[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6128685,"mediaKeyId","5750382-48e3ba2cf717e33102d9ce78081491b5","parentId",5750382,"title","Council introduces residential permit parking near convention center after enforcement leads to dozens of tickets and tows","audioSeconds",100,"startMs",7233000,"endMs",7333000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5750382-48e3ba2cf717e33102d9ce78081491b5&start=7233&end=7333","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5750382-48e3ba2cf717e33102d9ce78081491b5/thumbnail_7233000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6128685/St-Charles-County/Missouri/Council-introduces-residential-permit-parking-near-convention-center-after-enforcement-leads-to-dozens-of-tickets-and-tows","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6128685-721fd8253bcb4d67e01132c55f1f7b62/orig.mp4?Expires=1771096191&Signature=NuTKfIih9aQPSOixiYbgupxu9Az0J3KAaSKUkUZ5m1S3D1-sf0-p0Y8cLGmb9tQx6HV28SOU32Y3jVnxYP3elqHPhJ5A6FBpUO1vWngR9BjtYusIVBj2pafneAiDCiOXta4N~gq-~nAcilZFV3Wt2rznRJ1LQRJwrz2j~c30wzbtvrrA~aDGHWpXPWDMfhuTWQ9QiV-KRVg458Ifd6~DSelSxZS5gLX7QjJd5pBO0FD9v1Vu60FoyV1ECkAxtzorFgI2IPmZvOomTjeq9BqSK7MTojP0XKtrN1QkZ9KRLIjXRN8ierSt0Fqlkr-T1Ji2IqR1VPuGsn3WcjC87DSz~w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","SCCMOTV","date","2025-09-09T00:00:00Z","article","The council introduced an ordinance on Sept. 8 to establish a residential permit‑parking zone for the area bordering the St. Charles Convention Center and surrounding parking lots.

Council sponsors said the permit zone is a response to repeated event‑day parking overflow into nearby residential streets. Councilwoman York, who led the effort, and Councilman Baker reported an enforcement operation the previous weekend: officers issued 23 parking citations, placed 13 vehicles under 48‑hour tow tags and towed eight vehicles. Council members said those results showed immediate deterrence.

Council members emphasized the ordinance will be implemented with continued monitoring and the chance to modify the zone if problems or unintended consequences appear. “If you see problems, contact us so we can modify it along the way,” a sponsor said.

The bill was introduced; the council did not take a final vote during the meeting. Staff said new signage and enforcement will continue as the ordinance moves through the adoption process.

Ending: Sponsors urged residents to report implementation problems so the council can adjust boundaries, enforcement hours or exemptions before final adoption.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","St. Charles County Council Meeting 9.8.25","oneSentenceSummary","Council members introduced an ordinance to establish a residential permit parking zone near the St. Charles Convention Center; early enforcement issued multiple citations and tows and councilmembers said the new rules are already showing deterrent effects.","taxTitle","St. Charles County, Missouri","taxId",2594,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6128688,"Council votes to place property tax‑credit measure on April ballot; state office flags potential county cost",198,6208000,6406000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5750382-48e3ba2cf717e33102d9ce78081491b5&start=6208&end=6406","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5750382-48e3ba2cf717e33102d9ce78081491b5/thumbnail_6208000.jpg","/articles/6128688/St-Charles-County/Missouri/Council-votes-to-place-property-taxcredit-measure-on-April-ballot-state-office-flags-potential-county-cost","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6128688-28d7d0b1254ddb2b339207bc46347796/orig.mp4?Expires=1771096191&Signature=iSiNNPT1ar1RazutRsedfrsVFf9oKFcpDoPWKTsI~vkigbMH0FXf9iSEdLGnXW0kLobQmUTgMo~qjGcLFbKnmUmBrYmADoJXkbmVHZcoh01zRdWp8Ta6dXbCBeXAB7k3yxwSRSdHvMUm95LtYKaLgaXa0WS3pl1k6TXs-Jaz5HcvbTS8wyUr88k0DwNuxx798oPd-6pMT-YfGt0Poig9JMab5C5TnZ-Sx5K-oV-ChOX5Ar3VhFKsXlfS6MrFSqYsJukaQjY011XQkMiCzN89zEp2YXKZ6~A46bFnfBuqcbD4Dr3JhZ9BMBn49aRimQMiYPwjGo83qAuoipP4iLINtw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The St. Charles County Council voted on Sept. 8 to place a proposed tax‑credit measure on the Tuesday, April 7, 2026 municipal ballot that would authorize a program limiting real property tax liability on qualifying homesteads.

Bill 54‑13 passed on a roll‑call vote after administration warned the council the state Office of Administration had sent a letter asserting the county may face an unfunded mandate to administer the measure. County staff said they are preparing a response to the state and that if the state requires the county to cover costs associated with the measure appearing on the ballot, the local cost would be about $150,000.

