC appeal.

3. BAC-57-02, DISTRICT ONE UNITED COUNCIL OF HOPE, 3850 Linwood Avenue, Special Exception Use and Variance in hour of operation in a B-3 District, Reception Hall with the on-premise consumption of alcohol until 1 a.m. (B/Stewart)

Motion by Councilman Stewart, seconded by Councilman Carmody to postpone the application until the October 8, 2002 meeting.

Councilman Stewart: I spoke briefly at the beginning of this meeting with the lady who spoke in favor of it, representing the group. I was prepared to vote in the affirmative until we had the gentleman who spoke as a neighbor which contradicted some of the information that I received. So I would request that we would postpone it and allow me to speak to both parties, if it is the pleasure of the Council and have a recommendation at the next meeting.

Motion to postpone approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

4. BAC-68-02, PLAZA INVESTMENTS III, LLC, 600 Market Street, Special Exception Use in a B-4 District, lounge. (A/Huckaby)

Motion by Councilman Huckaby, seconded by Councilman Spigener to overturn the ZBA decision (to deny the application).

Councilman Huckaby: I stand firm in my belief that no bar be it white, black, gay, straight, purple, blue or yellow should be allowed to operate in a residential community. And for this reason, for the safety of my constituents, I can not in good sense just vote with the ZBA. I would like to ask my colleagues to support me in this matter, if they will.

Mr. Thompson: I believe the motion is to overturn the decision of the ZBA and to deny this application. If you are favor of that, vote "yes."

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, and Burrell. Nays: Councilman Shyne. 1.

Clerks Note: The following letter: 1) was filed by Councilman John David Stewart to explain his vote in BAC-68-02, Plaza Investments III, L.L.C., 600 Market Street, Special Exception Use in a B-4 District, lounge; 2) is inserted in the minutes; and, 3) will be filed with Louisiana Board of Ethics, all in accordance with R.S. 42:1120.

September 26, 2002

VIA FACSIMILE - 673-5270

Mr. Arthur G. Thompson, Clerk

Shreveport City Council

City of Shreveport

P. O. Box 31109

Shreveport, LA 71130

Re: Market Street Bar

Dear Art:

Based on my discussions with Julie Glass, the statute information she provided for me, and my discussion with you I am forwarding this letter for the records. My understanding of Julie's written comments indicates that I need to provide for the record the objective basis for my vote.

Prior to the vote I have represented these various parties for their personal, commercial and/or professional risk management needs. We presently provide Commercial General Liability insurance for the owner of the prospective bar operation. We represent Mr. Taft for personal insurance services and have provided certain services for various entities. Mr. F. Keith Todaro is a personal friend and we provide commercial services for his company. We provide risk management services for the owners of the Market Street building complex.

Since all of these parties had mutual interests I feel that I was able to reach an objective judgment based on the facts and merits of the case without any bias based on business and/or personal relationships.

Thank you for your assistance and guidance./s/Sincerely,John David Stewart

Ph: 318-673-2500

Fax: 318-673-2833

E-Mail: johndavid@isa-stewart.com

JD S/myf

xc: Hon. Keith P. Hightower

Ms. Julie M. Glass

5. BAC-69-02, ZACKIE GILES, 6014 Willard, Special Exception Use and Variance in front yard setback in a R-1D District, mobile home. (B/Stewart)

Councilman Stewart: Mr. Thompson, guidance on this. I wish to, I assume there is nothing unique about it. I would wish that this be denied. I would assume the motion would be to approve and request a no vote?

Ms. Glass: I don't believe that the ZBA denied this and so if you, you said you wanted to also deny, so that you would move to uphold?

Councilman Stewart: I move that we affirm and uphold the ZBA decision.

Motion by Councilman Stewart affirm and uphold the ZBA decision, seconded by Councilman Carmody.

Councilman Carmody: Let me make sure that I understand Mr. Stewart's motion. The appeal was made after the denial. Mr. Stewart's motion is?

Mr. Thompson: His motion is to uphold the decision of the ZBA to deny this application.

Councilman Carmody: To deny. And the appropriate vote to follow his lead would be?

Mr. Thompson: Yes.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Huckaby, Stewart, Carmody, Serio, Spigener, Shyne, and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

REPORTS FROM OFFICERS, BOARDS, AND COMMITTEES. None.

. CLERK'S REPORT:

Letters of Appeal (proposed Council action on October 8):

1. ZONING APPEAL: C-42-02, GEORGE GEKAKIS, INC., 1500 E Bert Kouns Industrial Loop from R-1D to B-2, drug store, retail sales and office or other permitted uses within zoning class. (D/Serio)

2. ZONING APPEAL: C-44-02, A & A AUTO SALES, 9488 Linwood Ave., MPC Approval in a B-2, used auto sales with an existing convenience store. (D/Serio)

3. BAC-81-02, FLOYD ROBINSON, 4708 Mansfield Rd.; Special Exception and variance in the hours of operation in a B-2 District, multi-purpose facility with on-premises consumption of alcohol operating until 2 a.m. (F/Shyne)

4. BAC-82-02, ALTON JAMES ROSS, 2911 Milam Street, Special Exception Use and variance in the hours of operating in an B-1-E District; tavern (low alcoholic content lounge) operating until 2 a.m.

THE COMMITTEE RISES AND REPORT. None.

ADJOURNMENT. There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting adjourned at approximately 5:25 p.m.

/s/Roy Burrell, Chairman

/s/Arthur G. Thompson, Clerk of Council