City Council Minutes 1/13/1998

COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT, LOUISIANA

JANUARY 13, 1998

The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana, was called to order by Chairman James Green at 3:20 p.m., Tuesday, January 13, 1998, in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 1234 Texas Avenue. Invocation was given by Councilman Spigener. On roll call, the following members were present: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green, and Burrell. 7. Absent: None.

Motion by Councilman Burrell, seconded by Councilman Cooper for approval of the minutes of the Administrative Conference of December 18, 1997, minutes of the Regular Meeting of December 22, 1997, and minutes of the Special Meeting of December 18, 1997. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green, and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

Awards, Recognition of Distinguished Guests and Communications of the Mayor which are required by law. Mayor Williams: Just for your information to the Council, the Evangel Christian Academy Class 3A Football Team will be here next Council meeting (two weeks from today) to receive a Certificate of Appreciation from the Mayor's Office; I just provide that to the Council for information.

I have one award I would like to make today and I call Ms. Edna Delphin to come down. The Government Finance Officers Associations of the United States and Canada (GFOA) has presented the City of Shreveport the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for its annual budget for the fiscal year beginning January 1997. In order to receive this award, a governmental unit must publish a budget document that meets program criteria of a policy document and has an operations guide as a financial plan, and also as a communications device. Ms. Edna Delphin who has also received a Certificate of Recognition in the budget presentation since she is the individual primarily responsible for having achieved this award. I would like to ask Edna to now receive this award from the City and I would like for the CAO present this to her and make any comments that she would like to, at this time. Mr. Collins: Congratulations and thank you for a job well done. I think you are very deserving and I'm proud to be associated with it; I'll let you make any comments you would like. Ms. Delphin: Thank you.

Councilman Green: We would like to recognize in our audience with us, we have Mr. Claude Underwood who is a former member of the Council. I would like to thank you for coming and we are sure we will hear from you later on in the meeting.

At this time we have Mr. Kim Mitchell who would like to bring a presentation at this time. I appreciate being asked here today. We received an invitation to come and give you a report on our involvement in the riverfront. I'm Kim Mitchell from Morgan, Hill, Sutton and Mitchell. Ed Morrison from Morrison and Associates. Ron and Ginger from Morgan, Hill, Sutton and Mitchell and I kind of gotten away from the riverfront. There are other things to do with it, projects to go onto and it was quite an experience for us in terms of what we learned about this community, what's important and I have a great pride for the people and their ideas. And this plan that we put together, just to show you, this consisted of a number of ideas and projects and processes, it involved our immediate riverfront, Cross Bayou, and it also involved the entire riverfront, stretching from Downtown Airport all the way to Bickham Dickson Park. And looking, (inaudible) which you hired a team of professional architects, planners, economists to create processes and work with citizens on how a plan could be put together. This plan include public participation and buy-in. The processes, decision-making concepts that illustrate the potential and economic strategies is built on THE sound principles of planning and guidelines aimed at long term prosperity. It will produce jobs, and it will produce quality, sustained investment.

I've given you today an executive summary and included that, what's in the folder is an executive summary of the riverfront plan. It is not an adopted document but it is something that we put together to kind of give you an overview, briefly because any time you work on a document that long, there is a lot to it that is very complex. We tried to give you something that, in a capsule, show you what it is all about. And in addition to that, there is video that I would like for you to take your own time to look at. It aired on BPS and I think Councilman Stewart has seen it. We used this video throughout the planning process and it (inaudible) for the people that were involved in the plan to understand what other communities do. Now when I go to the movies, I like to have my popcorn and I hope that you'll enjoy the popcorn and look at the movie. And if you would, I would appreciate it if you would share with me. If you would, if you would take a look at that because it is an extremely good video. We would do a follow up, produced by the Architectural Foundation because of the response to this one. But it shows how several communities: Chattanooga, Soson City, California and Portland, Oregon all reinvented themselves and how they did it working together. And it is an extremely inspiring video and I hope that you, you get out of it what I got out of it and many other has I think that we are involved in the planning process. And please, I would love to know what you think about it. Because it does show us how to go forward in the future.

Not much has been asked about, whose plan is this? So where did this plan come from? It came from a whole lot of involvement, a whole lot of talking to people. We had 11 public meetings, (inaudible) some of you participated in. We've been around talking to organizations all over the country. Ed has taken this to the National Economic Development Institute; people have looked at this. And so when it gets labeled as Kim Mitchell's Plan or something like, it is really not---I wish I could take that kind of credit for it, but it really belongs to all of the people who have had input in directing us, giving us ideas and allowing us to use our professional experience to synthesize something that represents all of that input.

But the question still remains though is, how are we going to plan? About midway through this planning process we had asked a question. We said, you know we've discovered kind of a, I suppose it is some what of a southern thing that we say we want one thing, but our actions are showing us that we want something else. And we've discovered this kind of dichotomy in what we are about. And it is best expressed as: Do we want to be comprehensive or do we want to be project driven? Or as we come to express that notion, do you want to function like a mall or do you want to be cloister in your development. Well each of these things represents positive signs or negative signs. But our actions have showed us that we want to work at project group manner. We said, lets go home. We were not interested in wasting public funds in terms of, do you want to be project driven, tell us. Well, we were told to go forward that we want to be comprehensive.

We showed you in the beginning, the ideas dealt with the entire riverfront but a lot of the concepts, when we cut right through it boiled down to something as simple as this. Do you want to have cloister development just like this with nothing happening in between or do you want to pull things apart like a shopping mall and create all sorts of investments in between. That really is a simple as what the idea is and it is somewhat embodied in this drawing that shows how you pull two things like hotels or boats apart and how that creates, that draws the market that you split, six million or so people and when six million people can walk from Sears to Dillard's then you have an economy in between that you can create. The question gets to be do you as the City want to see the City prosper from any kind of development like that or do you want to let somebody else prosper from it, who brings the market to town. Many things that the citizens wanted were embodied in this: keeping the Parkway open, keeping festivals in the center of activity where they belong, and stimulating activity on Commerce Street as a beginning. But the plan goes a great distance and it shows how we can settle for just a few jobs, a couple of thousand jobs or we can then believe in ourselves in the community and we can watch that grow into ten thousand jobs or it is a question of what you believe. Do you believe in us as a community or do you believe in what you got, a bird in the hand. So, that is kind of where we got to in our planning and to kind of emphasis that, we have this notion of what we are talking about. What does it mean to be comprehensive or a shopping mall versus what does it mean to surround development with parking or to cloister and I'm going to let Ed address that.

Mr. Ed Morrison: Thanks for inviting me. Basic theory of economics, here, is pretty darn simple. The theory is that there are different motivations going on. The boat operators or a major league sports team or any kind of an anchor wants to capture an audience and keep the audience; so, they want to keep a cloister. The city wants to develop real estate, wants new jobs, wants to create jobs; so, there incentive is to split the anchors apart and create that even between. And that's essential what the plan that we were working on tried to focus on this trying how do you split this apart and create value.

Now, part of the way through this process we got in a discussion with Ivan Baker about economic development. And Ivan said, well, the City has no role to play in telling private parties how to structure their (inaudible). I really disagree with that viewpoint. Why? Because the city owns the land in this project. And so the question comes down to, what is the value of the City's land as if you have a choice between Phil, a parking lot of an acre or a shopping center of an acre; what's your choice? Most of us would go for a shopping center. Why? The value of the land is higher; that's essentially the whole nut of this project.

Now, economic viability. Did this plan have economic viability? The answer to that question is yes. Hilton came to down with it, to plan and was interested in this project but the project didn't come to pass. There were several different reasons why that didn't come to pass but it basically boils down to the fact that in this city, there is no planning process. There is no effective planning process that is going on, and that's a big problem and that is essentially why I teach this case at the Economic Development Institute. I teach this case because I try to illustrate what can happen in a city when a planning process breaks down and when a planning process breaks down, you can lose $150,000 million dollars worth of investment which effectively is what happened when Hilton decided to leave.

Now you have two theoretical options. How do you develop, the shopping mall concept or the cloister concept. By default, you've done that and that's how the riverfront will develop. It will

develop by project-by-project. You will have parking lots on the riverfront and you will have a little bit, but not too much spin-off developed. You haven't gotten it yet and it is not likely you will get it. On the other hand, on the other side of the river, you've got Horseshoe that is going to be developing retail under a new downtown plan. So over the long term, I think, Shreveport is going to see some growth in its riverfront but most of the development is going to happen on the other side. Unfortunately these decisions have been made without any clear choice by the (inaudible), in my view. It has been ad-hoced and it a real tragedy for the city.

Mr. Mitchell: I guess we can clearly see with Ed's help, he talks project-by-project because that's what we are doing. We are making projects for the boats. We are making decisions for the festivals. We are making separate decisions for the agreement. We are making separate decisions for a farmer's market and a separate decision for a railroad museum, and on and on. Where will we go. So that is really the path that we've chosen at this point. It is pretty much why we decided that there are places to make the impression to accomplish things because of what we know and so we consulted with Detroit and some other places places and believe that these concepts are meaningful. I hope that you will review the information that we've given you. If you are interested, there is a lot to this plan, there is a lot for us all to learn about the processes and how to include people. A what this means to the City to begin to think about a process is a way to create wealth and opportunity for all citizens in this community which is one of the guiding principles.

And so if you are interested, invite us back, create a work session. We'll be glad to facilitate, discuss, answer questions, attempt to convey to you our expertise and knowledge and try to understand what your issues are and how they factor into a plan. So one again, thank you and I hope that you've been briefed enough with this presentation. If you've got any questions, we are certainly here at your invitation to try to explain what we can.

Councilman Burrell: I'm a little more confused now, do we have a plan? At this point, are we working on a plan or did we shut that operation down? We've spent so much money so far on this different plan. Do we have a plan, that's my question. Mr. Mitchell: We have presented a plan to the Planning Commission, they have received a plan. Their remarks in their minutes reflect that they think very positively about it. I think that it has been put on hold for reasons that I can't explain due to what appear to be a project in reference to the City as to what going on. And one of the reasons that I felt that it was time to move on, we've done all that we can is that, we are apparently now going to wait until project decisions that are in the works are made and then we'll find out why. And by that time, the reason you need a plan is for guidance and if you create more intrusion into this riverfront, you still need a plan. You got to always plan because that's how you make your decisions but creates some very difficult situations when you tie up as much of the acreage as the riverfront parking lots and making intrusions into some of the current plans, that is gone and passed about public access and walkways, any number of opportunities that are missed because you didn't utilize the plan to guide our decision-making.

Councilman Burrell: Well, the last I heard on this plan that we would possible salvage a portion of what you all had initially started and there would be a completion of some plan or proposal based upon what you all already had done and if there was a change in direction by the Administration, it would be changes would be made and we would have a complete plan that we would start working on developing the riverfront based upon that plan. My question, Mr. Chairman, where are we with that plan? I mean we need to know something at this point.

Councilman Green: Mr. Burrell, what I would like to do as Chairman is to appoint you as Chairman of that Committee to work with whoever is doing what, with Mr. Cooper and with Mr. Hightower. And then at the next meeting, maybe you all can find the different sources that were involved in maybe you can bring that report back as to where we are and where we messed up.

Councilman Serio: One of the things I would like to comment, is that in the spring you said, you got to look at the projects and develop a project from the aspect of the project, (inaudible) companies to plan and develop the (inaudible). I think one of the things you forget about is that you have got to have development first. You've got to have somebody out there with the money saying that they want to invest and if you don't have an investor, you have nothing but a drawing and a nice pretty picture and a good looking video up here because if you don't have an investor you don't have anything. All you've got is another expensive study that goes back on the shelf. Until you've got an investor at this point, it doesn't matter what you want to do, it doesn't matter what you hypothesize about doing, until you have got somebody out there who is willing to put their money on the dotted line and sign the check to build the building, you've got nothing more than a pretty picture.

I think right now, I know that I'm looking and we have quite a few documents in front of us and I see we have the folks from Harrah's out here and I'm assuming that there is going to be some type of announcement a little later on in this meeting but, the plans are great but you've got to get down to brass tacks. If you don't have an investor, you don't have nothing and that's where the money comes from and that's what drives this project. And unfortunately, I know there are some things I would like to see occur on the riverfront already as well as in the bayou project and we passed money to help develop the bayou. I would like to see the bayou develop; however, until you get somebody that is willing to put their name on the dotted line, it doesn't matter. You've got to have an investor, you've got to have a developer, you've got to have a guy that got the (inaudible) to get up and. . . .

