CC 3827

10 31 05

Council Proceedings of the City of Shreveport, Louisiana

October 25, 2005

The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana was called to order by Chairman James Green at 3:05 p.m., Tuesday, October 25, 2005, in the Government Chambers in Government Plaza (505 Travis Street).

Invocation was given by Councilwoman Robertson.

The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Hogan.

Councilman Green: Thank you, you may be seated. Again, we’d like to say welcome to our meeting. For those of you who have cell phones, we ask that you would be kind enough to turn them off at this time or put them on mute. I’ll be operating the meeting until Councilman Jackson gets here, the Mayor is out of the State.

On Roll Call, the following members were Present: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Green, Hogan and Jackson (Arrived at 3:07 p.m.) 7. Absent: None.

Motion by Councilman Carmody, seconded by Councilman Lester to approve the minutes of the Administrative Conference, Monday, October 10, 2005 and Council Meeting, Tuesday, October 11, 2005. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, and Hogan. 5. Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Jackson. 1. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

Awards, Recognition of Distinguished Guests, and Communications of the Mayor which are required by law.

Councilman Green: The Mayor is out of town, Mr. Dark, is there any communications from the Mayor?

Mr. Dark: I’m not aware of any other than we did provide you with a copy of the Convention Center Payment Report yesterday.

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, there are some Special Meeting Minute reports I believe that are on the E-Agenda and I don’t believe that those were approved.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Carmody to approve the minutes of the Special Meetings October 18,2005 and October 20,2005 . Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, and Hogan. 5. Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Jackson. 1. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

Councilman Green: At this time, we’ll move to distinguished guests. I have some distinguished guests today from the Bethune Middle School, which is one of the schools in my district. We have Mrs. Bell here who is President of the PTA. Ms. Bell, we’re going to ask that you would come up and bring the group with you and tell us who you all are and what you do at this time. And also there is a request from them to take a picture with the Council. Come right up to the mic Ms. Bell and introduce them.

Councilman Walford: Mr. Chairman, will we be including the Mayor Pro Tem in that photo?

Councilman Jackson: I’m not sure I’m in charge of the meeting yet. I’m waiting.

Councilman Green: Okay Ms. Bell.

Ms. Bell: Good evening, how y’all doing? I’m Karen Bell, President of Bethune’s PTSA, and I brought four of our students from the school, from our newspaper to come and see how the City is run and who is in charge of running our City and this is not our only meeting, that we’ll be attending. We’ll be attending the School Board meetings as well. And so, I just wanted to bring them to let them see. This is Andrenique Robinson, our Photographer, Discheka Combs, our Vice-President, Olivia Taylor, our Secretary, and Jeremy Mendoza, our Treasurer.

Councilman Green: Thank you. We’d like to say welcome. Would you all like to have a word or who would like to be the spokesperson?

Ms. Combs: Well I’m just happy to say that we’re glad to be at y’all meeting today, and we’ll have a good time.

Councilman Green: So, where would you all like for us to take the picture, you want to take the whole deal or how would you like to do it? Alright, I’ll move down here.

Councilman Walford: You can come over here with us.

Councilman Jackson: Do we have any other guests or recognition of distinguished guests, or any communications which we have not already received? I assume that we have already asked for I guess it may have been out of order to some of you, but according to our agenda, we have Convention Center and Convention Center Hotel Report, and I thought I heard him ask for that. I heard that being asked for already. Is that correct, or have we not gotten to that point yet.

Councilman Green: We hadn’t gotten there yet. We just coming there now.

Councilman Jackson: Okay, alright. Mr. Antee?

Reports:

Convention Center and Convention Center Hotel (To include detailed personnel report from SMG)

Mr. Antee: The Mayor and I took a tour through the Convention Center last week Thursday or Friday. Progress is being made. They’ve got a lot done on the inside. It will make the date in January and it looks real encouraging. If you’ve driven by the hotel site, you’ll notice that the big crane has been put up and it’s a huge crane. They’re moving along and I think by the end of next week or the following week, they’ll be pouring the 2^nd floor and then, they’ll do about a floor a week going up until they top it out. Pretty much all we have.

Councilman Carmody: Today a constituent had asked about what improvements will be done to Caddo Street prior to the opening as far as how the finished street will look. Can you kinda elaborate on that for us Mr. Antee?

Mr. Antee: Yeah, it’ll be widened. There’ll actually going to be three lanes isn’t it Mike? Three lanes, so a turning lane. There’ll be a retaining wall between the Convention Center and Caddo because it has the hill in between that’ll be landscaped along the wall with different landscaping. Then we’ll have streetscape sidewalks the length of it.

Councilman Jackson: Also, we’ll have the Convention Center Hotel. Mr. Antee?

Mr. Antee: Yeah, I included it.

Councilman Jackson: It says to include detailed personnel report from SMG.

Councilman Green: That’s Mr. Carrier.

Councilman Jackson: That’s Mr. Carrier?

Mr. Mike Carrier: I had forwarded last Friday a report to Mr. Thompson, I think it was distributed to Council. We have since the last meeting, we have brought one additional, we have hired one additional person. We will have four people joining our staff next week. Some that I had already spoken about and one additional. Sarah Kopec, who’ll be joining our staff next week.

Councilman Green: I’d also asked Mr. Mattox to be here, but he’s not here yet.

Mr. Antee: She’s gone to get him, we did not realize it.

Councilman Jackson: Okay, he is to speak with regards to this issue in the hotel?

Councilman Green: Yes sir.

Councilman Jackson: Okay, if it’s the Council’s pleasure, if you would, we’ll just go to Item B, Property Standards Report. We’ll come back to the Convention Center Hotel Report whenever Mr. Mattox joins us.

Property Standards Report

Councilman Jackson: I know we have a copy of it in our packets, is there anything additional?

Councilman Carmody: Mr. Bowie, I mentioned this to you yesterday. I was quite concerned to review the Property Standards Report and see that only one citation had been issued in the last two weeks for all of District C. If I could get you to check on where our inspectors are and what they’re focusing on, I’d appreciate it. Thank you sir. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Jackson: Mr. Bowie, do you have any comments in that regard?

Mr. Bowie: Yeah, well the inspector as I replied to Mr. Carmody, the inspector was off week before last on vacation, and last week, he was spending the week getting ready for HBO which is a meeting that we have for the substandard houses meeting today we had, (inaudible) for us. But the stats will improve these next weeks.

Councilman Walford: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Bowie, I’m curious. When the owner is the City of Shreveport, who are you serving with the citations?

Mr. Bowie: When we serve these vacant lots, we have no idea who we’re serving. Because what we do is - - - these are computer generated letters. We don’t know who the owners are. Now the City is supposed to be in charge of cutting their own lots.

Councilman Walford: I’m just looking at a report here for citations issued. And I see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 - - - seven of them that says City of Shreveport.

Mr. Bowie: Evidently we cut them and it shouldn’t have shown up on your letter. But they did. We try to curtail that off.

Councilman Walford: If you need to serve someone right now, we have the Mayor available.

Mr. Bowie: You think he’ll pay?

Councilman Walford: I don’t know, but he’s here.

Councilman Green: I’m just going to be in charge of giving raises today.

Councilman Jackson: Alright. Any other questions? If not, then Mr. Mattox has made his arrival and if it’s the pleasure of the Council, Mr. Mattox, if you would come now, we’ll revert back to the Convention Center Hotel Report and information pertaining to that. We have questions for Mr. Mattox Councilman Green?

Councilman Green: Mr. Mattox, welcome to the meeting. I’d just like you to write this down. Direct sources that have happened during the process of the Convention Center like those (inaudible) I guess that’s what you would call them. And an explanation as to why those items were direct source items.

Councilman Jackson: Councilman Green, sole source?

Councilman Green: Sole source. I’m sorry.

Mr. Mattox: And this is for the Convention Center?

Councilman Green: Yes sir.

Mr. Mattox: Okay. I can get you that list.

Councilman Green: Okay and an explanation as to each one of them as to why we did the sole source.

Mr. Mattox: Okay.

Councilman Green: Thank you. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Public Hearing: None.

Confirmations and/or Appointments, Adding Legislation to the Agenda, and Public Comments

Confirmations and/or Appointments.

Mrs. Catherine Kennedy – Division Manager of Recreation, SPAR

Mr. Twan Knight – Division Manager of Athletics, SPAR

Motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Walford to confirm Mrs. Kennedy and Mr. Knight to their SPAR appointments. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

Adding Legislation to the Agenda

Councilman Jackson: Mr. Thompson, do we have any additional. I see three on our - - - excuse me, looks like - - -

Mr. Thompson: We have seven

Councilman Jackson: We have seven on our screen, are there any additional to be added?

Mr. Thompson: No, one is a correction Mr. Chairman and the others are to be added. I’ll answer any questions that anyone might have about them.

Councilman Jackson: Four is the correction, the rest to be added?

Mr. Thompson: Five is the correction.

Councilman Jackson: Five is the correction. Alright.

1. Resolution No. 193 of 2005: Resolution supporting the application of Valencia Pointe Rental Homes to the Louisiana Housing Finance Agency and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

2. Resolution No. 194 of 2005: A Resolution supporting the application of Cypress Springs Rental Homes to the Louisiana Housing Finance Agency and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

3. Resolution No. 195 of 2005: A Resolution supporting the application of Old Oaks Rental Homes to the Louisiana Housing Finance Agency and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

4. Ordinance No. 152 of 2005: ZONING - C-52-05: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance by rezoning property located on north side of the extension of Freddie Street, 500 feet west of Caldwell, 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 "A Leasing Office and Community Center", only, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (A/Lester)

5. The title on BAC-100-05 indicates Shreveport Memorial Library as the owner/landowner. It should be corrected to show that the applicant is Robert Ferrier Jr., and the land owner is Albert Carroll.

