CC 3827

12 17 07

Council Proceedings of the City of Shreveport, Louisiana

December 11, 2007

The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana was called to order by Chairman Joe Shyne at 3:14 p.m., Tuesday, December 11, 2007, in the Government Chambers in Government Plaza (505 Travis Street).

Invocation was given by Councilman Pastor Hunt.

The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Bowman.

On Roll Call, the following members were Present: Councilmen Lester (Arrived at 3:16 p.m.), Walford, Long, Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Absent: None.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Long to approve the minutes of the Administrative Conference, Monday (Date) and Council Meeting, Tuesday, (Date). Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Walford, Long, Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 6. Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Lester. 1.

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

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Mayor, do you have any distinguished guests?

Mayor Glover: We have a room full of them to day Mr. Chairman, but in the interest of time, we’re going to forego Mayoral communications at this point to go ahead and facilitate the pressing issues that are before the Council today. We would like to have the opportunity to bring them back up today at a later point in today’s proceedings.

Councilman Walford: Mr. Chairman, at this time, I’d like to make a motion to suspend the rules.

Councilman Long: So moved.

Councilman Walford: To hear two zoning cases and a ZBA Appeal.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Long to suspend the rules in order to consider two Zoning cases and a ZBA Appeal.

Mr. Thompson: Do you also want to suspend the rules to allow comments at this time or you just going to take up the cases?

Councilman Walford: I’ll amend my motion to go to Public Comments on these particular items, and then hear and vote on the cases.

Councilwoman Bowman: Second.

Councilman Walford: That covers Ms. Glass, is that what we need?

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Bowman to consider two Zoning cases, a ZBA Appeal and to hear Public Comments related to these cases.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long, Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

Councilman Shyne: If it’s alright with the Council, what we will do today, we have Public Comments separated into, (Councilman Wooley, cause this is going to affect you, thank you), we have comments separated in two stacks. One is for and one is against.

Councilman Long: Mr. Chairman, do we want to set some sort of a global time limit for each side? Otherwise, we could be here for hours listening to each side.

Councilman Shyne: Everybody gets 3 minutes. This is democracy. This is what you asked for, this is what you vote for.

Councilman Lester: And I had a late lunch Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Shyne: And if I don’t have the time to be down here to hear you, I don’t have no business being down here.

Councilman Lester: There you go.

Councilman Shyne: This is what it’s all about. I don’t want to cut you short. If you think we need to be here until 12:00, I serve at your pleasure. And I believe they do too. So, I don’t want to cut you short. Okay, first we will start with those that are ‘FOR’ the Zoning.

Mr. Jimmy Mijalis: (505 Travis, Suite 500) I’m a lawyer here in town, and I’m here in representative capacity on behalf of the owner of the property, and the applicant to offer argument supporting decisions previously made by the ZBA and the MPC. As a matter of - - - in order to try to save time, there are a lot of people in favor of the applicant, in favor of the owner. I venture to guess there’s probably, after everybody is now clear, 2-300 people that are outside here in favor. All those persons did not put their name in to speak due to (inaudible) and timeliness for the Council, I request that that not be done, and me as the principle spokesperson would present a brief presentation. So, based on that based on the fact that we have two cases, I request the Council’s indulgence for a few extra minutes if that’s permissible for me to speak. Members of the Council, the MPC and the ZBA are appointed, and they perform a vital function within the city planning area. As boards, they gather facts, they work closely with the city planners and the staff. They tour property, they hear arguments, and they make decisions. And I’m here to tell you that each decision they make is not in favor of the application. There are quite a number of applications that are considered by the ZBA, and by the MPC that are turned down. On these particular dockets where these matters came through, there were a lot of matters that were denied that were requested of those boards, and I think that shows that the ZBA, and the MPC, their decisions are based on careful thought. And so I submit that based on that process, that their decisions ought to be given deference by this honorable Council. Otherwise their decisions have no meaning. To do otherwise would simply be to encourage persons who don’t prevail to appeal to City Council just to try to get a second bite at the apple. And I submit that shouldn’t be how the process ought to work. In connection with the matters before the Council today, I contacted City Council Office to see if any submissions had been made by the opposition. And the primary opposition is the Calvary Baptist Church. And I was told, that yes a position paper had been submitted by Mr. Johnson. I went and came and reviewed the packet. I read the position paper, I also read the letter from Pastor Edmonds, dated December 5, 2007. And members of Council, I respect that on behalf of the congregation, Pastor Edmonds has to object because this proposed use includes the sale of liquor. I’ve talked with him in great detail. I also understand that Mr. Johnson, on behalf of the Alliance Defense Fund feels that he has the same duty. I’ve talked to him about that as well. But I respectfully show that I disagree with their position, and frankly I disagree with some of the factual statements contained in submissions, and I’d like to briefly advise the Council about that. First of all Pastor Edmonds in his letter of December 5, 2007, indicates that this particular parcel is within a few feet of the corner of Linwood and Bert Kouns. That’s not correct. It’s 620 feet west of the corner of Linwood and Bert Kouns. He also indicates that it’s within eyesight of the front doors of Calvary. This particular parcel, I don’t know if you’ve been out there, or been to the area, but if you go to Calvary, there’s no possible way you can see this particular parcel from Calvary. Mr. Johnson, on Page 2 of his submission indicates that the parcel is adjacent to a residential area. It is not. Mr. Johnson in his submission indicates that this particular parcel is within feet of where houses are being built. Well I guess that’s partially true. It’s 1,830 feet from the closest area where houses are being built. This parcel is not and does not border any residential area. Pastor Edmonds also indicates in his letter that many cases they alcoholic beverage liquor stores are located in low income/high crime area. I don’t know if he’s advocating that that’s where these stores ought to be, but frankly if I’m going to go purchase something from a liquor store, or if my spouse is going to go purchase something from a liquor store for a gathering that I may have one evening, I certainly don’t want to go to some sort of high crime area, I’d like to go to a nice area, and go to a liquor store that’s in a nice area so I can purchase what I need. They exist in town. The Thrifty on Youree, the Cuban on Pierremont, the Albertson’s on Southfield. These are all legal businesses. And finally, Pastor Edmonds indicates that RA is adequate and consistent for this particular area as it relates to Zoning. When you’re considering zoning, you start by looking at the location of property. This property is on the Bert Kouns Industrial Loop. The place that is designed and has always been designed specifically as total access road for businesses to locate. You see it all up and down Bert Kouns. The only reason this property was here for RA is because that’s what it was when it came into the system. It has never been looked at for proper zoning. Now when the Code talks about - - - Mr. Johnson indicates that he believes it’s a casual zoning change, and permissibly so, I disagree with that. When the Code talks of ‘necessary and desirable’, is it necessary or desirable that this area on Bert Kouns be RA? Absolutely not. It is absolutely necessary and desirable that this area on Bert Kouns be business property, and if you look, the Shreveport Code of Ordinances provides for types of zoning that we have, this area fits like a glove with the definition of B-3. 106-676 of the Shreveport Code of Ordinances states that B-3 Community Business Districts, usually located on a thoroughfare or near the intersection of two thoroughfares, these districts are large and within convenient driving distances of the group of neighborhoods they will serve. Well, the opposition has suggested, no, no, no. Maybe that ought to be B-2 or B-1. Well, that’s not right, Section 106-36 B-2. These districts are small and are within convenient walking distance of most of the areas they will serve. I don’t think anything on Bert Kouns is in convenient walking distance of anything. I don’t think anybody is going to want to walk on Bert Kouns. And B-1 serves as a small area of the neighborhood. That’s not this area either. This area screams to be B-3. It’s all around. It’s at the corner, it’s down the other way. The only reason this is not here in B-3 is because that’s how it was when it came into system. I saw an argument in the position paper that this is impermissible spot zoning. This isn’t spot zoning. The same owner that owns this particular parcel owns the rest of the area and adjacent area. It’s illogical to think that he would be spot zoning himself. But if that’s true, was the corridor located - - - is that spot zoning? Or the other corner where the Shell is located, is that spot zoning? It’s not spot zoning. This owner has plans for the entire area. It’s obvious if you go to the area. This owner has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to bring the entire property above flood plane, if this was the only piece he intended on developing in that area, it would be illogical for him to spend that kind of money. There is a site plan that’s been developed for the entire area. It’s not been finalized yet, the owner’s going to be working with the city on that. I don’t know if the overhead is working, but I have - - - but in any event, the site plan has been submitted, I don’t want to waste time on that. The site plan is being worked on, but it’s not been submitted yet because the plan has not been finalized yet. And to get with the city planners to make sure on the out fringes on the buffer areas, what exactly we want to do with that. You don’t zone speculatively. You zone based on filed site plans. That’s why this entire area hasn’t been requested to be rezoned yet. The site plan hasn’t been completed. Short sighted has argued the opposition? Absolutely not, it would be insensitive to do otherwise. This owner is also going to be paying about $160,000 for sewerage in the area, something that’s usually paid for by the city on a major thoroughfare such as this. I submit that the MPC was absolutely correct in their decision to zone this particular parcel as B-3. Then you turn to the special exception use that was granted by the ZBA for the sale of alcoholic beverages. Chapter 10 of the Code of Ordinances draw circles to determine where these businesses are legally authorized to be. 10-82 provides must be at least 300 feet from church, library, school, or playground. This business at a distance of 3,050 feet from Calvary would be nine times that distance. The primary factors that we discussed with the ZBA when we went before them with the location of the parcel itself, and the location of the parcel in relation to other entities and other uses in the area, the Board was guided by the fact that under Chapter 10, this is a legal spot for this business to be and the Special Exception Use Ordinance, 106-127 was discussed among other things, compatibility with existing or planned development. We’ve already discussed where this property is on Bert Kouns, I submit to you that Special Exception Use is integral to business on Bert Kouns and integral to business in many places. Without it, many businesses wouldn’t be here. The Brookshire’s right across the street from the area wouldn’t be here. The Raceway gas station wouldn’t be there. They required a Special Exception Use. This area would still be largely undeveloped if it weren’t for B-3 and if it wasn’t for Special Exception Use. If you look at the location for this particular parcel in relation to Calvary, he asked first how do you get there from Calvary? Well, from Bert Kouns where this property fronts, you go down Bert Kouns 620 feet until you get to Linwood. You then make a left on Linwood, and you go down Linwood about another 2400 feet. Finally, you get to Calvary on the right side. What do you past before you get there? Well, lets see. You pass the Raceway that has a Special Exception Use for high and low alcoholic beverages. You pass the Shell which has the Special Exception Use for low alcoholic beverages. You then take a left on Linwood, and you pass the Brookshire’s which has a Special Exception use for high and low alcoholic beverages. I know the opposition here has vehement concerns, but if the children are the focus, we ought to be more concerned about those places rather than this site. This site, no one under 21 is allowed to be in. No one can loiter in the area. There’s no drinking on the premises, this store is not and does not affect the continuity of the neighborhood. This store is not in that neighborhood. This is not a neighborhood store in any sense of the term. It’s not a place where people are going to be walking to, this is on Bert Kouns. If this were not what was wanted or needed in the community, this place is going to go out of business, I promise you. This owner is also not be unmindful of the area residents, with respect to property (inaudible) from Calvary, this owner owns that as well, and he’s putting in a gated community over there. And he’s working with Calvary on that. Because he thought that was appropriate for that area, just as he thinks this is appropriate for this particular area, and finally there’s been some concerns raised about traffic. Traffic has been addressed at length with the city with respect to this particular parcel. City Planners can confirm that with you, that before the zoning was requested from the MPC, the plans were submitted, the city planners had suggestions. We made a lot of changes. The State’s looked at it, they’ve improved it from the traffic standpoint. The required side easements have been put in place for the future development of the property. The location of the parcel has even been shifted at the request of the City. We’ve worked closely with the city planners, and done everything that’s been asked. Lastly the crime – Pastor Edmonds indicated in his letter that, ‘well this liquor is going to create more crime in the area’. Well, I just suggest to you that has that happened with the Raceway? And the Brookshires? Has crime increased because those businesses came? Why do you think that’s now going to happen with this location? A location where there is going to be no loitering, it’s not going to be a walk-in establishment. There’s not going to be people under the age of 21 on the premises. Thrifty is and has been an establishment that has been a very good corporate partner for the City. This is a well thought out planned development. And I hear a lot of jeering behind me, and you know, I don’t think that’s necessarily fair, because it seems to me that passion in getting in the way of rational thinking. If you rationally think this out, this is the spot where this particular place is legal and is supposed to be. This Council should not overturn the ZBA decision, the ZBA’s unanimous decision to allow the Special Exception Use. The only other thing I have is that there were a lot of people that were here. Could we get a head count at some point, I’ve very much appreciate it.

Councilman Shyne: We just got one, would you like it now?

Mr. Mijalis: It doesn’t matter, we can do that later, it’s fine. Thank you for your time.

Ms. Keitha Avant: (400 Travis Street, Suite No. 1800) I’m a commercial real estate broker in Shreveport and I’d like to address this issue from a land use standpoint, and legal standpoint first. Whether anyone in this room likes it or not, it is legal to sell alcohol in the City of Shreveport, in Caddo Parish. If that is the case, and it is, where other than a high traffic commercial corridor should it be built. We don’t want them in our neighborhoods, next to our homes. We want them in high traffic, well lit corridors that were designed to house commercial businesses. Bert Kouns Industrial Loop is that corridor. Personally, I think we would all be better served to take the collective energy in this room and put it toward taking the unscrupulous liquor store owners to task for selling to our underage minors. There are some, somehow our children know them, and we as their parents don’t. Mr. Toups does not have that reputation. His liquor stores, it is my understanding actually have quite an excellent reputation for weeding underage kids out. Also frankly, I have faith in the children of Calvary Baptist Church. It takes a young person who desires to break the law to break the law. These are good kids with good parents and good morals and faith based values, and frankly I would very surprised if in fact you’ve got them at this liquor store attempting to buy liquor. I don’t believe that’s the case. But in summary I think it’s important to focus on land use, important to focus on the legality of the issue, and regardless of our personal feelings. Thank you.

Ms. Angel Pou: (7706 Sorthfork Dr) While Keitha addressed this from a land use standpoint, I want to address it from a neighborhood standpoint. I live in the center of one of the largest retail developments in the city. I live between Bert Kouns, Youree Drive, and 70^th . There are coffee shops, liquor stores, grocery stores and all kinds of retail establishments around my house. Never one time have they detracted from my quality of life, they’ve enhanced it. I’ve lived in Broadmoor, and I had traffic problems. Now every neighborhood has an issue. And I don’t believe locating a liquor store in a high traffic corridor like Bert Kouns is going to detract from the neighborhood around there, whether it be Calvary Baptist Church, or any of the other surrounding neighborhoods. I’m asking you to approve the zoning along the Bert Kouns/Linwood tract.

Pastor Kenneth Paul: ( 720 Wilder Place) I’ve come here to support all the property constituted bodies of this city who do diligence in their work. And also to commend Mr. Toups and others who are prosperous and generous businessmen in this city. I think that this is as the Mayor has reminded us ‘The New City of the South’, and in that new city, we will have great diversity. And that diversity will be expressed as it is here by Calvary Baptist Church, and by the Episcopal Church, which I represent. I commend all the efforts that have gone into this project, and the long hours of diligent work to make our city a more prosperous city, as well as a place convenient for Episcopalians to buy whiskey. Thank you..

Mr. Roland Toups: (3238 Barksdale Blvd, Bossier City, LA) I have a petition here that I’d like to give to you. People that have signed in favor of this location at 420 E. Bert Kouns Inner Loop. I have a petition of 4,771 names. I have been in business as Thrifty Liquor Company since 1961. I feel like that we are a good corporate citizen of Shreveport/Bossier City. We employ approximately 180 people. We have an annual payroll of $3,560,670.56 per year. These figures are based on 2006, 2007 figures are better. We paid in City and State sales tax in the year 2006, $4,045,201.43. We pay yearly property tax, roughly $335,550.63. We are members of the Shreveport Chamber of Commerce, The Better Business Bureau. We contribute to charitable organizations on a regular basis. Some of the ones that we do are The Betty Phillips Deaf Action Center, Shreveport Symphony, Shreveport Opera, Providence House, Feist-Weiler Cancer Society, The Red Cross, The Rutherford House, The Heart Association, MDA, Red River Revel, Holiday In Dixie, and many others that we donate smaller amounts of our time, energy and product. Last but not least, I’d like to mention to you that liquor prohibition was repealed March 23, 1933. I am in a legal business. I am in a legal business such as a cleaner, a dry goods store, a shoe store, or any other type store like that. And I feel like that I have the right as much as anyone else to be at this location on Bert Kouns. I’d be glad to answer any questions.

Mr. Michael Labban: (1298 Leonard Road) I am the other owner of Thrifty Liquor. I am the grandson of James Melton who along with Roland Toups started Thrift Liquor in 1961. I moved back here in 1994 after attending college in South Florida to go to work here in Shreveport with the company I started as an hourly employee. Eventually buying my way into the company, and I can’t tell you how excited I was the day I realized I had attained the American Dream of being a small business owner. I have a degree in Business Administration, and in every business class that I’ve ever taken in college, there were three important things that dictated success in a business. The first one was location, the second one was location, and funny enough, the third one was location. My grandfather was a very successful businessman, always told me that location and taking care of the customer are the keys to success. Now ladies and gentlemen, we just didn’t pick out a map, throw a dart at it and say we want to put a liquor store here. We picked this location for a reason. We have a definite need for this location. We have customers everyday asking us when are you going to put a store out here. I can’t get (inaudible) your other store. On my way from work, I like to stop there. We cannot currently meet all the needs of our customers with our current locations. I hear a lot from people, some of them sitting in this room about how we don’t need another liquor store, especially one in that area. However, we’re not just a liquor store anymore. We literally do thousands of transactions every month. Bill payments, people come in our store to pay their electric bill, their phone bills. They come and pay their gas bills, they buy home phones from us. People that can’t afford to get a phone from Bellsouth, they come in and purchase phones from us, phone service. They buy cell phones from us, they buy prepaid credit cards, they buy phone cards. They come in and wire money to their loved ones who are out of state or out of the city that need it, or might be in the military serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. They have come in to get money from their loved ones when they are in need. We have businesses that literally come in and wire money and conduct business with our Western Union wire transfer service. We have people buying money orders on a daily basis that cannot afford a bank. If you look right here, I guess to the Council’s right, convenience pay which is a form of bill pay, within a week we do 625 transactions. That equates to a four week month, 2500 transactions. Another bill pay service that we do, electric, phone and things like that, we do over 3,000 a week. That’s over 12,000 a month. Money orders, we do almost 8,000 money order transactions a week. That’s almost 32,000 a month. Western Union Wire Transfers – almost 900 transactions in a week. Over 3500 in a month. Budget phone and their phone services – almost 500 transactions a week. That’s almost 1900 a month. ATM Services and I’m sure we’re all familiar with that, 500 a week, over 2,000. That’s 13,500 transactions we do every week, 54,000 transactions we do a month that are non-alcohol related. Ladies and gentlemen, we’re not just a liquor store anymore. We are a community convenient center. People come to us on a daily basis that don’t even drink alcohol. We are a good neighbor in every area that we’re at. We have people that come in our stores, daily, weekly, monthly that don’t even drink alcohol and don’t purchase it. They come in for non alcoholic related services that we provide. I personally wait on little old ladies that come in and to pay their phone bill or electric bill. “I don’t drink”. I say, “Ma’am, that’s fine, we’re here for you, whatever you need, we’re here for you.” We’re a good neighbor in every area that we’re in. We have stores within a half mile from schools and churches all over the community. Interesting, there are more people here or as many people here that are for this, that are against it. They say they have a petition, we have a rather large petition. We have thousands of people every single day saying that they do want us here. And some of those people that say they do want us here, actually attend Calvary Baptist Church, and they are the parents of children that attend Calvary School. We ask that you vote with an open mind in this issue. This vote is a legal issue, it’s not a morality issue. We have every legal right to put a store here. There’s not one single legal reason that they’ve presented why we shouldn’t have a store here. All we ask is that you please vote with an open mind, and that you vote to uphold the MPC and the ZBA’s approval. Thank you for your time and your consideration. Any questions?

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Toups, a headcount was done outside (I want to say by the Fire Department), Chief I hope your officers are all men of integrity.

Chief Cochran: Yes sir. Everyone of them.

Councilman Shyne: Okay, alright. I think it was 150 outside that was in favor of Mr. Toups.

Councilman Walford: What about inside?

Councilman Shyne: How many do we have inside? Stand please.

Councilman Walford: Somebody going to count?

Councilman Shyne: One of your officers, if you want one of your officers - - - I can’t.

Mayor Glover: Mr. Chairman, would you clarify what your request is? Support or Opposition.

Councilman Shyne: This is for Mr. Toups and Mr. Mijalis. In support of the liquor store. Mr. Mijalis, you’ve got a good number in here already. 44 inside.

Councilman Walford: So, 194.

Councilman Shyne: Okay, so we’ll say 90% of you all (inaudible). Okay, you all may take your seat.

Mr. Jimmy Gosslee: (8805 Line Ave) I am the Chairman of the Board of the Caldwell Banker Company. I come representing the owners of this property and we’re marketing the property that we are talking about today, as well as the property that adjoins this property. We have represented this owner for at least 10 years on that property at Bert Kouns and also the property across the street. Our company was involved in the sale of the property to some of the other users out there. The gas stations and our company happened to be involved in the sale of Brookshire’s. Our company is also the developer and I personally been involved in the development of the Auto Mall in Shreveport, Louisiana, some 20 years ago. I’ve been in this business 32 years. Our company has is also represented Bayou Walk, the commercial development where Kroger is and Barnes and Nobles at 70^th Street. We’re also the broker/developer/partners of the Winegarten Development where Target is and Loews across the street, Chevyland, Sams, all those developments have gone on at 70^th Street and Youree Drive, that most of you are familiar with. My point is that this property is a property that I think is an economic development issue. And I think the land use that’s being requested and had been approved by the MPC as well as the Zoning Board of Appeals is appropriate for this type use. Our goal is to have the frontage on Bert Kouns Industrial Loop which was designed and developed for commercial use to be used such as the one that’s been proposed today, and to be voted on today. Other uses that we’d like to see in that area besides Sonic, McDonalds who are already in there, would be Wendy’s, Macaroni Grille, (Inaudible) TGIF Friday’s, Chili’s, On The border, to go along with all the other commercial uses that are there. What better use would there be for commercial zoning, for B-3 Zoning than the frontage of Bert Kouns. All of that property up and down Bert Kouns at some point will be commercially used, and our company will also be representing these owners, and developing residential property that will be along Linwood, and they’re going to have gated community as we’ve said, and going to (inaudible) brush bayou similar to what’s been done at Cottage Ridge, another development by this same owner. But I’m here representing the owners of this property as a realtor, a 32 year realtor to say we’d like to have your approval of this because I think it makes sense for the area. I think it’s good for Southwest Shreveport, and I think it’s good for economic development. Thank you for your time.

Councilman Walford: All your expertise as a realtor, if this Council should overturn the decision of the MPC on the Zoning side of it for the B-3, Ordinance prohibits coming back for one year to reapply for zoning, what impact would that have on selling the property or developing the property for any other uses.

Mr. Gosslee: I hate to speak for the owners of this property, but my opinion would be negative in that the owners of this property have spent quite a lot of money on developing that property to this point based on the fact that they’ve had a contract with Thrift Liquor to buy this location. This is the first point of contract in the process we go through as realtors is when we receive an offer, which we did, from another realtor who previously spoke in this matter, we present it to the owners, and the owners decided that yes, they’d like to do that. They’ve spent quite a lot of money, as you can see with the (inaudible) work that’s been done out there. And it would be a negative impact to not build and complete the sale, especially if it has to go for a year. I look at this property as just the first piece of a development that would be all commercial. The front of that property will always be commercial, it will never be residential, it won’t be RA. Should be zoned B-3, and it should be this use, and I hope I’ve answered your question.

Councilman Walford: Thank you.

Mr. Gosslee: Thank you very much for your time.

Mayor Glover: Before you move on, staff is gone outside to poll or do this for both sides, if you all don’t mind, gone outside to ask if any of those who are waiting, wanted to speak.

Councilman Shyne: That’s great Mr. Mayor.

Councilman Walford: Mr. Chairman, I might ask since we gave Mr. Mijalis a good bit of extra time, ask the other side if they have principle spokesperson who needs considerably more time than the others, and in the spirit of fairness, to let someone from the other side start off with more time than - - - you understand where I’m going here Mr. Chairman? We gave about 8 or 9 or more minutes, and I think in fairness.

Councilman Shyne: I understood what you’re saying and I thought we would probably do this on an individual basis. If you needed some extra time, then we’d give you some extra time. But if you don’t need any extra time, we won’t give it to you, we’ll give it to somebody else.

Mr. Johnson: I need it.

Councilman Shyne: Okay, if you need it.

Audience applauds loudly.

Councilman Shyne: Just a minute now, just whoa, whoa, whoa, just a minute.

Councilman Lester: Thank y’all for the hand.

Councilman Shyne: Yeah, he thought y’all were clapping for him coming in.

Councilman Lester: I thought y’all were saying, “And introducing”.

Councilman Shyne: I’m as emotional as anybody. I’ll jump up and shout in church, and might run down and hug the Pastor.

Councilman Lester: But you’re Methodist, y’all don’t do that.

Councilman Shyne: Don’t say that. But in here, we don’t want to be emotional right now. Hear? You can smile and maybe wink, but lets don’t clap and lets don’t say other little things, because we don’t want one group going out saying the other group got an advantage. So it’s kinda a whole lot of emotions and at the end of the day, I’ll come out there and we’ll all just kinda hoop and holler a little bit.

Mr. Johnson: As the principle spokesman, does it make more sense to go first Mr. Chairman?

Councilman Shyne: Not necessarily. I mean if you’d like to,

Mr. Johnson: (Inaudible) Hold it just a minute. We don’t have no problem with it, if you’d like to come first, we will take you first. This is - - -

Mr. Thompson: Mike Johnson.

Mr. Mike Johnson: (370 St. Charles Blvd) Thank you Mr. Chairman and Council Members. We have brought this appeal for several reasons, and we summarized them for you in a notebook of materials that I hope you had a chance to at least thumb through. We would summarize it in three points. 1) Rezoning this parcel as requested would actually violate existing provisions of the Shreveport Code of Ordinances and I’ll explain why in a moment. 2) It would jeopardize desirable business development that’s already going on full steam ahead in this facility, and 3) it would negatively impact the public health, safety and general welfare. That’s a phrase that comes right out of our code and it’s the one that Council is supposed to give great deference to. The first, the Code of Ordinances prohibits this zoning change. If you look at the Code Chapter 106, the other side has said we don’t have any legal arguments. I beg to differ with that. That’s the entirety of our notebook is based on legal arguments. Not moral arguments, not emotional arguments, but legal ones. Chapter 106 of our Code includes special provisions, and specific provisions regarding the circumstances that have to exist for a parcel of land to be rezoned. If you look at Section 106-3, which you all know well, it says, “In interpreting and applying the provisions of this Chapter, they shall be held to the minimum requirements for the promotion of the public health, safety, and general welfare.” That’s not a Calvary Baptist phrase, it comes out of the Code of Ordinances that the City regards and follows. Section 106-36 then list the City amendment policy, with regard to our zoning plan, and it affirms “It is therefore declared to be the public policy to amend this chapter only when conditions make it necessary and desirable to rezone an area in an particular way.” B-3 is the wrong zoning classification for this parcel, and we’re talking about only this parcel. Not the corridor, not this whole section of Bert Kouns, but this piece of property. Section 106-616 provides that when a residential neighborhood is situated in close proximity to a commercial development, that there is a particular kind of business zone that we prefer and defer to in that scenario, and that’s a B-1. It’s called a Buffer Business District, and you’re all familiar with. It’s not a B-3, not even a B-2. It’s a B-1. Why is that? Because the Code says it serves as a compatible transition between residential neighborhoods and commerce. Now, we have a residential neighborhood being built right behind this area that’s being cleared, and where the land is being moved. It is the same owner, he’s developing a residential neighborhood. That’s great. We’ve applauded it. Calvary’s been in favor of that. That is a desirable development, but it’s going to abut this section of this area, and for that reason, the homeowners there, the homeowners who are yet to move in, whose houses have not even been constructed yet, if we need to give them some deference, they need to have the same protections under the City Code that all the rest of us had when we bought and purchased our home. Also allowing the zoning change and the liquor store, and by the way, lets make no mistake about it, this is a discussion about a liquor store, it’s not just a zoning decision, the applicant has made no bones about this. He’s going to build and construct Thrifty Liquor, so that’s what we’re talking about. But allowing the zoning change, and this liquor store, would jeopardize desirable business development in this vicinity. Any of you can and I’m sure you have, driven by this corridor of Bert Kouns. This is not the industrial part of Bert Kouns. We have a flurry of medical service providers, professional service providers who have built offices there, even in the last few months. There are more coming. This is a desirable development and exciting one. One that the City Council should encourage. If you put a liquor store in the middle of that, it would seem to (inaudible) that kind of development and activity, and that’s what we’re all in favor of. Secondly, allowing this zoning change and the liquor store, would of course negatively impact the public health safety and general welfare. And that would be in violation of Code Section 106-03. The Code acknowledges that there are some dangers and some special precautions that have to be considered when you zone for and allow a liquor store. We all know why that is. It specifically prohibits the sale of alcohol in close proximity to churches and schools. Not for moral reasons, but for legal and rational ones. Now Mr. Mijalis said, there are no rational arguments here. These are all rational. We’re talking about crime. Let me give you a couple of examples. The Federal Bureau of Justice statistics report that nearly 40% of all crimes, violent and nonviolent are committed under the influence of alcohol. In your notebooks, under Tab 3, you have some summaries of land use studies and findings like people like Dr. Tom Farley. He’s the Director of the Center, and Chair of Department of Community Health Sciences at Tulane University. He said, “Several studies have shown that crime clusters around liquor stores.” American Journal of Public Health says the same thing. The Urban Strategies Council says the same thing. The Pacific Institute For Research and Evaluation says the same thing, and you have that information in your notebook. That’s crime, lets’ talk about traffic and public safety. We’re not concerned that Calvary Academy Kids are going to go buy liquor. That is not what we’ve said. No one suggested that. We’re concerned that these inexperienced drivers are going to be passing by this section and this business. We know that the 2005 National Highway Transportation Safety Administration Report shows that 39% of total traffic fatalities involved alcohol. Over 21% of the children age 14, and younger who were killed in motor vehicle crashes were killed in alcohol related crashes. And estimated 254,000 persons were injured in crashes where police reported that alcohol was present. That’s an average injured approximately every two minutes. Listen, prohibition was outlawed in the 20s. We took care of that, and Mr. Toups I’m sure is a fine businessman. I’m sure he’s a good man contributing a lot to the community. That’s not what this is about. You do not have a constitutional right to operate a liquor store. The law gives the deference to you as the elected officials of the people to make those decisions. And you’re supposed to make those decisions in what’s in the best interest of the people and the public at large. They’ve got 14 or 15 locations already throughout this city. There are plenty of places to buy alcohol, if you want to go get it. You don’t need to put it at this spot, at one of the busiest and most dangerous intersections in the city. Bert Kouns and Linwood Avenue is already noted for that. And we have countless young and inexperienced drivers that pass through this area everyday. That’s our concern, not morality, public safety. The introduction of liquor sales at this location is an inherently bad idea. And We’ve not heard anything from the applicants today, and they can of course present no case that tailors - - - that spot zoning change request to B-3 and the resulting liquor store here will in any way or by any stretch of the imagination “promote the public health, safety, and general welfare”, as is required by Code Section 106-03. You’re going to hear a lot about Calvary Baptist, the academy, the day care, all of our functions that we have on the weekends. Thousands of people frequent this area, and many of them are inexperienced drivers. The reported site plan that was discussed by Mr. Mijalis as he admitted has not been finalized. For that reason, it’s not worth but the paper that it’s printed on. You can’t place any reliance or deference on what they say they may want to build there at some point in the future, none of us can. That’d be inappropriate to do so. It’s important finally, and I’ll close it with this. It’s important for the City Council to note and respect the vehement and rational opposition to this application. We were the first to submit to your petition eight hundred some odd signatures, gathered by people who have a vested interest in this area, in this section of Bert Kouns. They attend church, they live in the immediate vicinity, they have kids who travel by this area. They put their petitions on the counters of the Thrift Liquors across town. Take that for what its worth. In Papa vs. City of Shreveport, 1996 case, many of you familiar with, the 2^nd Circuit upheld this City Council’s decision to deny a special use exception regarding alcohol sales, and it gave great weight to the citizens grass roots efforts. In that case, they only had 30 signatures on a petition. They had six opposition speakers, they had a minister, and they had a homeowners association who opposed the zoning change. I want to close with this. The Court said, and it was affirmed by the Louisiana Supreme Court, they denied the writ, “The ZBA Staff’s recommendations that previously approved this are to be considered by the Council in conjunction with the testimony and evidence presented by those who reside in the affected area”. That’s the people who are standing behind us. They’re not paid to be here, they’re here on their own volition. Many of them have taken off work, and they’ve taken their time to come down here. And for all these reasons and the rest that you’ll hear, we beg of you to do the right thing, to follow the Code, and approve this appeal. Thank you. If there are any questions, I’d be glad to answer.

Councilman Long: So, are you advocating not B-3? You’re saying B-1 is the appropriate zoning for this area?

Mr. Johnson: Suggesting that either B-1 or B-2 would be appropriate, but of course that’s not what is before the Council today.

Councilman Long: I just want to understand where you’re going.

Mr. Johnson: I think if you look at the medical and professional service providers that are building there, that’s the trend. That’s what we should look to. Those are the appropriate and the kinds of developments that encourage and anticipated by a B-2 or B-1. And that’s the kind of thing that I think we should all stand and applaud and encourage by whatever public policy we can create.

Councilman Shyne: Pastor, what do you need about eight minutes?

Pastor Edmonds: Well you know you’re asking a Pastor, Mr. Walford’s already suggested we take up an offering.

Councilman Shyne: That’s why I was saying that. They Mayor hunched me a while ago, and told me, saying, ‘You know you got a couple of Baptist Preachers in here and they talk a long time, so. I want you to share some of this.

Councilman Walford: Mr. Chairman, before the Pastor gets started, I started to say something. I have great respect for Mr. Johnson as a lawyer, but to leave over 4 minutes on the table?

Mr. Johnson: Did I?

Councilman Walford: I don’t know what’s going on.

Pastor Rick Edmonds: (9817 East Chase) Where I’m the Senior Pastor and President of Calvary Baptist Academy. It’s hard not to get emotional because there’s a lot on the table. We would not be here except for I want to make certain that we not apologize Mr. Mijalis, but this is the forum designed, and appeal is appropriate. But we are appropriate to be here today. Because that’s what government is for. We’re here to try to appeal to you about something that we believe is very vital to us. I will just say in answer to Mr. Walford, one of the reasons that we’re discouraged is because is Mr. Mijalis has basically drawn the line in the sand. We’ve not done that. We were there at the Metropolitan Planning Commission, and we’re in favor of business in our region. In fact I was at the drive-thru window at McDonald’s with the manager there, they’re some of our best friends, and we enjoy doing business with them. What you really are looking at now, and one of the arguments made is that this is the Industrial Loop. Well, I don’t know why they named it that years ago, but it is not fashioned itself out quite like that. For those who are not real familiar, I brought us some photos today to give us an idea of what the Industrial Loop now looks like. Now the Industrial loop, and we’re Calvary Baptist Church and you know where we sit, and of course people think that Calvary and Brookwood is pretty much the church area, but really and truly, this is what we now look like at Bert Kouns. We look like banks, and we have great representation from banks that are there in our area. We look like Starbucks Coffee, and we’re very thankful that we have neighbors that we have folks that have moved into great doctors clinics and others are making plans as we speak with a brand new three story facility that (inaudible) then on Bert Kouns Industrial Loop. We have a great neighbor in Brookshire’s that are participants in our area. Doctors that not only attend our church, but that probably might even be your physicians with Regional Urology. They do a great job in the area, and there’s Region’s, and you can see the architecture in the brand new banks and what they look like. However, this is not what Bert Kouns Industrial Loop looks like. No where in our corridor is this what this looks like. And we don’t want to pretend what is or what is not. Thrift Liquor may provide many services to the customers of Shreveport, but the one service they’re in business for is to serve hard liquor alcohol to people of Shreveport. Southwest Shreveport is our concern. Now, we’re not concerned with ATMs, and we’re not concerned with Western Union Service, and we’re not concerned with little old ladies that need help to send their mail somewhere. We’re interested in people that will serve beverages, that bring crime to the area. Now, we can look at statistics, and we can bog down all afternoon and talk about whether it’s the same building a shoe store as is building a Thrifty Liquor. Now, I would like to make that comparison for you this afternoon, however, I don’t have the latest crime statistics around the latest building of a Shoe Depot, or a Nike Outlet. However I can tell you with multiple sheets of information that the crime rate in Southwest Shreveport will go up according to national statistics of every major metropolitan city in these United States. They cannot be refuted. And so this afternoon, with heavy hearts, we stand before you because business is great in Southwest Shreveport. We applaud our Mayor, who has stated multiple times and now the (inaudible) phrase is that, “Man, we want to be the next great city of the south’. Well, Calvary wants to do their part. We are currently involved in the largest academy growth in the State of Louisiana. Over these past few years, our attendance has gone from 450, and I have on rolls today, 1,105 children, K-5 through K-12. We are currently part time and full time employing almost 200 people, and as Mr. Toups will tell you, and we don’t have a profit margin. We are almost at the $9,000,000 mark, which all dollars go back into ministry and (inaudible) personnel. So, we are trying to invest our best with the best that this city has. Our children. I represent mothers that care today. You know why? Because that mother has set in my office, and I performed a funeral after funeral of teenagers that have been killed in Mr. Webb’s District. Some of us have seen those that were killed in Mr. Lester’s District. It involves drinking and driving. Now, I’m not here to tell you that I dislike Mr. Toups, it’s not personal. They’ve said it’s not personal, we’re saying it’s not personal. It’s not personal. If I would tell you that it doesn’t matter, it does matter. But one mile point three-tenths from the front door of our establishment right now, there’s a Thrifty Liquor on Linwood, already exist. Turn down Bert Kouns, about 2.5 miles, there’s another Thrifty Liquor. There’s already outlets all over this area to provide hard alcohol. And through drive through windows, although we have an open container, (inaudible) I’m sure it’s very difficult Mayor, for our finest to try to determine what to do with an open container that’s served through a window that’s blocked with scotch tape and handed a straw. Now, I can pretend we (inaudible) and we can live in fantasy land, or I can tell you what’s on my heart. And what’s on my heart is to protect the young boys and girls, their moms and dads by which we represent thousands of them, almost 2,000 people per day enter the campus of Calvary Baptist Church, Calvary Baptist Academy, Calvary (inaudible) Daycare. From bed babies to K-4, 300 a day. From K-5 to 12, 1105 a day. Recreation wise, 500-1,000 per day. Employees, almost 200 per day. Every day we try to affect the lives of men and women in Southwest Shreveport. As Mike Johnson has already stated, there are hundreds of people here, many in the lobby. They took time off work today. They have given up some of their pay checks today. None of them are being paid to be here today. None of them are here representing vendors today. They’re here today because they are your numbers. They live in your districts. They love Shreveport. We love Shreveport, and we are pro business. We believe that this area can be rezoned and a great business come into this area. And I’ll tell you this, we’ll be the first ones to step forward and support great business that will be offered in this area. I hope today that you will think about your opportunity as Mr. Sprawls did when he took a look at this as Chairman of the Metropolitan Planning Commission, which he said, this basic location is now being held by people of B-1. That’s what’s moving in, doctors’ clinics, professional services, Starbucks and others. B-3 with exception, nobody’s thinking about that. We have to think about property value. Some might tell you that it won’t matter. Well when crime rate goes up, when things change, I don’t know about your statistics, but I believe we can prove that multiple real estate services, prime real estate goes down. Ladies and gentlemen, it is incumbent upon this Council to stand for the men and women of Southwest Shreveport. Mayor, business is good in Southwest Shreveport, and we’re glad to be a part of the plan to be a part of Shreveport, the South’s next great city. We salute you, and we trust you with our children. Anybody have any questions I can answer for you, I’d be glad to do so.

