CC 3827

11 20 06

Council Proceedings of the City of Shreveport, Louisiana

November 14, 2006

The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana was called to order by Chairman Jeffery A. Hogan at 3:01 p.m., Tuesday, November 14, 2006, in the Government Chambers in Government Plaza (505 Travis Street).

Invocation was given by Councilman Hogan.

The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Walford.

On Roll Call, the following members were Present: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody (Arrived at 3:10 p.m.), Robertson, Green, Hogan and Jackson. 7. Absent: None.

Motion by Councilman Green, seconded by Councilman Walford to approve the minutes of the Administrative Conference, Monday October 23, 2006 and Council Meeting, Tuesday, October 24, 2006. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Robertson, Green, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Carmody. 1.

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

Councilman Hogan: Mr. Dark, is the Mayor on his way?

Mr. Dark: I do not know sir. I know that at this point, we don’t have any communications until you get to the Convention Center.

Councilman Hogan: Alright, any distinguished guests today?

Mr. Dark: I do see State Representative Burrell in the audience.

Rep. Burrell: (Inaudible)

Councilman Hogan: Welcome Rep. Burrell. Before the meeting, I saw the other elected Council Members here, I don’t see them right now, but welcome to the meeting. Does any Council Member have anyone to recognize? Mr. Jackson?

Councilman Jackson: I didn’t Mr. Chairman, I didn’t know if we were moving on.

Reports:

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

Mr. Dark: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Carrier is here to give you a short presentation that I think will be on the screens showing you some events that just happened at the Convention Center. Kinda give you an idea of where your money went.

Mr. Mike Carrier: (400 Caddo Street) Feels like that’s where I live. I wanted to take this opportunity very quickly as this is, I believe, the last regular meeting of this Council to show you one particular event. I know Mr. Jackson had asked the question a while back about large events. I want to show you an event that we had recently and the kind of things that we think are going to be much more prominent and much more often occurring in the future. We had the opportunity a few weeks ago, to host BWI. BWI is out of Nash, TX. They are a large wholesale landscape and lawn and garden supply company, that does business literally all over the country. If you look at this map real quickly, and I’m not going to prolong this because I know you’ve got a long meeting, but I do want to talk to about a couple of things very quickly. What this map shows, if you see all the dark colored dots, up until this year, they’d always had two meetings a year. The dark colored dots are the dots that show the people that went to Arlington, TX. The red colored dots are the dots of people that went to Biloxi, MS for these meetings. Underneath all those dots, which doesn’t show up very well, but underneath everyone of those is a yellow dot plus more of all the people that came to Shreveport. Over 2,000 people from 16 states came here, spent the better part of a week and spent a lot of money here in our economy, that’s the kind of business we think that you will see continually coming into the convention center, and if this - - -

Mr. Dark: It’s changing screens.

Mr. Carrier: As usual, technology - - - . They played with this thing before I got here and said that it worked fine, so if Dan’s still back there, Dan come fix this real quick. The bottom line is BWI spent - - - thank you. Wrong button, okay.

Mr. Dark: And that’s why they pay him the big bucks.

Mr. Carrier: That’s why they pay him the big bucks. If you’ll look on the screen, BWI spent as I said, the better part of a week here. And these are just some scenes that you’ll see from their program in the convention center. We don’t know the final numbers on this yet, but as best we can figure right now, they spent about a million and a half dollars here in our city, in the convention center, in our hotels, in our restaurants. You’ll note in here a lot of the things that they did that really make the exhibit hall of the convention center look really outstanding. They had dealers coming in from 16 states. They had vendors from all across the country. This is a buying show. This is a private show. You can go in and buy truckloads and train car loads of fertilizer and lawn seed and other lawn and garden items if you are one of their dealers, but you or I can not go in and buy a single pack of seeds to take home with us. These folks are buying for small business all around the country, their annual stock of merchandise. BWI told us that they had the most successful show that they had ever had. They’re extremely pleased. They have already signed for 2007. We’re holding dates for 2008 and 2009. They have given us the approval to go ahead put tentatives for 2010 and beyond. But they have to coordinate their show, it’s so big, they have to coordinate with two other major shows, major dealership shows around the country to be sure that the vendors can get to all of those shows. The only complaint they had the entire week, and I’ll tell you they were very complimentary of the airport and the air service coming in here, of local transportation, of our hotels, of our restaurants, everything in the city. The only complaint that they had was that on Tuesday night, they had a social function which they had to limit to 1200 people because it was the largest facility that they could get into to have that function. They had all of the convention center already in use, they had to do this somewhere else, and Sam’s Town Ballroom was the largest thing that they could find. Next year, they have already told us they expect 25% more attendance than they had this year. That means 2,500 people. And so, we have already gone to work to identify a location for them for that Tuesday night event working with Stacy Brown at the Convention Bureau, and with SPAR to see if we can’t identify a really location to do something special for them that they will be excited about. And I can tell you that they will be excited to be coming back. This is the kind of group we think you will begin to see more and more of, that will use our facility, that will use our hotel rooms, that will use all the resources that we have here in this community and continue to be a positive benefit to us. Our local company HDW which many of you may know, Kenny Beauvai, who is president of Hardware Distributors Warehouses here in Shreveport, he had his Fall show here, and he has his Spring show here, again we’re holding dates for them several years in advance. And that show, while it’s a local company right here in Shreveport brings in vendors and dealers from about a 6 or 7 state area. Using hotel rooms, eating in our restaurants, doing all the things that you and your predecessors had the foresight to do in terms of building the convention center, and now having the hotel added onto it. So, we’re very excited about that. The shot you see right there, a lot of the folks that are in the convention center, their sales areas, the décor that they put into the convention hall to make it what it really is. And anything that you could want for lawn and garden, you could find there. It was a very successful show. I want to thank you all for the support that you have shown us this year as we have gotten open. It has not been without trial and tribulation as any facility of this nature would be. But it has been a successful year. We had projected about 109 events for this year. Knowing that with an opening and with some of the short term delays that we were having that is going to be a challenging year, we’re going to wind up with over 130. We’re going to wind up with over our projections on both attendance and on event days. And next year looks to be even stronger. So we’re very pleased and we appreciate the support y’all have shown and look forward to many, many more years of positive results in your convention center. So, thank you very much.

Councilman Hogan: Thank you very much Mike. You said just a moment ago around 130 events for this year?

Mr. Carrier: Yes sir.

Councilman Hogan: And you said at least that many or more for next year?

Mr. Carrier: We’re projecting this year, we think that with the results that we’ve seen this year, and the interest next year, we’re projecting 195 events next year. 50% increase.

Councilman Hogan: How many do we have booked so far for 2007?

Mr. Carrier: I know that - - - the last report that I got was just through the month of March. We had 32 events booked through the month of March, and another 15 still with tentative dates through the month of March. And many of those are multi day events, three and four day events. So, we’re seeing a lot of smaller and short term bookings come through with Hilton, with corporate meetings, and smaller things of that nature, with 50 people, 100 people and things of those kind, 1 and 2 days. And it takes all of that to make a convention center successful.

Councilman Hogan: Right, when we get the hotel on line, that’s going to even add to it.

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, if you could, if you wouldn’t mind the Council - - - I don’t believe we did Amendments No. 1 and/or Amendment No. 2 to the October 10^, 2006 Council Proceedings.

Amendment No. 1 to the October 10, 2006, City Council Minutes

Amend the October 10, 2006, minutes to delete Ordinance No. 123 of 2006 (as amended) from the October 10, 2006, Minutes in the permanent Minute Book and the October 10, 2006, Minutes published on the web page.

Amendment No. 2 to the October 10, 2006, City Council Minutes

Amend the October 10, 2006, minutes to delete Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 139 and Amendment No.2 to Ordinance 153 of 2006 from the October 10, 2006, Minutes in the permanent Minute Book and the October 10, 2006, Minutes published on the web page.

Motion by Councilman Jackson, seconded by Councilman Green to adopt Amendments No. 1 and 2 to Council Proceedings, October 10, 2006. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Robertson, Hogan, Green. and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Carmody. 1.

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, I believe yesterday also I advised the Council that we needed to add the Public Hearing for the 2007 Budget Appropriation Ordinances to the official agenda.

Motion by Councilman Green, seconded by Councilman Carmody to add the Public Hearing for the 2007 Budget Appropriation Ordinances to the official agenda. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, Green. and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Lester. 1.

Property Standards Report

Councilman Hogan: Does anyone need to speak to Mr. Bowie over any Property Standard issues? Mr. Mayor, you’re here. Did you have any comments. We had Mike Carrier come up and give us a presentation about the convention center, do you have anything to add to that?

Mayor Hightower: Nothing to the convention center, but I do have an item.

Councilman Hogan: At what point would you like to?

Councilman Jackson: Mr. Chairman?

Councilman Hogan: When would you like to do that?

Mayor Hightower: Whenever you’re ready.

Councilman Jackson: I know we did the convention center, but we didn’t deal with anything else under the convention center besides - - - the hotel I’m saying, we never did get to that. I didn’t know if this was the appropriate time or not.

Councilman Hogan: Yes sir. Okay. I beg your pardon. We will recognize any questions for the Administration on the convention center or the hotel. Any Council Members have questions?

Councilman Jackson: Mr. Chairman, I guess my question Mr. Chairman, yesterday we were saying that we thought someone from Walton Construction was going to be here, and I guess my questions are for - - - if there is anyone here from Walton Construction.

Mayor Hightower: I don’t see Tommy, and Tom told me that he had not seen him. I don’t know if he is on his way, he was asked to come. So, hopefully he’ll be here.

Councilman Jackson: Well just for the information of the Council, there is in fact, I don’t know if the Administration has been privy to it or whatever, but the Walton Construction Company sent out a press release today, suggesting that Mr. Clark’s comments were taken out of context. I don’t know by whom, but taken out of context, and that in fact, that they had started to elaborate on all these new programs they’re getting ready to start with the city, and through LSUS and things they’ve already been doing, and programs they’ve been doing in Kansas City, a whole lot of other things. This is a kinda of a proliferation of things that they said that they were going to do, and so I was real interested to hear what they had to say. Also, I thought interesting, and you all may want to follow up on it, interestingly enough, in that press release, they also suggested that their new goal was 20.2% because of somebody who was not a legitimate Fair Share person or whatever, they adjusted the goal to 20.2% and they have met that goal. Specifically in the press release, it says that it went from 21%, which we know is the contractual agreement down to 20.2%, and I may be wrong and maybe Ms. Glass or somebody can help me, I don’t believe that they can adjust that figure without contractually adjusting the figure. So, I guess my concern is that they’re putting out a press release which is saying some different things, but not specifically - - - you know that are not the truth, that I guess maybe I ought to say. Because I don’t know that they have the power to unilaterally decide that they’re going to change the amount that we’ve agreed to in the contract. Specifically it says this, if I can read it to you, that To date, current minority participation on convention center hotel project is 20.3%. The original minority participation goal for the project is 21%, which has since been reduced to 20.2% due to decertification of one of the proposed subcontractors. Currently this project has spent 51% of the projected goal with Fair Share and/or minority contracts/vendors. And at their new goal of 20.2% is .1% lower than what they said, they’ve achieved already, which makes them having accomplished something, when the truth of the matter is, they still are below what their contractual goal is and even lower than what our city goal is. So, I just thought maybe we need to clarify it because they send this out to news organizations and other folks I guess to try to clean up what they see as a miss with regards to what Mr. Clark has said to us publicly, and I said to the people at the news station who came by to talk to me about it, said it was taken out of context. My question was by who? Because it sounded as he said it right there, I discerned it to be what he said. Maybe he spoke out of context, but it certainly was not taken out of context, and so, I would hope that you all would with the same speed and rapidity that we did when we talked about these sham companies. I think Mr. Gilliam and others quickly pursued that, to be sure that they could investigate and get to the bottom of it, I think the same level of speed needs to be applied to this process as well, so that we can be sure that they’re not out there just propagating information that inures to their benefit, but may not be true at all. So, that’s just for your information. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Hightower: Mr. Chairman, in response to Mr. Jackson’s comments, obviously any contract is two sided, and you’ve all witnessed with the contract with Walton Construction, you voted to adopt the contract. So, and that has not changed and would not change without consent of the Council. I have not seen the press release that you speak of, but for them to want to change it from 21% to 20.6%, and it sounds like to me, what I’m hearing from you is they’re saying that we decertify, so it’s our fault that they dropped to 20.6. Nowhere in our contract, nowhere in our Fair Share ordinance does it say it is the responsibility of the city at any point. It’s the responsibility of the contractor or the vendor to the city, not the city itself. So, I in no way see the city relinquishing its position of the contractual 21%. And like you said, our goal was 25%. But contractually, we’re at 21, and that’s exactly where our feet are, and where we are contractually on our side of the agreement, and as far as I’m concerned, they are as well. So, we have no reason to back off that position at this point. So, but again, I hadn’t seen their press release or know what their motive may be with the release itself. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Jackson: Mr. Chairman, If anybody is interested in it, I’d be glad to forward you a copy of it.

Councilman Lester: Mr. Chairman, thank you. I have some questions. I understand that a representative from Walton is not going to be here, but if I could have Mr. Gilliam to come forward please? Is he here? Good afternoon Mr. Gilliam.

Mr. Sam Gilliam: Good afternoon sir.

Councilman Lester: You provide us with the - - - you provided us on yesterday with a progress report as it relates to the hotel, and their Fair Share summary on yesterday. Do you have a copy of that?

Mr. Gilliam: Yes I do.

Councilman Lester: Okay, there are two sheets that are associated with what I’m going to label as Exhibit 1. I’m going to say Page 1. It says it’s an actual MBE and Fair Share Contractors. And page 2 is the proposed MBE and Fair Share as submitted by Walton. Now, on the first page, where it says actual MBE and Fair Share subcontractors, these numbers, these figures represent actual payments to subcontractors. Is that correct?

Mr. Gilliam: That’s correct sir.

Councilman Lester: And as I appreciate it, the total here is a little more, almost $3.5 (million), and I believe your narrative says they’re a little more than 50% - - -

Mr. Gilliam: About 54%.

Councilman Lester: Of their goal, which was the 21%?

Mr. Gilliam: That’s right.

Councilman Lester: Okay. At the last time we talked about this when Mr. Clark was here, there were a number of things that came up that gave a number of us reason for pause, particularly, the conversation commentary relative to contract management. That was something that Mr. Clark said happened as routine, and even said that you were aware of it, but upon inspection, we were informed by you, that if that was in fact the case, that was not something that you were aware of. Tell me did that cause you to do any further investigation as it relates to the authenticity of the numbers that you have given us today?

Mr. Gilliam: Yes it did. Actually, at the very next day, we did an investigation of the companies that were listed on the payout report. In other words, actual. We interviewed with some letters to each one of them and interviewed them. We were simply again, appalled at the comment, the observation that Mr. Clark made that day. And I think he even went as far as to give a kind of a broad stroke against the whole industry by suggesting that everybody does that. Of course, if that were indeed the case, we wanted to get to the bottom of it, especially with these six or so, seven or so of these contractors, who are on this payout report and to a person. We went over and we wanted to make sure that these individuals were indeed performing the work so those that were indicated on this report, so we put the hard hat on, we actually went over, wanted to see what they were doing, and we actually posed the question. “Are you actually doing the work?” (Inaudible).

Councilman Lester: And your inspection included and was not limited to just you - - - I mean you looked at the figures, but you actually went on site, on more than one occasion?

Mr. Gilliam: Yes, and interviewed each one of these individuals.

Councilman Lester: Okay, so would it be fair to say that you can certify that to your investigation, the numbers that you’ve given us as it stands right now are legitimate numbers in terms of payments and work scopes?

Mr. Gilliam: We can stand behind them to the extent that, that’s what’s on the 15, and at this point, we have 15 progress reports that have been submitted. We have looked at those, and we have reconciled those to our interviews with the people who work there.

Councilman Lester: Okay, now let me ask this? Have you been given the copies of or have you been able to look at the actual subcontractors contracts?

Mr. Gilliam: No, that was an issue that was posed of course, I guess over a year ago. And it appeared as those, and there were actually legal opinions that were solicited from both Yates, and Walton. We actually sent them a letter. We had a group of individuals, concerned individuals, who asked the very question you’ve just asked. So, we sent a question to them, and both of those companies, their national attorneys sent back a response to us simply saying that they considered it proprietary information and they were not going to share that information. So, I shared with that group at that time, the legal recourse would be of course to challenge it if that’s what they saw fit to do.

Councilman Lester: Now, on the second page, it has proposed MBE and Fair Share as submitted by Walton. Now, the figure that they have here shows that their proposed MBE and Fair Share number is now 20.2%. That would be the second page.

Mr. Gilliam: No, that report that I gave you yesterday, this information changes moment by moment. At this point of course, the bottom line figure on that project (inaudible) those five change orders is about $32.3 (million), and of course, they are proposing that they added again just yesterday, a contract for a local janitorial firm. That brought their total up to about $6.7 (million) of the total contract, which again, we have recalculated to date, which by our calculation is 21%, proposed.

Councilman Lester: My question is this, and I don’t know if you’re the proper party to answer this and I guess the other folks will. Right now, as I appreciate it, we’re about halfway toward their goal in terms of Fair Share participation.

Mr. Gilliam: About 54%.

Councilman Lester: About 54%. But at as I look at the convention center, and I’m not trained in the ways of construction, but it seems like we’re more than 54% complete with this project. How does, with the time that you still have, how do you propose to insure from a compliance standpoint that they reach that number. I mean, what kind of - - - what tools of investigation are open to you?

Mr. Gilliam: It’s a real concern for (inaudible) because we seem to think that we’re somewhat over halfway this project. I understand and I think that it’s supposed to open sometime near the Spring. And the Fair Share figures are not, in our estimation, are not galloping along what we would like them to be but, consider too Councilman, I’m the Compliance Officer, and my job is not to be satisfied. So, we will press the issue to make sure as best we can. We have some work scopes in here that for instance, rough carpentry. One of our clients is listed in the proposed portion of this. We have not received any payment information for them, and by the same token, our last visit over there, actually we saw the contractor on the ground with his workmen there. However, we haven’t had any progress payments submitted for that contract.

Councilman Lester: Do you know how long that contractor has actually been there?

Mr. Gilliam: I do not know exactly, but I do over a month ago, I was there. They had a full crew on the ground.

Councilman Lester: Well, I would ask that you continue to keep us posted on your efforts relative to getting this done, because quite obviously, the last thing we want to do is have the building completed, and then we’re without recourse. And I’m certainly concerned as is Councilman Jackson with Walton’s decision to issue a press release, as opposed to actually bringing a live body down to answer to the questions that this Council had particularly given to the fact that they - - - I dare say, bragged that their motto was - - - well no, that’s the wrong guy. That’s the other guy.

Councilman Jackson: (Inaudible)

Councilman Lester: Well, we can give them one. But alright. Thank you Mr. Gilliam.

Councilman Jackson: Mr. Chairman, before Mr. Gilliam leaves, I have a question that they talked about, and I think Councilman Carmody had a question.

Councilman Hogan: Mr. Gilliam, would you stay for a moment longer and answers some more questions? Councilman Jackson.