Mayor Williams: And would like to remind the Council and the public about this situation. Mr. Mitchell was hired by the DDA in conjunction with the Metropolitan Planning Commission to develop a comprehensive plan for the riverfront. And I agree with what he said in terms of his plan was to be comprehensive. The issue of the Hilton Hotel or a Hilton boat, is a project, not a comprehensive plan. The Flamingo license which was (inaudible) by the Gaming Commission adjacent to the Harrah's site, that is a project and not a comprehensive plan. And I disagree totally with Mr. Mitchell's concept because that berth site is governed by that, by the Gaming Commission's ruling as to where that boat goes. Not only that, but whether the operators want that project has done. That project is consistent with overall planning for the riverfront area. It also would require to move that boat to any other location in the City, it would require a local referendum; that's what we've been working to avoid and (inaudible).

Now, what planning we have been doing with Hollywood has nothing to do with the comprehensive plan. Frankly, we need the comprehensive plan that Mr. Mitchell was charged to develop. So, I think it is unfair to try, what he has taken as a comprehensive plan and turn it into a project plan because he has only presented one proposal which you have seen time and time again which shows us putting up two hotels and I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Serio. We have got to have somebody that is willing to invest the money, and that is where we are in this process. So, I think that the Hollywood proposal is a good proposal because they do propose a retail component, a retail component will reach from the Clyde Fant Parkway back west to Commerce Street leading into the Central Business District is where you really, where you have private development not publicly owned land and that is where you get your real spin-off. So, I disagree with Mr. Mitchell in that regard and I think he is really overstepping the bounds of his study too because his project was to do a comprehensive plan for the entire city riverfront not to dwell on one project.

Councilman Green: Kim, at this time I've got a committee and what we are going to is, I'm going to refer you to them and then we are going to move on because we've got a long way to go and short time to make it; so, if you would in fact get with the committee. Mr. Mitchell: If I could make one comment. The discussion here explains why we don't know how to use the plan and I do hope that you'll have some follow-up. Be pleased to talk with you about it because it important that we learn the great value the plan has, much over one particular project. It requires us and not a private developer to lead the way.

The Chairman noted a public hearing was not scheduled and the Council addressed Confirmations and/or Appointments. Motion by Councilman Serio, seconded by Councilman Cooper to appoint Mr. Glenn O'Bryan to the Shreve Memorial Library Board. Motion approved by the following vote: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green, and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

Motion by Councilman Green to suspend the rules to add legislation to the agenda, seconded by Councilman Stewart. Motion approved by the following vote: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green, and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

Mr. Collins read the items by title: (1) A resolution authorizing the employment of special legal counsel to represent the City of Shreveport; (2) An ordinance authorizing the Mayor to execute an Amended Restated Gound Lease and Hotel Lease and related agreements with Red River Entertainment of Shreveport, a partnership in commendam. Councilman Burrell: I have one resolution by Councilman Stewart and myself: (3) A resolution to terminate the contract between the City of Shreveport and SS Consulting, L. P. and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Motion by Councilman Cooper, seconded by Councilman Hightower to add the legislation to the agenda.

Councilman Hightower: We received this two minutes before the meeting on the ground lease and contract with Harrah's, and you are asking us to introduce it today without any of us having seen it even over the weekend? I can read, but I can't read this quick. The thing that bothers me about this is Council members know that you been dealing with Harrah's for three years and now you want to dump this on us at the last minute. I don't know if there is something in here that I can't live with or any other Council member can't live with either, but it is sure going to make us look silly when we have to come back and amend the contract after it gets on the agenda. Certainly, I think the time to do that and work that out is before it reaches out agenda to make sure it is something we can all live with. I mean, we all have a vested interested here to work with Harrah's to get their hotel underway although we know they are still, probably contingency on the land base in New Orleans. We all have a vested interest in getting the parking garage larger and we all have a vested interested in being sure that whatever comprehensive riverfront plan is, whether it is the one that Mr. Mitchell is talking about, the one that Roy may have or the one that Hollywood Casino puts before us, certainly all these things are in conjunction in some fashion here. And to ask us to introduce this without having presented to us; am I wrong? Has anybody else seen this before 15-minutes ago?

Councilman Serio: No; this is the first time that I've seen it. I agree with you. I mean this is a shame to have this delivered today to us prior to the meeting. I would like to go through it as much as I want to get the casino's hotels built, I haven't looked at this thing. I want to see more on that riverfront than we've got now, but again it goes back to the same thing. We have not had these type of (inaudible) we would like to be brought into the process a little bit, as well as have some information.

Councilman Spigener: I guess it hadn't occurred to me that it would be a problem. We have two weeks here or so that we can work on this and perhaps that's what we need to if this will help expedite the process.

Councilman Burrell: I want to know whether or not there is a deadline that we are affecting again?

Mayor Williams: First of all, it is a three reader. It can not be voted on at the next Council; so, you'll have a full month in which to read the documents. We do have Mr. Maze Purcell, Mr. Larry Bunch, and Ms. Marilyn Handy with Harrah's along with Michael Weaver from Harrah's and I'd like Mr. Purcell, if its agreeable with the Council, just to touch a little bit on the reason for introducing it today or maybe Mr. Bunch for reasons for introducing it today. This document was just finalized. Any comments they would like to make in terms of the Council. We certainly want to work with the Council. I don't think there are any surprises in this document; Larry, if you come forward and make any comments and we'll certainly go from there.

Motion by Councilman Stewart to suspend the rules to allow Mr. Bunch an opportunity to speak, seconded by Councilman Serio. Motion approved by the following vote: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green, and Burrell. 7.

Mr. Larry Bunch, Corporate Director of Gaming and Development with Harrah's Entertainment: Harrah's along with the Mayor's Staff and the Mayor have been working on the lease document which you have before you now or the lease documents in fact there are two leases. One lease for the casino and one lease for the proposed hotel site, for more than two years now. And with the Hollywood proposal that's been in the works for some time now, we believe it is appropriate to try to move our lease documents forward.

As you know, a couple of the elements that have been discussed that are in the lease are the waiver of the exclusivity provision, where we have in our lease today as well as the giving up of the valet parking lot that we now use for development by another gaming developer,Hollywood or someone else. And we understand that this lease has to go through, I believe, three readings. And our understanding, Harrah's understanding was that it was important to get the lease introduced for Council review and that was certainly the intent. There was no intent to try to rush something onto the agenda and get it introduced without due action. And we hope that it can be introduced and considered by the Council in a prompt manner and we certainly will leave it up to you to make that decision.

Councilman Serio: I hope that you don't think by any means that we have any disapproval with Harrah's at all (inaudible), the expansion in front of it. The issue here is not so much with you but with a matter that was just given to us at the last minute to put to the agenda and not have the opportunity to have any of the information whatsoever that is here. W are pleased with the, I think we are glad to see and hope we can also see a (inaudible), a consultation of what you plan to do to provide the (inaudible) and see further development on the riverfront. Mr. Bunch: We'll certainly be happy, Councilman Serio to meet with members of the Council to answer any questions as you go through your review once that process starts.

Councilman Burrell: I'm going to ask the question that I asked previously, and that is are we facing any critical deadlines? Normally, when these things are brought to us, there is some deadlines that we have to meet for something that you already knew. Are there any critical deadlines we need to be considering it on? Mr. Bunch: There are a number of things going on, Councilman Burrell, that I think introduction of the lease will assist and I'm giving you my ideas on this; certainly other people might have different ideas. There is a Gaming Commission meeting, I believe on the 20 and I believe the Gaming Commission is going to be looking for progress towards providing Hollywood with what they need in order to come to Shreveport. Certainly the introduction of this lease and the fact that the Council would be considering the lease. If I were on the Gaming Commission, would be viewed as action in progress to get Hollywood the release of the exclusivity and the site that they need for development. On our side of the table, over in the Harrah's camp, we are prepared to spend significant dollars to design the parking garage expansion with significant, the design of that expansion somewhere near $300,000 plus. We are prepared, once the lease is adopted and approved, to spend (its in the lease, you haven't had a chance to see it yet but it is in there) to spend up to $750,000 dollars on hotel design, doing their hotel design. So, I think it is important to get it, assuming everyone is in agreement on it and assuming the Council believes it should be done as far as the--what's proposed in the lease. I believe it is important to keep it moving and to get it adopted quickly for, not only Harrah's benefit but it provides a benefit for the Hollywood, Sodak, Paddlewheels project.

Councilman Burrell: I don't know if now is the important to do this, are there any major differences from the previous one and the one that we are looking at, at this point or is this something that we may want to get with the Administration or will we being doing this during this three week period? Are there major changes? Mr. Bunch: There are a number of changes. What might be a major change to one person, might be a minor change for another and vice versa. There has been a summary prepared, that we've--the Mayor and Mr. Collins has summarizes, I think, about 6 pages of what you have there in front of you and about 120 or more pages. It is going to require, referring to when you see something in the summary that interests you, I think it would be appropriate to refer to the specifics of the lease because you can't summarize certain things to the extent that you might be interested in those details, but there are some major changes in the lease, yes.

Councilman Burrell: I would assume that we will look at the documents will go along with our packet so that we won't have go through there and try to summarize from there what those differences are? Councilman Green: So, are you asking the Administration to provide those changes for us. Mr. Collins: Yes, I'll have to you. Councilman Burrell: I would recommend that we do get those so we won't have to try to. . . .

Mayor Williams: Just to follow up in regard to the question Mr. Burrell asked Mr. Bunch about the timetable. It is critical, our negotiations with Hollywood that we have that valet lot free and I mean free from this lease. Harrah's currently has it under lease and for us to be able to, for the City to be able to lease to Hollywood that valet lot, we must first get this lease done to clear that particular parcel and lease them the north point for their hotel site; so that is a consideration too, in this process.

Councilman Burrell: Well based on that then, Mr. Mayor, it appears that we have two different set of dates that we are trying to juggle. Mayor Williams: Yes.

Councilman Burrell: Because we don't know any dates other than what you've given us which is January 20. And this introduction aids you in that, is my understanding; introduction of your. . . . Mr. Bunch: It won't aid Harrah's, it will assist the Hollywood project. But I think what the Mayor is trying to accomplish with the Gaming Commission to show positive progress on providing Hollywood with the resources they need, a gaming site, to do their project.

Councilman Burrell: I think somewhere to my knowledge, I think we may need to have a series of dates that we use in order to know how this thing is suppose to progress and then it'll give us an idea of what kind of time limit we have to peruse the information and hopefully come back with any questions that we have on the contract.

Councilman Stewart: Is Mr. Jones here? Mayor Williams: He is ill today. Councilman Stewart: I thought as it relates to valet lot that if construction did not start on the hotel by April 1998, then that lot was released back to the City; is that correct? Mayor Williams: That's correct.

Councilman Stewart: (2) I think Mr. Hightower's assessment is correct in terms of several issues. (1) We have a legal document and that's the reason I asked for Mr. Jones and that's the reason why we've asked for some additional information before. If you are in a circumstance here where we are dealing with one valet lot it is going to pass back to the City because of a lack of a hotel. (2) That raises questions from a time constraint. I think everybody assumed and I certainly know I'm on the record having sent a letter to the Commission and gone on visually in support of what we are trying to achieve here and followed it up by a letter. I still question as Mr. Hightower does, this document and now we have once again, have a timeframe running. That's not consistent with what we agreed to. There was to be involvement, as the Mayor would know and Mr. Hightower and (inaudible). The three of us in the situation and once again, we've been excluded. Now, whatever the reason was, (inaudible) lack of inclusion my assessment is I would be against introducing it at this time and I would like to meet with a representative from Harrah's as quickly as possible for a discussion. I duly acknowledge the issue of exclusivity as an issue but I reiterate we've had a verbal commitment of (inaudible) for over two years assuming we did other things.

My further understanding is, that we have a commitment from one group to build a hotel and we have a commitment from Harrah's subject to a renewal of a number of licenses, is that correct? Mr. Bunch: That's correct. Councilman Stewart: In New Orleans, which is not related to us as far as I'm concerned. I'll follow the lead of the rest of you. I think this should be placed back, I think we should expedite the review of it from legal opinions and I mean outside from the City Attorney's Office before we go any further; that's that's one vote, that's my feeling.

Councilman Burrell: I guess my concern now, if we don't introduce it today although we come to this point of impasse again by many of us on the Council that may not be priviledge to some of the information that's there, how it is going to affect us overall. Is it going to cause us any irreparable damage at this point in terms of Hollywood being able to secure a parking lot. That's where I'm a little confused at this point, by us not knowing anything on it today which is based on what we are facing. How critical is it to us to not showing signs of progress, I think, to go ahead on and consider the release of the valet parking; do you understand? Mr. Bunch: I understand your question and it is really, I'm guess you are posing that in the form of a question also. The only way to answer that question is to be able to know precisely how the Gaming Commission is going to look at this matter when it comes up again, I guess on January 20; I can't answer that question, I don't know.

