Inside Manchester City Government
- Jessica Green
- Mar 18
- 13 min read
Clear summaries of recent Board of Aldermen actions, votes, and city decisions
Manchester Board of Aldermen Update: March 2 & March 16 Meetings
On March 2 and March 16, the Manchester Board of Aldermen addressed business development, infrastructure investments, and policy discussions that directly impact residents. Here’s a clear, combined look at what happened—and why it matters.
What This Update Covers
Business development proposals and approvals
City spending and infrastructure investments
Policy discussions affecting residents
Items moving forward through the Board of Aldermen
Why It Matters
These decisions shape how Manchester grows and operates
Infrastructure and budget choices impact city services and long-term planning
Policy changes can directly affect residents’ homes and daily routines
Resident engagement continues to influence decision-making
Development & Local Business Growth
Two projects introduced on March 2 moved forward:
A drive-thru café at 14352 Manchester Road was approved unanimously
A warehouse, office, and production facility (GraniteGuru) at Old Meramec Station Road was later approved unanimously on March 16
These approvals bring new business activity—particularly two family-owned businesses—into Manchester.
Jessica Green’s Perspective: Manchester continues to see interest from small and locally owned businesses, which is encouraging. It’s important that as we welcome new development, we also ensure it fits well within existing infrastructure and neighborhoods.
Infrastructure & City Investment
Several items were approved or advanced during these meetings:
A Social Hosting Ordinance related to underage drinking and drug use
An MSD Stormwater Grant Agreement
A 2026 Concrete Street Improvement Project (~$750K)
Additional items—including an aquatic center study, compensation study, HVAC replacement, police purchase, and budget amendment—were advanced to the next stage without discussion.
The March 16 Public Works report was postponed and will be presented at a future meeting.
Jessica Green’s Perspective:
These are important investments in infrastructure and city operations. As these projects move forward, it’s important that residents have clear visibility into how decisions are made and how they impact both current services and long-term planning.
Solid Waste Ordinance & Resident Impact
The most significant discussion across both meetings centered on proposed changes to the solid waste code—particularly how trash and recycling bins are stored.
Residents raised concerns about:
Limited space in homes without garages
Safety challenges on sloped properties and in winter conditions
Vague enforcement language
On March 16:
Continued discussion was requested
A path forward was identified to separate contract-required updates from storage-related changes
This allows more time for resident feedback before any changes are made to how bins are stored
Jessica Green’s Perspective:
This was a meaningful moment. On February 9th, Jessica Green made residents aware of a pending decision. Residents then took the time to engage, and their input is now shaping the direction of the conversation. Policies like this may seem small, but they can have real impacts on how people use and maintain their homes. Taking the time to get it right matters.
This is a strong reminder that when residents are informed and engaged, their voices do make a difference.
Sources:
related blog posted Feb 20, 2026:
Board of Aldermen Meeting: February 17, 2026
This post summarizes discussions and actions taken by the Manchester Board of Aldermen based on publicly available agendas, meeting materials, and observations from the February 17 meeting.
The goal of this series is to help residents understand what decisions are being considered, what has been approved, and how these actions may affect the community.
What This Update Covers
Proposed revisions to the Solid Waste Code
First reading of the Social Hosting Ordinance
E-bike, scooter, and golf cart regulation review
Aquatic Center and infrastructure approvals
Municipal Stormwater Grant Participation Program
Candidate forum planning
Why This Matters
City ordinances and spending decisions directly affect residents: financially, legally, physically, and environmentally. Clear data, defined purpose, and thoughtful implementation are essential to good governance.
Solid Waste Ordinance: Mandatory Screening Under Continued Discussion
The City Administrator provided a detailed outline of the procedural steps required to amend the solid waste ordinance adopted in 2024. If the Board proceeds, the amendment will require:
A motion to amend the existing bill
Two required readings
A final roll call vote
What Is Being Proposed?
The revised language would require trash and recycling containers to be stored in a location not visible from the street the residence faces. After reviewing bin placement across all three wards, I observed that over 40% of residents currently storing bins in side yards [fully compliant today] would become noncompliant if screening becomes mandatory.