Councilman Jackson: Thank you Mr. Chairman. Mr. Gilliam, I want to first publicly say that I’ve stated repeatedly and I’ve heard people in closed quarters say, ‘boy, you’re giving Sam a hard time.’ And the truth of it is, I’ve tried to say over and over, that it wasn’t about Sam. And I want you to know that, but I’m no less passionate about the issue. I guess my concern is - - - I mean you may not have been here the last meeting. I think obviously my colleagues were here. Beyond this time of what Walton is going to do, and so on and so forth with the press release, when we first talked to Mr. Clark, when he replaced Mr. McCrocklin, on July 25^th, he came to the Council Meeting, and he bragged to Mr. Antee and Mr. Mayor that his title of interim was removed and he was now the permanent guy. He went on from that point to say, to answer my question, and my question was why was in fact their minority contractor who was in fact from outside of the State of Louisiana, who had a major portion of the contract, who had been now cancelled. And he came in and he says, and I’m reading from the minutes, just for your information. He says basically, Basically, we try to provide and grow the local minority businesses to create that capacity in order to keep up with our growth. And to that end, we looked at our contractors within the Convention Center Hotel, and we discovered that we had one in Atlanta, and I think he meant Tennessee, but he said in Atlanta, that was part of the MBE Fair Share addition that we turned in. He then goes on to say, we had the same capacity of a local minority Fair Share Certified, and we said, why are we shipping this out of the market? We should be bringing that money, keeping that money local - - -. I went on to ask him about capacity and did they have any - - -, he suggested to me that because they cancelled - - -, I had a copy of the letter that the company faxed me that they sent to them. That letter said that they cancelled the contract for convenience. I asked him what was the definition of convenience, what did they mean by convenience, and he said to me that it was about geography. I went on to ask Mr. Antee some questions about that. Now, I don’t know if you were at the - - - you were at the last meeting. At the last meeting, and I guess this goes less to the Fair Share Program, and more to the integrity of the city. At the last meeting, Mr. Antee sat over here, and Mr. Antee said to us specifically that the reason the contract was cancelled, for Step, Inc. was because of noncompliance. He said they had been asked to give an engineer - - - I want you to see. Mr. Burton has a copy of this tape I brought with me, so that nobody would say that I was being inaccurate, because everybody couldn’t see the minutes, I thought we ought to at least be able to see what happened at our last Council Meeting. Mr. Chairman, if we could ask Robert to play that so you can see what I’m talking about.

Mr. Burton played the following clip:

And now my question is, in the context of subcontracting 25% to minorities, how much of it was still the ‘sham’ business, and how much was legitimate? We found that out in the hotel, I’m simply asking you with the document that you’ve given me about the hotel, how much of this is real? And How much of this is Memorex?

Mr. Antee: Well, all of it’s real, and all I said was using your rationale, then it’s 0%. We didn’t have this discussion, when it was your guy in Tennessee that was contracted for to do the same work that Triple L (inaudible)

Councilman Jackson: It’s not my guy. It’s not my guy. It’s the guy you and the Mayor met with me behind the door and said yeah, you’ll get the deal set up, and Mr. Walton and all those folks said, get the deal set up. And I said to him, here’s three names of folks who are not even local, and you can use these folks, because I know they can do the business. He comes back and says to me, these guys were so large, they’re as big as we are (Walton Construction). And I said well they ought to be credible to do business with. You all then, at the 9^th hour, since you want to talk about it, you all then come back and bait and switch. The Mayor calls me on the phone, and says he didn’t know they got their contract cancelled. You said at the Council Meeting, yeah he knew, he had to give ‘em permission. I talked to you all in the hallway, and said, called you all some names, and said what I thought about you all. Now, we want to talk about it right here? That’s what we’ll talk about. That’s what really happen. So, it’s not my guy. Yes, they happen to be African-American, yes, I was supporting them in the project, yes. But they’re not my guy. Now, we talk about your guy? Your guy set up here and ran his mouth too much at the last Council Meeting. Your guy Tommy Clark, who worked for the guy who initially negotiated the deal with us when he wasn’t with Walton and McCrocklin, just happen to disappear, your guy cancelled the contract. That’s your guy. He’s not somebody who just became your friend, that’s your guy. To me that’s the definition of what ‘your guy’ is. So these were not my guys.

Mr. Antee: He was - - -he was with Walton. The guy from Tennessee was not performing. They called and said,

Councilman Jackson: They had nothing to perform.

Mr. Antee: They called and said, can we replace the minority from Tennessee?

Councilman Jackson: He had nothing to perform. How much work had Triple L done already.

Mr. Antee: With a local minority.

Councilman Jackson: How much work has Triple L done already.

Mr. Antee: And we said (inaudible).

Councilman Jackson: None. Nobody had even performed that contract. That $3,000,000 is not in the 51% that you said you’ve already spent. You told us at the last meeting, they’ve done no work yet, that’s why they’re not on the actual list. They’re on the proposed list. They haven’t done - - - how can they not perform and it’s not even time for them to do whatever they’re contracted to do?

Mr. Antee: Because part of the performance that - - -

Councilman Jackson: Lets tell the truth Ken.

Mr. Antee: He was to do was to provide a project engineer that he never provided for, that Walton then had to go out and provide.

Councilman Jackson: Well, why didn’t you tell me that the day, when the Mayor said it was just a mistake? Why didn’t somebody tell me that, that day? They Mayor could have stood there and said, well, let me tell you something. We tried to use him, but here’s what happened. He didn’t come with an engineer, he didn’t perform. That never happened. Today, you say that now on October the - - - whatever day it is, so it seems convenient that now you got a rabbit to pull out of your hat, but didn’t have one that day when we talked about it.

Mr. Antee: We weren’t answering that question. Walton was at that time.

Councilman Jackson: No, when you and I were standing in the hallway, when the Mayor and I were standing in the bathroom,

Councilman Jackson: My point Mr. Gilliam on this, was I wanted to be sure it wasn’t just me. Ken sat there, and Mr. Mayor, you were here, and he said that this contract was cancelled for nonperformance. I guess my point is, if it’s a Fair Share contract or whoever it may be, if those folks want to do business beyond the City of Shreveport or in the market, and then there reputation is besmirched or disparaged when the company itself said we cancelled the contract, because of convenience, we wanted to go, and you can read it on July 25^th, Mr. Mayor, he said we wanted to go with a local firm, who could do the same thing. So, we stopped shipping the money out. Yet here we are in October, Ken sits there and says it’s because the company didn’t perform. To me, that’s disparaging against a company. It’s saying we cancelled their contract for non performance. And right here in the July 25^th minutes, it suggest to us that Mr. Clark stood there and said, it was only a deal because they were local. We thought it would be logistically better to go with a local firm. And I guess that’s my problem, we start talking about the integrity of the process, how we do businesses, and how we do business is important. And I think that Mr. Antee owes at least an apology to that company for lying and saying that that company did not in fact do what they were supposed to do, and when the truth was within the right of the contract, we cancelled the contract. But to make them look bad, and in a spat of arrogance, say well I’ll tell you what the problem was, they didn’t perform. And I guess maybe as Councilman Lester has said, we do an investigation, maybe if I’m wrong I want to apologize to Mr. Antee. But it seems to me that between what’s happening in July, and what happened in October, and now in November, we’re getting two different stories. Maybe, as a part of the investigation, you couldn’t find out whether they did not do something. But Walton didn’t say that when they were here. Mr. Antee said it, and I don’t know where he got it from. And the Mayor and I were talking yesterday, he said he knows that he doesn’t talk to subcontractors, so Ken must have gotten it from the general contractor. But the general contractor didn’t say that when he was here yesterday. And I guess my concern is whether we cancel it or not, lets just do business like that. We cancel, we follow the tenants of the contract, work within the boundaries of the law to do what we can, but whatever we do, not to disparage people after the fact, or suggest what is not true, and that is that they didn’t perform. If we cancelled it because they were local, lets just deal with the fact that we cancelled because they weren’t local and not say that the guys didn’t perform the work, because that’s embarrassing to people who are trying to do work and who are just competing. If you get it fine, if you don’t get it fine. But they don’t deserve to be lied on. And I guess that’s my concern Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Gilliam: My only response is to say Mr. Jackson, I’ve long since tried to give up trying to figure out the mindset of Mr. Tommy Clark and Walton Construction. We just handle the bottom line compliance aspect of it.

Mayor Hightower: Mr. Chairman, I want to repeat my message from yesterday. Mr. Antee doesn’t talk and have any dealings with subcontractors. He talks strictly with the general contractor, and he’s not here today. His nephew is dying of cancer, he’s in New Orleans, and will be back later this week. But Ken didn’t talk to a sub. He talked to someone at Walton, that’s where that message came from because Tommy Clark stood there and said the other day that they cancelled it because of convenience because of the local guy. I truly believe that was at least a part of it. Maybe it was the whole thing, but certainly it was a part of it, and maybe the other part was what Ken said. Now, whether they provide an engineer or not, I don’t personally know, and whether they were supposed to provide an engineer or not, I don’t personally know. But Walton Construction knows, and I think the only people that can answer your questions are the Walton Construction people. Now whether that’s Tommy Clark or McCrocklin or someone else in the firm, they’ll have to put their heads together and figure that one out, but although I sat here and I watched the tape, and I listened two weeks ago, Ken didn’t sit here and make that up and tell a lie, that was something that was told to Ken by somebody in the Walton firm. Didn’t come from anywhere else. Didn’t come from out of the sky. Didn’t come off any local publication, that was told to him from the general contractor.

Councilman Hogan: Thank you Mr. Mayor, while you have the floor, would you like to take up the item you missed earlier?

Mayor Hightower: I will.

Councilman Hogan: You have somebody you want to recognize?

Mayor Hightower: Yeah, I’ve got a proclamation here that I wanted to read. We’ve got someone with us today that has been a city activist, a neighborhood motivator, a good provider for some of those that don’t have the opportunity to do and receive somethings probably because of the economic state that they’re in. And this person’s been a community leader for a long, long time, and a huge volunteer in this city. She’s been responsible for the African-American History Parade for 19 years in this city. It started out as not much of anything, and today, it’s broadcast on one of the local television networks live, and is probably without a doubt the biggest parade we have in this city, maybe with the exception of the Mardi Gras Parade. But it’s certainly well attended. She’s received countless awards from job training service awards to the Channel 3 Jefferson Award, to Harry Blake’s Community Service Award, a Black History Award, Health Fair Award. I know that she rounds up money and provides shoes for school kids every single year along with school supplies, and she again has just been one of those community leaders that gets paid nothing for what she does. But she does it because she cares so much about Shreveport. So, today I wanted to recognize Barbara Norton. Barbara if you would stand for a second.

Ms. Norton: Mr. Mayor, I’m asking if you will allow me and this Council. First let me say thank you for just a minute for what I would like to do. And since today is going to be my day, if you all would just kinda bear with me for two seconds, I promise you I’ll be gone in four seconds. What I want to do is everyone that is with me, the Chief of Police, my Pastor, you all come up, please, please, please. Ron, everybody get up, come on.

Mayor Hightower: Mr. Chairman, I’m sorry. I didn’t mean to lose control.

Ms. Norton, Come on Nicole, Jackie, Roy Burrell, (inaudible).

Councilwoman Robertson: She’s having a parade right here.

Ms. Norton: Jabber Jaws, (Inaudible), where is my grandbaby? Where is Jas. You’re a policeman? Okay, we have another policeman. My brother? Is he here? Henry Morgan over there. Come on, Helen, everybody that’s here. Mayor, just want you to know that before you finish I just need to take a half a second to get them all here, so that they can hear exactly what you’re going to say, and then I’ll say what I need to say.

Mayor Hightower: Mr. Chairman, I’ve been wondering about this lame duck deal now for the past several weeks, and today it’s finally hit me in the past few minutes. I can’t command attention in the City Council Chambers anymore if Barbara’s here. So, but I did want to in recognition for what she’s done for this community and in particular the African-American community, and the people that she’s really stepped up and taken care of and worked with Councilman Green and Councilman Shyne to again to really provide that no benefit to her other than a good feeling in her heart, so I wanted to take this opportunity to proclaim it Barbara Norton Day in the City of Shreveport and (inaudible). Councilman Green, would you join me with your good friend, and - - -.

Ms. Norton: Mayor, don’t you all leave. I want to first say thank God for allowing me the opportunity to be here and see another day, and to this great Council, I certainly take this opportunity to thank each and everyone of you for just stopping or pause for a moment to recognize not just my effort. My name is probably tagged to the back of this, but all of the people here with Channel 12, Channel 3, and all this whole group here is really responsible for those things. And I want you to know Mayor, that you have been the greatest. The greatest. I don’t care what they say. You have been the greatest Mayor there is. You have been a mayor for all of the people here in this city, and I want you to know the African-American Celebration Committee is in here somewhere with me, and there are many ministers, businesses, Channel 3, Channel 12, Channel 6, the radio station, Cummulus, AAMPS Magazine, Dream Magazine, all of them is back here somewhere, with all of the - - - the new Police Chief, congratulations. But anyway I want to just say, we’re going to miss you, I promise you that. These children are going to miss you. Because there is not one single time, that I called upon you for these children and you did not appear. And I just want to say, we love you and we appreciate you. When we say to you, keep your head up, continue to do what God would have you to do and to know that you have some friends here. All these people didn’t tell me that they were your friends, but if they’re my friend, they’re your friend. And let me say this is my grandbaby standing here with us, this proclamation is not for me, its for our children, that we prepare them for tomorrow. Those things that we do today is for them. And I want to say to Mr. Green, we appreciate you, and we know that sometime we go in the daylight, or we go in the dark, but whatever it is or wherever we are, God is still there. And he’s still on a high (inaudible), and all we have to do is keep asking him to lead us and guide us and direct us, and we’ll get there. So, I want to say to all of you guys here, men and women, I want to say that we really, really, really do appreciate you. And on behalf of all the wonderful people, the Shreveport/Bossier Convention Bureau, they’re here, and just so many people back here, and we’re going to leave somebody’s name out, but again, we just thank you. You all knew I was going to take over, so I just wanted to say thank you, and again, I appreciate you all, and keep each other in our prayer.

Councilman Hogan: Thank you for the presentation Mr. Mayor.

Mayor Hightower: You want me to do another one?

Councilman Hogan: I don’t know if anybody could top that.

Councilman Carmody: I thought we might have to end up naming it “Barbara Norton Week”.

Councilman Hogan: If there is anyone here that wants to speak for the Public Hearing, you have an opportunity to speak for the 2007 Budget for the City, please fill out a form like this. They’re at the desk at the entry. We’ll recognize you if you give it to the Clerk, right up here at the corner, and we’ll make sure you get a chance to speak.

Public Hearing: 2007 Budget Appropriation Ordinances.

Councilman Hogan: The Public Hearing for the 2007 Budget for the City of Shreveport is now open, is there a presentation from the Administration?

Mr. Dark: Yes sir, there is, and what I’m going to do is give just a brief summary. The City’s proposed budgets were submitted to the Council as required on September 29, 2006. They have been placed on the Council’s agenda and must be approved on or before December 15, 2006. The Council has held two review sessions on these budgets and will hold at least three more before final passage. There will undoubtedly be some changes in at least some of these budgets before they are adopted, reflecting the wishes of Mayor-elect Cedric Glover and the Council members who will take office in two weeks.

The City’s overall 2007 budgets are proposed to be $436.8 million, up 9.5% from the original 2006 budgets. The largest of the City’s 18 budgets are the General Fund ($194.1 million), the Debt Service Fund ($75 million), the Water and Sewerage Fund ($65.1 million) and the Community Development Fund ($18.8 million). Other City budgets include ones for the Airports, Golf courses, SporTran, Riverfront Development, Retained Risk Fund, the MPC, Fleet Services, the Convention Center Hotel and several smaller funds associated with grants or special purposes. The 2007 budgets provide funding to maintain City services at their current levels. Annual step increases are provided for the City’s classified employees. Longevity pay required by State law is provided to Police and Fire employees. Adequate funding is provided to pay increased costs associated with fuel purchases and utilities. Funding to a number of civic and non-profit groups has been provided in the Riverfront Fund. The City is in good financial shape. Sales tax revenues are holding strong. Our Operating Reserves are as large as they have ever been, with a 7% reserve in the General Fund. No tax increases are included in this budget. An increase of 4% in water and sewer rates, approved several years ago by the Council, is included in the Water and Sewerage budget. Mr. Chairman, it would be appropriate for the Chair to invite public comments at this time.

Councilman Hogan: As I verified with Mr. Thompson, it is not necessary that we vote if anyone wants to speak on the public hearing. So, we’ll just forego that.

Mr. Robert Darrow: (3920 Gilbert Drive) I come to you as Managing and Artistic director of the Shreveport Little Theatre. In 1922, the City of Shreveport allowed a group of individuals to start producing plays in the City Hall basement. That was the beginning of the Little Theatre of Shreveport. In this next year, we’re going to begin construction on the back stage area of our theatre which burned down in 1986. It’s been a long run to get to this point. I come to you about Community Development Funds and an application that we’ve submitted with the City. We respectfully ask that this application be considered on the grounds that as a component of this new construction, we would like to add a classroom for an after school program for inner city youth. This would be a free program, teaching theatre, public speaking, and leadership skills. This we fell is our only chance to add this classroom, into this construction project, and we feel that it would benefit generations of Shreveporters. Mr. Chairman, that’s all the comments.

Ms. Betty Lebrun-Mooring: (629 Spring St) I’m the Executive Director of the Shreveport/Bossier Film Office Commission. I wanted to come and give you an activity report and speak on the 2007 Budget. In the bylaws of the Film Commission, states that it was established in 1991, and is charged with proactively marketing the Shreveport/Bossier area to entertainment production companies worldwide. For 14 years, the Shreveport City Council and other governmental agencies wise investment in the Shreveport/Bossier Film Office allowed the area to have the only professional film office in the state outside of New Orleans. I belong to an association of film commissioners international, and that’s over 300 film commissioners from 30 countries. We’re a professional organization. For each dollar, the City of Shreveport invested in the Shreveport/Bossier Film Office for 2006, the City of Shreveport received a return on their investment, and listen to this 3,900%. The following productions with combined budgets in excess of $200,000,000 were filmed here. The Guardian, starring Kevin Costner, Mr. Brooks, starring Kevin Costner. A note on Mr. Brooks, that was slated to go to Portland, Oregon. And Kevin’s business partner, Jim Wilson came here and we started in the beginning on Kevin’s work on the Guardian. That was in November. And when I showed him locations that we could duplicate, that was placed in Shreveport/Bossier, so we got that from another state. The five part television series, Factory Girl, Premonition, A Year Without Santa Claus, (Inaudible), Roadhouse 2, Not Like Anyone Else, Initiation of Terror. Also I have some handouts, they already have them? And if you get time, can you look at them. It tells what kind of money was spent, the direct impact of what they spent in our area. These projects contributed to over $78,000,000 in direct dollars spent in our area. That’s significant. I mean if you think of it like jobs in manufacturing, what other business comes to your area to spend money and not make money. Your investment gave our area the professionalism, the film industry required to make Shreveport/Bossier City the No. 1 location in the country outside of Los Angeles. And that’s according to the film trade magazine, Production Update. As you know Hurricane Katrina devastated the film industry in south Louisiana. Production scrambled to find appropriate locations that would allow them continued filming in Louisiana. My office had a small window of opportunity to convince them that we were the place to film. First projects were always leave to surrounding states and to other cities because our business is a very competitive business. Hurricane Katrina came ashore on a Monday, Peter McGregor Scott, the Guardian’s executive producer called on a Wednesday and said, I’ll be there tomorrow, pick me up at the airport and give me a reason to stay in Louisiana. Well, bottom line, we did. Locations, logistics office (inaudible) the film office was able to answer all their questions, two weeks later, we got The Guardian for filming, Mark (inaudible) production manager was one of the ones that sent me a nice thank you letter the other (inaudible), I have the original letters, but I have some of the other quotes in the handouts where you’re sitting, but I’d like to read this one into record. He was Mark (Inaudible) Production Manager for The Guardian, had this to say about his experience about the film office. “After the hurricane, we had to prove to the studio that we could relocate the film Shreveport and fast, or there was a real chance that it would be cancelled. Your assistance in finding locations, facilities, housing, governmental contacts and so on were instrumental in keeping the movie alive in the Shreveport/Bossier area. We’ve never seen a film commissioner work as hard as you did with us, and the other projects in the post Katrina chaos. Of the projects that just completed is Homeland Security, they were also looking at Baton Rouge, but I was able to show them the benefits of them shooting Homeland Security in Shreveport/Bossier. Upcoming projects that are confirmed are Blonde Ambition, that will start within two weeks, starring Jessica Simpson, (inaudible) that starts in January, and the Cleaner, and that’s going to star Samuel L. Jackson. I want to broaden the markets and scopes for 2007. To facilitate this, I’m asking the City of Shreveport to fund the Shreveport/Bossier Film Office Commission $50,000. That concludes my reports.

Councilwoman Robertson: I notice in your brochure, you’ve got North Louisiana Film Alliance Marketing Committee Chairperson. What difference is that I guess and what you’re saying is Executive Director of the Film Office?