6. Ordinance No. 191 of 2005: An Ordinance amending the 2005 Capital Improvements Budget and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

7. Ordinance No. 192 of 2005: An Ordinance amending the 2005 General Fund Budget and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Walford to:

a) Add Resolution Nos. 193, 194, and 195 of 2005 to the agenda

b) To place Ordinance No. 152 of 2005 back on the agenda

c) To correctly identify applicant/land owner regarding Zoning Board of Appeals Case # BAC-100-05

d) Add Ordinance Nos. 191 and 192 of 2005

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

Public Comments (Agenda Items to be Adopted)

Councilman Jackson: I’m not in possession of any requests. We have no requests to speak at this time.

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, I believe we have at least one request, but it is not to speak at this time on the agenda. But that will come later.

CONSENT AGENDA LEGISLATION

TO INTRODUCE RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES

RESOLUTIONS: None.

ORDINANCES: None.

TO ADOPT RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES:

RESOLUTIONS:

The Clerk read the following:

RESOLUTION NO. 188 of 2005

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MYRA LEE MCKINLEY SCRUGGS, ROBERT LEE SCRUGGS, WENDY DAWN EMBRY, & DONNA GAY EMBRY LATIOLOIS LOCATED AT 1733 WELLS ISLAND RD., TO CONNECT TO THE WATER SYSTEM OF THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, Myra Lee McKinley Scruggs, Robert Lee Scruggs, Wendy Dawn Embry, & Donna Gay Embry Latiolois have agreed to secure all permits and inspections required by the Shreveport Comprehensive Building Code. Said party having submitted a petition for annexation to the City of Shreveport, and having agreed to fully comply with the regulations of the City of Shreveport in connection with said property, all as set forth in Section 94-1, et. Seq., of the Shreveport City Code. Said request and petition are attached hereto.

BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, regular and legal session convened, that Myra Lee McKinley Scruggs, Robert Lee Scruggs, Wendy Dawn Embry, & Donna Gay Embry Latiolois, be authorized to connect the building located at 1733 Wells Island Rd., to the water system of the City of Shreveport.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any provisions or items of this resolution or the application thereof are 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 resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Carmody to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

RESOLUTION NO. 189 of 2005

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING BELLE CHERRI LAND CO., TO CONNECT TO THE WATER & SEWER SYSTEM OF THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, Belle Cherri Land Co. has agreed to secure all permits and inspections required by the Shreveport Comprehensive Building Code. Said party having submitted a petition for annexation to the City of Shreveport, and having agreed to fully comply with the regulations of the City of Shreveport in connection with said property, all as set forth in Section 94-1, et. Seq., of the Shreveport City Code. Said request and petition are attached hereto.

BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, regular and legal session convened, that Belle Cherri Land Co., be authorized to connect the building located at 7050 Shrevepark Dr., to the water & sewer system of the City of Shreveport.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any provisions or items of this resolution or the application thereof are 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 resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilman Hogan, seconded by Councilman Walford to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

ORDINANCES: None.

REGULAR AGENDA LEGISLATION

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

The Clerk read the following:

RESOLUTION NO. 177 of 2005

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MICHAEL S. WHITE & CYNTHIA P. WHITE LOCATED AT 259 MOUNT ZION RD., TO CONNECT TO THE WATER SYSTEM OF THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, Michael S. White & Cynthia P. White have agreed to secure all permits and inspections required by the Shreveport Comprehensive Building Code. Said party having submitted a petition for annexation to the City of Shreveport, and having agreed to fully comply with the regulations of the City of Shreveport in connection with said property, all as set forth in Section 94-1, et. Seq., of the Shreveport City Code. Said request and petition are attached hereto.

BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, regular and legal session convened, that Michael S. White & Cynthia P. White, be authorized to connect the building located at 259 Mount Zion Rd., to the water system of the City of Shreveport.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any provisions or items of this resolution or the application thereof are 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 resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilman Robertson, seconded by Councilman Carmody to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

RESOLUTION NO. 178 of 2005

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SOUTHSIDE INVESTMENTS, INC. LOCATED AT 2934 MOSS POINT RD., TO CONNECT TO THE WATER SYSTEM OF THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, Southside Investments, Inc. has agreed to secure all permits and inspections required by the Shreveport Comprehensive Building Code. Said party having submitted a petition for annexation to the City of Shreveport, and having agreed to fully comply with the regulations of the City of Shreveport in connection with said property, all as set forth in Section 94-1, et. Seq., of the Shreveport City Code. Said request and petition are attached hereto.

BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, regular and legal session convened, that Southside Investments, Inc., be authorized to connect the building located at 2934 Moss Point Rd., to the water system of the City of Shreveport.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any provisions or items of this resolution or the application thereof are 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 resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Hogan to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

RESOLUTION NO. 181 OF 2005

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT AND J. FRANK MCANENY MUSEUM, INC., AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BY:

WHEREAS, J. Frank McAneny Museum, Inc.("Museum"), is the owner of certain

artifacts and collectibles which are significant to the history of the City of Shreveport and the United States of America; and

WHEREAS, Museum desires to make the collection available for viewing by the citizens and

visitors of the City; and

WHEREAS, City desires to participate with Museum in making the collection available for such public purpose; and

WHEREAS, Resolution Number 8 of 2000 authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with Museum for this purpose; and

WHEREAS, the current agreement with Museum provides that the agreement will expire on December 31, 2005 subject to Museum’s option to renew the agreement for one (1) additional three (3) year term; and

WHEREAS, City and Museum desire to amend the current agreement to permit Museum to renew the agreement for an additional three (3) years for a maximum option term of six (6) years.

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 an amendment to the agreement with J. Frank McAneny Museum, Inc., substantially in accordance with the draft attached hereto and filed for public inspection with the original of this resolution in the Office of the Clerk of Council on October 11, 2005.

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 Walford, seconded by Councilman Carmody to adopt.

Councilman Carmody: Thank you Sir. On our fact Sheet regarding the display of these items. It doesn’t elaborate where actually the museum exhibits are to be displayed. Does the Administration know where these items will be?

Mr. Antee: I’m not sure. Arlena is handling that, but I’m not sure, those may be the ones in the Multicultural Center. We can get that information when Arlena gets back.

Councilman Carmody: If you could. Thank you.

Mr. Hogan: Mr. Carmody, I just happen to know that out in the State Exhibit Building, there are a lot of items that belonged to Mr. McAneny.

Councilman Carmody: Correct.

Councilman Hogan: And I don’t know if that’s an extension of that or something, but I do know that he as a lot of items on exhibit out there and they could possibly be at the State Building.

Councilman Carmody: Mr. Vice-Chairman, if I’m not mistaken, I believe that Frank McAneny in his will had basically provided the items that were being displayed at the museum to the City of Shreveport. That’s why I wanted to make sure that we knew where they were going to be displayed, in that that was his desire that they continue to be offered to the public for their viewing. I know that we have a few items out in the lobby, but that’s just a very small amount of his collection.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

RESOLUTION NO. 182 OF 2005

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR’S SIGNATURE ON A QUIT CLAIM DEED BETWEEN LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC., THE PARISH OF CADDO, AND THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO

WHEREAS, in 1974 Western Electric Company, Inc. donated immovable property described on Exhibit A, attached hereto, to Caddo Parish, Louisiana for use as a public library; and

WHEREAS, the conveyance instrument stipulated that the Parish would use the property as a joint city-parish library; and

WHEREAS, the donor specifically reserved “…the right to revoke or rescind this donation on account of the non-execution of this condition if the aforesaid property is not put to such use within three (3) years of the acceptance of this donation or if the aforesaid property, having been put to use, ceases to be used for such purpose for a period of two (2) years;” and

WHEREAS, in 1975 Caddo Parish donated an undivided one-half interest in the property to the City of Shreveport and the Shreve Memorial Library proceeded to build a public library on the site. (Exhibit B). It was used continuously as such until June 2003; and

WHEREAS, Lucent Technologies, Inc., the successor organization of Western Electric, Inc. as it existed in 1974, executed a Quit Claim Deed on April 18, 2005, relinquishing any rights it may have in the property in question pursuant to the aforementioned reversionary clause, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit C; and

WHEREAS, Caddo Parish executed the same Quit Claim Deed on April 25, 2005 (See Exhibit C); and

WHEREAS, if the City of Shreveport likewise executes the Quit Claim Deed and same is properly recorded, title to the property will be perfected in the names of Caddo Parish and the City of Shreveport.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, in due, legal and regular session convened, that Keith P. Hightower, Mayor, be and is hereby authorized and empowered to execute a Quit Claim Deed between Lucent Technologies, Inc., the Parish of Caddo and the City of Shreveport, substantially in accordance with the document filed along with the original copy of this resolution in the Office of the Clerk of Council on September 28, 2005, attached hereto as Exhibit C.

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 Hogan, seconded by Councilman Carmody to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

RESOLUTION NO. 183 OF 2005

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF THE 2006 CONSOLIDATED COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT UPDATE (ANNUAL ACTION PLAN) TO THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BY:

WHEREAS, Resolution No. 171 of 2003 authorized the submission of a 2004-2008 Consolidated Plan to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development; and,

WHEREAS, pursuant to regulations of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the City of Shreveport is required to submit an annual update to the Consolidated Plan.

WHEREAS, this update serves as the planning document for the City’s Department of Community Development and as an application for funding under the Community Planning Development formula grant programs; Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME), and Emergency Shelter Grants Program (ESG)

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, in due regular and legal session convened, that the Mayor is hereby authorized to submit the 2006 Consolidated Community Planning and Development Update (Annual Action Plan) to HUD substantially in accordance with the attached draft which is filed for public inspection with the original of this resolution in the Office of the Clerk of Council on October 11, 2005.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute and submit any and all documents necessary for the submission of the 2006 Consolidated Community Planning and Development Update (Annual Action Plan).