For example: On St. Joseph’s Lane, six of nine homes would fall out of compliance under the proposed language, despite the street appearing orderly and well maintained.
I formally requested that the City provide the number of annual complaints specifically related to side-yard trash bin storage: not general noncompliance numbers and not complaints about bins left in the street.
A Ward 3 resident had remarks read into the record explaining that visual-based requirements may unintentionally disadvantage residents with disabilities, including those who are blind. Expanding the ordinance could also increase strain on code enforcement resources.
Mayor Mike Clement stated that residents should not fear immediate enforcement if changes are adopted. While that reassurance may be helpful, it raises an important policy question: if enforcement is not expected to be a high priority, what specific issue is this amendment designed to address?
We have already been told that approximately one-third of residents are not compliant under the current standards. Expanding the ordinance in a way that could significantly increase violations, without a clearly defined enforcement strategy or measurable benefit, warrants careful examination.
Jessica Green’s Perspective:
I support clean, well-maintained neighborhoods. That is not in dispute. However, I do not support expanding the solid waste ordinance without clear data demonstrating that such a change is necessary and effective. When a policy could place a significant portion of residents into noncompliance, the burden is on the City to articulate the specific problem being solved and how the proposed amendment measurably improves outcomes.
Good governance requires more than assumptions about appearance. It requires evidence, equity, and practical implementation. If existing ordinances already have low adherence, strengthening enforcement of current standards should be evaluated before creating additional mandates. Policy should be data-driven, clearly justified, and fair to residents across varying financial, physical, and property-layout circumstances.
Social Hosting Ordinance: First Reading
📜 Bill 26-2571 (Social Hosting Ordinance) received its first reading.
This ordinance would create liability for property owners if minors are found consuming alcohol or illegal substances on the premises — even if the property owner is not present at the time.
No data was presented during discussion regarding:
How many such incidents occur annually in Manchester
How frequently existing state laws are currently enforced
Whether this ordinance would reduce incidents beyond current enforcement tools
Public input remains open prior to final adoption. Once passed into Code, amendments require a formal process.
Jessica Green’s Perspective: Social Hosting Ordinance
Protecting minors from underage drinking and illegal drug use is a serious responsibility. I fully support proactive efforts that prioritize the safety and well-being of young people in our community. That said, expanding liability to property owners who are not present at an event represents a significant shift in policy. Before broadening legal exposure for residents, the City should present data demonstrating that existing state laws and enforcement mechanisms are insufficient.
Public safety policy should be effective, narrowly tailored, and evidence-based. Expanding liability without clear metrics or demonstrated gaps in current enforcement risks creating unintended consequences without necessarily improving outcomes. Thoughtful prevention and education strategies should remain central to any effort addressing youth-related concerns.
🚲E-Bikes, Scooters & 🛺 Golf Carts
The City is reviewing how local Code aligns with Missouri state statute regarding:
E-bikes
E-scooters
Golf carts
Other low-speed vehicles
Under current City Code:
Golf carts are illegal on city streets
Motorized scooters are prohibited
E-bikes must be treated similarly to bicycles under state law
Staff are researching best practices and exploring education efforts as usage increases, particularly among younger riders.
Jessica Green’s Perspective: E-Bikes, Scooters & Golf Carts
The increase in youth riding e-bikes and scooters without helmets is concerning. These are fast-moving vehicles sharing space with cars, and the margin for error on our roadways is small.
Manchester already faces ongoing challenges with drivers exceeding posted speed limits. When you combine higher vehicle speeds with young riders who may not yet have the experience to anticipate traffic patterns, the safety risk increases significantly.
This is not about discouraging recreation. E-bikes and scooters can be great tools for independence and mobility. As usage grows, so must education, parental awareness, and clear enforcement of traffic laws. Helmet use and adherence to roadway rules are not optional safety measures : they are essential.
Regarding golf carts: they have a place. Under current Manchester Law, that place is not on City streets. Clarity and consistent communication about existing law will help prevent confusion and reduce risk.
Public safety conversations should be proactive, not reactive. Clear rules, consistent enforcement, and community education will protect both young riders and drivers alike.