Ms. Lebrun-Mooring: Well, I’m been Film Commissioner for 14 years. The North Louisiana Alliance is a new support organization of people that work with people in the business of film industry, and it’s an alliance of individuals and I’m a member of that and support of the organization because I think that the more cohesive we are in north Louisiana, the more attractive we are to producers. So, I was asked to be on the marketing committee, because my office is one of the ones on marketing. And I am also - - - was voted the Chair of the marketing committee. But in answer to your question, it’s a support organization.

Councilwoman Robertson: Okay, and does the Parish- - -? Do you also have funding through Caddo Parish?

Ms. Lebrun-Mooring: Yes, I’m in the Caddo Parish Budget from what I understand, for the Budget Year of 2007. The City of Bossier funds my office also, and the Convention and Tourism Board funds my office. I’m housed under their umbrella, but I’m a stand alone office. But it really worked out well, thanks to Stacy, that when Katrina happened, I had a running tally of hotel rooms available to production, and I can’t tell you how important that was. For instance, The Guardian was 300 crew people, and if y’all remember that time we had evacuees, people that were coming from the southern part of the state, and I was relocating film personnel, as we would get confirmed productions, so that really worked out good.

Mr. Murray Lloyd: (4719 Richmond Ave) Good afternoon. I’m going to stick to procedural suggestions, primarily for next year, and see if we can move a little bit further. The one thing I would first suggest is that when the proposed budget goes out, that it would be put on the website so that citizens can see it and get a hold of it, and hopefully download it. I assume you could put it in a PDF read only or figure out whatever. Also, a schedule of the budget meetings on the website would probably be helpful with time and place. Some type of procedure to be put in place for citizen input during the budget meetings prior to each agency or department going through their budgets. And also on the website, a budget process 101, showing an explanation of how the budget is prepared, what the timelines are and how citizens could input through the whole process through the year. Thank you.

Councilman Hogan: Thank you. Just a moment.

Councilman Robertson: I was just going to let him know that yesterday’s agenda that is posted on the city website, it did show several of the budgets, and all the figures and all, so it was on there. So you’ll know if you needed to look at it.

Mr. Ken Kreft: (157 Archer Ave) Congratulations everybody, especially Landslide. As President of the Broadmoor Neighborhood Association somewhat on the first three points, and on the last point (inaudible), the Secretary-Treasurer for the Shreveport/Bossier Neighborhood Associations. And I’ll second Murray’s comments about the website. I think that’s a good idea. I’m very much pleased with the revenue growth, and I think that will hold strong for ’07, I’m not so sure about ’08, once the Katrina bounce is over, but it looks solid. Two things, personally to me and our association, we’d like to see a bigger emphasis on Property Standards. I know we’re reworking that. I think we have enough inspection, I just wish we could do better with city court and get more people into court after we get the new ordinance and probably have to change the state laws. Third, I think sometime next fall, maybe (inaudible) with the Governor’s state legislative ballots, if we can, and I think we have money, a GOB issue for the hard core stuff, streets and drainage. I think it’s been July of ’01 that we did a $70,000,000, and that will have been six plus years. Certainly we know what the needs are, we have a huge document called Capital Improvements, and that’s for the new mayor and the new council, but I think that should be at least discussed. And lastly, on behalf of Lola B. May, the President of the Shreveport/Bossier Neighborhood Association formed in ’94, initially Mayor Bo Williams, funded us with a $5,000 grant, probably from the General Fund, I don’t know, and it’s held us in good stead until now. And the reason I haven’t asked for any money in 12 years, is we haven’t needed any, and I don’t believe in asking when you don’t need it. And right now, I’m asking for the Council whether from the NIP or from the Riverfront fund, we don’t really have a project, but we really need $5,000 for the next ten years. I’d rather do it once and then come back in 2016 or $500 a year. It’s probably the smallest request y’all are going to get from any group, but I don’t believe in asking for more than you need, and this is generally for operations, and it will take us through 2016. Most of our income is from members from dues for our expenses. The other possibilities we could use that grant working with Dr. Melissa Flournoy, Executive Director of LANO, Louisiana Association of Nonprofit Organizations, to try to get $20,000, and our money would be 20%, and the money actually comes through the president’s faith based initiatives. But that’s real early. We just really need about $5,000 from the city for the next ten years. Like I say, if we can get that, we appreciate it. Thank you sir.

Ms. Linda Darnell Scott: (446 Woodrow) I live in the Hollywood section of the community and I’m a member of Hollywood Civic Club, also NICH, Neighbors Involved In Caddo Heights, as well as President of Concerned Citizens Coalition, Precinct 38. We’re located in District F, where Precinct 38 is, and some of our concerns were we visit or we participate at Hattie Perry Park, here in the City. We feel that we have needs, improvements, and everything for this neighborhood park which has been there for over50 years in the community, and we didn’t see anything on the proposed budget for that, so we would like for the incoming council as well as those that are going to remain, and the Councilman for that District, which is District B to try to allocate some funds for that park. Also we would like streets reconstruction to be considered in the budget for the Hollywood section of the city, as well as we want more funding to help us with the residents who live in the Hollywood area as well as Caddo Heights who needed help under the Project Rebuild. Especially those of District F, where the money has been allocated for. So we’re hoping that, that can be addressed in this upcoming year with this new budget. We as members of the Concerned Citizens, Precinct 38, we were fortunate this year. This year was our first year to receive NIP funding, which truly helped a lot of residents in our neighborhood. We are very grateful to the City for that, and for Councilman Lester for allocating that, and introducing that resolution. We appreciate that, and we look forward to working with this Council for the next year as well as our new Mayor. We hope you will consider putting something in the budget for our Hollywood neighborhood in District F. Thank you.

Mr. Roy Cary: (4615 Monkhouse Drive) I’d like to say good evening to the Chairman of this Council and the Council Members that are here and the ones that will be leaving. I want to say thanks for your service, and I think you’ve done a great job despite all of the things that you’ve had as challenges. And I wish you well. And to the Mayor and his Administration, I want to say thank you. They’ve done a fine job and want to commend them publicly and say that my hat’s off to them for the job they’ve done. Mr. Dark, if you convey that to the Mayor, I’d appreciate that. Of course, I’m down here this evening to speak on behalf of the Shreveport/Bossier Film Commission, which I have a vested interested in being a Board Member, and which I’m very excited about as you’ve heard and seen. I think Ms. Lebrun did an excellent presentation on what the Film Commission has done over the past 14 years. Myself and Mr. Lo Walker, who is now the Mayor of Bossier and Kip Holloway, who you know has been over the festivals that we’ve had started this some 14 years ago, I think Ms. Lebrun, which her and some other people. And we had nothing. We kinda started with nothing. And I was totally impressed as the years progressed, with the hard work ethics that Ms. Lebrun has. She is, I say sometimes a Roy Carey, Jr. She’s a ‘go getter” She knows how to treat people, she knows how to talk to people, she makes people feel welcome. She has done more for Shreveport/Bossier Film Commission than anyone person I’ve seen in any other organization, and without her and her efforts and her hard work, I don’t think none of this could be possible. But I do want to thank the Tourist Bureau, Caddo Parish Commission, the Shreveport City Council, and the Mayor’s office for their support. You guys have stepped up to the plate, you’ve been a team player, which has made this a success for us. Let me just read a comment if I can from a gentleman who is on the local (inaudible) which is the people who do a lot of service work with the stage peoples (inaudible). This is the comments that he made. He said, “As the events of the year 2005 draws to a close, I’d like to take the opportunity on behalf of the IATSE Local 478, Officers and Members to extend to you and your staff a heartfelt thank you for the work you’ve done to keep the Film Commission and television business in Louisiana alive and prosperous. A lot of Louisianians don’t know it, but they too owe you thanks. The film office of Shreveport/Bossier City has helped to keep this business alive and as such afforded many Louisianians workers good high paying jobs.” This is from Mike McHugh, ITASE, Local 478, the business agent. Of course, I think some of you have some other comments that were made by other agencies, and agents. I thought that was impressive along with the one Ms. Lebrun referred to. Two quick things I wanted to point out about why I think this Council Body and this Administration should fund this agency again, and do it excitingly, Mr. Green with enthusiasm. 1) Economic Impact, and Ms. Lebrun covered that. This agency and this organization has brought more dollars into the Shreveport/Bossier area than any other one industry as it relates to Shreveport not really having to put out any money. These people come in, they want hotels, they want rental cars, they eat at our restaurants, they even come in Mr. Jackson, and they hire people from the streets to become standbys or whatever in the movies. And a lot of people at my church have gotten parts, and a lot of people in my community have gotten parts in movies, and been able to get some notoriety, just by being associated and being able to connect with the Shreveport/Bossier Film Commission. That’s a positive, and that’s a plus. The other thing, it put Shreveport on the map. Shreveport up until - - - really didn’t have any notoriety, I don’t think. I don’t think until Hurricane Katrina hit, we really got the notoriety that we should. But because of Betty Jo’s hard work ethic, getting out talking to people, going to seminars in Los Angeles, asking, begging, and prompting and prodding people to come to Shreveport, look at Shreveport as a film market, that was the way that we were able to attract people to look at us. Of course, we do know that Hurricane Katrina had a significant impact and because of that, that brought more industry. But, Mr. Jackson, if we had not been already organized, set up and able to accommodate those people when they got here, I assure you they could have easily went to any other city, Baton Rouge, Lafayette, Dallas, any other city, because we wouldn’t have been able to have the mechanism to handle their needs. Again this office stepped up to the plate. They did what was necessary to make this a success. The other thing I want to talk about is the fact that this agency, unlike most agencies, they collaborate. You heard her talk about the collaborative effort, and I know I’m a nonprofit promoter, and a big thing in nonprofit agencies, is that Monty, you need to collaborate, work together, so you don’t duplicate, so you don’t end up doing the same thing, and so you don’t end up spending unnecessary funds. This agency and our office has worked in a collaborative effort with the Shreveport/Bossier Tourism Bureau, with the Caddo Parish Commission, with the agency that you’ve just mentioned, and with other agencies, local and national to try and work together because they feel and we feel, Mr. Carmody, working together is the best way to get things done, and you can get things done more effectively, and more efficiently. This agency has shown that. The last thing is the return on your investment. Betty told you I’m an investment consultant. Betty told you about the return on this investment. You don’t have to be a financial wizard, you don’t have to be very wise to see that there is a tremendous return on the City’s investment when you invest in this kind of event or this organization. I want to thank you for what you’ve done. I want to urge you to continue doing what you’ve done. I would like to ask you to do more, but we all know that dollars are tight, we all know that there are more needs than we can afford, but this is one need that we can ill afford not to consider funding. Please, if you will consider and do continue to support the Shreveport/Bossier Film Commission, and their works, and I think you’ll see a lot more greater returns in the future because now, Shreveport is really getting the kind of positive notoriety that they need. Thank you for your time, and are there any questions?

Councilman Jackson: Thank you Mr. Carey, I really appreciate it, I didn’t really have any questions, just a comment. I’m leaving the Council, and so I was trying to see maybe I could associate with the Film Commission, if they’re looking for extras. I’ve already been told, I have the face for radio.

Mr. Cary: Well Mr. Jackson, like I said, you may could pass for Samuel Jackson’s cousin and they may need you. They use some of all types of people from all walks of life. And I urge you and encourage you that if you get in touch with Ms. Lebrun. And when they look for extras, she’ll be sure and call you. They called me one time, but I didn’t have the time, and the energy to do it, but I referred someone, and they got in and they were very excited. So, I assure you though, they have an open door policy, all are welcomed.

Councilman Jackson: Good. Ms. Lebrun-Mooring, I’ve got my agent’s card, I’ll give it to you.

Councilman Green: Don’t worry about it Roy, he’s too short.

Mr. Cary: Well, coming from a man of your statue, (inaudible) excuse me Mr. Chairman, but it’s alright, to laugh and have good humor sometimes. God Bless you, thank you again, thank you all you Council Members who are going to be with us again. Monty “Landslide” Walford, thank you. Thank everybody. I want to thank you for all the times you’ve put up with me on other occasions, I’ve come down, you’ve been very generous. You’ve had a listening ear. People don’t know what you have to put up with, but I want to commend you on a job well done. God bless you and I wish each of you well in your endeavors. God bless you, thank you.

Councilman Hogan: Ms. Brown, Ms. Stacy Brown, I remember we spoke before the meeting, but I noticed you didn’t fill out a card, but I’ll just ask now the Council, if there is anyone - - - she has prepared a presentation for us from the Shreveport/Bossier Convention and Tourism Bureau, and if y’all would like - - - at the Council’s pleasure would like to hear - - -?

Councilman Lester: Would that be the budget that we can’t amend?

Councilman Walford: I think what Ms. Brown is going to have is for an upcoming piece of legislation to approve their budget. Not in conjunction with this.

Councilman Hogan: Well, she asked that we recognize her, and if anyone had questions or whatever about her budget, so - - - Did I misunderstand you Ms. Brown?

Ms. Brown: No, I’d be glad to present.

Councilman Jackson: Mr. Chairman, I think what Councilman Walford, is saying is that it’s probably in the wrong place. That it’s still in the Public Hearing for the Budget itself, and that since it is on the agenda, the appropriate place would probably be Public Comments.

Councilman Hogan: Okay. You want to hold off until then Ms. Brown?

Ms. Brown: Thank you.

Councilman Hogan: Okay, we’ll do that. Are there any other persons to speak on the proposed budget? Anyone else to speak in favor? Anyone to speak in opposition to the budget? Alright, if not the Public Hearing is closed.

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

Confirmations and/or Appointments:

Adding Legislation to the Agenda

1. Resolution No. 183 of 2006: A Resolution accepting dedication for St. Charles Boulevard, Conti Circle, and Toledano Circle in St. Charles Place Subdivision Unit No. 7 and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

2. Resolution No. 184 of 2006: A Resolution authorizing the Mayor to enter into, or request the Authority to enter into, one or more Swap Agreements, all in connection with certain outstanding bonds of the City or the Authority and providing for other matters in connection therewith.

3. Ordinance No. 199 of 2006: An Ordinance to amend Ordinance No. 149 of 2006 relative to creating and establishing a No Through Truck Route on the portion of East Kings Highway lying within the City of Shreveport between Bert Kouns Industrial Loop and Flournoy Lucas Road and to otherwise provide with respect thereto (D/Robertson)

4. Ordinance No. 200 of 2006: An Ordinance amending the 2006 General Fund Budget and otherwise providing with respect thereto (G/Jackson)

5. Ordinance No. 201 of 2006: An Ordinance amending the 2006 Budget for the Community Development Special Revenue Fund and otherwise providing with respect thereto (G/Jackson)

6. Ordinance No. 202 of 2006: An Ordinance amending the 2006 Budget for the Riverfront Development Special Revenue Fund and otherwise providing with respect thereto. (Youth Council) (G/Jackson)

7. Ordinance No. 203 of 2006: An Ordinance amending the 2006 Budget for the Riverfront Development Special Revenue fund and otherwise providing with respect thereto. (Lee Hedges Stadium) (A/Lester)

8. Ordinance No. 204 of 2006: An Ordinance amending the 2006 Budget for the Riverfront Development Special Revenue fund and otherwise providing with respect thereto. (Disparity Study) (A/Lester)

9. Ordinance No. 205 of 2006: An ordinance amending the 2006 Capital Improvements Budget and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Motion by Councilman Jackson, seconded by Councilman Lester to add Resolution Nos. Resolution 183, and 184 of 2006, and Ordinance Nos. 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, and 204 of 2006 to the agenda. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, Green. and Jackson. 7. Nays: None.

Public Comments (Agenda Items to be Adopted)

Mr. Steve Higgins: (1600 W. Seventh Street, Ft. Worth TX) Thank you for allowing me to approach the Council this afternoon. I would ask Zoning Case C-76-06, which is coming up a little later on the agenda, we’d like to keep that case tabled if possible. If that’s not in favor of the Council, I would like to bring up a few points. Maybe I’ve hit on these before, but I just want to make sure that everybody understood the circumstances of what we’re trying to do. We currently have a Cash America Pawn at 4012 Jewella. We’re attempting to move it across the street to 3749 Jewella. Both properties are zoned B3. I’m going from 3800 square foot to 12,000 square foot. There will be a training center in the new location as well as the market manager’s office who is currently in Bossier. I have a petition signed by Cash America Customers. I didn’t shoot copies of it, but I can make copies available if you’d like. I’ve got 267 signatures from existing Cash America Customers in approval of our move across the street. To my knowledge, there’s only been two letters of opposition. The MPC that I’ve been before twice has approved me unanimously both times. We have a building permit in hand. The leases have been signed. We’re probably out $15-20,000 currently on the expense to get to this point. We’re ready to start construction as soon as we get the necessary approval from the City Council. Our total expenditure in this particular project is $342,000 to make the move across the street which is pretty substantial for us in these types of situations. We serve over 7,000 customers in that immediate area. These people live there. They patronize our facility for their needs. Obviously, they’d like to have a better environment to do their shopping in and to also make their loans. A Shreveport Pawn Detective has already generated a letter, which a couple of months ago that you’re probably aware of. Says we’ do business the right way, we don’t intend to change that. And then Cash America would also be willing to sign any waiver that the Council feels is necessary that we would not sublease that for another pawn shop. I just wanted to bring these issues up. I know you’ve heard some of these before. I feel like we just needed to reference these things again in case y’all decide to vote on it this evening. And I’d be glad to answer any questions that you might have at this time.

Mayor Hightower: Mr. Chairman, I’ve got a question. I had a call from Stanford Alexander, The Chairman of Weingarten Realty yesterday asking that that item be withdrawn from the Council agenda. Is that what you’re asking for?

Mr. Higgins: That’s not my knowledge. I talked to Mr. Alexander yesterday and that was not mentioned to me. We - - - I don’t think we gain anything by withdrawing the case to be honest with you. Now there might be some setbacks for that decision, but we’d like to see it tabled first and foremost. If the Council doesn’t feel that way, go ahead and bring it off the table and take a vote. If we win, we move forward, if we lose, we will maybe, I can’t speak on behalf of the company, but there might be another effort to have the new Council hear that. But it’s not my request today to withdraw the case.

Mayor Hightower: Do me a favor and take the minutes of this meeting back to Mr. Alexander if you would. And your wish is the Council’s command.

Councilman Carmody: But to clarify sir, you’re asking us to leave the issue undecided at this point, and not act on it today?

:Mr. Higgins: That’s correct. And if y’all are in favor of that, go ahead and take a vote. I mean, obviously the other decision would be to bring it off the table and to cast your vote. My request is, initially, that you leave it on the table. If you’re not comfortable with that, vote it off the table, take the vote, and we’ll do whatever is necessary after that.

Councilman Carmody: Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Jackson: Mr. Chairman, I think I have stood pretty steadfast in regard to this issue. I’ve certainly not changed my position on the issue. I stated on yesterday, Mr. Higgins, that it was my desire to take it off the table to day and in fact vote on it. So, we certainly will comply with that particular wish. I know it’s on our agenda, but I don’t know if you’ve got time to stick around. But Mr. Chairman if not, I’d be so inclined to suspend the rules and deal with it, and be finished with it.

Councilman Hogan: Okay.

Motion by Councilman Jackson, seconded by Councilman Green to suspend the rules and remove C-76-06 from the table. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Green. and Jackson. 5. Nays: Councilmen Robertson, Hogan. 2.

Councilman Jackson: Mr. Clerk, you may help me with this. I guess I’ll look at it here. It came as a result of an ordinance that suggested it has to come to the Council even after the MPC, so I guess I’ll be looking to overturn the MPC’s decision. Would that correct?

Mr. Thompson: That’s correct.

Councilman Jackson: And that would be my motion Mr. Chairman, to overturn the decision of the MPC.

Mr. Thompson: To deny the application.

Motion by Councilman Jackson, seconded by Councilman Green to overturn the decision of the Metropolitan Planning Commission, and to deny the application.

Councilman Hogan: Okay, it was originally approved?

Mr. Thompson: That’s correct.

Councilman Hogan: And you’re voting to overturn approval?

Councilman Jackson: Right.

Councilman Lester: And you’re asking for a Yes - - -?

Councilman Jackson: I’m asking for an affirmative vote based on my motion.