Mr. Steve Angell: (9333 Linwood Ave) I appreciate being able to come here and speak with you. Today, before I start we have a Civics class taking place. Behind me is some of our 9^th Graders, and I would ask for them to stand.

Councilman Shyne: Sure. Let’s give them a big hand.

Mr. Angell: This represents a small portion of our school, who are here to see how our government works, how things take place. And it is very important when we talk about having this great city. Our former Mayor said, “Lets Bring The Kids Home.” Mr. Chairman, you said last night almost like this. Why don’t we invest in the kids we got here. Well right there is a class of 9^th Graders that we’ve been investing. He talks about 40 years, we’ve been here 80 years investing in the lives of these kids in our communities. They’re doctors now, they’re businessmen, they’re moms, they’re dads, they’re grandmas. We have all those kids right here, and we’re investing in them. I want to just clear up some things that Mr. Mijalis said just a little while ago, talking about crime and everything else. It so happens I have the Shreveport Times dated November 21, 2007. On the very front of the paper it says this, “Shreveport Police Detectives Mike (I won’t say his last name) and Richard are shown in the cooler of the Thrifty Liquor. Officers are gearing up to prevent robberies during the holiday season by hiding out in local retailers. Offices armed with shotguns will hunker down in icy coolers.”

Mr. Shyne: Are you sure that’s Shreveport, not Jackson?

Mr. Angell: I got it a week after the ZBA approved their liquor license. In the paper at my house, and I said, you know what? I think I’ll keep that, because I keep hearing about there’s no crime in our liquor stores. Apparently, Shreveport Police puts people in the coolers thinking, you know what they’re going to get robbed. They’ll bring this three-tenths from my campus. And if you look at this piece of paper right here, this is a master plan of what we’re planning on doing. We’re one of the largest land owners down there in Southwest Shreveport. We own 160 acres down there. One of the events we just put on, just a few months ago. It’s called our Fall Fest. We had over 5,000 people. Alternative to Halloween, the candy - - - we gave out candy, they had air balloons down here, they had food, they all kinds of stuff. Everybody across every district came with our partners because we host the Star Games on Saturday, (inaudible) football teams. We invited everybody across the city, whatever your team, you come this night, we’ll have a great event. We do it on the 4^th of July. So when it comes to dealing with all this rhetoric about where (inaudible) are, where DOT says we can have it, I want to tell you that if this proposed shopping center, they’ve not even filed yet, they have a (inaudible) right there on Linwood which is right below my church. I also (inaudible) Master of Divinity Degree, cause I am a Pastor, I also have a Business Degree. I said in many of these business classes that the gentleman that spoke earlier, and one of the things you do before you start out with a business is make sure your property is zoned properly before you actually invest the money. When you go into a business, it does not guarantee because you spend money and it is your right to have a business to make a profit. You should have did some fore planning as they teach you in those business classes to do that and get your zoning properly before you go ahead and invest your money inside of there. Last thing I’d like to say is again, it’s nothing personal with Mr. Toups, I have nothing personal with him, but I have a few folks who I spoke with from the Louisiana DWI Center. The Coordinator and the Communication Coordinator has lost someone because of drunk driving. One of them was out there on Baird Road, and she stated to me as a member of Wrenwood (inaudible) people coming up to speak, she said, “I can’t get off work today because I work at Willis Knighton”. She said, “But I lost a daughter who was 27 years of age, and she left a 4 year old behind and everyday I have to raise her.” This other mother lost a 16 year old on Baird Road. They talk about this liquor store, you can drive through it, they put a little piece of scotch on it, hand you a straw and basically walk through that intersection which is the fourth dangerous intersection in Shreveport. It’s dangerous down there. We don’t need any more people die there. And as Pastor spoke a minute ago about 1105 kids we have fromK-12 Grade, he did not mention the 400 we have in daycare down there. We have approximately 1500 kids on our campus everyday. That’s not including events, that’s just operation that takes place there. We appreciate today if you would deny this zoning because it is inappropriate down there, and I told you to look yesterday afternoon at the MPC Chairman’s comments, Mr. Sprawls. This does not warrant a B-3 in this area at this time. Thank you for your time.

Mayor Glover: Mr. Chairman, I did want to make just a couple of comments. First of all I want to thank you for bringing those outstanding students here from your Civics Class today. They just clarified something that I’d been assuming.

Mr. Angell: What’s that?

Mayor Glover: Here for I guess about the past years or so. I’ve been seeing all the folks around Shreveport with these big “Cs” on their chest.

Mr. Angell: Yes sir.

Mayor Glover: I just assumed that those are for “Cedric”. But thank you for clearing that up for me.

Mr. Angell: Mr. Mayor, these guys right here, I coached most of these guys about the last seven years (inaudible).

Mayor Glover: Thank you. And I also wanted to let you know that with regard to that newspaper headline, that you held up that showed the two officers inside the cooler. That those are officers that are not for that particular situation, but ended up where that’s where the newspaper ended up catching them that day to take that picture. But those officers are not just in Thrift Liquor, they’re in convenient stores.

Mr. Angell: (Inaudible)

Mayor Glover: In fact, they’re in Shreveport.

Mr. Angell: Yeah, but those are the Bossier Guys.

Mayor Glover: Exactly. But there’s a little known or a widely held misconception that the only shotgun squad that operates in Northwest Louisiana is in Bossier.

Mr. Angell: Well I didn’t use shotgun squad. It was in there, but I didn’t say that.

Mayor Glover: We want it to be understood that under the present Administration, that there is a very active, very mobile, not so visible shotgun squad operating throughout Shreveport. And so for those folks out there who may be watching via this media we want them to know that they could walk into a Thrift Liquor, or a Circle K, we may have to put some of them in the Dentist’s office before it’s all said and done, that they could come in and possible end up encountering a Shreveport Police Officer toting a shotgun. So thank you for being here, and certainly thank you for bringing these wonderful young people here.

Mr. Angell: You’re welcome. I told Chief Whitehorn this afternoon, I said, I appreciate his appointment, I realize it’s a tough job, and if we can do anything to help him, I will try my best to do that.

Mayor Glover: Thank you.

Mr. Cullen J. Clary: (9333 Linwood) Thank you Mr. Shyne, City Council and the Mayor, Police Chief, Fire Chief I guess left. I work for the city for over 30 years on the register (inaudible) Shreveport Fire Department. I have made numerous tragedies at Bert Kouns and Linwood. I’m sick and tired personally of the death and destruction, not only from drive bys, in fact we lost the two little children in the neighborhood, and I’ve been keeping up with the new Police Chief, I hadn’t personally met him yet, but I have myself personally over the years made numerous tragic, high impact accidents at Bert Kouns at Linwood. And I’d like to take to task and repeat what the attorney Mijalis about walking on Bert Kouns. You sure don’t want to walk on Bert Kouns unless you want to get splattered. Second of all the lady from Caldwell Banker brought up that it’s a well lit area out there where Mr. Mijalis’ property is. That’s not true at all, it’s dark and very dangerous out there. The other trouble driving and drinking is illegal. I know this to be a fact. Drive through get you a drink. What’s the difference in getting you some dope? I don’t see any difference. They’re both take your alertness away, and hurt people. Innocent civilians. And the reason I’m up here mainly, (inaudible) is one thing, but the most precious cargo in the world to me, travels up and down Linwood and Bert Kouns everyday trying to go to school, and that’s my grandchildren.

Councilman Shyne: Sonny, excuse me. I’m going to ask you to look this way because it just so happens that the Mayor doesn’t have a vote this time around. The Chief of Police doesn’t have a vote this time around. These people up here are the ones that’s going to be voting.

Mr. Clary: The main reason I’m here is a safety issue, and the second is a moral issue. We all have choices, you’re going to drink, or you’re going to drive, you’re going to go to church and serve God, or you’re not. But about the crime, I personally have come in or tried to get out of Brookshire’s before, and I’ve been run over with shoplifters. Meat falling all out of their pants and their shirt sleeves and everywhere else. I’ve seen them drag perps out there with a lady manager trying to hold on to ‘em keep from robbing ‘em. Yeah there’s crime there. But I’ve asked Council to help us and vote in opposition to this liquor store. We don’t need no more liquor stores, they’re on every corner now. But you, the city, Mr. Mijalis, Mr. Toups, all of them haven’t got enough money to buy one of those children that I drove down here on this bus, in my opinion. This whole city is not worth one more child’s life to be a victim of drive by, drunk driving or nothing else. And you know what it’s going to take us Mr. Police Chief to get rid of this problem? USA. US. A-all. All of us. Us all to get rid of this problem and this blight in this city and to make it the second greatest city in the Louisiana. Thank you very much.

Councilman Shyne: Sonny, thank you. Any questions for Sonny before he leaves? Mr. Mayor, you look like you may have had one for him.

Mayor Glover: I’m just glad you finally called him by the name I knew, cause I was still trying to figure out that first name that you called him Joe. I’ve known him as Sonny forever, for 20 years. Good to see him. And I’m not sure if he said second greatest city in Louisiana, but I’m going to - - -

Councilman Shyne: He said the first.

Mayor Glover: As Mr. Shyne has already reminded both you and I, this is the City Council Meeting, so (inaudible)

Councilman Shyne: Sonny, we’ll give you a minute. Executive privilege.

Mr. Clary: I’d like to ask Mr. Strong if he would pick that sand up at Linwood and Bert Kouns where we had a hazmat spill about three weeks ago, and to repair that bumpy road down through there so we don’t have another wreck. Thank you very much.

Councilman Shyne: I think he’ll take care of it for you.

Mr. Jack McCune: (168 Patton Ave) I come to you today not only as a businessman in this area. I come to you as a father. Wears one of those big “Cs” like the Mayor likes. I want to give you a few points to think about. 1) Think about those Thrift Liquor stores around town here, tell me what kind of other business you see like that, that are beginning to grow that’s on Bert Kouns. I don’t see doctors’ offices, I don’t see professional offices, I don’t see medical clinics, I don’t see any of that. Mr. Mijalis already alluded to it earlier. Brookshire’s, Shell and Race Trac, all B-3. They’re all zoned B-3. What do we need another one for? If you’ve got three locations already zoned package, what do you need a fourth for? Okay? There’s already a package liquor store down the street selling hard liquor, it’s down the street on Linwood and Flournoy Lucas. If they have to have it, well go to Walker Road and Bert Kouns. There’s a Thrifty Liquor there. As the gentleman alluded to also, it’s the fourth highest accident corner in our city. Do we want to raise it and make it No 2, No. 1? I don’t think so. I’ve got two boys, 9 and 13 that attend Calvary. I’m afraid, if they know they could walk out of there, cause they don’t know they can walk to the corner. I got them understanding that they need to stay in school, and stay there and not go anywhere. And thank God, they listen to their father. Cause there are kids I’ve seen walk down the street. And they go down to the Sonic, or they go down to Brookshire’s and they’re going there. But I’ll tell you this. Brookshire’s, Race Trac and Shell are not in the liquor business. Brookshire’s is a grocery store, the other two are gas stations. They sell package on the side as an added to their business. It’s not their primary business, as Thrifty Liquor wants to be, it’s a primary business. As Ms. Avant alluded to also, of having liquor stores within a residential area. Well, we already heard, there’s going to be a residential area right in back of this. And what’s going to stop from other ones on the other side in back of where Race Trac is located at, or end up back in front of where McDonalds is located at. Okay? I know there’s a new I think it’s cardiactric center that’s going to be built in front of my church, which I go to Brookwood. And that’s going to be a new (inaudible). That’ whole area is growing for our medical industry and our medical practices that we have attracting here. That is one part of what’s going to make our city great. And we have a great potential of being the next No. 1 southern city. Thank you very much for your time.

Ms. Kristi Carr: (301 N. Brook Drive) I live on North Brook Drive, and that’s in the Wrenwood Park Subdivision, and we are the neighborhood behind East Ridge Plaza off Bert Kouns, and I speak for at least 30 families out in our neighborhood. We’re starting to grow very big now. And that area is not zoned B-3 for a reason. You see doctors offices and churches. You see Brookshire’s and McDonalds, you see those restaurants there. Well behind all those are houses, and I live in one of those houses. We don’t need a stand alone liquor store that is open till the other ones are open. 12:30 midnight on Thursdays, Fridays, and Saturdays when we’re in bed with our children. I’m concerned about that. I’m concerned about drive throughs. It’s not an appropriate area. And I’m concerned about noise. We have had the biggest fight for years. I’ve lived in my neighborhood for eight years, and we have called police time after time to come out and stop people partying in East Ridge Plaza. And the lady that takes care of that for Bill Sale used to tell me that there are bottles of beer and packages, and there’s trash everywhere from people having their parties out there. And I’m concerned this is going to start all over again. We’re really worried about this. That the big concern for me is at night when I’m trying to sleep is that noise. In my neighborhood, my house is not adjacent to East Ridge. It’s probably maybe 5-600 feet away from East Ridge Plaza, but I still hear the noise just blaring and my windows shake at night from that noise. I know that if this liquor store comes that the noise is just going to deafen us at night. And it’s not a matter of it being right at my house, it’s a matter of it carrying through. Also, I do want to point out that our gate has been rammed over the years. We’re in a gated subdivision. The gate’s been knocked down and rammed because of people trying to get through. There are liquor bottles all found around those areas. I’m concerned about the increase of drunk drivers in that area, especially by the school zone. I’ll be driving my children to kindergarten next year to and from school, and it’s a very dangerous area turning left from Bert Kouns into Wrenwood. My neighbor has pointed out, she’s Cissy Cochran with the DWI resource center who lost her daughter to a drunk driver. She pointed out that in Caddo Parish, our rate of recidivism for children driving drunk is very high, and that’s something to be concerned about. I also want to remind y’all that about five years ago, I was up here in front of the MPC for the same owner not to build a casino truck stop in the same area. Is this B-3 zoning a first step? Is he going to try to bring this truck stop back? It’s been over a year, he might be ready for that, and I don’t know of his intention, but I’m concerned that this is the first battle again. I mean, I’m here again, and I really want to urge y’all to keep us a neighborhood. We want the doctors’ offices there, we don’t want people driving through with loud music and bad intentions and litter and crime in their minds to be in our neighborhood near that. And finally, I was talking to a person who works with my husband today, and I was telling her what I was getting ready to do. And she was shocked when she found that she had signed that petition for Thrifty. And I know that’s her business that she signed it. But she said that she was told when she went to Thrifty Liquor to sign this petition for a liquor store on Linwood and Bert Kouns area, and she was excited thinking oh, this is great. Maybe it will be where the industrialized area is right now. When I told her it was going to be right near my neighborhood, she felt just horrible that she had signed that. So, I know thousands of people maybe have signed this petition, but I don’t think they knew what they were signing. I wish they’d seen a map that had told them, it’s going to be right there, and look at all these little houses around it. Because I think it would really ruin our quality of life around Wrenwood, and I urge you to please vote against these people getting B-3. Thank you so much.

Councilman Shyne: Thank you Kristi. Any questions or comments for Kristi? Drive safely now, cause the Chief will give you a ticket if you get caught speeding. Okay.

Mr. Tim Carsdadden: (9964 Wrenwood Blvd) I also live in the same subdivision, and I’m also the Pastor of Christian Center of Shreveport. I feel like a step child, cause I’m not from Calvary. But I have friends on both sides. I know Rev. Paul very well, and I know some of the others. But it’s not a personal issue with me.

Councilman Shyne: You’re in a good position then.

Mr. Carsdadden: And I have two teenagers, and we drive the Linwood/Bert Kouns intersection on a daily basis. My son attends Calvary, he’s a high school student there. We also have a school at Christian Center Montessori School, and we’re about a mile down on Linwood. But we also are involved with the traffic in this area as well. So we have a deep concern with that. Traffic is increasing in this area. I wish the city would have addressed that issues. As well, I don’t know the studies that talk about it. I’m also a tax payer, when you talk about all the taxes I pay, a lot of taxes in that neighborhood, and I feel I have a right as well to this issue. And my concern is not to try to bring prohibition to alcohol. We realize that if that were to happen again, that this is the south, you’d probably see some running going on again, and that would go on. So, we’re not worried about that. What we’re worried about is the safety and the issues that Mike Johnson’s brought up, and as Pastor Edmonds’ brought up and that’s my concern. My children who are inexperienced, they’re teenagers that drive this intersection on a daily basis. I take my kid to that intersection everyday, that traffic there is incredible, and to think that we could have some drunk driving in that area is just a frightening thought to me, both as a neighbor cause I live in that neighborhood, as well as my church is in that neighborhood and my son goes to that school, and we drive that on a regular basis. I just ask that you take that in consideration when you vote today. Thank you..

Mr. John Templin, II, P.H.D.: (8924 Jewella) I own a company over there called secure servers. We do internet based surveillance and security systems. (Inaudible) many, many police places in town including the Shreveport Police Department, including Calvary Baptist Church, and many, many others. A couple of comments that I’d just like to make to you is the MPC and the Zoning Board of Appeals, the fact that they have approved this and gotten it this far, does not make it an automatic lay down for the City Council. It was suggested that if you don’t approve whatever they’ve approved, then they become meaningless, and that’s not true at all. We want to just make sure that you know that conversely if you are compelled to approve everything that they approve, then there’s no reason for the City Council, or one less reason for the City Council. It makes a lot of sense to me as a P.H.D. in business that a transition from RA to B-3 using the B-1 and B-2 rezoning categories, appears to be most appropriate especially in this particular case. I suggest that the City Council adopt that sort of transition guideline whether it’s Thrifty Liquor, or any other B-3 zoned application. It doesn’t matter. I think we need to go B-1, B-2, and only for compelling undeniable reasons should we make a distinct jump from RA to B-3. I do feel like that one of the intentions here is to lay the ground works for other types of development in the area that would need to be B-3. That may be made perhaps being contemplated by the owner at this time, but maybe not disclosed. I think a truck stop is a logical thought, because it has been approached before and certainly a truck stop doesn’t fit there either. And that was defeated a while back. I’d like to state for the record that many of the Councilmen know that I am the Director in charge of Governmental Affairs and Planning for the Southern Hills Business Association. I do not speak for them. I do not, I’m not authorized to be either for or against this issue as it relates to my service on that particular board. But I would like, and I am prepared to back to the extent that it may have value, Petro Sun, Inc. Petro Sun of course is the named sponsor of the Independence Bowl. And I say that because Petro Sun is deeply involved in the community and wants to be even more and more on a continuing - - - I’d like to bring Petro Sun’s influence to bare, because Petro Sun has a dedicated and committed reputation for being a family, children, minded company. Rayfield Wright, the President of the company and Hall of Famer from the Dallas Cowboys for instances sponsors himself personally, Every Kid Counts. A nationwide plan to support children and families from all walks of life. Mr. Gordan LeBlanc, the CEO and Chairman of Petro Sun is also a very children, family minded organization with many philanthropic issues that he deals with. I am the Executive Vice-President of Petro Sun, and I speak on their behalf when I ask you to align Petro Sun with the Calvary Baptist Church on this particular issue. I am also a member of the Calvary Baptist Church. My daughter graduated there as the Valedictorian a couple of years ago. I’m very much concerned about the ongoing just issues involved with the church and it’s location next to any sort of B-3 business, but particularly a liquor store. I don’ think that this is about the best use from, or the most desirable use to change. I think it’s purely about money. And that’s what I think the Thrift Liquor Store is about is increasing their profits. It’s all about the money to their particular business. And there are some other things that are much more important. Calvary represents those things.

Councilman Shyne: Any questions or comments? If not.

Councilman Lester: Just one. One quick one.

Councilman Shyne: Okay, just let me make this statement and then I’ll let you.

Councilman Lester: Okay.

Councilman Shyne: I’m glad to see that your P.H.D. is in Business and not in Political Science. If you know Councilman Lester or Councilman Long, you know it’s no lay down in them. Now, I’m a little timid, and a little shy, and you know you can kinda scare me, but those two guys right there are right up front.

Mr. Templin: No, no. Absolutely. Yes sir.

Councilman Lester: And Councilman, as you have done many time, you have read my mind completely. I was going to say to Dr. Templin, if he’s followed this Board at any time, you know that we are not bound by any of the decisions made by the ZBA, or MPC. Sometimes much to our chagrin, the only thing that consistent about our process is that it’s consistently inconsistent. So, we’re not a rubber stamp at all.

Mr. Templin: I do understand that. I just wanted to really basically have a rebuttal to the notion that if you overwrote them, then they would be of no (inaudible)

Councilman Lester: This ain’t that Council.

Councilman Shyne: Don’t worry about it, we are tried and tested warriors. You don’t have to worry about that. I can guarantee you that.

Mr. Templin: I know you well, and I appreciate your honesty.

Councilman Walford: I’d like to make a motion at this time that we continue our suspension of the rules to hear the other Zoning Board of Appeals cases. There are people waiting outside and asking if they’re going to be able to speak as well. So, I would suggest that as we finish these, that we do them all. If I could get a second.

Councilwoman Bowman: Second.

Councilman Shyne: That would be fine.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Bowman to continue suspension of the rules to hear the other Zoning Board of Appeals cases.

Councilman Lester: Mr. Chairman, couldn’t we even just extend that motion to here all public comment?

Councilman Walford: (Inaudible) with what we’ve got.

Councilman Lester: I mean, I don’t know what’s on there, but I would think if we’re going to - - - since we have this many folks, lets just - - -

Councilman Shyne: That would be fine, is that a motion from you?

Councilman Lester: That would be a substitute motion to hear all public comment.

Councilman Wooley: Second.

Councilwoman Bowman: We basically did it like this so we could have the room in the Chamber.

Councilman Shyne: Right.

Councilwoman Bowman: And my people are outside, waiting. So, I don’t know how you’re going to accommodate people coming in. How do you plan on doing that if you’re gonna bring my people in or the ones that’s outside waiting and give them a chance to speak too, when they don’t have anywhere to sit?

Councilman Shyne: I’ve got a couple of geniuses here that will give us the answer.

Councilman Lester: Mr. Chairman, what I would suggest Mr. Chairman, and that’s why I made that motion. If in fact we have had all of the public comments associated with this particular issue, then we would take a brief recess, allow those people to exit so that the folks with the next group can come in, so that they could have a chance to sit down and do what they need to do.

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, couldn’t we just vote on this item and then clear the room, and then we could bring the next group in?

Councilman Wooley: Yeah, lets do that.

Councilman Shyne: Look, I serve at the pleasure of the Council, so - - -

Councilman Lester: Mr. Chairman, the only thing my question would be, and that would be to Councilwoman Bowman, I don’t know how long we’re going to talk about this, and I’m claiming my Baptist thing. So I might be long winded, I know Joe is a Methodist and he’s working on me. My grandfather was a Methodist, so - - - but I don’t know if you’re comfortable with your folks waiting, that’s fine.

Councilwoman Bowman: I went out to try to reassure them that it wouldn’t be too much long, but their patience is wearing a little thin too.

Councilman Lester: That’s why I would ask that - - -

Councilman Shyne: Can I get a motion?

Councilman Lester: I mean again, these are your constituents.

Councilman Shyne: I serve at the pleasure of the Council

Councilman Webb: There is a motion.

Councilman Shyne: And the public so can I get a motion from Councilman Webb that - - -

Councilwoman Bowman: Has everyone here spoken that wanted to speak on this case?

Councilman Shyne: Do you have - - - just one minute.

Pastor Edmonds: Can I interrupt just one thing?

Councilman Shyne: Pastor, come on up. Come on up with Rick.

Pastor Edmonds: We have students in the house that would help Ms. Bowman, and I think a couple of them signed to speak I think. But we would be more than happy to dismiss those students, which is numerous seats and that would help immediately.

Councilman Shyne: But you would do that?

Councilman Lester: Let the kids talk.

Pastor Edmonds: If there’s a student that would - - -

Councilman Lester: No, no. No, no, no. I want to hear. If the kids signed up to talk - - -

Pastor Edmonds: There are two of those, we could dismiss that class, and I think that would help.

Councilman Shyne: Could we let Pastor Martin speak, and then we’ll let the kids come up and speak and then they can exit. Give us your name and - - -

Mr. William D. Martin: (413 Danbury Drive) Thank you Mr. Shyne, it’s a joy to be here with you folks today, and certainly all this conversation has been something. I know you’re attempting to digest as fairly as you possibly can, and I want to affirm my support of the opposition to this zoning. I’ve known Mr. Charles Kirkland for a long time, and I have a lot of great respect for him and his Board. But I like you don’t think they’re infallible, and I think this is a mistake in judgement for them to grant this zoning and I would encourage you and the evidence of that encouragement, the data has already been presented to you. We’ve got hundreds of students, we’ve got hundreds of young people and young people have a tendency to make mistakes and do things they ought not to do, and we need to build an edge of protection about them as best we can. It’s not as if there not adequate places in the City of Shreveport for anyone who wishes to drink, that’s their prerogative regardless of my position and my feelings about it. They’re not inhibited, they’re not restricted, but rather than can go to multiplied places to receive their liquor, their beverage or whatever it is, even places owned by the applicant for the rezoning and for the new store that he thrives to put there. So I just want to stand with you or before you on behalf of the Pastor of Calvary Baptist Church, it’s membership and other concerned citizens that have addressed you today and appeal to you to evaluate all the evidence that’s been presented to make a decision that would benefit the City of Shreveport and our youth of today, and I thank you for this opportunity.

Ms. Jordan Ward: (279 Hanging Moss Trail) I just wanted to come and let y’all know that us students come up here today to let y’all know that we don’t really want this to happen because there’s been several accidents in our subdivision involving our friends already, and I think that if y’all put another business like this, it’s going to shoot that up a lot. And I just want to let y’all know that we’re here because we want to be here and we want to do this. We’re not here because it’s a mandatory field trip, we’re here because we want to let y’all know that we don’t want this to happen, and we wanted to let y’all know that most of us get our drivers license in a few years, and to have more things happening like this would just not really help us out at all.

Ms. Cara Roscoe: (2830 Fountainbleau) I’m a Freshman, and I’m about to get my drivers license, and I think that if you put a Thrifty Liquor there or - - - well that would cause more traffic and me being inexperienced, I don’t want to have to be able to deal with the traffic and feel unsafe. And I think that will cause an increase in crime stats if we have more traffic. And if people do decide to drink and drive, then that would just probably (inaudible) and I just want you to know that I’m here on my own terms and I’m glad to speak for my class.

Mr. Jacob Rodgers: (10020 Lovelin Ct) I’m just like a 9^th Grader, and I’d rather be in Science Class because there’s always people up here like her, like lawyers and stuff. But I just wanted to say that these people I’ve grown up with, and I know they’ve gotten in like big car accidents and stuff like that. And I think if we get a big, I mean like a big Thrifty Liquor or whatever, and put it right by our school, it wouldn’t help out much, but there’s like 1500 people that go through that intersection from our school everyday, and I wouldn’t want to see like some of my best friends going there, and get hit by a drunk driver or something, and in our Bible class, you have to memorize a verse, and 1 Corinthians is talking about how you shouldn’t put stuff in your body that would hurt you, but if you put that stuff in your body, you can hurt other people too. And I just wanted to say you wouldn’t want your kids to die from like another drunk driver or something and that’s all I wanted to say.

Councilman Wooley: I’d like to make a motion to call for the vote.

Councilwoman Bowman: Second

Motion by Councilman Wooley, seconded by Councilman Bowman to end debate and call for the vote.

Councilman Lester: What vote are you talking about?

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, I believe it’s Ordinance No. 204.

Councilman Shyne: Right.

The Clerk read the following:

10. Ordinance No. 204 of 2007: ZONING APPEAL – C-93-07: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning property located on the north side of Bert Kouns Industrial Loop, 575 feet west of Linwood, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from R-A, Residence Agricultural District, to B-3, Community Business District, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (D/Wooley)

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, in accordance with our rules, we would ask that there would be a motion to adopt and those who want to vote against would vote “NO”.

Councilman Shyne: Are we - - -

Councilman Webb: Mr. Chairman, are we voting on calling for the question or - - -?

Councilman Shyne: No, we’re voting on calling for the question now. And then we will get a motion - - -

Councilman Walford: Point of Order. We can’t call for the question cause we haven’t started debate on the issue itself yet. We don’t have a motion on the ordinance itself. So, we can’t call for the question at this time.

Councilman Shyne: I think he’s calling for the motion for us to get back to - - -

Councilman Wooley: Right. I make a motion to adopt.

Councilman Shyne: Wait just a minute. I think your first motion was so we could get out of the Public Comments.

Councilman Wooley: That’s correct.

Councilman Shyne: And back to the - - - and I think he was maybe over there talking and didn’t really understand what our original motion was. So, now we’re coming back to the agenda, and that would be - - -

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, I think that the motion was to take up the Public Comments concerning this ordinance and to take up this ordinance.

Councilman Walford: When I made the motion, it was to vote on them as well.

Councilman Shyne: Okay, well my memory is not that long at this age. So, if that’s - - -

Mr. Thompson: I think the proper motion is the motion to adopt and second, and then you would start the debate.

Councilman Wooley: Okay, motion to adopt.

Councilwoman Bowman: Second.

Ms. Pilkinton: (Inaudible)

Having passed first reading on November 27, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Wooley, seconded by Councilman Bowman to adopt.

Councilman Shyne: On this issue?

Ms. Pilkinton: Yeah on this issue. I mean, and we went out to find her.

Councilman Shyne: That’s okay. We’ll just tell them because of time, we have to - - -

Councilman Walford: Whoa. Point of Order Mr. Chairman. I think that would be totally out of order, and I would object. If there are speakers left to speak, those people have every right to come forward and speak.

Councilman Shyne: I’m going to let you and Councilwoman Bowman discuss that.

Councilwoman Bowman: Well (inaudible)

Councilman Walford: We have speakers left to speak on this issue?

Councilman Shyne: Yes, I mean what we were doing is - - - because her group is outside, and she didn’t want them to leave.

Councilman Walford: I understand. My question is this. Are there speakers left to speak on this particular zoning or Zoning Board of Appeals issue?

Councilman Shyne: I mean, I serve at the pleasure of the Council. And if you want them to speak, then I don’t have no problem with that.

Councilman Lester: Mr. Chairman, Point of Order. It appears that there are still people who want to speak, then I think the thing to do is, if Councilman Wooley withdraws his motion to consider this.

Councilman Wooley: I withdraw the motion to call the vote. I did not know there were still speakers left to speak.

Councilman Lester: Right, and having done that, that puts us in a position to still hear those people that still want to speak.

Councilwoman Bowman: How many more do you have to speak Mr. Chairman?

Councilman Shyne: We have one - - - we have about eight.

Councilman Lester: Whose next?

Councilman Shyne: Ms. Georgia Flook. Is she here?

Mr. Osteen: George Osteen.

Councilman Shyne: No, this is Flook, that’s not Osteen.

Mr. Osteen: Okay, I was asked to speak too.

Councilman Shyne: You could be right, but you’re not asked to speak at this particular time. We’ll get to you in a minute.

Mr. Osteen: Thank you sir.

Councilman Shyne: Is that Ms. Georgia right there? Please. You have three minutes. Don’t be bashful

Ms. Georgia Flook: (2572 Mayflower Road) Thank you for the opportunity to come and speak. I guess I would like to just talk about as a young adult, you know as a future homeowner, as one who attends the church down the street from this intersection, for me it just creates a safety question for raising my children. For right now, it seems like it’s a safe place. Bringing that into the mix, seems like it wouldn’t be that safe. You know to me, where there is alcohol, it brings in those addictions. You know where there’s addictions, there’s desperation, and where there’s desperation, there’s desperate people hanging around. And I just feel that desperate people along with the kids at Calvary, this would not be the safest or the wisest decision. You know this statistics show that it’s the fourth highest accident prone intersection in Shreveport, and so I just feel that why would we want to bring alcohol into this, if it’s already an accident prone place. It seems that it would just make things worse, not better. So, I feel that this area is at a tipping point. It can either go up right now or it could go down. Thank y’all for your time.

Mr. Mike McTiernan: (174 Rustic Way) I’ve lived at 174 Rustic Way for 27 years. For 27 years, I’ve driven past a liquor store on Bert Kouns and Linwood. It’s a mess. The people that are going in there are not the pillars of society. A lot of them are kids, children if you will, and you want us to put up a liquor store less than a quarter of a mile away. I think that is utterly ridiculous. Mr. Councilmen, would you please tell the Mayor for me that every picture I’ve seen in the paper of policemen standing in coolers has always been behind the beer, never behind the milk.

Councilman Shyne: I’m afraid to do that because he’s larger than I am.

Mr. McTiernan: I noticed that sir.

Councilman Shyne: I’m not running though.

Mayor Glover: Mr. Chairman, he’s either blind or - - -

Mr. McTiernan: Another point I would like to make, the Counsel for the liquor store mentioned two things. One he said that there’s not going to be a residential district there because it’s gonna be on Bert Kouns. Three minutes later he said, the builder is building a residential district right behind it. You can’t have it both ways fellows. One way or the other. Something else that was mentioned. There are 300 people out there waiting to be counted. Well it turned out to be 150. My question is how many of those 150 are on the payroll? Nobody here from Calvary is on the payroll. We live there, we pay taxes in this city and we do not want that liquor store on that corner. It’s that simple gentlemen. We vote for you. Seven people got out and spoke for the proposal. None of them, zero, zip live in the Zip Code 71106. We do. We don’t want the liquor store. How hard is that to understand. Now people have said it’s not personal, let me tell you something. It’s personal. I grew up in a home of drunken parents. I’ve seen my drunken father beat my sisters and beat me. I’ve seen people killed on the highways. I drive 60,000 miles a year, and I see it every month. People killed from booze. A drunk is a drunk, and you can call it anyway you want to, but that’s what it is, and thank you for your time.

Mayor Glover: Mr. Chairman, a point of clarification for the gentleman in the audience. I think he misinterpreted your earlier statement to Mr. Clary in that Mr. Clary should direct his comments to the Council. And that you all are the ones who actually have the votes in this matter. That is not to indicate that any of you can’t address me or the Council. So, I was concerned whether the gentleman could hear or see, cause if he missed me, (inaudible)

Councilman Shyne: The Mayor is exactly right. That’s why I made the statement earlier, to make sure you address all of your remarks to Council. At this particular meeting, he doesn’t have a vote.

Mr. George Osteen: (1217 Manor Place) First of all Mr. Mayor, I can see you very well, and I appreciate what you do. Thank you for the time to speak, I appreciate you calling me. I live 1 ½ , 1.6 mile from this particular location. I do not want to see Thrifty Liquor go in there. I’m a member of Calvary Baptist Church. There’s many young people, and their lives are changing because of that church and that school. I want to see that continue. I want to see this city grow. The Mayor has alluded to over the past few weeks that he is going to revisit the Master Plan for the planning of this city. Mr. Mayor, that Master Plan starts here in this Council Chamber. It starts here with these people, that are the voters. That Master Plan would be developed, but you’ve got to worry about today, the next 10 years, and the next 30 years. You know you Council Members are the gate keepers of this city. You’re elected by the people. You have the right to change an ordinance to overrule the Zoning Commission, and that’s the way it should be. As far as gate keepers, I want to read you one little paragraph, and I’m through.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Osteen, I’m sorry to hold you up for just one minute. But Pastor Edmonds, could you have the kids go out, because we’ve got another group outside that’s just hanging at the (inaudible) to come in, and they think that we’re mistreating them. And I have to run for re-election, and I don’t want anybody to think that I would ever mistreat them. I’m not like Councilman Lester, or the Police Chief, or the Mayor who get a chance to have a lot of pictures taken.

Councilman Lester: I don’t want my picture taken anymore.

Councilman Shyne: And please excuse me for this, but I’m trying to facilitate as many - - - while they’re coming in, come on, come on. Are they coming in now? Please come on in and take your seats. I think Mr. Mijalis got up over there so somebody can have that seat. Okay, I was going to give you one at the table. I’m sorry, but this is wonderful. I wish we could have this at every Council Meeting. I wish we could have people this interested in what goes on in the City of Shreveport at every Council Meeting. I haven’t been down here very long, but I think this is the largest crowd that we’ve had. I haven’t been down here as long as Monty, Monty grew up down here.

Councilman Walford: Or are you just saying I got old down here.

Councilman Shyne: Bryan said he didn’t want to grow up and he didn’t want to get old down here. Is everybody - - -? Okay, I’m sorry.

Mr. Osteen: Okay, as I was saying, the Council Members are the gate keepers of this city. You’re the gate keepers of the future of this city. It’s an unpopular job, but I want to read you this passage. “Enter through the nearer gate, for the wide is the gate, the broad is the road that leads to destruction. And many enter through it, but small is the gate and narrow is the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.” If you want to know where that’s from, that’s Matthew 7:13. Thank you.

Ms. Nicole Hudgens: (9424 Wrenwood Blvd) Like I said, I am a student at LSUS right now, I did graduate from Calvary Baptist Academy. I attend Christian Center Church which is about a mile from Linwood. The area that we’re discussing is where my neighborhood is located and I do drive on a daily basis sometimes 8-10 times through the intersection and the road where this liquor store could be built. I also have a brother and many friends who attend school and I think that by having a liquor store there, already there’s some like some have said, there is so much traffic in that area, and to have even a business, excluding the fact that it’s a liquor store, but just having business right there will increases the traffic, potential accidents, and when you throw in the fact that there could be drunk drivers, and also inexperienced drivers driving through that area increase the hazard of vehicle accidents. One point that was made today that stuck out to me was that the issue here is money, and I believe that by having a business at that intersection is not going to benefit the people who are out there. And if the issue is money, I heard one time that money can but a clock, but it cannot buy time. Money can buy a bed, but it cannot buy you rest. If money is an issue, then I’m asking that the money to be made by this business worth any chance of injuring one of my friends, my brother or any one else that’s in that area, and I’m also asking you today to consider the students of this school and the residents, people who live in this area. If building a business here would really be worth their well-being.

Councilman Shyne: Just a minute, before you leave I thought that was kind of catchy, and I want Councilman Webb to make sure he writes that down about money and Councilman Long. Would you say that again?

Ms. Hudgens: Okay. Money can buy a clock, but it cannot buy time. It can buy a bed, but it cannot buy rest.

Councilman Shyne: Thank you. Gentlemen, did you all hear that? Thank you here. Words of wisdom come from the mouths of babes. Anybody else? I’m out of slips.

Councilman Lester: Give both primary speakers rebuttal, and let them summarize.

Councilman Shyne: Is that the consensus of the Council?

Councilman Lester: And once they finish talking, it’s on us.

Councilman Walford: Mr. Chairman, I understand there is a request for rebuttal, I would make a motion at this time for the primary spokes person for each for those who support, and those who oppose be given five minutes for rebuttal.

Councilman Lester: And no extensions.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Long to allow the primary spokesperson for those who support, and those who oppose be given five minutes for rebuttal. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

Mr. Mijalis: While I think it’s pretty much been said, but I do want to point out just a couple of things briefly. I didn’t ask this Council to rubber stamp what the ZBA or the MPC did. What I ask the Council to do is I pointed out to them that these are the Boards that are charged to look at these issues, and to make these tough decisions regarding what’s best or not best for the area. So, what I ask the Council to do is not to rubber stamp, but to give some sort of deference to what they did. This Council should not vote to overturn, what those Boards did simply to substitute their own opinion. I submit that the facts were submitted to those boards and they evaluated those matters and made decisions. With respect to zoning, this cannot be anything but B-3. This was always intended to be B-3, it’s B-3 all around, rezoned from RA to B-3 is proper in this case. It fits the Code exactly. This is not adjacent to or unreasonably close to any residential area. This is not within walking distance of any residential area. The residential area that’s being built by this owner on property way in the back is at least 2,000 feet as the crow flies from this particular parcel. If you take street distance, we’re talking twice that much at least. There will be no entrance to this residential area from Bert Kouns. Entrance is way off at Linwood. I heard statements about this is a bad intersection. Well, I haven’t heard any facts to support those feelings about traffic and the intersection. I told you before that traffic has been evaluated by the State, and by the City Planners. We’ve made tweaks based on the suggestions of the City Planners in connection with the traffic issues. Those have been addressed. Those have been resolved. Once this entire site plan is put into place with the center present there, there’s going to be - - - - there’s access easement agreements with respect to all the tracks, people will have to get back onto Bert Kouns to access the various parts of the property. I don’t know why the leap is being made that putting this store there is going to make this area any worse, or any different than it already is. This is in an area that already has three Special Exception Uses within just a few feet from where this particular parcel is located. This is the Bert Kouns Industrial Loop where you expect to have the Special Exception Uses. From Linwood coming back toward the west, there are no doctors’ offices. A few gas stations and there’s no doctors’ offices until you get way down near the Kingston area, you have a chiropractor place down there I believe, but for the most part, this is all business type matters. These are all B-3 uses. And I submit that this particular property once developed will be a very nice revenue maker for the city, it will be a good thing for the city. The site plan is being developed, and like I said, you don’t speculatively zone things. You zone based on what you’ve got completed. And if you look out there, it’s obvious this owner has a lot more store for this area, and the people who were here in support of the application, and in support of the applicant and the owner, these people are residents of this town just like you and me. I live in the 71106 Zip Code. They’re here in support of the application. They are parents, they have children, and they feel comfortable being here and standing up and being counted and say, “I’m in favor of this, because I believe this is a good thing.” Now I understand that there are people here who obviously object. We’ve heard those. And as I told you when I began, I respect those opinions, but I think factually if you look at the submissions, there are gray factual areas in there, and if you look at this thing from a factual standpoint, from a legal standpoint, from a logical standpoint, this use is proper in this area, and should be allowed. Thank you.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Mijalis, just before you sit down, I want to make this clear again to both sides that we are not a rubber stamp. We don’t rubber stamp for one another, and the Mayor hasn’t felt it yet, but it might be coming pretty soon. So, I don’t want anyone leaving thinking that this is just a rubber stamp process, cause it’s not.