Candidate Engagement: League of Women Voters
The City is coordinating with the League of Women Voters to host a structured candidate forum prior to the April 7, 2026 election. The League is a nonpartisan organization known for equal speaking time and clearly defined rules.
Learn more about this organization here: https://www.lwv.org/
An additional open-house-style event is also being explored to allow residents one-on-one engagement with candidates.
Candidates across all three wards have expressed support for these opportunities. Especially in Ward III where we have an unprecedented 4 registered candidates. Make sure you are registered to vote by March 11, in order to vote in the April 7 election. Check your status here: https://voteroutreach.sos.mo.gov/portal/
Parks & Infrastructure Approvals
Aquatic Center Improvements
The Parks Department came in $126,690 under budget on Aquatic Center upgrades, including:
Replacement of slide stair systems
Improvements to the baby pool area
Everyone should be proud of the strong fiscal stewardship of Parks Director Kat Schien and her team.
Additional Approvals
Replacement dump truck (budgeted item)
Hanna Road Improvement amendment
Lawn maintenance contract for high-risk areas
Bulk fuel purchase contract ($108K)
Police UTV purchase using asset forfeiture funds
Justice Center digital sign replacement
Fireworks contracts for July 4 and America 250
Municipal Stormwater Grant Participation Program
The Municipal Stormwater Grant Participation Program was introduced and will be voted on at the next meeting. Director of Public Works Errol Tate provided explanation regarding participation and funding structure.
Public Participation
Board of Aldermen meetings are open to the public, with agendas posted in advance. Residents are permitted three minutes of public comment per speaker.
Public participation is most effective before ordinances receive final approval. If you wish to provide input on Bill 26-2571 (Social Hosting Ordinance) or the proposed Solid Waste Code revisions, now is the appropriate time to do so.
Why This Matters
Policy changes affecting large segments of residents should be grounded in clear data, defined purpose, and thoughtful implementation.
Engaged residents strengthen local government.
Sources:
related blog posted Feb 9, 2026:
Board of Aldermen Meetings: January 5, January 20, and February 2, 2026
This post summarizes recent discussions and actions taken by the Manchester Board of Aldermen based on publicly available agendas, approved minutes, and observations from meetings. The goal of this series is to help residents understand what decisions are being considered, what has been approved, and how these actions may affect the community.
What This Update Covers
Proposed ordinance changes, including a Social Hosting Ordinance and Solid Waste Code revisions
Recent public safety equipment approvals
Ongoing environmental discussions
How public input and commission updates are currently being handled
Why This Matters
City ordinances and spending decisions directly affect residents — financially, legally, and environmentally. Clear data, open discussion, and balanced use of public meeting time are essential to good governance.
This series is intended to provide residents with clear, factual summaries of what is happening at City Hall and to encourage informed civic engagement.
Social Hosting Ordinance: Expanded Liability Under Discussion
The proposed Social Hosting Ordinance was discussed during the January 20 and February 2 meetings. This ordinance applies to situations where police respond to a residence and minors are found to be using illegal substances, such as underage alcohol consumption or other illegal drugs.
As presented, the ordinance would create penalties for property owners even if they are not present at the event, expanding responsibility beyond adults who are physically on site.
During the February 2 meeting, attorney Keith Chung, who addressed the Board, explained that current Missouri law already accounts for situations where an adult is present and supporting the delinquency of a minor. The proposed ordinance would extend responsibility to individuals not present at the time of the event, significantly broadening liability.
The ordinance also includes provisions allowing police to speak with residents in advance of potential gatherings, such as when school resource officers observe social media posts or overhear discussions about planned parties.
Questions Not Addressed in Open Discussion
No data was presented regarding:
How many underage drinking or drug-related party incidents occur annually in Manchester
How often existing laws are currently enforced
Whether this ordinance would meaningfully reduce incidents
What enforcement looks like today without this ordinance
Jessica Green’s Perspective
Protecting minors from underage drinking and illegal drug use is essential to the health and safety of our community. I do not support youth parties involving alcohol or drugs, and I believe situations involving minors should be addressed seriously, responsibly, and with their well-being as the top priority.