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

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

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Walford to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

RESOLUTION NO. 184 of 2005

A resolution making application to the State Bond Commission for consent and authority to issue, sell and deliver not exceeding $8,500,000, of Water and Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2005, of the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana, all in the manner provided for by Chapter 14-A of Title 39 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950, as amended, and other constitutional and statutory authority supplemental thereto and providing for other matters in connection therewith.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the “Council”), acting as the governing authority of the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana, that:

SECTION 1. Application be and the same is hereby formally made to the State Bond Commission for consent and authority for the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana (the “Issuer”), to issue, sell and deliver not exceeding $8,500,000 of Water and Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2005 of the Issuer (the “Bonds”), to bear interest at a rate or rates not exceeding five percent (6%) per annum, to mature no later 22 years from the date thereof, all in the manner provided for by Chapter 14-A of Title 39 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950, as amended, and other constitutional and statutory authority supplemental thereto, for the purpose of refunding all or part of the Issuer’s outstanding Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 2000 Series A (collectively, the “Refunded Bonds”) and paying the costs of issuance of the Bonds, which Bonds shall be secured by and payable from a pledge and dedication of net revenues derived from the operation of the Issuer’s combined water and sewer system (the “System”) on a parity with other outstanding parity bonds payable from net revenues derived from the System.

SECTION 2. A certified copy of this resolution shall be forwarded to said State Bond Commission by the Issuer’s bond counsel, together with a letter requesting the prompt consideration and approval of this application.

SECTION 3. This Council finds and determines that a real necessity exists for the employment of special Bond Counsel in connection with the issuance of the Bonds, and accordingly, Casten & Pearce, A.P.L.C. is hereby appointed as Bond Counsel to the Issuer, and requested to do and perform comprehensive legal and coordinate professional work as Bond Counsel with respect to the issuance and sale of the Bonds. The fee of Bond Counsel in connection with the issuance of the Bonds shall be fixed by subsequent resolution.

SECTION 4. Morgan Keegan & Company, Inc. and Stephens Inc., both of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, are hereby appointed as investment bankers/underwriters in connection with refunding the Refunded Bonds, any compensation to be subsequently approved by the Issuer and to be paid from the proceeds of the Bonds and contingent upon the issuance of the Bonds; provided that no compensation shall be due to said investment bankers/underwriters unless the Bonds are sold and delivered.

SECTION 5. Government Consultants of Louisiana, Inc. of Baton Rouge, Louisiana is hereby appointed and employed as financial adviser in connection with the Bonds, any compensation to be subsequently approved by the Issuer and to be paid from the proceeds of the Bonds and contingent upon issuance of the Bonds and the Bond Counsel is authorized and directed to prepare necessary documents appertaining thereto and to present them for further action by this Council.

SECTION 6. The Bond Counsel, the Financial Advisor and the Investment Bankers/Underwrites are hereby authorized and directed to prosecute the refunding and the Bond Counsel is authorized and directed to prepare necessary documents appertaining thereto and to present them for further action by this Council.

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilman Carmody, seconded by Councilman Robertson to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

RESOLUTION NO. 185 OF 2005

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

BY:

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 thus reduce their need for public assistance; and

WHEREAS, the City has received an award from DSS of approximately $302,161.00 per year for federal fiscal years 2006 through 2008 to continue to operate the LaJET Program; 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 Carmody, seconded by Councilman Walford to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

8. Resolution No. 190 of 2005: A resolution ordering and calling a special election to be held in the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana, to authorize the renewal of the Levy and collection of the one-fourth percent sales and use tax therein making application to the State Bond Commission in connection therewith and providing for other matters in connection therewith.

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Carmody to adopt.

Councilman Lester: As I appreciate it, we had some discussion about this on yesterday. That the special election is to renew the one-quarter cents sales tax that was for the Police and Firemen that we used to give them a raise. And I asked the question on yesterday just to let my constituents know whether or not this Council had the authority to in fact broaden the call of this special election to include all City Employees. And the information I was given from our City Attorney was that we could not. And that in order for us to get - - - we would have to get permission from the State in order to have a specific election to raise the sales tax or to allow an election for sales tax increase for the purpose of funding pay raises for all of our employees. My question is I understand that the date that we’re trying to have this election is April the 1^st. Would that process be hampered severely if we placed a delay, a two week delay on this particular item?

Ms. Glass: Mr. Chairman? I think I’ll go ahead and answer it Mr. Lester.

Councilman Jackson: Go ahead Ms. Glass. I’m sorry.

Ms. Glass: We put it on the agenda for this week, because it is a long process of having to be approved by the Bond Commission and then to the Secretary of State. And then you have a 45 to about 90 day advertising period. So we think if we wait past this date, next Bond Commission meeting will be day before it’s due to the Secretary of State’s office, and it’s doable, it’s - - - it would put us in kind of a bind to get it to them, but I think it would be doable.

Councilman Lester: Okay. Alright that answers my question. Gentlemen, I will state this. You know, we talk about and in no way is this a slight against our Police and Fire Departments, because certainly they do a very difficult job and they do that difficult job well. And I support their - - - the increase in sales tax for them to get additional money. But I just don’t and can’t in good conscious agree and I understand what all is involved. I just can’t in good conscious agree to continue to pit one group against the other. I think as we’re going through this budgetary process, we’re talking about pay raises and things of that nature, but I just - - - I still don’t understand how this body and of course, that was the previous Council, would even put out there to have a sales tax election for employees and not include all the employees. I think that’s - - - it’s just an issue of fundamental fairness. And I think it’s fundamentally unfair. And again, it has absolutely nothing to do with the Police and Fire Departments. I just think it’s fundamentally unfair to give a pay raise or to allow the public vote on the pay raise for only a portion of your employees. Because no matter how good the Fire Department is and they are excellent, they are Class I, but if the people in Water and Sewer don’t do their jobs, they don’t have any water to deal with the pumps and I just - - - I have a real issue with that. And understanding what the process is, I would ask for a substitute motion for a two week delay. If we get that, fine if we don’t. My intention on the next meeting is to come forward with a resolution requesting our State Legislative Delegation to authorize a special election for or at least to allow the citizens to be heard on the issue of raising taxes for all of the municipal employees. But I think that’s the only fair thing to do. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Jackson: Did we get - - - was that a - - -

Councilman Lester: I offered a substitute motion for a two week delay.

Councilwoman Robertson: Second.

Substitute motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Robertson to postpone.

Councilman Hogan: Thank you Mr. Chairman. Ms. Glass I noticed that you prepared the Fact Sheet for this legislation. And I was just wondering if you could give us some guidance on this. If it would be any problem postponing it for two weeks I’m assuming - - - did you say two weeks?

Councilman Lester: Right.

Councilman Hogan: Is there going to be any problem with that?

Ms. Glass: Well, what I was saying to Mr. Lester a minute ago is that the reason we’re so early with this even though the election is not until April, is we have to go to the Bond Commission first and then give notice to the Secretary of State. And the Bond Commission has a month’s delay where you have to notify them in advance of their meeting. What a two week delay will do will move us from the November - - - I think it’s November Bond Commission meeting to the December Bond Commission Meeting and their meeting if they approve it, we have to have it to the Secretary of State the next day. That’s why I said it’s putting kinda a time bind on it, I think it can be done. That was why we were trying to come with it this early.

Councilman Hogan: Excuse me. If you had explained that earlier, I was reading some other material- - -

Ms. Glass: Well, I may not have explained it clearly.

Councilman Hogan: And I’m sorry if you went over that just a few minutes ago. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Walford: I don’t see any value in postponing one, even if we do a resolution to the State Legislature, we’re talking literally months before they could act on it. We’re not asking the voters to approve a new tax for pay raise. This is a renewal because our legislative delegation put a sunset provision on the original provision that allowed us to go forward. So, I would urge a no vote to a postponement, and certainly, we can go forward with a resolution if that’s Councilman Lester’s choice to ask our delegation to move forward to approve a tax. But I would urge us to go forward and pass this today.

Councilman Lester: In response to that, and I understand that. 1) It’s not going to jeopardize what we’re trying to do in terms of getting the information to the State of Louisiana, but I think it’s important and the reason why I asked for the two week delay - - - I think it’s important for us as a body to speak with one voice. And once we send the message to Baton Rouge that we are ordering and calling a special election to renew the tax. At the same time, speak with the same voice and say “and we also want the authority to give the citizens an opportunity to vote on giving a pay raise for our employees.” I think it’s very important that we send that message. Even more important than just saying go ahead and do a blanket renewal. That’s the point that I’m trying to make. I think we should stick with one voice. Again, if the citizens decide that they don’t want to tax themselves, that’s fine. I just think it’s unconscionable that we even - - - and again, this had nothing to do with this Council. This was before we were elected. But I just think it’s unconscionable for us to continue to separate the classes of our employees to the point where you pit the Police and Fire Department against Operational Services, against Community Development, and you have different classes of employees. And I don’t think that’s fair. And for us to continue to do that, that’s not something that I’m willing to live with. And if we vote against it, that’s fine. I’m a big boy, but I just cannot see us continuing to do that. Particularly given the fact that after every hurricane or every storm, every tornado, every weekend, at the end of the meeting, we always say what an outstanding and fine job our employees did with cleaning up this trash and what a yeoman’s job they did with the Revel, what a yeoman’s job - - - it’s time for us to put our money where our mouth is. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Carmody: I do want to make sure that at lease I remind all the present Council Members because y’all were not on the previous Council, but it was not actually the previous Council that had put together this proposal. It was actually the Fire Union that brought it to the legislature. The legislature then passed it, and then it was brought back to the Council. It was not something I think that was brought to the Administration if I’m not mistaken. Is that correct?

Mr. Antee: The two Unions came to the Mayor and discussed it with him, if you recall it was during an election year and he stated that he would support them in that effort.

Councilman Carmody: Oh okay, so then it was done through the Administration, but the Council - - -

Mr. Antee: It was initiated by the unions, and then the Mayor even though it was an election year, felt like it was a good thing to do and did support it.

