News Release From City Hall.

"On Tuesday, November 9, 1999, the Carthage City Council voted in closed session to enter into a contract for sale of Lot 2, Block 1 of the Myers Park Development with Southwest Missouri Bancorporation, Inc. for the price of Six Hundred Thousand Dollars ($600,000) plus additional compensation of Seventy-five Thousand Dollars ($75,000) to assist in the construction, alteration, or modification of certain public streets and/or roadways. The Council also authorized the City Attorney and the Economic Development Director to clarify several contractual issues and bring forth a Council Bill for first reading at the November 23 meeting of the Council. Roll call vote: Ross-yes, Johnson-yes, Fortune-yes, Bastin-abstain, Boyer-yes, Whitledge-yes, Brewer-yes, Dunaway-yes, Stearnes-yes, Clark-yes."

Development Changes Discussed.

The proposed modification of the Myers Park Development Plan sparked several questions and comments from Council members during the regular Council meeting Tuesday night in City Hall.

The changes would completely eliminate the Myers Park Property Development Committee. The Committee spent over a year developing the Myers Park Regulations and Development Standards. The ordinance would bring those regulations and standards into the City code for any future developments in Myers Park. The intent of the original document remains intact according to City Economic Development Director Max McKnight. McKnight had told the Council in a previous meeting that the Committee form of administration for the development concerned a potential buyer.

Standards for Myers Park require regulations beyond other developments within the City. Such additional standards would include underground power lines, guidelines for landscaping including the planting of trees, parking areas and others.

Council member Lujene Clark stated that she felt eliminating the Committee changed the intent completely. She said the intent was to make the Myers Park Development something special and a gateway to the community.

"I thing we are going to take something that was meant to be very special and end up with something that is so-so," said Clark. "I thought the airport was very quaint. If I had known that it would end up just so-so, I would have voted to leave the airport where it was."

Council member Jackie Boyer, who is a member of the Myers Park Development Committee, also state she felt the Committee process would have been beneficial.

City Administrator Tom Short reported to the Council that over thirty-four phone calls had been placed over a four month period to Hunter Appraisals of Joplin in an attempt prod the firm to complete the appraisal of the proposed airport property. He also said Mayor Johnson had made two visits to Hunter’s office and Short had been three times with little result.

"There wasn’t a whole lot we could do," said Short. "It was like pulling teeth through this whole process."

The contract between the City and Hunter was terminated by the City last Friday after repeated promises by the firm to deliver a completed product were not fulfilled. Short told the Council that other appraisal firms were being contacted to complete the appraisal. The City has been trying to meet appraisal guidelines to keep the option of obtaining federal and state grants in the future. Short said he intends to send a letter to the Missouri Department of Transportation Aviation Division concerning the problems with Hunter Appraisal. The firm is on a short list of qualified appraisers for this type of property.

The City has put aside approximately $600,000 that is earmarked for a new airport.

Just Jake Talkin'
Mornin',

 

The Council decided in a vote Tuesday to have the state Insurance Services Office conduct a review to see if there is really a need for a new south fire station. There would be no charge for the review. Most towns are a little of the ISO comin’ in, they can affect insurance rates.

The thinkin’ was that even if they say we need the station, we have a head start with in the base of the south water tower. The alternative, hirin’ someone to come in and do a study, at a cost of fifteen to thirty grand, seemed less attractive.

It has been assumed for some time that there would be the need for a fire substation, this may give some basis for goin’ ahead. There is about a hunderd and fifty grand set aside for the structure, wherever it is.

This is some fact, but mostly,

Just Jake Talkin’.

by

Metcalf Auto Supply

Click and Clack Talk Cars

Dear Tom and Ray:

My brother and his wife like to snicker at what they perceive to be the high cost of repairs that my wife and I occasionally incur on our vehicles - an '83 Volvo 240DL sedan, and an '84 Volvo 240DL wagon. I could deal with the jokes if it were not for the blatant hypocrisy. My brother and his wife have two Volkswagon Vanagons, an '86 and an '87, and not a day goes by in which at least one of them is not in the shop (and need I mention than an air filter for one costs $50?).

My question is, then, over the course of a period of years, which of us is likely to spend more in repair bills (or as my brother phrases it, which of us is the bigger set of fools?). — Todd.

TOM: Gee, Tod! Talk about a tough call!

RAY: Well, let's analyze this carefully. I'd say the repair bills should be about even. You'll spend twice as much on each Volvo repair, but his Vanagons will be in the shop twice as often. So let's call repair costs a draw.

TOM: Stylishness? That would have to be a draw, too.

RAY: Fun to drive? Looks pretty even to me.

TOM: Utility? The Vanagon has more interior room than the Volvo wagon, but on the other hand, the rear passengers in the Volvo probably won't suffer from hypothermia in the winter. So let's call that a draw, as well.

RAY: Safety? The Vanagon's use of the driver's knees as the front wall of the safety cage doesn't win any points with us, so the Volvo has the clear edge in safety. Also, you're Volvo will probably outlive the Vanagon by a long shot.