Mr. Mijalis: I didn’t suggest that it was.

Councilman Shyne: I know you didn’t, but just let me clear it up. I’m not actually asking you a question, I’m making a statement. So when I’m making a statement, you don’t have to answer. We listen to - - - I’m not going to say the facts that are presented, but we listen to the information that is presented. Then we try to make the best decision that we can after we get all the information together. The information that we hear from you all, the information that we read from both sides, and then we put them together to make a decision. We don’t come here with a rubber stamp attitude in mind, we come here to look at information that is presented to us to make a decision. Thank you very much, and we will have the lead speaker from - - - that’s correct.

Mr. Johnson: Thank you Mr. Chairman, and Council Members. I will also not take five minutes, because I believe you’ve heard an earful today, and you’ve heard some emotional comments, I think most of them and all of them that have been presented in favor of the appeal have been very rational, very logical as Mr. Mijalis says. I just want to draw your attention in closing and conclusion to the actual city code. We all can present our opinions and our thoughts on this, and certainly they are varied. But the code is supposedly what you all are governed by. And again, to reiterate Section 106-03 says that when you interpret, and when you apply the provisions of the zoning chapter of the City Code of Ordinances, they shall be held to the minimum requirements for the promotion of public health, safety and general welfare. Now, I’m just going to submit to you nothing Mr. Mijalis presented or any of the supporters of their side, either in their principle submission or in their rebuttal make any argument with regard to those three factors. They cannot make one single argument allowing the Thrifty Liquor at this location will promote public health. They cannot make a single argument that it will promote public safety or support the general welfare. The best argument you heard is that is a good business decision for the owners. And they want to allow another outlet for people to go and do business again. But again, they already have 14 or 15 of them, many within the very close proximity of this location. So that argument to us, we just submit carries very little weight or should. They presented no case in support of that and you’ve heard from people from Calvary Baptist Church, the academy, the daycare. Here’ s the numbers again. 6500 members at the church, and enrollment of 1,104 students at the academy, daycare center serving 412 children and their families. They all travel frequently right through this area. There’s a 160 acre campus of Calvary that bustling with activity and traffic seven days a week. On Saturdays, thousands of people visit the campus for Calvary League Athletics. On Friday nights, you all know additional thousands attend the home football games at Jerry Barker Stadium. We’re proud of that, but it’s not just the church that’s making this opposition. There are homeowners, there are people with a vested interested from a property standpoint, and from other standpoints that live and reside in this immediate area. In conclusion, I’ll wrap it up with this, and again, I’ll please Mr. Walford by ending early as attorneys are not prone to do. We would just suggest to you respectfully, this is not personal as it’s been said. Nothing again Mr. Toups, Mr. Labban, Mr. Mijalis or anyone else. But the risk of allowing this rezoning and the liquor store in this location far outweigh any possible benefits that could accrue with it. And the appellants are concerned citizens, they’re not opposed to progress as you heard, not opposed to sustainable development that’s good and positive, they’re just opposed to short sighted and what we deem to be dangerous change that will jeopardize the people and the welfare of the area. And all that being said, the appellants respectfully request that the City Council do the right thing. Closely follow the guidance provided by the City Code, protect the best business interest of this corridor in the long run, honor the will of the countless residents and families of this area and vote in favor of this appeal. We appreciate your time very much. Thank you.

Councilman Shyne: If it’s the pleasure of the Council, I will call for the question and the vote on the zoning appeal ordinance, C-93-07.

Councilman Walford: We’re not ready to vote, we’ve got debate. We’re going to do a lot of debating.

Councilman Webb: Don’t we need a motion on the floor first?

Councilman Walford: I think we have one.

Councilman Long: Yeah, he just call for the question. Let’s vote on the question and then we’ll - - -

Motion by Councilman Bowman, seconded by Councilman Wooley to call for the question.

Councilman Walford: Point of Order. My motion was to consider these items, to hear the public comments and to vote on them, so that we don’t have to go back into regular session to do it. Is that not the motion I made Mr. Thompson?

Councilman Shyne: I think we’re at the juncture where we can vote on it.

Councilman Walford: Absolutely, but we don’t need to vote on voting on it. We need a motion on the ordinance and then debate.

Councilman Shyne: Well we’re wasting time even discussing about that. I’m waiting for a motion to (inaudible)

Councilman Walford: Well what are calling for a vote on?

Councilman Wooley: The motion to adopt the ordinance.

Councilman Shyne: It’s been moved by Councilman Wooley, and seconded by Councilwoman Bowman that we adopt the motion. Now Mr. Thompson, so we can make sure that we are clear.

Mr. Thompson: Now, you’re ready to debate the question.

Councilman Shyne: Right.

Councilman Walford: Debate goes first to the maker of the motion.

Councilman Shyne: Right, but I just want to be clear of the up and down vote.

Mr. Thompson: Well, Mr. Wooley made a motion to adopt I assumed because that’s what our rules require. He may ask the Council to do something else.

Councilman Shyne: Okay, now we’re at discussion. Councilman Wooley?

Councilman Wooley: Thank you Mr. Chairman, I do want to thank everyone for coming out today. I have to take a couple of phrases from my fellow councilmen. As I appreciate it (that’s Councilman Lester’s line), this is a democracy (that’s Councilman Shyne’s line), and it is very healthy and very appreciative of everybody’s efforts today. I do want to be respectful of everyone whose been here and been here for quite some time. I want to be to the point and very bold in what I’m saying. No. 1, I’m going to be asking for an overturn of the MPC in favor of the appeal. And my reasons are the following: 1) For many years Shreveport has not had a Master Plan for our city, we have not defined ourselves of what we want. We have an Administration whose communicated to us that that is his goal. You have a Council whose communicated to the people of Shreveport, that is our goal. You will see an amendment proposed today to the budget for $250,000 for that type of commitment for a Master Plan for our city. We’ve not had one since 1957 I believe. In doing so, I believe we’ve hurt our city in the past, by letting different businesses whatever they may be and their nature to really establish themselves at any given point in the city. I spoke to a property management owner the other day, a business owner of a property management company, and he said that in the early 80s and early 90s when the old industry dropped out of Shreveport that Shreveport was desperate. And definitely for “economic development”, which I do believe is a phrase that is probably overused and abused. But they were desperate and allow many things to take place. But those things are changing. And I believe Mr. Charles Kirkland, our MPC Director said times are changing in our city, we now have somewhat of a vision of where we want to go, and this MPC Master Planning weekend that we’re going to have this Saturday, we’re going to define some of those goals and lay clear cut lines. In saying all that, I believe that allowing this type of development and the nature of it’s business is what has been commonly done in the years past. But this will be the second time I have opposed a business for “economic development”, something in my district because it was not conducive to the immediate area. When you look at the area that’s being proposed for this development, which is very common to me, I grew up in Southern Hills, and I attended LSUS. I drove down Bert Kouns on a daily basis, and for years the area laid dormant. Then we saw slow development with a shopping strip. It almost laid dormant for years itself. And then over time I’ve seen progression, well we’ve seen great progression, and what I like to think is upscale and even high end. We now see Regional Urology, we see the (inaudible), we see the Starbucks, we see other doctors’ offices (and I don’t know what their actual nature of business is, foot surgery maybe or something of that nature), come to this area. And also we have the gas stations, we’ve got Brookshire’s, we have a McDonalds. So, we’ve finally seen this area come to life. It’s taken quite a long time, and I do not believe that a liquor store is going to fit this puzzle, and it will not bring economic development to the region, maybe only to itself. And I respect that as well for those who have an interested part in that. But we are charged as City Council to make what we believe are the best decisions for our people, for our community, and for our city. Which I believe is in the best interest of the area. There’s been great opposition to this, not only from Calvary, but also from neighborhoods, and also from other business in the area. The other concern I have is the saturation of liquor stores in the area, or the ability to purchase liquor. If someone wants to purchase liquor, that’s fine. That’s their personal business, but it’s been proven through studies time, and time again which I reviewed on my own that the presence of liquor stores somehow, someway attract crime to that area. Now, I don’t have all the stats in front of me, but I can easily bring that at some other time, but I am basing that on my own personal study that I did for myself in regards to this case. You have RaceWay, a Shell station and a Brookshire’s, and yes they do sell beer and wine. And finally, someone mention that there is a liquor store at the corner of Flournoy Lucas and Linwood, that does sell hard liquor. You do have two other Thrifty Liquor stores, I think 2.5 miles in one direction, and 1 mile in the other direction. So I would dare say that there’s enough establishments in the area to provide a liquor service to the people of that area if they so desire. I believe that if we allow this, that it would definitely over saturate, and we have other Council Members who serve on this Council today who are constantly concerned about their neighborhoods because of an over saturation of liquor stores in their neighborhoods and looking for ways to ratify that. And the other issue I wanted to bring up was the zoning. Now we can listening to legal jargon on both sides, and we can listen to other people’s comments including my own, but the fact remains it is a clear case of spot zoning for a liquor store and nothing else. That’s it. The only reason why it’s even zoned or asked to be zoned or to be rezoned (and I should be more specific and correct), is because it for a liquor store. It’s not for anything else. Yes, I’ve heard of the Master Plan, I was privy to that and presented with the information for that particular development owned by the property owner. However, it is only on paper. It’s not been proposed, I will not make a decision on something that could be. I will make a decision on what’s trying to be there today. Today a liquor store is not needed for this area, it will bring a negative impact economically overall, it will affect the residents there, and other businesses that will try to go to that area or people who are tying to attract business to come to that area. That’s a clear cut case of spot zoning. It’s only for the liquor store, and it’s that simple. Thank you.

Councilman Webb: Thank you Mr. Chairman. I know we’ve had a lot of comments, there’s been a lot of laughter and everything, but when we get down to the end of it, it does get serious, and what we’re doing today is serious and does affect a lot of people’s lives. I’m going to support Councilman’s motion to overturn the MPC. I know Mr. Toups very well, I’ve know him for quite some time, I even worked with his brother out at General Motors before he retired and have a lot of respect for him, and have a lot of respect for his business. And I think he runs a good ship. But I do know the citizens of my district too, and I am glad to know and say that the people in Southwest Shreveport do care about their community, and coming out here today is proof of that. I know a lot of you are here from Calvary, that don’t necessarily live in that district, but maybe I know you drive everyday. I’ve had a lot of phone calls from people that don’t go to Calvary, that go to Summer Grove and go to different churches out in Keithville, some that even travel down Bert Kouns to get on I-49 to go downtown to work. I know that that intersection is a very dangerous intersection, in fact I went to the trouble of getting the stats on it. Just in the last 12 months, there’s been 42 accidents at that intersection, 31 of them were injury related, and I know Mr. Toups has several liquor stores around town and he’ll probably find another location to put another one in, and I wish him well in that. But I too agree that this is not the ideal location to put another liquor store. I tell you that’s somewhat of a problem with the spot zoning, but one of the things that always gets me about some of the zoning cases, and for the life of me, I never understand why that the people, there were some comments made earlier about the amount of money that was invested in doing all this, I really don’t know why the developers put the cart before the horse so to speak, before they get the zoning approval before they - - - they might not want to put the money in it if they can’t get the zoning approval, and it seems to me like we do things backwards sometimes. But as far as substituting a motion that the MPC made with our own opinion, that’s what we’re here for is for our opinion, and we as a Council have the final say to either uphold or overturning the MPC. So, I respect each Councilman’s decision in whatever they want to do in that manner. I just think it’s the rational thing to do to support overturning the MPC, and I intend to do that, and I wish Mr. Toups well in any future endeavors he might have for putting on in another location, but not at this spot. Thank you.

Councilman Shyne: What happened to Councilman Lester, he always got something to say about everything. Waiting on you, couldn’t pass you up. I told ‘em you always had something to say about everything. So, it’s no rubber stamp.

Councilman Lester: No, I don’t have any comments. I’m keeping my comments to myself.

Councilman Walford: Alright I’ll make a comment.

Councilman Shyne: Okay, we have I guess you could say kinda the old man of the Council. Wisdom.

Councilman Walford: You’re going to speak now?

Councilman Shyne: I’m sorry.

Councilman Walford: Somehow, we’re getting off target here. And I certainly respect the opinions of those who oppose the liquor store, but I think Councilman Wooley should be addressing that in the ZBA appeal, and not the Zoning Appeal. I think to deny B-3 along a corridor that’s literally covered with B-3 is improper. Everybody is tying the liquor store to this and talking about liquor. The liquor is going to come up in the appeal of the Zoning Board of Appeal’s decision. If this is overturned, the applicant cannot come back for rezoning this to B-3 for one year. Pastor Edmonds said he’d like to see a Wendy’s. My guess is if they can’t put liquor there, they’re going to want something else there, and a Wendy’s or anything else is going to want B-3, just like McDonalds, Brookshire’s, even the doctors’ offices up there are B-3. They’re not B-1, they may be in a B-1 use, but they are B-3. So, the item that we’re considering right now is strictly the zoning. It doesn’t allow any alcohol, it just happens to be that that’s the use that they would like to have for it. But that use will only be granted if the decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals is upheld. So, I’m not willing to deprive somebody of their right to their property, and tell them you’ve got to sit back now and wait a year. I think that’s improper. I think if this Council makes that decision, we’re opening ourselves to litigation, and we will conceivably wind up in court spending your tax money to defend it. So, to block the liquor store, the right decision is to go ahead with the zoning. Let them have the B-3. Hopefully, they’ll develop the rest of it with B-3 or whatever they decide to do. And vote “NO” on the alcohol application, which is another item that we’re going to have to bring up next and vote on so, I’m not going to vote to overturn the MPC. I don’t think it’s necessary, I think it’s an unfair and improper thing to do. And it has nothing to do with the alcohol. That is a separate issue that will come up with the next vote. So, I support the MPC decision, how you could tell someone, everybody along this tract can have B-3, but because you talked about alcohol, you can’t have it. And not only that, after we deny it, you’re going to have to wait a year to do anything with your property. Because I assure you they’re not going to use it for Residential Agriculture, nor sell it for that. So, in fairness to the property owners, I’m going to support the MPC decision and we will address the alcohol decision in the next vote. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Thompson, this is very important, so we want to make sure that we vote the right way, and when you vote, you understand what you’re voting for.

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, the motion was to adopt the zoning ordinance. If you vote yes, you’re voting to change the zoning of this property to B-3, which would be the first step that they would need in order to open the business that’s being requested. If you are for changing the zoning to B-3, you vote “YES”. If you’re opposed to changing the zoning to B-3, you vote “NO”.

Councilman Webb: Thank you for that explanation.

Councilman Shyne: Do we all understand?

Mayor Glover: Mr. Chairman, before you vote, I want to make a couple of comments. As you have appropriately reminded the folks who are here, as Mayor, I do not have a vote on this particular matter. Unfortunately had to remind folks on both sides of the issue of that fact as well. And if I were being political here, I would sit back and just simply allow you all who are on the ‘hook’ for this, in terms of having to go on record, to simply slosh into it yourselves without offering any input. But I’m not, though I may be perceived as being political, I don’t think I am. I generally try to tell it as I know it, and not as I believe it, and deal with the consequences that come out as a result. So, for what it’s worth from my perspective as Mayor, and as a former Councilman, I think there’s some relevance to the comments that were just made by Council Member Walford with regard to what the implications are with regard to the B-3 zoning matter. And I think that you all will hopefully give that some consideration. But now, we all know that the real question, the real issue here has to do with the eventual request to sell liquor from this location, and so there’s no way for any of us to deny or get around it. I don’t envy any of you, because there was once a point and time in another Chamber, where Council Members sat, where I did in fact have to weigh in, and take a position. And ultimately vote on these types of matters. And it was always a very difficult thing to do. I came to my service on the City Council with a huge, huge (inaudible) against folks who were in the liquor industry in general. Having been born and raised in the Cooper Road/MLK section of Shreveport, I saw first hand the impact that an over saturation of liquor stores can have on a city, and on a neighborhood, and on the people within those particular areas. I wish that had been blessed to have been a part of the processes that took place decades ago that made the decisions about where those particular places went. About who got the right to operate there, and how many of them ended up being placed within a certain geographic area or region. But I didn’t. I came here with the desire and the intent of trying to shut down as many of them as I could. And I’m very proud to say that I was the first Councilman, and Charles Kirkland can correct me on this is I’m wrong. I was the first Councilman in a bunch of years who actually brought forth and advance an effort to actually revoke the license of a liquor store to operate before the Council. Charles, I don’t know if I’m correct in that, but that’s what I’m remembering. Now whether getting into my 40s, I guess I’m kinda like Council Member Shyne over there, I start to forget.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Mayor?

Mayor Glover: Maybe some of those things I should remember. So my record in terms of being against these types of issues is rather clear. But I did begin to learn and get exposed to some perspectives and points of view that I didn’t necessarily have a great deal of appreciation for prior to getting elected to the City Council. In fact, I had one individual who was a part of this industry locally to ask me the next time I traveled, to Baton Rouge or to New Orleans, to see if I could find a liquor store. In fact they asked me if I got to Alexandria, to see if I could find a “liquor store” within any of those communities as well. And I remember in driving down stopping on old, I guess that was 71 as you go through Alexandria, McArthur Drive, the various circles. And I pulled in there to buy gasoline, and as I went in to pay for my gas, as I stood there at the counter, I noticed that I was not only in a gas station, I was in a convenience store, that was also in a place that sold liquor. And it became clear to me that there are places outside of Shreveport that don’t have “liquor stores”. They did not make the decision on a positive note that those who came before me and those of us who are here today, did here in Shreveport. And that is to decide that we were not going to allow, I guess for lack of a better word, putting in liquor coup. But you wouldn’t be able to go into your grocery store, your drug store, your convenience stores and be able to find a fifth of whiskey, or a pint of vodka standing there next to the chap stick and the Hershey bars, that we would have specific establishments that restricted those types of sales in terms of high content alcohol to “liquor stores”. Got to Baton Rouge, noticed and observed the same thing. Traveled on to New Orleans, and saw that same phenomenon. I actually came back to Shreveport with a greater appreciation for some of the foresight and planning that some group of individuals here made on behalf of this city. It did not help some bad decisions that were made in Allendale, and Mooretown, and Hollywood, and MLK, and some other places. But I think it has in fact, (inaudible) the City of Shreveport very well. And so, it would be politically convenient for me to sit here today and allow this discussion to move forward without saying that the way in which we now allow and govern and restrict, and direct what we’re talking about here today, to not say that the way it’s done right now in Shreveport is a good thing, would be less than honest of me to do that. I know these folks who are here in opposition to this, are very genuine in their concern. They’re very passionate in their opposition, but to make a case that does not fall within any of the specific boundaries that we currently establish in terms of number of feet from a church, or from a school, and other types of parameters in which we direct these types of or restrict these types of uses, none of those exist at this particular point for this particular development. In the interest of trying to be circumspect about it, I went out and actually drove the area myself several days ago. And did in fact the residential development that’s going on I believe on Kenny Street, if I’m not mistaken, that’s there off Linwood. Drove around to some of the other areas and in fact saw one of the types liquor stores, quite frankly folks, that I don’t want to see us have any more of on this Southside of Linwood, there at the intersection of Bert Kouns and Flournoy Lucas, I guess my lawyer is going to tell I can’t call them by name, if I don’t want to risk the city fisc,

Councilman Shyne: Please don’t.

Mayor Glover: But those are the types of establishments that I don’t want us to have any more of. Because they represent the types of places where you see the opportunity for children to come in and pass the whiskey on their way to go get a lollipop. This type of establishment exist in other areas of this city. They exist there, in my perception, whether you’re talking Youree Drive, or Bert Kouns, or N. Market, or some of the other areas without any significant detrimental impact or effect on those areas where they are. I’ll even go so far as to reach across the river, and say that there’s a particular barbeque establishment that the City Council Staff appears to be rather fund of, and they provided some of the barbeque for one of the recent Council Budget Hearings that is situated right next to what was, at least at one point in time, a very controversial zoning matter before the City of Bossier. Since I have taken the lead of the Council Staff and actually sought out this particular unique barbeque place for myself, I drove there and observed activities going on in that particular region, and did not notice any sort of negative impact or any of the types of traditional conceived deviant behavior that I think we may be concerned about at this type of establishment. If you want to go to Allendale, I can show you people unfortunately who may be standing outside of a liquor store. If you want to go to the Cooper Road, I can show you some folks who may be standing outside a liquor store. If you want to go to Hollywood, unfortunately I can show you some people who may be standing and loitering outside of a liquor store, and with the good Lord’s help and the courage and the determination of Chief Whitehorn and the men and women of the City of Shreveport, we’re going to see fewer of them. But I can’t say I’ve been to any of these establishments that’s set up in this manner where you’re talking about the very nice one, that’s there on Pierremont or any of the other ones around the City of Shreveport, and seen the type of negative behavior or type of activity that ends up being detrimental to our city or to our neighborhoods. And so, while I don’t envy you all for the job to have to sit here and vote today, I did not want to allow this issue to be voted on, without offering you my opinion and perspective, both as Mayor and as a former City Councilman. So having said that, God bless each and everyone of you, as you determine your own individual motivation for the votes that you cast. Thank you Mr. Chairman, thank you Members of the Council.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Mayor, thank you. And I tried to sit here, but look like the Spirit hit me, and I guess I have to say something Joyce. I’m not really concerned about how well it looks. It could have gold all the way around it. And Pastor Edmonds, we could have a Sunday School Class right outside of it. As I look out in the audience, and what I’ve heard, my investment - - - my precious investment, No. 1 is in my kids. I’m not one of those people who have a lot of money Ed. My blessings - - - I put what I have in my kids. My next biggest investment, I guess I don’t want to say because I live in Mooretown, is in my house and in my neighborhood. And it seems like that’s what I got today from some of you all. That this is an investment. I think your concern about the integrity of your neighborhood. I also had a chance to go out there and look. I’m not just sitting here making a decision just because of something I read. (Inaudible) if you have to wait a year, it’s not going to be that much economic development come in out there anyway in a year’s time. The way I look at it. Now, I may not look at it like everybody. If you have to wait a year, I’m sorry. Pray for me. I think these people are concerned about some intangibles that we have to deal with in life, and you call it quality of life. Some of you all might be moving there and that’s your last stop. You want to try to at least have a good quality of life at your last stop. Let me say this, and I’m going to start with you Rev. Martin, and I’m going to end up with (inaudible). I appreciate and I hope the City of Shreveport appreciate what you all have done out there collectively. You’re talking about becoming “The Next Great City Of The South”, you’ve got to have residential neighborhoods where you’ve got some things you just keep out. Am I making any sense? I’m sorry, I’m sorry, I’m sorry. I told you, see I’m about to get emotional, and I don’t want to - - - you can’t do that. But you know some things you just ought to want to keep out, in order to have that quality. It’s not that you’re against it, but you might not want it in your neighborhood. If we’re going to become that great city of the south that we plan to become, we’re going to have to start making some hard value judgements. It’s going to have to be some things added and some things taken out. That’s just like little Johnny at home, you want him to go to a lot of things, but some things you have to tell him ‘little Johnny, you can’t go to that.’ I almost said, “Pastor, can I get an Amen on that”. But I don’t want to go there. If we’re going to get to be this great city, if we’re going to progress, the most important things that you have in a city is not the economical impact, it’s the people, it’s the human resource. It’s your neighborhoods that you live in day by day by day. You all excuse me for hitting on the counter. That’s the greatness of a city. The greatness of a city, you have to look at those opportunities that are provided for you to have that quality of life. People who are retiring, they want to move to an area where 1) it’s safe. Where you’ve got good healthcare. Where you don’t have something that’s going to draw something in that you might not want. Not saying that it’s illegal or unconstitutional, or don’t have no right to survive. But you just don’t want it in your neighborhood, because it’s going to impact your quality of life. I appreciate you all coming, I appreciate everybody coming down. I appreciate hearing both sides. And I can understand both sides, but I guess in this particular case, it’s not so much that I’m siding with Councilman Wooley, but I’m siding with homeowners out there who want a little bit of peace. And every time they get a chance to get a little bit of peace, they say, “Thank you Lord”. So, my vote, and I tried to keep this quiet, but I heard Councilman Walford, and I heard the Mayor, and I tried to agree with both of them, but this time, I’m going to have to kinda disagree. If we have to go a year longer, big deal. So what? It’s not that much economic growth that’s going to come at that particular location anyway. If you have to wait a year, then it gives us more time to bring in something a little bit more creative. I guess I’ve gotten to the age where I don’t like to rush into anything. I like to take my time, I like to have a little patience. A few years ago, I might have just run right into something. I don’t do that now. 12 months to me is not a very long time. Lets make sure that we make that area out there the kind of area that we can tell General Motors or anybody, if you come and locate in our city, we’ve got one of the best neighborhoods in the country. We’ve got good schools, good playgrounds, good churches, good places for you to go and shop, and we’ve got a safe environment. I’m going to cut it off here, because I might be like the little lady who came up a while ago. Somebody might have to bring me a tissue, but I’ll yield to you Councilman Walford.

Councilman Walford: Pastor Edmonds, I hope Wendy’s doesn’t come along, because the message is clear, B-3 would be damaging to your neighborhood. So, I’m sure that at some point, when people start looking at developing, they’re going to look at what’s happening here today. That it wasn’t a alcohol issue, that you don’t like B-3. And that Wendy’s and others are probably going to pack up and go out on Youree Drive or some other part of time. Cause we’re sending a terrible message.

Councilman Shyne: Councilman Webb said they can come on over to Mansfield Road, but I don’t think we’re sending them that message. Just a minute. Are we having a problem?

Mr. Thompson: No. We just want to be sure that if people voted early that they voted the way they wanted to vote. That was the only thing. And if you wanted to change your vote, you can always do it before Bea cuts it off.

Councilman Shyne: Okay, let me make this clear. A “NO” vote would overturn the decision by the MPC. That’s correct. A “NO” vote denies the zoning, and send economic development somewhere else. A “YES” vote says that you are for the ruling of the MPC. Okay? All in favor? Lets vote.

Motion to adopt Ordinance No. 204 of 2007 fails by the following vote: Councilmen Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 4. Nays: None. Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, and Long. 3.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Thompson, you want to - - - ?

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, the ordinance to change the zoning was defeated.

Councilman Shyne: Okay, did you all hear that? I guess evidently you did, cause I heard a lot of clapping. I don’t know if it was ‘FOR’ or ‘AGAINST’, but the vote overturns the ruling of the MPC.

Mr. Thomson: Mr. Chairman, you still have another item on your agenda which relates to this matter. The Clerk read the following:

BAC 110-07: Property located on the north side of Industrial Loop, 620 feet west of Linwood Avenue.

Mr. Thompson: It’s a request for a Special Exception Use in a B-3 District. You do not now have a B-3 District, so you can make a motion to uphold the decision of the MPC or to overturn the decision of the MPC.

Motion by Councilman Wooley, seconded by Councilmen Bowman, Webb, and Lester to overturn the decision of the ZBA.

Councilman Lester: I want to have a debate.

Councilman Shyne: Lets go to Bryan first.

Councilman Wooley: I’ll yield to Councilman Lester.

Councilman Lester: Thank you Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, Members, to me the meat of the issue was about the alcohol. I think the MPC’s ruling to allow a B-3 zoning was accurate, and I think that was the right decision. The ruling on the alcohol, I think I can understand where the church is coming from, because I have had that issue in my district. So, lets be clear. To me, I always separated the two arguments, because I think there was a tremendous difference between whether or not a person can have a business in a B-3 District that is zoned, and personally - - - I mean, I understand everyone’s frustration, I understand the concern. But I think from a legal standpoint, if you cannot have a B-3 zoning on Bert Kouns, you can’t have a B-3 anywhere. That is separate and apart from the question of whether or not you should have alcohol at this particular location. And to me, it was easy for people to amalgamate those questions, but I think those were two completely separate issues. I’m voting on the alcohol. Cause I’m always going to vote “NO” on the alcohol. I think that the B-3 decision was the accurate decision under the rules and auspices of the MPC. So, I just wanted to state that for the record. A lot of people say, well where are you? You have two separate and totally distinct questions. And as a matter of fact, to kinda piggy back off something that our Mayor has said, and Mr. Johnson (inaudible) some quiet moments when you go back to your office and conference with the members. I have looked at this issue a lot, and think there’s a way for us to deal with this issue so we don’t have to continue to have it. And it’s not an issue that we’re going to have to deal with from the MPC standpoint or the Zoning Board, it’s going to require some legislation. So rather than take the easy way out, we’re working on some legislation at the State level to rearrange that for what it’s worth. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Wooley: Just for clarification purposes, I’d ask the Council Members for a “YES” vote to overturn the appeal.

Mr. Thompson: To overturn the decision, I thought that’s what you - - -

Councilman Wooley: To overturn the decision of the ZBA.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 6. Nays: Councilman Walford. 1.

Councilman Shyne: Okay. Am I reading that right? 6 – YES, and 1 – NO. Okay. Ladies and gentlemen, we appreciate you all coming down. This is democracy in it’s truest form. We will recess for - - -

Councilman Walford: Lets take five.

Councilman Shyne: How about three, because we have some people who have been waiting a long time.

Councilwoman Bowman: Right, my people are waiting.

RECESS 6:15 p.m. until 6:21 p.m.

MPC APPROVAL:

Councilman Shyne: Lets take (inaudible) first.

Councilwoman Bowman: Councilman Shyne, before we start with this, can I at least address my people?

Councilman Shyne: Sure, sure.

Councilwoman Bowman: Cause I do want to apologize to you all for the long wait. Shows how interested you are in this case, to sit here almost three and a half hours and have the fortitude to hang in here. I appreciate that. That lets me know again, just how interested you are in your community and where you live. Thank you again for your patience and your time. Thank you Councilman Shyne.

Councilman Shyne: And we apologize to you all, and to Councilwoman Bowman. Councilman Walford kinda twisted my arm a little bit, and that’s why I went along with him. We’ll go into Public Comments on Case - - -

Councilman Walford: Can I make one comment before we do since you’re slamming me. I want to thank them all for staying as well. And tell y’all as Mr. Shyne commented earlier. This makes us feel good that people are that involved. You’d be surprised how few people we look out at most meetings. And I know it’s been long, and I appreciate the fact that you’re here.

Councilman Lester: And we have snacks which means we’re not going to rush you. So don’t think that you know the first group got to say their - - - we’re going to be quick on the draw with the three minutes. You know the kids are in bed, you know - - - we have a cot in the back, so we’re not going to short change anybody. Seriously. In all seriousness, cause this is - - - very rarely have we had two - - - that many large groups coming at one time. Normally there’s usually one humongous group that comes to address the Council, and then they leave. This was one of those instances where we had two large groups on two very separate and several actually, as I appreciate it, issues and so I just wanted to let you guys know we’re not going to short change you any of your time. We have our coats off and our shoes off, so we’re here to listen. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Shyne: And we have only one Councilman that’s a little uncomfortable. You can see how he’s dressed, he’s missing two Christmas parties, you know Santa Clause look and the beard and all. And I see somebody in the audience who might be able to fill in for you, I won’t call his name. So, you might have to make the parties and play Santa Claus. Okay, these are the people that are in support of the zoning. We’re going to hear from them first.

Ms. Camille Hudspeth: (6908 Casa Cove) Good evening. I’m a homeowner, and I rent my home out to leasers. I have renters. I bought my home five years ago. It was new, newly built. Was built in 2002, I bought it in 2003. I bought it for $101,000, and it’s not worth $130 (thousand). So, evidently renting your home out does not depreciate the value of it. And that’s certainly something that I’m concerned about. But I think that being in support of what Mr. Wimberly is trying to do is provide affordable housing for persons who normally would not be able to purchase a home on their own. They deserve it, and I’m in support of it.

Mayor Glover: I’m not understanding your point in terms of leasing your home. You’re making a point that you by being able to lease your home, you’re not decreasing or diminishing the property values of the homes adjacent.

Ms. Hudspeth: (Inaudible) my point. Evidently renting your home, I’m a case in point where renting your home out to - - - having renters in a neighborhood, I’m over by Steeple Chase, that’s where Casa Cove is, right off W. 70^th Street, has not depreciated the value of my home. So, there is a belief by some here who are opposers that persons renting homes will decrease the value of your property. And that is simply not true.

Mayor Glover: And now I understand your point. I do have one question.

Ms. Hudspeth: Yes sir.

Mayor Glover: Is there anything in your mortgage agreement that would prevent you from selling your home?

Ms. Hudspeth: No, there is nothing.

Mayor Glover: No timeframe in which you would not be able to sell your home. So, if someone showed up tomorrow with $135,000 and you were inclined to sell, you could sell?

Ms. Hudspeth: I would consider it.

Mayor Glover: And you could?

Ms. Hudspeth: I could.

Mayor Glover: Okay. I was making sure I understood that. Thank you.

Ms. Truecilla McGreggor: (6760 Raspberry Lane) I want to live in a house, what I’m used to. I’m not used to living in apartments. I’m used to living in a house, and I would like to have one that Mr. Wimberly is trying to build. And I wish the people would help. Thank you.

Ms. Rosie George: (4440Danny R. Wimberly) About ten years ago, I was married, had over $100,000 salary coming in, the potential for buying a home, three kids, pretty much set. Unfortunately, I didn’t know that I would be divorced, and that my father would pass, and my mother would come to me, leaving me with 75% of my income gone. As a mother, and person who has gone to college, received a degree, I also wanted that for my children. But when you’re a single mother, living on 25% of a salary of which you are used to living on ($100,000), that’s very hard to do. Mr. Wimberly then opened up the apartments, the affordable housing. Which not only allowed for me to pay for my children’s education, have the extra money for healthcare, take care of my mother, give me enough space so that my children didn’t have to sleep in the same rooms, and the capacity to grow. As a result of that, it has given my children such a hope, it has allowed my children to go onto - - - my daughter-in-law actually came from New Orleans, did not have a place to live, wanted to go to medical school, and because of that apartment complex, and because of the place that I lived with those rules and regulations, I was able to offer her a place to live, in which she could stay with us, and pursue her medical degree, which she will begin her residency next year. My daughter as a result of living in better, decent housing has gone on to receive her Masters as a Computer Network Engineer, that will go all around the world now and make a difference. My son now attends LSU in creative writing, and he has written the first 8-10 chapters of a book, a 35 chapter book. I guess my point is that we just need an opportunity to prove that there is some good. It doesn’t matter that you don’t have enough, but if you had a hand up, we’re affecting a generation. We’re affecting not just right now, but I’m looking at 10-20 years down the road. There are so many young kids who have great potential, but that potential can’t be reached if they are not allowed to have decent housing. I can’t tell you what a struggle it was for me and my kids to sleep on someone’s floor. That was never my ambition, nor was it my goal. But hard times fell on my family. And as a strong mother, you have to stand up and do something about it. And so when Mr. Wimberly brought in affordable housing, you wouldn’t imagine what that did for my life, for my children’s life. My children as a result would never have to walk in poverty. My daughter-in-law will graduate from medical school, I’m very proud. My daughter with a Masters will never have to know what that’s like. And all we’re asking is for the opportunity. Even myself, it has given me the opportunity to want to go back to school to better my life. Even if I don’t live in one of the houses in the future, because my life has gotten much better. My point is that I would like to represent Mr. Wimberly and all that he has done for our community. It’s a great community. It’s not the $300,000 community that most people are used to, but it is substantial. It’s clean, and it offers a better way of life. It gives our children hope, because there’s a lot of good that can come out of it. So I’m just asking you not to vote against it. Because I’m definitely proof that if you offer a hand up, some people to have the capacity to take hold, and to go on to do better things.

Councilman Shyne: Any questions for Rosie? Rosie you are a tremendous woman. It won’t be long and you’ll be out of there. When he finishes that book.

Ms. George: But my heart cry sir is not just for my family, because when we get blessed, we need to give it back. My cry is for the young children that are right here in this city that are crying out for somebody to give them the same opportunity. That’s my heart cry.

Ms. Yolanda Mikle: (4440 Danny R. Wimberly) Good evening. I have lived in Greenwood Villa Townhomes for about five years. I’m a single mother with one son. Since living in Greenwood Villa Townhomes, I have recently obtained a degree in the nursing field, and I am currently preparing to take my State Board Exams to become a Licensed Registered Nurse. One of my biggest dreams and goals like so many others is to have homeownership. If everyone I knew were able to afford the $100,000 homes that exist in the Shreveport/Bossier area, why do we have such areas as Queensborough, Hollywood, MLK area and Cedar Grove? Areas that are sadly known for the high crime rates, and poor school districts. I am for one a taxpayer, a registered voter who does exercise the right, and last but not least, I’m a concerned parent. I would like for my child to have the same advantages as others. Such as better living, affordable living, better schools and overall, a better environment. What better way to rekindle a generation of children we are losing to the streets, but by starting at the base which is the home. Better living environments equal better neighbors. Better neighborhoods equal better schools. Better school districts equal better education. A better education equals a less drop outs. Less drop outs equal less crime. We deserve the opportunity and chance and we owe it to our children to pave a better way.

Councilman Shyne: That was beautiful. We’re going to have to come get you sometimes. Any questions? If not, Yolanda, let me ask you this, or Ms. Bowman, you might be able to tell me. Do they stay in the same - - - is this the same area where property is going to be developed?

Councilwoman Bowman: Yes. In close proximity.

Ms. Ida R. Hall: (4430 Danny R. Wimberly) I am all in favor of the construction of the Greenwood Villa Townhomes III on Pines Road. I have lived in Greenwood Villa Townhomes II for about six years, will be six years Jan 2, 2008. This has been a nice place to live, they are well kept up and the neighborhood watch out for each other. We all have rules we have to abide by. We know that. We know somewhere, time or another, wherever we live, there are going to be rules. It’s quiet at night and that sits well with me, considering I have to be to work each morning at 7:00. I haven’t always lived in a townhouse, I once owned a home in a subdivision between Western Hills and Timberline, which was called Timberlake, where the constructor was June (inaudible), but due to divorce, I had to move out. Right down the street where I used to live there were some L’Tierra apartments which may still be there, I’m not really sure. But at the time when I lived there, those people had to have somewhere to live too. So, what we had to do during the time I was living there when I was trying to get a mortgage on my home, a second mortgage, we had that subdivision there at the end, where the people did live, but had come to the decision that even though those apartments were supposed to be low income, they had to have somewhere to live too. There were nice people living in those apartments because of the fact that we had church members that we used to go pick up on Sundays for church. I do believe that there are some bad people in the neighborhood, but there are some bad people in all neighborhoods. And if we’re talking about crime, there’s crime everywhere, not only in the Pines Road area, but Western Hills, and Timberline and everywhere else. What we must realize is everybody does not make that six figure each year. But we still work hard trying to make an honest living. Trying to provide for our families. We are respectful citizens, we should be able to live somewhere comfortable and safe for our families just as well as yours. My hat is off to Mr. Wimberly for trying to do something positive for the area. The area is nice and I love it. I have been out there in the area for 22 years or more, and I am looking forward to them putting these houses up in the west part of Shreveport. No one in this room could look at me and tell me where I was raised up as a child. But let me tell you, I am a product of Allendale, right off Clay Street. But as you can see now, those houses over there are nice, affordable, and comfortable. If we can do it for Allendale, we can certainly do it for the Pines Road area where we must consider, just remember lets not judge the book by the cover. Thank you.