Councilman Carmody: Thank you for the clarification. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Lester: But I would say Mr. Chairman with all due respect, this Council still had the ability, and when I say this Council, because I wasn’t there, Councilman Carmody was. This Council still had the ability to express itself through Resolution/Ordinance to our Legislation Delegation that in all fairness, if we’re going to pass a tax for our Police and Firemen, we need to do something for the rest of our employees. And this Body is not inept body, and contrary to popular belief, and it’s not an impotent body either. We can speak up for our employees. And the fact I think that makes it even worse, that the Police and Firemen’s Union came forth and said this is something that they wanted, and they were able to get it done. And you know the City Workers who at that time, did not have a voice, were not given that same effect. I think it speaks to two things. 1) It speaks to the idea and the necessity for our city workers to have a union. I think it speaks to that issue, and I think you made that case very eloquently Mr. Carmody. The second thing I think it speaks to is the fact that they are being treated as second class. And that’s not right. And again, it has absolutely nothing to do with the policemen and firemen. Because we understand and appreciate the important role that they feel in our city for public safety. Again, it is unconscionable that this Body at some time could have said “we want to allow the citizens to voice their opinions on whether or not we want to give some of our employees a pay raise and not all of our employees a pay raise.” There is no excuse for that. None whatsoever. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Ms. Robertson: Councilman Lester, If I’m understanding correctly from you, you want to see if the legislature could make it more of a wide span for the renewal to go across the board, or you want an additional tax to go in for the renewal?

Councilman Lester: I would like for it to be expanded. But again, if that’s not possible, I would like the legislature to allow the citizens of Shreveport to decide whether or not they want to tax themselves to give all municipal employees a pay raise. If the public decides that they don’t want to do that, fine. I just believe that our City Workers deserve their day to make their case before the people in terms of getting a pay raise. And you know, they were denied that opportunity sometime ago when this issue first came up because it would have been very easy for us as a Body to say to the Legislature, “You know what? If we’re going to raise taxes, cause no one likes to raise taxes, but if you’re going to raise taxes, we need to raise taxes to be fair to all of our employees, not just Police and Fire.” At some point, it was decided and I don’t know where, because I wasn’t party to any of the conversations. Not in Baton Rouge, not in Shreveport. But at some point the decision was made that we had set the Police and Fire Departments separate and apart from the rest of our City Workers. And having had the opportunity sitting on this Council, to see what our City Workers deal with on a day in and day out basis, I just cannot see myself sitting here silent and us just saying you know, lets just renew this and we’ll get to you when we get to you. And so what I’m asking that this Body do is postpone this at this particular time. And a resolution in two weeks that request the legislature to do one of two things. 1) Expand the election to allow for all employees, or in the alternative, allow for an election to be held at some point for the City Employees to have a pay raise, separate and apart from Police and Fire. And if that means an additional tax, then let the citizens decide. But I think at a minimal, we owe it to our City Employees to give them a chance to make their case to the people. Because they were not given a chance. Probably because they didn’t have a union. I mean obviously, the Police and Firemen’s Union is pretty strong and they have a strong lobby, but our City Workers, they don’t have that mechanism. Consequently, they pretty much got left out, and I don’t think it’s fair.

Councilwoman Robertson: Ms. Glass, do you think in the two weeks, that the information can go down to them to find out if they’re able to expand it or not to be handled or not what - - -?

Ms. Glass: I mean, I think the Council Staff can certainly send a letter to legislators, but I don’t think there’s any official action that I know of that the legislature can take.

Councilwoman Robertson: Okay.

Councilman Jackson: It would seem to me that the legislature probably could not act with regard to expanding this until the regular session. I guess in March or what have you, but we’re talking about holding this election in April. Is that correct? And we were actually just trying to hold this election, and there was really not a reason why it couldn’t be held another time. Actually, it could be held in ’06, but we have the regular elections in ’06, but it would be a lot - - - the question was whether or not money would be there, and those kinds of things. That was the issue. It wasn’t an issue about whether it could legitimately happen, it was an issue about budget and whether or not we would put ourselves in a bind if I’m not mistaken. You remember that being correct? Is that correct? I’m asking Mr. Dark. Is that correct?

Mr. Dark: That is correct. Normally, you don’t ask for elections that late in the year if you can help it.

Councilman Jackson: So, I think that’s the situation and that’s what puts us in that situation. If I appreciate what Councilman Lester is saying, that in two weeks, this will be up again to vote on and I might add with or without the resolution, he is making mention of. So, I don’t know if there’s a real harm in the two week delay. I don’t know what the benefit will be, but I do know there won’t be any harm either.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 4. Nays: Councilmen Carmody and Walford. 2. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

Councilman Jackson: Mr. Clerk, that was 191?

Mr. Thompson: That was 190, 191 is a companion legislation.

Councilman Lester: Mr. Chairman, I would like to postpone that one also.

9. Resolution No. 191 of 2005: A resolution specifying the purposes for which a renewal of the one-quarter cent sales tax would be spent if approved by the voters of the City of Shreveport and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Robertson to postpone. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 4. Nays: Councilmen Carmody and Walford. 2. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

Councilman Jackson: Mr. Clerk, we had some add-ons?

Mr. Thompson: That’s correct.

The Clerk read the following:

RESOLUTION NO. 193 OF 2005

RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE APPLICATION OF VALENCIA POINTE RENTAL HOMES TO THE LOUISIANA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BY: COUNCILMAN WALFORD

WHEREAS, the Valencia Pointe Rental Homes are 20 unit single family homes located on River Parkway Boulevard; and

WHEREAS, said development lies in the incorporated area of the City of Shreveport, and therefore within the jurisdiction of the Shreveport City Council; and

WHEREAS, this City has been and remains supportive of safe sanitary, affordable housing for all of its citizens; and

WHEREAS, although this City does not encourage or direct its citizens to select one residence over another, it does support as a general proposition the building of new housing that is safe, sanitary and affordable; and

WHEREAS, Valencia Pointe Rental Homes will partially fund this project upon successful application with Internal Revenue Service Code Section 42 tax credits as awarded by the Louisiana Housing Finance Agency; and

WHEREAS, said tax credits are awarded on a state-wide, competitive basis to those applicants that score the highest points; and

WHEREAS, a resolution of support from this governmental body will be a significant factor, but not the only factor, in determining whether or not said application is successful.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council for the City of Shreveport in due legal and regular session convened, that it supports the application of Valencia Pointe Rental Homes to the Louisiana Housing Finance Agency for tax credits pursuant to Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution of support is provided to satisfy requirements of the Louisiana Housing Finance Agency and shall not be construed nor is it intended to grant any approval, variance, or waiver of any requirement, regulation or process required by federal, state or local law for the construction, development or occupancy of the proposed project.

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.

Councilman Walford: So moved.

Councilman Jackson: Let me do this. Prior to this, we have gotten a request to speak from a citizen who wasn’t here during the - - - and this gentleman wanted to speak about these three add-ons. And so, we would need to suspend the rules to allow Public Comments at this time for this one.

Motion by Councilman Hogan, seconded by Councilman Lester to suspend the rules to receive public comments on three added resolutions. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: Councilman Walford. 1. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

Mr. Link Coleman: (207 Milam Street ) In the commercial real estate development business and my understanding is that the resolution being considered is for a housing development, affordable housing development to be considered on the southwest corner of Stoner and Clyde Fant Parkway. And I’m here to speak in opposition, and I think there are some strong reasons for that. I’m the owner of a development and a portion of the land south of there on the right island and also on The Willows at Wright Island which is there. We were involved in the planning process along the parkway over the last 20 years, and there was considerable work that went on during that planning process, and I think laid the ground work for what will continue and can continue to be excellent development along the parkway. Let me say just as an editorial comment that certainly the Katrina situation and the Rita hurricanes both amplify the need for better planning in Louisiana and I think that we desperately need that. I think the planning of a large section of affordable housing in one area is not conducive to smart planning, to good planning for our City. Clearly every city and our city have needs for affordable housing. They need to be represented, but those need to be assimilated and incorporated into all neighborhoods, all communities, and not a large area of the discussed or at one time as is the plan and discussion here. That doesn’t represents - - - I would encourage a planning solution to these approaches, and not political solutions to them, and I think that if you have again, a large area that is in one type of housing development, just I don’t think that is good public policy. The - - - I think the very people that it attempts to help in so many cases are those who with low incomes or minority neighborhoods. I think it practically hurts in the long run. Because it winds up feeding pockets of poverty as oppose to assimilating and incorporating those into multiple neighborhoods. And I think that’s what needs to be done. That’s what’s being done. You can look for planning solutions that are effectively done. You can look at cities that are planned well. Charlotte, NC, Raleigh-Durham, N.C. , Austin, TX, you can find excellent examples of how this is done. And so, I encourage and invite you to look at those, what I would say are smart growth planning solutions as opposed to political solutions. I would just say in rounding this out that again, that I’m very much for addressing our critical housing needs as a community. I think that needs to be done, I think that needs to be done for all areas. If you look at cities that have urban growth, they mix different types of housing together in areas and they don’t create large pockets of it. There’s been discussion of potentially having as many as 100 to 120 acres plus of affordable housing on this. I know that there’s been some discussion, resolution presented before City Council at one point, and/or the Metropolitan Planning Commission to have additional 40 acres. And I know there’s an additional 30 acres that they’re attempting to sell into affordable housing on this. And I say that this is a mistake for our community. You probably have a billion dollar investment in the Clyde Fant Parkway, including the parkway, the land, the developments, the Red River navigation, and to not make available to that investment in our community, a quality planning solution, I think is just catastrophic for our city. I think that people that come to our area, they want to see what kind of stewards we are about our city if they’re thinking about investing in our city. And one of the first areas they’re going to go is to see what we’re doing on the Clyde Fant Parkway. And so I think those are things that need to be taken into consideration, so I wind up, I’ll say that I respectfully request that you do not support this. I understand that it’s a financial institution that is dealing with a defaulted loan. I don’t think that the place of the Council is to basically bail out a financial institution on a defaulted loan. And so, I ask you respectfully to decline support of this resolution. Be glad to answer any questions that you might have.

Councilman Walford: I do have a question. I’m a little bit confused now. The property is properly zoned residential. So, you’re asking this Council to be against development that meets the zoning? Am I understanding that right?