Councilman Lester: Okay, a Yes vote. Because this is not the deal where you ask - - -?

Councilman Jackson: No.

Councilman Lester: Gotcha.

Councilman Hogan: You’re asking for a Yes vote to overturn?

Councilman Jackson: That’s correct.

Mr. Thompson: I don’t think we ever said in the record, precisely what this is. It’s MPC Case No. C-76-06, 3749 Jewella Avenue, and the applicant is Cash America.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Robertson, Green. and Jackson. 4. Nays: Councilmen Walford, Carmody, and Hogan. 3.

Ms. Stacy Brown: (629 Spring St) Mayor, City Council, thank you very much for allowing me to come before you today requesting approval of our 2007 Budget. You should have received a copy of our budget already. First, I’d like to take just a brief look at what has happened in tourism over the last several years. As you all know September 11, 2001 hit the industry very hard, and we did incur some decreases in tourism over the next couple of years in 2002 and 2003. However in 2004, we saw some good steady increases, in 2005, we had a very strong year with over a 10% increase in revenue. And then in 2006, we currently a have more than 14% increase in revenue. Each year, we review our programs for their effectiveness and tweak those programs to provide the maximum return on investment. As you can tell the adjustments we have made in our programs have been very effective. We’ve been very pleased with the results. Last year, the hurricane threw us some opportunities, but we had to be ready to take advantage of those opportunities. One of those was some great tour opportunities. One of them was a Swedish group that was planning to come to New Orleans for a music tour. We were able to divert them to Shreveport/Bossier and accommodate their needs here. There were some conventions, and as Betty Jo Lebrun-Mooring has already told you, the film industry was a tremendous opportunity as well. It’s very important that the Convention and Tourism Bureau, the Film Office, and December on the Red, which are two projects continue to be successful, because they bring revenue to the City of Shreveport. There are still some challenges from the hurricane. Believe it or not, we still have people asking about our (inaudible) problem, because they know we’ve been underwater, so that’s one of the things that we have to combat. However, we overcome that through our grassroots efforts. Going to consumer shows in our surrounding areas. By working community planners, and operators. By advertising and working through public relations. One of the ways that we do that in a group market is through the National Tour Association. We just returned form that, Nancy in our office, and she said, you know the tour operators are all excited about coming back to Shreveport/Bossier. The challenge is their clients still believe we’ve still got some problems. The media is still portraying Louisiana as still having many challenges, even though the information that comes from the state says that Louisiana tourism is down. Actually New Orleans area tourism is down. The rest of the state is seeing some significant increases. So, we’re looking for ways to combat that. And to bring that information to fruition. We’ve also become a member of (inaudible) which is Student (inaudible) Travel Industry Association. This is one way that we can work with a number of our attractions to build some consistent attendance by working with them to tweak their programs a little bit to make them more attractive to that student youth group. The conventions are going strong as Mike Carrier talked to about earlier today. We’ve had some very large conventions this year. One of those we just hosted last month, the Louisiana Math and Science Teachers. They were expecting to accommodate about 750 room nights. They ended up with nearly 1,000 room nights with the largest attendance they’ve ever had. So, that was a great opportunity for our area, and not only for the convention itself, but for the opportunity to showcase what we have to offer to those teachers so that they can bring other conventions. We’ve been working with the Convention Center, and the Hilton Hotel in a number of cooperative opportunities, different trade shows, sales missions and advertising. And by working together, we can maximize our dollars, and make sure there is no duplication of effort, and that we’re all working in the same direction. Once again, we have set aside $50,000 for special promotion of the Convention Center. We are now starting to utilize those funds. You will see down in the prior designated funds the $300,000 down there. In the communications area, our public relations value averages more than $10,000,000 per year. We work very consistently with travel writers to bring them into the area. We also attend a number of trade shows to make sure that the writers know about Shreveport/Bossier, what’s happening and they have the information when they need it. I was talking with Larry (inaudible), the travel editor of the Dallas Morning News, and he was complimenting me on Brandy Evans, our Vice-President of Communications. He said, “you know, when I need a story last minute, Brandy is one of the people I call, because she provides me with the information that I need. Or if she can’t, she lets me know up front. So I always know she’s going to help me in a pinch”. The goals, key projects, and action plans outlined in our business plan were utilized in preparing this 2007 Budget. You will notice that it shows excess expenditures over revenue, if you look on page 6. Those are the designated funds that have been accumulated in prior years to be expended in the future. There is a little over $88,000 in there for CenturyTel Center promotions, $300,000 for the Convention Center, $95,000 for special marketing projects, $100,000 for capital and operating reserve. And we also have $550,000 in there for capital outlay. We have been in our current building for approximately 20 years, and we are bursting at the seams. So we’re exploring the opportunity to expand our building a little bit, build a new visitor area, and some meeting space for those industries that are coming in, making sure that our walk-in visitors are seeing the best side of the Shreveport/Bossier area and what all we have to offer, and getting them out and about in the community. With the hurricane coming in those last four months of the year, we weren’t sure what our budget was going to be, so we cut a lot of expenses last year. Instead, we saw an increase in our revenue, and we’ve seen a very steady increase in our revenue this year. So, those are the funds that you see set aside there for the capital outlay. We try to be very careful in the funds that we spend, and very judicious in making sure that we spend them appropriately, and that we have a tremendous return on investment for the Shreveport/Bossier area and Caddo and Bossier Parishes. Again, Councilmen and women, I appreciate you allowing me to come before you today and I appreciate you considering approval of our budget. Are there any questions?

Councilwoman Robertson: I just was going to share, Stacy and I had talked before hand, but I’d asked there was $300,000 that was a hold over, or carry over for the advertisement and all the Convention Center, and she had explained to me, I didn’t know how they were using that, and I didn’t know if maybe they partnered with people in their advertising and she was letting me know that. And she was letting me know that it’s good to work with the Convention Center as well as SMG.

CONSENT AGENDA LEGISLATION

TO INTRODUCE RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES:

RESOLUTIONS: None.

ORDINANCES: None.

TO ADOPT RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES:

RESOLUTIONS: None

ORDINANCES: None.

REGULAR AGENDA LEGISLATION

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

Councilman Green: Mr. Chairman, I’m trying to find the item for Friends of Municipal Auditorium, what number is that?

Councilman Jackson: It’s coming up.

Councilman Green: Oh, okay.

The Clerk read the following:

RESOLUTION NO. 154 OF 2006

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A SLUDGE PROCESSING/MARKETING CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY AND C. E. DELANEY AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO

By:

WHEREAS, the City has produced and continues to produce daily processed biosolids at its sludge field located at 11726 Hart’s Island Road, utilizing sewage sludge pumped to the facility from the City’s Lucas Wastewater Treatment Plant;

WHEREAS, the materials are considered to be Class A biosolids under state and federal regulations, which allows them to reused with little if any restrictions;

WHEREAS, it is in best interests of the City for markets to be found for the materials and for them to be taken offsite for reuse in beneficial land applications;

WHEREAS, C. E. Delaney (“Delaney”) has offered to further process the materials, using his equipment and personnel, in order to render the materials more transportable, and has offered to make arrangements for the marketing and distribution of the materials to various farmers and end users, all at no charge to the City; and

WHEREAS, the City wishes to utilize the services of Delaney for the purposes stated above:

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Shreveport, in due, regular and legal session convened, that Keith Hightower, Mayor, be and is hereby authorized to execute on behalf of the City of Shreveport a Sludge Marketing/Processing Agreement with C. E. Delaney for the handling of treated biosolids produced at the City’s sludge field located at 11726 Hart’s Island Road, Shreveport, Louisiana, in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in the draft of said agreement which was filed for public inspection with the original draft of the resolution in the Office of the Clerk of Council on October 10, 2006.

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

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilman Green, seconded by Councilman Lester to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, Green. and Jackson. 7. Nays: None.

RESOLUTION NUMBER 161 OF 2006

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A DONATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT AND BRUNSWICK PLACE, L.L.C. REPRESENTED BY JON E. SAYE, MANAGER, FOR WATER AND SEWER MAINS SERVING BRUNSWICK PLACE SUBDIVISION, UNITS 11, 12 AND 13 AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO

BY:

BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, legal and regular session convened, that Keith Hightower, Mayor, be and is hereby authorized to execute on behalf of the City of Shreveport a Donation Agreement with Brunswick Place, L.L.C. represented by Jon E. Saye, Manager, substantially in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in the draft of said agreement which was filed for public inspection with the original draft of the resolution in the office of the City Council on October 24, 2006.

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 all ordinances or resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilman Robertson, seconded by Councilman Green to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, Green. and Jackson. 7. Nays: None.

Mr. Thompson: :Mr. Chairman, it was announced yesterday that Resolution No. 167 is no longer needed and should be removed from the agenda.

3. Resolution No. 167 of 2006: A resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement with the Southern Hills Business Association and the Parish of Caddo and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Motion by Councilman Carmody, seconded by Councilman Lester to withdraw. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, Green. and Jackson. 7. Nays: None.

RESOLUTION NO. 171 OF 2006

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NUMBER 2 TO THE COOPERATIVE ENDEAVOR AGREEMENT WITH THE FRIENDS OF THE MUNICIPAL AUDITORIUM, INC., AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO

BY: Councilman Walford

WHEREAS, Resolution Number 49 of 2003 authorized the Mayor, on behalf of the City of Shreveport ("City"), to execute a Cooperative Endeavor Agreement (the "Agreement") with The Friends of Municipal Auditorium, Inc ("Friends"), relative to the operation of a gift shop and related activities within Municipal Auditorium (the "Auditorium"); and

WHEREAS, Resolution 145 of 2004 authorized an amendment to the original Agreement to provide for use of additional space or areas within the Auditorium by Friends; and

WHEREAS, City and Friends now desire to further amend the Agreement to provide for additional matters relative to management and operation of the Auditorium.

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 Amendment Number 2 to the Cooperative Endeavor Agreement with The Friends of Municipal Auditorium, 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 24, 2006.

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.

Amendment No. 1 to Resolution No. 171 of 2006:

Amend the Amended Agreement as follows:

Substitute the attached pages 1-17 of the Amended Agreement for the previously submitted copy of the Amended Agreement

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Green to adopt Amendment No. 1 to Resolution No. 171 of 2006. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, Green. and Jackson. 7. Nays: None.

Amendment No. 2 to Resolution No. 171 of 2006:

Amend the Amended Agreement by adding Section X. REPORTING, to read as follows:

X. REPORTING

1. Monthly Reporting Requirement. Friends shall submit a monthly report to City's

Director of Public Assembly and Recreation on or before the 20^th day of each calendar month during the Initial Term or any Renewal Term of this Agreement containing detailed information on all rental and use of the facility for the preceding month. At a minimum each report shall contain: a) user name(s); b) event/activity dates; c) list of income and expenditures; d) all other information reasonably requested by City. The report shall be submitted in a format approved by City.

2. Annual Reporting Requirement. Beginning March 1, 2008, Friends shall submit a

annual report to the Shreveport City Council on or before March 1 of the year following the prior year during the Initial Term or any Renewal Term of this Agreement containing a summary of all rental, use and activity in the facility for the preceding year. At a minimum the report shall contain: a) user name(s); b) event/activity dates; c) list of income and expenditures; d) a statement of planned or anticipated events and activities in the facility for the upcoming year; e) detailed outline of marketing strategies and goals for the facility for the upcoming year; f) all other information reasonably requested by the Shreveport City Council. The report shall be submitted in a format approved by City.

3. Annual Financial Reporting Requirement. For calendar year 2007, and for each year of the Initial Term and any Renewal Term of this agreement, Friends shall submit an annual compilation audit of its financial condition on or before May 1 of the next year to the City. This compilation audit report shall be performed by a certified public accounting firm qualified to perform such an audit. The report shall be in a form in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and submitted to the City Council.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Green to adopt Amendment No. 2 of Resolution No. 171 of 2006. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, Green. and Jackson. 7. Nays: None.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Green to adopt Resolution No. 171 of 2006 as amended. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, Green. and Jackson. 7. Nays: None.

RESOLUTION NO. 172 OF 2006

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE RENEWAL OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT AND KPMG, LLP FOR AN EXTERNAL AUDIT OF THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR JANUARY 1, 2006, THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2006, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN ENGAGEMENT LETTER EVIDENCING SAID RENEWAL, AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, the City is required by City Charter Section 4.28 to cause to have accomplished an annual financial audit of the City; and

WHEREAS, external audit firms are normally selected by the City for four years with one year contracts executed for each of those four years; and

WHEREAS, the engagement of KPMG, LLP best meets the needs of the City; and

WHEREAS, the city entered into an agreement with KPMG authorized by Resolution No. 160 of 2003 and dated December 18, 2003, for a one year term renewable at the option of the City Council, with the services to be provided in accordance with Request for Proposals No. 03-810, KPMG’s Proposal dated June 25, 2003, the Schedule of Funds to be Audited, and the Engagement Letter for 2003.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, legal, and regular session convened that it hereby selects KPMG, LLP as the City’s External Auditor and authorizes the renewal of the above referenced contract between the City of Shreveport and KPMG, LLP for the fiscal year January 1, 2006 through December 31, 2006, and authorizes the Mayor to execute the Engagement Letter for 2006 evidencing the renewal.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any provision or item of the resolution or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other 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 Green, seconded by Councilman Jackson to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, Green. and Jackson. 7. Nays: None.

6. Resolution No. 173 of 2006: A resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement for the financing of vehicles and equipment and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilman Green, seconded by Councilman Carmody to postpone. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, Green. and Jackson. 7. Nays: None.

RESOLUTION NO. 176 OF 2006

A RESOLUTION AMENDING SECTION 13 OF THE CITY COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, legal and regular session convened that Section 13 of the City Council Rules of Procedure is hereby amended and reenacted to read as follows:

Section 13. Budget review meetings.

After the budget ordinances are filed with the Clerk of Council by October 1 of each year in accordance with Section 7.02 of the City Charter, the City Council will hold budget review meetings. The Chairman of the Council will set the dates and times for such meetings after consultation with the Mayor regarding the availability of department heads and other necessary personnel. All other budget preparation, review and adoption procedures shall be as set forth in the City Charter.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any provision 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, Green. and Jackson. 7. Nays: None.

8. Resolution No. 177 of 2006: A resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute Change Order Number Five to contract for the construction of the Convention Center Hotel, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

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

Councilwoman Robertson: Do we know, do we feel like that we’re getting pretty good with the change orders, I mean, we still have some money left according to what the original contract was, but do we know how it’s going with the Change Orders?

Mr. Dark: To be at the point where we are Madam Chairman, as few as we’ve had so far, it looks good. I mean, you never know what’s going to come down the road, but so far, the change orders that are actually related to construction, have been less than 1% of the contract price when we’re basically two-thirds through. So, we’re doing pretty well.

Councilman Jackson: Mr. Chairman, with all due respect to what Councilman Lester asked earlier, I guess it’s tough to know how well we’re doing with anything. We don’t get the answers back in the kind of time frame that we need, we’re just kinda of plugging along, and taking everybody’s word for it. So, you know I just think we ought to also be cognizant of that fact as well.

Councilman Lester: Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I’m sure the votes are there to support this. I’m voting no. and I’m not voting no because I’m not in favor of the Convention Center Hotel, I’m clearly in support of it. I supported it, went to Baton Rouge, the whole nine yards. I just feel that it is - - - what’s the word I want to use? Disrespectful. For us to have made a request of the point person for the Convention Center Hotel, our contractor, to come down before this body and answer some legitimate questions that this council had, as it relates to Fair Share issues and contracting issues. I feel it’s disrespectful for him not to show up for the second meeting in a row, and at the same time to issue a press release speaking to those issues. When it came time for us to sign a contract, we didn’t issue a press release, we signed a contract. And I think it’s disrespectful. So, I’m supporting the hotel, but I’m voting no on this change order, because I think Mr. Clark’s behavior is disrespectful. And it’s not about me, it’s about the public, and it’s about the things that we’re asking him to do. We’re not asking him to do a whole lot, and if Mr. Clark can’t come down and answer legitimate questions about his reporting of our contract with our money, I think that’s shameful. But at the same time, they’re asking for us, and it’s nothing against the Mayor to execute a change order. I think it’s disrespectful Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

Councilman Carmody: I appreciate the Councilman’s comments, I just wanted to ask the Mayor what would be the result of the failure of the Council to confirm the approval for the change orders.

Mayor Hightower: Councilman, I’m not real sure if any of the work has actually been done or not. I don’t think that it has.

Mr. Dark: Mr. Chair, these are typically a mixture of things that have been done, because they had to be done that day, and things that have been requested by either us or the hotel operator or the contractor.

Councilman Carmody: Excuse me, but would it delay the completion of the work and the opening of the facility?

Mayor Hightower: They’re going to claim that because they’re running behind already. So.

Councilman Carmody: Is there a penalty then on the city if we drag our feet and cause them to - - -?

Mayor Hightower: They’re going to ask for delay money. They did that on the pile caps, they’ll do it on anything that comes about. So, it’s a give and take on both sides. From our standpoint, we think they’re behind on the project. From their standpoint, they admit that they’re behind on the project, but they’ll say that it’s the city’s fault, and these are the reasons that they’re behind as many days as they are, and they’ll ask for payment.

Councilman Carmody: Mr. Chairman, based upon those comments from the Administration, I certainly respect where my fellow councilmen are coming from, but I’m going to go ahead and vote yes. And no disrespect to them, it’s just that I’d hate to put the city behind the financial 8 ball, and we’re trying to complete a project that seems to be so imperative to the success of our convention center.

Councilman Green: Mr. Mayor, when was the completion date for the hotel?

Mayor Hightower: We had obviously hoped to complete it before the end of this administration’s term. That clearly won’t happen now, so we’re looking for a February open date.

Councilman Green: So, was that our - - - is it something that we didn’t do?

Mayor Hightower: From their standpoint, that’s debatable. From our standpoint, it’s not debatable. We think clearly the hotel should be opening as we speak. But they have from their standpoint, they have numerous reasons as to why it didn’t happen, none of which they claim are their fault.

Councilman Green: Thank you. And my vote will be no as well. There were basically only four of us up here, not including - - - Cindy was not here at the time, who basically supported the project. And the four of us are still here. And I think the request was simple, is that we asked them to come and give a report. And I just think as large as their company is, somebody in their company should have made an effort to come. And no effort has been put, not today. So, I just think that that’s not right. So therefore, my vote will be no, and it’s strange that even my fellow colleague at the point and time that we were doing all of this, he was totally against the project, but at this point and time, he’s in favor of the project getting paid. And I don’t understand that, and I don’t have enough time left on the Council to even figure it out. But there were only four of us, had it not been for the four of us up here that’s still here, this wouldn’t even be a project. And I just think that there is a due diligence that they should have at least come to the meeting whether they had the answers or not. I mean, whether they had to apologize publicly for whatever was said, I just think they should have been here. So, I’ll just be voting no. I’m a supporter of the project, I hate that we’re at this point, but it’s no fault of ours. Because whenever we needed to vote, they were here, and they were smiling, and everything. And they got our vote. In fact, I asked the question, and my answer to the question was that they were going to do what they were supposed to have done by Fair Share, and they have not lived up to that. So, I just think that it’s bad on their part. But like I said, it’s really strange that my colleague at this point and time would speak out for them, that he was totally against them from way back when we took all the heat is not on, then you raise your hand to say, hey I’m for them, and I just think they ought to get paid so we won’t get penalized. According to some months ago, we were being penalized by just doing it. So, now - - - but anyway, Mr. Chairman, thank you for allowing me and I guess Councilman, when you get my age, you won’t understand what you just said, and what you’re just doing, but Mr. Mayor, are you aware of what I’m saying, that if it had not been for the four of us, we wouldn’t even be talking about this at this point and time. I mean, we took the heat, we took the heat, we took the heat. And then now, today that we make a request for them to come, not today, but we’ve given them plenty enough notice, and they would not even take the liberty to send one person to say one thing, and I just think that that’s wrong, And again, for my colleague, and I’m sure he’s going to have a good explanation for TV, but just for the public record, he was not with it then, and he’s not with it now. But now it’s okay to pay them the city money. Thank you.