Ms. Denise Wimberly: (4430 Danny R. Wimberly) I’m here today in support of Mr. Wimberly’s project, Greenwood Villa III Townhomes. I’m a member of the management staff at Greenwood Villa, and I have seen first hand the number of success stories that come through the complex, and it’s amazing the amount of people that come into the office looking for a place to live. And I think that if we can do something to provide affordable housing for the people that come through the office, I think that we’re helping the community. Also I would like for each member of the Council to look at your own personal conscious when you’re making the decision on this matter, and please give these people a chance. They really try hard, and again, I see people first hand and I know that all they want and all they need is just a chance to be able to continue on and do better for themselves. Thank you.

Ms. Sh’Barbara Williams: (4430 Danny R. Wimberly) I am a single parent of three children, one of which who is a 2007 graduate. I think that these homes that Mr. Wimberly is pursuing to build is a great opportunity for single parents or single home families. We have an opportunity to live in a house, if you’re not able to purchase a home. My son will be starting college in January along with myself, and right now, I can’t afford to purchase a home, so in order for me to be able to rent a home and send my son to college and as well continue my education will be a great opportunity with Mr. Wimberly’s help.

Ms. Sonia Smith: (4430 Danny R. Wimberly) I’m a recent retiree from the State of Louisiana, and I’m not able to afford a house on my monthly income. I’m very appreciative that there is someone like Mr. Wimberly that is willing to build affordable housing for people like myself that are unable to afford a house. I’m puzzled, and at the same time, I’m hurt to know that a human being would try to deny another human being a place to dwell. The constitution states that all men were created equal and the Bible states that God is not a partial God. Isaiah 65:20 states that, all men will certainly build house and have occupancy. And I was watching the news this morning, and people across the country are losing their homes due to high interest rates, and soon we will need more affordable housing across the country. And in view of what others think, I think that Mr. Wimberly is doing something that is a blessing. And I would very much like to appeal to your humanity, and ask that you not vote against what Mr. Wimberly is trying to do. And that is to help people like me, middle income, to live in affordable housing. Thank you.

Ms. Margaret Ford: (1544 Milam Street) Thank you Mr. Shyne. I will own you as one of my home boys of Homer, LA. I am also and more importantly one of the attorneys representing Mr. Wimberly in this matter and other matters, and if at all possible, I would like to yield any time that may have been allotted to Mr. Wimberly for his rebuttal. Obviously I am in favor of the development. Having worked for one of the national civil rights organization in the country, and one of our objectives was to provide safe, decent, and sanitary housing which included of course safe neighborhoods, safe schools, proper infrastructure, and what have you. Obviously I am in favor of what Mr. Wimberly is doing, not only in the West Shreveport area, but in other areas of the city, where he is also developing affordable housing. So, I yield any time that I have left.

Councilman Walford: Ms. Ford, like Mr. Lester said, and we reiterated, anybody that would sit there more than three hours waiting to talk to us, they’re going to get all the time they want. So, you don’t have to yield to Mr. Wimberly. We’re going to give him time.

Ms. Ford: I appreciate that, but I would be dishonest if I accepted it on that basis. I have been sitting in a Continuing Legal Education Course all day today. Which may be a little bit more burdensome. But thank you very much.

Mr. Dan Wimberly: (6007 Financial Plaza) I’d like to start out with a statement. Imagine a great city. In order to do that you have to build good neighborhoods, and that’s what we’ve been talking about today. The Chairman, Mr. Shyne took the words right out of my mouth earlier when you were defending the right of the property owners in the neighborhood against the liquor store. You talked about family, you talked about homes, and as you can see, the individuals that reside in our current property in which this is not a property that we are contemplating building or coming into an area, this is an area, where we currently are. In talking about the facts about this particular development, the development currently is zoned for residential purposes, which is what we are going to do. The fact of what we are seeking is to file a subdivision plat which tells the public and adjacent homeowners, or adjacent property owners how we’re going to subdivide the land. That’s what we’re doing. We’re not here seeking a rezoning classification, that issue has already been decided. What we have here as you can see every lot size in the property complies with the city ordinances as it relates to lot sizes in an R-1-D zoning district. Street sizes as you can see comply with the street sizes of the city’s ordinance for this type of residential development. The setbacks which is where we will develop the houses apply. We met with a group of professionals from the city in designing this subdivision plat as it relates to fire safety. We have cul-de-sacs for the fire trucks to go in and turn around, the ingress-egress area was recommended by the Operational Services Engineering Department, so every aspect of this development conforms to the city’s Code of Ordinances. We have requested no waivers, we’ve requested no variances, so therefore factually, our subdivision plat meets all the city’s requirements in filing a subdivision plat. Now as far as the law is concerned, which I will speak briefly to that, the city’s Code of Ordinance 82-41 says generally that the development of a subdivision, the filing of a plat, as long as it meets the infrastructure requirements and there’s infrastructure access immediately available to this site as long as it’s for the safety environmental concerns, and the general welfare of the public. And this particular subdivision plat that we are filing meets all of those requirements. There are no environmental impacts. We’ve had an environmental assessment done. The environmental report has been publicized or it’s been published here in the City of Shreveport and in Baton Rouge. There were not comments as it related to that. Incidentally, I might also add, in this same statement of facts that I developed and distributed to each Council Person, this Body itself passed a resolution in 2006 supporting this development when we went to the Louisiana Housing Finance Agency to seek financing for this particular development. Now, in being true to what you represent and what you are about, this is your word as a governing body supporting this particular development, and also and what you are about as family oriented individuals. As you heard individuals that came before you to speak representing themselves as wanting decent, safe, and affordable housing. That is what this site is all about. Now I also want to show you two maps here about the location of this particular site. Can you see that Mr. Shyne?

Councilman Shyne: I can, of course my eyes are little tired by now, but I can see it.

Mr. Wimberly: Alright. Well, this is where our proposed site is, and I have another picture to show you. Surrounding the site which is zoned R-1-D, there is no other residential development other than our development which we are expanding. This is our development which we are expanding into this area in here, which is approximately 10.6 acres. Adjacent to our site, there was no other residential development other than our development which we are expanding. The nearest site to ours which is the L’Tierra Subdivision here. If you go directly across, it’s approximately half a mile, if you go bay street path, which is to come out Danny R. Wimberly, go down Greenwood Road, and back up Pines Road, it’s roughly a mile and a half. If you go back up to the next closest subdivision, which is the Western Hills area, it is approximately two miles from this site, lets see, it is 1.78 miles from our site going across back to this subdivision. The other subdivision which is Twilight Meadows which is three miles from our site, and another subdivision down here on the other side of Steeple Chase is 2.4 miles from our site. And if you were driving down Greenwood Road or Pines Road, unless you knew somebody in our development or had a reason to go into our development, and incidentally, to access our development, we have private streets, or the streets going into our development are private, so therefore we can control ingress-egress into our site. And that has allowed us to control who comes in and who goes out, and it has allowed us to maintain our property as a safe and decent property. In the district, the police district that our property is in has the second lowest crime index in the city. And since our property has been developed on this site in the year 2000 which is when we developed Phase I, and we completed Phase II in 2001, the crime index in this part of the city has not gone out of control. Property values in this particular part of the city based on this map, given the location of where our site is and where the closest development to our site, L’Tierra Subdivision, and the Western Hills Subdivision here, property values in this area when we developed our first Phase in the year 2000, the average home, and incidentally there were 12 homes that were sold in the Western Hills area, the average property value was $80,000. During that same year, the average cost to build was approximately $153,000. In the year 2007, which is not been completed yet, so year to date, there has been 11 homes that have sold in that subdivision for an average price of $130,000. And the square footage of those homes is approximately the same. In the year 2000, the average square footage per home was approximately 1700 square feet, and the average square footage in 2007 is approximately 1900 square feet. So with all things being equal, what I’m saying is sine our development has been in this neighborhood, and we didn’t move there yesterday. But our development has not caused property values to go down, it has not caused crime rates to go up, and incidentally it is not a subsidized development. It is financed with private money. So we’ve asked for no waivers, no variances, and we meet all of the requirements. The people that live in our development, and incidentally I asked one of the mothers from a past resident of our development who is a military, and he gave his life to serve this country, and he was a resident of our development. And in concluding, I would like to say that sine our plat meets all the city requirements, we’ve asked for no variances, no waivers, we ask that you uphold the MPC’s approval of our subdivision plan. Thank you.

Ms. Paula Ocon: (6422 Faust) I feel like everybody has a right to have a place to live. However, there is properties that already have water, electricity, streets. I’m very proud of the ladies that came up here and have overcome their situation, I think that that’s remarkable. But I am too first hand on when it comes to rent homes. I’ve seen people come and go in our neighborhood. It’s horrible. And I’m not, by no means downgrading these ladies at all. We’ve had drugs, theft, people walking up and down the streets. We’ve had a lot of problems with the rent houses in our neighborhood. I don’t think it’s a good idea, but however, I do feel like everybody has a place to live. I wish that maybe they would consider going to Youree Drive, because they want to better themselves from what I understood, and I think Youree Drive would be the perfect place. That’s really all I have to say. Thank you for allowing me to speak.

Ms. Pearlie Ansley: (6706 Sagewind Dr.) I have lived at the current address for ten years, and I’ve lived in the Western Hills community for 24 years. And I am here to ask the Council Members to reverse the Zoning Commissions decision to allow government subsidized rental homes in our community. We currently have condos at this location that fit into the same category. We also have L’Tierra apartments a few minutes away. We have apartment complexes located just across I-20, and I want the Council to realize that I’m not here to bash housing for people in need of homes, nor am I here to bash Mr. Wimberly’s project. Because I have walked in the shoes of some of these people that I heard speak before me. And I hardly have a six figure salary. Because I’m a retired teacher of 34 years. And I have also been a renter. I didn’t always live at 6706 Sagewind in Western Hills. I have lived in Cedar Grove as a renter, I have lived in Allendale, Lakeside, because as I stated, I was a teacher by profession, and on a teacher’s salary, I realized that I could not afford to purchase a home. And my husband is a blue collar in a local plant, and he is still working. I heard one of the ladies mention about having a child graduate from school. And I too in May had a daughter to graduate from LSU Med School. So, I’ve walked in the shoes of these people, and I need you to understand that I am sensitive to their needs. And I am sensitive to their need to rent such properties. We’re not opposed to positive growth and development. But we must ask you as members of this Council to consider the impact that 44 units, that is houses, 11-1200 square feet of space, consider the impact that this would have on our community. And I’m asking you is it fair or is it right, and I know that life isn’t always fair. But is it right to allow a housing project to come in which would lower the values of existing homes. Our community would be best served by the construction of homes for sale that are comparable to existing homes. Homes that would provide home ownership. And I tell you from personal experience that there is a difference between the feeling that one has a renter, as opposed to a homeowner. And also we’re looking at the investment that we have made over the years. And anything that comes into the neighborhood or in the community, that may lower and have the possibility of lowering our property values we’re against that, we’re not against the people who need housing.

Councilman Shyne: Ms. Ansley: We appreciate you coming down and I know how it feels, and how to be trying to live on the retired teachers income. I’m trying to do the same thing. And his mother is a retired teacher, and so we feel for you, and we just be happy if somebody would come up here and say my daughter or son finished from Grambling. Thank you very much hear.

Ms. Joyce M. Lawrence: (4107 Scenic Drive) When this was before the Metropolitan Planning Commission, I was a little more emotional than I am now, because I took my retirement and my savings, and I invested $200,000 cash in my house to build it. And with the help of the folks in the building and permits department who were very helpful, took me six months to plan it, and another three to solicit bids and select contractors, and six months to build. I am here on a personal note, as a concerned person in the community, and I want to say that there is nothing personal about any of this. Mr. Wimberly made it clear during his comments before the Planning Commission, that he had investors, and I consider myself and those of us in the community that have built homes to be investors as well, and also active participants to the tax base, and the vitality of the community. The first thing that I would like to say is that I’d like to challenge Mr. Wimberly’s plat plan which he submitted for approval. You’d have to get a magnifying glass to see it. But unless he’s submitted something since I reviewed the case yesterday, his plan does require ordinance relief which was not requested, nor is it valid under the code. These are copies of documents that I obtained from the Planning Commission’s Case SC-88-07, and while the grid is very small and readable at a distance with magnifying glasses, you can see that the lots that I have highlighted are less than the 7200 square R-1-D zoning. There’s 23 of them to be exact. That’s on one grid and this is the entry way into that area. I looked very closely. I checked his numbers with my constructors master calculator, and he even has the correct measurements on there as 7,050 square feet. That’s below the minimum. It requires ordinance relief. And that’s my first basis of asking you to overturn the Planning Commissions approval. The second thing is the size and density of this project is a substantial change in the character of our community which is prohibited under Article V, Division 3, Section 106-24-1b. Many of the homes in our area are set on an acre or more. Others are on half acre. But most are on at least a quarter of an acre. I am asking that you consider that the plan that he submitted does not meet the code. The second thing is that in his design minutes from the design standards review meeting, it clearly says, the developer said that they were considering requesting the following relief. 25 foot front setbacks, 20 front yard setbacks, and all cul-de-sacs 25, feet. Inverted crown private streets with no curbs or sidewalks and a 50 foot private row. I saw nothing in Case SC-88-07 to tell me that that has been revised or some other subsequent submission of the request. Therefore the setbacks on the plat plan that has been requested and was approved, I believe inadvertently by the Planning Commission, is out of compliance with the ordinance and what the city’s requirements are. My third concern is that at the same design meeting, and the minutes reflect that ordinance relief was needed on at least three items. During the design meeting the Engineer indicated that he had some concerns about the ingress-egress, which means that he was taking a look at - - - you already have 80 units there, and you’re planning another 44, so now you have 124 residents in the midst of a disaster or an emergency who have to come out one way. There was some discussion around having them come out behind the old Brookshire’s, well there was also no discussion by the developer during the request who was going to pay for that. I have only been here two years, I’ve infused a lot of money into the community, I’m a taxpayer, and thus I would like to know how that entrance in and out would be accommodated and whose going to pay for it. He’s planning - - - another thing I thought this was really interesting. Something about private water and sewer? I mean I am concerned that when he decides that he’s going to sell this development, that I as a taxpayer am going to be left to pick up the tab for that when the street maintenance and the sewerage and drainage and all that has to be maintained, I’m not okay with paying for it, and he’s moving forward with building this as private. The other thing that I’m concerned about is that there are qualified census tracts identified for uses of low income tax credit under IRS Section 42. This development falls in none of them. On yesterday, I gave a copy to Mr. Thompson, and asked him to share with the Council Members in the event that he did not share that, I would like to share it with you at this juncture. I tried to use little chevrons here to show in Caddo Parish, that that low income tax money is earmarked for particular developments. These developments qualify, 1) because they’re considered hard to develop areas, or distressed neighborhoods. I’m concerned by that repeatedly for a number of years a consolidated plan which addresses this city’s housing needs because it gets federal money, and you have a mandatory report on that, that the seven distressed communities that I won’t enumerate because we all know what they are, are in the qualified census tracts. I’m concerned not only that he is trying to build outside of those census tracts, but that the regulatory compliance says that he needs to do the market study. I haven’t seen a market study, and basically the market study if you read the instructions and I won’t bore you with the complete document which is 66 pages, but I did read it, there are a number of factors, and one is a justification for this housing. I don’t really have a problem, and I’ve done it by Zip Code, and you can go to the census website and do it yourself by Zip Code. There is a an abundance of rental properties, over 10%, and that’s per the definition of what HUD and Louisiana Housing Finance Agency calls adequate rental property availability. That measure is 6-8%. Shreveport has run over the last two years excess rental property inventory of over 10%. I’m also concerned that - - - I got to say to the ladies that spoke, I know the plight. I’m the product of meager means, I’m a product of broken relationships, and this will be the third time in my life, I’ve started over. I am a single parent, I have two boys, and to the moms who have boys, my heart goes out to you. I got the last one, hopefully I can cut that apron string, he’s a junior at Southern University in Baton Rouge, and I can cut that apron string when he graduates. Even he’s talking about a MBA, that’s on his time, not mine. I want to tell you mothers how I’m paying for my son’s education. It’s through homeownership. I challenge the City Officials here, the State elected officials in Baton Rouge to take a close look at how the housing, the low income tax credits are being utilized in this city. I don’ think that it should be developer or investor driven, it should be policy driven. Having said that there needs to be a comprehensive economic development plan in place that not only addresses the housing, but jobs. Education. I have been fortunate to do some research, and the No. 1 factor that business sight to coming to Shreveport, and Mayor I’ve read your State of the City Address, I wasn’t able to be there because I was at the Planning Commission. I am concerned that if we are moving forward that we’re not shifting the burden of our low income citizens who need affordable housing into more rental project. Now ‘project’ is the word that they coined and I’m using it. Because given the size of the yards, 10 feet on each side, that’s 10 feet, that’s shorter thank this table here. The 20 foot yards, where do the kids play. There’s no curbs or sidewalks proposed (inaudible) the streets. I’m concerned about the safety of the kids. My child was hit by a car. Scares me to death when I go down Tierra Drive when I see those kids playing in the street. I don’t want to see kids in another community resort to playing in the streets. They have no back yard on these houses that they’ve planned. I’m not against development, I’m not against growth. I’m against what’s better for all of the citizens of this city. I’d discouraged that there’s this push on for all of this low income tax credit around rental properties. Our families need homeownership, and if they are making $25,000 or more, there are programs that those tax credits can be used for to create down payment assistance, to create offsets in interest payments. I mean these things have to be looked at. They are working in other areas, other areas are more progressive, and using their tax credit for homeownership, which in the long term builds something for the families that need this. Someone said this to me while we were debating the issue, and they were on the other side, and I thought it was quite interesting, and that we had this conversation earlier today, that these people have to go somewhere. They are already in dire conditions. Let’s move them into something new. Well, let me tell you this. 10-15 years short term, we’ve moved them out of one condition to place them right back into another condition. Let’s create homeownership. It’s not about what is going to happen short term. Long term, these designs are not a good product for this city or any city for that matter. There’s data out there on HUD, the Urban Institute has studies on it, the only thing I’m concerned about is how many people have already bought houses in the two phases he’s got up, they’ve been completed. If they’re trying to rent and his rents are around $800, that’s a house payment. People in these house settings can own a house. Let’s look at some products that they could have. I’m concerned that Mr. Wimberly is waving around this resolution that the city gave him back in September for his application, as I understood from listening to the tapes for the Planning Commission, it may have been though they could not decide if it were the requirement that when an application for low income tax credits was submitted, that it actually had to have an accompanying government body’s support. Now I don’t know what that was, but let me read to you, and as I understood it, it was not in support for this project being placed there, as I understood it in reading this, the Whereas Greenwood Villa Homes will partially fund this project upon successful application with Internal Revenue Service Code, Section 42 Tax Credit as awarded by Louisiana Housing Finance Agency, and; Whereas (inaudible) tax credits are awarded on a statewide competitive basis to those applicants that scored highest points, and; Whereas a resolution of support from this government body will be a significant factor, but not the only factor in determining whether or not said application is successful. Having said that, this is not a good product for the citizens that Mr. Wimberly has brought here, and most of them actually live in one of his projects already. My heart goes out to them. I actually came out of a government project. When I left Louisiana, poor and not with many dimes, I went to Houston, Texas. So, I know what that’s like. So, I’m not the one to sit and sneer down at anybody. I want the folks living there to understand that if you’re paying Mr. Wimberly, or if anybody is paying on your behalf, over $600 a month for rent, and by the way, the 2008 sale market rate under HUD is $830, we can put folks in houses. Let’s look at partnerships with banks, lets look at partnerships with developers and builders, and lets try and get the legislature in Baton Rouge to realize that we have a need for home ownership in the areas that qualify under the census tracts. Thank you.

Councilman Shyne: Ms. Lawrence, before you go, you’ve done an excellent job. Charles I’m going to suggest if you ever need anybody on your staff, she - - - you were well prepared. Mr. Mayor, if you ever need a consultant, we know where to look. We know where to send Dale to look. Dale, make sure you get the address and phone number please. Where is Ms. Bowman?

Councilman Lester: She had to step out. She’ll be back. She just said she was stepping out back, to continue.

Councilman Shyne: I was wondering if you wanted to ask a question for Ms. Bowman.

Councilman Lester: No, no. We have a great relationship, but I’m not going to do that. I have a wife Mr. Chairman, I’m learning.

Ms. Gwen Phelps: (6635 Santa Monica Dr) I come to you today as an ordinary everyday citizen who has a plan for their future. This plan led my husband and myself to remain in the West Shreveport area and to renovate our present home, instead of taking our dollars and going somewhere else. We like the West Shreveport area. And why do we like the West Shreveport area? Because of the low crime rate. We’ve got easy access to the interstates and to the loops, and also we have wonderful neighbors. But this plan I feel, is in jeopardy. I believe that if Mr. Wimberly is allowed to build the 44 low income subsidized homes, the remaining acreage around this development is also around this development will also be developed in this same manner. Mr. Wimberly stated at the October MPC meeting that after this tract is approved, he has an option to purchase four other surrounding tracts of land. And if each of these tracts are developed in the same manner, there will be over 220 government subsistent families moving within walking distance of my home. The developer gets rich, and the community suffers. Homeownership suffers, our inheritance suffers, and our children suffer. We suffer because crime statistics show that economics is the driving factor in crime. This can be seen by comparing Shreveport 2004 to 2007 crime statistics, and that’s all they had on the internet. And I compared the ones for January between 2004-2007. And I looked at specifically the Allendale/Ledbetter Heights District. And the reason I looked at this district is because for the last 20 years, I’ve been driving down Ford to work everyday at SWEPCO at the end of Allen Avenue. In that time in the last five years, they’ve torn down the Jackson Heights Projects and they’ve also torn down quite a few of those shotgun houses in that area. And I looked at the crime rate. The overall crime rate for that district, which is District 3 dropped dramatically. It dropped 229%. The residential burglaries which frighten me more than anything, dropped 583%. If Mr. Wimberly is allowed to continue with this project the Pines Road area will become the next Queensborough and we all remember how nice Queensborough used to be. Even the most uninformed person can see how this would destroy the marketability of the existing homes in that area. So, I’m asking you to please not allow Mr. Wimberly to destroy my plan and make me a prisoner in my home, because I would not be able to sell my home and be able to move to an area that will be more appropriate for me when I retire. Thank you. Oh, and I have another factor. Mr. Wimberly stated that the crime in our area had not gone up in our area since those apartments have been down there, those townhouses. Well I looked at, and it’s kinda hard to look at it because they changed the districts here recently, but just looking at what we have as the districts right now, the overall crime in that area for the month of January, since that’s the data that I have with me, went from 37 in 2004 to 78 in 2008. Those are the incidents that we had in January from 2007 to 2007, and to me that’s like what 200%?

Councilman Shyne: Now Ms. Phelps that’s what I was about to ask you. Now are you saying that you’re afraid that the crime rate that dropped in Lakeside and Allendale might just pick up and move and just move on out there and just enjoy where you are?

Ms. Phelps: That’s what I’m saying. Where are we going to get the people to move into these houses from?

Councilman Shyne: Okay, I was just asking and we appreciate you coming out. Any questions for Ms. Phelps?

Councilman Lester: Mr. Chairman, with all due respect to Ms. Phelps, and the people that are concerned about their standard of living in West Shreveport.

Councilman Shyne: Count to 10.

Ms. Phelps: I’ve been counting on this one for quite a bit.

Councilman Lester: I think it’s more than just a bit unfair, and the thing about statistics is you can make numbers say what you want them to say. I think it’s more than just a bit unfair for us or anybody to label people and to say because something has decreased in one area, that the people have moved in another area. I don’t think, and I heard your recitation of the facts as you perceived them and your recitation of the numbers as you perceive them, but what I have not heard was any specific data that correlated a one to one correlation between a person leaving Ledbetter Heights, a person leaving Allendale, and a person moving to Mr. Wimberly’s place, L’Tierra, or any place over in West Shreveport. Crime is down in Allendale for a myriad of reasons. The easiest thing to say is the people are gone. And that is true. And there has been a trend of people leaving Allendale and many parts of our city, but for you to say that the people who live in Allendale are suddenly roaming the streets of Shreveport or West Shreveport or anybody else committing crimes, that’s not true. That’s not true, and lets say this. I understand the desire for anyone, because you’ve made an investment in your home to protect your investment. I have no problem with that, and I have supported initiatives in your neighborhood where we have had scenarios where people wanted to for instance put mobile homes in an area right next door, yeah that was me, right next door to stick built, site built homes in the Pines Road and I have fought against that because there is a difference in the value of the house, and the quality and the character of the house as it relates to property values, and I don’t have a problem with that. I’ve supported your neighborhood folks when you’ve had an internet squabble about starting a home based business and breaking that open. Even though your Councilman, not her, at the time did not support you, but please, please, please do not insult the people who live in Allendale, the people who live in Ledbetter Heights and say that they are somehow criminal, and say because people have left that area, that crime because unless you can show that there is a one to one correlation, unless you can show that there was a 525% increase in the crime in Pines Road, and you can go and track Joe Blow that lived on Anna Street or Murphy Street, and now lives in this place, that’s disingenuous. That’s not fair. I understand your desire to protect your property values, I don’t have any qualms with that, but in protecting your property values, please - - - you know what? What disturbs me in this whole scenario is 20 years ago, and I’ve been praying about this, I’ve been trying to hold my tongue, that’s why I’ve been in the back so long. 20 or 30 years ago, a lot of people who looked like us didn’t live in the Pines Road, because they wouldn’t allow us to live in the Pines Road, cause they wouldn’t sell to us. And for us in 2007, the same people that are there now to use the ‘these people’ argument, what is that about? What is that about? Why are saying that someone 30 years ago? Somebody took an opportunity to give you a chance to do something. You worked hard, and you made it. God bless you, but for you to say and people to subscribe because someone doesn’t own a home or because someone has a different income level than you, then your citizenship is less. I can’t say that. And we can’t say that. Because understand to make that argument is to say that if someone lives in Southern Trace, and their house note is $3,000 and my house note is $1,000, he’s three times the citizen that I am, cause his house note is three times bigger. Well, if they live in his district, and their house if $5,000 and mine is $1,000, he’s five times the citizen. That’s not fair. Listen, deal with the issues about property value, that’s neither here nor there, but please, please do not be a part of subscribing that somebody because of the area that they live. Some people live there because they don’t have a choice. Some people live there because they choose too. But just to say, and to paint somebody with this negative brush, here come those Allendale folks because many years ago, here come those Black folks or here come those Jewish folks, or here come those Mexican folks, and we’re a better city than that. Say that look, I have an issue about this development coming because such and such and such. Fine, lets keep it on that level, but lets not type cast people. 2000 years ago, a family was on the run, little boy with all power, He had no place to stay in the nice neighborhoods. We’ve built up a whole religion and a celebration in about two weeks. His parents were on the run. He was a fugitive, He had all power. He didn’t get to go where He should have been. In the high places. He was born in a manger, and there is a message in that. I’m not going to preach. I’m trying to hold my tongue, I just really have an issue with us type casting folks. And I’m trying to calm down. I just have an issue with us type casting folks.

Ms. Phelps: Do I get to respond.

Councilman Shyne: You may do it, but I just want to tell you to breath hard, because I don’t want you taking this anger and animosity home, and then you take it out on your husband. That’s what I’m saying, but I don’t want you to take it home, but let some of it out, so you won’t take it all home with you. We’ll give you a minute or two. Just let it all out. I see your husband back there holding on to his Bible.

Ms. Phelps: Well, what I wanted to say initially was economics drives crime, and that’s statistically - - - you know those are the facts. I pulled this information off of the City of Shreveport website. I didn’t go out there and gather this information up, just pick up some numbers out the air. This information came from the city’s website.

Councilman Lester: And I’m not disputing that. The thing that I disputed Ms. Phelps is the gap. Making the jump that crime and people left Allendale. And when the population declined in Allendale went down, and there was a 500 and some odd percent decrease in crime, and then making the leap to correlate that to now, those people - - - those people, here we go with that again, or now - - - I’m in fear of those people, and there is nothing that you said or any empirical evidence that brought any of those folks from Ledbetter or Allendale to Pines Road. If you have some documentation that can show that people left Allendale or left Ledbetter Heights, and moved to the Pines Road, or moved to any of these places, or moved to Mr. Wimberly’s place, or moved to anywhere in West Shreveport, I will certainly entertain that, but you didn’t do that. You said you left a glaring gap in your argument, and advanced that gap as a reason for saying this is why I’m afraid. And I didn’t take offense to the fact that crime went down, cause it did. And I could say they got a hell of a councilman in District A, that’s why crime went down. But that’s not nearly the case. But for us to say that that happened and to take that and extrapolate and extend that to West Shreveport without any supporting documentation, that’s what I had a problem with.

Ms. Phelps: Economics. That’s what I used, that’s the driving factor.

Councilman Lester: I understand that, but here again Ms. Phelps - - -

Ms. Phelps: I’m not going to debate you on this issue, because you’re probably right. I can’t go out there and pick a guy out that used to live in Ledbetter Heights and say now he lives in Dan Wimberly’s project because of what I’ve been told, it’s been full for the last eight years or seven years, or however long it’s been there. No, I cannot say that. But I can say economics is what drives crime.

Councilman Lester: And I don’t doubt that and I don’t dispute that - - -

Councilman Shyne: Let me pause. Mrs. Phelps take your seat, he’s not your husband, so he’s not going to let you have the last word.

Councilman Lester: No, it’s not like that.

Councilman Shyne: Now your husband will let you do that, and I don’t blame him. Mr. Phelps, I don’t blame you hear. My wife gets the last word at home too. The last three or four words.

Councilman Lester: And listen, not to be out done, my does too. I mean lets keep it real.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Billy Wayne. You’re the cleanup man, but before you start, Chief, I want to thank you, no no, Chief Cochran, I want to thank you for what was back there. I was going to give the credit to the Mayor, but I found out it was you hear? I want to let you know I will remember that hear? That kindness, that act of kindness.

Mayor Glover: Is he a member of the Administration Mr. Shyne?

Councilman Shyne: I’m not going to go into that.

Mayor Glover: Until December 31, there’s a certain signature.

Councilman Shyne: That’s right, you sign his check.

Mr. Billy Wayne: (6144 Farrington Court) Congratulations to you, this governing body for your dedicated efforts toward making this city, the City of Shreveport, one of the greatest cities in the nation. Much of your positive vision has been due to your regard for the rights of every citizen. I hate Mr. Lester had to leave, because I was not going to say a couple of things. But I will say this, if he continues to read in the Book of Luke about that same child that was born in a manger, he would read nowhere, where that child says, “I came from a broken home, or I was a child of a single parent”, because this has no bearing upon housing, it has not bearing on economic development, it has no bearing upon those of us who are indeed products of a mother, and a father. This society has gone too far in ignoring those persons who were blessed to have mothers, fathers, and the children did what they were supposed to do in the home. This is by no means a reflection upon anybody. Because for 33 years, I sat in a classroom and watch people say poor little Johnny, he came from a single parent home, and there’s a child sitting there with a mother and a father, whose almost embarrassed to say I have two parents. We have to stop doing that for the sake of future generations. Now, I’m though with that. Now I come to you today, requesting your denial of SC-88-07, Greenwood Villa. So often you hear housing developers speak of economic development when we talk of projects of this nature, when in fact economic enhancement is what they seek. Economic development encompasses growth which not only considers housing, but skills, trade, jobs, and education to sustain this housing. Economic enhancement involves not growth, but a swelling which serves to benefit specific causes. We the citizens of West Shreveport have no problem with economic development which will better the growth of the communities. But we emphatically reject economic enhancement and the poisonous swelling which it can bring on. We have petitions totally more than 700 names of citizens requesting that this council let our combined voices be heard denying the economic enhancement of Greenwood Villa. Thank you.

Councilman Shyne: Wayne, I can’t believe it. That’s less than three minutes. Some took 20 to get their point across.

Mr. Wayne: In my old age, I’m getting better. I knew Gwen Phelps as Joyce Lawrence would give you all the demographics you need. We planned it this way.

Councilman Shyne: That’s what I call being a school teacher. Teach in three minutes, what it takes somebody 20.

Councilwoman Bowman: I know that we lost quite a few people that had come before us today because of the 3 ½ hour wait. But those who are in favor, Mr. Chairman, I would like to have them stand and then those who are in opposition. Would all of those who are in favor of overturning the MPC’s approval please stand. Okay, thank you very much. And for those who are for Mr. Wimberly’s project, will you please stand. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I move that we overturn the MPC’s approval.

Councilman Walford: We need to do it like an ordinance or - - -

Mr. Thompson: No, that’s fine.

SC-88-07: Property located on the north end of Danny R. Wimberley Drive, north of Greenwood Road, east of Pines Road (Westwood Neighborhood) (G/Bowman) Subdivision Request – No Ordinance Required.

Motion by Councilman Bowman, seconded by Councilmen Wooley and Webb to overturn the decision of the Metropolitan Planning Commission.

Councilwoman Bowman: I appreciate again, the time that the citizens of West Shreveport have spent on this. I applaud Mr. Wimberly for his efforts, and what he has been trying to do. But my position is the majority of the citizens who reside in and around that area contacted me, their Council Person, and my reply to them was I operate solely on your behalf. Government for the people, by the people, and the majority of the people contacted me, the majority of the people met and the majority of the people are here today as you can see. So, therefore my vote is for the citizens, the majority of the citizens that I represent in that area. Thank you.

Councilman Long: I have a question for Mr. Kirkland. Ms. Lawrence was very detailed in some of her reasons for opposing. Would you address any of those for my information?

Mr. Kirkland: Well the MPC public hearing was not about the financing, it was not about subsidized housing.

Councilman Long: Well I understand that part. But she spoke of some lot size issues, and some - - -

Mr. Kirkland: The lot sizes meet the ordinance requirements, and Mr. Wimberly, when he submitted his plats for approval of subdividing the land, met all the requirements of that district, which is a typical single family detached housing, 44 units. As he said, he didn’t ask for a single waiver, he could have in a number of areas, lot size and etc.

Councilman Long: So all the lot sizes are well within the guidelines?

Mr. Kirkland: Well within the requirements, and there was not a single request for waiver, variance or relief in any area.

Councilman Long: Okay.

Mr. Kirkland: And the part the Board voted on was just the subdivision request itself. Unfortunately, or fortunately however you want to look at it, issues such as how you finance the property or how you - - - who you go to, to get the loans, is not the issue that’s in front of the Board.

Councilman Webb: I’m going to support Councilwoman Bowman’s motion, but for somewhat of a different reason. I recently had a person make application at Louisiana Housing Finance Agency for a low income housing project in my district. And I went down to Baton Rouge to lobby against it, but my biggest problem is I don’t like the way the entire process is done. But once again, I think we’re always putting the cart before the horse. The developer goes down to Baton Rouge and is granted approval for money to develop something, before they even know exactly what they’re going to put up. I just feel that the local government, the MPC and then the City Council should approve these things before they even ask for the financing. Maybe that’s the wrong way to look at it, but I hope that in the near future, that our legislature look at getting the local governments involved in the process so that we can approve of a site before they can even get approval for the funding. And I just feel real strong about that. I feel like we’re being left out of the loop. And then once they get approved for funding, it’s like shame on us if we don’t approve the site plan. That’s basically my reason and I’m going to continue to do that as long as all that comes before the local government’s input and the citizens input. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Lester: First of all I want to apologize to Ms. Phelps and I want to apologize to Ms. Bowman and the other Council Members. Many times in doing what you do, you put so much time, effort and energy into some things, you kind of become emotionally invested in things. I still don’t agree with the logical argument that Ms. Phelps made for the same reasons I spoke of before. I don’t think that it’s a fair characterization of the people that live in Allendale or the people that live in Ledbetter Heights. And being trained, there’s a better way for me to have conveyed that. And I apologize to you and to your husband, and to anybody else that’s in the Chamber, because that was not professional, the emotion that I spent. So, I wanted to say that first to you before the day was over.

Ms. Phelps: Thank you.

Councilman Lester: One of the things that, one of the reasons Mr. Chairman, (this is on subject and off the subject at the same time), one of the reasons why I’m so adamant about what happens in Ledbetter Heights and Allendale is growing up in Shreveport, when my parents came from Holly Ridge in East Texas, they came to Allendale first. That’s where they established their residence. In fact before my parents got married, my mother, people say why do I have such an issue with shotgun houses, well my mother lived in a shotgun house in the 1800 block of Ford Street, because that’s all they had. Because back at that time, Mr. Chairman, it was not considered a good thing for a working woman to live by herself. So my Great Aunt had a friend and a church member, that’s how in fact we ended up at Mt. Canaan, because it was in close proximity in Allendale, and that’s where I’ve always gone to church. Anyway I’ve spent a lot of time, effort, skill and labor throughout my representation of District A to try to fix some of the issues and problems that we had in Allendale. Well, one of the things that’s easy for people to do in government is to just walk by and give up on scenarios. And I’ve never been that type of person. It bothers me that as a government, and I’m not saying that this Administration, because certainly this area was represented very ably by our Mayor, but despite his best efforts, in many instances, he was the lone voice crying in the wilderness up on the wall, like Nehemiah did and you know the first thing he did when he came back to his home city, is he cried. And after he cried, he petitioned the government, and after he petitioned the government, he picked up a handle. And while picking up a handle, he had to have a hammer in one hand and a sword in the other to fight some of his own folks sometimes in the rebuilding process. So, I said all that to say, there is a lot of good things that are going on in Allendale. A lot of the things that the average person doesn’t know about. Yes, people know about Shreveport/Bossier Community Renewal, and they’re doing an outstanding job. People don’t know about organizations like the People of Praise, that have taken and transformed that whole area of Yale and Walnut that are doing some tremendous things. They are building new houses, they’re repairing new houses, you’ve got developments like Mt. Canaan and Grace Project that are building houses on Austin Street, you’ve got the million dollar establishment of Galilee City with Rev. Jones and those groups. You’ve got the Milam Street Development Corporation with Rev. McClain, that has transformed the 1900 block of Milam Street, and even more than that, you’ve got the whole Total Commitment effort that a lot of people that live in Allendale have bought into and are trying to make the neighborhood better. It’s easy, it’s very easy when somebody’s down to kick them. It’s easy to forget about them, and that’s not something that I want to do. So, I’m very sensitive about that and I’m very protective of that because there are a lot of people who are working hard, senior citizens that are there working hard, that just want to see their neighborhoods better. And one of the things that I appreciate that this Administration has done, particularly with the T-Bone concept is we have spent a lot of money tearing a lot of those houses down. There are a lot of people who want to maintain those shotgun houses for economic reasons. For no other reason than that, and fought tooth and nail. So, it’s every battle, every step that we’ve taken in the progression of Allendale as we have hit rock bottom and started a trend up, it’s not been easy. And a lot of people drive by and they see things happening, they don’t see and our staff can tell you and Ms. Moore can tell you, they don’t see the emails at 1 and 2:00 in the morning, and at countless hours that the people in Community Development have been spending, and people like Mr. Wimberly. In fact yesterday, our Shreveport Redevelopment Authority meeting, there were no less than three non-profit groups that were buying five, nine, and ten lots in Allendale for redevelopment purposes. So, it’s a lot of people spending a lot of time looking at making something good happen in Allendale and you might not see the fruits of their labor, but it’s coming and I’m very sensitive to that. Now, I needed to say that. To the issue at hand. People would much rather people be homeowners. I think that’s an easy thing to say. But the reality of it is everybody can’t afford to be a homeowner. Some people choose not to be. You know I hear when we’re having these discussions, we say well people are renting and there’s crime, but as I pass down Clyde Fant, there are some multi-million dollar places, Champion Lake and things of that nature that come to mind that are strictly rental. Townhouse and apartments that people are spending $1-1,200 a month to live in, and no one type cast them because they live in an apartment complex. So for us to type cast somebody because they’re renting, I think that’s a little unfair. Again, people make choices. One of the other things that I was disappointed by some of the comments that I heard, and some of the calls that I fielded on my voice mail and what have you, were people saying that this is government subsidized housing, and that has a stigmatism. Now first of all, let say it was. Okay, does that mean that you’re less of a person because you live in a government subsidized house? I don’t think so. Does that mean that that person has less value? No. There are some people that need help. But this is not that scenario. And I think that the ladies that have come before them at this meeting have been people that have success stories, and my heart goes out to them because they were high, and life’s changes and circumstances put them in a scenario where they needed help. But they didn’t stop. They kept working, they’ve educated their children, they’ve put their children through high school or college or whatever and they’re moving forward. At the end of the day, what is before this Council is not a referendum on whether or not you like, appreciate or believe in tax credit or rental housing. The only issue that is before this Council is whether or not the subdivision request that was placed before the MPC by Mr. Wimberly’s organization met the guidelines. The MPC looked at it and they decided that it did, and they moved forward. But for an appeal, this would have handled administratively and we would never have heard from it. So, everyone’s going to vote the way they need to vote, and I don’t have a problem with that, but I just think that as we discuss these issues, much like we had earlier on in the Council Meeting with the folks from Calvary, we separate, and I guess I’m stuck on the Biblical thing Mr. Chair, the weak from the (inaudible). This is one issue whether you like tax credit housing or what have you, the issue before the Council is whether or not the subdivision met the guidelines. And I think that - - -

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Lester, I was about to say your 25 minutes is up, but why don’t we vote on this and we’ll let them go.