Councilman Green: At this time, we have these three matters to be introduced. Coming from the Chair, when you bring about Hollywood and then as to making progress which would show the Gaming Commission that we are making some progress, I would not want to jeopardize 1,500 jobs. So, I would be in favor of introducing it, if in fact once we move through it, if there is something that we failed to want to have in here, if we failed to want to have any of it in here, we still have the power to vote it down. So, by you making a statement as to assisting Hollywood, I think that was a kind gesture. So, as for me, I would be willing to vote to introduce it and to have the opportunity as Mr. Burrell had stated to get the other documents from the Administration that we can go through them. Once that happens, our City Attorney will be back with us that, that we can go through it and get all of the legalities to it; that's just my statement.

Motion by Councilman Spigener, seconded by Councilman Cooper to add the three items to the agenda.

Councilman Burrell: I know you asked earlier about whether there was discussion before we made the motion, but I was asking and I was wondering if Councilman Stewart may have some feelings on that because I know he made the comment at this point, he would be reluctant. I would be one percent supportive of it but I'm again, I'm concerned that if we don't do it based on the deadline that is being presented, again are we doing ourselves more harm than good.

Councilman Serio: The comment just occurred to me, this almost brings back the middle of last summer when we were faced with a situation at the State Fair Stadium. The State Fair Stadium contract where it had to be introduced on the agenda and it had to be introduced so that we could let it sit out there for so many weeks before we were able to vote on this. And that point in time, we were going to be voting on it after the first football game and we are almost the same situation again, with this the Administration just pointed that we had to let it sit for three complete settings (inaudible) market before we can every vote on this. We might be forced at this point to accept this and then make amendments to it as we go along because I don't see that, I feel we are pushed into a corner by the way ((inaudible). I mean it is similar to the State Fair Stadium contract as well.

Councilman Green: Here again, I think it puts us in a difficult situation but again, I would not jeopardize losing 1,500 jobs or more so. I would prefer introducing it because if we fail to introduce it today, then we would have to wait another two weeks before introduction so that would just be my recommendation.

Councilman Stewart: Mr. Burrell asked a question. (1) I would suggest that we withdraw the votes and consider the Harrah's issue separately for introduction; that would be consistent where I am. (2) I would offer my opinion, that the Harrah's project and the Hollywood Casino project stand on their own two separate feet; they are two separate contracts. One is not dependent on the other although the allegation is associated with exclusivity which I certainly understand is the central part of the agreement. I do not think that it is correct to infer that is (inaudible). The issues that are at test, as I best understand it from my communications are not associated with the Harrah's project but the issue is the investment circumstances. Certainly we had the commitment and had the commitment at least from the Chairman, to support this project and that (inaudible) mean the Chairman of the Gaming Commission. I would encourage those be at least separate. I would still feel and I'm not in a position to vote for it, separate it because of the information that we had and the manner in which it is being handled and there is no inference or agony directed toward Harrah's. It is consistent with what I said all along. What we prior, this (inaudible); iit has not been executed.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Cooper, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 4. Nays: Councilmen Stewart, Hightower, and Serio. 3. (Clerk's Note: See Councilman Green's comments after the next paragraph.)

Mayor Williams: I just want to reassure the Council that we will be providing an executive summary today, as soon as the documents are prepared. After the Council---it can not be acted on for two weeks. We will bring Harrah's attorneys in and let each one of the Council members and our City Attorney will go over in details, give us much time to answer any particular question. There are really, in opinion, no surprises in this document and we certainly (inaudible) working with and this Council certainly has the opportunity to amend. There is no one perfect contract that all seven people would like to just, totally agree to in terms of a document with this in place, major. So, the Council certainly, we feel like it is the best document we could put together on behalf of the citizens of Shreveport to go before the Council. The Council certainly has ample opportunity to go over it. It will not be for a vote today. I want certainly want you to review this document, spend as much time as you feel like you need to evaluate and go over its merits. If it needs to be amended, in your opinion, the Council certainly has that prerogative and I just want to assure you that (inaudible) we want to work with the Council in anyway to make you comfortable with this document.

Councilman Green: Thank you Mr. Mayor and to the Council, the Chair stands to be corrected. The Attorney just came over and said to me that it would take five votes for those items to be introduced, so the introduction of those items failed. Motion denied by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 4. Nays: Councilmen Stewart, Hightower, and Serio. 3.

Councilman Burrell: With all due respect to Councilman Stewart and his proposal of separating the two items. I have not privy to much of the negotiations on the (inaudible) but I think you and Councilman Hightower and Councilman Stewart have. And you made a proposal of looking at these things separately. It has been my understanding the short deliberation that we have today, that they were dependent upon each other and I would definitely like a clarification as to whether or not they can be acted on separate or whether or not there is any advantage to or disadvantage to do so?

Councilman Green: Since our City Attorney Mr. Jones is out, I don't think that we could give a legal answer to that. So, what I would ask that you have the Administration get an answer from Mr. Jones because at this point it really wouldn't matter, it hadn't been introduced; so, we still have time to find the information.

Councilman Hightower: What I think we would want to do is introduce those resolutions and ordinance that were not party to that Ground Lease and Hotel Lease.

Councilman Green: In the motion that was made, we accepted all three of them. So what has to happen now, is that a vote on the whole issue I believe would have to be rescinded. Ms. Glass: No, I think what you could, just make a new motion that would include only the two that are non-controversial.

The Deputy Clerk read the items by title. (1) A resolution authorizing the employment of special legal counsel to represent the City of Shreveport and (2) A resolution terminating the contract to the City of Shreveport and SS Consulting, L. P. and otherwise providing with respect thereto. Motion by Councilman Stewart, seconded by Councilman Burrell to add the legislation to the agenda. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

The Council considered the Consent Agenda legislation.

INTRODUCTION OF RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES ON CONSENT:

Motion by Councilman Serio to remove Ordinance No. 3 from the agenda.

Councilman Hightower; Councilman Serio, I may not have a problem with what you want to do, but you are talking about an ordinance that is talking about Mardi Gras parade route? Councilman Serio: Yes, I am. Do you want me to give you an explanation on it? Councilman Hightower: Yeah, if you would, I'd appreciate it.

Councilman Serio: This allows for the $15 dollar parking fee along East Kings Highway and that's all it also provides for a $15 dollar parking fee. I was under the impression that in the park, that were are going to have a lottery for the spaces, that's fine, we'll take a lottery for the spaces. But allowed to have an organization who rules who has space where, but as far as charging a fee for it, I don't see any need to charge a $15 dollar parking fee for the space. It is in a public park as it and quite frankly, if we have 100 spaces you are going to create $1,500 dollars out there, at the maximum and it is not anything that is going to be significant to the City. I guess one of the things that kind of keyed me on this, was in the document we just received from the Internal Auditor about petty cash funds is that petty cash funds, is that our petty cash funds, it shows that we can only account for about thirty percent (30%) of the petty cash funds and I just felt like on this, quite frankly, we could do without this particular $15 fee to the citizens.

Councilman Hightower: This has kind of hit me blind side. I don't really have a problem with the fee that you are talking about, but I do want to be sure that we have some method to the madness.

Councilman Serio: We have organization. The only thing this is, removes is the cost on that, the organization is still there.

Councilman Hightower: Then let me ask you, instead of removing that and I'll take some direction from the Administration, we would be better off having Mr. Serio amend this particular ordinance, scratching the fee and still keeping the organization in tact? Mr. Thompson: Mr. Serio, originally asked this be amended. When I looked at it, and Julie I wish you would look at it, it appears to me that the only thing that the ordinance does is to impose the fee but it does nothing accept to impose the fee, is that correct, Julie? Ms. Glass: As I recall from looking at it yesterday. Mr. Thompson: And so I said to him, that there was nothing to amend if he did not want the fee. It should either be defeated or it he could remove it from the agenda. You might want to give Julie a couple of minutes to look at that to see if she agrees with my statement, but that's the way I'm reading it; that's all it does. You might want to remove it from the consent agenda anyway.

Councilman Hightower: Mr. Serio, to expedite the meeting, would you mind removing it from the consent agenda and then we could come back and discuss that? Councilman Serio: That's fine, Mr. Hightower.

Councilman Hightower: I don't have a problem with doing what you want to do, I just want to be sure that we don't, there has been a problem out there with traffic, with a little respect for the residents that live on the parade route, in that we've had in years, past people that camp out there for weeks at a time and it has presented a problem. Like I said in fairness to the people that live in that neighborhood and I think everybody loves the parade there, it is a good route, and provide a great atmosphere on parade day, but I don't think it is fair to vehicular traffic and the residents that live in the neighborhood to have to put up with a week's long and it is two weekends in a row, so you are really talking about, maybe up to 14 days worth of havoc in the neighborhood. As long as there is some sort of regulatory methods so that we don't have people camping in the park and setting up their trailers.

Councilman Serio: Essentially what this does, the only thing this does just--I agree with you, I've had many discussions, I had a lot of comments this morning and we have talked to some of the residents from the other side of town (inaudible) that would like to take advantage of the family atmosphere that we've always had in that particular part of town in regard to the parades. I agree that leaving the permit in place is fine, but I don't think we need to charge for it. I mean, it is one of the things that---this is one of the finest programs that we've got in the City of Shreveport. And we've got so many folks that come in from out of town as well, that participate and enjoy and I say, take the fee off.

Councilman Burrell: I have two questions, (1) what is the significance of the $15 dollar fee is it to restrict people from coming or is that is a fee that somebody uses in order to clean up the mess or put down the bleachers, that's the first question. The second question (2) when that area is used, because I've gone over there, I try to park and it is havoc over in that area, but is there a selection, some sort of a selective system that they use in order to occupy the spaces there; I heard you say something about organization and parking?

Councilman Serio: From what I understand, there is a lottery, Mr. Burell, that is utilized when people sign up for it and there is a lottery for and we have a lottery and people tend to pick and from that, the spaces are allocated at.

Councilman Burrell: So, that lottery just open to the public, its announced? Councilman Serio: It is opened to the public.

Councilman Burrell: Now what about the $15 dollar fee, incurring of that, is that a restrictive penalty, does it goes toward cleaning up the area or it is just something that we are accessing to limit the number of people? Councilman Serio: I think it is just insignificant to the amount of what we have got out there. I mean, if we charge one area of the city $15 dollars to camp out and having a place to set up their cars, and their pits and grills and all that. We had so much of other areas wanted to be a parade route, that goes right through Shreve City and we are charging for that space as well for all the. . . .I just don't see we need any cost. If you want to organize, that great, fine; the neighbors might appreciate that and anticipate this but as far as charging the cost for this, I don't see it.

Councilman Spigener: I would like to request that Mr. Norman, I'm assuming SPAR is responsible, to come to podium and explain to us what the $15 dollars is used for. I'm sure there was some logic when this was put together and if tis benefit to control the process, we might need to look at it, but I agree the $1,500 dollars is not great deal of money, but I do know there has to be clean up, there has to be control of the traffic and that kind of thing.

Councilman Green: Mr. Serio, is that your district? Councilman Serio: No, sir.

Councilman Green: Whose district is that? Councilman Serio: That one would be Keith.

Councilman Green: Mr. Norman, I would like for you to give us a helping hand here and after which I'd like to follow the lead of Mr. Hightower, whom that's whose district, we are in.

Mr. Norman: What' I've done with this document that I've handed to you is try to outline the questions that Councilman Serio had for yesterday. One the first page, we've outlined some of the problems that we've had with the parade and I think that we are all aware of the different things that take place with people trying to secure a spot and keep it. The second page, we also list out the things that we think this will help us with in being able to maintain a more orderly fashion with it. The expense, on the second page, are outlined. We took in about $3,000 dollars last year. Our expenses as outlined: We had port-a-lets at an expense of $2,450 dollars; security for both of the parades are listed there; we had tape for taping off the yards and also paint for marking the spaces. So this is just an attempt to regain some of the expenses. The money was deposited into the General Fund, attached all of the deposit slips to show where the money went from last year. But it is just strictly an attempt to recoup some of the expenses that are incurred by putting the (inaudible).

Councilman Serio: On the port-a-lets, is that the cost of the port-a-lets for the entire parade route or just in from the bayou? Mr. Norman: The whole parade.

Councilman Burrell: I guess my question would then be, are penalizing the people in this part of town versus the other part of town? Councilman Serio: I don't think it is a matter of penalizing.

Councilman Burrell: Well it appears that they are bearing the cost of--- Councilman Serio: Mr. Burrell, what I see is that it is not really penalizing anybody from one side of town or the other, that's not the issue. It is an issue that, setting up a lottery for it. Want to set up a lottery so that the folks can have a designated area set up and maintain order so that we have, we have enough parking provided so that folks can move their vehicles into it; fine. I just don't see that we need to put a cost to it. It is just the fact of taking the cost out.