Councilwoman Robertson: Shelly Ragle just walked out, I was going to ask her a question, so but I do know that it said that there is no increase in the contract time, and Mr. Dark, you think that some of this has already been done?

Mr. Dark: Ms. Robertson, there is no way I can tell you that with any certainty.

Councilman Walford: I certainly respect where my colleague to my right is coming from, but to some extent, to not allow the change orders to go forward on some of this, we’re cutting off our nose to spite our fact. We’re making a point, but the ones that are going to pay are going to be the taxpayers of Shreveport, because the hotel is going to be delayed coming online, and we’re going to continue the debt service. And I cite some of the things in here like modifications to the rooftop (inaudible) supports. Obviously, as it was designed, it’s not strong enough. They’re putting $4,083 worth of additional structure before they set the chiller on top of it. And there are a number of small changes in there like that. I don’t want to see us waiting on air conditioning because we wouldn’t okay the change order to reinforce the structure that’s needed. So, while I certainly can respect what Councilman Lester is asking for, I don’t think this is the way to get it. We’re going to delay the project ultimately, and I don’t think that’s the answer. And don’t forget, I was one of the supporters down there my colleague. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Carmody: Very quickly, my mother and father raised me to be a very polite person and to respect persons even if they disagree with me. And just again, I know that sometimes that you try to be clear and articulate, so that people understand where you’re coming from, but I do feel like it’s necessary to clarify something, and that is that indeed I was never a supporter of this hotel. My concern again, has been for the financial viability of the project. And convention centers a hold different issue. What we’re talking about today is there were the votes to commit the community without a public vote to the project. I’m not here to speak, and nor have I spoken today in support of the contractor. I don’t think I’ve mentioned him yet. My question to the administration was whether or not indeed it would put the taxpayers and the citizens of the community again at further financial liability or risk by delaying this. And for those persons who think that somehow or another that I had changed tact to say that, I am now in full support of this hotel, please understand that my reservations are still there. And I hate to use that particular phrase, but my concerns are still there for this project. But if we vote today to basically send a message to whoever that y’all can’t shun our request to come down here and talk to us, and you need to do so, and then so it’s going to cost the citizens of this community, that’s an expensive lesson in etiquette, and this administration has a rapport with the contractor, I believe that our Mayor said that Mr. Antee does not talk to anyone but the general contractor, and I assume that Mr. Antee made the request of this council to have someone appear. I cannot say why they have not. It’s not my job to know why they have not. Because I don’t communicate with the general contractor. But what I do communicate with are my fellow citizens. And I think they want to see the project done and finished so that it will open and we will all find out whether or not it was financially feasible. But to further put us at delay or risk of paying additional monies, I don’t think is fair to the citizens.

Councilman Green: Thank you Mr. Chairman. And here again, I was raised by my grandmamma, and I don’t think I was un-polite to you or no one else. But you all can speak so passionately now about these folk getting paid. But a few minutes ago, when we were talking about Fair Share, I could not hear a passionate response that it’s unfair, that your fellow citizens that may not be the same color, be put at disadvantage and not make money. Which is all of our money, the city’s money we’re paying for it. But I would like for the day to come, and I probably won’t be here, that we won’t do what is popular, that we would do just what is right. It’s just right for - - - if you make a request for a contractor to come to clear up whatever, for them to come, for them to send somebody. It’s just right. It’s just right. And when you talk about your fellow citizens losing money, there is nothing in this to say that any money will be lost in the next two weeks. We’ll be back here in the next two weeks. And I just think that it’s right, that if in fact, because whenever we were putting all this together, whatever request that you asked the Administration to do, and asked them for, they tried to provide it. Is that true or false Mr. Mayor?

Mayor Hightower: True.

Councilman Green: You carried the Administration through the ringer, for whatever any “T” that they did not dot, and any “I” that they did not cross, you carried them through it, because you wanted to know A,B,C,D. Now here were some request just made that these people come, that’s not a part of the administration, not a part of the council, just to report on our money. They didn’t show up, so that means maybe they don’t even care about the change order. Maybe somebody should - - - in fact, I think it ought to be said, that whenever there are change orders, that somebody from that operation ought to come up and explain the change order instead of the administration trying to say, how important they are. They’re the ones making the money, they’re the ones putting us at risk. Not me. Not us. They didn’t show up. And Councilman, for you to say well, you know you were with us and whatever, just know that you were with us, and when you say us, us. And if it were not for us, the six, landslide that you have, then you wouldn’t be able to come back to even talk. And I just think that there’ll come a time, that there ought to be some due diligence, that just for the mere sake, that I’m not going to go with what is popular, what is politically correct. That I’m just going to go against the grain for a minute. We just experienced another thing a minute ago. When it comes to our district, we talk about our district, but then certain issues that can be in our districts that we disregard. Councilman Jackson requested that in his district, that a pawn shop not be enlarged. But because it’s business, and because I’m pro-business, then I decide that I want to vote because I’m business, or because it’s politically correct, that’s wrong. If it was in your district - - - when we had the chickens in your district, I took a lot of heat for you. But it was your district, and I did that for you. But when it comes to certain times, we do certain things because it’s popular, but that’s wrong, and somewhere down the line, we’ve got to give an account of that. I just think if in fact, Councilman Carmody, Councilman Hogan, or whoever wanted a request to say, lets not do this today, I just think that that would be granted. If it were not how it is now. And I think it’s wrong. There’s no way you all can explain to make it right. I just think that this ought to be postponed at this particular time. There is no way that you can say why. Because there is nothing from the Administration or from the folk with the contract. They don’t even have enough of whatever to come down here because they don’t want to answer the tough questions. So, I don’t think they ought to get our tough money at this time. I don’t think that the request ought to be. And so there fore I’m voting no to postpone it. And I’m just in hopes that possibly the next time, they will have enough guts to come. Maybe they will, maybe they won’t. But sometime or another, we’re going to have to step up to the plate because it’s just right to do it.

Councilman Lester: Thank you. This will be brief. I think it’s important that we do this project, and it’s not about etiquette at all. It’s that this project is done, and it’s finished on time, but it’s finished correctly. I think that there are taxpayers that are concerned about what’s going on. They’re concerned about what’s happening with Fair Share. I’m concerned with what I perceive to be a strategy by the Walton people to use a sports analogy, of playing four corners. Stalling. They’re waiting for us to leave. Well unfortunately for them, I’m going to be back. But in my mind, justice delayed is justice denied. There is no reason why someone from Walton could not have been here. I think as Councilman Green said, they are one of the largest construction concerns in this country, certainly in the Gulf south. And for them to have made the decision to rather than to deal with their issue, that they started out of their spokesperson’s mouth before this Body, to issue a press release as a way of dealing with their policy is something that’s disrespectful. There’s no other way around that. And for me to vote to move a project forward, when their point person on the ground did not have the respect for this Body to come and answer legitimate questions about how their contracting, because please understand, we are still - - - we are not without recourse. There is a potential of extra dollars, but just because they say that we possibly have extra dollars that’s accessed against us. I mean that’s something that can be litigated, and I’m not afraid of that. Because if we get to litigation, then we can start speaking on the issues in terms of whether or not they complied with their contract, in terms of the 21% for Fair Share. I would love to litigate that issue. I would love to litigate that issue, and I don’t think that they would want to. The request that we asked for, is not very much. Come before us and explain what your processes and procedures are so that the people that we represent, and that’s all of us, can have a spirit of - - - we can believe that this process (inaudible) of a certain level of integrity. And for them to have missed this meeting twice, but issue a press release saying that you misunderstood is disingenuous at best.

Councilman Jackson: Thank you Mr. Chairman. And again in deference to all of the previous Council Members who have spoken, I’m certainly not inclined as I started this conversation by saying I think Councilman Lester, certainly voices my sentiment, as he spoke after I did. I had already registered my vote and had not said anything about it. Thought I’d be the only one. But I will say this, that I also understood what Councilman Carmody was saying. But I guess my perspective may be a little different in the sense that we do have a stewardship responsibility. We talk about the people’s money, and to do so and to go about recklessly in suggesting that now time is the dictator for what our actions need to be. When before prudence was supposed to be the dictator of what our actions were supposed to be. Now, I don’t think we subvert time for prudence in my opinion at all. I think it would be prudent on the part of this Council to always know every answer to every question that we can possibly get before we vote on something. It shouldn’t be a rush to vote on it because something may happen - - - the convention center - - - if you all think that $78,000 or whatever the number is, is going to slow the convention center down, we’re not being realistic with ourselves. We have to understand that every dime in this project is public money. And we have a fiduciary responsibility, not just a moral responsibility of whether or not we have a personal sensibility to try to look into it. But we have a fiduciary responsibility to know. And without knowing if we can blindly make these decisions and pass them off as trying to be judicious with time, then I think we’re being at the least malfeasant, to be able to do that. And not being able to get any of our questions answered, I think the best judge of what a person is going to do in the future, is what they’ve done in the past. And if we can’t get answers to some very simple questions, question it whether or not, as my colleague has said, this is an expensive lesson. And we’re sending a message. Well, ladies and gentlemen, they sent us a message. And they sent us a message that they’re not going to comply, or they’ll comply when they get ready, and they’ll say one thing and do another. They sent us a message that what’s in the contract is not concrete, because in their press release, they move the numbers and change the numbers, and they’re not here to even defend whether or not what I’m saying is true. And I think that says something about our business relationship, and the level of relationship. Maybe you all feel comfortable with the level of relationship with Walton. I do not at this point because I think in order for the relationship to prosper, and for us to get to the point of turning over the keys and getting to the point where we can utilize fully our hotel, our convention center hotel, we have to do this as a partnership. We signed a contract in that spirit, I believe we’re paying our bills in that spirit, but we’re not getting what I think is the appropriate reciprocity with them coming up simply being business partners, and coming to answer our questions. If that’s too much for them to do, then $78,000 is too much for me to spend, even as minor as it may seem when you juxtapose it to what the entire budget may be. I don’t think it’s a real, real serious concern. What we ought to have a real serious concern about, the speed at which they are opening. They said - - - the Mayor said they wanted to open before this term is out. Clearly we’re not going to do that. Whether we open it March the 1^st, or March the 15^th because of a change order, I think is a minor issue with regard to the level of dollars we’re going to save. They’re not going to charge us another dime for not being able to report to us. I mean, I think they have a responsibility to report to us. And they cannot say that it’s going to cost us more money if they come and talk to us. And that’s tantamount to what’s happening right now. And for us to buy into that, I think is reckless on our part. And I think we ought to do so or not do so if that’s what we’re considering and we ought to move forward with some prudence, and send not a message, but send a true statement to them that we in fact need a partner who is a true partner, not somebody who takes us for granted because they already have a contract. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Walford: Mr. Mayor, maybe you can help me out a little bit. Generally, is it the contractor who comes forward asking for change orders, or is it often the architect because certain things won’t fit? And I cite things like - - - one of the items here is to relocate fire pump control panel to opposite wall due to a clearance conflict with one of the entry doors.

Mayor Hightower: Most of the time it’s going to be the contractor, finding something on the plans that doesn’t fit, won’t work. They’ll go back and talk to the architect and eventually talk to the owners, and that’s what they’re doing today, to say here’s what we have to do to make this work, or here’s what we have to do to make this fit, so - - - . Probably a combination of, but I think almost all of these are field suggestions of what we need to do to make the project, either work or work better. Well, I would agree with the statement that it’s reckless, but I think what is really reckless is to hold a project hostage to achieve something that totally unrelated to it. And I find that totally unacceptable. To hold up the hotel project, potentially hold up the hotel opening, to get something that could be handled other ways is reckless and irresponsible I’m voting yes for the change order. I’ve read them, they all make good sense. They’re not excessive. And for us to delay would be just totally irresponsible and a breach of our fiduciary responsibility. Thank you.

Councilman Green: Mr. Mayor is it something that we did wrong? Did y’all mess up?

Mayor Hightower: No. I don’t think we’ve done anything wrong, I think that as in the case that Councilman Walford pointed out that the structural steel support chillers was not sufficient. And I don’t know if it was the architect or the contract or maybe the manufacturer of the chillers that recognize the problem and asked for the change order. So, changes get asked for by either the owner, the architects, the vendors, someone recognizes the problems in the initial drawings. So, I don’t think it’s the city’s fault, but at the same time, I don’t think it’s the contractor. It’s just something that didn’t get or wouldn’t work or may not have been spec’d right in the first place.

Councilman Green: And so, I guess my statement would be we up here didn’t cause it. But on the other hand, the 20% - - - but somebody caused the Fair Share problem, and we didn’t cause that either.

Councilman Walford: Point of Order, Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Hogan: Councilman Walford, what’s your point of order?

Councilman Walford: This is the third debate by Mr. Green.

Councilman Green: And?

Councilman Walford: We’re limited to two by the Council Rules of Procedure, unless the Council votes to suspend the rules.

Councilman Green: The Chairman is supposed to talking, not you.

Councilman Walford: That’s just my point of order Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Hogan: Thank you and we will - - - Mr. Thompson, that is correct?

Mr. Thompson: That is correct.

Councilman Hogan: And so the Chairman rules that you’re out of order Councilman Green.

Councilman Green: Okay, I’ll get my statement in.

Councilman Hogan: Alright, and Councilman Jackson, I believe you have spoken twice already as well. I know that you had asked to speak - - -

Councilman Jackson: I move to suspend the rules.

Motion by Councilman Jackson, seconded by Councilman Green to suspend the rules. Motion denied by the following vote: Nays: Councilmen Walford, Carmody, Robertson, and Hogan. 4. Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Green, and Jackson. 3.

Substitute motion by Councilman Jackson, seconded by Councilman Green to deny Resolution No. 177 of 2006.

Councilman Jackson: I want to go back to what I was about to say. And I say this because we talk as if we’re dealing with something monumental. My colleague who Councilman Green has given credit or somebody has given credit for being “with us”. Technically, I think Councilman Hogan, Councilman Carmody, myself and now the former Councilman Gibson, was together with us when we voted to ask change orders to come back. If I’m not mistaken, that was the four votes Mr. Walford. Those were the four votes that I think you missed whenever we voted to say that every change order must come back to the Council, it was Councilman Hogan, Councilman Carmody, former Councilman Gibson, and me. I mean, you weren’t in favor of even coming back and dealing with it at the Council level, and I think that’s what responsible to the citizens. To always make sure we’re looking at their money because it’s their money the whole time. What that vote was previous those years back, was to allow them without even any citizen review, to go ahead and do the change orders like they wanted to. We voted against that if I’m not mistaken. I think you can check the record on that, and that’s why it’s here today. The citizen owners decided that we wanted to see each one, and that’s what we’re doing now, and I’m glad we’re engaged in this process. Because everyone of us here knows notwithstanding what we think the other subject may be. If one contractor, Mr. Chairman was engaged by us to fix our roof, our driveway at our house, and that contractor didn’t fix our roof, the way we thought it should have been fixed, and he said, but I wanted to ask you Mr. Councilman if you would give me more money to go and pour the driveway, cause it’s a part of the contract as well. You’ve got to pour it all., I would suggest that we would say to him, I don’t want you doing anymore work until you finish our roof. I mean that’s just what the normal thinking human being in my opinion, the reasonable man would do. And I’m simply suggesting that it’s one of those scenarios where the roof ain’t fixed. And if the roof’s not fixed, and we want to give them more money to pour the driveway, they may pour the driveway like they fixed the fixed the roof. But we say it’s too important to get the whole project done, notwithstanding the leaks in the roof, lets just move forward because it would be reckless. Now that’s silly to say it would be reckless not to make sure that every part is together before we move on any further. Nobody would do that. I think it’s unreasonable to even suggest that anybody would. With that, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate you letting me make my final comment.

Councilman Hogan: Would you mind restating your motion. Your motion was to deny.

Councilman Jackson: A substitute motion not to give them the money. Not to approve the change order.

Councilman Green: Thank you. I second the motion as Councilman Jackson has just said. And here again, before we got this project started, every tactic that could be brought up was brought up. And nobody cared about a delay. And so now, because we just want to basically delay for two weeks, when we delayed for months. In fact, if in fact and the Mayor can attest to this, if it hadn’t been for so many different tactics from some of our colleagues, we would have been in the hotel now. I mean, we would have been in the hotel, we would have been a part of the ribbon cutting and been finished with it. But because everybody at that time that was against it wanted to know this, and wanted to know that, we delayed. But come today, we can’t delay for two weeks because they need their money. And so I just think that it’s wrong, but I’ve always learned that up here, four is more than three. But as I’ve predicted before and almost lived to be on the Council when it happened, sooner or later the numbers are going to change. And once the numbers change, then we’ll see how people will respond. Sooner or later, just mark my words. They will change. Thank you very much Mr. Chairman, and Robert when Councilman Walford comes back, I ask that you play the tape. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilwoman Robertson: I’d like to make a substitute motion that we postpone.

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

Councilman Hogan: Mr. Thompson, if we have a substitute motion on the floor, a substitute motion, another one would override it. Correct?

Mr. Thompson: Yes, and I believe that the person who seconds the first substitute, seconded this one, so apparently there is no objection.

Councilman Hogan: There is no objection. Alright.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Robertson, Green. and Jackson. 4. Nays: Walford, Carmody, and Hogan. 3.

Councilman Walford: I didn’t vote. My vote is no on postponement.

Councilman Green: You were out of the Chamber.

Ms. Johnson: Sir you have a no vote.

Councilman Jackson: That didn’t count.

Councilman Green: You got a no vote.

Councilman Walford: I’m opposed to a postponement.

Mr. Thompson: I believe the matter has been postponed. Mr. Chairman, I would if I could bring up one item, that the Council may consider and I don’t know. I don’t know whether you intend to ask a representative of the construction company to come down. But I would remind you that the next meeting - - - we will ask you to start the next meeting of the Council at 8:00 in the morning, and the swearing in ceremony will be at 10:00, which means that hopefully the meeting will only be an hour, hour and a half. So, - - -

Councilman Green: You want to have it at 7:30?

Mr. Thompson: Well, there could be a special meeting if you wanted to do this, or you could bring it up on Monday, I mean I’m just throwing out ideas and suggestions to say that there may be some problems if you have a lengthy meeting at 8:00 in the morning on the 28^th. That’s all I’m saying.

Councilman Carmody: That means we hold office longer?

Mr. Thompson: I think the swearing in ceremony will be at 10:00, and at 10:00 I think this meeting will be over.

Councilman Jackson: We could have a special meeting Mr. Chairman, Monday evening.

Councilman Lester: That’s why we said do it Monday.

Councilman Hogan: This coming Monday evening?

Councilman Green: Monday, the 27^th.

Councilman Jackson: Yeah, the 27^th to see if we can have the Administrative Meeting from 2:00 until 2:30 and then have the Special Council Meeting at 3:00.

Mr. Thompson: Or maybe have it the other way around.

Councilman Carmody: Yeah, you want some time, don’t you?

Councilman Jackson: I was saying have the Administrative meeting from 2-2:30, and then the Council Meeting?

Mr. Thompson: No just have the special meeting at a different time, rather than change the time of both meetings.

Councilman Jackson: So, just have the special meeting at 4:00?

Councilman Green: No, have the Special Meeting at 2:00.

Mr. Thompson: Exactly.

Councilman Jackson: So, when would you have the Administrative meeting?

Mr. Thompson: Three.

Councilman Lester: We’re going to be longer than an hour, I can guarantee you that.

Councilman Carmody: That’s what I’m thinking.

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, unless there’s a motion, you can just instruct us when the special meeting will be unless you want to make a motion Mr. Jackson to insure the time.

Councilman Hogan: I’ll entertain a motion.

Councilman Green: 1:30.

Councilman Jackson: Mr. Chairman, I’d like to move that we would in fact move both meetings and have the Administrative meeting of the Council, because I don’t see what the reasoning of having the Administrative Council Meeting after the Special Council Meeting.

Ms. Johnson: The Administrative Conference is for - - -

Councilman Jackson: I guess what I would be trying to do is find out whether or not we would have the meeting.

Councilman Hogan: Excuse me. I can’t hear.

Councilman Jackson: Can we have a special Council Meeting immediately after the work session?

Councilman Carmody: That’s the way to do it.

Councilman Lester: Yes.