Councilman Lester: Mr. Chairman, with all due respect, I’m almost through with my comments, I really would appreciate you at least letting me get to the tail end of my comments. I do appreciate that. I know I can be (inaudible) Baptist, and I said that at the beginning, I know I can be long winded. But as the son of a minister, I think you more than anybody can understand that. Okay, having said that, I just think that the issue that is before the Council is the whether or not the subdivision request met the guidelines of the MPC. Councilman Long asked Mr. Kirkland whether or not it did. He said it did, and I don’t think we have a choice. And I think for us to deny the subdivision request when it met the guidelines, I think it’s probably arbitrary and capricious. So, thank you for allowing me the chance to state my case. Again Ms. Phelps and Mr. Phelps, I apologize for my outburst. People of Allendale know that I love them, and I’m always going to be working for them because somebody has to. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Shyne: And I want to thank y’all for sitting there so patiently because I know if you were in church, you would have gotten up and tipped out. But I appreciate you all not tipping out. I think we have a couple of remarks from Councilwoman Bowman and then we’re going to take a vote on this.

Councilwoman Bowman: I do want to make one comment Mr. Chairman. When Ms. Phelps stood up, and she even mentioned Queensborough. I heard that. I didn’t get angry with you. Because guess what I live in Queensborough. Not only do I represent Queensborough, I live there. My house is paid for. But I chose to live there. It’s a difference. I stayed in so many others, those who moved in that community 30 some years ago when I did, they moved away. They live out in other areas. Which was fine. That was their choice. But I chose to stay there to make it better. That’s why I’m there now.

Councilman Long: Just like Councilman Long, he lived in Queensborough, but he moved out.

Councilwoman Bowman: I thank Mr. Chairman for that. But I did. I had so many, so very many professional people that lived in that neighborhood. Yes, it did go down, but I am there along with others in my community. We have good things too that we can talk about. Our neighborhood association, and other things. We have problems. We have some major issues over there. But we’re working on them. We’re working them out. I don’t get angry anymore when people talk about it, because I know what the end result would be, and I’m not going to use this Council to throw out my frustrations anyway. My job is to come here and represent the citizens of District G. I’m going to do that, and I’m going to do it well. And I’m going to try and work as best I can with my fellow Council Members and others if they allow me to. I’m going to get off of this, but I do appreciate my citizens for coming out, and we all are entitled to our own opinions. Thank you.

Councilman Wooley: Thank you Mr. Chairman. I’m going to be real brief. I just wanted to say I will be joining Councilwoman Bowman supporting the residents of West Shreveport Alliance. It’s important to me that we do take in deep consideration that those who have invested their time, money and life in this neighborhood, and that is the reason of my decision today.

Motion to overturn the decision of the Metropolitan Planning Commission is approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 4. Nays: Councilmen Lester, Walford, and Long. 3.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Thompson, I’ll let you make the announcement.

Mr. Thompson: There are four votes “FOR” and three “OPPOSED”.

Councilman Shyne: That means what?

Mr. Thompson: That means that the MPC’s decision has been overturned.

Councilman Shyne: I wanted Mr. Thompson to say it first, but that means that the MPC’s decision has been overturned. We’re going to pause for two minutes, and it will give you all a chance to - - - and I’m sorry for all of the pain that we might have inflicted upon you all. But we appreciate it and we’re going to give you all a chance to leave the Chamber at this time.

RECESS: 8:08 p.m. until 8:17 pm.

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, I think the motion was to suspend the rules for two cases, and I understand there are two additional cases where people are still waiting to speak. You may need a motion to suspend the rules.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilmen Wooley and Webb to suspend the rules to hear the other three zoning cases. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 6. Nays: None. Out of the Chamber: Councilman Lester. 1.

Councilman Shyne: We’re looking at C-93-07?

Councilmen Walford and Bowman: No, we’ve done that one. BAC-108-07.

Councilman Shyne: That’s Mr. Long. Mike?

Mr. Thompson: Joe, I believe there are people here to speak.

Ms. Kendra Meiki: (6607 Line Ave) We have over 300 students ranging in age from 3-17, coming in and out of the dance studio on a regular basis. And up until last weekend, we would have had a cast of over 100 children involved in the local production of the Nutcracker. We’re a little concerned about the traffic that’s going to be coming through, and also the high alcohol content being served with no food. Also, it would only take one child being hit by a car, or as a concerned parent of a 4 year old who also dances at this studio, I would not feel safe with my child being within 30 feet of a high alcohol content lounge. So, I just wanted to express my concern, and I do represent over 300 students at my school and the concern that parents do have as well.

Councilman Webb: How long have you been there at this particular establishment.

Ms. Meiki: We’ve been there over three years. An unfortunately if this does move in, we probably will have to find another place to move. And we didn’t even know about this until the very last minute because it was actually (inaudible) real estate that filed the appeal on this, so we actually are catching the tail end.

Councilman Webb: Where are you in proximity of Tower?

Ms. Meiki: We are the suite that’s next door.

Councilman Webb: Towards the front?

Ms. Meiki: Towards the back.

Councilman Long: What are you typical operating hours?

Ms. Meiki: We’re actually open at 9:00 a.m. every morning. But there are students that arrive as early as 1:00, and some evenings we do not get out of there until 9:30. So, I was noticing on here that we’re not a typical school, but we are dance educators, and like I said, the age range for these kids is from ages 3-17.

Councilman Long: Have you had any problems with any of the other restaurants or bar establishments that are there now?

Ms. Meiki: No, we have not, but on a regular basis on Saturday mornings, we do arrive and have to pick up the beer bottles that are left there before our children come to classes.

Councilman Long: Have you complained to your landlord about that?

Ms. Meiki: On numerous occasions, yes.

Ms. Carl Taylor: ( I’m here as a representative of the Shreveport Metropolitan Ballet. I serve on the Board of Directors, and also as their Treasurer. And as Mrs. Meiki pointed out, we really just learned of this, I know we haven’t met the normal protocol to contact Councilman Long. We’re having to start in kinda at the last minute, and scrambling to see what we can do to stop this lounge from coming in. The Shreveport Metropolitan Ballet has a company of approximately 50 girls. And while the 3 year olds obviously are not taking dance classes everyday, these young ladies take dance classes, in fact the older ones actually get P.E. credit. They leave school early, and they arrive at the studio maybe around 1-2:00 and many times, are there as Mrs. Meiki said, until late at night til 9. Understand these are young ladies that are in leotards and tights, and this is a very close - - - I mean we’re talking where the Sea Blue Restaurant used to exist. And that’s a very, very short strip center, and the Dance Academy is at the other end, the only thing that would separate the Dance Academy from that location is Tower Real Estate. And so we respectfully ask that you understand why we are so late. Had we known, we would have been at the MPC, we would have been at the Zoning, but we just discovered this. We’ve been in rehearsals for Nutcracker. In fact Councilman Lester’s daughter was in that production, and also we feel like we’re not a public school that’s doing your regular education, it’s definitely a school. And that perhaps we could get a legal opinion as to whether or not a studio that is teaching 300 students, should get the same consideration of any organization that has that many children on their location for that many hours a day. This lounge would be open from 6:00 a.m. till 2:00 a.m. with only four hours during the day that it is closed. And this is just not appropriate to expose our children to this. The Chianti Restaurant that’s right next door, you asked about the others, that’s a very upscale restaurant. I’ve seen the clientele that they have, it’s really not a problem. People don’t go there to get drunk. Okay? Lounges is where people go to - - - they get drunk because there’s not food served. And again, I want to, especially Councilman Long, we understand we haven’t taken the normal steps to try to defeat this, but understand that we’re doing the best that we could based on the fact that we just learned of this.

Councilman Long: I was going to comment on this. I appreciate your thoughts on this, but I don’t think that a lounge is going to be operating at 6:00 a.m. Mr. Echols is going to get up and explain that. But what I perceive to be happening is the operating hours, there be some minor overlay, but not what you’re thinking about, but again, I’ll let him address that at the time it comes up.

Councilman Shyne: And Ms. Taylor, I would hope that people wouldn’t be going to a lounge to get drunk. I mean, I go sometimes myself, and I would hope that Ms. Bowman wouldn’t look at me and say I’m going there to get drunk. I might be going to have a little fun Mr. Mayor, and don’t think I’m so old that I can’t go out and have a little fun. I’ve heard you and Councilman Lester refer to (inaudible) at the time, but I don’t really be going to get drunk. But I appreciate you coming down, and we appreciate your remarks. We have Quinn Echols, what is the pleasure of the Council?

Mayor Glover: Mr. Chairman, do you mean the world famous and internationally renowned Quinn Echols?

Councilman Shyne: Oh, is that - - - ? Wait just a minute. Is this the (inaudible) that we hear on the radio?

Ms. Johnson: Excuse me. Mr. Shyne, would you vote please?

Councilman Shyne: Oh. I was so stunned, until didn’t have a chance to vote, but Mr. Mayor, I appreciate you bringing that to our attention.

Mayor Glover: Mr. Shyne, I was just curious whose been manning the evening airways? We know that more than a few hours that Mr. Echols has been here with us. So I went in back looking for a radio, but I couldn’t find one so. I’m just wondering what all the folks out there who trust the evening drive home to. You probably have people stranded all over Shreveport. Trying to make it home without their dose of (inaudible), so I’m glad he’s here with us today, he serves great justice by gracing us with his presence. And he has with him Mr. Rodmetrius Woodson as well whose in the audience Mr. Shyne and Members of the Council. And I want to say this Mr. Shyne, there are very few people I’m able to use a world famous “Joe Shyneism” with. And that Shyneism being “I raised this young man”. But I can certainly say that and say it very proudly about one Rodmetrius Woodson, who is in the audience today with Mr. Echols.

Councilman Shyne: I’m glad to hear him say that, because I say that about him a lot. How I helped raise him. I knew his mom and daddy.

Councilman Lester: Well Joe by extension, you raised him. Cause if you raised Cedric, and Cedric raised him, then you raised him.

Councilman Shyne: Wait a minute, I’m not that old.

Mayor Glover: Rod, say hello to your grandfather.

Mr. Quinn Echols: 207 Fountainbleu) First off, good evening to the Councilmen as well as my (inaudible). To answer your question, this has been indeed a tedious day to say the least. I had no idea and I must compliment you. I have such a new found respect for what happens in City Government. I think I thought I knew, but no. After today, just call me if you every need an endorsement on that. I am the Program Director at KDKS and KVTT, a product of Access One Communications here locally in Shreveport, LA. The proposed site that we were speaking of in the Spring Lake Mall previously was for those of you who are not aware, was the Sea Grille, and indeed had been given the allowance of a liquor permit at that location. All we’re doing is proposing the exact same thing. First off, to give you just a little run down of what we’re talking about, we’re proposing a very upscale (inaudible) R&B/Jazz lounge. This environment would give an opportunity of diversity to the community. Also some of the amenities it would have would be valet parking, very similar to that of Chianti’s that exist currently as well as a secured security environment as far as the parking situation there as well. The target demo is going to be very, very adult, 30 and up. Basically the location, once again will be locally owned and provide jobs, and a tax base revenue that obviously is there on Line Avenue with a number of businesses currently. As far as the operation hours, there is no way we would propose to be open from 6:00 a.m. until 2:00 a.m. the next day, cause I have to work. But it actually would be from 5:00 in the evening till 2:00 a.m. So, you know of a happy hour situation, (inaudible) of one of which that you spoke about. As far as your concern - - - and I’m sorry you didn’t get a chance to come to the MPC meeting, but I addressed a young lady who was there representing (inaudible), and I shared with her, you know first off, I’m a parent too. So I have the same types of concern. So by no means, and plus I guess you found out today, I’m kinda in the public eye a little bit, so I cannot afford to put myself of a business of any kind or our community in jeopardy in any kind of way. There are too many ramifications for that, that I personally would have to be responsible for. So, going into any situation I try my best to think twice, three, four, five times, and sometimes if it gets to that point, you stop and you hold up a minute, something that Councilman Shyne was talking about earlier about taking your time. So this has been very well thought out. To give you some information, we’ve actually been discussing this since October. So, this didn’t happen over the last 30 days. And a lot of questions have been asked. I have monitored the area. I would be more than happy to sit down with you ladies and talk to about some things to try to help out to make sure that we become a good neighbor. I’ve tried to make sure and look at some things to make sure that at the end of the day you’ll be able to see that we’re adding value to the area. And you know that you brought up beer bottles and things of that nature. Well I’m not aware of that, but if indeed that is there, I assure you that we will be part of the effort to clean that up. Because I just don’t do business that way. I don’t have - - - . To give you a little bit of my background, as some of these people know, I’ve been very, very blessed in Shreveport. I’ve been in to broadcasting business here for around about 15 years, that being radio and T.V. as well. I’ve done a number of concerts, music and social events. Some of you are aware of that from the Strand Theatre, to the CenturyTel, Municipal Auditorium, the Civic Theatre. A number of events, civic events. I’m on the planning committee for the entertainment for the Red River Revel here locally. I’m also on the entertainment committee for the “Let the Good Times Roll Fest”, those of you that are aware of that, and in ’05, I was presented by the Lt. Governor, Mitch Landrieu an award for my promotions effort, bringing entertainment to the area that particular evening, and just so happened I was presented that proclamation by our now honorable Mayor. So, first off

Councilman Shyne: I wish you had kinda held off on that.

Mr. Echols: Well it’s true, and I’m proud about that. You know I want to be a good neighbor and a good citizen.

Mayor Glover: Mr. Echols, he’s reminding you of that because I don’t have a vote in this process.

Mr. Echols: Oh yeah, I understand. So, I do share your same concerns. I do understand so that’s pretty much what it’s about. If you have any questions, I’d be more than happy to answer. I appreciate the opportunity, and I want to than the MPC and the Zoning Board to get us this far in the endeavor itself.

Councilman Shyne: Quinn, I think we have one question from the Council.

Councilman Long: I just want to ask a couple of questions. Looking at the stipulations of our original approval, you plan on having valet parking there from 5:00 on?

Mr. Echols: Yes sir.

Councilman Long: Okay, and just for the sake that everybody knows, this approval, the reason approval was for 18 months only. Can you explain why? I might get Charles to explain that in a minute. But is it alright to bring Charles up for a minute?

Councilman Shyne: Anything you would like.

Councilman Long: Charles could you explain a little bit about the background?

Mr. Kirkland: (Inaudible) backdrop. The owner of the property for these folks are tenants and was the one who signed this application. And so he appeared to and I’m not going to try to be callus about this, but he appeared to have taken into account (inaudible), his tenants. And all we could surmise is that he by endorsing Mr. Echol’s application and signing it, is that he fully agreed with it. The other backdrop is that the Sea Grille I think, you may have gone there, they were probably one of the most popular places to go get a drink at 5:00. For two or three years, the paparazzi and the Who’s Who, and so they really must have experienced (and Tower Real Estate, and Bill was at the meeting), but again the Board was a little bit surprised that there were a few folks, tenants who were opposed, but we asked the owner directly and he said “NO”, he’s happy about it. In fact he’s got an item on our agenda tomorrow for a bar out in front of his new bar of an open area bar, and frankly we were concerned that what are you going to do with your customer base at Chianti, because you appear to be moving more toward a part time operation. But no reflection whatsoever on Mr. Echols and his application, he has obviously said he would do whatever. The 18 months was to really put a limited trial on it, there was some opposition, just to see if some of the parking and/or other issues become a problem. We don’t think - - - there’s plenty of parking in the back, but as you know, there’s very little in the front. But they should be able to easily handle the parking and all that. And then if it does - - - plus we also have this issue of this other bar that we’ll be looking at tomorrow. It’s that open air bar, which we’re not sure how that’ll operate.

Councilman Long: So he just wants to serve drinks out there in the patio, right?

Mr. Kirkland: Yeah, right. So, anyway does that answer your question?

Councilman Long: Yeah, I’m just trying to get a better understanding. Because I’ll be honest with you, like y’all, this thing just kinda snuck up on me a little bit, and I’m just trying to understand the dynamics of about who and why and where.

Mr. Kirkland: Well you know the location of this one is again, we don’t recall any complaints. Now the police may have had some on the secret.

Councilman Long: On the secret, I’m not aware of any.

Mr. Kirkland: We talked to Julie and her husband that ran it, and it was about as wide open, it was almost more of a bar than it was a (inaudible). But regardless you know to the south is the Sonic, and across the street vacant, hopefully soon to be filled, (inaudible) pharmaceutical site. We weren’t aware of any neighborhood issues, residential, that would really upset anybody. Ernie Turner, the owner down to the north, he was there in opposition, but I think he (inaudible) might somehow, problems might spill over, but again we had a property owner who said ‘hey, I’ve got no problem, and in fact I’m supporting all of this.’ And with no really strong neighborhood issues, it looked like Mr. Echols had a good proposition.

Councilman Long: It seems to be that the appeal was just sort of like a last minute after the fact kinda thing. I mean, I guess I don’t know.

Mr. Kirkland: And it does, but it’s almost like - - - normally the person who would care the most about opposition from the tenants would be the owner of the property. And so that big question mark was hanging there. But (inaudible) was okay with it, and the Board was fine with it. So Mr. Echols presented a good plan, and didn’t appear to be a problem.

Councilman Long: Well thank you I appreciate that.

Councilman Shyne: What is your pleasure?

Councilman Long: Well is there anybody else who wanted to speak on this matter in the audience?

Councilman Shyne: We only had two.

Ms. Christine Harris: (445 Forest) I have two students at the Dance Center. My concern is the Happy Hour. Between the hours of 4:30 and 6:30-7:00, there are a huge number of little girls darting out into the parking lot, and that is my primary concern. And then there’s always the concern of the older girls that are there later when the patrons have been there for an extended period of time. But the parking that they are talking about in the back is where all the Ballet Moms are parking and where all the little girls are running straight out to cars. You know you can’t always contain them as well as we have here for the past five hours when they’re fresh out of a dance class. And that really is my concern is the traffic and the little girls getting hit in the parking lot, and people coming out of Happy Hour. I don’t know how much, and we don’t carry a whole lot of weight against a radio personality, but we do have a large number of little girls that their safety is at stake. That’s what I wanted to say.

Mayor Glover: Mr. Chairman, always know that little girls count. No question.

Councilman Shyne: And I think she knows that. Let me ask Quinn to come back up for just a minute. Not really a minute Quinn. Do you plan to have any kind of security or any kind of monitoring system out in the parking lot?

Mr. Echols: Yes sir. I thought I made mention of that a moment ago. It’s stipulated actually in my lease that I am to have security monitoring the parking lot during hours of operation at all times. So, that’s why I shared that with them earlier that indeed two things are going to happen. They were going to monitor it not only for my business, but for everybody’s business just to be a good neighbor. And then two as far as the reference to like I say, if there are any beer bottles, just to keep it a good environment, I just want to make sure that we do. So yes in answer to your question.

Councilman Shyne: Yeah, I was about to say it would be to your advantage to make sure that the beer bottles or whatever is not there.

Councilman Lester: No question for Quinn. I just wanted to make a brief comment and I’m going to listen to what Councilman Long has to say. We’ve been on a roll today.

Councilman Shyne: We’ve been on a long one.

Councilman Lester: A long one and it’s not over. The people coming to the lounge aren’t going to hurt the girls in the tights. The people in the lounge are not going to run up and grab the little girls in the tights. Now having said that, I’m still going to vote no, and I understand where Councilman Long is coming from, but that’s not going to happen. You’ve already got a restaurant, Chianti’s there that serves alcohol. They have a happy hour. Do I think there needs to be some safeguards? Sure. Do I think that we need to deal with the parking issue and things of that nature? Sure. But to somehow say that the people in the lounge are going to mess with the little girls in the tights? No. And just for what it’s worth, and this is not to the folks at the Ballet studio, but just for the people that signed the petition particularly as it speaks to “immediately south of this location is one of Shreveport’s low income, high crime areas, while it can be argued that residents of this area would not be patrons of this lounge, it can easily be anticipated that parking lot auto thievery, business break-ins, plus drug deals outside the premises will occur. Violence will soon follow. . . . . . . it comes with the territory”. I grew up in that neighborhood, just immediately south. I mean literally throwing a rock. I mean again, we’ve got some growing up to do in Shreveport Mr. Mayor if we’re going to be The Next Great City of The South. And we can’t be so concerned and let our fears rule our better judgement in saying things about folks that just really aren’t true. I mean if thievery and break-ins and drug deals were an issue, then that would happen because drug dealers have money, and they can go to Chianti’s if they want to. But to say that Mr. Echols is going to have a business that is going to market to the drug dealers, I mean I don’t understand how he would market his business to the drug dealers in the community. That’s a little troubling, but I’m still supportive, because at the end of the day, I mean people have seen I guess and I’m going to apologize again, but Mr. Shyne the passion comes out of me when I’m dealing with my folks, but the only thing that brings even more of a rise, Mr. Mayor hit the nail on the head, little girls do count. And my daughter is part of it. So, if you saw the Allendale outburst - - -

Councilman Shyne: Please don’t.

Councilman Lester: The little girl outburst is like on the top of this building. So, thank you Mr. Chairman.

Councilman Shyne: Don’t y’all make him have another outburst, I don’t think we could stand it.

Councilman Long: Mr. Chairman, I’ll tell you what I’d like to do at this time. I’d like to delay this appeal for a couple of weeks, until our next meeting.

Councilman Lester: If that’s a motion, I’ll give you a second.

Councilman Long: And can I explain that? Quite frankly what I’d like to do is I’d like to get Mr. Echols and the Dance group and all the other tenants in that immediate area, I’d like to get them together one last time and make sure that we can try to address some of these issues. And I think the best time to do it is now, when we got everybody kinda at the table.

Councilman Shyne: It’s your district.

Councilman Long: That’s right, and I appreciate your support to do that, and that’s what I’d like to do is bring everybody together and lets talk about it some more.

BAC-108-07: Property located within Springlake Mall (C/Long)

Motion by Councilman Long, seconded by Councilman Lester to postpone until the next meeting. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, I think we’re at BAC-111-07.

Councilman Shyne: That’s in my district and I believe we have a couple of people here to speak.

Mr. Aldof Adam: (P.O. Box 572495) I bought the property that is the subject of this appeal. I have a tenant who will be here to speak for himself. Some of my (inaudible) probably you don’t know (inaudible), and for that I apologize if there is any duplication. This property that I bought was a closed down Circle K store which closed down approximately 11 months ago. We bought it about three months ago. Before it closed down, it had a variance. It was operating 24 hours, and it had a low content package beer application. That’s exactly what we are applying for. I’m told that in the last meeting, there were two objections to our application. One was from an individual who did not live in that neighborhood, and the other one was from an individual who was objecting only to the hours of operation. If the hours of operation is a sticking point here, I will withdraw or the tenant will withdraw the requirement or the request for 24 hour operation, even though we feel that makes the property more secure, having been lit the whole time, having been lit the whole night. I don’t know if Councilwoman is just stretching, or wanting to ask me a question. I’m sorry, I saw you raise your hand and I wasn’t sure if you wanted me to stop.

Councilman Shyne: I think when it’s time for you to stop, you look directly at me and I’ll say STOP.

Mr. Adam: Thank you. So, as I say all we’re wanting is exactly the same, what was happening there. If it is a sticking point, we will agree to a variance of midnight for closing. And even if that’s a problem, and if you don’t want to put us on a probationary period, we’ll even leave at 10:00 p.m. So, it does handicap us in the economical sense, but if that’s what it has to be, that’s what it has to be. And just know why I’m here to object on the beer issue, the low content package beer, it’s not a problem of selling or not selling beer. Obviously, we need to sell beer to have a complete package. Even if the Council had objected to us from selling milk, I would be here right a way for the same reason. The reason is, if someone is wanting to buy chips, nuts and beer, he will go where he can also buy the beer, chips and nut. He’s not going to come to our place, buy the chips and the nuts and go somewhere else. Similarly, if we were not allowed to sell milk, we would object and object in the same manner. If someone wants to buy bread and milk, he’s not going to come to our place to buy the bread and the eggs, and go somewhere else to buy the milk. We’re not wanting liquor variance, we don’t want to sell liquor. We want to sell the minimum items which we can sell, which is beer. And that’s basically what it is. I just want to wrap it up with one last thing. Obviously, I do not live in Shreveport, and the minute the Mayor has a plan together, there is no reason why I should not be able to move here, however, I would like to feel that the interest of someone who might be outside the community also weighs, and the economical impact is weighed. Circle K is a Texas corporation. It was selling this property, they did not want to run it anymore. We bought it. We want to run it. We would like it to be an ongoing business and would like you to overturn the ruling. I brought 300 signatures with me. I think there are 300, I may be off by a bit. I don’t know whose here in objection. If there is someone, I would like to get another minute to rebut on it. And that’s our position on this issue.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Adam, I’d like for you to move to Shreveport, but I wouldn’t like for you to move to Shreveport because you’re able to sell alcohol at that particular store location. Hold it, this is not a rebuttal, you and I are not in debate right now. I’m talking and it’s your time to listen. I was glad and other people were glad that the store closed. It was a thorn in my side and it was a thorn in the side of other people who live in that neighborhood. I think the people closed because that area got so bad. I got sick and tired of getting up driving, and the Chief of Police is here. I thought I was going to get shot sometimes. Trying to play police. I’d be glad for you to come over here and sell some milk. Now if somebody’s got some opposition against you selling some milk, that’s not going to be a problem. If it’s going to put you to a disadvantage because you can’t sell beer or alcohol in there, I would advise you to sell that property to somebody else. We have enough places in our neighborhoods that are joined to our neighborhoods to sell liquor already. We don’t need anymore liquor in our neighborhoods. If you want to come in and sell milk, if you want to come in and sell chips, well and good. If you want to come in and sell bread and eggs, well and good. I was on the Council before the Mayor. I don’t see how I got here before he did, cause he goes way back. But there was one thing that was always on my platform. I was going to make sure that we cut out some of the alcohol from the inner city neighborhoods. I’d like for you to move to Shreveport and start a business. I sure don’t want you to move in my district and start selling alcohol. Whether it’s low content or whether it’s high content, or it’s middle content, or whether you know whatever names you want to give it. I appreciate you coming down, I hope you understand how I feel. We’re trying to do our best to clean up that area in there and clean up that neighborhood in there and give it a new quality of life. We’re trying to bring a new culture into our inner city neighborhoods. And I don’t believe it contains selling alcohol. And if it does then we’re going to look at this new culture that we’ve got coming. Mr. Adams, we love you, but we don’t need anymore in our inner city neighborhoods. I appreciate you. Thank you sir.

Councilman Webb: Mr. Adam, are you aware of the history of this particular piece of property.

Mr. Adam: From what I got from Circle K and from what I got from talking to the Zoning Commission before I bought the property, other than that no sir.

Councilman Webb: Before you bought the property?

Mr. Adam: Yes, I talked to Circle K.

Councilman Webb: Did you consider making the final purchase contingent on the approval of the zoning?

Mr. Adam: When my representative talked to the zoning committee or zoning people, the conclusion that I got from them was that since it already was operating that way, it should not be a problem at all. Nothing is changing. And my understanding was that Circle K was not closed down by any regulatory board. They closed down because they wanted to close down, and only then did I buy that property. That was my assumption. And I do feel like I did my due diligence on that.

Councilman Webb: If your zoning is denied, are you intending to open it up just to sell groceries, or - - -?

Mr. Adam: Obviously I’m stuck with the property now. I don’t know what my recourse would be after the ruling by this panel. We will evaluate that, but I have to keep the property going somehow. Obviously (inaudible) will change. I really don’t know. And I don’t want to mislead the Council in any way. I don’t know. But the chances are that we will open. The question is can we stay open. That’s the issue. If I may, my understanding and I’m not very detailed in it, but right now, almost the whole neighborhood has to cross Haynes Street to buy anything. There is no store in that immediate neighborhood on this side of Haynes Street. I may be wrong. Councilman probably knows more because it’s apparently his district.

Councilman Shyne: If we have not more questions - - - are you the only speaker, or do you have somebody else that wants to speak?

Mr. Adam: I believe the person who - - - oh no, he’s already giving up Judge, so I think I’m the only speaker.

Councilman Shyne: Okay Mr. Thompson, I believe the correct motion would be to uphold the ruling of the MPC.

Mr. Thompson: The board voted 6-0 to deny the application.

Councilman Shyne: Right. So, my motion would be to uphold the denial, and I would ask for a “YES” vote.

BAC-111-07: Property located on the southwest corner of Midway Street and Rightway. (F/Shyne)

Motion by Councilman Shyne, seconded by Councilman Bowman to uphold the decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals, and deny the application. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Thompson, would you give the results of the vote?

Mr. Thompson: The vote is 7-0 to uphold the decision of the ZBA to deny the application

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Adam, we would appreciate it if you open it as a grocery store, but I grew up with stores being opened as a grocery stores, but we just have to make a stand, and we just gotta get alcohol out of our inner city neighborhoods. It’s just not - - - I’m sorry, but it’s just not good. It’s not good for the neighborhood, it’s just not good for this city to become The Next Great City of The South. But we would hope that you would open it up as a - - - I’m not asking you to come back up, I’m just making some statements to you. You want a clarification on the ruling? The ruling is that you will not be allowed to sell alcohol.

Mr. Adam: What about the hours?

Councilman Shyne: Is that on there Mr. Thompson?

Councilman Lester: Whatever the ruling was it was overturned. So, if they denied it.

Councilman Shyne: Charles do you remember what it was?

Mr. Kirkland: (Inaudible)

Mr. Thompson: The motion covers both.

Councilman Shyne: Yeah, the motion covers both, so Mr. Adam, I hope you understand we’re trying to bring a new culture into our inner city neighborhood, and we don’t mind you coming in as a business man, but we don’t want you to bring in alcohol, whether it’s low content, high content. That’s in case you might have some other investors from Houston that want to come and invest here in Shreveport. We’re glad for them to come, but not to come looking to sell alcohol in our inner city neighborhoods. We just doing our best to try to clean it up. And I’ve been working at this for a long time, and other members of the Council have been working at this for a long time. And we love you and we appreciate what you’re doing. And when you open up, I’ll stop by sometimes to see how you coming along, and sometimes I have a tendency just park on the parking lot, just to see what’s going on. Thank you sir. God bless you. Okay Mr. Thompson, I believe we’re ready to do what at this point? Move back into - - -

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, I think there are some other people waiting to speak, I don’t know whether the Council wants to hear all of the people who’ve been waiting.

Councilman Walford: Mr. Chairman, I think I had made a subsequent motion later, and we went out and told the folks that they would get their opportunity to speak.

Councilman Shyne: Okay, they are here to speak. I’m sorry, I didn’t have anything before me. You all excuse me.

Ms. Paula Ocon: (6422 Faust Drive) I am the Neighborhood Watch Captain, also the President of Broadview Subdivision. The Townsends came up here November 13^th. They made a lot of accusations.

Councilman Shyne: Just a minute. Ms. Ocon, we would appreciate it if you would not call people by name, you can say some citizens or some individuals or my neighborhood

Ms. Ocon: Okay, well the called me by name.

Councilman Shyne: From my area or my neighborhood, cause they are not here and we don’t - - -

Ms. Ocon: I wasn’t here either sir, but they were and they called me by name.

Councilman Shyne: We don’t generally do that.

Ms. Ocon: Oh, I’m not, I’m just stating the facts. Okay, there were some accusations that were not true. They stated that several things. They don’t know how I became a neighborhood watch captain. I was voted in, and there are witnesses here to testify if they need to. I was voted in to be President of Broadview Subdivision. They stated that I’ve run people off the road. My husband and others have pulled guns on people. They stated that we threatened to burn people’s houses down. They stated quite a few things. They stated that I asked people to come out in the street and fight. However, one of their neighbors asked me to come out in the street to fight. That’s a fact, no hearsay. And pretty much what they said is all what they’ve been told by a handful of people that don’t like our neighborhood watch. Of course those handful of people have had difficulty with the law themselves. The other calls herself a neighborhood watch captain. She works all day. Nobody can call her. There’s 70% of the neighborhood that calls on us for our help. And they get it. It was said that I, by them this time, that we drive around the streets and blocks, ride our bikes and we walk. Yeah, we do. We watch out for our people, we watch out for our neighborhood. Some call it patrolling, we call it watching out for our neighborhood. All I’ve heard is lets take back our neighborhoods. That’s what we’re doing. We’re getting the drugs and the crime out. They stated that there wasn’t any crime in the neighborhood. Well, there’s plenty, and there’s still some there. But these are the facts. Arrested for cocaine, theft, marijuana charges, meth with a gun, counterfeit $100 bills, theft, illegal possession of stolen things. He’s been here quite a few times. His brother, criminal property damage. Here it is right here in our neighborhood. Proof, not hearsay. One of the Council Members came out to our subdivision. He stated a lot of things, he was going on hearsay. He stated that I passed by him driving 40-50 miles per hour, four or five times. That never happened. That’s a fact. I’ve got proof, three witnesses, plus video tape. He also stated that I leaned on his truck, and he told me that I didn’t have permission to lean on his truck. I never leaned on his truck, and he never told me not to. And I do have proof. Video tapes. I was followed by four ladies and a Councilman going down Faust Drive. They stopped in front of my home. They were behind me, I wouldn’t stop in front of my home, I wouldn’t pull up to my drive way. I went down the street and stopped and looked back. When I saw them coming at me, I decided I could go home. The ladies passes by, and may I add one of the ladies wanted to put a peace bond on me. If she was so afraid of me, I don’t know why she felt she had to stop in front of my house with three other ladies that say they are afraid of me. The Councilman stopped in front of my house as well. But when I pulled in the driveway, the ladies went back by. I did ask the Councilman, I flagged him down, I asked him what he needed. And he told me I could park anywhere I wanted to park. That’ wasn’t the question I had asked him. I thought they were honestly wanting to talk to me, being the other ladies were trying to flag me down. This Councilman also stated that I was grinning like I might have something wrong with me up here. I don’t know how anybody can make that comment unless they’re a doctor. I don’t even know how anybody can make a comment on how fast somebody’s driving unless they have a radar. But I do have Video tapes, and I do have witnesses. And if anybody’s getting railroaded, I’m getting threatened, I’ve been harassed, you name it, I’ve been through it. I still keep hanging on. Okay, to make a long story short, I have God on my side and he knows the truth, and so do the witnesses. And so do the video tapes. I do have letters here for the Council Members to read from our neighborhood, because they were in this meeting, it was said that I was intimidating people. Well here’s some letters from the people who know how to tell the truth. Thank your for your time. Do I leave them here or give them to y’all. The Mayor has been to our house, and he’s been to our meetings. Mr. Webb, Councilman Webb, you’ve been to our house, you’ve been to our meetings. Councilman Lester has. Our meetings are outstanding, they’re great. We’re taking back our neighborhoods without violence. We’re doing what we gotta do. And that’s all we can do, and I thank y’all for your time, and I invite anybody to our home to view these video tapes, because that’s where the truth lies. Thank you.

Councilman Shyne: Ms. Ocon, let me make this statement to you. Let me clear this up. The Councilman that she was talking about, that was out in the neighborhood, that was me. Joe Shyne. I was out there because I was invited by a group of citizens. I met with a group of citizens. I think that same group of citizens came down to the City Council. I think we turned that situation over to the Chief of Police. And Ms. Ocon, I wish you would understand that because you are a captain in your neighborhood, it does not give you the right to intimidate, to harass or make any members of the neighborhood uncomfortable.

Ms. Ocon: I haven’t done that.

Councilman Shyne: Let me finish now, I didn’t break in on you.

Ms. Ocon: You just lied.

Councilman Shyne: Wait a minute. I did not break in on you now. If you can’t be quiet, you sit down.

Ms. Ocon: Okay.

Councilman Shyne: Or either I’m going to have you escorted out of here. You don’t run this.

Ms. Ocon: I didn’t say I did.

Councilman Shyne: Would you sit down or either.

Ms. Ocon: I was going to my seat.

Councilman Shyne: Chief! Okay. We don’t have that in my neighborhood. We don’t have that in other neighborhoods. Neighborhood Captains do not act in that manner. If there is a problem in your neighborhood, the Police Department don’t want you jeopardizing yourself by patrolling the neighborhood. That’s why we have these officers here who are trained to do that. They’re trained to do that. We’ve spent thousands of dollars for them to be trained to patrol neighborhoods. If you have a concern of a dope dealer or somebody whose doing something wrong, call them. They will do the patrolling of a neighborhood. Matter of fact, we don’t even ask our citizens to give their names out when they call in about something going on in the neighborhood. I hope we don’t Chief, I don’t believe we do. So, that’s for anybody. If you have anything wrong that’s going on in your neighborhood, you call them. That’s why we pay these gentlemen extremely well to do that. Call them and let them know. Because if your conduct is continued, we’re going to have a thorough investigation on harassing, intimidating. You don’t do that in your neighborhood. Those people are supposed to be secure in their neighborhoods. I will be driving back through your neighborhood. Because I drive back through a lot of neighborhoods. I will be stopping in front of a lot of houses, and your house might be one of them. And the other folks might stop in front of your house. I will not say anything to you. If I want to contact you, I know how to contact you. But I would hope that you would reconsider your conduct within your neighborhood.

Mr. Dennis Ocon: (6422 Faust Drive) She covered most of it, but that’s just a map of our neighborhood. The neighborhood watch that when we started three years ago, Ms. Mary Ann came out from the Liaison Office. And we had about 30 people there, that were either working or retired and have been around before when there was a watch there, and didn’t want to be involved in a captain’s position. So Mary Ann said, there’s four streets of people here. Paula was the only one picked. She told her said, you take the Broadview Subdivision, not just Faust. So, she was kinda appointed by the Liaison on that, and then she’s held it ever since, and everyone is satisfied with her. It’s hard to tell - - - the alleged people that were here said there were only eight here because we intimidated the rest to not show up. It’s only 15 of them to my knowledge. Five of the homes (you can’t see, that’s this in yellow) but there’s 15. Five of them are owned by one man. All of the dark gray areas are people that come to our meetings from all streets. There’s eight off Buncomb Road, three on Best, ten on Hobbs, 13 on Roosevelt and 12 on our street. We have a meeting once a month. We have food, we have fellowship, we talk about what’s going on in the neighborhood. Our neighborhood block party was not as big this year, we had 70 something people at it. Last year, it was 120. It’s a great party, we have water slides for the kids, we cook hamburgers. Myself, and the people that are right here tonight all pitch in money, food, whatever and we entertain everyone. And what she said about the lady said there was no drugs in our neighborhood, my wife started to show you those. But on where in here the minutes from y’all’s meeting where it says that we’re under civil suits and we’re under peace bonds. Well, (I got one), we have a person tried to put us under a peace bond. They were also put under one. I don’t consider that a loss. The civil suit, I’ve got a letter from October 12^th. We were investigated by the State Attorney General. They’re trying to get us on hate crimes, and racial crimes. Their determination is there’s no reasonable cause to believe that a discriminatory (inaudible) practice has occurred. We had to go the day after you came out to our home to court. She didn’t make it because she had to go to the hospital. We went the next Wednesday. Ms. Cleveland’s case, (I mean the other lady) denied. So, we have not been found guilty on anything. Now if the FBI’s getting involved in this, I welcome them. All I want is a fair investigation. If you see the people that I’ve got here, I don’t think that anyone’s talked to any of them that are with us. The only people being talked to are the 15 that do the most complaining and the loudest complaining, and the most untruths. What we state or talk about, if I don’t have it here on paper, we don’t say it. And I don’t know, I’ve talked till I’m blue in the face. It seems like we’re not being listened to, we’re hitting road blocks, and I ask Chief Whitehorn if he would do something for me, and I don’t want him to get a Captain under him to do it or a Lieutenant, I want him to do it, to question someone for me, and I want a response from him when he finds out. And after I get that - - -

Councilman Shyne: I was about to say, I believe you’re talking to us at this particular time.