County Executive remarks noted the county would pursue clarification and, if necessary, pay the cost to get the question before voters. “We are preparing a response to try to convince them that, in fact, it should [not be an unfunded mandate],” administration said, but cautioned the expense could be material.

The ordinance as introduced will place the authorizing language on the April 7 ballot; if voters approve, the program’s implementation details and any fiscal responsibilities would be part of subsequent ordinance and budget decisions.

Ending: Administration will continue discussions with the state Office of Administration and report back to the council on whether the county must fund the ballot placement and the next steps for a voter‑approved tax‑credit program.","The council approved an ordinance to place a tax‑credit measure on the April 7, 2026 ballot. County administration said the Office of Administration has questioned whether placing the measure is an unfunded mandate and may cost the county roughly $150,000 to administer the ballot question if the state requires payment.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6128693,"Council considers ordinance to authorize community improvement districts for subdivisions; some members cautious",289,6777000,7066000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5750382-48e3ba2cf717e33102d9ce78081491b5&start=6777&end=7066","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5750382-48e3ba2cf717e33102d9ce78081491b5/thumbnail_6777000.jpg","/articles/6128693/St-Charles-County/Missouri/Council-considers-ordinance-to-authorize-community-improvement-districts-for-subdivisions-some-members-cautious","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6128693-f2f12fa2dbd61a262e904775e20ea0f7/orig.mp4?Expires=1771096191&Signature=RFxtNnWL2M0riw8e5jmCcieYM3AnEx9FRe1n4mC9Hr22II4SwbPsE7S9UsHkADNfOcdC0YkUMhqWeLa~GV9uz4sWw5LHMkwjoMKm~eifAdHDRzQbagGt~Yhr-9SxXnFyw3R9Y5gM6rjkUX6-2YL5s8Vu-OVtgQ83x3-yel0NIPZIQVJyYOBk33vpkvcKJ0uvy1LrgQP6YV3UpRo9lQWKyHFLjMQjZgTVtNzXFGie4lqz2d~YYy3xH4pRRZ6EtnBO8KoKXrfjvGHV1ESWTgPP6ywCQBbF4XO3UkTOttFTqAYjmNFCMIfy75e7irvbFa-WHCYxtMLgx9M-KZ6sCAC-pQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The St. Charles County Council discussed a proposed ordinance, introduced Sept. 8, that would add a local procedure for community improvement districts (CIDs) specifically tailored for single‑family subdivisions and financed through assessments on buyers.

Sponsors described the CID proposal as a tool developers could choose to finance on‑site amenities such as lakes, trails and larger lot infrastructure while spreading developer costs among purchasers over a set term. Proponents said the approach is voluntary for developers and buyers: a subdivision would only adopt a CID if the developer proposed it and buyers approved the assessment structure.

Council members asked several clarifying questions. Councilman Elam and others noted that Missouri statute already authorizes CIDs and asked whether the county’s ordinance adds material new authority or simply restates state law for local clarity. Councilman Swanson and Councilman Fox asked that any county policy ensure buyers are told up front about assessments and that disclosures appear in closing documents.

Councilman Brasel, one of the sponsors, said the proposal would allow developers to present a single package in initial zoning and subdivision applications so that buyers see the amenity plan and the related assessment at the time of purchase.

Committee discussion touched on consumer protections. Councilman Hollander and others said title searches and realtor disclosures already surface assessments but urged additional transparency. Councilman Fox said he is skeptical of CIDs generally, noting that they shift development costs onto homebuyers and can be configured in ways that are not obvious to purchasers.

The bill was introduced for later consideration; council members asked staff to return with details on how other local cities manage CIDs, what consumer protections apply, and if any local statutory duplication is necessary.

Ending: Staff to provide follow‑up information comparing statutory CID authority, examples from other cities, and proposed consumer‑disclosure language ahead of a future council decision.","A proposed county ordinance would allow developers to create community improvement districts (CIDs) tied to subdivision amenities (trails, lakes, green space, larger lots). Council members discussed whether the change is necessary and whether state law already provides the tool; some members warned about shifting costs to homebuyers.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6128698,"Residents push back on small‑lot rezoning proposals near Weldon Springs; council receives multiple public objections",310,4682000,4992000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5750382-48e3ba2cf717e33102d9ce78081491b5&start=4682&end=4992","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5750382-48e3ba2cf717e33102d9ce78081491b5/thumbnail_4682000.jpg","/articles/6128698/St-Charles-County/Missouri/Residents-push-back-on-smalllot-rezoning-proposals-near-Weldon-Springs-council-receives-multiple-public-objections","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6128698-f2dcd7f80787e41266742b8e9cccead7/orig.mp4?Expires=1771096191&Signature=dgg85wBGApMiKpGbmQePO938YH24VJvXcu9FQ4tIInVkbyFgr1aArkYAwZje5SijJ8DVidG9zPSFKqau92mk4qyAgKoM5jOqbrshMxNTm9oKuy1peTr4BkOVSXJvh6-L9gbpyVNAV47AEm9-uiQaxnoV0ajWYU9WDr4oa4ZKzH~1rCcP3PMqtQigUu~uT5dgaVaUzsm1vhjbielhT37rAFhu9Kg2jP1HRwtfGRkMJ0B1wePIRQJP8YQg1fFfc-kBWBxqBsEymOhbIqPU2r8Bn9-EddgBzU6aM5z8o6296Jw4PRzzWMalvr92DsMKwQP3Ge6fY067NLUbfwX5mdghbA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Residents told the St. Charles County Council on Sept. 8 they opposed several introduced zoning measures that would allow smaller lots or additional homes in long‑established rural neighborhoods.