Councilman Walford: At 4:30 or immediately following the - - -

Motion by Councilman Jackson, seconded by Councilman Hogan to move both meetings to Monday, November 27, 2006.

Councilman Hogan: Yes, I’ll second that.

Councilman Carmody: Mr. Chairman, you have a motion and a second, but my comment would be, at this point, lets make sure that the Administration understands that this Council is asking the Administration, and I guess Mr. Antee in that he deals with the general contractor, to request the appearance of the representative of the contractor to be here to answer questions of this Council. So, that there is not any confusion when we get into this special meeting.

Mayor Hightower: There has been no confusion prior to the special meeting.

Councilman Walford: Mr. Chairman, would you just state the motion real quick?

Councilman Hogan: The motion is to have a special meeting.

Councilman Walford: Get the maker over there.

Councilman Carmody: Restate your motion.

Councilman Jackson: Let me say Mr. Chairman, that I’m in fact, I think I was misinterpreted. What I was interested in doing, because of the time crunch on Tuesday, was being able to have a special meeting that allowed us to deal with many of the items that we won’t have time to deal with on that day. I wasn’t suggesting calling a special meeting to deal with this one subject.

Councilman Green: So, we need to come at 7:30.

Councilman Jackson: To move the Council Meeting to in fact deal with (inaudible).

Councilman Hogan: Okay, and forego the 8:00 a.m. meeting on the 28^th?

Councilman Jackson: Correct. That was my issue.

Councilman Green: We can’t do that.

Councilman Jackson: To try to get everything in and if not, then we needed to know today that we need to deal with all these things, because if not, we will be faced with them on that morning. And I don’t think it makes a lot of sense to think - - - it’s going to be overly ambitious to say we’re going to - - - unless we can meet long on Monday, that we come in and say Yea or Nay between 8 and 9:00 so that we can get out of here.

Councilman Green: I’m leaving at 9.

Councilman Jackson: That was the intent of my motion, which I’m saying may have been misinterpreted.

Councilman Hogan: Are you saying that we’ll have a special meeting after the work session on the 27^th, and then in addition to that, we will still have the 8:00 a.m. meeting on that morning of the 28^th ? Are you saying that?

Councilman Jackson: In lieu of is what I was saying.

Councilman Hogan: That’s what I thought you meant.

Councilman Walford: Councilman Lester and I both (inaudible)

Councilman Hogan: Are we required to have the 8:00 a.m. meeting Mr. Thompson?

Mr. Thompson: No, but Ms. Glass has a point that you probably need to hear.

Ms. Glass: If you have less than two weeks, between the meetings, then you won’t be able to adopt anything that was just introduced today, but you would be able to take care of things that afternoon pending.

Councilman Jackson: And then we could meet on Tuesday morning to deal with things with things that were introduced today?

Ms. Glass: If that’s - - - yes.

Councilman Jackson: I guess that would be in line with what I was concerned about. I didn’t want to necessarily do away with the Tuesday meeting, but if we needed to make it where we could just get out, so that everybody who has something to do that day could be out of here, and not - - -

Councilman Green: Well the law say we gotta be - - - even if we don’t get it by 10:00, it’s null and void anyway.

Councilman Jackson: My point is lets get to everything. And we may need a special meeting to get to everything.

Councilman Lester: Mr. Chairman, my question to Mr. Thompson and Ms. Glass is this. If we have the Special Council Meeting on Monday after the work session, would that provide us with sufficient time to adopt things that we have placed on the agenda for this meeting?

Mr. Thompson: I mean you could stay as long as you want to, until 10:00 or - - -

Councilman Lester: Well, given the fact that some of us are going to be otherwise occupied, I guess my question is can we legally, can we have a meeting on Monday. Is that within the two week period?

Mr. Thompson: No.

Councilman Lester: So, the meeting on Monday is too short or compressed a time period.

Ms. Glass: For things that were just introduced today. You have other things that have been postponed that could be adopted that day.

Councilman Lester: Okay, let me ask this question. The only reason that we would want to deal with those issues is if there is something on our agenda that was introduced today, that was not voted for by the conclusion of our, this present Council’s last meeting, those items, are they automatically adopted into the next meeting agenda? Or, do you start with a fresh slate?

Ms. Glass: Mr. Chairman, under your rules, they disappear. They go off your agenda, unless the old Council by a majority vote continues them onto the new Council’s agenda. Which you could do that and they would continue.

Councilman Lester: Which we have to do with budget and other items? So, the answer to the question is we are not without recourse? Okay. So, what I would suggest is this. That we have at our Monday meeting, rather than have a special meeting, we have our regularly scheduled work session meeting on Monday, and all those items that we cannot decide on and vote expeditiously on Tuesday, we would move my majority action to place those on the next Council’s agenda as we do the budget. And if it’s something that you a heartburn about as a Council Member, then it’s incumbent upon you to resolve that heartburn with the other six members. So you could have an affirmative vote on Tuesday. So that we’re not here beyond 10:00 for those that want to deal with the inaugural activities. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Green: Mr. Chairman, since the big issue is to have the contractor here, why not have them here on Monday?

Councilman Lester: Right, lets just do it Monday.

Mr. Dark: Then you don’t need a special meeting.

Councilman Green: I’m fine with that.

Councilman Lester: We don’t need a special meeting. If there are things that we don’t take care of, we by majority action - - -

Councilman Green: I’m fine.

Councilman Lester: Can postpone or move it to the next Council.

Councilman Jackson: Mr. Chairman, I want to clarify that at 10:00 a.m., the Council Meeting is not over.

Councilman Lester: No.

Councilman Green: No, it’s not over, it would be adjourned.

Councilman Lester: No, no, no, no. It would not be adjourned.

Councilman Jackson: The meeting would go on until the new Council is seated. I know the Charter doesn’t say at 10:00 a.m. on the day of the election. I know by noon, there needs to be a new Council who is organized. Is that correct?

Mr. Thompson: That’s correct. But the new Council will be sworn in - - -

Councilman Green: At 10:00.

Councilman Jackson: What I’m suggesting to you, at 9:30, 9:50, whatever time it is, that you don’t automatically say that the meeting is shut down because they’re getting ready to start a ceremony. But the Council is still taking up something. For example, if nobody who is in here was going to be sworn in, you could from 9 until whatever time, till you finish your agenda, you could in fact do that.

Councilman Green: No.

Mr. Thompson: I have not researched that, but you are no longer a Council Member after the new Council Member is sworn in.

Ms. Glass: Up until - - - the Council Members serve a term of four years, from I think it’s the date you’re sworn in until your successors are sworn in.

Councilman Jackson: Right.

Ms. Glass: So, what you’re saying is could you keep meeting and voting until the moment they are sworn in?

Councilman Jackson: The answer must be yes. That’s what I’m saying. So they would be gone, the majority would be three people. Is that correct?

Ms. Glass: You wouldn’t have a quorum.

Councilman Jackson: Yes, you would. If they were gone, there would be five of us, and the majority of that vote would be three.

Councilman Green: It wouldn’t be five, because I’m leaving when they leave.

Councilman Jackson: Well, we would have four. We’d hate to do it without you, (inaudible), but I’m just asking - - - I’m not interested.

Councilman Lester: Point of order.

Councilman Hogan: What’s your point of order.

Councilman Jackson: My point is if you get to a - - -

Councilman Hogan: Let me recognize the point of order, just a moment. Councilman Lester.

Councilman Lester: My point of order is that we either vote on this motion or withdraw it. Cause this banter is - - - yes, out of order.

Councilman Green: What is the motion?

Councilman Hogan: Did you withdraw you motion to have the special meeting?

Councilman Jackson: I will.

Motion by Councilman Jackson, seconded by Councilman Hogan to move both meetings to Monday, November 27^th is withdrawn.

Councilman Hogan: The motion has been withdrawn. So, we’re done and ready to carry on.

RESOLUTION NO. 178 OF 2006

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND PROVIDING FOR THE WAIVING OF PERMIT FEES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAFETY TOWN AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BY:

WHEREAS, the City of Shreveport, Department of Operational Services has received a request to waive the permit fees for the construction of Safety Town; and

WHEREAS, this request is not adverse to the public interest of the citizens of the City of Shreveport; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, legal and regular session convened, that the City of Shreveport is hereby authorized and empowered to waive all permit fees associated with the construction of Safety Town;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any provision of this resolution or the application thereof is invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, items or applications of this resolution which can be given effect without 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 Hogan, seconded by Councilman Carmody to adopt.

Councilman Jackson: Did we ever get the answers to the questions yesterday?

Mr. Strong: We do not have the exact construction plans on what it is, but based upon what we do have is $1,000,000 project. In looking at that, the maximum amount would be an inspection fee for about $6,400. That would be the maximum amount. We know that there is not going to be all buildings, it’s not going to take up the whole site. There’s going to be a lot of dirt work in there in different areas, so the fees for that would not be calculated into the full construction side of it. It would only be for the building.

Councilman Jackson: But we’ve got an approximate number, we don’t have the actual number?

Mr. Strong: We know the big dollar amount, if we say the maximum amount is $1,000,000, then we’re looking at the maximum amount that you would be waiving is $6,400, if every bit of that was used.

Councilman Jackson: Okay, whoever is doing this, did they request this, or is this Councilman Hogan being proactive?

Mr. Strong: This is the Sheriff. This came directly from the Sheriff to us requesting this. He is out getting donations to do the facility now, they don’t have all of the plans put together, he’s just trying to be proactive in doing this. It is from the Sheriff.

Councilman Jackson: But we are waiving an unknown amount?

Mr. Strong: Well, lets put it this way. I’ll be on record as saying it’s an amount that’s not going to exceed $6,400 based upon that million dollar figure.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, Green. and Jackson. 7. Nays: None.

RESOLUTION NO. 183 OF 2006

A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DEDICATION FOR ST. CHARLES BOULEVARD, CONTI CIRCLE, AND TOLEDANO CIRCLE IN ST. CHARLES PLACE SUBDIVISION UNIT NO. 7AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, in due, legal,

and regular session convened, that the dedication for St. Charles Boulevard, Conti Circle, and Toledano Circle in Section 29, (T16N-R13W), Caddo Parish, Louisiana, and as shown on the plats attached hereto and made a part hereof, be and the same is hereby accepted as dedicated to the public for public use in the City of Shreveport.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the original plat reflecting the dedication for St. Charles Boulevard, Conti Circle, and Toledano Circle be recorded in the official records of the District Court for Caddo Parish, Louisiana.

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 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 RESOLVED that all ordinances or 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, Green. and Jackson. 7. Nays: None.

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, the staff would request that you would consider suspending the rules to move Resolution No. 180 to this point on the agenda.

Motion by Councilman Green, seconded by Councilman Carmody to suspend the rules to move Resolution No. 180 of 2006 from section 9B to 9A of the agenda.

Councilman Walford: So, we’re voting on a suspension?

Mr. Thompson: Suspension for the purpose of moving it. If you’re uncomfortable in doing that, we can let it stay over, if there is any unreadiness. But we would urge that you do that.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, Green, and Jackson. 7. Nays: None.

RESOLUTION NO. 180 OF 2006

A RESOLUTION AMENDING SECTIONS 4.3 AND 4.4 OF THE CITY COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, legal and regular session convened that Sections 4.3 and 4.4 of the City Council Rules of Procedure are hereby amended and reenacted to read as follows:

4.3 Motions.

(a) No motion shall be put or debated in the council or in a committee unless it has been seconded. When a motion is seconded it shall be stated by the chairman before debate and every motion from the council, except motions of procedure, shall be reduced to writing if required by a member, and the person proposing the motion shall be entitled to the floor.

(b) Motion to Postpone. The Motion to Postpone shall be treated in the same manner as the Motion to Postpone to a Certain Time under Robert’s Rules of Order. When the Motion to Postpone is adopted, the item shall be postponed until the next regular meeting of the City Council, unless a different time is stated by the maker of the motion. For the convenience of the Council, a date later than the next regular meeting of the City Council may be stated by the maker of the motion. If such a motion is adopted, the Clerk of Council shall include the postponed item under the appropriate section of the Order of Business on each regular meeting agenda until and including the date specified and shall note the postponed date for the item. However, nothing herein shall prevent the Council from deciding, in its discretion, to bring the item up for a vote prior to the postponed date, and the Clerk shall note that possibility on each agenda on which there is an item so postponed.

(c) Motion to Table and Motion to Take from the Table. The Motion to Table and Motion to Take from the Table shall be not treated in the same manner as the Motion to Table and Motion to Take from the Table under Robert’s Rules of Order.

(1) The Motion to Table shall be in order at any regular or special meeting, for the purpose of postponing an item so that it is not brought up for a vote until a motion is made to take it from the table. The Clerk of Council shall include the tabled item under Unfinished Business on each regular meeting agenda, and it shall not be brought up for a vote until a motion is made to take it from the table. The Motion to Table requires only a majority vote of those members present and voting.

(2) A Motion to Take from the Table shall be in order at any regular meeting or at a special meeting if it has been included in the notice of the meeting. The Motion to Take from the Table requires only a majority vote of those members present and voting.

4.4 Debate.

(a) All motions shall be subject to debate except the following:

(1) Motion to adjourn;

(2) Motion for the previous question;

(b) When any question or motion is under debate the following motions only shall be in order and may be entertained by the chairman:

(a) To adjourn;

(b) To the previous question;

(c) To postpone to a certain time;

(d) To table;

(e) To commit;

(f) To amend;

(g) To postpone indefinitely.

Each of said motions shall take precedence in the order set out above.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any provision 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 Green to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, Green, and Jackson. 7. Nays: None.

INTRODUCTION OF RESOLUTIONS (Not to be adopted prior to Nov 28, 2006)

1. Resolution No. 179 of 2006: A resolution authorizing the Mayor’s signature on an agreement for water and sewerage services between the City of Shreveport and General Motors Corporation, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

2. Resolution No. 181 of 2006: A resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute a donation agreement between the City of Shreveport and Hidden Trace, L.L.C., represented by William L. Mayfield, member for all sanitary sewer and water main extensions, and related facilities to serve Hidden Trace Unit No. 7, and otherwise provide with respect thereto. (D/Robertson)

3. Resolution No. 182 of 2006: Approving the 2007 Budget for the Shreveport-Bossier Convention and Tourist Bureau and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

4. Resolution No. 184 of 2006: A Resolution authorizing the Mayor to enter into, or request the Authority to enter into, one or more Swap Agreements, all in connection with certain outstanding bonds of the City or the Authority and providing for other matters in connection therewith.

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Carmody to introduce Resolution Nos. 179, 181, 182 and 184 2006 to lay over until November 28, 2006 meeting. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, Green. and Jackson. 7. Nays: None.

INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES (Not to be adopted prior to Nov 28, 2006)

1. Ordinance No. 191 of 2006: An ordinance declaring certain adjudicated properties to be surplus and to authorize the Mayor of the City of Shreveport to sell the City of Shreveport’s tax interest in certain surplus adjudicated properties, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (A/Lester/C/Carmody/F/Green)

2. Ordinance No. 192 of 2006: An ordinance declaring certain adjudicated properties to be surplus and to authorize the Mayor of the City of Shreveport to donate the City of Shreveport’s tax interest in certain surplus adjudicated properties, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (A/Lester)

3. Ordinance No. 193 of 2006: An ordinance amending and reenacting portions of Chapter 6 of the Code of Ordinances relative to alarms and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

4. Ordinance No. 194 of 2006: An ordinance amending the 2006 budget for the Community Development Special Revenue Fund, and otherwise provide with respect thereto.

5. Ordinance No. 195 of 2006: An ordinance amending the 2006 budget for the Police Grants Special Revenue Fund, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

6. Ordinance No. 196 of 2006: ZONING C-88-06: An ordinance amending Section 82-44 (e) of the City of Shreveport Code of Ordinances, the subdivision ordinance, relative to final plat approval, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

7. Ordinance No. 197 of 2006: ZONING C-89-06: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning property located on the west side of Jewella at its intersection with Southside Street, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from B-3, Community Business District, to B-3-E, Community Business/Extended Use District, Limited to “sheet metal fabrication sales and service, only” as described at the November 1, 2006 Public Hearing, which includes fabrication of mobile video surveillance monitoring stations (either self-contained in a vehicle or trailer type), and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (E/Hogan)

8. Ordinance No. 198 of 2006: ZONING C-91-06: An ordinance mending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning property located ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF West College and Jewella Avenue, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from R1D, Urban, One-Family Residence/Extended Use District, to R-1D-E, Urban, One-Family Residence/Extended Use District Limited to office and retail space only, and from B-1, Buffer Business District to B-2, Neighborhood Business District, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (G/Jackson)

9. Ordinance No. 199 of 2006: An Ordinance to amend Ordinance No. 149 of 2006 relative to creating and establishing a No Through Truck Route on the portion of East Kings Highway lying within the City of Shreveport between Bert Kouns Industrial Loop and Flournoy Lucas Road and to otherwise provide with respect thereto (D/Robertson)

10. Ordinance No. 200 of 2006: An Ordinance amending the 2006 General Fund Budget and otherwise providing with respect thereto (G/Jackson)

11. Ordinance No. 201 of 2006: An Ordinance amending the 2006 Budget for the Community Development Special Revenue Fund and otherwise providing with respect thereto (G/Jackson)

12. Ordinance No. 202 of 2006: An Ordinance amending the 2006 Budget for the Riverfront Development Special Revenue Fund and otherwise providing with respect thereto. (Youth Council) (G/Jackson)

13. Ordinance No. 203 of 2006: An Ordinance amending the 2006 Budget for the Riverfront Development Special Revenue fund and otherwise providing with respect thereto. (Lee Hedges Stadium) (A/Lester)

14. Ordinance No. 204 of 2006: An Ordinance amending the 2006 Budget for the Riverfront Development Special Revenue fund and otherwise providing with respect thereto. (Disparity Study) (A/Lester)

15. Ordinance No. 205 of 2006: An ordinance amending the 2006 Capital Improvements Budget and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Jackson to introduce Ordinance Nos. 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, and 205 to lay over until November 28, 2006 meeting. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Green. 1.

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

1. Ordinance No. 151 of 2006: An ordinance authorizing the donation of City-owned property to the Housing Authority of Shreveport and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (A/Lester) (Postponed October 24, 2006)

Having passed first reading on September 12, 2006 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. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Green. 1.

2. Ordinance No. 154 of 2006: An ordinance creating and establishing a speed limit of 45 MPH on Wells Boulevard from North Thomas Drive to Airport Drive and on North Hearne Avenue from North Market Street to North Thomas Drive and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (A/.Lester) (Postponed October 24, 2006)

Having passed first reading on September 26, 2006 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. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Green. 1.

3. Ordinance No. 182 of 2006: An ordinance creating and establishing the intersection of Flournoy Lucas Road and Wallace Lake Road as a four-way stop intersection and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (D/Robertson)

Having passed first reading on October 24, 2006 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full 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. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Green. 1.

4. Ordinance No. 183 of 2006: An ordinance amending and replacing Ordinance No. 58 of 1972, yield intersections, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 24, 2006 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. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Green. 1.

5. Ordinance No. 184 of 2006: An ordinance amending and replacing Ordinance No. 63 of 1976 creating twelve (12) stop intersections within the city limits of the City of Shreveport and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 24, 2006 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Robertson, seconded by Councilman Walford to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 5. Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilmen Lester, and Green. 2.

6. Ordinance No. 185 of 2006: An ordinance amending the 2006 Budget for the Convention Center Hotel Enterprise Fund and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 24, 2006 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Jackson, seconded by Councilman Carmody to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, Green. and Jackson. 5. Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilmen Lester and Green. 2.

7. Ordinance No. 186 of 2006: An ordinance amending the 2006 Capital Improvements Budget and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 24, 2006 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. The Clerk read the following:

Amendment # 1 to Ordinance No. 186 of 2006

AMEND THE ORDINANCE AS FOLLOWS:

In Program C (Street Improvements):

Decrease the appropriation for Lakeshore Drive Extension Widening (89C021) by $100,000. Funding source is 1999 GOB, Prop. 4.

Increase the appropriation for Traffic Signal Installation (96C020) by $100,000. Funding source is 1999 GOB, Prop. 4.