Mr. Ocon: I talked to him about it.

Councilman Shyne: If you need to meet with him, we’ll set it up where you can meet with him, but right now, your time is with us.

Mr. Ocon: Okay. And we used to have an officer, we could just call downtown on our watch nights. And say if you’ve got any officers out here that aren’t tied up, cause our area is low crime, if they’re not doing anything, they can come by and have a sandwich, have a coke, or whatever we had to cook that night. We have Fire District 13 come out, 14 comes out, their ambulance drivers come out, they eat, we send them back to the station with pizzas. Everyone has a good time. But these (in the yellow) pass our house while we’re having our meetings. For whatever reasons, they should stop. They should stop by, not stop coming by. We have no problem. We’re just trying to get along. We’ve tried to talk with Officer Lee and an Officer White, had us meet with Ms. (inaudible), well one of the ladies you met. And we couldn’t get a good conversation going, because she was too interested in telling me about my wife.

Councilman Shyne: How much more time do you think you need.

Mr. Ocon: All night. I’m fine now.

Councilman Shyne: We can’t give you all night now. We can’t just let you just go on.

Mr. Ocon: I understand:

Councilman Shyne: Okay, now do you need another minute?

Mr. Ocon: I’m alright, I’m good. I shaved before I came this morning too.

Councilman Shyne: Don’t worry about that.

Mr. Ocon: Been here seven hours.

Councilman Shyne: You didn’t have to stay.

Mr. Ocon: Watching you eat for 30.

Councilman Shyne: I appreciate it and you didn’t have to shave. Now are you through?

Mr. Ocon: Yes sir.

Councilman Shyne: I would advise you to take your seat. Chief, and Chief Cochran too. I wish you all would check, if you heard what he said, I wish you all would check to who those firemen are, who are going out and socializing at his house during times when they ought to be at the station or times that they are on duty. And Chief, I wish you would find out who those police officers are who are going out and socializing during that time, because suppose they would be going to a hundred different citizens’ homes. Or suppose we would have that all over the city, where they would be going out socializing. I wish you would check in on that and see whose doing that. Because I think we need to stop that. And Chief, I would also like for you to look at whoever the officer is with the neighborhood teams so you can give them a list of what they legally is able to do as a neighborhood watch. And I would hope that one of the things as a neighborhood watch that if they detect anything wrong going on in the neighborhood, that they would call you or one of the officers. Because I wouldn’t want to see a citizen out trying to apprehend somebody. And they could jeopardize themselves. Whoever the person is that’s over the Neighborhood Watch, let them get them a list of the DOs and DON’Ts from a legal standpoint. And please check in and see who those, I mean you heard it from his mouth, please check in and see who those officers are who are supposed to be on duty and they’re out eating and socializing at the houses. And that was one thing that we heard. I didn’t want to bring it up, and I don’t know whether he slipped and said it or whether it’s just so common until they just go out. I would appreciate if you all would check in on that.

Chief Whitehorn: Councilman Shyne, certainly I will check into that. But I’ve already looked into the allegations that we had officers hanging out at the Oconn’s residence and that’s certainly not the case. During those neighborhood watch meetings, we’re often present at the neighborhood association meeting. So, that may be what folks have seen. But I don’t have any officers that’s hanging out over there.

Councilman Shyne: I heard what he said about officers, it might be firemen who come by and do it, but please get them a list of the DOs and DON’Ts that they can do as a neighborhood watch.

Councilman Webb: Chief, I’m glad you’re here. I spoke with Chief Van Zant at the Joint Council Commission Meeting, the Board Meeting that we had last Friday, you left before I got an opportunity to talk with you. This neighborhood squabble I want to call it, been going on for quite some time. I know you’re aware of all the situations and everything. It’s a shame that adults can’t get along. It’s one thing for kids, but adults is worse. But is there anyway, I was thinking about we could get all the parties involved to sit down, maybe meet at the park one day or something and bring all this to the table and try to put this to bed. I mean it’s just a shame, it just keeps going on, and on, and on, and there’s got to be an answer to it here, and I don’t know what it is. But I don’t know what your thoughts are, or what you’ve done, you know maybe you don’t want to bring it up here, I don’t know.

Chief Whitehorn: I’d be happy to explain it. I personally have had at least two meetings with the Oconns. In fact the last meeting, I explained very clearly or articulated my thoughts and what I expected, and we would and would not tolerate. And if this continues with the complaints, that somebody would be going to jail. We were not going to tolerate it. I explained to them that we had also contacted the FBI on the hate crime issues and that they are looking into those allegations. We have had community meetings with the CLOs with the community at a neutral location. Short of them understanding that they are going to have to take their responsibility.

Councilman Shyne: Chief, just a minute. Would you all please be quiet back there.

Chief Whitehorn: I don’t know what else I can do other than start locking people up for crimes that we can show that there are crimes taking place out there. And I’ve explained that. My officers have explained that. And we’re going to do just that if we have probable cause.

Councilman Shyne: Chief, if you have probable cause, I would advise you to start locking somebody up. Because if not, we’re going to really have some real problems in that neighborhood. Because there are other people that have been talking about you know hey, we’ll go in there and we’ll settle that. But we don’t need that, we don’t need another Jena here. So, if you have to lock somebody up, regardless of who it is, lock ‘em up. Because we don’t need that. We don’t need people taking over their neighborhoods in that manner. You don’t live in a neighborhood to take it over in that manner. You might have somebody in the neighborhood that don’t even want to be bothered with the neighborhood watch. That’s their right not to be bothered with the neighborhood watch or whatever it is.

Chief Whitehorn: And I did explain for them to notify the police if there is a problem, so that we can take the appropriate action.

Councilman Shyne: Good. Chief, thank you. And Chief Cochran, thank you, and I hope that you would check to see who those fine firemen are who find time to socialize with anyone on their work schedule. Thank you very much.

Mayor Glover: Mr. Chairman, I’ve got to make a few comments here. You know I have followed this situation over the last year or so. Ms. Oconn mentioned I did have a chance to meet her, and her neighbors, and her husbands acquaintance, during the course of last year’s election. And have also received and heard and read and spoken back and forth with you Mr. Chairman, Members of the Council and folks within the Police Department about some of the concerns and issues that have been raised in terms of some of their neighborhood watch activities over there. I do know that the night I went out, I met a house full of people who were energetic and enthusiastic about making their neighborhood a better and safer place. I have also heard the people who have complained and raised their concerns and issues. I’ve also heard from the folks in the police department. I will say this. One thing I can guarantee and especially since I heard you mention it Councilman Webb, as Mayor Mr. Shyne, you’re not going to have to worry about me mediating this situation, you’re not going to have to worry about the Chief mediating it, I’m going to take care of these type of situations as Mayor because what we have here is a very fine line. You know some of what you and others may be criticizing might have been some similar criticism that some may have leveled against me and a group of folks who refer to ourselves as the Kingsmen up in the Cooper Road area back in the late ‘80s and the early ‘90s, when we found ourselves in the midst of a set of circumstances that we found problematic. But I also know that there is a balance that has to be reached there. Because you are not a commissioned officer, you don’t have arrest authority, and you don’t want to do anything that’s going to endanger yourself or others. I will say this. And before too long, I am in fact going to be asking others around this city to take a greater role in creating a greater positive presence (I’ll put it that way), within their neighborhoods here throughout the City of Shreveport. And so, I don’t want anybody to think that you or this Council or certainly anyone in this Administration is not going to be willing to be supportive of the efforts of folks who are genuinely interested about what happens within their neighborhoods, and that we’re not going to meet that enthusiasm in a positive and a constructive way. And at the same time, we’re also going to let folks know, the neighborhood watches and other groups that may form are not posses, they’re not vigilante groups. And they don’t have the power or the authority to reign terror down on other folks who are otherwise law abiding. And so, I certainly appreciate and respect the concerns that all have expressed in this regard, both in terms of the neighborhood folks, the O’cons, the police, the Councilmen, what have you, but if we’re going to have this city end up where it is that we want it to be, then we’re going to end up having to call on lots of folks who will be willing to step up and stand out and let folks know who otherwise are inclined to do bad things in our neighborhoods know that there are folks willing to stand up, look them in the eye and tell them that while we may be afraid of you, we’re not going to back down from you. And that there’s a spiritual force out there that I felt strongly back in the early ‘80s when we were organizing the Kingsmen, that I believe really stands with and supports efforts like these, and I’m looking forward to as Mayor being a part of helping to support. So essentially, I’m going to take on the role and responsibility of being that moderating and mediating force to insure that we continue to see that enthusiastic support coming from our neighborhood, but at the same time as you mentioned so eloquently, Mr. Chairman, that it does not end up getting out of control in becoming a force for (inaudible) within our neighborhoods.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Mayor, I appreciate you saying that and I want you to know that I’m with you 100%. But I also want to make sure now that if we ask people to stand up, there’s a fine line that we don’t want you to cross. We don’t want you standing up intimidating and harassing your neighbors. Now if you’ve got some undesirables coming into the neighborhood, to be truthful Mr. Mayor, I would appreciate them calling the police. Because the first time somebody stand up and stand out there, and they get shot - - - see I know some neighborhoods, they could be doing that and they’re going to mess around and get shot. That’s what we got the Police Department for is to make sure that they do (inaudible). Now if you know their names, you got some license plate numbers, you call them. But when you start getting in your truck or you start getting in your car, I would advise you not to do that, because you don’t know what you’re running into. Those people are trained to do that. And when you start doing that, when law abiding citizens, I’m sorry, but I’m going to have to step in too. I do not want to see our city, I do not want to see our neighborhoods turned into a situation that we have a bunch of vigilantes that think that they have the backing of city government, to just act like a bunch of thugs in a neighborhood under the pretense of keeping this neighborhood safe. I think we’re asking for problems when we do that. Now if you’ve got a problem in your neighborhood. I would ask you to call the Mayor, I would ask you to call the Chief of Police, I would ask you to call your Council Member first. Call the Chief of Police, call the Mayor. There’s a legitimate, and a professional way to handle problems in your neighborhood, in order to keep you safe. I wouldn’t want my wife out making rounds in the neighborhood. Chief, I get scared when I do that sometimes. I don’t know what I may run into. You got some of these neighborhoods, you get in your truck and make a round, somebody is going to snatch you out of it, that’s why you need to call the police. That’s why we have them. That’s why we have the Sheriff’s Department. We don’t need no vigilantes. And I appreciate what you said Mr. Mayor, but we can’t afford to let this thing get out of hand under the pretense of something else. We had people that came down. We had people that filed charges. I talked to people who have actually been intimidated. That’s why I went out myself. I’m passionate about this. I want neighborhoods to be safe. I drive my neighborhoods. But Chief, you can rest assure that I’m not going to be trailing no dope dealer hear? I’m going to call your officers, and I’m going to give them the license plate. Now you can rest assure that I’m not going to be busting up in no house, and you can rest assure that I’m not going to try to stop one. I get the information, I’m going to call you. I’m sorry for getting so passionate. You all forgive me.

Councilwoman Bowman: Mr. Shyne, you forgot to say, “I love you”.

Councilman Shyne: I’m sorry, I love y’all. Mr. Parker, I hope you understand. I’m passionate. I don’t have no problems if you’re handling what you’re handling in a nice and legal way. Now if you’re stepping on somebody’s shoes, then you tell your neighbor, because you have some neighbors that might not want to be involved. I’ve got a neighbors in my neighborhood that don’t even want to speak, that don’t even want to be involved. There’s nothing wrong with that, that’s just the way they are. And then I got some dopers who live there, if I get out and chase them, we’re going to have a special election, that’s why I’m going to call t he Chief.

Councilman Webb: It’s getting late, lets move on.

Councilman Shyne: I understand that, and Councilman if you’re in a hurry - - -

Councilman Webb: Lets move on.

Councilman Shyne: Go take you a break and then come back.

Councilman Webb: We’ve got a long way to go.

Councilman Shyne: Councilman, if you’re in a hurry, you go take you a break and then come back.

Councilman Webb: I want to get home before 1:00.

Councilman Shyne: Well go head on and get home then, but I hope you understand what I’m saying. Because we want to keep this city safe. But we still, we don’t want a bunch of vigilantes running around. And I don’t want nobody out there getting shot. Because if you’re in my neighborhood doing that, you know you might get shot, that’s why you need to call the police.

Mr. James Parker: (7817 Hobbs) I have lived in Shreveport all my life. I’ve lived at 7817 Hobbs Drive for 38 years. We’ve had a great neighborhood. It’s been a low crime neighborhood ever since I’ve lived there. We have great neighbors. I can get along with all of them. I get along with the Ocons, I get along with the other side. The Ocons hadn’t a neighborhood watch in about three months since all this come up. I haven’t joined the neighborhood watch because I was intimidated or threatened or anything else. I did it because I like to see our area well watched, crime free. There’s also another neighborhood watch, you know which one it is. I go to their meetings also. I’m friends with them, and sir, I hate to tell you, but you’ve been lied to.

Councilman Shyne: That’s your opinion, but go head on.

Mr. Parker: Oh, I know, I understand what you was told and by who you were told it by.

Councilman Shyne: Now your mouth is cut just like their’s, so go head on. Lets see if you start saying whose lying and whose not lying, just say what you want to say.

Mr. Parker: This is my time please.

Councilman Shyne: Right, if I give it to you, it’s your time.

Mr. Parker: I understand what you was told, because I am friends with them also. And she had told me numerous things that Paula has done. Which I have never seen, and I told her. I said, “Charlotte, I have never seen what you’re accusing her of.” I said, “I’ve known them a long time. I don’t run with them, we don’t go out and go partying together, but I know them well”. I go to all the neighborhood watches, when we have a problem, being the captain, I would call her, and she would call the police, not me because she knew who to call the police and they would come out and take care of it. If there were strange people in the area, I would call Paula. I would say, “Paula, we’ve got a strange vehicle going real slow down the street, been up and down three times”. She’d call the law instead of me. I have never seen her run anybody off the road. She gets a little mouthy every now and then. We all know that, but that’s besides the point. That has nothing to do with here nor there. I have seen several neighborhood watches come and go in my neighborhood. We had one a few years back. It was going good, and it folded up because the captain was - - - received a phone call, and I was there when they received. Said it’d be a shame if one of your kids got hurt because you’re nosing around the neighborhood. They shut it off. So, we’ve had problems with neighborhood watches all the long. Nobody wants to get involved. As far as the Ocons patrolling the neighborhood, I’ve never seen them patrolling the neighborhood, I’ve seen ‘em right through it quite often. I’ve never seen them chase anybody down, I’ve never seen ‘em run anybody off the road. If there’s a problem, she has called the police and she has come out. Like I say I get along with both sides. I am friends of the other neighborhood watch captain, his step-daughter and my daughter are married. I mean you know, we’re friends. We’re neighbors. So, I mean I know ‘em well. But that’s why I told you while ago, that you’d been lied to, is because like I say, they had told me, they said, well you know I’ve seen this, I’ve seen that, I got the same thing that you were told also, that has not happened. That’s my word against what everybody else. What I’m standing here saying is I’ve heard a lot of trouble about the Ocons. A lot of it’s not true. We’ve got a problem in the neighborhood right now. I’ve got a parking ticket on my motor home, because the Zoning Commission told me to park it on the side of the road. I went down to the Police Station to find out what it was. It was a 90.287 – (inaudible) number. Got down there and nobody could tell me what my violation was. I said how do I know what to do, if can’t nobody tell me. So, I went down to patrol desk. I walked in, told them what I had. He says where do you live? I says on Hobbs Drive. “Oh, don’t want nothing to do with that neighborhood.” Turned around and walked off. I mean we got a problem in the neighborhood, we need to get it straightened out. And it’s not all the Ocons, but like I say I appreciate your time.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Parker I appreciate you coming down, but I hope you would understand that just because you said somebody lied, this is not my first rodeo.

Mr. Parker: I know.

Councilman Shyne: I’m going to leave it at that. Thank you. I believe that was all we have, was there anybody else? Hold up just a minute. Now we don’t generally do this, now we’ve done this a lot today, but we have little slips out there that you fill out.

I knew that.

Councilman Shyne: Well that’s what you got to do. We don’t kinda run this like a classroom when the teacher ask a question, you throw up your hands. Now we’re going to let you do it today, but next time you come fill out the slips. Now come on up, and give us your name and when you get through you can fill the slip out.

Ms. Betty Kemp: (7918 Hobbs Drive) And if I could ask you to please just read what I wrote down, because there’s not like you say, a lack of time, and the lack of my experience of being able to speak to you or the Councilmen, and I’ve also (know him real well) and also Ms. Joyce. And I would appreciate us really doing exactly what you said. Lets have a meeting with the Chief, and try and see if we can’t iron out the difference, because if you will read what all I wrote down there, and I can see. I am neighbors with everyone of them that’s mentioned. I have also gotten the record from the Council Meeting before, which was a little bit disturbing to me. I also have received a phone call at my home telling me that - - - they asked me, is this the way that a Christian supposed to do? Take sides? I do not take sides, I asked them who is this? And they said, what is the difference, I’m the devil and I’m coming after you. I was very disturbed. I called the Police Department, I did not get a - - - it was not a number left on my caller I.D. I did get the time, I do think that it was a White lady, I do not know who it was. But that’s disturbing, and also if you’ll read my report, what I wrote, then you may understand what is happening. I’ve been out there about 16 years.

Councilman Shyne: Not cutting you off, but where is your report?

Ms. Kemp: Oh no, mines longer than that.

Councilman Shyne: Ms. Kemp, we will read your report, but we do know that there is a problem.

Ms. Kemp: I know, the time, the time right now. There’s no way.

Councilman Shyne: Right, right. We will read it, but we do know that there is a problem out there. That’s why we have it investigated so that we can find out what - - - so we can identify what the problem is.

Ms. Kemp: Okay. That, we would deeply appreciate that if the Council would and Chief Whitehorn would set up a meeting where this can be ironed out, because I really am not ever going to lie to anybody, and I will tell you, I will look straight at you and tell you the truth. I did see you out there that day, I didn’t know it was your vehicle. I did see, and I can see a lot in my neighborhood, and I do know what’s going on, and I do know that it has been a lot. And she was also exonerated in court for what she was brought to court for. And I do believe the Judge did a good sound judge on that exonerating her.

Councilman Shyne: Ms. Kemp, I appreciate it, but I will state again, that there is a problem out there.

Ms. Kemp: You can believe it.

Councilman Shyne: We need to identify the problem and we need to come to a solution.

Ms. Kemp: Absolutely.

Councilman Shyne: This is not a validate somebody’s character.

Ms. Kemp: Right.

Councilman Shyne: Type of situation. You know I’m not here to decide on whose a Christian and whose not a Christian and whose the devil and whose not the devil. I don’t do that. But I do know that there is a problem out there. I was called a number of times. People came down to the Council. I will not get into what I observed at this particular time, cause it’s no use in us going into that.

Ms. Kemp: Correct.

Councilman Shyne: But that’s why I put it in the hands of professionals. We have one of the top professionals anywhere. So he’s going to do an investigation. He’s going to pull in what he needs. So by me and this is not his first rodeo. I had somebody tell me Joe, so and so and so is lying and they’re lying. You can look at this hair and tell this is not my first rodeo. I’ve been here a long time. When people say that, I just look at them and smile. Cause all of our lips are cut the same and our tongues are kinda made the same, but Ms. Kemp I appreciate you coming down and the Chief is going to look into that situation.

Ms. Kemp: That’s what I want him to do and also read what I did.

Councilman Shyne: I want peace in the neighborhood.

Ms. Kemp: So do we.

Councilman Shyne: And I want people helping out, but I don’t want people doing what the Police Department is supposed to do. I don’t want it to get to that point. I want people to come and give information, right down license numbers or whatever and turn that over to the professionals. Cause I don’t want you out there getting killed. It would break my heart, if that would happen to you. So, I love you and I appreciate you coming down. And come back again.

Councilman Walford: We’re ready to go back into regular session.

Councilman Shyne: Yes, lets go back into regular session. Okay Confirmations, I believe we left of at Confirmations.

Councilman Walford: No.

Mr. Thompson: We were at Awards and recognition of distinguished guests and communications of the Mayor.

Councilman Shyne: I thought I - - - Mr. Mayor, didn’t I ask?

Councilman Long: Yep, that’s where we were.

Councilman Shyne: Maybe that was yesterday. We’ve been here so long until I’m thinking yesterday. Well I know by now, you don’t have any important guests here.

Mayor Glover: They told me that I could keep the awards and the recognition, and call them back after Christmas. We did have several, we told them to go ahead and go home, about four or five hours ago. So, we’ll pick those back up at the next Council Proceeding or the first one in the New Year.

Councilman Shyne: Thank you Mr. Mayor.

Councilman Walford: Mr. Chairman at this time, I’d like to make a motion to suspend the rules, Resolution No. 3 on our adding legislation to the agenda, and to take action on that resolution please.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Lester to suspend the rules to add Resolution No. 194 of 2007.

Councilman Shyne: Now do you want the Clerk to read that?

Councilman Walford: I would appreciate it if the Clerk could read that, but I really would like for the Fire Chief to come up here and stand on the firing line while we do.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

The Clerk read the following:

RESOLUTION NO 195 of 2007

RESOLUTION TO THANK KELVIN J. COCHRAN FOR HIS SERVICE AS FIRE CHIEF AND FOR MORE THAN TWENTY-FIVE (25) YEARS OF SERVICE TO THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT; TO WISH HIM WELL IN HIS NEW POSITION AS FIRE CHIEF FOR THE CITY OF ATLANTA, GEORGIA, AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO

By: Councilman Walford

WHEREAS, in 1981, Kelvin J. Cochran, fulfilled a childhood dream to become a firefighter in his home town of Shreveport, Louisiana; and

WHEREAS, in 1999, through hard work and dedication, Kelvin J. Cochran exceeded his childhood dream and became the first African American Fire Chief for the City of Shreveport; and

WHEREAS, as Fire Chief, Kelvin J. Cochran directed the operation of a 600 member Class One Fire Department, with a annual budget of some 47 million dollars; and

WHEREAS, during Kelvin J. Cochran tenure as Fire Chief of the City of Shreveport, the Fire Department infrastructure was improved, and the pay for fire department personal was increased, to ensure the delivery of the highest quality services for fire suppression, Emergency Medical Services, aircraft rescue and firefighting, bomb disposal, hazardous material operations, search and rescue, underwater rescue and public information and education programs; and

WHEREAS, Kelvin J. Cochran has accepted the position of Fire Chief for the City of Atlanta, Georgia.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, regular and legal session convened, that the Shreveport City Council, on behalf of all citizens of Shreveport, recognize Kelvin J. Cochran for more than Twenty-five (25) years of service to this City as Firefighter, Training Officer, Assistant Chief Training Officer and Fire Chief, and thank him for his exceptional service to this community.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that each member of the Shreveport City Council wishes Kelvin J. Cochran well in his new position as Fire Chief of the City of Atlanta, Georgia.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution shall be executed in duplicate originals with one original presented to Kelvin J. Cochran and the other resolution filed in perpetuity in the office of the Clerk of Council for the City of Shreveport.

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

Councilman Walford: Chief, I just wanted to compliment you, and it’s kinda bitter sweet. We hate to lose you, but we wish you well in your new endeavor.

Chief Cochran: Thank you sir.

Councilman Walford: And I thank you for all you’ve done for Shreveport.

Councilman Wooley: Chief Cochran, I just wanted to say thank you for the many years to our city. You and I only got to have a relationship for a small amount of time, you have been an inspiration to me as a leader in this community, and I appreciate all that you’ve done.

Chief Cochran: Thank you sir.

Councilwoman Bowman: I salute you. I think you have done an excellent job over the years. You have proven yourself to be great. I expect you to go to Atlanta and make us proud. You’ve made us proud right here, and we can’t expect any more from you. I know I might be telling my age a little bit, but I remember you when you were a little boy.

Councilman Shyne: Wait, wait. You got to be kidding Joyce! As young as you are.

Councilwoman Bowman: Thank you Joe, but I worked with your mother many years ago at Doctors Hospital. And wonderful woman, raising her kids in the best manner she knew how, and I was proud of her. But I’m even more proud of you. You kinda hung around in one of the neighborhoods I grew up in, over in Hollywood, with some of my relatives. I know you’ll be truly be missed by them. I know you learned how to swim, and I think maybe some of that from over at Hattie Perry. Well before Hattie Perry was built, from where that drainage ditch it, there was a pond over there. I called it a pond, and it was a mud hole really, and we used to crawfish and swim over there. That’s where I learned how to swim.

Councilman Shyne: Joyce isn’t that old.

Councilwoman Bowman: But I know Janie, and I think she did a wonderful job. Any mother would be so proud to have a son like you. I’m not saying this like Councilman Shyne says it, but I love you. I really do, and I wish you the very best, you and your family. Let us hear from you.

Chief Cochran: Thank you Ma’am. I will. Thank you.

Councilman Webb: Yes, I was going to say the same thing. Don’t forget where home is, and I know I first met you when I was on the Caddo Parish Commission, there at Fire District 6 when we had a function out there, and you gave a speech. And I thought you were very articulate. And I admire what you’ve done for the Fire Department, and you got a passion for your men, and everything that goes on within the department. I know we’re losing a good man. It’s going to be some large shoes to fill, and I wish you well in Atlanta. And we’ll be watching and reading the papers, we’ll probably hear some good things about you out that way. Enjoyed working with.

Chief Cochran: Thank you sir.

Councilman Long: I agree with all that. I just wish you the best of luck and I hope your new job brings you - - - allows you to progress to the next level. So, good luck with all that, and come back and see us sometime.

Chief Cochran: Thank you sir. I will.

Councilman Lester: Thank you Mr. Chairman. Chief Cochran, to many of us in the neighborhood, both you and the Mayor and Ramon Lafitte, represent very historic scenarios for us. Particularly growing up in neighborhoods like Hollywood, Cedar Grove, Martin Luther King/Cooper Road area, that even today as people look at you, and they look at your geography and they try to limit you geographically, you and Ramon and the Mayor have not allowed - - - where you start to limit where you finish and where you go. And that is something that I have always been proud of. And you need to know that you have inspired me and countless young African-American males in this town to want to do better. To live their lives at a higher standard, and heroes many times are people that you see on stamps, that you can’t look at, that you can’t touch, and you can’t feel. And I have been fortunate and many of the young men in this community have been fortunate enough to have people like you that we can touch, that we can talk to, that we can feel, that we can be mentored by, and that makes all the difference in the world. And I just appreciate you for what you’ve meant to the Fire Department. I appreciate you for what you’ve meant as a trail blazer, I appreciate you for understanding the historic nature of what you do, and not treating that lightly. And I can only imagine, what it’s like to be the first at anything in the 20^th Century and for whatever reason to be the first, it’s a burden and a blessing that you have carried extremely well. And on behalf of the people in the neighborhood that you inspire, I want to tell you I thank you for not disappointing us, for not disappointing your family and giving us something to aspire to. Not someone that’s untouchable, and not someone that’s a basketball player or an entertainer. But a father, a man of God, a man whose not afraid to say what he means, and mean what he says, and someone who has been strikingly upright in his actions. And I do appreciate that. And you will be missed sorely, but you have enriched a number of young people’s lives in this community through your tenure, and you are to be commended for that and I do appreciate that. Thank you so very much.

Chief Cochran: Thank you sir.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Mayor, since you and the Chief have two things in common, first of all, both of you are about 60 years old and next, you all are the first.

Mayor Glover: Chief, if you and I are 60 - - - - we better get our (inaudible) cleaning and get ready for the dust cloud that Chairman Shyne is about to erupt into over there.

Councilman Shyne: Thank you, you’re so kind.

Mayor Glover: But no, I am convinced that Chief might have been in the first grade when Council Member Bowman might have been in the fifth grader so, maybe that’s how it all worked out that they’ve known each other for so long. I’ve got to reserve some of what my mind and my heart to say for tomorrow, since I know that all of you have by now received your invitation to join us for Chief Cochran’s going away party on tomorrow afternoon. But I certainly wanted to have an opportunity as well as I mentioned to Council Member Walford today, to be able to offer some comments for the resolution that he was going to be offering this afternoon, and that is the (inaudible) I guess has occupied my mind since that fateful day that I got the call from you Chief Cochran to tell me about what was transpiring and to expect a call from the good folks in Atlanta, that in any event that you were to be selected, what a huge gaping void that you would leave in the City of Shreveport as these men and women have expressed. You have left such an overwhelming footprint upon this city. I can remember back in 1998, ’99 rather when you were appointed as Chief, in addition to having all the emotions that Council Member Lester and others expressed so well. The one thing that I really appreciated a great deal was the fact that you simply sucked up all of the speaking engagements that I and other elected officials were called upon, especially during the month of February. I got a chance to speak at my own church I think that particular February. And I sat there and I just simply marveled at your ability to be able to accept each one, at least what I saw as each one, I know there were probably too many for you to be able to do them all, but each and every place where I saw you, you were such an overwhelming presence. The words you spoke, the countenance that you just manifested in being there in the midst and amongst young people in particular, seniors, adults, business folks, and working people and what have you was just simply something that was inspiring. And so from that day to this one, I’m just simply looked at the void that I saw you leaving, but I guess I’m going to have to not just look at from the void that you’re leaving, but see it in terms of the benefit and the blessing as Council Member Lester put it so eloquently. The folks that you touched and inspired throughout this city. The story of being able to give young people, no matter who they are, where they’re from, of every color, and stripe, and gender across this city, a real live Horatio (inaudible) story of being a young boy who as you have told folks, saw that fire engine arrive, and saying to yourself, on that day, that’s who I want to be and who I want to become. And not only becoming just a firefighter, although that’s a significant accomplishment in and of itself, but to actually ascend to heights of becoming the Chief of Shreveport’s Fire Department, a great group of legendary men and women who like you, I grew up watching and admiring and seeing myself standing myself on the back bumper of that fire truck as it raced down the street and seeing the wind blowing in my hair, and rushing into the house with the hose and putting the fire out and saving someone’s life, and you actually having the chance to be able to prove that not only can you take that step, but you can actually go all the way to the top. And set a standard of excellence that will be so difficult for so many who will follow you to ever be able to parallel. And so, rather than the void, I’m going to look at it as the gift, the footprint, the pattern, the standard that you have stepped, and one that I will challenge all others to be able to measure up to. And to add to that, the spiritual dimension that you add to my life and I think practically the life of every individual that you every have the opportunity to touch is something that is just truly unique. And so I thank you for your service to this city, I thank you for your service to this department. I thank you for the friendship that you’ve extended to me over the years, and I thank you for showing that not only is it possible to achieve the very highest ranks here in Shreveport, but that we can produce a level of excellence, that those who are far, far away from here can look at and say we want that. Thank you, we’re going to miss you, and I look forward to having a chance to come out and witness the great things that you’re going to do in the City of Atlanta. Appreciate your service, and hopefully I’ll have a little less to say tomorrow, because if I keep talking, I may end up having a tear or two coming to my eye. But thank you Chief, thank you Mr. Chairman, thank you Members of the Council.

Councilman Shyne: Chief, let me I just want to piggy back in on what the Mayor said, the last part. When we come out to Atlanta a couple of months from now, I think I’ll since you won’t be on his payroll anymore, lets find him a good room in a hotel, and I know you’re going to be staying in a nice neighborhood, so I want to stay with you in the nice neighborhood, and we’ll put him up in a hotel.

Mayor Glover: Mr. Chairman, you don’t know what agreement I came to with the Mayor of Atlanta. Agreed to not hold any animosity for her coming to our wonderful city and plucking away one of our very best and finest. So, I’m not even sure if you could even get into Atlanta.

Councilman Shyne: Chief the Mayor and I go way back, so I know he’s not going to do that. Let me say, I don’t go back as far as Joyce I guess. Joyce I don’t mean any harm, but I’m not that old. But Chief, I do remember when you were just a Captain. I do remember when Larry Ferdinand and Hilary Huckaby and myself was fighting constantly with John Hussey and Dallas Green to make sure they would promote a man of color, that a man of color could handle that position as Asst Chief. I don’t know if you remember, that position stayed open for two years, and this is no reflection on anyone but we’ve never really had a man of color at that level before. And I don’t have to tell you about how conservative and how racist Shreveport was at that time, because you probably know better than I, because you were in that department and you know we fought almost daily and almost at every City Council to make sure that there were more fire recruits. I mean this is a thing that we hammered on. Larry Ferdinand, Hilary Huckaby and Joe Shyne. So, finally Mr. Mayor, it seemed like it was going to come to a point where we were just going to have to put the gloves on and go to fighting. Because we knew you could handle it, and I don’t want to demeanor anybody else, but there were other, I think it might have been maybe two or three other captains back at that particular time, but we kinda felt like that you might have had the demeanor and you kinda had that brain and guts, because I tell people don’t get into politics, don’t get into athletics if you don’t have that fire in your belly, don’t get in there. So, we were able to put a little pressure and Kelvin was promoted. And we shouldn’t have had to put any pressure. And Kelvin I know you understand what we’re talking about. You know Mike was always promoted easily, and look at that smile on his face back there. He always was a good little boy. But a lot of people look at you Kelvin, and they don’t realize, it was not this easy for you all the time. All of it is not just glamour. They see the glamour part. They don’t remember the days when you wondered whether you were going to get the promotion or not, or whether you thought you were treated fairly or not. But you hung in there, and then it came a time, I want to say 1999 during the Keith Hightower Administration, and it was the good Lord blessed Huckaby and myself to be on the Council again, and I think at that time, it was two Chief positions that were open. The Fire Chief, and the Police Chief, and it was kinda going (inaudible) and we told Keith, you know now one of those has got to be for a man of color. It was kinda going up and down who would it be. I hope we’re not on TV now or not, but Huckaby and I felt like you were the best choice. Mater of fact that you would have enough time to put in the department. It’s kinda like it was a long time before they had Black head coaches in the NFL, cause you know the word was they couldn’t handle it. And the word was well you know a man of color just can’t handle it because he doesn’t know enough about the budget and other things. But Kelvin, we knew you could handle it. We knew if you couldn’t, that God was going to help you to handle it. And we knew that you knew that you need to handle it. And I’ll have to give (since Councilman Huckaby is not here), but I’ll have to give Mayor Hightower the credit for having the wisdom to see that you could handle it. And I’ve seen you come up. I’m not old enough to remember you in that little mud hole. But I’ve seen you come up as a firefighter. I’ve seen you come up through the ranks, and I want you to know that I’m extremely proud of you, and that was one of my dreams when I first got on the Council, I don’t want to say how long ago that is, cause the Mayor will try to make a crack at me, but I’m just going to say a few years ago. That was one of my (inaudible) was to make sure that people would be judged on their abilities. On the content of their character, and not their color. And I also wanted to make sure Mr. Mayor, that somebody sitting over there would also be judged on their abilities, and not how they look. So, you know Kelvin you’ve had a chance to see your dreams fulfilled. I’ve had a chance to see my dreams fulfilled, and I want Calvin to know that I might be going home soon. Of course I’ve enjoyed the stay that I’ve had down here over the years, but I’ve had a chance to see you grow and I’m proud of you. I really don’t have a bitter taste in my mouth about you going to Atlanta, cause I think it’s the best thing that could have happened to the City of Shreveport. It goes to show that quality can come out of Shreveport. You don’t have to always get quality to come into Shreveport. We can send quality. You know you probably wouldn’t have thought a few years ago, if we needed somebody to come here from Atlanta to show us how to run our Fire Department or to show us how to run our Police Department. Because we never needed anybody to come in and show us how to run the operational department, because we always had a good man sitting back there. But Kelvin you are leaving Shreveport to go and take over a big great department. Kelvin, that’s a plus for us, anywhere we can go, we can stick our chest out and say hey look, Shreveport can produce people that can go anywhere and be at the top. So, I wish you well, I’m glad to see you go, don’t forget where your home, and you know like they say, you can always come home. And I was always glad to see you move up, because in the beginning, Monty might not know this, but your mother lived in my district. So Monty, that was a vote that I knew I always had.

Councilman Walford: I met Kelvin’s mom when I was campaigning.

Councilman Shyne: But I’m saying that used to be my district, and I knew that I always had that one vote, Kelvin so, I might have had a little selfishness in pushing something (inaudible) so don’t hold that against me. We’re extremely proud of you, and I will be there tomorrow. I might crack on you a time or two, if I do, just smile it off, cause I get this from somebody else over there. But Kelvin thank you. Now, do you have a word or two you’d like to say.

Chief Cochran: Thank you Mr. Chairman, Members of the Council, Mayor Glover, I can’t tell you how much I appreciate and how much I’m moved by your generous words. I’ve just been overwhelmed from the very outset of this new opportunity that God has made available to me. And just can’t help but reflect back on the early years of growing up in Allendale in a shotgun house at 1656 Rear Snow Street. It’s a long way from 1656 Rear Snow Street, a shotgun house to 263 North Common Street, the Dallas W. Green, Jr. Central Fire Station. But it simply sums up to what the grown people told me when I was a little kid, and I always shared with them, when I grow up, I don’t want to be poor, and I want to be a fireman. They said, if you believe in God, you get a good education, you treat other children like you want to be treated, and you respect grown people, your dreams come true. And I was just convinced that the grownups were right, and I focused on that throughout my developmental years, and standing here today they will tell you, the Council and children all over our city, that those same values work in the United States of America today. That the United States of America is one of the only countries in the world where those four values work in making your dreams come true no matter where you come from. The City of Shreveport has caused me to be the professional I am today, and has positioned me to be qualified and capable to run a fire department like the City of Atlanta, and has positioned me to be the president in an International Association of Fire Chiefs. I’m extremely grateful for all that you’ve done. The men and women of the Shreveport Fire Department, that has a small little remnant behind me this afternoon, that is here have contributed greatly to the person that I am today and to the success that our fire department has had through the years, and I’m extremely grateful to them. All that I am I owe, and I’ll live eternally in the red. Thank you sir.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Thompson, Councilman Walford talked so long, that I forgot - - - we voted on?

Ms. Johnson: No sir.

Councilman Long: We’re waiting for your vote.

Councilman Shyne: Thank you Mike.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

Councilman Walford: Look at that. As soon as he voted it popped up. Mike was telling the truth.

Reports: Property Standards Report

Public Hearing: None.

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

Confirmations and/or Appointments:

SCADA System Administrator, DOS Mr. Gregg Meentemeyer

Mayor Glover: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Council, he was going to take the job, we’d offered him the job, but after sitting through - - -

Mr. Meentemeyer: I’m still here.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Wooley to confirm the executive appointment of Mr. Gregg Meentemeyer.

Councilman Shyne: You want to just stand or come up to the front so we can just take a look at you. You want to say a word or two?

Mayor Glover: He was a few pounds heavier.

Mr. Meentemeyer: I’m just looking forward to the opportunity. I’ve worked here as a contract employee for the last nine months basically in the same position, and I’m just really looking forward to the opportunity to serve the City of Shreveport.

Councilman Walford: Welcome aboard.

Mayor Glover: Good to have you here.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

Adding Legislation to the Agenda

1. Ordinance No. 208 of 2007: Amending certain sections of Section 62-78 of the Code of Ordinances relative to the Department of Public Assembly and recreation fee schedule and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

2. Ordinance No. 209 of 2007: ZONING – C-99-07: Amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by re-zoning property located on the SE corner of East Kings Highway and Beverly Place, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from SPI-3 (B-2) Commercial Corridor Overlay (Neighborhood Business) District, to SPI-3-E (B-2), Commercial Corridor Overlay/Extended Use (Neighborhood Business District, LIMITED TO “A VETERINARY CLINIC (SPAYING/NEUTERINIG)” only, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (C/Long)

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Long to add Ordinance No(s) 208 and 209 of 2007 to the agenda. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

Public Comments (Agenda Items to be Adopted)

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, I think we’ve done all of the Public Comments.

Councilman Walford: Is there anybody out in the hall?

Councilman Long: No, there isn’t anybody out in the hall.

CONSENT AGENDA LEGISLATION

TO INTRODUCE RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES

RESOLUTIONS: None.

ORDINANCES: None.