Councilman Green: I talked to Mr. Hightower for just a minute, and he don't really feel that it is too much to pay or whatever. And we just got the report as to how much it cost us; so, if we fail to charge, Mr. Serio since you are asking that this request be done, who will pick up the tab for the rest of the money? Councilman Serio: I guess the same as in Bossier City, the city picks up the tab for the full parade route and the same as the rest of the parade route in front of Shreve City and across the Shreveport-Barksdale bridge, the city picks up the tab as well. It is pretty much, the City of Shreveport is going to pick up their side as well (inaudible) and quite frankly, it is just a matter of this one area right here near the duck pond, we are charging for that area.

Councilman Hightower: Gary, last year you did charge $15 dollars. Mr. Norman: I think there was a charge of $10 last year. Councilman Hightower: For all the slots? Mr. Norman: Yes, sir. Councilman Hightower: Were they all full? Mr. Norman: I wasn't part of the department at that point. Shellie, were all of them full? Ms. Shellie Ragle: No, (balance in audible); they were not full. Councilman Hightower: Along the duck pond? Ms. Ragle's response was inaudible. Councilman Hightower: Did your office feel like the reason those other spaces weren't full was because of the $10 charge or do you have any way of knowing that? Mr. Norman: I have no idea. Councilman Hightower: Or did we just not have enough applicants? Ms. Ragle: I think what we expected, we had enough spots to accommodate everybody who applied for a spot for one parade or the other. We had some people who applied for both and maybe their neighbors applied and they went together and we had about five---the first parade I think we had about five spaces along the route not used and the second parade, maybe two and we decided because they decided at the last moment that they didn't want them, to just leave those for other people who were coming down to the bayou, to leave those available for people who didn't have a spot. Because it is really our family oriented area, in there, but they were all---everybody who applied was able to get a spot in one parade or the other and that was not the reason, I don't think the $10 dollars was the reason that they didn't. We had plenty of responses to them and we were able to help most of those people.

Councilman Serio: So we were currently charging $10 dollars. We are currently charging the folks $10 dollars? Ms. Ragle: We charged them $10 dollars in 1997; correct. Councilman Serio: We just raising the price by about $5 dollars; I stand by my motion to remove it from the agenda.

Councilman Hightower: Gary, also do you feel like you've got a way to maintain sanity (for a lack of a better word) in the park, that there is not a dollar fee attached to the permitted spaces? Mr. Norman: Regardless of whether we charge a fee or not, I think we still need to go through with the process, so that we can maintain order with it. I think that it proved out to have worked well from everything that I've been told and would like to continue that part of it.

Councilman Hightower: So, you would be able to continue to do the lottery system that you did, you just won't have a fee to have your name in the pot, so to speak. Mr. Norman: That's correct.

Councilman Hightower: I don't have a problem with Mr. Serio's motion. I guess my main concern all along when the Administration and SPAR asked me about it, I just wanted to be sure that we did have some way to maintain some sort of control, like I said, just to be able to respect the residents that live in that neighborhood and also, to be sure that vehicular traffic versus pedestrians campers there wasn't a lot of conflict there and it didn't pose a hazard. I don't think we are talking about a lot of money and certainly some of this, we are going to do it whether we charge or not. We have to got have security there and certainly we've got to have, like you said, port-a-lets along the route and I think some of that we just have to do as a city and that ought to be part of our contribution to the two parades, that I think we are fortunate to have and certainly adds something to that time of year and especially given the fact that everything is volunteer as far as the two krewes are concerned, so as long as we are able to maintain some sort of order in the park, Mr. Chairman, I wouldn't have a problem with the fee itself.

Councilman Cooper: You said the last time, there were vacancy on the lots and there was a $10 dollar fee and now we are asking $15 dollar, is that correct. How expensive is it to keep the lot up? Mr. Norman: I think it was outlined on the second page of the hand-out that we gave you. We had an expense of about $4,500 dollars and we took in $3,000. This was an attempt to increase it to make sure that we covered the expenses that were incurred with parade.

Councilman Cooper: How do we monitor the fact of how many cars we have and how much money we are getting from that and how we are spending it? Mr. Norman: All of the, as far as the spots go, all of the spots are marked out and are monitored and also include security to oversee that. We follow the proper process and collect the money and recording it and making sure that it hits the right account.

Councilman Cooper: So we are supplying security as well as the lot? Mr. Norman: Yes, sir, it is listed on the second page. We've got covering the expenses of port-a-lets, security, tape, painting, marking for the spaces.

Councilman Cooper: And of course these lots only cost during the parade time, other times they are free to park in? Mr. Norman: Yes, sir. Councilman Cooper: Are they; you say "yes" and you say "no", which is? Ms. Ragle: There is an ordinance that prohibits parking on the park itself, Ordinance 62.

Councilman Cooper: That prohibits parking on this particular lot at any time? Ms. Ragle: In any park. Mr. Norman: It is public land.

Councilman Green: I would ask that in the future, so that we wouldn't have to get into this, that any Council member that is crossing your own district line into another Councilman's district, I would ask that you would at least give that Councilman or Councilwoman a call just to say what you would like to do and possible we could come to some reasons before we get to this point.

Motion by Councilman Serio to remove Ordinance No. 3 of 1998 from the Consent Agenda (not introduced), seconded by Councilman Hightower. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Out of Chamber: Councilman Stewart. 1.

Motion by Councilman Serio to Introduce the Resolutions and Ordinances on the Consent Agenda to lay over until the January 27, 1998, meeting, seconded by Councilman Cooper. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Out of Chamber: Councilman Stewart. 1.

INTRODUCTION OF RESOLUTIONS:

1. Resolution No. 8 of 1998: A resolution authorizing a three (3) year contract between the City and the Krewe of Centaur relative to Mardi Gras Parades and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

2. Resolution No. 9 of 1998: A resolution authorizing the Mayor to enter into an amendment to an agreement between the City of Shreveport and Twin City Salvage Pool, Inc. for a central storage facility for towed and impounded vehicles.

3. Resolution No. 10 of 1998 by Councilman John David Stewart: A resolution authorizing the waiver of entire building rental fee to allow the Bass Life Associates, Inc., to hold its annual banquet on April 21, 1998, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

4. Resolution No. 11 of 1998: A resolution authorizing the Mayor to accept a monetary donation for the purchase of six (6) Kustom Signals, Inc. mobile video recording systems for use by the Shreveport Police Department's DUI Task Force and otherwise provide with respect thereto.

INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES:

1. Ordinance No. 1 of 1998: An ordinance authorizing and providing for an encroachment onto portion of Bolinger Street right-of-way and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

2. Ordinance No. 4 of 1998: An ordinance amending Section 62-2 of the Code of Ordinances and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES ON CONSENT:

Motion by Councilman Serio to Adopt the Resolutions and Ordinances on the Consent Agenda, seconded by Councilman Hightower. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Out of Chamber: Councilman Stewart. 1.

RESOLUTIONS:

RESOLUTION NO. 230 OF 1997

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO MAKE A FORMAL REQUEST TO THE LOUISIANA

DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES FOR AN EVALUATION OF VEGETATION IN

CROSS LAKE AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO

WHEREAS, Cross Lake serves as the primary drinking water supply source for the City of Shreveport;

WHEREAS, the City wishes to ensure the lake's continued viability as a drinking water source for the City and as a recreational and aesthetic asset for the City and area in the future; and

WHEREAS, the City is concerned about the proliferation of certain vegetation in the lake and its effect on the lake and potential impact on the City's water treatment plant:

NOW, 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 make a formal request to the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries for an evaluation of vegetation in Cross Lake and a list of management options/recommendations relative thereto, substantially in accordance with the draft letter which was filed with the original copy of this resolution in the office of the Clerk of Council on December 9, 1997.

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

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

RESOLUTION NO. 231 OF 1997

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EMPLOYMENT OF SPECIAL LEGAL COUNSEL TO REPRESENT THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT, AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City of Shreveport to retain the services of outside legal counsel to represent the interests of the City of Shreveport in the lawsuit entitled DONNA VENABLE WARKE V. CITY OF SHREVEPORT, Number CV97-218 firm Cook, Yancey, King and Galloway, 6S in the United States District Court.

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8.03 of the City Charter, the City Attorney recommends that Price Barker and Byrce Denny, with the law firm Cook, Yancey, King and Galloway, be retained for the purpose of said representation.

NOW, 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 he is hereby authorized to execute, for and on behalf of the City of Shreveport, a retainer agreement with Cook, Yancey, King and Galloway substantially in accordance with the terms and conditions of the draft thereof which was filed for public inspection, together with the original copy of this resolution in the office of the Clerk of Council on December 8, 1997.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this contract shall be paid out of the general government legal expense fund.

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

RESOLUTION NO. 236 OF 1997

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE WAIVER OF THE ENTIRE BUILDING RENTAL FEE FOR THE CIVIC THEATER TO ALLOW THE AMICETTE CLUB TO HOLD ITS ANNUAL VALENTINE SWEETHEART PAGEANT AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BY: COUNCILMAN COOPER

WHEREAS, the Amicette Club, a subsidiary of Zeta Phi Beta Sorority, Inc., has scheduled its Annual Valentine Sweetheart Pageant for Saturday, February 14, 1998 in the Civic Theater; and

WHEREAS, the Amicette Club, a youth group for girls ages 6 through 13, participates in various local community activities such as nursing home visits, literacy, environmental and "good neighbor" projects ; and

WHEREAS, these activities promote civic and cultural growth within the African American community; and

WHEREAS, the revenues generated by the Annual Valentine Pageant will defray the cost of the Zeta Phi Beta Sorority, Inc. Workshop where the club members are taught self-esteem, self-reliance and self-motivation; and

WHEREAS, the Amicette Club's community projects, and the lessons learned by the members while attending seminars and completing the community projects serve a public purpose.

WHEREAS, it is therefore in the public interest and it serves a public purpose for the City to waive the entire rental fee for the use of the Civic Theater for the pageant on February 14, 1998.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, in due, legal and regular session convened, that the entire rental fee for the use of the Civic Theater by the Amicette Club for its Annual Valentine Sweetheart Pageant on Saturday, February 14, 1998 is waived and the provisions of Section 26-123 and Section 26-124 of the Code of Ordinances are suspended relative to this event only.

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

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

RESOLUTION NO. 237 OF 1997

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EMPLOYMENT OF SPECIAL LEGAL COUNSEL TO REPRESENT THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT, AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH

RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City of Shreveport to retain the services of outside legal counsel to represent the interests of the City of Shreveport in lawsuits in which civil rights violations are alleged by or against the Shreveport Police Department, the Shreveport Fire Department, or their personnel.

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8.03 of the City Charter, the City Attorney recommends that Edwin Byrd, Attorney at Law, with the law firm Pettiette, Armand, Dunkelman, Woodley & Byrd, be retained for the purpose of said representation.

NOW, 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 he is hereby authorized to execute, for and on behalf of the City of Shreveport, a retainer agreement with Edwin Byrd, Attorney at Law, with the firm Pettiette, Armand, Dunkelman, Woodley & Byrd, substantially in accordance with the terms and conditions of the draft thereof which was filed for public inspection, together with the original copy of this resolution in the office of the Clerk of Council on December 23, 1997.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this contract shall be paid out of the general government legal expense fund.

items or applications and to this end the provisions of this resolution are hereby declared severable.

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

RESOLUTION NO. 238 OF 1997

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EMPLOYMENT OF SPECIAL LEGAL COUNSEL TO REPRESENT THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT, AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City of Shreveport to retain the services of outside legal counsel to represent the interests of the City of Shreveport and its officers and employees in the claim filed by Allen Partner, Claim Number 96-001666.

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8.03 of the City Charter, the City Attorney recommends that Marshall Pearce and Theordore Casten, with the firm, CASTEN & PEARCE, be retained for the purpose of said representation.

NOW, 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 he is hereby authorized to execute, for and on behalf of the City of Shreveport, a retainer agreement with Marshall Pearce and Theodore Casten, substantially in accordance with the terms and conditions of the draft thereof which was filed for public inspection, together with the original copy of this resolution in the office of the Clerk of Council on December 23, 1997.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that expenses from this contract shall be paid out of the general government legal expense fund.

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

RESOLUTION NO. 239 OF 1997

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ACCEPT A DONATION FOR THE USE OF TWO (2) WATERCRAFT JET SKIS FOR USE BY THE SHREVEPORT FIRE DEPARTMENT SEARCH AND RESCUE TEAM, AND OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO

WHEREAS, Section 2.02(e) grants the City the right to accept gifts, donations, bequests, or grants for any purpose related to the powers and duties of the City or related to providing for the welfare of the citizens of the City; and

WHEREAS, the Fire Department desires to accept from Kawasaki of Shreveport, through Kawasaki Motors Corporation, the use of two (2) Kawasaki 1100 jet skis for one year with a total value of $12,000.00; and

WHEREAS, the previous arrangement for the use of these watercraft has expired; and

WHEREAS, Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A., through Kawasaki of Shreveport, has offered to donate the use of two (2) jet skis for the purpose of assisting the Shreveport Fire Department's search and rescue team; and

WHEREAS, this will involve no cost to the City of Shreveport.