Increase the appropriation for Ellerbe at Flournoy-Lucas Road Intersection (98-C004) by $100,000. Funding source is 1999 GOB, Prop. 4.

In Program F (Sewer Improvements):

Increase the appropriation for Marjorie Lift Station Improvements (05F004) by $50,000. Funding source is 2005 URB.

Decrease the appropriation for Olive Street Sewer Main Improvements (05F022) by $50,000. Funding source is 2005 URB.

Adjust totals and subtotals accordingly.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Carmody to adopt Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 186 of 2006. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Green. 1.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Carmody to adopt Ordinance No. 186 of 2006 as amended.

Councilman Jackson: Yes sir, this is for the Convention Center Hotel?

Councilman Walford: No, this is 186.

Councilman Jackson: When I click on 186, I don’t know what you all are reading.

Mr. Dark: Mr. Chairman, the original ordinance not the amendment, included some funding for the - - - in fact we were transferring some of the bond proceeds for the hotel construction, into the hotel operations fund. And this is just simply made it match the one you just passed. It doesn’t have anything to do with the construction contract at all.

Councilman Jackson: No, no. I’m just saying. I wanted to be sure that they were aware that they did in fact have the convention center hotel - - - I mean click on it spoke to the convention center hotel project, and what you were doing to it?

Mr. Dark: You’re correct.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan. 5 Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilmen Green. and Jackson. 2.

Councilman Jackson: It didn’t record my vote. It was six for, I hadn’t registered, but it clicked when I hit yes. So it only showed five votes. I was voting - - -

Councilman Hogan: Madam Clerk, would you record that as six for. Councilman Jackson is in favor of it.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6 Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Green. 1.

8. Ordinance No. 156 of 2006: ZONING - C-74-06: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport zoning ordinance, by re-zoning property located on the east side of East Kings Highway 474 feet north of east Bert Kouns Industrial Loop, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from R-A, Residence Agriculture District, to B-2, Neighborhood Business District, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (C/Carmody) (Postponed October 24, 2006)

Having passed first reading on September 26, 2006 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 postpone. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Green. 1.

9. Ordinance No. 187 of 2006: ZONING – C-63-06: An ordinance amending Section 1 of Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport zoning ordinance, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto

Having passed first reading on October 24, 2006 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: And for the record, I just need to ask Mr. Kirkland just a couple of brief questions after the meeting.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Green. 1.

10. Ordinance No. 188 of 2006: ZONING – C-65-06: An ordinance amending Section 638 of Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto

Having passed first reading on October 24, 2006 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 Jackson to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Green. 1.

11. Ordinance No. 189 of 2006: ZONING - C-83-06: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning property located on the SE corner of Mount Zion road and Linwood Avenue, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from R-A, Residence-Agriculture District, to B-2, Neighborhood Business District, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto

Having passed first reading on October 24, 2006 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Robertson, seconded by Councilman Walford to adopt.

Councilwoman Robertson: Just Mr. Chairman, this is for a strip center that Mr. (inaudible) is doing at that corner, and there was no opposition at the MPC.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Green. 1.

12. Ordinance No. 190 of 2006: ZONING - C-84-06: 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 Industrial Loop, 1225 feet east of Kingston Road Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from B-2-E, Neighborhood Business/Extended Use District, “Limited to storage, mini-warehouses, residences, outside storage of R.V.’s and boats, only, to B-2-E, Neighborhood Business/Extended Use District, “Limited to truck rental, storage, mini-warehouses, residence, outside storage of RV’s and boats,” only,   and to otherwise provide with respect thereto

Having passed first reading on October 24, 2006 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full 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. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Green. 1.

The adopted ordinances and amendments follow:

ORDINANCE NO. 93 OF 2005

AN ORDINANCE 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.

WHEREAS, La. R.S. 47: 337.10(I) of the Uniform Local Sales Tax Code provides that
a political subdivision may provide for a sales and use tax exclusion as provided for in R.S. 47:301(3)(i), (13)(k), or (2 8), or any combination of these or all of them, for the sales, cost, or lease and rental price of manufacturing machinery and equipment; and

WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the city and its citizens to encourage the establishment and expansion of the manufacturing industry, which will improve employment opportunities and otherwise enhance the economy of the city; and

NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, in due, legal and regular session convened that Section 3.01 of Ordinance No. 96 of 1980 is hereby amended by adding Subsection 3.01(15) to read as follows:

3.01. Exemptions and Exclusions.

* * *

(15) Manufacturing

(a) For the purposes of this section, the terms used shall have the meanings set forth in La. R.S. 47:(i)(ii).

(b) The cost price of machinery and equipment used by a manufacturer, in a plant facility predominately and directly in the actual manufacturing for agricultural purposes or the actual manufacturing process of an item of tangible personal property, which is for ultimate sale to another and not for internal use, at one or more fixed locations within the city, shall be reduced as provided in subsection (e).

(c) The sales price of machinery and equipment purchased by a manufacturer for use in a plant facility predominately and directly in the actual manufacturing for agricultural purposes or the actual manufacturing process of an item of tangible personal property, which is for ultimate sale to another and not for internal use, at one or more fixed locations within the city shall be reduced as provided in subsection (e).

(d) The "gross proceeds", "monthly lease or rental price paid", and "monthly lease or rental price contracted or agreed to be paid" for machinery and equipment used by a manufacturer in a plant facility predominately and directly in the actual manufacturing for agricultural purposes or the actual manufacturing process of an item of tangible personal property, which is for ultimate sale to another and not for internal use, at one or more fixed locations within the city shall be reduced as provided in subsection (e).

(e) The cost price, sales price, gross proceeds, monthly lease or rental price paid, and monthly lease or rental price contracted or agreed to be paid set forth above shall be reduced as follows:

(i) For the period beginning July 1, 2007, and ending on June 30, 2008, by seventy-five percent.

(ii) For the period beginning July 1, 2008, by one hundred percent.

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

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

ORDINANCE NO. 182 OF 2006

AN ORDINANCE TO CREATE AND ESTABLISH THE INTERSECTION OF FLOURNOY LUCAS ROAD AND WALLACE LAKE ROAD AS A FOUR-WAY STOP INTERSECTION 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 to create and establish the intersection of Flournoy Lucas

Road and Wallace Lake Road as a four-way stop intersection requiring all traffic and vehicles

approaching this intersection to come to a full stop before entering the intersection.

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. 183 OF 2006

AN ORDINANCE CREATING YIELD AND STOP INTERSECTIONS WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

SECTION I: BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in regular and legal session convened that the following are hereby made and created yield intersections:

1. Horton Drive and Locust Street Yield to Locust Street

2. Alberta Avenue and East Dalzell Street Yield to East Dalzell Street

3. Cornwell Avenue and East Prospect Street Yield to Cornwell Avenue

4. Cornwell Avenue and East Topeka Street Yield to Cornwell Avenue

5. Joplin Street and Michel Street Yield to Joplin Street

6. Joplin Street and Rainwater Street Yield to Joplin Street

7. Joplin Street and Fulton Street Yield to Joplin Street

8. Cheatham Street and Wallace Avenue Yield to Wallace Avenue

9. Lyons Street and Wallace Avenue Yield to Wallace Avenue

10. Malcolm Street and Wallace Avenue Yield to Wallace Avenue

11. Rainwater Street and Wallace Avenue Yield to Wallace Avenue

12. Caroline Street and Wallace Avenue Yield to Wallace Avenue

13. Doris Street and Wallace Avenue Yield to Wallace Avenue

SECTION II: BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in regular and legal session convened that the following intersection is hereby made and created a stop intersection:

1. Earl Street and Wallace Avenue: Earl Street shall stop for Wallace Avenue

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

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that all ordinances or resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith, including Ordinance No. 58 of 1972, are hereby repealed.

ORDINANCE NO. 184 OF 2006

AN ORDINANCE CREATING STOP INTERSECTIONS WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

SECTION I: BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in regular and legal session convened that the following are hereby made and created yield intersections:

1. Pomeroy Drive and White Avenue Stop at Pomeroy Drive

2. Village Green Drive and Sophia Lane Stop at Village Green Drive

3. Brunswick Drive and Millicent Way Stop at Millicent Way

4. Brunswick Drive and Turtle Creek Drive Stop at Brunswick Drive

5. Rock Hollow Drive and Brunswick Drive Stop at Brunswick Drive

6. Melissa Way and Rock Hollow Drive Stop at Rock Hollow Drive

7. Sophia Lane and Wiscassett Drive Stop at Sophia Lane

8. Rock Hollow Drive and Wiscassett Drive Stop at Wiscassett Drive

9. Wiscassett Drive and Turtle Creek Drive Stop at Turtle Creek Drive

10. Dollarway Drive and Penny Street Stop at Dollarway Drive

11. Standard Oil Road and Wisteria Street Stop at Wisteria Street

SECTION II: BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in regular and legal session convened that the following intersection is hereby made and created a 4-way stop intersection requiring that all traffic and vehicles approaching this intersection shall come to a full stop before entering the intersection:

1. Brunswick Drive and Sophia Lane

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

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that all ordinances or resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith, including Ordinance No. 63 of 1976, are hereby repealed.

ORDINANCE NO. 185 OF 2006

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2006 BUDGET FOR THE CONVENTION CENTER HOTEL ENTERPRISE FUND AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BY:

WHEREAS, the City Council finds it necessary to amend the 2006 budget for the Convention Center Hotel Enterprise Fund, to appropriate additional revenues and for other purposes.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, in legal session convened, that Ordinance No. 168 of 2005, the 2006 budget for the Convention Center Hotel Enterprise Fund, be amended as follows:

In Section 1 (Estimated Receipts):

Appropriate Interest Earnings at $136,000.

Increase 2005 Hotel Bonds by $1,404,000.

In Section 2 (Appropriations):

Decrease Contractual Services by $300,000.

Increase Other Charges by $1,840,000.

Adjust totals and subtotals accordingly.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the remainder of Ordinance No. 168 of 2005, as amended, shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.

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

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

ORDINANCE NO. 186 OF 2006

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2006 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS BUDGET AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

By:

WHEREAS, the City Council finds it necessary to amend the 2006 Capital Improvements Budget to adjust project funding and for other purposes.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, in legal session convened, that Ordinance No. 166 of 2005, the 2006 Capital Improvements Budget, be further amended and re-enacted as follows:

In Program A (Buildings and Improvements):

Decrease the appropriation for Shreveport Convention Center Hotel and Associated Improvements (03A004) by $404,000. Increase funding from Interest Earnings by $1,000,000 and decrease funding from 2005 Hotel Bonds by $1,404,000.

Adjust totals and subtotals accordingly.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the remainder of Ordinance 166 of 2005, as amended, shall remain in full force and effect.

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

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

Amendment # 1 to Ordinance No. 186 of 2006

AMEND THE ORDINANCE AS FOLLOWS:

In Program C (Street Improvements):

Decrease the appropriation for Lakeshore Drive Extension Widening (89C021) by $100,000. Funding source is 1999 GOB, Prop. 4.

Increase the appropriation for Traffic Signal Installation (96C020) by $100,000. Funding source is 1999 GOB, Prop. 4.

Increase the appropriation for Ellerbe at Flournoy-Lucas Road Intersection (98-C004) by $100,000. Funding source is 1999 GOB, Prop. 4.

In Program F (Sewer Improvements):

Increase the appropriation for Marjorie Lift Station Improvements (05F004) by $50,000. Funding source is 2005 URB.

Decrease the appropriation for Olive Street Sewer Main Improvements (05F022) by $50,000. Funding source is 2005 URB.

Adjust totals and subtotals accordingly.

ORDINANCE NO. 188 OF 2006

AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 638 OF CHAPTER 106 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT ZONING ORDINANCE, AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BY:

BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, in due, legal and regular session convened, that section 638 of Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances is hereby amended to now read as follows:

Sec. 51-638. Same--Uses by right.

The uses listed below are permitted subject to the conditions specified:

All uses listed as "Uses by right" in B-1 districts.

Antique store.

Apparel and accessory store.

Appliance store.

Aquarium supplies and sales.

Artificial limb manufacture.

Auto parts store, retail; no installation, repair or rebuilding of parts is permitted on premises.

Automobile filling stations, where the primary function is the retail sale of gasoline, oil, grease, tires, batteries and accessories and where services are limited to installation of items sold, washing, polishing and greasing, fuel pumps need not be enclosed within structure; pump islands shall be located at least fifteen (15) feet from the property line, canopies anchored or supported in pump island may extend within five (5) feet of the property line; canopies shall have a minimum height of ten (10) feet above driveway.

Automobile glass tinting, operations shall be conducted only within a completely enclosed structure.

***

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

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

ORDINANCE NO. 189 OF 2006

BY:

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 106 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT ZONING ORDINANCE, BY REZONING PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SE CORNER OF MOUNT ZION ROAD AND LINWOOD AVENUE, SHREVEPORT, CADDO PARISH, LOUISIANA, FROM R-A, RESIDENCE-AGRICULTURE DISTRICT, TO B-2, NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT, AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO

SECTION I: BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, in due, legal and regular session convened, that the zoning classification of Lots 1, 2, & 3, Bufkin Addition, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, located on the SE corner of Mount Zion Road and Linwood Avenue, be and the same is hereby changed from R-A, Residence-Agriculture District, to B-2, Neighborhood Business District.

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

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

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

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

ORDINANCE NO. 190 OF 2006

BY:

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 INDUSTRIAL LOOP, 1225 FEET EAST OF KINGSTON RAOD, SHREVEPORT, CADDO PARISH, LOUISIANA, FROM B-2-E, NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS/EXTENDED USE DISTRICT, “LIMITED TO STORAGE, MINI-WAREHOUSES, RESIDENCES, OUTSIDE STORAGE OF R.V.’S AND BOATS, ONLY, TO B-2-E, NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS/EXTENDED USE DISTRICT, “LIMITED TO TRUCK RENTAL, STORAGE, MINI-WAREHOUSES, RESIDENCE, OUTSIDE STORAGE OF RV’S AND BOATS,” ONLY,   AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO

SECTION I: BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, in due, legal and regular session convened, that the zoning classification of Lot 1 Blom Commercial Subdivision, Unit #12, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, located on the N side of Industrial Loop, 1225 feet E of Kingston Road, be the same and is hereby changed, from B-2-E, Neighborhood Business/Extended Use District, “limited to storage, mini-warehouses, residences, outside storage of R.V.’s and boats”, only, to B-2-E, Neighborhood Business/Extended Use District, “limited to truck rental, storage, mini-warehouses, residence, outside storage of RV’s and boats”, only.

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

1. Development of the property shall be in substantial accord with the site plan submitted

with any significant changes or additions requiring further review and approval by the

Planning Commission.

2. Approval is limited to a maximum of 10 rental trucks only. Two of the trucks may be parked in the front parking lot at the location indicated on the site plan. The balance of the trucks must be parked at the rear of the site at the location indicated on the site plan.

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

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

Amendment No. 1 to the October 10, 2006, City Council Minutes

Amend the October 10, 2006, minutes to delete Ordinance No. 123 of 2006 (as amended) from the October 10, 2006, Minutes in the permanent Minute Book and the October 10, 2006, Minutes published on the web page.

EXPLANATION

1. Ordinance No. 123 as printed in the September 12, 2006, minutes was the draft of the Ordinance before it was amended and adopted.

2. Amendment No. 1 to the September 12, 2006, Minutes (adopted October 10, 2006) provided for Ordinance No. 123 as amended and adopted to be inserted into the permanent September 12, 2006, Minutes in the Minute Book, and in the September 12, 2006, Minutes on the web page.

3. Amendment No. 1 to the September 12, 2006, Minutes also stated that Ordinance No. 123 as amended and adopted, would be printed at the end of the October 10, 2006, Minutes (to insure that the Ordinance as adopted was published in accordance with Section 4.16 of the Charter).

4. However, Ordinance No. 123 as amended and adopted was inadvertently printed (and published) in the body of the October 10, 2006, Minutes.

5. This amendment prevents Ordinance 123 of 2006 as amended and adopted, from being printed both in the permanent minutes of September 12, 2006 (where it is printed, and in the permanent minutes of October 10, 2006 (where is should not be printed).

Amendment No. 2 to the October 10, 2006, City Council Minutes

Amend the October 10, 2006, minutes to delete Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 139 and Amendment No.2 to Ordinance 153 of 2006 from the October 10, 2006, Minutes in the permanent Minute Book and the October 10, 2006, Minutes published on the web page.

EXPLANATION

1. Amendment No. 1 to the September 26, 2006 minutes (adopted October 10, 2006) provided for the amendments to Ordinance No. 139 and 153 to be inserted into the permanent September 26, 2006, minutes in the Minute Book and in the September 26, 2006, minutes on the web page under “Adopted Ordinances and Amendments follows:”

2. However, the amendments to Ordinance No. 139 and 153 were inadvertently published inside the minutes of October 10, 2006 under “Adopted Ordinances and Amendments follows:”

3. This amendment prevents the amendments to Ordinance 139 and 153 from being printed in both the permanent minutes of September 26, 2006 (where they are printed) and October 10, 2006 (where they should not be printed).

UNFINISHED BUSINESS:

Councilman Hogan: Does any member want to bring anything up from unfinished business?

Councilman Lester: Yes Mr. Chairman. I’d like to move to call off item No. 2. Ordinance No. 93 of 2005.

1. Resolution No. 100 of 2006: Authorizing the release of mortgages and cancellation of promissory notes executed by Shreveport Publishing Corporation (now Snap Property, LLC) in favor of the City of Shreveport in connection with the neighborhood improvement leveraging project and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (Introduced June 13, 2006 – Tabled August 8, 2006)

2. Ordinance No. 93 of 2005: Amending and reenacting 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 – 6/14/05 - Tabled on July 12, 2005)

Motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Jackson to remove Ordinance No. 93 Section 10 to be considered. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Green. 1.

Having passed first reading on June 14, 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 Hogan.

Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 93 of 2005

Delete the ordinance as introduced and substitute the attached ordinance.

Motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Carmody to adopt Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 93 of 2005.

Councilman Lester: Basically what the difference is, is the amendment removes the language that speaks to the disadvantaged portion of what we were trying to do with this. Basically what we have, in the State of Louisiana, the state collects a sales tax on equipment that is being phased out by the state. In fact, I believe two sessions ago, the State phased out over a period of time, the collection of this particular time, which is a tough tax on the manufacturing section of our economy. Orleans Parish, East Baton Rouge, Lafayette, have all as municipalities, both from their city and from the parish level, have all voted to either do away with this completely on one year, or phase them out in a stair step down fashion, much like the State of Louisiana does. I just believe that if we’re going to keep our municipality in line with the rest of the state, and more importantly, if we’re going to keep our municipality competitive from an economic development standpoint, we need to do the same thing that Orleans, East Baton Rouge, Lafayette, and other parishes have done as it relates to the collection of this tax. Mr. Dark is going to have a - - - I’m sure he’s prepared a presentation or rebuttal or some facts as it relates to this, but I think this is something that we need to do to make sure that our business climate stays competitive. I know we talk a lot about bringing business to this area, but one of the strongest segments of our local economy is our manufacturing base. We brag about what we’re doing at General Motors, and things of that nature. And if you’ve been watching the newspaper, lately, our Governor has spent quite a bit of time overseas (inaudible) business. In the far east, they’re talking about doing refineries, and they’re also talking about doing a large, as I appreciate it, manufacturing plant somewhere in the southern part of our state. Again, when we talk about bringing business to the state of Louisiana, almost always option no. 1 is Orleans, option no. 2 is E. Baton Rouge, and then Lafayette. And we aren’t talked about very often. And I just believe that if we’re going to remain competitive, we need to do as other parts of the state have done. Again, this is a tax that’s being phased out by the state. So, it’s not a situation where we will be out of step, and certainly it’s being phased out by other municipalities. Orleans Parish did it some two years ago before the hurricane, before the hurricane situation. And they did away with it in one year. So, I would just ask you to adopt what we’re doing. We’re not getting rid of the tax at one time. It’s a stair step. There is a 75% in the first year, and then we’re talking about getting rid of it in the second year. But it’s a stair step approach. And I would urge your support.

Councilwoman Robertson: We’re not able to pull it up, so what is the amendment to the original.