TO ADOPT RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES

RESOLUTIONS:

The Clerk read the following:

RESOLUTION NO. 193 of 2007

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING LATOYA RENEE PARTNER, LOCATED AT 250 OLYMPIA DR., TO CONNECT TO THE WATER & SEWER SYSTEM OF THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

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

BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, regular and legal session convened, that Latoya Renee Partner, be authorized to connect the structure, located at 250 Olympia Dr., to the water & sewer system of the City of Shreveport.

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

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

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilman Wooley, seconded by Councilman Bowman to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 6. Nays: Councilman Walford. 1.

Councilman Walford: Until those in the City get water pressure, I vote no to - - -

ORDINANCES: None.

REGULAR AGENDA LEGISLATION

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

The Clerk read the following:

RESOLUTION NO. 190 OF 2007

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DONATION OF SHREVEPORT POLICE DEPARTMENT PROPERTY AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO

BY:

WHEREAS, the City desires to donate Shreveport Police Department Mounted Patrol horse “Angel” to James Lorenzen which serves a public purpose and renders a public service; and,

WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 315 of 1979, requires City Council approval of an agreement made and entered into by the City of Shreveport and any person or entity, whereunder such person or entity receives a donation in return for service which serves a public purpose; and,

WHEREAS, James Lorenzen has agreed to accept all responsibility, financial obligations and liability associated with the acceptance of this donation; and,

WHEREAS, the horse described herein is unable to perform her duties as a mounted patrol horse for the Shreveport Police Department and is hereby deemed surplus of the City of Shreveport; and,

WHEREAS, this donation, under these circumstances, provides for the most humane and dignified way to retire the animal.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due regular and legal session convened, that the Mayor be and is hereby authorized to execute an agreement between the City of Shreveport and James Lorenzen donating Shreveport Police Department Mounted Patrol horse “Angel”.

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 application of this Resolution which can be given affect without the invalid provisions, items or application and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are hereby declared severable.

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

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilman Webb, seconded by Councilman Long to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

RESOLUTION NO. 191 OF 2007

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A COOPERATIVE ENDEAVOR AGREEMENT WITH THE CADDO PARISH SCHOOL BOARD RELATIVE TO THE MUTUAL USE OF FACILITIES, BUILDINGS AND EQUIPMENT AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BY:

WHEREAS, the City of Shreveport ("City") and the Caddo Parish School Board ("CPSB") are political subdivisions of the State of Louisiana; and

WHEREAS, City and CPSB are owners of various athletic facilities and other buildings located in the City of Shreveport and in Caddo Parish which are used by children and adults of the City and Parish; and

WHEREAS, City and CPSB each have a long history of sharing the use of facilities and equipment for the mutual aid and benefit of the other; and

WHEREAS, City and CPSB desire to enter into this Cooperative Endeavor Agreement to govern the mutual use of athletic facilities, other buildings and equipment owned by the respective parties for the benefit of the citizens of the City of Shreveport and Caddo Parish for a public purpose.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, legal and regular session convened that the Mayor is authorized to execute an agreement with the Caddo Parish School Board substantially and in accordance with the draft thereof which was filed with the original copy of this resolution for public inspection in the Office of the Clerk of Council on November 27, 2007.

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

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

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilman Long, seconded by Councilman Shyne.

Amendment No. 1 to Resolution No. 191 of 2007

Amend Paragraph 1 of the Cooperative Endeavor Agreement as follows:

This Agreement shall govern the use of the following named facilities owned by City and CPSB. Except as otherwise provided herein and subject to availability, the use of all facilities listed in this section of this Agreement shall be provided to the requesting party at no cost when such use does not conflict with events or activities previously scheduled by the owner of the facility:

***

Golf Huntington Park Golf Course

Querbes Golf Course

Lakeside Golf Course

CPSB shall be responsible for payment of all fees and costs for use of any golf course listed above in accordance with the fee schedule contained in Section 62-78 of the City of Shreveport Code of Ordinances.

Motion by Councilman Bowman, seconded by Councilman Walford, to adopt Amendment No. 1 to Resolution No. 191 of 2007. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Long, to adopt Resolution No. 191 of 2007 as amended.

Councilman Shyne: Shelly.

Ms. Ragle-Stone: Yes sir.

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Mayor, I’m going to vote for this, but I want us to be able to come to some kind of compromise with the School Board, on a couple of parks where we can use a couple of their basketball courts, because to me it would be a waste of public money to go out and spend $35,000 a piece on putting up a basketball court, and the public schools have them there, and they’re not being used. I would like for Shelly to look into that, and I kinda like for you to kinda keep an eye on that, and maybe kinda, you know how you can put a little pressure down from time to time. Cause I think you know we got some areas, if they got some problems about us using it, it they got some safety issues, you know we might need to go in and put up some barb wire or whatever it is, but Shelly get with them and keep the Mayor abreast, and keep the Council abreast. Because those public facilities need to be used. Because the same kids go to school at those school are the same kids that would be there playing basketball. So, that’s my concern.

Mayor Glover: Mr. Shyne and Members of the Council. I’m sure that you’re reiterating this point Mr. Shyne based upon the meeting from last week. Our second intergovernmental meeting, because this is one of the issues that we raised there last Thursday I believe. And it certainly is one of the issues that we will expect the intergovernmental committee that will actually be in panel to sit down and spend some time discussing and ultimately hopefully making a recommendation back to both the City and the School Board in terms of how we work and resolve this issue. But I know we made some very direct points to the superintendent and the school board members there on last week. I got the sense that they hear the sentiment that I know I expressed to them and I believe they heard yours as well. And hopefully this is going to be an area where we’re going to get some compromise.

Councilman Shyne: We could always go up to Linear and play basketball. Any of the elementary schools anywhere on the Cooper Road years ago. I mean you all grew up going to the schools to play. We still need to have that kind (inaudible). Shelly thank you hear?

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

RESOLUTION NO. 192 OF 2007

A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE INTENTION OF THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT (THE “CITY”) TO PROCEED WITH A FINANCING IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED NINE MILLION AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($9,000,000) FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCING AND/OR REFINANCING THE COSTS OF THE ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION AND/OR EQUIPPING OF IMPROVEMENTS, ENLARGEMENTS AND/OR UPGRADES TO THE CITY’S REVENUE PRODUCING UTILITY SYSTEM INCLUDING FACILITIES USED FOR BIOSOLID DISPOSAL AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, by prior resolution, the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana (the “City”) became a participating political subdivision and member of the Louisiana Local Government Environmental Facilities and Community Development Authority (the “Authority”); and

WHEREAS, the City desires to proceed with a financing through the Authority in an amount not to exceed Nine Million and No/100 Dollars ($9,000,000) in a manner and structure to be determined by subsequent resolution, to finance and/or refinance the costs of the acquisition, construction and/or equipping of improvements, enlargements and and/or upgrades to the City’s revenue producing sewer utility system including the facilities used for biosolid disposal (the “Project”).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE City Council of the City of Shreveport, in legal session convened, acting as the governing authority thereof, that:

Section 1: The City is authorized to proceed with a financing through the Authority in an amount not to exceed Nine Million and No/100 Dollars ($9,000,000), represented by the issuance of the Authority’s bonds on behalf of the City (the “Bonds”) to provide funds to finance the Project.

Section 2: The structure, terms and conditions of any such borrowing by the City shall be determined by subsequent resolution of the City Council, provided, however, that the term of said borrowing shall not exceed fifteen (15) years from their date of issuance and will bear interest at a fixed rate not to exceed 7% and/or a variable rate of 15%.

Section 3: The City hereby finds and determines that a real necessity exists for the employment of special bond counsel in connection with the issuance of the Bonds, and accordingly The Boles Law Firm, APC, of Monroe, Louisiana, and Weems, Schimpf, Gilsoul, Haines, Landry & Carmouche, APLC, of Shreveport, Louisiana (together, “Co-Bond Counsel”), are hereby employed (such employment to be by the Authority) to do and perform comprehensive legal and coordinate professional work with respect to the issuance of the Bonds. Said Co-Bond Counsel shall prepare and submit to such officials of the City for adoption all proceedings incidental to, and shall counsel and advise the Mayor and City Council on the issuance and sale of, the Bonds by the Authority. The fee of Co-Bond Counsel shall be contingent upon the sale, issuance and delivery of the Bonds.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby authorizes and directs its Mayor, Chief Administrative Officer, Director of Finance, Clerk and such other officials of the City to do any and all things necessary and incidental to carry out the provisions of these resolutions.

BE IF FURTHER RESOLVED, that if any provision or item of these resolutions 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 to be severable.

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

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilman Webb, seconded by Councilman Long to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

INTRODUCTION OF RESOLUTIONS: (Not to be adopted prior to Dec 26, 2007)

1. Resolution No. 194 of 2007: A resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement with Chase Equipment Leasing Inc., and other necessary parties for the financing of vehicles and equipment, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Webb to introduce Resolution No. 194 of 2007 to lay over until December 26, 2007 meeting. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES: (Not to be adopted prior to Dec 26, 2007)

1. Ordinance No. 207 of 2007: An ordinance declaring certain adjudicated properties needed for a valid public purpose, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

2. Ordinance No. 208 of 2007: Amending certain sections of Section 62-78 of the Code of Ordinances relative to the Department of Public Assembly and recreation fee schedule and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

3. Ordinance No. 209 of 2007: ZONING – C-99-07: Amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by re-zoning property located on the SE corner of East Kings Highway and Beverly Place, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from SPI-3 (B-2) Commercial Corridor Overlay (Neighborhood Business) District, to SPI-3-E (B-2), Commercial Corridor Overlay/Extended Use (Neighborhood Business District, LIMITED TO “A VETERINARY CLINIC (SPAYING/NEUTERINIG)” only, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (C/Long)

Read by title and as read, motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Long to introduce Ordinance No(s). 207, 208, and 209 of 2007 to lay over until December 26, 2007 meeting. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

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

1. Ordinance No. 191 of 2007: An ordinance authorizing the issuance of not to exceed $9,000,000 of the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana Taxable Special Facilities Revenue Bonds on behalf of the Shreveport Airport Authority, authorizing the pledge of certain revenues to secure the Bonds, awarding the Bonds to the Purchaser thereof, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE DOCUMENTS RELATED TO AN INTEREST RATE SWAP AGREEMENT; and providing otherwise with respect thereto. (Postponed November 27, 2007)

Having passed first reading on October 23, 2007 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 Long to postpone. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

2. Ordinance No. 196 of 2007: A Supplemental Ordinance amending and supplementing Resolution No. 131 of 1984 (the "General Bond Resolution") adopted on June 12, 1984, as amended; acknowledging and approving the issuance of not to exceed $28,900,000 principal amount of Louisiana Local Government Environmental Facilities and Community Development Authority Revenue Bonds (Shreveport Utility System Project) Series 2007, on behalf of the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana, approving and confirming the sale of such bonds; pledging revenues of the System to secure such bonds; and providing for other matters in connection therewith. (Postponed November 27, 2007)

Having passed first reading on November 13, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Wooley, seconded by Councilman Lester. The Clerk read the following:

Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 196 of 2007

Amend the ordinance as follows:

Delete the ordinance as introduced and substitute the attached ordinance.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Wooley to adopt Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 196 of 2007. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

Motion by Councilman Wooley, seconded by Councilman Walford to adopt Ordinance No. 196 of 2007 as amended. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None

3. Ordinance No. 198 of 2007: An ordinance to amend and reenact Section 10-44 of the Code of Ordinances relative to qualifications of applicants for alcoholic beverage permits and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (Postponed November 27, 2007)

Having passed first reading on November 13, 2007 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 Wooley to postpone. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

4. Ordinance No. 199 of 2007: An ordinance amending the 2007 Budget for the General Fund, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on November 27, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Long, seconded by Councilman Wooley. The Clerk read the following:

Amendment # 1 to Ordinance No. 199 of 2007

AMEND THE ORDINANCE AS FOLLOWS:

In Section 2 (Appropriations):

In Office of the Mayor, decrease Personal Services by $1,000 and increase Materials and Supplies by $1,000

Motion by Councilman Long, seconded by Councilman Walford to adopt Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 199 of 2007.

Ms. Johnson: Mr. Shyne?

Councilman Shyne: You didn’t get my vote?

Ms. Johnson: I didn’t get a vote from Ms. Bowman on the Amendment.

Councilwoman Bowman: Well he didn’t even want to see if we had any discussion. I did have a question. Sorry.

Councilman Long: Oh, slow down.

Councilman Shyne: Okay, let’s get the question right now.

Councilwoman Bowman: You know you said on materials Mr. Dark, what materials are you speaking of?

Mr. Dark: Mostly office supplies.

Councilwoman Bowman: And is this the one that I read about Fleet Services?

Mr. Dark: No Ma’am.

Councilman Shyne: I thought she was going to say lawn mowers and sling blades. I was going to say give me and the Mayor a sling blade.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Lester to adopt Ordinance No. 199 of 2007 as amended. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

5. Ordinance No. 200 of 2007: An ordinance amending the 2007 Budget for the Community Development Special Revenue Fund, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on November 27, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Long, seconded by Councilman Walford to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

6. Ordinance No. 201 of 2007: An ordinance amending the 2007 Budget for the Metropolitan Planning Commission’s Special Revenue Fund, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on November 27, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Webb, seconded by Councilman Long to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

7. Ordinance No. 202 of 2007: An ordinance amending the 2007 Budget for the Fleet Services Internal Service Fund, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on November 27, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Long, seconded by Councilman Bowman to adopt.

Councilwoman Bowman: Now Mr. Dark, what is this $35,000 for?

Mr. Dark: What we’ve done is in the General Fund where you’ve already passed two of the things that we did in that amendment, added money for payments to Fleet Services, this is just receiving those same monies. It’s costing more to repair vehicles for SPAR and Police than we originally budgeted. This is putting that money in the Fleet budget.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

8. Ordinance No. 203 of 2007: An ordinance amending the 2007 Budget for the Riverfront Development Special Revenue Fund, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on November 27, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Long, seconded by Councilman Wooley. The Clerk read the following:

Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 203 of 2007

Amend the Ordinance as follows:

Delete "Section 2 Appropriation" in Ordinance No 203 of 2007 and substitute the following "Section 2 Appropriations":

Section 2 (Appropriations):

Increase "Other Charges" by $70,000

Decrease "Operating Reserves" by $70,000

Adjust totals and subtotals accordingly.

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, the way this one is worded, if this is adopted, and the ordinance is adopted as amended, it would not give extra money to the Shreveport/Bossier Community Renewal. It would only be $30,000 rather than $60 (thousand)

Councilman Shyne: Mr. Thompson, I believe, I don’t want to speak for Councilman Long or not, but my idea was to give them the 30 that they missed and then put the 30 in for 2008.

Mr. Thompson: This is for 2007.

Councilman Lester: Right.

Councilman Shyne: But it does not include - - -

Mr. Dark: That’s a separate budget amendment later.

Councilman Shyne: There’s going to be a second amendment?

Councilman Walford: I’ve got some discussion. I really think this is a bad amendment. Both the amendment and the ordinance are bad. For one thing the air show that we’re talking about funding is over. I will tell you that some years ago, the folks with the air show came to the city, asked for funding one time for $25,000. But as seems to be the case, once we give somebody money, it becomes and entitlement thereafter, and they insist on spending their money with performers from far out of state. They don’t want to use any locals, and I’m going to vote “NO”. And I think giving Community Renewal money right at the end of the year when it’s less that 15 days left by the time they get it. So, I’m going to vote “NO” on the amendment and the ordinance.

Councilman Wooley: I’m going to vote “NO” on this one as well. I just can’t justify giving the air show any money. I just can’t see that. They’ve already spent the money. It’s just that simple, they’ve already spent their money for the year. It’s over. And I just cannot do that in good conscious. So my vote will be ‘”NO”.

Councilman Lester: Mr. Chairman, if I may?

Councilman Shyne: Yes.

Councilman Lester: Again, to reiterate where I’m coming with this. I kinda of agree with what Councilman Walford said. I think it’s not fair, and more than not just being fair, I think it’s not just. Cost justice is a higher value than fairness. Fairness is something that changes with a sliding scale, justice is something that’s a lot more sound and stable. I don’t think it’s just for us to look at the budgets from the Riverfront Development fund and single one organization out and say we want to give them more money because they did not get in 2006. Well they got less in 2007 what they got in 2006, especially when you guys all voted for it (I say you guys cause I wasn’t here when we voted on the budget amendment). That being said, I think the just thing to do is to give everybody that got less in 2007 than they did in 2006, the balance that they did not receive which is what I appreciate Councilman Long is doing, or do nothing. Don’t give anybody anything. And Councilman Wooley, if you’re concerned about the Barksdale Air Show, I mean the point of the fact is as I appreciate it, all these things have to be done in a fast track type scenario. Just because we appropriate the funds, if the air show is over with, that doesn’t mean that they’re going to show up on the contract and say give us a contract for something that’s already happened. But you understand my position was I don’t believe that we should be making those value determinations.

Councilman Wooley: I understand.

Councilman Lester: And so that’s where I’m coming from. Because I want to be, I try to be as consistent as possible in situations like this. But I think that is the just thing to do. Considering the fact that I think it can be argued as it relates to any of the other organizations, and I think both those organizations have representatives here, that they are not only at the end of their budget year, they’re at the 11^th hour of their budget, and to the extent that the Barksdale Air Show has done without those resources for 11 months, almost 12 months, you could make the same arguments that these two organizations have done so without those resources. And even if this were to pass and we were to fast track it, it would be very doubtful that they would get those 2007 funds before 2007 is over. So, that’s where I’m coming from on that particular issue. I respect your position, but that’s where I’m coming from. I think again, do it for everybody, or do it for no one.

Councilman Long: Our fiscal years goes in February, does it not Tom? Or are we calendar year.

Mr. Dark: Ours is the calendar year. In order to get these funds to these organizations, we would have to get a contract done in the next 20 days.

Councilman Shyne: I’m like you and I can’t in good conscious spend public money based on the idea that I have to be fair with one, what I gave one, I have to give to another. Like I said before, I’ve got two boys, and I don’t raise them like that. Jacobe knows not to come in and ask, “Well daddy you gave Joe $20, I want my $20”. I don’t operate like that, and I don’t think we need to spend public dollars like that. If we going to give an organization some money that they didn’t even come up and ask for it cause we want to be fair. I think sometimes we have to make value judgements. That’s a part of what we do. Now whether we like it or not, that’s another thing. I like it. I don’t have no problem (inaudible) value judgements. So my vote will be a “NO” vote. Cause the other organization touch the lives of people who really need some help. The air show is not a necessity. You can see an air show on TV. What Mac McCarter’s group does is - - - they actually touch the lives of people who need help. Who can impact - - - Councilman Long, I’m sorry, I’m going to have to vote “NO” on your - - -

Councilman Long: Can I offer a substitute motion that we go with Amendment No. 1 less the Air Show money.

Councilman Lester: Second

Substitute motion by Councilman Long, seconded by Councilman Lester to adopt Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 203 of 2007, less the Air Show money.

Mr. Thompson: All of our amendments have to be in writing.

Councilman Shyne: You want to postpone this and let him write it up and let him come back to it?

Councilman Lester: Here it is. I also was a Boy Scout. (Inaudible)

Substitute Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 203 of 2007

Amend the Ordinance as follows:

Delete "Section 2 Appropriation" in Ordinance No 203 of 2007 and substitute the following "Section 2 Appropriations":

Section 2 (Appropriations):

Increase "Other Charges" by $60,000

Decrease "Operating Reserves" by $60,000

Adjust totals and subtotals accordingly.

Councilman Long: My concern is that I think all of us here share our thoughts and concerns about the Sports Authority and some of the treatment they received in the past Administration, and I just you know, I just feel like we need to do something about that. And I certainly understand everybody’s sentiment concerning the air show, cause that’s done and passed.

Councilman Shyne: I can go along with the Sports Authority, but the Air Show, Mr. Mayor, you know I’ve got a reputation of being by Mr. Thompson over there, about being a little tight with money.

Councilman Long: Mr. Chairman, I understand Councilman Lester has the concept as well.

Councilman Shyne: I understand it, but going along with it is another horse with a different color.

Councilman Webb: Point of Order. Ms. Glass is that legal what Councilman Lester did?

Ms. Glass: Yes, we do have an amendment in writing. There’s not a requirement that it be typed, it just needs to be in writing.

Mayor Glover: Mr. Chairman and Members of Council, from the Administration’s standpoint, is there a specific identified need for these dollars that these groups have identified or represented to you all that these dollars will be used to deal with in color at this point. Because there’s a whole list of other groups who have received dollars from the River front fund in 2007. And my question to each and everyone of you is that if you’re going to decide that you’re going to take out the Barksdale Air Show, which from a PR standpoint may not be a very good thing for those of us on the Shreveport side of the river to be doing in light of the continual effort to show how much we support Barksdale and the great things that go on there. But then you’ve also got a long list of other groups who receive funding this year. Now what’s the wisdom of deciding here at this point with 20 days left in this year that we’re going to give these additional dollars to these two groups, and not make a decision to give to any of the others. Since I’m going to be ultimately the one who has to decide to sign off on these individual contract amendments, you all need to give me some indication as to why it is I need to be inclined to do that.

Councilman Long: I’d like to address that. I think that what I’d like to do is the $30,000 that we’re talking about the Sport’s Authority that goes directly to their debt to the schools, the colleges that they owe money to, that they’re on a payment plan right now, be specifically earmarked for that purpose. And as far as the Community Renewal, I believe that Michael can you come up and maybe talk - - - I think what we’re talking about is right now they’re operating at a (I’m not going to say at a deficit), but maybe you can address - - - this money, if you get it, what would you do with it.

Mr. Mike Leonard: Thanks Mike, thanks Council Members. Every non profit in Shreveport prays in December for revenue to come in, because I suspect most of them are like us. We run at deficits during different times of the year, and we have about a $2.4 (million) annual budget which is roughly $200,000 a month, a $140,000 of that is spent in programmatic ways. And so, the $30,000 that would be put back in the budget, could easily be spent in the last couple of weeks of December of 2007.

Mayor Glover: That’s what every government bureaucracy says as they’re coming towards the end of the fiscal year. I used to hear my dad and his military friends having left over paint towards the end of the fiscal year, that they would go out and drain down the sewer so that they’d make sure that they got the same number of buckets and barrels allotted for the next fiscal year. So, I mean you guys and anybody else can spend money, my question is what’s the justification in this case, and any of the others that we’re talking about and not giving consideration to the needs of the other recipients of dollars from the Riverfront Development Fund.

Councilman Long: In this particular case Mr. Chairman.

Mayor Glover: That was not a specific answer with all due respect.

Councilman Long: Okay, well I’ll be specific. Yeah, back the first meeting we had when we approved the budget of this year, later in ’06, I believed that one of the things that occurred at that time was that there was a cut made and Mr. Walford can explain that, cause I think you offered that, at that time, that Community Renewal was cut by $30,000. I was upset with the situation at the time, and I went along with it. So, I saw it, and through the year wanted to restore that money at some point and time, because I felt like I strongly believe in their mission, and what they do.

Mayor Glover: We cut every department in the City of Shreveport in this current years budget. I’ve got a Fire Chief, whose about to leave here today that still tells me he wants back the two positions that I took from him in this current budget. And Shelly says the same and Bonnie and everybody else. My question is why are we taking (inaudible) now two plus a whole list of other folks who receive money from this fund, what makes these two rise up to the top that warrants me as the Mayor agreeing to sign off on this before the last 20 days of the year. There are other groups that are doing great things. It’s Christmas time. You know there are coats that can be bought, turkeys that can be purchased, toys that can be gotten, there’s a whole list of wonderful things we can do. I mean what - - - I’m trying to figure out the rhyme and the reason in terms of these two situations and circumstances.

Councilman Long: Well the Sports Authority was put in play by Councilman Lester, when he presented his amendment to the situation. So I thought if it’s going to be in play, lets play. If not, the other situation again with Community Renewal had to do with my desire to do something for that particular organization based on what happened to them late in ’06 which impacted them throughout the year. Take it or leave it, that’s what it is.

Mayor Glover: But do we not have others that received cuts from their allocations from the City.

Councilman Long: I believe that was the only one that was cut last year (inaudible) last year’s (inaudible), was Community Renewal I believe.

Mayor Glover: Then there were those who submitted that were not funded at all.

Ms. Pilkinton: Mr. Chairman, the three that Councilman Lester has in his amendment were the three that were cut from what they received in 2006-2007. And that’s why Councilman Lester asked for this to come back, for me to do research to find out who actually was cut to reinstall their money.

Councilman Long: Again, from the second to last list, the (inaudible) got approved in a sense.

Ms. Pilkinton: I’m taking actually what is put in the 2007 published budget as to what they received in 2006 and what they received in 2007. That’s where the numbers came from.

Councilman Shyne: Point of order. Could I ask one of the officers to step and look outside. It seems like we have storm. A severe storm coming into the City of Shreveport, and Tom that might cut out some of the talking.

Councilman Walford: Don’t tell them I’m looking at radar up here.

Councilman Shyne: And Mike we have a tendency to flood sometimes.

Councilman Lester: Mr. Chairman, thank you. Mr. Mayor, I think you’ve asked the question of the day. I don’t think there was any rhyme or any reason to doing a late year budget appropriation. Any organization that does any work within the City of Shreveport of the many that are funded through the Riverfront Development Fund, or that have sought resources and support from the Riverfront Development Fund, and as you accurately said received no support, could have gotten some I guess Christmas gift or what have you in this particular fashion. My amendment simply looks at the issue and say, ‘either if we’re going to do it for one, we do it for all’. I would be just as comfortable doing it for none. But what I did not believe was fair, or not even fair, just because just is higher than fairness. Fairness is a sliding scale. What’s just is if you’re going to open up Pandora’s Box, you make sure everyone gets it now. I’m certainly not going to pass judgement on the way people, their value systems, their beliefs, or the way they raise their children. He’s raising his twins one way, I’m raising my twins another way. I mean that’s the what I love about this country. I mean maybe you can do that for 20 year old twins, but when they’re 5, it’s kinda hard to explain why this one got a toy and why that one didn’t, or if you’ve got small kids, you can’t make that argument. I tried as recently as Sunday, and I just wasn’t successful, and I can argue. Having said that, it was my position that if we decide to do this, we should do it for everyone. To me I took what I thought was the most reasonable accommodation if you’re going to do something is without making any value judgements on the efficacy or the work or anything that the - - - not passing any judgement on any of the work that was done, I asked Sharon how many organizations in the 2007 budget received less than they received in 2006 that were funded. There were those three organizations. I said, if at the end of the day, if those three organizations got less in 2007 than they got in 2006, then let us make up the difference. Because if we’re going to make up the difference for one, then I believe we should make up the difference for all. I’m just as comfortable if my amendment fails, and the ordinance fails, because again my position was if you’re going to do for one, you do it for all, or do it for none.

Mayor Glover: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Council. As I said you know you all are the ones who have votes on this particular issue, the thing I have is the pen. At some point if you all pass this, it’s going to be incumbent upon Tom Dark and these groups to figure out some contractual set of circumstances that would justify me putting my signature on. What I need to here is the why and the wherefore to do that. I would offer that there are also amendments as I understand to be offered to the ’08 Budget that we’re to ultimately pass here tonight, that will also restore this funding. To sit here tonight and decide that with 20 days left in the year, that we want to make some rich and overlook some others is not the type of way in which I want to go about trying to lead and direct the Mayor’s office. Obviously folks do good work. As someone mentioned today, there are lots all over Shreveport who do great work. We just may not have the kind of quality politics that these good folks here have. And if we’re piggy backing the Sports Authority and the Air Show on the Back of it to try to and thing we’re going to make everybody whole, that’s something that frankly bothers me. And so, ultimately you folks have the votes on this situation. I can assure you that what I heard thus far here tonight won’t be the standard for this pen to meet with my signature. Thank you Mr. Chairman, thank you members of the Council.

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman Substitute Amendment No. 1 has been prepared, that was the motion by Mr. Long and we cut him off because it was not in writing. It is now in writing, and I think it’s only fair to let the Council know we have it in case anybody wants to make a motion and a second. The substitute amendment No. 1 strikes the Air Show, the $10,000 for the air show and it would leave the money for Shreveport Regional Sports Authority and Shreveport Community Renewal.

Motion to adopt Substitute Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 203 of 2007approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Long Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 5. Nays: Councilmen Walford, and Wooley. 2

Motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Long to adopt Ordinance No. 203 of 2007 as amended. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 6. Nays: Councilman Walford. 1.

9. Ordinance No. 155 of 2007: ZONING – C-64-07: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning property located on the south side of Lakeshore Drive, 140 feet west of Mertis Street, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from R-1D, Urban, One-Family Residence District, to B-1, Buffer Business District, with MPC Approval for a Day Care, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (G/Bowman) (Postponed November 27, 2007)

Having passed first reading on September 25, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Bowman, seconded by Councilman Wooley to postpone. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

11. Ordinance No. 205 of 2007: ZONING – C-95-07/P-42-07: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning property located the east and west sides of Buncombe Road at its intersection with Shrevepark Road, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from R-1D, Urban, One-Family Residence District, B-2, Neighborhood Business District, and B-3 Community Business District, to B-2 Neighborhood Business District with Planned Building Group and MPC Approval, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (F/Shyne)

Having passed first reading on November 27, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Shyne, seconded by Councilman Bowman to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

12. Ordinance No. 206 of 2007: ZONING – C-101-06/P-34-06: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by rezoning property located the south side of Bert Kouns Industrial Loop, 1500 feet east of Ellerbe Road, Shreveport, Caddo Parish Louisiana, from R-A, Residential-Agriculture District to B-1, Buffer Business District, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto. (D/Wooley)

Having passed first reading on November 27, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Wooley, seconded by Councilman Bowman to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, at this point, we would recommend that there would be a motion to remove the 2008 Budget Ordinances from the table and to take them up at this time.

Motion by Councilman Long, seconded by Councilman Lester to remove the 2008 Budget Ordinance No(s) 160-178 of 2007) from the table and to take them up at this time. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None

6. 2008 Budget Appropriation Ordinances (Introduced and Tabled on October 9, 2007) (To be adopted by December 11, 2007)

1. Ordinance No. 160 of 2007: An ordinance adopting the 2008 Capital Improvements Budget, appropriating the funds authorized therein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 9, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Shyne, seconded by Councilman Long. The Clerk read the following:

Amendment # 1A to Ordinance No. 160 of 2007

AMEND THE ORDINANCE AS FOLLOWS:

In Program A, under AProjects@, add a line to read:

6. Municipal Auditorium HVAC Improvements (08A003) $140,000 $140,000

Under ARevenues@, increase Riverfront Development by $140,000.

In Program B, under AProjects@, add a line to read:

3. Ledbetter Heights/Allendale Park and Community

Center (994B003) ($1,200,000) $1,845,000

Under ARevenues@, insert a line reading APrivate Donations ($1,200,000).@

In Program C, increase the ATOTAL - ALL PROGRAM C PROJECTS@ by $98,000.

In Program E, under AProjects@, add lines to read:

3. SE Shreveport Water Distribution System

Improvements (05E009) $21,000,000 $26,200,000

4. 60" Water Main - Amiss Plant to West College

Street (06E001) $ 287,000 $ 5,550,000

Under ARevenues@, add two lines to read:

2007 URB $26,000,000

Water and Sewer Revenues ($4,713,000)

In Program F, under AProjects@:

Decrease ATOTAL_ ALL PROGRAM E PROJECTS@ by $1,500,000.

Then, add a line to read:

2. SSO Abatement Program $100,000

Under ARevenues@, insert a line reading A2005 URB $100,000.@

In Program H, under AProjects@:

Reduce ATOTAL- ALL PROGRAM H PROJECTS@ by $1,800,000.

Then, insert a line to read:

2. Air Cargo Facility (08H001) $10,800,000 $10,800,000

Under ARevenues@, add lines to read:

2007 Airports Bonds $9,000,000.

State Grant $900,000

Shreveport Airport Authority $900,000

Adjust totals and subtotals accordingly.

Councilman Shyne: All of that is in 1A?

Mr. Thompson: It’s in 1A.

Motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Long to adopt Amendment No. 1A to Ordinance No. 160 of 2007.

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, to be sure that everybody understands, if you vote for 1A, then you would not vote for the Fire Maintenance Facility. If 1A would not be approved and you would vote for Amendment No. 1, you would vote for the Fire Maintenance Facility. So I just want everybody to understand the difference between the two.

Councilman Shyne: Chief, let me ask you my last official question while you’re still on the Mayor’s payroll.

Mayor Glover: Mr. Chairman, if you don’t mind, we’d like to start this discussion off with comments from CAO Dark, and then Chief Cochran.

Mr. Dark: We support 1 and not 1A. I want to make that very clear. I also - - - there was a lot of discussion yesterday about the amount of available bond funds that we have. I gave you all a piece of paper which is probably buried under seven hours of fun by now, that tells you how much bond money we have (yeah eight hours, sorry). We have about $5.3 (million) in various bond funds right now. We believe there’s enough to do the Fire Maintenance Facility with part of it, and to do some of the things that you all have requested because you all have things you’d like to do in your districts as well. We don’t think that’s an either or proposition, but you obviously couldn’t come up with things you wanted to do that we could get funded between yesterday and today. But we wanted to give you a clear choice. 1A says you don’t want to fund the Fire Maintenance Facility, 1 says you do. And there’s no difference between them other than that. That’s our spill. Kelvin obviously has operational reasons why he thinks Fire ought to do it, might as well let him express those if that’s what you want to do.

Councilman Shyne: Come up and before the Chief speaks, I trust Mr. Dark. He and I have worked - - -

Mr. Dark: That’s scary.

Councilman Shyne: You’ve blown my whole speech.

Mr. Dark: I’m sorry.

Councilman Shyne: I also support 1 and Chief I’d hate as good a job as you’ve done since you’ve been here, I’d hate for you to have to leave going to Atlanta knowing that your last big shot lost. I’d like for you to leave with a homerun. I’d like for you to leaving knowing that you have left this fire department in a position to move to another level.

Chief Cochran: Thank you Mr. Chairman. The $1.2 (million) simply is not enough to renovate the old Wray Ford facility to be an adequate fire maintenance facility that our city can be proud of and that our fire department could actually use to work on vehicles and equipment, and store all of it’s supplies and equipments necessary for us to be a Class I efficient fire department. We have scaled back the project.

Mayor Glover: Chief, not to interrupt you, but would you take them a step back for those who are new to the process, to let them know how we got to this process in terms of the $1.2 (million), the bond issue that identified this project, and the fact that we just don’t have enough to get it done?

Chief Cochran: Yes sir. The bond election that actually yielded the money for the fire maintenance facility passed in 2001. It originally was $2,000,000. At that time the project estimate was that $2,000,000 would pay for a new facility. After a substantial time had passed before the project, the funds were actually released and the project (inaudible) away, the construction cost had grown to the point that $2,000,000 was not enough. So, we began the process of looking for an existing facility, vacant facility in the city that would be adequate to renovate. That process took approximately two years before we actually ultimately ended up purchasing the current property that we call the Wray Ford facility. During that time, there were funds used to purchase the property at a very good price, but also list purchase that were needed for the facility that we needed at the time we purchased them, that we would later transfer them to the Wray Ford facility. Since that has been going on, a lot of the copper and interior materials that we were going to use that were not a part of the cost have been stolen. So, that is further deducted, and construction costs have continually increased. Currently to renovate the facility to the full extent of our needs, is I think, a little of $3.5 (million). We scaled back from that (inaudible) project to where we currently are about a little over $2.5 (million) and the prospects of getting additional funds is at least a year or more out. And this is our next great opportunity to get the funds that we need to do what we need to do partially to move from the old facility that was built in 1969, that is grossly undersized and inadequate for our needs to get to where we are today. And it’s just a highly - - - one of our significant needs for us to continue to work on fire trucks and equipment that firefighters need to respond safely to fires and other emergencies, and if you have equipment that’s going to work when they get there. And the sooner we get it done, the safer we’ll be, and the better off our fire department is going to be. So we really need your support.

Councilman Shyne: Chief, thank you. I think all this bragging that you heard a few minutes ago, we’re getting ready to put it to the test to see if we really have the faith in you that we professed to have had a few minutes ago. And Mr. Dark, I believe you said that to vote down 1A and to vote for - - -

Mr. Dark: That is our recommendation. This is the only project from the 2001 bond issue that is not currently fully funded or done. And we’d like to finish that before we start other things.

Councilwoman Bowman: Mr. Chairman, as we discussed this in the meeting yesterday, Mr. Dark, can you explain to me what the voters actually voted for this money.

Mr. Dark: Julie and I will try to do that one together. The voters voted for I can’t remember what the total number was.

Ms. Glass: $70,000,000.

Mr. Dark: $70,000,000 I think in projects. And the Council passed a resolution in 2001 that Julie has determined today does not need to be amended. That we will have met the requirement to do what we said we would do for the voters, that we met it already. But the voters did not pass a drainage proposition, and a parks proposition, and a public safety proposition. They simply passed one proposition, and it said we will do public improvements basically. And this was one of them. And what we’re doing now is now that we’ve basically finished or have fully funded the ones we haven’t finished all the projects in that except for the fire maintenance facility, we are simply trying to shift some money from what was originally allocated to drainage to this, because we’ve done the drainage projects we promised we’d do. That’s the short version. Julie has the other one.

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, I was the one who originally brought this to the attention of Mr. Dark to make sure that the resolution that we had adopted earlier was adhered to. Mr. Strong this morning brought me a list of all the projects that were in the bond issue and stated that they were either all done or the money was there to finish those projects and that there was also sufficient funds to do this project. So it appears as if everything that the voters were told would be done, has been done or will be done with those funds.

Councilwoman Bowman: This is for Mr. Strong: Wake up.

Mr. Dark: It’s way past his bedtime.

Councilwoman Bowman: Did that include - - - well what’s left over that’s going to be done. Anything for streets or ?

Mr. Strong: There’s about $558,000 in streets I think from this bond issue Tom that’s in there and about $4,000,000 that’s in drainage. But everything that was set to be done in the streets has been done. This is access monies that can be gone into to completing the jobs that we have ongoing right now too.

Councilwoman Bowman: What’s ongoing over there in my area?

Mr. Strong: I know that we have, Tom you have my receipt over there, but I show that we have the Southern Loop is a road that is ongoing right now.

Mr. Dark: I’ll try to read real quickly the things that are funded fully, but are not yet under construction. The Southern Loop portion from Windward to Wallace Lake, there is work on Booker T. Street from Kennedy to Broadway, the turn lane and intersection at Pierremont and Fairfield, the intersection at Southland Park and Mansfield Road, the bridge on S. Brookwood, I believe that’s all the individual projects - - -

Mr. Strong: I think that is that are still left?

Mr. Dark: All the drainage is done.

Councilwoman Bowman: Okay, neither one of those are in District G.

Mr. Dark: Well let me suggest something that we’re perfectly willing to do. We have normally it’s fairly prudent to hold on to some of this as much as we can. It’s been six years, plus since we’ve done a bond issue. I think we’re getting close enough to one where we can draw some of this down. We’re going to solicit, I think, some input from you all on project or projects in your area, which could be streets, drainage, parks, public safety. We’re not going to be able to spend it all now because if something goes to the point where he needs a million dollars to fix something tomorrow, we’ve got to have that money. But it is certainly possible I think to do this that we’re asking you to do tonight and then come back at the first of the year and set up something else. It’s not out of the question at all. But what we really wanted to do, and I guess I said it a minute ago, this is the (inaudible) the fire maintenance facility is the last big project of the 2001 bond issue. If you vote “NO”, basically we’re not going to do that one. At least not any way it was originally designed anyway. And it would be nice to do everything we said we were going to do in 2001, and then with whatever is left we go do other projects that meet current need.

Mr. Strong: Tom, I think projects in District G have already been done.

Mr. Dark: I mean I just listed the ones that had not been done.

Mr. Strong: I mean this was passed in 2001, and there’s a list of projects that were set up in this bond issue in ’01.

Mr. Dark: They did work on Jefferson Paige, they did work on Missouri, which I think is yours.

Mr. Strong: Jefferson Paige was the drainage project.

Mr. Dark: There was also a drainage project on Missouri and Andrew fairly close to Lakeside Golf Course, which I believe is yours. There was work on drainage in the 6400 Jefferson Paige. There was work on Santa Monica, and there were a number of city wide smaller projects that are not listed out. So there were - - - your district was represented at that time.