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 authorized to execute an agreement, substantially the same as the document filed in the Office of the Clerk of Council on December 9, 1997 between the City of Shreveport and Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A., through Kawasaki of Shreveport accepting the donation of the use of the two (2) jet skis.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City council wishes to express its appreciation, on behalf of the citizens of the City to Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A., through Kawasaki of Shreveport, for its assistance in improving the capabilities of the Shreveport Fire Department.

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

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

RESOLUTION NO. 2 OF 1998

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CHARLES GLEEN LINCOLN, ORA JEAN LINCOLN, AND MAE B. HARRIS LOCATED AT 3339 MERIWETHER ROAD TO CONNECT TO THE WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM OF THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, Charles Gleen Lincoln, Ora Jean Lincoln, and Mae B. Harris have agreed to secure all permits and inspections required by the Shreveport Comprehensive Building Code. Said parties 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 Charles Gleen Lincoln, Ora Jean Lincoln, and Mae B. Harris be authorized to connect the building located at 3339 Meriwether Road 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.

RESOLUTION NO. 3 OF 1998

A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE BID RECEIVED ON IFB #97-133 FOR THREE (3) 1-TON CAB & CHASSIS AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

WHEREAS, One bid was received as a result of solicitations for the purchase of Three (3) 1-Ton Cab & Chassis, IFB #97-133; and WHEREAS, the City has rejected the bids due to the fact that the bid received was in excess of the projected budget estimate of the Department of Public Works Solid Waste; and

WHEREAS, the Department of Public Works Solid Waste plans to buy the items off of State Contract.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, legal and regular session convened that the bids received on IFB #97-133 be rejected.

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

ORDINANCES: None.

The Council considered the Regular Agenda legislation.

RESOLUTIONS ON SECOND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE:

The Deputy Clerk read the resolution by title: Resolution No. 89 of 1997 by Councilman Stewart: A resolution suspending the effects of Section 58-26 of the Code of Ordinances relative to noise and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

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

Councilman Hightower: This is an item that Mr. Stewart has postponed in the past, with him out of the Chamber, could we reconsider that motion and move for a postponement on his behalf.

Read by title and as read motion by Councilman Hightower, seconded by Councilman Cooper to postpone the resolution until the next regular meeting. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Out of Chamber: Councilman Stewart. 1.

The Deputy Clerk read the resolution by title: Resolution No. 233 of 1997: A resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an addendum to Cable Television Franchise Agreement with Time Warner Entertainment Company, L. P. and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Read by title and as read motion by Councilman Cooper, seconded by Councilman Burrell to postpone the resolution until the next regular meeting.

Councilman Burrell: Can we get a reason for postponement, why it is being postponed? Mayor Williams: The City Attorney, I requested the City Attorney, go over the ordinance that he had prepared. Our City Attorney had been working with the Cablevision people to create a document to allow the extension of that franchise, then the ordinance was introduced. When it was introduced, I asked the City Attorney to refer the matter to the consultant who wrote the telecommunications ordinance this past last year. He referred and list a number of amendments, that I believe you have before you, some amendments that he had proposed. And there are, some of them are technical and some of them but there are. . . .

Councilman Burrell: Do we have those amendments? Mr. Collins: I don't believe they have them. Mayor Williams: They don't have them. Anyway, they are some amendments he sent to have prepared, to that ordinance. I will request that the Council either adopt those amendments or postpone and allow Mr. Jones to come back at the next meeting and explain a rational for the amendments; so that I was why I suggested a postponment since he is not here today to explain those various amendments.

Councilman Burrell: If we can, the amendments are prepared? Mayor Williams: Yes. Councilman Burrell: You don't have them? Mayor Williams: They are here. I thought they had passed them out. Mr. Collins: Mayor, I'll get some. . .Mayor Williams: We'll get a copy of it and then if they are prepared, they have not been passed out. We'll get them in just a minute for you.

Councilman Burrell: I suggest that we are going to look at these amendments, then before we do get the amendments prior to the time that we are going to be asked to vote on them so that we have some idea of what we are going into or again, or we may want to postpone it again.

Councilman Serio: Mr. Burrell, this almost sounds familiar. This is the third time in this one session today I heard the same time. It is the third time (inaudible) in this session about the issue within the course that we are not getting information on it until the last minute here in the Council session. So, I think it would be better to accomodate to us, if we looked (inaudible) prior to the voting session. Mayor Williams: We just received those yesterday, Mr. Serio and I was not able to be at the meeting yesterday afternoon to. I had the amendments at that time and Jerry was out at that time and today, but he was out yesterday also but that is where we are.

Councilman Serio: We meet yesterday at 3:00. Mayor Williams: Yes.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Out of Chamber: Councilman Stewart. 1.

The Deputy Clerk read the resolution by title: Resolution No. 4 of 1998 by Councilman Stewart: A resolution temporarily closing a portion of Oak Street to vehicular traffic, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Read by title and as read motion by Councilman Green, seconded by Councilman Hightower to postpone the resolution until the next regular meeting. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Out of Chamber: Councilman Stewart. 1.

RESOLUTION NO. 5 OF 1998

RESOLUTION STATING THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT'S ENDORSEMENT OF, CROWN DENTAL STUDIO, INC. TO PARTICIPATE IN THE BENEFITS OF THE LOUISIANA ENTERPRISE ZONE PROGRAM

WHEREAS, the Louisiana Enterprise Zone Act of 1981, Act 901, was enacted by the 1981 Louisiana State Legislature, Act 337 was enacted by the 1982 Legislature, Act 433 was enacted by the 1987 Legislature, and Act 1024 was enacted by the 1992 Legislature, and

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

WHEREAS, the Louisiana Department of Economic Development has designated certain 1990 Census Tract/Block Groups, in the City of Shreveport as "Enterprise Zone" eligible, based on demographic and economic factors, and

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

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

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

1. If approached by an industry who would assume all costs involved, to apply with the U.S. Department of Commerce to have the enterprise zone area declared to be a free trade zone.

2. To devise and implement a program to improve police protection within the zone or zones.

3. To give priority to the use in the zone or zones of any UDAG or JTPA or CDBG funds received from the federal government.

4. To provide assistance to the Department of Economic Development in certifying employers to be eligible for the benefits of this program. This would include verification of the location of the business, number of employees and other verification that would have to be made at the local level.

5. To REFUND all applicable local sales taxes on the purchase of the material used in the construction of a building, or any addition or improvement thereon, for housing any legitimate business enterprise, and machinery and equipment used in that enterprise. This tax refund would be on materials, construction and equipment purchased for a project and used by that business permanently on that site.

6. To cooperate with the Department in reviewing certain local regulations which may serve to discourage economic development within the enterprise zone. A possible solution may be to establish a special "enterprise zone" district in local development codes.

7. To assist the Department in evaluating progress made in any enterprise zone within its jurisdiction. This would entail a comparative analysis of conditions in the zone prior to designation (number of workers employed there and businesses) and conditions some time after designation (six months or a year, etc.)

8. To keep the Department informed whenever changes occur within the zone, i.e., an establishment goes out of business, is destroyed by fire, flood, etc., new development takes place with the infrastructure (streets, etc.), changes in local development codes that may affect the zone.

BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, regular, and legal session convened that, CROWN DENTAL STUDIO, INC. and their project number 970471 located at 1842 Barton Drive, Shreveport, Louisiana 71107 , in Census Tract 205 and Block Group Number .001, is endorsed to participate in the Louisiana Enterprise Zone Program.

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

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

Read by title and as read motion by Councilman Cooper, seconded by Councilman Serio passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Out of Chamber: Councilman Stewart. 1.

RESOLUTION NO. 6 OF 1998

RESOLUTION STATING THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT'S ENDORSEMENT OF, ALLOY PIPING PRODUCTS, INC. TO PARTICIPATE IN THE BENEFITS OF THE LOUISIANA ENTERPRISE ZONE PROGRAM

WHEREAS, the Louisiana Enterprise Zone Act of 1981, Act 901, was enacted by the 1981 Louisiana State Legislature, Act 337 was enacted by the 1982 Legislature, Act 433 was enacted by the 1987 Legislature, and Act 1024 was enacted by the 1992 Legislature, and

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

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

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

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

1. If approached by an industry who would assume all costs involved, to apply with the U.S. Department of Commerce to have the enterprise zone area declared to be a free trade zone.

2. To devise and implement a program to improve police protection within the zone or zones.

3. To give priority to the use in the zone or zones of any UDAG or JTPA or CDBG funds received from the federal government.

BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, regular, and legal session convened that, ALLOY PIPING PRODUCTS, INC. and their project number 970457 located at 740 North Market Street, Shreveport, Louisiana 71107 , in Census Tract 205 and Block Group Number .003, is endorsed to participate in the Louisiana Enterprise Zone Program.

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

Read by title and as read motion by Councilman Green, seconded by Councilman Burrell passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Out of Chamber: Councilman Stewart. 1.

RESOLUTION NO. 7 OF 1998

RESOLUTION STATING THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT'S ENDORSEMENT OF ROOFING SUPPLY ,INC. TO PARTICIPATE IN THE BENEFITS OF THE LOUISIANA ENTERPRISE ZONE PROGRAM

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

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

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

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

1. If approached by an industry who would assume all costs involved, to apply with the U.S. Department of Commerce to have the enterprise zone area declared to be a free trade zone.

2. To devise and implement a program to improve police protection within the zone or zones.

3. To give priority to the use in the zone or zones of any UDAG or JTPA or CDBG funds received from the federal government.

BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, regular, and legal session convened that ROOFING SUPPLY, INC. and their project number 970503 located at 6504 Union Avenue, Shreveport, Louisiana 71106 , in Census Tract 233 and Block Group Number .002, is endorsed to participate in the Louisiana Enterprise Zone Program.

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

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

Councilman Burrell: I would like to ask the Administration, specifically, I believe it comes under Mr. Dumar's Office to give a report on those companies that are involved in enterprise zones program because they do keep a record of their participation because the Louisiana state law says that under that program they have certain requirements. And one of the specific requirements is that they hire people from the area, I believe in which they are stationed and I think that is very critical to us in terms of trying to make sure that they are carrying out their duties and we are effecting the unemployment that we have in this city. Councilman Green: Mr. Dumars, when you get that prepared for us and get each Council member a copy of it.

Motion passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Out of Chamber: Councilman Stewart. 1.

RESOLUTION NO. 12 OF 1998

A RESOLUTION TO TERMINATE THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT AND SSP CONSULTING, L.C. AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BY: COUNCILMEN BURRELL AND STEWART

WHEREAS, the City of Shreveport entered into a contract with SSP Consulting, L.C. on September 16, 1996; and

WHEREAS, the initial term of the contract was for a period of eighteen months beginning on the 1st day of September 1996 and ending on the 30th day of March 1998 with an option to renew for two additional years, at one year increments at the city's option, at terms, conditions and for consideration, mutually agreeable to both parties; and,

WHEREAS, the contract provides that the city may terminate this contract upon thirty days written notice to SSP Consulting, L.C. with the understanding that all services being performed under this contract shall cease upon the date specified in such notice; and,

WHEREAS, it is in the interest of the City of Shreveport to terminate said contract.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, in due, legal and regular session convened, that the contract between the City of Shreveport and SSP Consulting, L.C. is terminated effective February 28, 1998.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Chief Administrative Officer is directed to notify SSP Consulting, L.C. immediately, but no later than January 26, 1997, of the termination of said contract and he is directed to take all other appropriate actions in this regard.

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

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

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

Councilman Hightower: This resolution is being introduced by Councilman Burrell and Councilman Stewart and I'd just like to take two seconds to specifically express my appreciation to both Councilman Burrell and Councilman Stewart for bird-dogging or watching this particular contract and realizing that it is something that we were spending money on that we shouldn't been spending money on and have the nerve to bring that back before the Council and terminate the contract, before its conclusion, saving taxpayers'---how much, Mr. Burrell? Councilman Burrell: Well, at this point, from my understanding it is only one month that we are saving but it was a $182,000 dollar contract.

Councilman Hightower: Like I said, I would just like to commend you for bringing that back before us, at least then before it was able to be re-newed then lost in the shuffle; so, certainly I support the resolution.

Councilman Burrell: This function that this company was suppose to provide is still a very vital function to the well being of our small businesses in this City. And I am asking that the Administration would consider bringing that back under the umbrella of the city. As I understood when this contract was first initiated, that the Community Development Department could possible handle this same work that we were paying all this money for. And it has been brought to may attention by some of the people who were actually suppose to be served and others who have worked with this program that we could have done a better job, which is possible, even if we would have left it within the confines of the City. That may be matter of question, whether (inaudible). But I think we still need it. We just need to know how to (inaudible).