Mr. Coleman: No sir, you are not. I’m asking that anytime you have a large area that was zoned R-1, Residential Single Family. Yes it is possible under the Code for somebody to come in and put 25, 50, 100, 150 acres, however large it is, they could put that all into affordable housing. That is allowed under the program. And I am suggesting to this Council that it has a higher responsibility to look at these things and some of the planning solutions and not just allow whatever is being done or whether it can be done under the Code, but simply what is good for the City. That’s where I think that our city planning needs to come into affect. I think that this matter should be referred to city planning. I think that there are planners that can give this kind of input back to the city. I think we desperately need that. And I think that, that’s what should be done in this case. I think we’re - - - it will not be helpful to vote for the next pocket of poverty. I mean, you know your children and your grandchildren will be here to see it. And I think it’s a mistake. I think it’s a huge mistake. If somebody doesn’t - - - it’s time that we stand up as citizens and talk about these things. If we don’t do it now, you know it’ll never be done.

Councilman Lester: Mr. Coleman, you made the point that successful cities have done mixed developments, urban-wise. As I appreciate it, this would be a mixed development in that area. How is it not a mixed development in this area?

Mr. Coleman: Cities that have effectively addressed affordable housing needs have found ways to incorporate a variety of housing and income types in one neighborhood.

Councilman Lester: Okay.

Mr. Coleman: And have not allowed it to be all luxury houses. They’ve not allowed it to be all medium income housing. They’ve not allowed it to be low income housing. They’ve found ways to incorporate and assimilate these into communities. And those are the ones that this is all about. Is sustainability of communities. There are precious resources that were invested in terms of land resources, and our money. And we only have one time to do it right. If we don’t mix these uses together in the proper fashion, then what we’re doing is we’re setting up an urban problem of the future. And if we’re putting all affordable housing, Mr. Lester, into one community, I think that’s a mistake.

Councilman Lester: Well, as I appreciate it, correct me if I’m wrong, there - - - adjacent to this development is not or it is normal conventional (inaudible) affordable housing. Isn’t that correct?

Mr. Coleman: Adjacent to this development is the Magnet High School.

Councilman Lester: Right.

Mr. Coleman: Adjacent to this development is part of the residential that’s in the Stoner Hill area, and then on the south side of this is undeveloped land. There is another 70 acres of undeveloped land south of this site that’s being considered.

Councilman Lester: Right. Then comes the Wright Island area?

Mr. Coleman: No, that 70 acres includes part of Wright Island. And then south of that are the Willows at Wright Island which is the multi-family development that’s there.

Councilman Lester: And could someone consider Wright Island, Willows, and this development all part of one community, or do you see them as separate?

Mr. Coleman: No sir, I think they’re all part of one community to have roughly 120 acres presently, 120 maybe to 130 acres of undeveloped land that’s right there in that area. And this development is on the north end of that.

Councilman Lester: Something that you said that just raised a question and you made mention that we made an investment in Clyde Fant and that whole area, I think you said we made a billion dollar investment?

Mr. Coleman: Yes sir.

Councilman Lester: Is that to say that we made that billion dollar investment in people who live in affordable housing can’t be part of that billion dollar investment?

Mr. Coleman: No sir. The affordable housing needs to be incorporated into every community. You know we’re for the affordable housing, we’re not opposed to the affordable housing. What we’re opposed to is congregating it, putting it together in large masses. Because that’s the - - - and you’re welcomed to - - - I’d refer you to, I don’t represent myself as an urban land planning expert, but we’ll - - -

Councilman Lester: You’re laying a foundation, I’m just saying I’m well-studied.

Mr. Coleman: Well, the only thing that I wanted to tell you is that there is a group called the Urban Land Institute.

Councilman Lester: I’m familiar with it.

Mr. Coleman: It is very, very knowledgeable in these areas, and they can tell you chapter and verse why you don’t want to have large areas of that all in one area of the community. It’s very mixed throughout the community. And why that makes better sense for everybody in the community.

Councilman Lester: I guess what I’m trying to understand is we have The Willows, Wright Island, and then we have a piece of property that’s been undeveloped for quite some time. And now a developer wants to come in and develop this undeveloped land for affordable housing purposes, and for once as I appreciate it, they’re going to put something nice that is available for affordable housing folks in an area where otherwise they ordinarily wouldn’t be able to go. And I guess where I’m trying to understand is Under Land Institute, or anybody else’s, if we’re saying that mixed developments are good for community?

Mr. Coleman: Yes sir.

Councilman Lester: By definition, that’s a mixed development for that community. I mean, I asked was that a community, and you said it was. And I would agree that I think it is. I guess what I don’t understand and what I’m hearing and I hope, and I’m going to give you an opportunity to please clear it up. Because it almost sounds like you’re saying that this area is too nice to have affordable housing. Put those folks over somewhere else.

Mr. Coleman: No sir, we’re not saying that at all.

Councilman Lester: Okay.

Mr. Coleman: I’ve tried to say just the opposite.

Councilman Lester: Okay.

Mr. Coleman: You know this is an area I mean, affordable housing can be a component of any development including this one. And - - - but, it should not be the entire component.

Councilman Lester: Okay.

Mr. Coleman: And that’s what we’re saying here. And I think that we need to pull together on all sides of the isle here, and address these issues. They’re tough issues to talk about.

Councilman Lester: I don’t mind talking about it.

Mr. Coleman: Well, there are some that do. And I think that they do need to be incorporated. And what you see in again, urban situations, what people come in for a Master Plan and they say they want to build a certain type of housing, they will not let them build all one kind of housing. All low income housing, or all luxury housing. They require that they build a mixture of housing so that it’s a more sustainable development. So that you have, you know those areas, you have all walks of life assimilated into each neighborhood.

Councilman Lester: I guess what I don’t understand Mr. Coleman is you’re saying that you don’t want to build all of one type of housing, and you don’t want to have all of one type of income in one neighborhood, but at the same time, the reality is, if this development is to go through, you will have affordable housing, and then you will have the upscale housing and they’re all in the same neighborhood. And so I don’t understand how you - - - on one hand you say, we’ve got to mix the incomes, we’ve got to mix the areas, so that we don’t have an over concentration of one thing in one area, when at this point, if this development goes through, you will exactly have that. You will have the high, the medium and the low in the same area. And if that’s a good thing, then it would seem to me that it would be a good thing here. Unless you’re saying ‘we just don’t want this here.’

Mr. Coleman: Let me ask you this. 30-40-50 acres potentially up to 120-130 of concentrated development in one area is a mistake. And you don’t have to - - - the easy thing is you don’t have to take my word for it, you know. All I would ask you to do is to table this and ask people - - -, you know solicit some input from groups from the Urban Land Institute. Ask them what levels of - - - and what breakdown of these different types of housing should be in neighborhoods, and what the size component should be of these. So that those factors can be addressed here. That represents smart growth planning solutions and for people that are much brighter, have much more experience than I do in urban planning. But that’s where I would ask this group to do and how could the group be harmed by hearing the input of people that are very, very knowledgeable in the process.

Councilman Green: And I guess, I’m just completely confused. You’re saying that, and of course I look at affordable housing as however far your money can go. That’s what I look at affordable. So are you saying for instance from Spring Lake all the way down past Ellerbe Road or wherever, you’re saying in those gated communities, that they shouldn’t just build $250,000-500,000 houses. There ought to be some $50,000 houses in there?

Mr. Coleman: What I’m saying is as part of the City’s Master Plan, it has to address these issues. And part of the City’s Master Plan has to decide where they’re going to have different types of uses. Residential, Commercial, Industrial. When they talk about residential, they’ve got to decide where they’re going to have different types of R-1, R-2, R-3 and then they’ve got to decide as a part of that, as part of the R-1 District, whether they’re going to have different elements of affordable housing, public housing issues, where those things are going to need to be addressed. Cities that are well planned address those things in terms of Master Plans.

Councilman Green: Are you saying that there is a difference between residential and public?

Mr. Coleman: Well, in some cases it’s the way it’s financed. Yes sir, there is - - -, sometimes the public housing is either financed through HUD or through city ventures or in this case State - - -

Councilman Green: Are you saying that the houses that’s financed through HUD should be where the houses that you classed as residential?

Mr. Coleman: No sir. I’m not saying that at all. I’m saying that - - -

Councilman Green: You answered my question.

Mr. Coleman: I’m not saying that at all.

Councilman Green: Thank you. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Jackson: Let me ask a couple of questions. But first let me clarify something, and then I’ll ask a question too. What we’re being asked to do on this agenda today is to approve a resolution which simply a document from this Council which I know you’re aware of, just for the general public, to approve a resolution that will go down to the Louisiana Housing Financing Agency saying that this City Council supports the application that’s being put on file with the Louisiana Housing Finance Agency to do these kinds of developments. This is not approval for development. This is not an approval for a subdivision, this is not what this is about. This is simply saying that this Council either resolves to support or not to support this application. So, I assume your request is that you are in opposition to the submission of this resolution as a supporting document to this application? Is that correct?

Mr. Coleman: That’s correct. But let me say quickly on the back side of that. That I’m supportive of affordable housing. What I would ask our City Council and our City to do is to look at that and bring in the necessary experts to study that issue for the City. Decide how to best address that issue in the most sustainable long term fashion. And then to support whatever resolutions are necessary to implement that plan.

