COUNCIL EYES SPORTS COMPLEX; CITY LOOKS AT TOURISM TAX ALLOCATIONS

After lengthy debate Wednesday, Cape Girardeau's City Council voted unanimously to further study the feasibility of building a Shawnee Park sports complex with city tourism dollars.

Also at the meeting, several property owners objected to city street improvements in their neighborhood.

The council approved a motion directing the city staff to determine if tourism funds could finance the city's Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB) and construction of a sports complex at Shawnee Park, while allowing a year's Show Me Center bond payment in reserve. The motion was made by Councilman Al Spradling III.

In 1990, voters rejected a tax proposal to fund a sports complex at Shawnee Park.

Last year, the council sent a group of about 30 proposals for use of the tourism fund which is financed through hotel and restaurant sales tax receipts to the Convention and Visitors Advisory Board for its recommendations.

The board narrowed the proposals to eight, including continued CVB funding and the Shawnee sports complex proposal.

Although all the council members agreed Wednesday to continue CVB funding, debate focused on whether study should be limited to only one other proposal.

Spradling said that if study determined the Shawnee sports complex wasn't feasible, the council could consider other proposals. He said his motion "gets the ball rolling" so that the CVB board doesn't get "bogged down" with a lot of proposals.

But Mayor Gene Rhodes said he feared Spradling's motion would restrict the CVB board too much.

"I think we need to go back and let the board make a decision, and give them additional time," he said. "The voters already told us no and now we're going right out there to say this is the way it's going to be."

Council member Mary Wulfers said she also thought other proposals should be considered.

"In my opinion, it's the role of the board to narrow this down more than this," she said. "I can't support the motion because I think it's limiting too quickly."

Some members of the advisory board indicated they didn't want to be restricted to the single project.

"Please don't pick one project," said Bob Hoppmann, a CBV board member. "Pick a vein, such as a general sports vein, and send it back to us and let us decide that it's the direction we want to take."

Hoppmann said during Wednesday's council study session that if the council favored the Shawnee project, it "should have told us that a month ago and saved us a lot of hassle."

But Councilman David Limbaugh said he thought the council would be forcing the CVB board into an "exercise in futility" by continuing to study a broad range of proposals. He didn't think some of the proposals, such as a funding request for the Bicentennial Commission, represented the best use of the funds.

"It's a great project, but it's a one-shot deal," Limbaugh said of the Bicentennial Commission request. "I feel that way and if four of us (on the council) feel that way, we ought to let you know about it so you don't waste your time on that project."

Councilman David Barklage said Spradling's motion wasn't the final word on the issue.

"All we're going to do is take one thing and look at it, and if it's no good then we'll throw it away and look at something else," he said.

Councilman Hugh White also said that his vote on the motion was no indication of whether he'd ultimately support the sports complex.

Spradling assured council members and board members that his motion was intended to be "a starting point" in the process of determining the feasibility of a sports complex, which could later be amended and enhanced by the board.

With regard to the street work, about 20 people from the area of Montgomery, Louis and Brink Streets complained about the poor quality of city asphalt overlay work there last year.

The city paved the streets as part of its three-inch asphalt overlay program, which paves mostly gravel streets with the improvements assessed to property owners.

Charles Hickman of 1725 Montgomery said he thought the street "improvements" would actually result in further drainage and erosion problems. He also complained that the drainage work done as part of the project diminished property values in the neighborhood.

Hickman, who lives on the corner of Montgomery and Louis, questioned why Louis was paved, when it already had a hard surface. He said the street's traffic count was five to 10 vehicles per day and that all the property owners along the street were opposed to the project.

Ann Fowler, who also lives on Montgomery, said none of the property owners were notified of the overlay project. She also questioned the quality of the work done.

"There are a lot of things that are aggravating about this," she said. "It's not just the bill."

John Piper of 1750 Montgomery said drainage work in front of his house left a "hole in my front yard big enough to drive a truck through."

The council agreed to a suggestion by Councilman Doug Richards that the city staff review the paving project and determine if the work created problems that the city should correct.

"When we do this type of work, we should leave that in better condition than when we started," he said.