Mayor Williams: Just a comment to the Council. First of all, we did not fund this program for the remainder of 1998, the year's up. The contract is to expire sometime in March, I'm not sure of the exact date, but anyway, we did not fund it for the rest of the year in anticipation of trying to bring that back with the Community Development. We are very aware of the need to train our work force for the skilled jobs and our business operators but we are headed in that direction. I just want to echo what Mr. Burrell said, that's the direction that we are headed, we've been headed in.

Councilman Burrell: Mr. Mayor, I know that Councilman Stewart and I had requested during the month of December that the contract be looked with for a possible termination of it at that time but I'm holding letter dated October 23, 1997, from Ms. Liz Washington, Director of Finance from Mr. Tom Mattox, Purchasing Agent. Subject: Surety Support Services. And it states that, with the increase in appropriate personnel to run SSP's Program in Shreveport an increase in personnel in the City in the Department or office, I recommend that we exercise the 30-day cancellation option in our contract with the firm. (Inaudible) as enclosed. We currently pay $18,799 dollars per month to the Surety Support Services. It would appear that these funds would be best spent elsewhere and this is dated back in October. And we did not act upon it at that time and only when Councilman Stewart received a call from me and then I received a call afterwards about this contract, that it was considered for termination. Could you give us an explanation as to why we did not recognize and support the recommendation from our Finance Department on this? Mayor Williams: Right off hand, Councilman Burrell, I'm not familiar. I would like to see that particular memo.

Resolution passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Out of Chamber: Councilman Stewart. 1.

Councilman Green: Why don't we. . . (we'll come back to that).

Mayor Williams: I'd like to ask Ms. Liz Washington to address Councilman Burrell's concerns about SSP, a minute ago.

Ms. Washington: In regard to the memo to me from Tom Mattox. I didn't act upon that because, at the point when Tom sent me this memo, we had already submitted the budget and taking SSP out of the budget. If that was his personal recommendation. It didnot reflect Finance's point of view, necessarily but we had already taken them out of the budget.

Councilman Burrell: But it is my understanding, did we stop the payments at that time because we are talking about October 23, and I understand that they received these payments up until today. Ms. Washington: We paid them. All invoices that SSP has sent us, we have paid.

Councilman Burrell: Oh, I understand that. What I'm asking is if the memo was for October 23, requesting that we look at the clause for termination giving a 30 days notice, we would be talking about November 23 or thereafter or whenever you made that decision. But we were still paying the contract up until, from my understanding, up until today and now we have to get a 30 day notice. Mayor Williams: That's correct.

INTRODUCTION OF RESOLUTIONS:

1. Resolution No. 13 of 1998: A resolution authorizing the employment of special legal counsel to represent the City of Shreveport and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES:

1. Ordinance No. 2 of 1998: An ordinance amending portions of Article II of Chapter 74 of the Code of Ordinances relative to solid waste collection, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

2. Ordinance No. 5 of 1998: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by changing the zoning classification of property located on the east side of Youree Drive, 425 feet north of its intersection with Stratford, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, from SPI-3, Commercial Corridor Overlay District to SPI-3-E, Commercial Corridor Overlay/Extended Use District limited to "a print shop which includes copying, printing, mailing, and related uses as described at the public hearing" only and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Read by title and as read motion by Councilman Burrell, seconded by Councilman Spigener for

Introduction of the Resolution and Ordinances to lay over until the next regular meeting. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE

1. Ordinance No. 119 of 1997 by Councilman Serio: An ordinance establishing certain four way stop intersections and three way stop intersections within the University Terrace South Subdivision, and otherwise providing with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on October 14, 1997, was read by title and as read on motion ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Serio, seconded by Councilman Stewart to postpone the ordinance until the next regular meeting. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

2. Ordinance No. 176 of 1997: An ordinance amending Ordinance No. 253 of 1987, extending the franchise granted to Time Warner Entertainment Company, L. P., as successor in interest to Cablevision of Shreveport, Inc., for the operation of a cable television system within the City of Shreveport, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

The Deputy Clerk read the following amendments:

AMENDMENT NO. 1

SECTION I. DEFINITIONS

Subsection (b)

"Cable Television System" hereinafter referred to as "CATV System" or "System" shall be defined by the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, and any amendments thereto.

The foregoing subparagraph shall be amended to read as follows:

"Cable Television System" hereinafter referred to as "CATV System" or "System" shall be defined by the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, as amended by the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 and the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and as may be further amended.

AMENDMENT NO. 2

3) Section 10. PAYMENT TO THE CITY

Subsection (d)

A statement certified by an officer of the Grantee of revenues shall be filed by Grantee with the payment of the first quarter following the close of Grantee's fiscal year. The Grantee shall provide, upon request from the City, an independently audited statement of its revenues for the previous calendar year. The City shall have the right to review or audit, at its cost, the revenue information from which the franchise fees have been computed. Any over or under payment determined by such annual revenue statement shall be reflected in the concurrent payment.

The foregoing paragraph shall be amended to read as follows:

A statement certified by an officer of the Grantee of revenues shall be filed by Grantee with the payment of the first quarter following the close of Grantee's fiscal year. The Grantee shall provide, upon request from the City, an independently audited statement of its revenues for the previous calendar year. The City shall have the right to review or audit, at its cost, the revenue information from which the franchise fees have been computed. Any over or under payment determined by such review or audit shall be reflected in the concurrent payment.

AMENDMENT NO. 3

8) SECTION 16. DURATION AND REVOCATION

The rights granted by the City to the Grantee under this Ordinance shall continue and remain in full force and effect until December 31, 2012.

The foregoing paragraph shall be amended to read as follows:

a) The rights granted by the City to the Grantee under this Ordinance shall continue and remain in full force and effect until December 31, 2012, unless revoked or reduced pursuant to Section 12(b).

AMENDMENT NO. 4

Add Section 23 to read as follows:

SECTION 23.

Nothing contained herein shall be construed to limit the rights of the City available under applicable federal and state law pertaining to the regulation of cable communications and telecommunications.

Councilman Burrell: Mr. Mayor, based upon those amendments, I'm sure that those amendments been acceptable to Cablevision. Have they agreed or do they need to? Mayor Williams: I can not really answer that. I think Mr. Johnson is in the audience or was, but I do not know because we received a copy of your ordinance att the last Council meeting and I referred that to the City Attorney to review. His discussions was with, initially, with the consultant as to the language and whether or not he has actually discussed this with Cablevision, I don't know; I just don't know.

Motion by Councilman Hightower, seconded by Councilman Stewart to postpone Amendments Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 7. Nays: None. S

Amendment No. 5 by Councilman Serio:

Amend the ordinance as follows:

On page 1, in the second paragraph, third line, delete the word "ten" and substitute the word "five", and

On page 4, in paragraph 8, amending Section 16, delete the number 2012 and substitute the number "2007."

Motion by Councilman Green, seconded by Councilman Cooper to postpone Amendment No. 5.

Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

Having passed first reading on December 8, 1997, was read by title and as read on motion ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Spigener, seconded by Councilman Burrell to postpone the ordinance until the next regular meeting. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

3. Ordinance No. 177 of 1997: An ordinance closing and abandoning Boyd Street and its adjoining turnaround easement in the E. & B. Subdivision, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on December 22, 1997, was read by title and as read on motion ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Cooper, seconded by Councilman Serio to postpone the ordinance until the next regular meeting. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

4. Ordinance No. 178 of 1997: An ordinance to enact Section 66-99.1, titled Repurchase of Creditable Service Time, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto

Having passed first reading on December 22, 1997, was read by title and as read on motion ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Stewart, seconded by Councilman Serio adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

5. Ordinance No. 179 of 1997: An ordinance amending Chapter 86 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Shreveport relative to occupational license taxes and otherwise providing.

Having passed first reading on December 22, 1997, was read by title and as read on motion ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Hightower, seconded by Councilman Cooper adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Green and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Recusal: Councilman Spigener. 1.

6. Ordinance No. 180 of 1997: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by changing the zoning classification of property located on the east side of Line Avenue, 125 feet south of Thora, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana from R-1D, Urban, One-Family Residence District to R-1D-E, Urban, One Family Residence/Extended Use District limited to "a contractor's office" only, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Councilman Stewart: Do you recall Mr. Kirkland, the vote of the Board. Mr. Kirkland; Yes. Councilman Stewart: Would you share that publicly. Mr. Kirkland: Unanimous.

Councilman Stewart: No objections, by any members. Mr. Kirkland: Tthere was some objections from a couple of the neighbors, but the board members themselves in their discussion decided this was a good land use for that site.

Councilman Stewart: And I would assume not trying to lead you that, they were comfortable with the stipulation associated with it . Mr. Kirkland: Right.

Councilman Stewart: I mean it would not be damaging the environment for future purposes based on the uses around it at this time. Mr. Kirkland: Generally, I would agree with what you said, yes.

Councilman Stewart: Any other explanatory remarks you would like to share with us for the record. Mr. Kirkland: There is a remaining piece of property that is zoned R-1 to the south of this site that is fairly suitable commercial and at some point in the future, hopefully that will be dealt with. That is something that is not residential, it is a vacant lot and it will be residential.

Councilman Stewart: Thank you for your observation. I appreciate it. Mr. Chairman (inaudible) with the balance of the Council that we pass this zoning ordinance, No. 180.

Ordinance adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

7. Ordinance No. 181 of 1997: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by changing the zoning classification of property located on the north side of Boulevard, 300 feet east of Line Avenue, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana from R-1H, Urban, One-Family Residence District to R-1H-E, Urban, One Family Residence/Extended Use District limited to "a parking lot" only, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Councilman Stewart: Mr. Kirkland, my general understanding of this particular issue is not a significant or a fairly significant in change, are in fact on the neighborhood. Our obligations are as problems; is that a reasonable statement? Mr. Kirkland: Correct. Councilman Stewart: Were there any objections to this. Mr. Kirkland: No, not at all. Councilman Stewart: Thank you; I urge for passage of this.

Ordinance adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

8. Ordinance No. 182 of 1997: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by changing the zoning classification of property located at the northeast corner of Kingston Road and Mansfield Road, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana from R-2, Suburban, Multi-Family Residence District, B-2, Neighborhood Business District and I-1, Light Industry District to I-2, Heavy Industry District and R-2, Suburban, Multi-Family Residence District to I-1, Light Industry District and R-2, Suburban, Multi-Family Residence District and B-2, Neighborhood Business District to B-2-A, Business Park District, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Councilman Spigener: Mr. Kirkland, am I correct in assuming this is the tract at the corner of Mansfield Road and Kingston and I'm sure there are no objections. Mr. Kirkland: That's correct. Surprisingly enough, there were no objections, in fact, Ms. King was in favor of this. In which, those of you who've represented that district know what that mean, that is a good point. Councilman Spigener: And of course was the Board unanimous in---Mr. Kirkland: Yes, they were.

Ordinance adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

9. Ordinance No. 183 of 1997: An ordinance amending Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Shreveport Zoning Ordinance, by changing the zoning classification of property located on the west side of Inner Loop, 1,000 feet north of E. Kings Hwy., Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana from B-3, Buffer Business District to R-3, Urban Multi-Family Residence District, and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Having passed first reading on December 22, 1997, was read by title and as read on motion ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Hightower, seconded by Councilman Stewart adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

10. Ordinance No. 185 of 1997: An ordinance authorizing the Mayor of the City of Shreveport to enter into a lease agreement with Greenwood Acres Full Gospel Baptist Church for the lease of certain real property belonging to the City of Shreveport and to otherwise provide with respect thereto.

Mr. Thompson: This needs to be postponed because a certain advertising requirement has not been met.

Having passed first reading on December 22, 1997, was read by title and as read on motion ordered passed to third reading. Read the third time in full and as read motion by Councilman Cooper, seconded by Councilman Hightower to postpone the ordinance until the next regular meeting. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

The adopted Ordinances follow:

ORDINANCE NO. 178 OF 1997

AN ORDINANCE TO ENACT SECTION 66-99.1, TITLED REPURCHASE OF CREDITABLE SERVICE TIME, AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO

BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, in due, legal and regular session convened that Section 66-99.1 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Shreveport is hereby enacted to read as follows:

Section 66-99.1 - Repurchase of Creditable Service Time

(A) If any person who receives a refund from the retirement system, shall reenter service, or, if an active appointed employee reaffiliates in the retirement system by beginning contributions, he or she may immediately be qualified to purchase prior membership service for which he or she obtained a refund by selecting one of the following options:

Option 1) Purchase the entire amount of creditable service for which the employee had received a refund, or,

Option 2) Purchase only a portion of the creditable service for which the employee has received a refund. Any employee who elects to purchase only a portion of their prior creditable service shall be required to first purchase the time commencing with the date they first became eligible as members of the retirement system and may purchase their consecutive months of creditable service leading chronologically up to and including the employee's date of separation from the retirement system.