Speakers during public comment asked the council to reject a rezoning application for 2630 Forest Drive (file RZ25‑10) and a related subdivision plat, saying the plan would place seven homes on 3.18 acres in a neighborhood of 2‑to‑3‑acre lots and add traffic to Highway DD, which currently lacks a left‑turn lane in that location.

Cynthia Lopane, a nearby resident, said the neighborhood was chosen for its rural character and large lots and warned that a cluster of smaller homes and repeat cookie‑cutter façades would not fit the area. “If the council approves this project, I only hope it’s for one home,” Lopane said, describing erosion and infrastructure concerns on Forest Drive.

Elizabeth Drury objected to a proposal to divide a 3‑acre parcel on Snipes Drive into a 0.6‑acre lot and a remaining parcel; she told council members such a split would “change the entire dynamic and landscape of this neighborhood” and set a precedent for future divisions.

Bax Engineering representative Jeff Simmons and property owner/developer speakers described technical remedies — revised septic designs, vacation of alleys and adjustments to parcel boundaries — that, they said, would allow some subdivisions to meet county standards while staying out of floodplain. Developers said a number of the lots in question were originally platted in the early 1900s; some are smaller than today’s minimums and require variances.

Council members noted these items were at the introduction stage and would return for formal consideration at a later meeting; the council did not vote on any zoning or platting measures on Sept. 8. Councilman Swanson reminded the public that bills introduced on Monday would be considered at the next meeting and that no final decisions were made that night.

The public record will include written opposition that residents said they submitted to Planning & Zoning. The council indicated it would review those submissions and that staff will prepare formal materials for the next hearing cycle.

Ending: Several residents said they would attend the subsequent Planning & Zoning and council hearings to press their opposition; the council will consider the rezoning and subdivision bills at forthcoming meetings.","At Monday’s meeting residents opposed rezoning and lot splits for multiple properties in the Weldon Springs/Summers Road area, arguing new smaller‑lot subdivisions would change neighborhood character and raise traffic and stormwater concerns.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6128703,"St. Charles County Council holds work session on jail staffing, pay and renovations as budget constraints bite",2556,309000,2865000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5750382-48e3ba2cf717e33102d9ce78081491b5&start=309&end=2865","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5750382-48e3ba2cf717e33102d9ce78081491b5/thumbnail_309000.jpg","/articles/6128703/St-Charles-County/Missouri/St-Charles-County-Council-holds-work-session-on-jail-staffing-pay-and-renovations-as-budget-constraints-bite","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6128703-365c182904e9104a567a1ba25d218467/orig.mp4?Expires=1771096191&Signature=bCU9bZVb2MOozcYCUt-wt2O-ADvftoV~wh38v-9bzvibGQqScearXlX5tRsrXKlzWNGHqWBTBlu1lbv-IjTNDi0qKOugFYWOEunWpiBx-i-vjMBx3eA32moTRHLBRM3w3iciyhN6lzx3-kXtUt5~YWjp9LtO~Hqv3HKecmLQu65wQoxqDGJVksrjsjcqlasixpU9NAHGvrX3N-lq-N-nFqvgD10FnLW~VxMvSQgDyuaxSWtitm0DFWUO-yLaTcWfWoTwhy9cdkgY8ykcmKBffzkjfeF7C0Yd2yZUz1uIcbPiKOJyhf92wraSRFce89Yy0GcdJqcB3gbyXflvJfRpiw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","St. Charles County Council members met in a Sept. 8 work session to review persistent staffing and operating problems at the county jail and to hear proposals from administration and corrections leaders for pay changes, incentives and facility renovations ahead of the 2026 budget.

The session did not include votes; council members and staff framed the discussion as a review of possible, budget-dependent responses to a sustained staffing shortfall and rising costs.

Council members pressed administration and corrections staff on recruitment and retention, while corrections officers described the operational impact of mandatory and volunteer overtime and a month-by-month overtime pay cadence. County staff outlined a menu of potential measures that would require funding decisions in the November budget process.