Councilman Jackson: And I’ll suggest to you, and I’m not going to go back through all of the basic jargon that we talked a little bit earlier, about urban planning. What constitutes sustainable growth, what is smart growth and all those things. I think These Council Members have been privileged and exposed to those kinds of developments processes, if you will. But let me say I agree. And I want to be a matter of fact about this. There are different properties all around the width and breadth of this city, that taken on a greater appeal based on their geography. And the truth of the matter is it would make more sense for me - - - I would say if I were an opponent of this, is because I wanted to protect what I perceive to be this geography that I think would not be a good place for a certain type of housing. This (inaudible) clearly say rental homes on all three of these kinds of scenarios. All of us who are here know the effects of what happens with rental homes. And people I hold responsible for this, not only folks who live in those homes, but the folks who in my opinion, are the slumlords, who get into it for tax credit purposes, who make their money on the front end and then who abdicate the responsibility if you will, and then allow this to continue to deteriorate over the years. And it does in fact litter in my opinion, cities and in urban areas, both in the inner city and wherever you build those kinds of things. So, I think there is an incumbent responsibility on the city to make sure that we have responsible people as well who are doing these developments. Because some of it is about those folks who don’t take care, but a lot of it is about those folks who know and who are not even trying to get people to take care of it. They’re trying to get whatever federal money is out there, whatever tax dollars are out there, and they are ripping off the federal and state systems for every penny that they can get and then they go on, and (inaudible) where it’s not a mix, it’s not an integrated socio-economically integrated neighborhood. They live in neighborhoods that they can afford to live in because they do these kinds of things to our city. That’s a larger concern for me. My concern is about not only location, but the systematic raping if you will, of this city’s natural resources, our land and all of these things that are geographically wonderful areas. The areas that we call slums now were not always slums. It’s irresponsible citizens and not the irresponsible poor citizens, but irresponsible citizens who could afford to erect these rental structures, and then create these systems and I got a fundamental philosophical problem with that. And that doesn’t matter when you do it. So, for me it’s not about geography. Doesn’t matter if it’s on the Riverfront or down behind whatever. I mean, I think people like yourself ought to be here talking about the same thing we’re talking about doing in North Shreveport, we’re talking about doing it in the inner city, we’re talking about doing it in Allendale, and there needs to be more people like you who come and say that 30 acres, 40 acres of land, this density is too great. Not just because it’s close to my development. Not just because it’s close to our natural environment, not just because it’s close to Clyde Fant. Because it’s bad for the City. And if it’s bad for the City on Clyde Fant, it’s bad for the City on Milam Street, it’s bad for the City on MLK, it’s bad for the City in Spring Lake, it’s bad for the City anywhere we would put it. And what I’m suggesting is that - - - I think where the suspicion comes in, and you used these terms, you said ‘lets do it because it’s right for the city and not to be political.’ Well, in order to do what’s right for the City, there needs to be some consistency. Now every time these applications go forward, we’ve not seen a single individual we’ve sent - - - I gather - - - I would just guess, if I’m guesstimating that we’ve done at least 20 of these in the last three years. And never has anybody said anything which brings them to suspicion to question about the geography and not about urban planning, not about whether it’s sustainable growth or smart growth. But it brings into suspicion the issue of geography only. And I’m saying to you that as a citizen of this city, that we need you to stay engaged and people like you to stay engaged. But when you show up on certain kind and not on others, I can’t speak for anybody else’s motive, but perhaps that’s what makes people suspicious about this particular geography that has - - - that is to some degree contiguous to some property that is going to be affected. That you happen to be in ownership or in possession or have some interest in. Am I clear?

Mr. Coleman: May I respond to a couple of your comments?

Councilman Jackson: Sure.

Mr. Coleman: Let me say I agree with you totally. These things are done for fees. There are major fees that are involved in them. A lot of time, the people that do these things and come, don’t even live in our communities. And if they present something or build something that’s a future problem they really don’t have a problem with it. I mean, you know it’s not their problem for the future. It’s ours. I agree with you totally that we all need to be standing up here addressing this. Not just with the exception, but with a plan for our community. Put something forward that’s (inaudible), so yes, I am here in opposition to something that I don’t think is good. What am I doing to try to present a solution? This is on another subject, but we’re working on a Planning Use and a Strategic Plan for our whole metropolitan area. And that’s something for both sides of the river that we’re working on, that will address things including the housing issues. I think that there does need to be a plan. There needs to be a strategy for the metropolitan area as to how they they’re going to handle that. That’s what we’re trying to do for the Northwest Louisiana Board of Realtors. This is underway. We hope to have this study completed in the first quarter of 2006, and we will definitely be working closely with the City of Shreveport on that. So, we’re trying to be - - - Mr. Jackson, we’re trying to be part of the solution and not just here to talk about why we shouldn’t do something, but how we should do it. And I think that those things in communities and neighborhoods, where they’ve been effective, they have higher income housing, they have middle income housing, they have lower income housing, they have multi-family, they have townhouses, they have single family, they have a mixture. You know people then are able to work in those communities, they’re able in some cases to walk to their jobs. They’re able to have access to public transportation, people just because they have lower income doesn’t mean that they want to have crime problem. And I know that I’m preaching to the choir here, but by mixing these neighborhoods, you have a more sustainable development and thus you cut down on some of those problems. So I’m appealing to you on that.

Councilman Jackson: And I don’t disagree with you philosophically, I think that when it comes to urban planning, it’s right on time. The issue becomes practicality. What actually happens in these urban centers, in these urban cities and municipalities, what actually happens. And unfortunately, the practicality gives way to the politicism of this issue. And whether we like it or not, that’s what rules, the practicality of urban planning very often give way to the policiticism that comes in, in these processes. And the politicism is driven by the whole idea of - - - I think Charles Kirkland is out there, but he can talk about this whole adage, NIMBY, which is fine as long as it’s “not in my back yard,” and I think we’ve got to get beyond that because that’s when the politics rally comes to bat, is when you do these kinds of projects and people say it’s fine, just as long as it’s over there and not over here. We’ve got to come some agreement on the practicality on how we integrate this housing and all socio-economic levels and moving beyond practicality, but it’s difficult to try to factor the politicism out.

Mr. Coleman: It’s impossible to do as long as it’s kept in the political arena. It’s possible to do absolutely, if it’s kept in a public policy and planning arena and that’s what we’re trying to promote for our city is some strategic plans to come back in the first quarter of 2006 and address some of these things. And we’ll have a steering committee that’s working on this process. It’s going to be make up of all socio-economic groups, all neighborhoods, and they’re going to be - - - that’s going to be one of the many issues that we want to tackle.

Councilman Jackson: Well, it sounds like the best is yet to come.

Councilman Green: I just wanted to ask you. Sometimes we talk about precepts and examples. Do you have a model in our community already established like what you’re talking about? Like is there a model whereas there is a gated community that you could take me to with some rental property in there?

Mr. Coleman: There is not a model in our community of what I’m talking about. What I would be glad to do is to get some Urban Land Institute things, show you the communities, the neighborhoods, the models and the cities and the contacts where you could contact and directly see how those models work. I’d be glad to volunteer our time to find those things for you.

Councilman Green: So you - - -, and I guess I’m trying to understand. Are you saying that from this point on, we ought to have a model whereas all of the gated communities that are going up, that there ought to be some low income houses in there. Is that what you’re saying?

Mr. Coleman: I’m not saying that.

Councilman Green: Okay, that’s fine. You’ve answered my question.

Mr. Coleman: What I am saying is there (inaudible) - - - but I think all neighborhoods in and a neighborhood is going to be defined by your public planner. But neighborhoods need to have a mixture of housing types in there. Whether they’re inside gated communities, or outside, those are issues to be determined, in many cases, based on a private sector or a public policy.

Councilman Green: So you’re saying that neighborhoods are made up by planners and not by people?

Mr. Coleman: They’re guided by planners, they’re made up of people.

Councilman Jackson: Thank you Mr. Coleman, if there are no other questions. Thank you and we will revert back to our - - -

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, we did not record a second.

Councilman Walford: I made the motion, but then we suspended the rules before I got a second.

Councilman Jackson: Yeah, we did receive a second. I interrupted him at that time and asked to suspend the rules. So - - - we didn’t recognize even the motion at that point.

Councilman Walford: Okay, so my motion still stands.

RESOLUTION NO. 194 OF 2005

RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE APPLICATION OF CYPRESS SPRINGS RENTAL HOMES TO THE LOUISIANA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BY: COUNCILMAN WALFORD

WHEREAS, the Cypress Springs Rental Homes are 20 unit single family homes located on River Parkway Boulevard; and

WHEREAS, said development lies in the incorporated area of the City of Shreveport, and therefore within the jurisdiction of the Shreveport City Council; and

WHEREAS, this City has been and remains supportive of safe sanitary, affordable housing for all of its citizens; and

WHEREAS, although this City does not encourage or direct its citizens to select one residence over another, it does support as a general proposition the building of new housing that is safe, sanitary and affordable; and

WHEREAS, Cypress Spring Rental Homes will partially fund this project upon successful application with Internal Revenue Service Code Section 42 tax credits as awarded by the Louisiana Housing Finance Agency; and

WHEREAS, said tax credits are awarded on a state-wide, competitive basis to those applicants that score the highest points; and

WHEREAS, a resolution of support from this governmental body will be a significant factor, but not the only factor, in determining whether or not said application is successful.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council for the City of Shreveport in due legal and regular session convened, that it supports the application of Cypress Springs Rental Homes to the Louisiana Housing Finance Agency for tax credits pursuant to Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution of support is provided to satisfy requirements of the Louisiana Housing Finance Agency and shall not be construed nor is it intended to grant any approval, variance, or waiver of any requirement, regulation or process required by federal, state or local law for the construction, development or occupancy of the proposed project.

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.

RESOLUTION NO. 195 OF 2005

RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE APPLICATION OF OLD OAKS RENTAL HOMES TO THE LOUISIANA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BY: COUNCILMAN WALFORD

WHEREAS, the Old Oaks Rental Homes are 20 unit single family homes located on River Parkway Boulevard; and

WHEREAS, said development lies in the incorporated area of the City of Shreveport, and therefore within the jurisdiction of the Shreveport City Council; and

WHEREAS, this City has been and remains supportive of safe sanitary, affordable housing for all of its citizens; and

WHEREAS, although this City does not encourage or direct its citizens to select one residence over another, it does support as a general proposition the building of new housing that is safe, sanitary and affordable; and

WHEREAS, Old Oaks Rental Homes will partially fund this project upon successful application with Internal Revenue Service Code Section 42 tax credits as awarded by the Louisiana Housing Finance Agency; and

WHEREAS, said tax credits are awarded on a state-wide, competitive basis to those applicants that score the highest points; and

WHEREAS, a resolution of support from this governmental body will be a significant factor, but not the only factor, in determining whether or not said application is successful.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council for the City of Shreveport in due legal and regular session convened, that it supports the application of Old Oaks Rental Homes to the Louisiana Housing Finance Agency for tax credits pursuant to Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution of support is provided to satisfy requirements of the Louisiana Housing Finance Agency and shall not be construed nor is it intended to grant any approval, variance, or waiver of any requirement, regulation or process required by federal, state or local law for the construction, development or occupancy of the proposed project.