(B) Any employee who chooses to purchase former membership service in accordance with the terms of this article, shall repay his or her refunded contributions, plus compounded interest at the actuarial valuation rate approved by the board on the date of the employee's application for repurchase of prior service, from the date of the original refund to the employee, until repayment to the retirement system.

(C) All fees including charges for actuarial valuations associated with repurchases of prior membership service shall be payable by the employee.

(D) All repurchases of prior membership service shall be paid by the employee to the retirement system by one lump sum payment.

(E) An employee electing to repurchase prior creditable service pursuant to the terms of this section may do so only one time and must choose either Option (1) or Option (2) as a one time irrevocable election.

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

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

/s/James Edward Green, Chairman

/s/ Arthur G. Thompson, Clerk of Council

ORDINANCE NO. 179 OF 1997

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 86 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT RELATIVE TO OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE TAXES AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING WITH RESPECT THERETO.

BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport in due, regular and legal session convened that Section 86-36 of the Code of Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:

Section 86-36. Real Estate Brokers.

Notwithstanding the provisions of R.S. 47:357(B), real estate brokers shall obtain a license and pay a tax in accordance with R.S. 47:359(J).

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

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

/s/James Edward Green, Chairman

/s/ Arthur G. Thompson, Clerk of Council

ORDINANCE NO. 180 OF 1997

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 106 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT ZONING ORDINANCE, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF LINE AVENUE, 125 FEET SOUTH OF THORA, SHREVEPORT, CADDO PARISH, LOUISIANA, FROM R-1D, URBAN, ONE-FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT TO R-1D-E, URBAN, ONE-FAMILY RESIDENCE/EXTENDED USE DISTRICT LIMITED TO "A CONTRACTOR'S OFFICE" ONLY, AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

SECTION I: BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, in due, legal and regular session convened, that the zoning classification of Lot 33 and the south 10 feet of Lot 32 lying next to and adjoining Lot 33, less and except the west 10 feet dedicated to Line Avenue, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, property located on the east side of Line Avenue, 125 feet south of Thora, be and the same is hereby changed from R-1D, Urban, One-Family Residence District to R-1D-E, Urban, One-Family Residence/Extended Use District limited to "a contractor's office" only.

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

1. Development to be in substantial accord with revised site plan indicating landscaping, fencing, no signage in the front yard and no parking in the front yard, to be submitted to and approved by the Zoning Administrator prior to the issuance of any permits.

2. Hours of operation are to be from 7 a.m. till 7 p.m.

3. No outside storage of equipment or vehicles is permitted.

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.

/s/James Edward Green, Chairman

/s/ Arthur G. Thompson, Clerk of Council

ORDINANCE NO. 181 OF 1997

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 106 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT ZONING ORDINANCE, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BOULEVARD, 300 FEET EAST OF LINE AVENUE, SHREVEPORT, CADDO PARISH, LOUISIANA, FROM R-1H, URBAN, ONE-FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT TO R-1H-E, URBAN, ONE-FAMILY RESIDENCE/EXTENDED USE DISTRICT LIMITED TO "A PARKING LOT" ONLY, AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

SECTION I: BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, in due, legal and regular session convened, that the zoning classification of Lots 153, 154 and the W/2 of Lot 155, Land Subdivision, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, property located on the north side of Boulevard, 300 feet east of Line Avenue, be and the same is hereby changed from R-1H, Urban, One-Family Residence District to R-1H-E, Urban, One-Family Residence/Extended Use District limited to "a parking lot" only.

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

1. Development to be in substantial accord with a revised site plan showing a 5' buffer on the east boundary line outside of the 6' high wood fence to be submitted to and approved by the Planning Commission, with any changes or additions requiring further review and approval by the Planning Commission.

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

/s/James Edward Green, Chairman

/s/ Arthur G. Thompson, Clerk of Council

ORDINANCE NO. 182 OF 1997

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 106 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT ZONING ORDINANCE, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NE CORNER OF KINGSTON ROAD AND MANSFIELD ROAD, SHREVEPORT, CADDO PARISH, LOUISIANA, FROM R-2, SUBURBAN, MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT, B-2, NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT AND I-1, LIGHT INDUSTRY DISTRICT TO I-2, HEAVY INDUSTRY DISTRICT AND R-2, SUBURBAN, MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT TO I-1, LIGHT INDUSTRY DISTRICT AND R-2, SUBURBAN, MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT AND B-2, NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT TO B-2-A, BUSINESS PARK DISTRICT, AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

SECTION I: BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, in due, legal and regular session convened, that the zoning classification of property located at the NE corner of Kingston Road and Mansfield Road, Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, legally described below, be and the same is hereby changed from R-2, Suburban, Multi-Family Residence District, B-2, Neighborhood Business District and I-1, Light Industry District to I-2, Heavy Industry District and R-2, Suburban, Multi-Family Residence District to I-1, Light Industry District and R-2, Suburban, Multi-Family Residence District and B-2, Neighborhood Business District to B-2-A, Business Park District:

TRACT A; R-2, B-2, AND I-1 TO I-2:

A tract of land in the SE/4 of Section 27, T17N, R14W, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, and being more particularly described as follows:

From the SE corner of said Section 27, run thence N8947'50"W along the south line of Section 27 a distance of 400 feet to a point; thence run N039'58"E a distance of 9.32 feet to a point; Thence run N7551'20"W a distance of 1020.83 feet to the POB on the E'ly R/W of Southern Pacific Railroad; Thence run N1357'0"E along said R/W a distance of 681.27 feet to the S'ly R/W of T & P Railroad; thence run along said R/W S6931'7"E a distance of 603.92 feet to a point; thence run S1357'0"W a distance of 614.61 feet to a point; thence run N7551'20"W a distance of 600 feet to the POB. Said tract containing 388,763 sq. ft. or 8.9248 acres.

TRACT B; R-2 TO I-1:

A tract of land in the SE/4 of Section 27, T17N, R14W, Caddo Parish, Louisiana, being more particularly described as follows:

From the SE corner of said Section 27, run thence N8947'50"W along the south line of Section 27 a distance of 400 feet to a point; thence run N039'58"E a distance of 9.32 feet to the POB; thence run N7551'20"W a distance of 420.83 feet to a point; thence run N1357'0"E a distance of 614.61 feet to a point on the S'ly R/W of T & P Railroad; thence run S6931'7"E along said R/W a distance of 284.88 feet to a point; thence S039'58"W a distance of 599.68 feet to the POB. Said tract containing 209,681 sq. ft. or 4.8136 acres.

TRACT C; R-2 AND B-2 TO B-2-A:

A tract of land in the NE/4 of Section 34, T17N, R14W, Caddo Parish, Louisiana and being more particularly described as follows:

From the NE corner of said Section 34, run thence N8947'50"W along the north line of Section 34, a distance of 400 feet to the POB; thence run S039'58"W a distance of 247.76 feet to a point on the N'ly R/W of Kingston Road; thence run N7551'20"W along said R/W a distance of 1079.90 feet to a point on the E'ly R/W of Southern Pacific Railroad; thence run N1357'0"E along said R/W a distance of 250 feet to a point; thence run S7551'20"E a distance of 1020.83 feet to a point; thence run S039'58"W a distance of 9.32 feet to the POB. Said tract containing 262,591 sq. ft. or 6.0283 acres.

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

1. Development to be in substantial accord with a revised site plan for Tract A to be submitted to and approved by the Planning Commission showing ingress and egress for the rear tracts, with any significant changes or additions requiring further review and approval by the Planning Commission.

2. Tract A shall be in compliance with the Landscape Ordinance.

3. Master plan showing curb cuts, parking, and full compliance with the Landscape Ordinance to be submitted to and approved by the Planning Commission on Tracts B and C prior to the issuance of any permits for Tracts B and C.

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

/s/James Edward Green, Chairman

/s/ Arthur G. Thompson, Clerk of Council

ORDINANCE NO. 183 OF 1997

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 106 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, THE CITY OF SHREVEPORT ZONING ORDINANCE, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE INNER LOOP, 1,000 FEET NORTH OF E. KINGS HWY, SHREVEPORT, CADDO PARISH, LOUISIANA, FROM B-3, COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT TO R-3, URBAN, MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT, AND TO OTHERWISE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT THERETO.

A 10.552 acre, M/L tract of land being a portion of Lot 146, Dixie Gardens Subdivision, said tract being more particularly described as follows:

Commence at a concrete monument found for corner at the intersection of the abandoned centerline of Dixie Gardens Drive, closed and abandoned by the City of Shreveport in Ordinance No. 4 of 1985, and the W'ly R/W of Bert Kouns Industrial Loop Expressway as dedicated; thence run SW'ly along a curve to the right, said curve having a Radius of 1,312.39 feet, an Arc length of 442.69 feet, a Chord bearing of S288'48"W and a Chord length of 440.59 feet, to a concrete monument found for corner; thence run S3759'32"W along the W'ly R/W of Bert Kouns Industrial Loop Expressway a distance of 603.85 feet to a ½ inch iron pipe set for corner and also being the POB of the tract herein described; thence continue S3759'32"W along the W'ly R/W of Bert Kouns Industrial Expressway, to the SW line of Lot 146, of said Dixie Gardens Subdivision and Sand Beach Bayou, a distance of 622.94 feet; thence run along Sand Beach Bayou and Old River Bayou these next 10 calls:

N6119'39"W a distance of 13.12 feet;

N260'0"W a distance of 202.70 feet;

N3740'0W a distance of 373.05 feet;

N6445'0"W a distance of 130.20 feet;

N7545'0"W a distance of 185.90 feet;

N660'0"W a distance of 50 feet;

N2645'0"W a distance of 70 feet;

N2050'0"E a distance of 90 feet;

N710'0"E a distance of 410 feet;

N8630'0"E a distance of 286.62 feet to the centerline of the City of Shreveport 15 foot drainage and utility servitude; thence run S300'0"E along the centerline of said 15 foot easement a distance of 301.54 feet to a ½ inch iron pipe set for corner; thence run S710'0"E along the centerline of said 15 foot easement a distance of 145.85 feet to a ½ inch iron pipe set for corner; thence run S4147'30"E along the centerline of said 15 foot easement a distance of 138.76 feet to the POB.

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

1. Development to be in substantial accord with site plan submitted with any significant changes requiring further review and approval by the Planning Commission.

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

/s/James Edward Green, Chairman

/s/ Arthur G. Thompson, Clerk of Council

Motion by Councilman Green to suspend the rules, seconded by Councilman Hightower. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

Councilman Hightower: I just talked to Mr. Collins and he has provided me with some of what I wanted to ask that I'd asked for in the work session yesterday, let me preface this by saying that this park was not built under the current Administration, so, I know they don't know all the answers to this but what I do wish to happen is that we have someone within the Administration to lead us to some sort of conclusion or final end and result on the Riverfront Park flooding situation.

As everyone in the room knows, we back in 1994, we spent $1. 2 million (roughly) to build that Riverfront Park. We hired a contractor to do that for us, a professional. Two weeks ago we were asked by the current Administration to include him in another landscaping project and at that meeting I asked that he not be included in any further city work until the Riverfront Park problem was rectified. As evidenced by pictures in the newspaper, pictures that I brought yesterday and anyone's trip to the riverfront, I think they can see that that problem hadn't been rectified. Mr. Collins, last meeting you informed me that we had started building a 2 foot high levee with the sand that was used from the prior clean up in the park, and that is certainly indicated on our progress report here that you provided me with just a minute ago, and certainly I know you understand that hadn't worked. I guess what I really want to get to here is, and it is also my understanding we have a current RFP or bid out for the Police/Fire Memorial that would also go down there in park area, is that not correct? Mr. Collins: But it doesn't go in the flooding area, it goes up by Barnwell. So it will be up in the high part of the area so there is no problem with that.

Councilman Hightower: Let me commend you for that; I like that. What I'd like to do and like to know and ask the Administration to pursue and I talked to Jerry Jones abut this several months back, ask him what liability the architect should have on the property. I really wouldn't have a big problem with water in the park if it weren't that the river were 2 foot below flood stage, yesterday at least, I don't know about today and we are still taking on water in the park and its costing us tens of thousands. It is not the first time it has happened, three or four times a year since the park has been built. And again, Mayor and Wendell, I understand you had nothing to do with that contract, that was in the prior Administration but certainly there should be some sort of liability if it were a building or if it were my house, I'd be going after somebody if it were flooding three or four times a year. I don't know if the architect has insurance of if the park is under some sort of warranty, if there is some sort of bond that should have been collected or just what, but like I said I've asked the City Attorney to pursue this in the past and as far as I can tell, that hadn't happened. And I know that certainly, with you getting back to me as quick as you did, you understand it is a problem. You've worked to build a berm that hadn't worked, so I know that you understand its a problem, but I would just ask that we try to get to some resolution, certainly I don't think it is the City's fault at this point at least. But if we are due something for poor design, I certainly think that we ought to go get and I would just, publicly ask that we pursue that avenue until we can pursue it no further.