Councilman Lester: The original legislation said that in order for a business to participate in the rebate for lack of a better term or the exemption portion of this program, that business had to have some type of minority or disadvantaged business program, i.e., something like Fair Share. But we have removed that section of this legislation, and basically what we’re talking about is if you are a manufacturer, concern and you are purchasing new equipment, I just think it’s a little backwards to congratulate your decision to expand your business by levying this tax on the equipment that is eventually going to pay more people more money. And then give them more money that they can turn around and buy more things which inures to our benefit, because our economy here in the City of Shreveport is based on sales tax. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Jackson: Mr. Chairman, we have the amendment, is the reason we have this amendment because as we compared to other cities, they didn’t have this portion, or we didn’t think we could get it passed with that on there?

Councilman Lester: The hones answer is both.

Councilman Jackson: That’s what I wanted to know. Thank you Mr. Chairman. That’s unfortunate.

Councilman Lester: It is.

Councilman Hogan: Councilman Lester, I applaud you for this. It may not be in agreement with most of the time, the theology of the Democratic thinking.

Councilman Jackson: (Inaudible)

Councilman Hogan: So, I appreciate your effort on this.

Mr. Dark: Well, all I wanted to do, was to remind you that we put fiscal note on your desk today, that says this is what it’s going to cost you. This is a policy issue. This is not - - - I mean in a perfect world, and certainly in the world I’d like to be in, what I would suggest you do is, if you decide to do this after you’ve already taken the revenue out of next year’s budget and know what you took out, we go on. But one of the things this amendment also does, when this ordinance was offered, it was going to cover 2005, 2006, and 2007. Since it didn’t pass during those years, Mr. Lester’s amendment changes it where it doesn’t go into effect until the middle of next year. As a result, the first year fiscal impact is not a huge number. It’s depending on who you believe, somewhere between $3 and 400,000 from the General Fund. It gets bigger in 2008, because you’ve got half a year at 75% of the exemption, and half a year at 100%. Beyond that you’re losing about 1% of your sales tax revenue doing this. I’m not really in favor of giving away revenue. This however is not my call. This is yours. But I just want you to know if you vote for it, that’s what you’re voting for.

Councilman Carmody: Mr. Dark, I appreciate your putting this information together. I applaud Mr. Lester, on basically adding the amendment to remove the previous stipulations. And I think all of us (inaudible) in whatever it does to make us more competitive as a community, I think that we need to support it. I do think it’s an inopportune time though, as Mr. Dark had pointed out to do this, especially when you’ve got a change of Administration that’s going to be occurring in the next two weeks. Mr. Mayor, I don’t know that you may have had any conversation or maybe Mr. Lester with Mayor-Elect Glover to see what his thoughts might be. You do hate to put a new administration in a position where they’re potentially losing 1% of their general fund resources, so again it’s a policy decision, but I’m much more along the lines of supporting local businesses and making sure that they remain competitive. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Walford: I’ve got a couple of questions, and I’m not sure if they’re going to - - - did you see Mr. Dark turn away as soon as I said I had questions?

Mr. Dark: I wasn’t sure if you’re looking at me or - - -.

Councilman Walford: I’m not sure if you’re going to be the one, or Councilman Lester but, who determines who gets the exemption? How does the exemption come about?

Mr. Dark: Liz, do you know? All I know is that this is one of those, if you’re filling out a sales tax form, it’s going to have a series of exemptions that are allowed by state law. I mean that’s one of the things that you take off your gross. Everything from purchases for resale to whatever, and this would simply be one of them. It’s not going to be on the local form unless this gets passed in some form. It’s already a state exemption that you can take on your state form. The sales and use office will have to change the forms in some way to make all that work, but that’s the way I understand it.

Councilman Walford: So, if I’m understanding it right, you pay the tax to the vendor, whoever sells you the equipment? And then you reclaim it from Caddo/Shreveport or whatever?

Mr. Dark: I’m not sure if it’s done that way or if it’s done one of those things where you certify up front that you’re exempt. I’m not really sure how that works, but it’s going to be one of those two. Either way, the manufacturer doesn’t pay the tax, if this goes through.

Councilman Walford: How do we define who is a manufacturer?

Councilman Lester: By statute.

Mr. Dark: That’s a state statute. That’s not anything we would do one way or the other.

Councilman Lester: It’s the exact parallel of the state statute. That already does away with this tax (inaudible).

Councilman Jackson: Thank you Mr. Chairman. And I think as Mr. Dark was talking about the idea of giving up revenue, I think when we talk about tools as our state does in fact have a package of what I like to call tools to be competitive. And I thin what Councilman Lester is suggesting is that this is another arrow in our quill with regards to having tools, I’m using a mixed analogy, but we’ll have this tool to operate with. Because if we’re every in competition with Baton Rouge, New Orleans or Lafayette Parish, certainly at the state level, all things are equal. But when it gets beyond the state level, then that becomes where we’re at a disadvantage. And not because we’re bad people, I mean, we’d like to have that 1%, but again, when it comes to being competitive, you’ve got to give something to get something I guess is what the bottom line is. I guess, as Mr. Dark said, it’s a policy decision whether or not we want to have this tool to add to our quill of things that we have on a local level, we don’t have a lot, compared to the state already. And we just have some aggressive people, we have a lot of good things in the market with regard to the quality of life and our infrastructure, and those kinds of things (inaudible) our environment if you will. So I would suggest, or I would vote against the amendment, for I think the amendment, we can - - - the actual ordinance itself, I certainly would support the ordinance, but not the amendment.

Councilman Lester: I think the number is high.

Councilman Walford: I’m confused by the numbers now. If I’m correct, 2.75 is our city tax rate?

Mr. Dark: I think so. Basically, let me tell you where the numbers came from.

Councilman Walford: That’s where I’m going. Please.

Mr. Dark: Back when Mr. Lester brought this up two years ago, I asked Ms. Washington to try to determine somehow the magnitude of numbers we’re talking about. I got an email back from here that says according to the sales tax office, the estimated impact of this fully done is between $3.1 and 4.65 (million) over four years. Which I have prorated back down to the numbers you see. I don’t know how good their numbers are. Mr. Lester think they’re not good. I don’t have anyway of knowing. I think if you take the low number, then you’re talking just a little less than $800,000 a year, once it’s fully implemented. Which does not fully happen until 2009. You’ve got a half a year of partial implementation next year. You’ve got kinda half and half the year after that, the full implementation the year after that. It’s not a portion, it’s conceivably is $1,000,000. You’re going to be looking for a million in two years, I’m going to remind you where it went.

Councilman Walford: So that’s saying that our local equipment purchases that fit the definition of which I really didn’t get clear, of what is equipment is about $43,000,000.

Mr. Dark: I don’t know. I cannot vouch for the authenticity. They Mayor and I were talking a minute ago. Some of this, a lot of the places that buy bug ticket stuff aren’t in the city anyway. I think you’re talking about a somewhat more limited pool of manufacturers maybe than we’re think about when we think GM, GE or some of those people.

Councilman Walford: I have a hard time imagining that we’re going to have a consistent $42-43,000,000 worth of equipment that’s purchased subject to this now. I hope we do. I hope that the businesses are doing that, but that’s an awful lot of equipment unless we’re awfully broad in our statutory definition of equipment. I mean if it starts to cover vehicles and things like that, I could understand it, but I see Ms. Washington shaking her head. Can you define equipment for us for the statute?

Ms. Washington: (Inaudible)

Mr. Dark: You’re going to have to come up here if you’re going to talk, Bea’ll never get you from there. No, there’s no way I can tell you anything (inaudible)

Councilman Walford: Oh, I understand that it’s an estimate. I’m not criticizing.

Mr. Dark: No, I’m just telling you (inaudible)

Councilman Walford: I’m just trying to figure out - - -

Ms. Washington: Actually (inaudible), but I’m sure that it does not include equipment. The equipment does include vehicles. My understanding from the (inaudible) tax office is this is companies that actually buy equipment in the city. And they’re pretty good with their numbering as to what’s being bought and where, so I can’t fully vouch for the numbers, but I’m sure that he had a good basis with which to come up with the estimate.

Councilman Walford: Thank you, I think that answers.

Councilman Hogan: Thank you, and that was Ms. Liz Washington, our Director of Finance.

Councilman Lester: Just to put a couple of things in perspective for what it’s worth. As I appreciate it, Mr. Dark will tell me if I’m correct. Our end of the year fund balance is over $14,000,000?

Mr. Dark: That certainly is our hope for next year.

Councilman Lester: Alright. So, if this passes and if we got rid of it, the end of the year fund balance would then be $13,000,000. Correct?

Mr. Dark: At the end of ’07, yes sir.

Councilman Lester: And the balance of the Riverfront Development Fund, I believe is a little bit more than $10,000,000?

Mr. Dark: Oh, no. Probably closer to one, and getting smaller by the ordinance, I believe.

Councilman Lester: And as I appreciate it, the amount that we transferred from Riverfront Development to cover the hotel was a little bit more than $1,000,000? To cover the expenses for the hotel this year?

Mr. Dark: Not the hotel. The hotel money came out of the bond proceeds. The convention center is a number in excess of $1,000,000. That’s the only transfer we did.

Councilman Lester: And if I’m not mistaken, we transferred that $1,000,000 from the Riverfront Development for the purposes of operations of the convention center hotel. I mean not the hotel, but for the convention center?

Mr. Dark: Yes sir.

Councilman Lester: I ask those questions illustratively because again, at the maximum, we’re talking about $1.16 (million) in 2009. We’re already taking in excess of a million dollars to support our convention center. One building, one enterprise. The purpose as I appreciate it for is the support of the convention center of the hotel was to stimulate business. I just believe if we can spend a million dollars to stimulate business on our riverfront with all the secondary affects in terms of sales tax and things of that nature, then why can’t we spend anywhere from $300,000 to $400,000 in 2007, $600,000 to $900,000 in 2008 and between $780,000 to $1.1 (million) in 2009 to stimulate the economy and to stimulate the businesses of people that don’t do business on the riverfront. I think that would be also an appropriate use of those dollars. And as I appreciate it, or if memory serves (not as good these days as before), but I do appreciate that we are going to be supporting the convention center and/or convention center hotel at least to the tune of $1,000,000 over more than one year. Is that correct?

Mr. Dark: For the convention center, yes.

Councilman Lester: Okay, so we’re going to be spending, we’re subsidizing the convention center in more than one year for more than $1,000,000. In fact in 2008, I think that number is a million?

Mr. Dark: Every year. I think the number is designed to drop to around a million when we do well.

Councilman Lester: Okay, so even when we’re doing well, we’re going to be spending $1,000,000 to subsidize the operations of the convention center. Again, $1,000,000 in one building, or $1,000,000 in 2009 to stimulate the economy of every manufacturing business regardless of whether you are in Agurs, which is in my district, which is a primary industrial area or West Shreveport or whatever. And I just think it’s again, if you’re bring business to this city, and making us competitive, I think it’s an appropriate use of the money. Again, the sky is not going to fall if we pass this. The state has already passed this. Our fund balance is already $14,000,000. So, even if we implemented the whole thing this year, we’d still have $13,000,000 left over. And for those that don’t know, fund balance is the money left over for the operation of the city after we’ve paid all our bills and our encumbrances. That number is $14,000,000 this year, and will probably be at least that much next year. The Riverfront development fund has a balance of $1,000,000 this year, even after we spend $1,000,000 on the convention center. So again, I understand what Mr. Dark says, and in terms of lost revenue. But if we can spend $1,000,000 to stimulate our convention industry, why can’t we spend $1,000,000 at the maximum in 2009, to stimulate our manufacturing businesses. Which pays real money to real people, with real jobs. Thank you Mr. Chairman. And for the record, you know what’s been interesting in this process is the assumption that because, and I’m not subscribing this to Councilman Hogan, (inaudible) because you may happen to be African-American and represent a district that’s African-American, and you might be a Democrat and you don’t somehow understand the tax code and you don’t understand what it means to induce business. Fortunately for the City of Shreveport, we have gotten past that, because we’ve elected someone who will do both those things from that chair over there, and I just want to let people know that this is not something that just popped up today. It’s been on our agenda for 2005, and now is the time to deal with it.

Mayor Hightower: And I just want to make it clear to the Council. First I applaud Councilman Lester’s initiative. It’s coming. The state has taken the lead in this venue. As he mentioned, other cities have followed in different respects and in different methods to get there. It’s coming, and Mr. Dark and the administration’s job is just to provide you with the figures so that you can make an informed decision. That - - - I side with Councilman Lester on what he wants to do. I think it is something that we need to do, but I think you do have to at least have the numbers in front of you so, that at least the two remaining Council Members understand that there is a possibility that the budge may need to be re-shaped from a revenue side, and it may be a $200,000 cut, it may be $1,000,000, the next Administration and the next Council will have to deal with that. But Tom, his efforts were to put the numbers forward so that it wasn’t a shock to the next Council and the nest Administration, and they weren’t a million dollars short from the budget in the budget book that is handed to the new City Council, and the Mayor-Elect. But again, I applaud Councilman Lester’s direction. It’s coming, it’s just a matter of how you do it and when you do it.

Councilman Hogan: Mr. Thompson, just out of curiosity, if after November 28^th, the new Council chose to reverse this decision, assuming it passes, could they do that?

Mr. Thompson: They would have to do a new ordinance.

Councilman Hogan: They could? It could be done by a new ordinance? Okay, just wondering.

Councilman Jackson: Mr. Chairman, can you restate - - - I’m not sure which motion we’re voting on.

Councilman Hogan: We’re on the amendment, I believe right now.

Councilman Walford: That’s right, we’re still on the amendment.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Green. 1.

Councilman Jackson: That’s not correct. I voted no.

Councilman Hogan: Excuse me?

Ms. Johnson: Apparently you pressed yes Mr. - - -

Councilman Jackson: I had no registered on my screen.

Councilman Carmody: No take backs.

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, could you vote over please?

Councilman Hogan: Okay, we’re going to call for another vote.

Councilman Lester: No, no, no. He can - - - if his vote was no,

Councilman Hogan: If there is no objection from Council Members, your vote will be registered as no.

Mr. Thompson: It says yes on the screen.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, and Hogan. 5. Nays: Councilman Jackson. 1. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Green. 1.

Motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Carmody to adopt Ordinance No. 93 of 2005 as amended.

Councilman Walford: You don’t lose anything unless a lot of folks buy a lot of equipment.

Councilman Lester: Right.

Councilman Walford: It’s not like we’re just taking money away. Somebody’s buying a lot of equipment, (inaudible) employment before we lose this potential million dollars.

Councilwoman Robertson: And you’re not going to make that with the sales tax (inaudible).

Councilman Lester: Exactly.

Councilman Walford: That’s the concept.

Councilman Lester: That’s why the state’s done it.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 5. Nays: Councilman Lester. 1. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Green. 1.

Councilwoman Robertson: What did you vote?

Councilman Carmody: Now wait a minute.

Councilman Lester: I voted yes! I voted yes like 20 times. I’m very sure. All that talking I did.

Councilman Jackson: No, no. with all due respect.

Councilman Lester: No, no, no. I voted yes.

Councilman Walford: He led us down this path, and look what he did.

Councilman Lester: I voted yes.

Mr. Dark: That was the lobby factor.

Councilman Carmody: Oh, now we all voted no.

Ms. Johnson: That’s a test, I’m sorry.

Councilman Hogan: Everyone changed their mind.

Councilman Walford: Even James voted.

Councilman Lester: These machines are from Florida.

3. Ordinance No. 122 of 2006: An Ordinance to amend portions of Chapter 90 of the Code of Ordinances relative to traffic and vehicles and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (A/Lester) (Introduced August 22, 2006 – Tabled October 24, 2006)

4. Ordinance No. 131 of 2006: Amending certain sections of Chapter 38 of the City of Shreveport Code of Ordinances relative to housing and property standards and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (Introduced August 22, 2006 - Tabled - October 10, 2006)

5. 2007 Budget Appropriation Ordinances (Introduced and Tabled on October 10)

163 Adopting the 2007 General Fund Budget, appropriating the funds authorized therein and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

164 Adopting the 2007 Capital Improvements Budget, appropriating the funds authorized therein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

165 Adopting the 2007 Budget for the Riverfront Development Special Revenue Funds authorized therein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

166 Adopting the 2007 Budget for the Community Development Special Revenue Fund, appropriating the funds authorized therein and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

167 Adopting the 2007 Budget for the Water and Sewerage Enterprise Fund, appropriating the funds authorized therein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

168 Adopting the 2007 Budget for the Metropolitan Planning Commission’s Special Revenue Fund, appropriating the funds authorized therein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

169 Adopting the 2007 Budget for the Fleet Services Internal Service Fund, appropriating the funds authorized therein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

170 Adopting the 2007 Budget for the Golf Enterprise Fund appropriating the funds authorized therein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

171 Adopting the 2007 Budget for the Airports Enterprise Fund, appropriating the funds authorized therein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

172 Adopting the 2007 Budget for the Police Grants Special Fund appropriating the funds authorized therein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

173 Adopting the 2007 Budget for the Environmental Grants Special Revenue Fund, appropriating the funds authorized therein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

174 Adopting the 2007 Budget for the Downtown Entertainment Economic Development Special Revenue Fund, appropriating the funds therein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

175 Adopting the 2007 Budget for the Downtown Parking Enterprise Fund, appropriating the funds authorized therein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

176 Adopting the 2007 Budget for the Convention Center Hotel Enterprise Fund, appropriating the Funds authorized therein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

177 Adopting the 2007 Budget for the Shreveport Redevelopment Agency Special Revenue Fund, appropriating the funds authorized therein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

178 Adopting the 2007 Budget for the Retained Risk Internal Service Fund, appropriating the funds authorized therein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

179 Adopting the 2007 Debt Service Fund Budget, appropriating the funds authorized therein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

180 Adopting the 2007 Budget Funding Contractual Services provided to SPORTRAN by Metro Management Associates, Inc., and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

NEW BUSINESS:

ABO APPEAL

Ms. Adweanar Samuel, 620 E. 67^th Street, Shreveport, LA 71106 (Circle K, 325 W. 70^th, Shreveport, LA 71106) (C/Carmody)

Councilman Hogan: The ABO Appeal was not present, or we postponed - - -

Mr. Thompson: It was postponed until today. And I have a report if I may Mr. Chairman. Our office called Ms. Samuel’s home this morning at about 9:39 a.m., and her mother said she would have her call us when she got home. We didn’t get a call, and we called back at 1:10:15, spoke to her grandmother, she said that she was in and out all day and she would remind her that she had missed the meeting yesterday, and that she would have her call us back if she got in before 3:00. We didn’t hear from her. We also called Circle K, which was listed as her employer, and they said she no longer worked there.

Motion by Councilman Carmody, seconded by Councilman Walford to uphold the decision of the Police Department and deny the application for an ABO Card. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Green. 1.

PROPERTY STANDARDS APPEALS – Postponed until December 11, 2006

HBO0600239 – 4133 San Jacinto Avenue (G/Jackson) Mr. & Mrs. Ricky Swift, 3020 Regent Street, Shreveport, LA 71109 (B/Walford)

HBO0600281 – 2524 W. College Street Mr. Billy Draydon, 2536 W. College Street, Shreveport, LA (G/Jackson)

REPORTS FROM OFFICERS, BOARDS, AND COMMITTEES: None.

CLERK’S REPORT:

Mr. Thompson: I really hate to do this, but we need a motion to call a regular City Council Meeting for November 28^th at 8:00 am.

Motion by Councilman Carmody, seconded by Councilman Lester to call for a regular City Council Meeting, November 28, 2006 at 8:00 a.m.

Councilman Walford: I’d like to make a substitute motion that, that meeting last no longer than an hour and twenty minutes?

Councilman Lester: An hour.

Councilman Walford: An hour. Councilman Lester and I have something else to do.

Councilman Lester: 20 minutes.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Carmody, Robertson, Hogan, and Jackson. 6. Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Green. 1.

THE COMMITTEE RISES AND REPORTS: (Reconvenes Regular Council Meeting)

ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting adjourned at approximately 6:57 p.m.

___________________________________

//s// Jeffery A. Hogan, Chairman

___________________________________

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