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 Walford, seconded by Councilman Jackson to adopt Resolution Numbers 193, 194, and 195. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

Mr. Antee: Mr. Chair, if I may, there is a man in a black robe - - -

Councilman Jackson: Yeah, I’m aware of that. That was “C” right?

Mr. Thompson: A, 9A. We’re now at Introduction of Resolutions.

Councilman Jackson: Mr. Clerk if you would just one second, I’d like to - - - Gentlemen and Lady, I’d like to ask if we would entertain a motion to suspend the rules at this time. On yesterday, I - - -

Motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Walford to suspend the rules to administer the oath of office and install the City of Shreveport 2005-2006 Youth Council Members. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

Councilman Jackson: I think the current Chairman of the Youth Council is present. If you would Mr. Chairman, the current Chairman, if you would come now and swear in (inaudible) in swearing in our new members? If you would, all of our new members, if you would come right up here, all of our new members. Oh, I’m sorry, we’re going down here? Okay.

Councilman Walford: We all can see who runs things now. It’s Sharon.

Councilman Jackson: We have old members here too. The old members, if you would, stand behind - - - there you go. Judge Walker.

Judge Walker: Mr. Mayor.

Councilman Green: Yes sir.

Judge Walker: Members, would you please raise your right hand please? And as I said earlier, I want you to repeat these words after me. State you name I, do solemnly swear that I will support the constitution and the laws of the United States, and the constitution and laws of the State of Louisiana, and I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as Youth City Council Members, for the City of Shreveport according to the best of my abilities and understanding, so help me God. Congratulations.

Councilman Jackson: Thank you. Let me say thank you to Judge Walker who has come from District Court and been so kind to take his time out to come from Caddo Parish District Court. And we thank him for his service and certainly Judge, we know you’ve got stuff to do, so thank you so much for being here.

Judge Walker: I appreciate the opportunity. Thank you Chairman, Ken, and Mr. Mayor.

Councilman Green: Just know I’m the unpaid Mayor.

Councilman Jackson: If you would, just before you leave, I’d just like to ask if you would, the new members, if you would introduce yourself. You’ll be free to leave. Just say who you are and what school you represent, and you’ll be free to leave at that time.

Ms. Ned: I’m Jan Ned, I’m representing Green Oaks High School.

Ms. Murphy: I’m Carolyn Murphy, and I’m representing Captain Shreve High School.

Ms. Ambler: I’m Hylisha Ambler, and I represent Woodlawn High School.

Mr. Washington: My name is Frederick Washington, and I represent Booker T. Washington High School.

Ms. Jackson: My name is Tawonna Jackson, and I represent Huntington High School.

Mr. Harville: My name is Mat Harville and I’m representing Southwood High School.

Ms. Stokes: My name is Kadi Stokes and I’m representing Evangel Christian Academy.

Ms. Prothro: My name is Torie Prothro and I’m representing Byrd High School.

Ms. Standke: My name is Georgia Standke and I’m representing Caddo Magnet High School.

Mr. Harrington: My name is Josh Harrington and I’m representing Northwood High School

Councilman Jackson: Thank you all so much for the existing members and the new members who now all work together as one large group. We look forward to a lot of good work. Thank you so much. Mr. Clerk, item B.

INTRODUCTION OF RESOLUTIONS: (Not be adopted prior to Nov 8, 2005)

1. Resolution No. 192 of 2005: A resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute on behalf of the City of Shreveport a permanent servitude of passage with Texas Gas Transmission, LLC. (D/Robertson)

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilwoman Robertson, seconded by Councilman Carmody to introduce Resolution No. 192 to lay over until November 8, 2005 meeting. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES: (Not to be adopted prior to Nov 8, 2005)

1. Ordinance No. 181 of 2005: An ordinance amending the 2005 Budget for the Environmental Grants Special Revenue Fund.

2. Ordinance No. 182 of 2005: An ordinance closing and abandoning the 20 foot-wide alleyway running between Albert L. Bicknell Drive and Portland Avenue and bounded by Edgar Street and Kings Highway in the NW 4 of section 11 (T17N-R14W), Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (G/Jackson)

3. Ordinance No. 183 of 2005: An ordinance amending the 2005 Budget for the Water and Sewerage Enterprise Fund.

4. Ordinance No. 184 of 2005: ZONING APPEAL – C-70-05: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance by rezoning property located on the northeast corner of Fairfield Avenue and Robinson, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from SPI-1, Highland Urban Conservation District, to SPI-1-E, Highland Urban Conservation/Extended Use District, limited to “A total of 4 Pet Fowl” only, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (B/Walford)

5. Ordinance No. 185 of 2005: ZONING – C-75-05: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning property located on the northwest corner of Gilbert and Rutherford Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from R-1H, Urban, One-Family Residence District to R-1H-E, Urban, One-Family Residence/Extended Use District, limited to Office Use,” only and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.(B/Walford)

6. Ordinance No. 186 of 2005: ZONING – C-77-05: An ordinance amending Chapter of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning property located on the northwest corner of Bethany and Bates Streets, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from R-1H, Urban, One-Family Residence District, to R-1H-E, Urban, One-Family Residence/Extended Use District, limited to “a Parking Lot for Church Use,” only, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (C/Carmody)

7. Ordinance No. 187 of 2005: ZONING – C-78-05: 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 East Flournoy-Lucas Road, 3100 feet west of Youree Drive, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from R-A, Residence-Agriculture, to R-2, Suburban, Multi-Family Residence District, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (District D)

8. Ordinance No. 188 of 2005: ZONING – C-79-05: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning property located on the southeast corner of Dalton and Hudgens, Streets, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from R-1D, Urban, One-Family Residence District to B-2-A, Business Park District, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (District D)

9. Ordinance No. 189 of 2005: ZONING – C-80-05: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning property located on the northeast corner of Kings Highway and Albert Bicknell Drive, 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. (G/Jackson)

10. Ordinance No. 190 of 2005: ZONING – C-84-05: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning property located on the northeasterly corner of North Market and North Hearne, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from B-3, Community Business District to I-2, Heavy Industrial District, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (A/Lester)

11. Ordinance No. 191 of 2005: An Ordinance amending the 2005 Capital Improvements Budget and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

12. Ordinance No. 192 of 2005: An Ordinance amending the 2005 General Fund Budget and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilman Carmody, seconded by Councilman Walford to introduce Ordinance Nos. 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, and 192 of 2005 to lay over until November 8, 2005 meeting. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE (Numbers are assigned Ordinance Numbers)

1. Ordinance No. 156 of 2005: An ordinance closing and abandoning the remaining 20 foot-wide alleyway in Block 27 of the City of Shreveport subdivision, bounded by McNeil Street on the West and located North of Fairfield Avenue in Section 37 (T18N-R14W), Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana and otherwise provide with respect thereto. (B/Walford)

Having passed first reading on October 11, 2005 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Carmody to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

2. Ordinance No. 157 of 2005: An ordinance closing and abandoning the 60 foot-wide public right of way known as Woodrow Street located between Dowdell Street and Williams Avenue in the Foster Terrace Subdivision in the NW ¼ of Section 12 (T17N-R14W), Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, and providing with respect thereto. (B/Walford)

Having passed first reading on October 11, 2005 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Carmody to adopt.

Councilman Walford: Mr. Chairman, just for the benefit of the public, this is to allow additional student parking for LSU Health Sciences Center.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

3. Ordinance No. 158 of 2005: An ordinance closing and abandoning the 60 foot-wide public right of way known as Kansas City Avenue located northeast of Jack Wells Blvd. in the Free State Industrial Park District No. 8 in the SW ¼ of Section 24 (T18N-R14W), Bossier Parish Louisiana and providing with respect thereto. (A/Lester)

Having passed first reading on October 11, 2005 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Carmody to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

4. Ordinance No. 159 of 2005: An ordinance closing and abandoning the 15 foot-wide alleyway running from Bernstein to Linwood Avenue and between Woodrow and Champ Clark Streets located in the Linwood Subdivision in Section 23 (17N-R14W), Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (F/Green)

Having passed first reading on October 11, 2005 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Walford to postpone. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

5. Ordinance No. 160 of 2005: An ordinance declaring the City’s interest in certain adjudicated properties as surplus and otherwise providing with respect thereto. (A/Lester/F/Green)

Having passed first reading on October 11, 2005 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Carmody to postpone. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

6. Ordinance No. 161 of 2005: An ordinance creating and establishing a no parking anytime zone either side of Hawkins Street from Legardy Street to Jones Mabry Road and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (A/Lester)

Having passed first reading on October 11, 2005 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Carmody to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

7. Ordinance No. 162 of 2005: ZONING APPEAL – C-72-05: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, to rezone property located on the northwest corner of Shreveport-Barksdale Highway and Camilla, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from B-2-E, Neighborhood Business/Extended Use District, limited to automotive repair, sales, and storage of 25 vehicles, only, to B-2-E, Neighborhood Business/Extended Use District, Limited to Automotive Repair, Sales and Storage of 45 vehicles, only, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (C/Carmody)

Having passed first reading on October 11, 2005 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 Lester to adopt.

Councilman Carmody: Mr. Chairman, I do want to clarify. The appropriate motion would be to uphold the decision of the decision of the Metropolitan Planning Commission?

Mr. Thompson: This is a Zoning Ordinance, and we would prefer that the motion would be to adopt and if you wanted the Council Members to vote against it, you would ask them to do so.

Councilman Carmody: My motion then would be to adopt, and I would ask for a “No” vote.

Councilman Lester: Question Mr. Chairman. Mr. Kirkland, and maybe also to Mr. Carmody while he is coming. As I appreciate it, this is one that has been around for a while?

Councilman Carmody: Right.

Councilman Lester: At one point, didn’t this Council or didn’t the MPC give a one year extension or something like that? Tell me what happened in that intervening one year period if you could.