Councilman Shyne: Oh, looks like Joyce got the majority - - -

Councilwoman Bowman: Don’t start that Joe! That’s absolutely false. I did have one more thing. Now we’re not in violation of anything by using this money that the voters voted for?

Ms. Glass: That is correct. The resolution had a list of projects, and it said and I was trying to pull it up, but I don’t have it pulled up yet, projects listed in the proposition. Well the proposition included all of those projects. So, no we don’t think that it is a violation

Councilwoman: Okay, and this is my final question in ’01 for G?

Councilman Lester: That would be Roy Burrell.

Mr. Thompson: Mr. Chairman, there was a Jerry Bowman on the committee.

Councilwoman Bowman: Yeah, right.

Mayor Glover: I’m sorry Mr. Lester. Mr. Chairman, can a facial expression be entered into the official record?

Councilman Lester: Thank you Mr. Chairman. Amendment 1A is my amendment, and I’m going to claim it. Let me tell you what my reasoning was. When we had this discussion on yesterday, and I was - - - I did communicate with Mr. Dark, and I appreciate his candor. One of my major concerns is how we get both things done. In other words, the citizens as I appreciate it, when the bond issue went out, they didn’t - - - they said, well we’re going to spend $70,000,000, and some of the things we’re going to do were streets, drainage, and some other things in public safety in terms of the fire service and (inaudible). But as I appreciate it, correct me if I’m wrong, we’re not going to actually - - - when the people went to the polls and actually said, okay the street projects will be A,B,C,D,E,F,G as I appreciate it, that is something that was developed internally. Is that correct?

Ms. Glass: The projects were not listed in the proposition. The proposition broadly listed types of projects like streets and drainage.

Councilman Lester: But internally, the Administration or some entity thereof came up with the projects that we needed to use in terms of streets and drainage. My issue was this, and also correct me if I’m wrong, in the dialogue, there was mention of a renovation of the Central Fire facility, and a new fire repair facility, is that not correct?

Mr. Thompson: It said that the Central Fire Station would be renovated I believe was the language, and there would be a new maintenance facility built.

Councilman Lester: Right.

Mr. Dark: It actually, in the citizens committee report, it simply says the words “maintenance facility”, it doesn’t say new, doesn’t say renovated, it just says those two words.

Councilman Lester: Well, this is what it boils down to, and last Council, we had some conversation at some point about the purchasing of the Wray Ford facility. And as I recall Mr. Dark, when that item was approached with the Council, the Council took a position that that was not something that we necessarily wanted to do.

Mr. Dark: Mr. Lester, Mr. Green who was the representative of District F at the time originally said, I don’t want to see that move off Kennedy Drive, and when - - - eventually I believe the Fire Chief and he reached an agreement that it was better for them to move off, and dropped his opposition, so we went on.

Councilman Shyne: I’m glad he did Chief. That was one of the reasons why I ran.

Councilman Lester: Okay.

Councilman Shyne: I’m sorry go ahead.

Councilman Lester: That’s alright, that’s alright. I’m going to let you finish

Councilman Shyne: I’m through.

Councilman Lester: Okay, thank you. That was the purchasing of Wray Ford facility was not something that was brought before the Council as I appreciate it, that’s not something we voted on.

Mr. Dark: That’s not something you’d have to. You give us the authorization with Capital Budget to do things.

Councilman Lester: Gotcha. I guess where I am Mr. Chairman, and it just becomes a matter of choice and priorities. You know I would just like to be able looking at $4,000,000 in the budget in terms of drainage issues and knowing for instance, I have had and Mr. Strong will tell you, in the five years I’ve been sitting down here, a lot of conversation and concern from my constituents in the University Park area about persistent and constant flooding, only to be told well that’s bond issue stuff, Capital Projects, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, and then when I hear Monday, that there’s $4,000,000 sitting aside to specifically deal with drainage, I’m saying okay, I want to take care of this issue with my constituents. And again, it has absolutely nothing to do with the fine regard and esteem that I hold (inaudible). It means nothing at all. Mr. Chairman, I think we’re smart enough to be able to deal with our intellectual issues and deal with our constituents first. I mean, the Chief was here before I got here. But if it weren’t for the people in University Park, I would not be here. And in all deference to the Chief, I have an obligation and my hierarchy goes to representing those folks that put me here in the first place and kept me here for what that’s worth. And so having said that, that’s why I offered issue 1A, and apparently in the process of discussing 1A, having our City Council Staff prepare the amendment for 1A, and having conversation with Mr. Dark, apparently, I’m hearing that there is money to deal with some of those issues and those drainage projects in District A, and other districts as well. So having said that my major concern and my overriding goal was to deal with the issues of my constituents first and to the extent that my constituents issues can be dealt with, and based on what Mr. Dark say, we can still deal with the issues of the Fire Department. Then I can in good conscious withdraw Amendment 1A and move forward. But please understand that at the time - - -

Councilman Shyne: Is that a motion?

Councilman Lester: Yeah, that’s a motion.

Councilman Shyne: Can I get a second on that?

Councilman Lester: But at the time that it was offered, there was not the accommodation that was made so - - - . We don’t have to vote. It’s mine. I’m withdrawing.

Amendment # 1 to Ordinance No. 160 of 2007

AMEND THE ORDINANCE AS FOLLOWS:

In Program A, under "Projects", add a line to read:

6. Municipal Auditorium HVAC Improvements (08A003) $140,000 $140,000

Under "Revenues", increase Riverfront Development by $140,000.

In Program B, under "Projects", add a line to read:

3. Ledbetter Heights/Allendale Park and Community

Center (994B003) ($1,200,000) $1,845,000

Under "Revenues", insert a line reading "Private Donations ($1,200,000)."

In Program C, increase the "TOTAL - ALL PROGRAM C PROJECTS" by $98,000.

In Program E, under "Projects", add lines to read:

3. SE Shreveport Water Distribution System

Improvements (05E009) $21,000,000 $26,200,000

4. 60" Water Main - Amiss Plant to West College

Street (06E001) $ 287,000 $ 5,550,000

Under "Revenues", add two lines to read:

2007 URB $26,000,000

Water and Sewer Revenues ($4,713,000)

In Program F, under "Projects":

Decrease "TOTAL_ ALL PROGRAM E PROJECTS" by $1,500,000.

Then, add a line to read:

2. SSO Abatement Program $100,000

Under "Revenues", insert a line reading "2005 URB $100,000."

In Program H, under "Projects":

Reduce "TOTAL- ALL PROGRAM H PROJECTS" by $1,800,000.

Then, insert a line to read:

2. Air Cargo Facility (08H001) $10,800,000 $10,800,000

Under "Revenues", add lines to read:

2007 Airports Bonds $9,000,000.

State Grant $900,000

Shreveport Airport Authority $900,000

Delete the "Program I" section of the ordinance and substitute in lieu thereof the following:

Program I - Fire Improvements

Projects

1. Fire Maintenance Facility (01I004) $1,500,000 $3,400,000

Revenues

2003 GOB $1,500,000

SUBTOTAL - PROGRAM I PROJECTS $1,500,000

TOTAL- ALL PROGRAM I PROJECTS $5,714,000

Adjust totals and subtotals accordingly.

Motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilmen Wooley and Walford to adopt Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 160 of 2007. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

Motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Walford to Ordinance No. 160 of 2007 as amended. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

2. Ordinance No. 161 of 2007: An ordinance adopting the 2008 Budget for the Riverfront Development Special Revenue Fund, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 9, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Shyne, seconded by Councilman Long. The Clerk read the following:

Amendment # 1 to Ordinance No. 161 of 2007

AMEND THE ORDINANCE AS FOLLOWS:

In Section 2 (Appropriations):

Decrease Operating Reserves by $390,000. Increase Contractual Services by $250,000 and Transfer to Capital Projects Fund by $140,000.

Adjust totals and subtotals accordingly.

Motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Bowman to adopt Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 161 of 2007.

Councilman Wooley: This is for the Master Planning?

Mr. Dark: This is Master Planning and boiler repair.

Councilman Wooley: I just wanted to say I do look forward to moving forward with this item. And look forward to this Saturday. Definitely something well needed in our city, and I think we’ll be very productive in doing so.

Mayor Glover: Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to say in the interest of full disclosure that this number does not necessarily represent what could end up being the ultimate cost of a Master Plan. It certainly is to indicate without question that we want to be in a position to move and move very quickly as we get in the position to be able to do so, but this is a number that has not yet been fully determined. We hope to get support from other governmental entities as well as folks from the private sector. But we don’t want anybody to leave here tonight thinking that we’re going to get a Master Plan for $250.00.

Councilman Wooley: This is not the grand total.

Councilman Long: We gotta start somewhere.

Councilwoman Bowman: Right.

Councilman Shyne: I think we have some members on the Council from the Parish, and I know they would be willing to help you do a little lobbying with the Parish Commission.

Councilwoman Bowman: Way to go Joe.

Councilman Shyne: I see some volunteers already. Mike Long, Bowman, and Webb to volunteer. Lets move on.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

The Clerk read the following:

Amendment # 2 to Ordinance 161 of 2007

In Section 2: Appropriations

Increase "Other Charges" by $2,500

Decrease "Operating Reserves" by $2,500

Motion by Councilman Bowman, seconded by Councilman Lester to adopt Amendment No. 2 to Ordinance No. 161 of 2007. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

Amendment # 3 to Ordinance 161 of 2007

By: Councilwoman Joyce Bowman

In Section 2: Appropriations

Increase "Other Charges" by $15,000

Decrease "Operating Reserves" by $15,000

Councilman Bowman: I move to withdraw Amendment No. 3. I had the opportunity to speak with Ms. Dudley this morning, and we’re going to look at something else in maybe March.

The Clerk read the following:

Amendment # 4 to Ordinance 161 of 2007

By: Councilman Michael Long

In Section 2: Appropriations

Increase "Other Charges" by $100,000

Decrease "Operating Reserves" by $100,000

Councilman Long: Mr. Chairman, I would like to withdraw that amendment.

Councilman Shyne: Thank you.

Councilman Walford: Can I say thank you too?

Councilman Shyne: Yes.

The Clerk read the following:

Amendment # 5 to Ordinance 161 of 2007

In Section 2: Appropriations

Increase "Other Charges" by $30,000

Decrease "Operating Reserves" by $30,000

Motion by Councilman Long, seconded by Councilman Shyne to adopt Amendment No. 5 to Ordinance No. 161 of 2007.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 6. Nays: Councilman Walford. 1.

The Clerk read the following:

Amendment # 6 to Ordinance 161 of 2007

In Section 2: Appropriations

Increase "Other Charges" by $50,000

Decrease "Operating Reserves" by $50,000

Motion by Councilman Webb, seconded by Councilman Lester to adopt Amendment No. 6 to Ordinance No. 161 of 2007.

Councilman Walford: So, we’re going to increase this in addition to what we gave ‘em a few minutes ago.

Councilman Webb: Yeah.

Councilman Shyne: This is Councilman Webb’s amendment, and this is either his first one or second one, so I would encourage y’all to PLEASE. I’m sorry. Calvin I got that from you, that outburst.

Councilman Lester: Hey.

Councilman Shyne: That emotional outburst.

Councilman Lester: It’s a whole lot of stuff you can get from me if you listen Mr. Shyne.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 6. Nays: Councilman Walford. 1.

Motion by Councilman Lester, seconded by Councilman Long to adopt Ordinance No. 161 of 2007 as amended.

Councilman Walford: Well mine is not really a question. I just think it’s time to make a comment and it’s going to be a very unpopular comment, and the media is going to pick it up.

Mayor Glover: Nobody’s watching.

Councilman Walford: And I’m sure Ms. Atchison is going to be mad when she hears me say this, but at some point, this Council has got to look at the amount of money that we’re giving away. So what I want to do is quantify what we’ve done, and I’m going to base it on what the Chief told us when we talked about police. You’re all talking about we need more police, we need to find money. If you take the amount of money that we’re giving away tonight, and you take out what’s required by statute for the Multicultural, you take out the Independence Bowl, it comes down to it would fund 34 new police officers. Complete with cars, academy and everything else based on the figures the Chief told us. Now, I’m not saying that we should cut off all of our funding out of the Riverfront Development Fund. But at some point, it’s got to quit going up, and we’ve got to stop this free flow of money. If we were to go to the voters, and say, do you want us to give this money away, or would you rather have more policemen, would you rather have us do something about your bad streets? You tell me what they’d say. So, I’m voting this tonight, but I will tell you next year, I will not be supporting the mass giveaway. Deserving organizations, I certainly will support some funding for, but I want to see at least 12-15 new police officers on the street. Or you can use the $85,000 figure and that’s what I’m going to push for next year, but I think you can already see that I’m going to be outvoted, so that’s my feeling.

Councilman Long: Mr. Chairman, I’m going to echo that sentiment as well. I too believe that over time, we need to go ahead an wean these folks off and get (inaudible) to see those. We need to deal with especially when it comes to crime, and police protection and all the other issues that we have to deal with. We just gotta do it sooner or later. But we just can’t do it at one time.

Councilman Wooley: Thank you Mr. Chairman. While I appreciate and respect the sentiments and comments from other Council Members, I would dare say that I think we as a Council and the Administration can be creative enough to find funding to fund more police officers. I know that Chief is working hard in doing that. And some of that will be proposed and voted on this evening. (Inaudible) of those officers now become (inaudible) in the street and being replaced by civilians. That’s creative in thinking. Thank you Chief. Also I know there are some proposals. I have one here in my paperwork of what he used to increase police and fire salaries in a very creative way and it really won’t cost us as much as most people think. So at the same time, I would dare say, yes crime is the No. 1 concern in this city. I think steps are being taken to address those concerns. I think we need to do more. One thing I’ll be advocating is more for police and fire and their salaries to attract more officers and firemen to stay in our city. But at the same time, we have a responsibility to the citizens of Shreveport for a quality of life, and a lot of the groups that we give to, whether it be on the Riverfront or whether it be in the inner city. These are things that the citizens of Shreveport truly desire. And some that would rather not do without. So we have a responsibility to them and I appreciate that. Thank you.

Councilman Shyne: Councilman Wooley, those are words of wisdom that’s coming from a young and upcoming politician. I also agree and I think the Mayor understands that if we’re going to be this great city that we need to get to be, we can’t just spend it all in bricks and mortar. We have to have a certain amount of culture. We just have to. And I’m not necessarily saying that my other two colleagues might not know what they’re talking about, but Pam, I want you all to know that you all have done an excellent job over the years. I’ve been here for a long time, and I know what you all add to this community. I know what you all add to this community, I don’t think we can pay it in dollars and cents. And what we give is kinda matching funds, and you all make those funds grow. So, I want you to know that maybe I’ve seen what you all have done a little bit longer than others. So, I want to tell you that next year, you’re going to have my support and my vote, and I want you all to continue doing what you doing. Cause that goes into making this a great city.

Councilman Lester: I just wanted to say I agree with what Councilman Walford said. The budget reflects what your priorities are and I think this time next year, if we believe the priorities are to do some additional things with police and fire, I think we can do that. I for one at the budget meeting just to refresh some of the colleagues memories, I came up with a way that could have dealt with increases to the police department’s budgets in terms of pay raise that would not have required him going and doing anything spectacular or in fact would not have touched the Riverfront Development Fund at all. After having had the conversation with the Administration and our legal department, I decided against it at this time, but you know the commitment I got from the Administration was that we were going to look at that particular fund this year and kinda (inaudible) in some of those issues because they believe with me that the number that we were looking at did seem high, and it did seem rather bloated. But I think what it becomes, we don’t have to have a zero gain, we don’t have to have someone win and someone lose, we can all win if we are willing to do the work and be creative enough to get there, and there are a number of ways to get there. And I would solicit the entire Council support in terms of doing some things for police and fire in the next year’s budget, because it can be done. We just have to do the work.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

3. Ordinance No. 162 of 2007: An ordinance adopting the 2008 General Fund Budget, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 9, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Shyne, seconded by Councilman Long. The Clerk read the following:

Amendment # 1 to Ordinance No. 162 of 2007

AMEND THE ORDINANCE AS FOLLOWS:

In Section 1 (Estimated Receipts):

Increase Taxes and Special Assessments by $538,000.

Increase Miscellaneous by $1,072,000.

In Section 2 (Appropriations):

In Public Assembly and Recreation, increase Improvements and Equipment by $150,000.

In General Government, decrease Transfer to Community Development Fund by $326,700.

In Police, increase Personal Services by $513,000.

In Fire, increase Improvements and Equipment by $750,000.

In Operational Services, increase Personal Services by $322,700, Contractual Services by $29,000 and Improvements and Equipment by $172,000.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Long to adopt Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 162 of 2007. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

Motion by Councilman Long, seconded by Councilman Walford to adopt Ordinance No. 162 of 2007 as amended. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

4. Ordinance No. 163 of 2007: An ordinance adopting the 2008 Budget for the Community Development Special Revenue Fund, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 9, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Shyne, seconded by Councilman Long. The Clerk read the following:

Amendment # 1 to Ordinance No. 163 of 2007

AMEND THE ORDINANCE AS FOLLOWS:

In Section 1 (Estimated Receipts), under Fiscal Year 2008 Funds:

Decrease Transfer from General Fund by $326,700 and Certificate of Indebtedness by $16,000.

In Section 2 (Appropriations), under 2008 Revenues:

In Property Standards, decrease Personal Services by $322,700, Contractual Services by $4,000 and Improvements and Equipment by $17,000.

Adjust totals and subtotals accordingly.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Bowman to adopt Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 163 of 2007. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Bowman to adopt Ordinance No. 163 of 2007 as amended. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

5. Ordinance No. 164 of 2007: An ordinance adopting the 2008 Budget for the Water and Sewerage Enterprise Fund, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 9, 2007 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 Long to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, and Shyne. 6. Nays: Councilman Bowman. 1.

6. Ordinance No. 165 of 2007: An ordinance adopting the 2008 Budget for the Airports Enterprise Fund, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 9, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Long, seconded by Councilman Walford to adopt.

Councilman Lester: Mr. Chairman, I’d like to ask Mr. Dark to have someone on staff at some point tomorrow (which is in about 20 minutes) to discuss the project at the airport that’s currently underway. I got some calls from some folks that were involved in that process and they raised some pretty serious fair share concerns as it relates to the general contractor. And questioning whether or not the funds or city funds are there for incorporate fair share language as opposed to being federal dollars which is a whole nother calculation.

Mr. Dark: Which construction project?

Councilman Lester: The one that was just recently bid. I think it’s the cargo terminal.

Mr. Dark: Cargo facility is a city project. There are no federal funds in it. And I know we have not awarded a bid yet. They just took ‘em.

Councilman Walford: But they’ve got other projects going on.

Mr. Dark: But that’s the one you’re most likely asking about.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

7. Ordinance No. 166 of 2007: An ordinance adopting the 2008 Budget for the Golf Enterprise Fund, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 9, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Shyne, seconded by Councilman Long. The Clerk read the following:

Amendment # 1 to Ordinance No. 166 of 2007

AMEND THE ORDINANCE AS FOLLOWS:

In Section 1 (Estimated Receipts):

Decrease External Service Charges and Fees by $2,300.

Increase Interest Earnings by $300.

Increase Miscellaneous Revenues by $2,000.

Adjust totals and subtotals accordingly.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilmen Long and Lester to adopt Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 166 of 2007. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

Mayor Glover: Mr. Chairman, there’s a rampant rumor that there’s already a green in your backyard.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Long to adopt Ordinance No. 166 of 2007 as amended. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

8. Ordinance No. 167 of 2007: An ordinance adopting the 2008 Budget for the Information Technology Internal Service Fund, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 9, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Shyne, seconded by Councilman Long to adopt. The Clerk read the following:

Amendment #1 to Ordinance No. 167 of 2007

AMEND THE ORDINANCE AS FOLLOWS:

In Section 1 (Estimated Receipts):

Increase Transfer from General Fund by $34,300.

Decrease Transfer from Airports Fund by $10,000.

In Section 2 (Appropriations):

Increase Improvements and Equipment by $24,300.

Adjust totals and subtotals accordingly.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Wooley to adopt Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 167 of 2007. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Wooley to adopt Ordinance No. 167 of 2007 as amended. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

9. Ordinance No. 168 of 2007: An ordinance adopting the 2008 Budget for the Metropolitan Planning Commission Special Revenue Fund, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 9, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Wooley, seconded by Councilman Long to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

10. Ordinance No. 169 of 2007: An ordinance adopting the 2008 Budget for the Fleet Services Internal Service Fund, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 9, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Shyne, seconded by Councilman Long. The Clerk read the following:

Amendment # 1 to Ordinance No. 169 of 2007

AMEND THE ORDINANCE AS FOLLOWS:

In Section 1 (Estimated Receipts):

Increase Transfer from General Fund by $2,000.

Increase Transfer from Water & Sewerage Fund by $6,200.

Decrease Transfer from Community Development Fund by $1,000.

Decrease Transfer from Golf Fund by $3,000.

Decrease Transfer from Retained Risk Fund by $400.

Appropriate Transfer from Information Technology Fund at $10,000.

In Section 2 (Appropriations):

Increase Materials and Supplies by $13,800.

Adjust totals and subtotals accordingly.

Motion by Councilman Wooley, seconded by Councilmen Walford and Long to adopt Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 169 of 2007. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

Motion by Councilman Wooley, seconded by Councilman Long to adopt Ordinance No. 169 of 2007 as amended. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

11. Ordinance No. 170 of 2007: An ordinance adopting the 2008 Budget for the Retained Risk Internal Service Fund, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 9, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Long, seconded by Councilman Bowman to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

12. Ordinance No. 171 of 2007: An ordinance adopting the 2008 Debt Service Fund Budget, appropriating the funds herein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 9, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Wooley, seconded by Councilman Long to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

13. Ordinance No. 172 of 2007: An ordinance adopting the 2008 Budget for the Police Grants Special Revenue Fund, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 9, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Shyne, seconded by Councilman Long to adopt. The Clerk read the following:

Amendment # 1 to Ordinance No. 172 of 2007

AMEND THE ORDINANCE AS FOLLOWS:

In Section 1 (Estimated Receipts), under "2007 and Prior-Year Receipts", increase Prior-year Solving Cold Cases With DNA by $2,000.

In Section 2 (Appropriations), under "From 2007 and Prior-Year Revenues", from Prior-Year Solving Cold Cases With DNA, decrease Personal Services by $39,900 and increase Contractual Services by $41,900.

Adjust totals and subtotals accordingly.

Motion by Councilman Webb, seconded by Councilman Long to adopt Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 172 of 2007. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

Motion by Councilman Webb, seconded by Councilmen Long and Walford to adopt Ordinance No. 172 of 2007 as amended. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

14. Ordinance No. 173 of 2007: An ordinance adopting the 2008 Budget for the Environmental Grants Special Revenue Fund, appropriating the funds authorized therein, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 9, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Wooley, seconded by Councilman Lester to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

15. Ordinance No. 174 of 2007: An ordinance adopting the 2008 Budget for the Convention Center Hotel Enterprise Fund, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 9, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Wooley, seconded by Councilman Long to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne. 6. Nays: Councilman Bowman. 1.

16. Ordinance No. 175 of 2007: An ordinance adopting the 2008 Budget for the Downtown Entertainment Economic Development District Special Revenue Fund, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 9, 2007 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 Long to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

17. Ordinance No. 176 of 2007: An ordinance adopting the 2008 Budget for the Downtown Parking Enterprise Fund, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 9, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Shyne, seconded by Councilman Long. The Clerk read the following:

Amendment # 1 to Ordinance No. 176 of 2007

AMEND THE ORDINANCE AS FOLLOWS:

In Section 2 (Appropriations):

Increase Operating Reserves by $200 and decrease Transfer to General Fund by $200.

Adjust totals and subtotals accordingly.

Motion by Councilman Walford, seconded by Councilman Long to adopt Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 176 of 2007. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

Motion by Councilman Wooley, seconded by Councilman Walford to adopt Ordinance No. 176 of 2007 as amended. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

18. Ordinance No. 177 of 2007: An ordinance adopting the 2008 Budget for the Shreveport Redevelopment Agency Special Revenue Fund, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 9, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Long, seconded by Councilman Bowman to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

19. Ordinance No. 178 of 2007: An ordinance adopting the 2008 Budget Funding Contractual Services provided to SPORTRAN by Metro Management Associates, Inc., and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 9, 2007 was read by title, and on motion, ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Webb, seconded by Councilman Long to adopt. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Lester, Walford, Long Wooley, Webb, Shyne, and Bowman. 7. Nays: None.

The adopted ordinances and amendments follow:

ORDINANCE NO. 160 OF 2007

AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE 2008 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS BUDGET, APPROPRIATING THE FUNDS AUTHORIZED THEREIN, AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO

BY:

WHEREAS, Article 7 of the City Charter provides that the appropriations set forth in the annual Capital Improvements Budget remain in effect until they are amended or the project is closed; and

WHEREAS, 2008 appropriations are necessary only for those projects which are new or for which the appropriation is increased or decreased.

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

Section 1 - Appropriations:

The following funds are hereby appropriated for the projects in the column titled “2008 Budget.” For those projects listed herein, total project spending for all years shall not exceed the amount appropriated herein, unless such amount is increased by subsequent action of the City Council. For active capital projects which are not listed herein, but which have been previously appropriated in a Capital Budget ordinance, the prior appropriation shall remain in effect. The Director of Finance is authorized to expend same in accordance with law, to the extent that funds are available.

Program A - Building and Improvements

Projects: 2008 2008

CHANGE BUDGET

1.Shreveport Convention Center (97A004) 500,000 109,895,100

2.Downtown City Hall (99A002) (725,000) 7,691,300

3.Riverfront Parking Structure (05A001) 2,500,000 4,571,100

4. New Office Building for Operational Services

(08A001) 600,000 600,000

5. Downtown One-Stop Shop Building (08A002) 1,000,000 1,000,000

SUBTOTAL - PROGRAM A PROJECTS 3,875,000

TOTAL - ALL PROGRAM A PROJECTS 190,894,000

Revenues:

Water and Sewer Revenues 300,000

Interest Earned 575,000

Riverfront Development 900,000

Downtown Parking Fund 150,000

2008 Parking Bonds 1,950,000

SUBTOTAL - PROGRAM A REVENUES 3,875,000

Program B - Recreation Improvements

Projects:

1. Riverfront Park Extension 251,700 5,927,200

2. Independence Stadium Capital Repairs &

Improvements (02B001) 42,000 605,300

SUBTOTAL - PROGRAM B PROJECTS 293,700

TOTAL - ALL PROGRAM B PROJECTS 9,637,500

Revenues:

Other Funds 42,000

1996 GOB, Prop. 8 (Riverfront Park) 500

1997 GOB, Prop. 8 (Riverfront Park) (6,900)

1999 GOB, Prop. 8 (Riverfront Park) 258,100

SUBTOTAL - PROGRAM B REVENUES 293,700

Program C - Street Improvements

Projects:

1. Youree Drive/Kings Highway Intersection

Improvements (89C027) (2,717,000) 1,445,900

2. Lakeside Area Street Paving (96C010) 450,000 2,375,000

3. Bridge Replacement Program (96C104) 250,000 2,051,000

4. 2008 CBDG Overlay (07C001) 300,000 300,000

SUBTOTAL - PROGRAM C PROJECTS (1,717,000)

TOTAL - ALL PROGRAM C PROJECTS 49,948,000

Revenues:

Community Development Block Grant 300,000

1999 GOB, Prop. 4 (Streets) 200,000

2003 GOB 700,000

Urban Arterial (2,717,000)

SUBTOTAL - PROGRAM C REVENUES (1,717,000)

Program D - Drainage Improvements

Projects:

1. Bayou Pierre Channel Improvements - 2001

Bonds (01D013) (800,000) 925,000

2. Purchase of Flood-Prone Properties (01D017) (250,000) 650,000

SUBTOTAL - PROGRAM D PROJECTS (1,050,000)

TOTAL - ALL PROGRAM D PROJECTS 25,453,800

Revenues:

1996 GOB, Prop. 10 (Drainage) (38,900)

1997 GOB, Prop. 10 (Drainage) (10,900)

1998 GOB, Prop. 10 (Drainage) 48,900

2001 GOB (900,000)

2003 GOB (150,000)

SUBTOTAL - PROGRAM D REVENUES (1,050,000)

Program E - Water Improvements

Projects:

1. Jefferson-Paige Water and Sewer Main

Relocation (04E001) (100,000) 168,000

2. Gilbert Avenue Water Main Improvements

(05E010) (400,000) 515,000

SUBTOTAL - PROGRAM E PROJECTS (500,000)

TOTAL - ALL PROGRAM E PROJECTS 95,347,600

Revenues:

1994A Utility Revenue Bonds (100,000)

2005 Utility Revenue Bonds (400,000)

SUBTOTAL -PROGRAM E REVENUES (500,000)

Program F - Sewer Improvements

Projects:

1. Wallace Lift Station Improvements (01F003) (550,000) 11,000,000

SUBTOTAL - PROGRAM F PROJECTS (550,000)

TOTAL - ALL PROGRAM F PROJECTS 120,622,900

Program G - Traffic Engineering

Projects:

SUBTOTAL - PROGRAM G PROJECTS 0 0

TOTAL - ALL PROGRAM G PROJECTS 6,286,400

Program H - Airports Projects

Projects:

1. Improvements for Continental Air Lines

Facility (01H008) 500,000 5,902,200

SUBTOTAL - PROGRAM H PROJECTS 500,000

TOTAL - ALL PROGRAM H PROJECTS 47,297,400

Revenues:

Shreveport Airport Authority 500,000

Other Funds (37,500)

State Grant 37,500

SUBTOTAL - PROGRAM H REVENUES 500,000

Program I - Fire Improvements

Projects:

SUBTOTAL - PROGRAM I PROJECTS 0

TOTAL - ALL PROGRAM I PROJECTS 4,214,000

Program L - Transit Improvements

Projects:

1. 2008 SporTran Capital Improvements

(08L001) 3,278,500 3,278,500

SUBTOTAL - PROGRAM L PROJECTS 3,278,500

TOTAL - ALL PROGRAM L PROJECTS 26,236,300

Revenues:

General Fund 649,000

FTA Grant 2,622,000

NL-COG 7,500

SUBTOTAL - PROGRAM L REVENUES 3,278,500

GRAND TOTAL - 2007 CHANGE $ 4,130,200

GRAND TOTAL - ALL PROJECTS $575,937,900

1.No office, department, agency or individual shall be allowed to expend any funds or incur any obligations other than in accordance with the Capital Improvements Budget’s appropriations, as provided in Article 7 of the City Charter.

2.The Mayor be and is hereby authorized to execute all contracts, deeds, grant documents and other legal instruments necessary to expend and receive the funds herein authorized.

3.The Mayor is authorized to transfer among projects within programs and funding sources an amount which will not increase or decrease any project budget total more than ten per cent (10%), provided, however, that at least one hundred twenty (120) hours, excluding holidays and weekends, prior to taking such action, the Mayor shall notify the members of the City Council of the proposed action, the reasons for the proposed transfer and the impact the transfer will have on the projects, by filing such notice with the Clerk of Council, who shall immediately forward copies of the notice to all members of the City Council and shall file the original of such notice with the current Capital Budget Ordinance. Thereafter, a special Council meeting to consider any proposed transfer of funds will stop any action on the designated projects. Provided, further, that funds may be transferred one time only to or from a project unless the prior transfer(s) has been included in a capital budget amendment.

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. 161 OF 2007

AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE 2008 BUDGET FOR THE RIVERFRONT SPECIAL REVENUE FUND, APPROPRIATING THE FUNDS AUTHORIZED THEREIN, AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO

WHEREAS, Article 7 of the Charter of the City of Shreveport requires the adoption of a comprehensive operating budget for the year 2008; and

WHEREAS, the City of Shreveport has available in fiscal year 2008 certain funds as a result of gaming activity on its Riverfront; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has previously determined that the dedication of these funds to riverfront, downtown and economic development activity to be beneficial to the interests of the City of Shreveport.

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

1. Estimated Receipts - The estimated receipts of the Riverfront Development Special Revenue Fund for 2008 are hereby established as follows:

Estimated Fund Balance as of 1/1/2008 $1,843,300

Land Rent 912,900

Sam’s Town Casino 5,150,000

Boomtown Casino 1,200,000

El Dorado Casino 6,025,000

Interest Earnings 150,000

TOTAL $15,281,200

2. Appropriations - The funds set forth in the following classes of expenditures and projects are hereby appropriated out of the Riverfront Special Revenue Fund’s receipts for the year 2008:

Personal Services $ 341,000

Materials and Supplies 7,800

Contractual Services 2,635,600

Other Charges 2,910,000

Operating Reserves 2,836,800

Transfer to General Fund 4,050,000

Transfer to Capital Projects Fund 900,000

Transfer to Debt Service Fund 1,600,000

TOTAL $15,281,200

3. The Riverfront Development Special Revenue Fund budget presented to the City Council by the Mayor on October 1, 2007, as amended by subsequent action by this Council, be and the same is hereby adopted.

4 Capital Transfers - All amounts authorized by the Capital Improvements Budget ordinance to be financed from the receipts of the Riverfront Development Special Revenue Fund shall be transferred to the proper capital funds as provided by the Capital Improvements Budget ordinance.

5 Administration - The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute all contracts, deeds, grant documents and other legal instruments necessary to expend or receive funds herein authorized.

6 Donation of City Funds - No funds herein appropriated shall be donated, loaned or pledged, and no expenditures for such purposes shall be authorized except in accordance with Section 26-53 of the Code of Ordinances, as it exists now or may hereafter be amended.

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.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that this ordinance will be effective on January 1, 2008.

Amendment # 1 to Ordinance No. 161 of 2007

AMEND THE ORDINANCE AS FOLLOWS:

In Section 2 (Appropriations):

Decrease Operating Reserves by $390,000. Increase Contractual Services by $250,000 and Transfer to Capital Projects Fund by $140,000.

Adjust totals and subtotals accordingly.

Amendment # 2 to Ordinance 161 of 2007

In Section 2: Appropriations

Increase "Other Charges" by $2,500

Decrease "Operating Reserves" by $2,500

Amendment # 5 to Ordinance 161 of 2007

In Section 2: Appropriations

Increase "Other Charges" by $30,000

Decrease "Operating Reserves" by $30,000

Amendment # 6 to Ordinance 161 of 2007

In Section 2: Appropriations

Increase "Other Charges" by $50,000

Decrease "Operating Reserves" by $50,000

ORDINANCE NO. 162 OF 2007

AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE 2008 GENERAL FUND BUDGET, APPROPRIATING THE FUNDS AUTHORIZED THEREIN, AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO

WHEREAS, Article 7 of the Charter of the City of Shreveport requires the adoption of a comprehensive operating budget for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2008.

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

1. Estimated Receipts - The estimated receipts for the General Fund for the year 2008 are hereby established and adopted as follows:

Taxes and Special Assessments $141,704,000

Licenses and Permits 9,066,600

External Service Charges 8,854,100

Internal Service Charges 3,943,000

Interest 225,000

Fines and Forfeits 3,696,200

Intergovernmental 1,835,000

Miscellaneous 13,698,400

Transfer from Riverfront Fund 4,000,000

Prior-Year Fund Balance 11,210,000

TOTAL $ 198,232,300

2. Appropriations - The funds set forth in the following classes of expenditures are hereby appropriated by department, out of the General Fund receipts for the year 2008:

Office of the Mayor

Personal Services $2,517,900

Materials and Supplies 40,900

Contractual Services 147,300

Other Charges 4,500

Improvements and Equipment 5,600

Transfer to Fleet Services Fund 500

Subtotal $2,716,700

Public Assembly and Recreation

Personal Services $8,814,200

Materials and Supplies 947,800

Contractual Services 3,459,700

Other Charges 336,600

Improvements and Equipment 565,300

Transfer to Fleet Services Fund 224,400

Notes Payable 486,800

Subtotal $14,834,800

Finance

Personal Services $2,554,200

Materials and Supplies 183,000

Contractual Services 625,700

Other Charges 0

Improvements and Equipment 9,200

Transfer to Fleet Services Fund 700

Subtotal $3,372,800

General Government

Personal Services $3,647,800

Materials and Supplies 1,000

Contractual Services 285,500

Other Charges 2,821,000

Operating Reserves 10,327,100

Transfer to MPC Fund 928,200

Transfer to SporTran Fund 5,300,000

Transfer to Retained Risk Fund 6,750,000

Transfer to Community Development Fund 4,624,400

Transfer to Golf Fund 210,000

Transfer to Water and Sewerage Fund 755,000

Transfer to Information Technology fund 3,040,000

Subtotal $ 38,715,000

Police

Personal Services $40,699,100

Materials and Supplies 1,780,500

Contractual Services 1,005,100

Other Charges 77,000

Improvements and Equipment 1,942,400

Notes Payable 1,057,100

Transfer to Police Grants Fund 127,400

Transfer to Fleet Services Fund 1,220,000

Subtotal $47,908,600

Fire

Personal Services $41,446,500

Materials and Supplies 1,403,000

Contractual Services 1,035,000

Improvements and Equipment 792,300

Notes Payable 685,000

Subtotal $45,361,800

Operational Services

Personal Services $14,614,100

Materials and Supplies 2,901,600

Contractual Services 12,814,300

Improvements and Equipment 5,473,700

Transfer to Fleet Services Fund 1,849,000

Transfer to Water & Sewer Fund 385,000

Notes Payable 1,685,400

Subtotal $39,723,100

City Council

Personal Services $ 1,084,700

Materials and Supplies 14,200

Contractual Services 217,000

Improvements and Equipment 28,000

Transfer to Fleet Services Fund 2,000

Subtotal $ 1,345,900

City Courts

Personal Services $2,585,400

Materials and Supplies 78,800

Contractual Services 79,700

Transfer to Fleet Services Fund 2,000

Subtotal $2,745,900

City Marshal

Personal Services $1,428,900

Materials and Supplies 69,800

Contractual Services 9,000

Subtotal $1,507,700

GRAND TOTAL - GENERAL FUND OPERATIONS $198,232,300

3.The General Fund Budget presented to the City Council by the Mayor on October 1, 2007, as amended by subsequent action of the City Council, be and the same is hereby adopted.

4.Capital Transfers - All amounts authorized by the Capital Improvements Budget ordinance to be financed from General Fund receipts shall be transferred to the proper capital funds as provided in the Capital Improvements Budget ordinance.

5.Administration - The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute all contracts, deeds, grant documents and other legal instruments necessary to expend and receive the funds herein authorized, excluding contracts for special legal counsel.

6.City Court Judges’ Salaries - The salary paid to each City Court judge by the City of Shreveport shall be $64,521 per annum for the year 2008.

7.City Marshal’s Salary - The salary paid to the City Marshal by the City of Shreveport shall be $83,836 per annum for the year 2008.

8.Donation of City Funds - The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute all contracts involving funds appropriated herein. However, prior to execution, all contracts in which the City undertakes obligations or responsibilities over and above payment of funds herein appropriated must be authorized in accordance with Section 26-53 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Shreveport, as it exists now or may hereafter be amended.

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.

BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that this ordinance will be effective on January 1, 2008.

Amendment # 1 to Ordinance No. 162 of 2007

AMEND THE ORDINANCE AS FOLLOWS:

In Section 1 (Estimated Receipts):

Increase Taxes and Special Assessments by $538,000.

Increase Miscellaneous by $1,072,000.

In Section 2 (Appropriations):

In Public Assembly and Recreation, increase Improvements and Equipment by $150,000.

In General Government, decrease Transfer to Community Development Fund by $326,700.

In Police, increase Personal Services by $513,000.

In Fire, increase Improvements and Equipment by $750,000.

In Operational Services, increase Personal Services by $322,700, Contractual Services by $29,000 and Improvements and Equipment by $172,000.

ORDINANCE NO. 163 OF 2007

AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE 2008 BUDGET FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SPECIAL REVENUE FUND, APPROPRIATING THE FUNDS AUTHORIZED THEREIN, AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO

WHEREAS, Article 7 of the Charter of the City of Shreveport requires the adoption of a comprehensive operating budget for the year 2008; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has created the Community Development Special Revenue Fund, to account for certain funds spent on jobs training, housing improvement, codes enforcement and neighborhood development.

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

1. Estimated Receipts - The estimated Community Development Special Revenue Fund budget receipts for the year 2008 are hereby established as follows:

2007 and Prior-Year Funds:

Prior-Year CDBG Entitlement 1,075,000