patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Councilmember Crow Talks Firehouse, City Attorney and Driving Range Lights

Councilmember Terry Crow's latest newsletter to his constituents in the 1st Ward features his thoughts on the new firehouse and the driving range lights.

 

Hello 1st ward Constituents and other concerned citizens of University City!

            Thank you for your continued interest in the decisions of our city government, decisions which affect the quality of life of each of us and our neighbors.  Since my last e-mail update, some notable events have occurred at City Hall that I'd like to share with you today.          

            New fire station: Construction of a new fire station was approved by the Council on a 6-1 vote. While I have serious concerns about the cost and location, I am also convinced that this is the right time for this, so I voted in favor of it.  We need to take advantage of the available $2.6 million in federal grant money to make this happen. I toured our 108 year-old fire house recently and saw many problems with the current structure.  The new facility will help the firefighters who protect our lives and property to do so in a safer, more efficient environment.

            The new station will be located at Eastgate and Vernon on land donated by Washington University. I realize that there is some concern over the proximity of the station to Ward 1, but for better or worse, the location was never part of the discussion until the 11th hour, and then the Council as a body did not explore this further. The city manager estimates the cost to us at $874,000.  Changes during construction are common.  I predict probable overruns that could bring the actual cost to the city to something over $1 million.  I have instructed the city manager to keep the expenditures for this project under close scrutiny, and I hope that my request will be heeded. The money for this project will come from our tax reserves, which currently total around $11 million. About nine million of those dollars exist largely du e to the efforts of former city attorney and prosecutor, John Mulligan, which brings me to my next topic of concern.

            Replacement of our city attorney and prosecutor:  For about 25 years, Mr. Mulligan served as our city's prosecutor, and for many of those years, he also served as our city attorney. At the last council meeting, on November 14th, he was replaced in a move that was unwise and clearly politically motivated.  Our city's new attorney is Paul Martin. I have no qualms with the past work he has done for the city, but he was not the lowest bidder. My primary concern is that we have retained for city prosecutor someone with much less experience in this field but our cost was not reduced. The firm of Crotzer and Ormsby has been named as the City Prosecutor with the primary contact being an attorney who graduated law school in 2008 and has no experience in municipal prosecution.

             I don't mind a shake-up now and then, but this one makes no sense.  We have given up 25 years of experience for someone who has been out of law school for three years. The council is truly politicizing the prosecutor's position rather than choosing the most qualified professional. I find it disturbing that I was the only member of council who asked any questions about these contracts when they came up for a vote. Without Mr. Mulligan's work on the telephone company lawsuits, our city wouldn't have nearly the reserves it has, and those who voted him out would not have been able to vote for the new fire station.  At the end of the day, this is about getting the best legal advice for the city at the best price.  The manager and council have failed in their duty to do so, and the city may suffer for it. 

            Golf Course Update:  It is now past any reasonable time for the decision to be made to turn the lights at the Ruth Park driving range back on, per the request of numerous citizens.  Our city manager has commissioned, at further expense to the city, yet another study of the driving range to be done by a different landscape architectural firm, in hopes that their conclusions will match his previous rash decision to shut off the lights. In the meantime, they have remained off. There is no reason to believe that the previous study was flawed or that the previous firm was unqualified. And yet no information has been shared with me, or to my knowledge any other council member, regarding the findings of such a study.  Now that it is mid-November, I predict that the lights will remain off until the next election, in mid-April, and possibly remain off forever, despite reasonable objections of so many of our citizens.

As always, feel free to contact me with your concerns and questions regarding these and any other actions of your City Council.

Sincerely,

Terry Crow

About this column: This column is for University City residents to voice their opinions on happenings in U City. The views expressed are not those of University City Patch nor its editorial staff, and solely reflect those of the author. Related Topics: Firehouse, driving range lights, terry crow, u city, and university city

Nick Frederiksen

2:50 pm on Tuesday, January 10, 2012

Mr. Crow:Mr Mulligan should be commended for the portion of revenue that went to University City. His efforts also paid him hansomely. It is hard to tell what work was done when ,in regards to time spent as our city attorney and twhat time where he was acting independently.You also failed to mention that Mr. Mulligan took no responsibility in regards to City Manager Julie F. failing to notify U Cities Insurance company on a law suit that was later settled for 146K. The deductible would have maxed U City's cost at 15K. Mr Mulligan was part of many administrations. Mr. Mulligan, CM Julie F, the mayor and you failed to take any responsibility for this huge mistake. Mulligan was a rubber stamp for what the mayor and the majority of the voting council wanted. You now have the opportunity to scrutinize the new prosecutar. It is unfortunate that you failed to scrutinize what Mr. Mulligan and Julie F. did that cost U City 100K plus. I recall that you supported Julie F's performance, amazing in light of the audit.Can I please get an e mail of your monthly letter. I am a major critic of your actions as a City Counselor for Ward One, regardless I am a resident of Ward One.

Reply

Deedis Dunn

7:45 pm on Sunday, February 19, 2012

Cindy Ormsby is in way over her head already...The lack of experience is showing and will be costly to the City.

Reply
Comment_arrow

AnneHendrickson

9:58 am on Monday, February 20, 2012

I am interested in knowing how the lack of experience is showing. What proof do you have?

Cindy Thierry

7:37 am on Monday, February 20, 2012

Someone told me that Cindy Ormsby doesn't live in U. City, but since Lynn Ricci has been a councilperson, Ms. Ormsby has been copied on Ms. Ricci's emails to U. City residents. A quick Google search shows that when Ms. Ricci served as board president of the Women Lawyer's Association, both Cindy Ormsby and Jan Adams were board members. We know that Ricci and Adams are friends. Jan has told residents that she was "hand-picked" by Lynn to run for her seat. One has to wonder about the relationship between Ormsby and Ricci and how Ormsby came to be hired by the city.
http://www.wlastl.org/docs/newsletters/WLANewsletter--Winter2007.pdf

Reply

AnneHendrickson

9:56 am on Monday, February 20, 2012

So? Cindy, these comments are pathetic and desperate. Weren't you hand picked by someone to run for the last election? Even if not, who really cares?

Reply

Irv Logan

4:30 pm on Wednesday, April 4, 2012

Councilman Crow, you failed to explain how the City or me was served by the City's attorney representing both sides of the phone settlement?

Is the golf course a profit center for the City and how much did profit increase by lighting the course?

Reply

Nancy MacCartney

5:01 pm on Wednesday, April 4, 2012

Driving range grossed ~ $136,000 first year of operation and paid off all the captial cost of construction (~60,000 U city funding) and covered all operational costs of supplies, staffing and utilities. Can't recall the net surplus that year but ~ $100,000 the second year and eliminated the general fund subisdy for the golf course.

Reply

Leave a comment