Mr. Collins: Councilman, at least from where I sit, yes we will do that. Even to correct the problem as the water level is now and Gary, keep me honest but we would have to increase that levee by more than 4 foot above the 2 foot levee that we got in, so we don't know whether the 2 foot levee is there or not either after the water being on top of it. But that, I guess my point is, we don't think that is the resolution. And of course or other great concern is the return water back into that water (inaudible) and with the silting moving in there like it has, you can't run the pump naturally, the silt gets into the pump and its a major job to clean it out, so yes we are concerned about it. We don't know what the answer is, honestly, but we will try to look at some other aspects. We will move forward on it and yes, we will get the City Attorney to pursue this.

Councilman Hightower: I appreciate that.

Councilman Stewart: Mr. Collins, at the same time Mr. Hightower raises the issue, I raise the question with Mr. Jones also, I do not have my file with me and was fundamentally something Mr. Hightower's actions I followed, but I did ask for information concerning the professional liability contract and the obligation of the contract and to my knowledge, I never received that either. It was not a written request however, it was a result of a phone call. I would appreciate you providing a copy of that document and also any information concerning the professional liability insurance that the architect has. There should be a certificate or insurance requirements as part of the contract, as I recall; thank you very much.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS. The following items remained tabled:

1. Ordinance No. 46 of 1995 by Mr. Stewart: To revise the membership of the Board of Trustees of the Employees' Retirement System. (Tabled on 6-13-95)

2. Ordinance No. 90 of 1995: Amending Sec. 30-92 of the Code relative to fireworks. (F/Green) (Tabled on 2-27-96)

3. Ordinance No. 61 of 1996: Amending the Code by adding Div.5, Art. V, Chap.26 relative to establishing a Riverfront Development Special Revenue Fund. (/Serio) (Tabled on 7-9-96)

4. Resolution No. 94 of 1997: Renaming Airport Park the "Maurice 'Blimp' Monroe Park." (F/Green) (Tabled on 5-27-97)

NEW BUSINESS:

1. BAC-120-97, BIPIN C. SHAH, M.D., 5607 Mirador Circle, variance in front yard setback in an R-1D District, garage.

Motion by Councilman Cooper to postpone the case, seconded by Councilman Stewart. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Green and Burrell. 6. Nays: Out of Chamber: Councilman Spigener. 1.

Councilman Green: Yesterday, Captain Smith gave us a report on the following ABO cards and in his report, none of these would be eligible at this time to receive an ABO card. We can either vote on them separate, right Ms. Glass or we could vote on them individual or how would we need to do that? Ms. Glass: You can and your normal procedure has been to let the person speak if they are present.

2. ABO Card Appeals:

a. Mark Scroggins.

Mr. Mark Scroggins (2660 Ashton Street, Shreveport, LA): I been living in Shreveport all my life. I love Shreveport, that's why I never left Shreveport my family live here in Shreveport. In the past I had made some mistakes, but I've changed and turned my life around; I'm a born again Christian. I was raised up in the Baptist Church, Sunday, BTU; everything. And you know, we all have, I guess, problems in life; I know I did. But I changed and I need my ABO card where I can make a living. I have three kids, two daughters in college and one son at Evangel Christian Academy. He play football. I just, want another chance in life. I been clean and I haven't had any problems in eight years and I just throw myself at the mercy of the City Council and I want another chance to be a productive citizen that I can be in Shreveport.

Councilman Green: Captain Smith, just for the benefit of Councilman Stewart who was out yesterday, would you just give us a briefing, on yesterday, with Mr. Mark Scroggins.

Captain Smith: Mr. Scroggins applied for an ABO card on July 25, 1997 and his background check showed that his latest arrest was for conspiracy to distribute Schedule II CDS. He terminated his probation satisfactory on 3-1-95. According to our ordinance, he must do five years after that point until he is eligible for an ABO card which would mean that he would be eligible in 3-1-2005. However, since that time he was arrested on June 28, 1997, for violation of Section 10 which is the same section that he'd be required to uphold if he had an ABO card. So, it is our position that it would be contrary to the ordinance to issue this ABO card before 2005.

Councilman Burrell: The last violation was what, again? Captain Smith: The felony charge was conspiracy to distribute Schedule II CDS. The last arrest, misdemeanor arrest for violation of Section 10 was on June 28, 1997, and that was for working with no ABO card.

Councilman Burrell: Okay, but his actual violation other than working without an ABO card dated back to, well, he was off his probation---he is not off of his probation until 2005, you said? Captain Smith: He completed his probation in March 1, 1995. He has to do five years after that, according to our ordinance, before he is eligible for an ABO card. But on June 28, 1997, he was arrested in Shreveport for working with no ABO card.

Mr. Scroggins: Not working with no ABO card was dismissed, null process; they threw that out of court. I got early termination on good behavior, I made the restitution to the court. I did community service for State Representative Danny Mitchell, New Elizabeth Baptist Church. The Honorable Judge Leon Emanuel gave me a early termination probation for working in the community doing volunteer work and everything, 2-1/2 years early. So the sentence was in 1991, it was April and I got off probation early, the five year probation cut it in half to 2-1/2 years. So the judge terminated my probation. So, I been off probation now, for five years. If he say it is five years, I have did the completion of my probation, early termination on good behavior and volunteer service and paid the court cost and everything else.

Councilman Burrell: Do you agree with that Mr. Smith? Captain Smith: No, sir, the record shows that he completed his probation 3-1-95; that is not five years ago, the way I add.

Councilman Burrell: So we are talking about three years here, into his probation is what we are saying? Captain Smith: Sir? Councilman Burrell: With 1998, we are talking about 3 years into his probation? Captain Smith: Yes, sir.

Councilman Burrell: Mr. Scroggins owns a store in my Council district and he does employ people and he is three years into his probation. I know we have a deadline of five years. And after that five years, then I assume he wouldn't have a problem? Captain Smith: That's correct, assuming there is no further arrest. Councilman Burrell: Assuming that there is no further arrest? Captain Smith: Right.

Councilman Burrell: Well, I feel like I'm caught between a rock and a hard spot, but I know that at the times that I've worked with him over there with the store being there, he does employ people and right now, looking at possibly giving opportunity to individuals in many of those neighborhoods that many people would not give workers an opportunity to work. I would be torn at this point, with possibly asking to give him a chance at this. I know his father and he's a pillar in the community over there in the Queensborough and very well respected.

Its a very touchy situation here given the fact that he is three years into his probation and the responsibility that he is trying to show in that he is running a business over there that is employing people in that neighborhood, so I would just ask the Council to lend their support but I know that they have been very strict, somewhat strict on these situations and I've been strict along with them, on these situations; so, I'll ask for support, but it would be still based upon the decisions that you all want to make.

Motion by Councilman Burrell to render the ABO card, seconded by Councilman Stewart. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Green and Burrell. 5. Nays: Councilmen Serio and Spigener. 2.

Councilman Green: Mr. Scroggins, I'd like to say as Chairman of the Council that what has happened, we are in hopes that you not abuse it because I do take the charges as serious and the only reason that I voted for it is because of Mr. Burrell ask that we would give a possible chance.

I don't like folk that sell drugs, I don't like what happens when drugs are sold. The Police Department will still be checking you out, your store out; it is bad, it is tearing up our community and it is destroying our community. The question that I would ask to you, the drugs that you have sold, would you in fact like for a person that has done that, to be given that opportunity that we've just given you. Here again, you don't have to answer, I'm just throwing this out parenthetically. You may take your seat.

Councilman Burrell: Mr. Scroggins, you know I visit your area and around your area quite often and there are things that are still in that area that I don't really agree with. And we have no tied them to any activities that are going on around your establishment but I do want you to know that if I do, I will do everything possible to revoke it and anything else that I can to hinder any further problems associated with it, I want you to know that from my standpoint because as Councilman Green says, our Chairman it is a very, very serious offense and we take it very, very seriously. Mr. Scroggins: Yes, sir.

b. Stacy D. Lister.

Captain Smith: Mr. Lister applied for an ABO card on December 19, 1997. On his application he admitted that he'd been arrested for an open container violation, December 1997. This was found to be correct and that charge hadn't gone to court yet. But his background also showed arrest and convictions dating back to '84. One of them was a felony possession of stolen things back in '87, but his latest felony charge was in July 1, 1996. He was convicted of possession of cocaine. He was given two years probation which ends 11-14-98. He's got to do five years after that before he would be eligible for an ABO card according to City ordinance.

Councilman Serio: Was his application in order? Captain Smith: Yes. Councilman Serio: My understanding yesterday, he would be arrested at the time? Captain Smith: He was arrested for the open container on December 10, 1997; that charge hadn't gone to court yet.

Councilman Cooper: I think the question is, if he were here now, would he be arrested; was that your question? Councilman Serio: Yes, sir. Councilman Cooper: If he were here now, would he be arrested? Captain Smith: If he were here now, would he be arrested for falsifying an application, yes sir he would (sorry, I misunderstood your question).

Motion by Councilman Spigener to uphold the request of the Police Department, seconded by Councilman Cooper. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Hightower, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 5. Nays: None. Recusal: Councilman Serio. 1. Out of Chamber: Councilman Stewart. 1.

c. Timothy Anderson.

Captain Smith: Mr. Timothy Ray Anderson. He applied for an ABO card on December 3, 1997. On his application he admitted to being arrested and convicted of an armed robbery in Ruston. The conviction was 10-13-95. He is still on probation. I don't know at this point when his probation is going to end, but he has to do five years, according to our ordinance after he finishes that probation; so, he is not eligible at this time.

Motion by Councilman Hightower to uphold the request of the Police Department, seconded by Councilman Spigener. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Out of Chamber: Councilman Stewart. 1.

Councilman Green: Ms. Glass, would you give us some guidance on this. Can we vote on all of these together or do we have to do them item by item? Ms. Glass: You can vote for them all together and if any member wishes for any one matter to be separated out, it would be so moved otherwise you can vote for them together.

Councilman Serio: So that I understand correctly, the Police Department has no qualms about all of these being approved? Captain Smith: On these ten renewals, yes, sir that is true. Councilman Serio: So, in your direction these eleven can all be renewed. Captain Smith: Yes, sir.

3. Liquor/Beer Permit Renewal Appeals:

a. Judy Bracken, P & M Grocery, 1105 Fannin.

b. Teri M. Lay, Malibu Club, 630 Commerce.

c. Deborah Boles, Apollo Taurus, 559 E 70th St.

d. Bryan Trudnak, Martini's, 521 E Kings Hwy.

4. Beer Permit Renewal Appeals:

a. Mitch Gladwin, Circle K, 7702 Pines Rd.

b. Mitch Gladwin, Circle K, 1340 North Market

c. Mitch Gladwin, Circle K, 3310 Youree Dr.

d. Bryan Cush, Otto's, 1700 E 70th St.

e. Wanda Lacy, Jewella Fast Mart, 3034 Jewella Ave.

f. Mahmoud Saad, Otto's Mobil, 3300 Youree Dr.

Motion by Councilman Serio to renew the liquor/beer permits, seconded by Councilman Hightower. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 6. Nays: None. Out of Chamber: Councilman Stewart. 1.

REPORTS FROM OFFICERS, BOARDS, AND COMMITTEES. None.

CLERK'S REPORT.

Letter of Appeal:

1. C-2-98, CORINE ANDERSON, 3710 Dilg League from R-1D to B-2 with MPC & PBG approval, barber/beauty shop with approval for a residence. (G/Burrell) (not to be considered until an ordinance has been introduced)

Ms. Glass: This is not up for a vote at this time. The ordinance will be introduced that you will have a chance to . . . .

To address Communications and Miscellaneous Matters, the Council resolved itself into Committee of the Whole, on a motion by Councilman Hightower, seconded by Councilman Cooper. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Stewart, Hightower, Serio, Spigener, Green and Burrell. 7. Nays: None.

Motion by Councilman Spigener, seconded by Councilman Serio, that the Committee Rises and Report and convene itself as the Council. Motion approved by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Cooper, Hightower, Spigener, and Green. 4. Nays: None. Out of Chamber: Councilmen Stewart, Serio and Burrell. 3.

There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting adjourned by 6:10 p.m.

/s/James Edward Green, Chairman

/s/Arthur G. Thompson, Clerk of Council