| Today's Feature Tarp Ordinance Goes to Council.
The City Council will hear the
first reading of two Council bills coming from
the Public Safety Committee during tonight’s
regular Council meeting in City Hall. One will
deal with the continuing problem of spills from
gravel trucks on Civil War Road, the other will
allow enforcement of a lowered speed limit on HH
highway from 571 to the 71 interchange.
The Francis Street
truck/traffic problems were revisited at great
length by residents and local businessmen during
last week’s Public Safety Committee meeting.
Resident Harold Neely indicated the situation had
improved but more needed to be done. The
residents requested a weight and speed limit sign
for trucks be posted. Mr. and Mrs. Epperson
indicated a problem with red clay from a vacant
lot was still a very real problem.
Phil Smith, of Carthage Crushed
Limestone, and John Stevens, of Butterball Foods,
jointly agreed to approach the owner of the lot
in question to resolve the issue at no cost to
the City or residents.
Representatives of Shreibers,
Butterball and Carthage Limestone reported on
corrective steps they took to alleviate many of
the traffic problems. Ron Rudolph of Butterball
Foods stated if there were future problems with
their trucks to, "Call me personally."
Committee Member, H.J. Johnson,
read aloud, in part, from Missouri Statute
307.010 which specifically spells out loads on
trucks in regard to tarps and tailgates. The
statute requires that trucks and trailers be
secured so that nothing is blown or bumped onto
the street. This would include tarping of gravel
trucks. A suggestion was made that the city adopt
a parallel law. The firms represented volunteered
to notify their personal and outside vendors of
the changes and continue to use alternate routes
where possible. The Committee voted 3-0 to
request a Council Bill that mirrored the State
statute.
Police Chief Dennis Veach told
the Committee he met earlier with MODOT, City
Mayor Kenneth Johnson, and City Administrator,
Tom Short to discuss the speed limit on HH within
the City limits. Veach said after studying the
route, MODOT "agreed to lower the speed
limit to 45 from 571 west, through the
interchange to the West Outer Road." A City
Ordinance is needed to enforce it.
A motion by H.J. Johnson to
lower the speed limit and submit a request for a
Council Bill passed 3-0.
Veach also said that MODOT
agreed that Hazel Street should have a traffic
control device, but will be placed on a
‘needed, but unfunded’, list of
improvements until the monies are available.
Mayor Johnson read a letter he received from
MODOT stating an earlier traffic study reinforced
the need for a stoplight at the intersection in
question as well as needed road improvements at
the same time. No improvements at HH and Chapel
Road were justified by the State at this time.
Veach also reopened the subject
of an equipment allowance for the Police
Department. The original request for a $500 per
year allowance for clothing and equipment for
each plain clothes officer was made to the
Budget/Ways & Means Committee. That Committee
approved a clothing allowance of $300, but denied
the equipment allowance request and referred it
back to Public Safety for further discussion. A
motion was made for a $200 equipment allowance,
given in the form of a reimbursement, then
emended to $100 by Johnson, was passed 2-1. The
Committee Chairman, Charlie Bastin, dissented.
In other business, the Council
is scheduled to vote on the annexation of
property located at 1825 S. Baker as requested by
Warren C. and Edna M. Davis.
The Council will also be asked
to authorize agreements with Carthage Youth
Baseball, The Carthage Sports Association, and
the Carthage Girls Softball Association.
An agreement between the City
and Alan Hancock for agricultural purposes at
Myers Park will also be in first reading.
The City Council meets each
second and fourth Tuesday of the month in City
Hall at 7:30 p.m.
Commentary
Martin
"Bubs" Hohulin
State
Representative, District 126
You can take
your hand off your wallet now, the Legislature is
no longer in session! This year’s Regular
Session of the Legislature ended Friday, May 14.
I will be using this column for the next few
weeks to write about some items I think you will
find of interest that passed or didn’t pass.
This week I will attempt to
explain the retirement bill. Retirement bills are
always contentious because someone in the Senate
usually tries to slip in a pension increase for
legislators. Let me say up front that I
don’t support pensions for legislators
because it is a temporary, part time job and was
never meant to be a lifelong career. We are said
to be a citizen Legislature and most of the
members have employment outside of politics. Lest
I give the impression we don’t do anything,
I average about 35 hours per week doing work
related to my state representative job.
This year’s retirement
bills had something for everyone. Teachers,
firefighters, state employees, widows, orphans,
prosecutors, you name it, they were in there. I
have always supported pension increases for
teachers as long as it was actuarially sound
because they have their own retirement fund that
is separate from the State.
In fact, I have never
understood why the Legislature has to approve the
increases. They have their own fund and a Board
that operates the fund. Most of the others come
from the State.
When the bill arrived from the
Senate, sure enough, there was an increase added
for legislators. Actually, there were two
different increases. One was for about a dozen
longtime legislators, and the other one, the big
one, was for the rest of us. There was a
provision that said a retired legislator
couldn’t draw more in pension than they did
in salary. For that reason there was a separate
formula for them that capped it at a certain
level.
For the rest of us, future
pensions were tied to salary so that as salary
went up, pensions went up. You can see that while
neither provision was good, it was the one for
the most of us that caused the most damage to
taxpayers. In comparison, the one for the dozen
long timers was very minor. There was an
amendment offered to take legislators out of the
bill entirely and I voted for it. It failed by
only 3 votes.
Immediately Governor Carnahan
weighed in and said he would veto the bill
because it contained an increase for legislators.
I assumed that meant he was against all the
increases for all the legislators. He thumped his
chest and claimed he was going to protect the
taxpayers from the greedy Legislature. Imagine my
surprise when the final bill came over and all
that was missing was the increase for the dozen
long timers. The increase for the rest of us was
still there. The sponsor of the bill said that
Governor Carnahan was okay with this one. What
political grandstanding!
Governor Carnahan held a press
conference to say he brought the Legislature to
its knees and made them change the retirement
bill when all that was changed was a very minor
provision while endorsing the much larger
increase.
After voting for the amendment
to take us out of the bill entirely, I voted for
the final version because of the other people it
affected. I do believe the retired teachers are
entitled to their own money and I also believe
the cities of St. Louis and Kansas City have a
responsibility to take care of the families of
their firefighters and policemen. It was a tough
vote and I hope I did the right thing.
As usual, I can be reached at
House Post Office, State Capitol, Jefferson City,
MO 65101 or 1-800-878-7126, or
mhohulin@services.state.mo.us for your questions,
comments, or advice.
|