Joanne (staff member, county administration) told the council each 1% increase in a general‑fund pay raise would cost about $727,500 across county general‑fund positions; a 2% COLA was estimated to cost roughly $1.5 million. For corrections specifically, administration said it is considering moving correctional officers from pay class C4 to C5, which would change the starting salary from $48,582 to $52,226 before any cost‑of‑living adjustment.

Corrections Director Dan (staff member) described operational steps already under way: booking-area upgrades, completion of a renovated Fifth Floor, and Phase 1 work on the Third Floor. He told the council the Fifth Floor is finished and that substantial completion on the next phase of the Third Floor—designed to add beds and create a larger staff break area—was expected in mid‑to‑late next year, with a major staff break area due by October. Dan said many needed changes are “budget dependent” and noted some one‑time federal funds used after the pandemic are expiring.

Dan also gave specific recruiting outcomes from a recent contract with job site Indeed: from May 31 to Aug. 14, 957 career seekers were referred, 165 applied, 119 tested, 92 passed tests, 40 were interviewed, and 13 were hired. A more recent testing cycle invited 56 candidates; 10 tested and eight passed, Dan said.

Several corrections officers said mandatory staffing practices and the county’s pay and scheduling policies reduce staff morale and retention. Officer Brown (corrections officer) said officers sometimes volunteer for overtime to avoid being next on the mandate list and asked why overtime pay could not be paid more frequently. “We volunteer to not get mandated,” Brown said. Officer Armstead (corrections officer) told the council officers used to be paid overtime every two weeks and asked whether the county could restore that cadence because monthly overtime payments increase tax withholding burdens on staff.

Union representative Mr. Reagan, who addressed the council near the end of the session, urged more immediate and substantive changes. “You’re gonna have to do something to attract people in,” he said, urging a mix of pay and nonpay measures to improve retention.

Administration presented several budget options for corrections to consider for 2026: a $2‑per‑hour overtime premium (estimated roughly $85,000 based on last year’s overtime), a $1‑per‑hour night shift differential (estimated roughly $219,000), milestone longevity payments for long‑tenured officers, and educational incentives (a proposed $2,000 supplement for an associate degree, $2,000 for a bachelor’s and $1,000 for a master’s, which administration said would affect roughly 30 staff). Milestone and education steps would be permanent base pay adjustments in most proposals.

Retirement options that officers raised — often termed “55 and out” — were discussed but administration described them as financially out of reach. Administration cited a prior market study estimating about $14.4 million to extend 55‑and‑out just for corrections and about $40 million to adopt a higher multiplier plan (L6) countywide.

Council members repeatedly noted there is no single “magic bullet.” Councilman Hollander said a patchwork of smaller measures plus capital investment and targeted recruitment might together narrow the staffing gap. Councilman Bridal emphasized schedule predictability for employees: “When you're working 8 hours and your kid's got a soccer game and they're told you can't go … that's a major problem,” he said.

Administration said it is discussing a proposal with the sheriff’s office that would transfer some prisoner transport and medical‑appointment duties to the sheriff to reduce jail staff workload. Staff also noted growing inmate medical costs, rising healthcare premiums (administration estimated a roughly 10.55% increase in employee healthcare costs and an approximately $1.92 million general‑fund impact), and the end of ARPA funds that had temporarily supported some positions.

Several council members and staff discussed recruitment support options, including outside agencies. Dan said the county has tried job fairs, social media and the Indeed contract; he also said corrections will not lower hiring standards.

Where the council goes next: administration said specific proposals will be packaged into the 2026 budget request and presented in November. Several council members asked that administration and the corrections director continue negotiating with employee representatives and prepare cost estimates so the council can weigh tradeoffs when the budget arrives.

Discussion vs. decision: the meeting produced no formal actions on pay or retirement changes; the session was explicitly framed as informational. Staff committed to present budget‑dependent proposals and costs for formal consideration during the regular 2026 budget cycle.

Ending: Council members and corrections leadership agreed to continue the dialogue as administration completes precise cost estimates. The council emphasized the November budget process as the time to decide which of the proposed measures, if any, will be funded.","County officials, corrections leadership and officers met in a council work session to review staffing shortages, pay-classification proposals, recruitment efforts and phased jail renovations that county leaders say will be limited by available revenue and expiring federal funds.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Council introduces residential permit parking near convention center after enforcement leads to dozens of tickets and tows

Council votes to place property tax‑credit measure on April ballot; state office flags potential county cost

Council considers ordinance to authorize community improvement districts for subdivisions; some members cautious

Residents push back on small‑lot rezoning proposals near Weldon Springs; council receives multiple public objections

St. Charles County Council holds work session on jail staffing, pay and renovations as budget constraints bite