Mr. Kirkland: Mr. Krohn I think is the, as most of you know, the owner/operator of this business. He is one of the most popular auto mechanics in the regional area and has been very successful, and that’s good. We like to see our businessmen do that, the problem is the success has led to him trying to over use a site that won’t handle the sort of traffic that he’s accustomed to. The MPC in 2003 is when we started the process, finally asked Mr. Krohn rather than shut down, he had the right to go to the Board and ask for the approvals. He got that and he was given a maximum number of cars he could have at any one time on his site of 25. What he had been doing and he continues to do it even to this day is max out the site, and then he parks cars into the right of way and then our phones ring and they want to know why is this business man not following the rules on parking and etc?

Councilman Lester: Right.

Mr. Kirkland: He had come before the MPC more than once in response to your question Mr. Lester, and basically to ask for more, but every time, he accepted the 25 limit. He also has environmental problems, that - - -

Councilman Lester: Right.

Mr. Kirkland: That some legitimate issues that he’s dealing with on his site, and frankly the MPC and the staff are trying our best to work with Mr. Krohn. He I think, acquired an additional site elsewhere in the City to move some of the cars that were being apparently, could not collect from customers, and he would have to mechanics lien the vehicle. Anyway, long story made short, we continued to try to work with him and he just needs a larger site. And that’s really the crux of it. Is that as I told him, when he filed this case is don’t ask again for a number that won’t work. So, if there’s a reason that he’s asked for 45 cars, he determined that he would absolutely need to have 45 cars at any given time on his site in order for his business to work at this location. That’s way too many, and he just needs to get a bigger location.

Councilman Lester: So if we uphold the MPC’s decision, what we will be doing is telling him, he has to stay within the 25 - - -.

Mr. Kirkland: 25 cars. At the end of the day, we’re not really concerned about him running 30-35 during the day, so long as at the end of the day it’s 25, and he’s not in the right of way.

Councilman Lester: Okay, that answers my question.

Motion fails by the following vote: Nays: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Ayes: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

8. Ordinance No. 152 of 2005: ZONING - C-52-05: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance by rezoning property located on north side of the extension of Freddie Street, 500 feet west of Caldwell, 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 "A Leasing Office and Community Center", only, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (A/Lester)

Having passed first reading on September 27, 2005 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Hogan to postpone.

Councilman Lester: If you give me a second, I can explain. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilwoman Robertson: Where is that?

Councilman Lester: That’s on the docket, under B Adding Legislation to the Agenda. It was on the agenda for approval on last meeting. I asked that we postpone it at that time, because I needed additional information from the proponents. I’ve gotten that information just this morning, we played phone tag, and I got a fax. And so, I’m going to have a meeting with the proponents and I was going to ask for a postponement, and they have agreed. I think they’ve also sent some letters to the Council to that same affect. So, believe that we will - - - my questions will be answered in a timely fashion so that we can move forward on this at the next meeting. And so based upon that, I’m asking for postponement. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. (Councilman Green – Mayor Pro Tem).

The adopted ordinances and amendments follow:

ORDINANCE NO. 156 OF 2005

AN ORDINANCE CLOSING AND ABANDONING THE REMAINING 20 FOOT-WIDE ALLEYWAY IN BLOCK 27 OF THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT SUBDIVISION, BOUNDED BY MCNEIL STREET ON THE WEST AND LOCATED NORTH OF FAIRFIELD AVENUE IN SECTION 37 (T18N-R14W), SHREVEPORT, CADDO PARISH, LOUISIANA AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

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

WHEREAS, Water and Sewerage Engineering has reviewed this request and has no objections to this portion of the alleyway 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 remaining 20 foot-wide alleyway in Block 27 of the City of Shreveport subdivision, bounded by McNeil Street on the west and located north of Fairfield Avenue in Section 37 (T18N-R14W), Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana and as shown and as indicated 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 thereof 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 herewith are hereby repealed.

ORDINANCE NO. 157 OF 2005

AN ORDINANCE CLOSING AND ABANDONING OF THE 60 FOOT-WIDE

PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY KNOWN AS WOODROW STREET LOCATED

BETWEEN DOWDELL STREET AND WILLIAMS AVENUE IN THE FOSTER TERRACE SUBDIVISION IN THE NW 1/4 OF SECTION 12 (T17N-R14W), SHREVEPORT, CADDO PARISH, LOUISIANA, AND PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BY:

WHEREAS, today the Property Management Section of the Department of

Operational Services has received a request to close and abandon a 60 foot wide public right-of-way, and

WHEREAS, Water and Sewerage Engineering has reviewed this request and has no objections to this portion of the alleyway being closed and abandoned.

BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, legal, and regular session convened, that the 60 foot-wide public right-of-way known as Woodrow Street located between Dowdell Street and Williams Avenue in the Foster Terrace Subdivision in the NW 1/4 of Section 12 ( T17N-R14W), Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, and as shown an as indicated on the plat attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby closed and abandoned, and that utility and drainage servitudes be retained.

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 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. 158 OF 2005

AN ORDINANCE CLOSING AND ABANDONING THE 60 FOOT-WIDE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY KNOWN AS KANSAS CITY AVENUE LOCATED NORTHEAST OF JACK WELLS BLD. IN THE FREE STATE INDUSTRIAL PARK DISTRICT NO. 8 IN THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 24 (T18N-R14W), BOSSIER PARISH LOUISIANA AND PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BY:

WHEREAS, today the Property Management Section of the Department of Operational

Services has received a request to close and abandon a 60 foot wide public right-of-way, and

WHEREAS, Water and Sewerage Engineering has reviewed this request and has no objections to this portion of the alleyway being closed and abandoned.

BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, legal, and regular session convened, that the 60 foot-wide public right-of-way known as Kansas City Avenue located northeast of Jack Wells Blvd. In the FreeState Industrial Park District No. 8 in the SW 1/4 of section 24 (T18N-R14W), Bossier Parish Louisiana, shown and as indicated on the plat attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby closed and abandoned, and that water and sewer servitude be retained.

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

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. 161 OF 2005

AN ORDINANCE TO CREATE AND ESTABLISH A NO PARKING ANYTIME ZONE ON EITHER SIDE OF HAWKINS STREET FROM LEGARDY STREET TO JONES MABRY ROAD AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BY:

BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, legal and regular session convened that it shall hereafter be unlawful for anyone to park any vehicle at any time of the day or night on either side of Hawkins Street from Legardy Street to Jones Mabry Road.

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.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS:

Councilman Jackson: Mr. Clerk, is that it?

Mr. Thompson: That’s it, we’re down to Unfinished Business and I don’t believe any matter is going to be pulled off the table.

Councilman Lester: Question Mr. Chairman. Just from a procedural standpoint, to bring a matter off the table, does that require a two-thirds vote or just simple majority?

Councilman Carmody: Simple majority.

Councilman Lester: Simple majority? Okay, thanks.

1. Ordinance No. 93 of 2005: To amend and reenact Section 3.01 of Ordinance No. 96 of 1980 relative to exemptions and exclusions from sales and use taxes and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (Introduced- June 14, 2005/ Tabled - July 12, 2005)

2. 2006 Budget Ordinances: (Not to be adopted prior to Dec 15, 2005)(Tabled - Oct 11, 2005)

163 Adopting the 2006 General Fund Budget.

164 Adopting the 2006 Budget for the Airports Enterprise Fund.

165 Adopting the 2006 Debt Service Fund Budget, appropriating the funds therein and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

166 Adopting the 2006 Capital Improvements Budget

167 Adopting the 2006 Budget for the Community Development Special Revenue Fund.

168 Adopting the 2006 Budget for the Convention Center Hotel Enterprise Fund.

169 Adopting the 2006 Budget for the Downtown Entertainment Economic Development District Special Revenue Fund.

170 Adopting the 2006 Budget for the Downtown Parking Enterprise Fund.

171 Adopting the 2006 Budget for the Environmental Grants Special Revenue Fund, appropriating the funds authorized therein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

172 Adopting the 2006 Budget for the Fleet Services Internal Service Fund.

173 Adopting the 2006 Budget for the Golf Enterprise Fund.

174 Adopting the 2006 Budget for the Metropolitan Planning Commission Special Revenue Fund.

175 Adopting the 2006 Budget for the Police Grants Special Revenue Fund.

176 Adopting the 2006 Budget for the Shreveport Redevelopment Agency Special Revenue Fund.

177 Adopting the 2006 Budget for the Retained Risk Internal Service Fund.

178 Adopting the 2006 Budget for the Riverfront Development Special Revenue Fund.

179 Adopting the 2006 Budget funding contractual Services provided to Sportran By Metro Management Associates, Inc.

180 Adopting the 2006 Budget for the Water and Sewerage Enterprise Fund.

NEW BUSINESS:

Councilman Jackson: On yesterday, we dealt with all that’s listed.

1. Taxi Driver License Appeal: Mr. Robert Smith, Golden Stripe Taxi, 1540 Texas Avenue, Shreveport, La. (B/Walford)

2. Property Standards Appeals:

Ms. Sidney Peacock – Case # WAB 0501384 (655 Wilder Place, Shreveport, LA) (B/Walford)

Mr. Washington Starks – Case # CAB 0500658 (6400 Border Lane, Shreveport, LA) (G/Jackson)

REPORTS FROM OFFICERS, BOARDS, AND COMMITTEES:

CLERK’S REPORT:

Mr. Thompson: Just an explanation here Mr. Chairman. The letter of appeal, the item here should read as is now printed in the ‘corrected to read’ portion.

1. BAC 100-05, Shreveport Memorial Library, 1333 Captain Shreve Drive, Shreveport, LA, 71101, Special Exception Use and a variance in the required parking in a B-3District. (C/Carmody) (Available for consideration November 8, 2005)

1. CORRECTED: BAC-100-05: Robert Ferrier Jr. dba Rollin’ in the Dough (Albert M. Carroll, land owner), 1333 Captain Shreve Drive, Shreveport LA. zoning for special exception use and a variance in the required parking in a B-3 District for a restaurant with the on-premise consumption of low alcoholic content beverages.

ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting adjourned at approximately 4:55 p.m.

__________________________________

//s// James E. Green, Chairman

__________________________________

//s// Arthur G. Thompson, Clerk of Council