That said, I do not support this ordinance. I believe it expands liability without clear evidence that it would improve safety or outcomes. Before creating new penalties for residents, the City should be asking data-driven questions in open session and evaluating whether existing laws are sufficient.
My concern is that this ordinance shifts focus away from prevention, education, and targeted enforcement, and instead broadens liability to individuals who may not be present or involved. Protecting minors is critical — but policy solutions should be effective, evidence-based, and fair to residents, not reactive or overly expansive.
Solid Waste Ordinance: Mandatory Screening Under Consideration
One of the issues I am most passionate about is the proposed revision to Manchester’s solid waste ordinance.
As currently drafted and discussed, the proposed changes would effectively make screened trash and recycling bins mandatory for residents. While the language is being presented as a clarification or update, the practical outcome would impose new financial, physical, and environmental burdens on households.
Current Code
“…all containers shall be stored at least twenty-five (25) feet behind the front yard building line unless fully screened from public view from the fronting road or street.”
Proposed Change
“…the containers shall be stored in a place not visible from the street which the residential structure faces.”
The ordinance revision has been discussed without clear data addressing:
How many current complaints exist under the existing code
Whether mandatory screening would meaningfully improve sanitation outcomes
The cost impact to residents, including installation and maintenance
Accessibility concerns for seniors, renters, and residents with physical limitations
During public comment, residents raised concerns that the proposed changes prioritize appearance over practicality and place additional requirements on households without demonstrated benefit.
During the February 2 meeting, Ward One Alderman A. Streeter expressed a preference for an alternative version that does not mandate screening of trash and recycling bins. This was the only statement made during that meeting indicating opposition to the ordinance as currently drafted.
Jessica Green’s Perspective
I oppose the proposed solid waste ordinance revisions. I believe mandatory screening requirements create unnecessary burdens for residents without clear evidence of improved outcomes. Any changes to city code should be driven by data, equity, and real-world impact — not assumptions.
Manchester can maintain clean, attractive neighborhoods without shifting costs and responsibilities onto residents in ways that are impractical or inequitable. Residents deserve transparency and a clear explanation before new mandates are imposed.
➡️ Read my full public comments on the solid waste ordinance here:
Public Safety Equipment: Resolution No. 26-1049
The Board unanimously approved Resolution No. 26-1049, authorizing Manchester Police Department to use $10,682.02 from the Asset Forfeiture account for the purchase of five PepperBall VKS PRO devices and over 1,000 rounds of ammunition.
During discussion and prior to approval, no questions were raised regarding:
How much live firearm ammunition Manchester Police use annually during incidents or calls for service
How often Manchester Police respond to mental health–related calls, which Police Chief Ed Skaggs cited as situations where PepperBall devices may be used
Whether additional training costs would be required in future budgets
These questions were not addressed during open discussion before the resolution was approved.
Jessica Green’s Perspective
I support the work of Manchester Police and appreciate the challenging situations officers are asked to manage, including mental health related calls. I am also glad to see Manchester Police exploring and adopting non-lethal tools as part of a more progressive approach to public safety.
Asking about usage data, training requirements, and long-term costs is not criticism of our police , it is responsible governance. Thoughtful oversight helps ensure officers are properly trained, public resources are used effectively, and residents can have confidence in how public safety decisions are made.
Environmental Discussion: DarkSky Missouri Presentation
At the February 2 meeting, a representative from DarkSky Missouri provided a presentation focused on outdoor lighting standards and their impacts on safety, visibility, and the environment. [https://darkskymissouri.org/]
The presenter shared research showing that lighting with a color temperature above 3,700 Kelvin can create excessive glare and harsher contrasts, resulting in darker shadows that may actually reduce visibility for drivers and pedestrians. According to the data presented, overly bright or improperly designed lighting can make it more difficult to see potential hazards, despite appearing brighter.
The presentation also highlighted studies indicating that well-designed, lower-temperature lighting—when applied consistently and thoughtfully—can improve safety and reduce crime, contrary to the assumption that brighter lighting always leads to better outcomes. DarkSky standards emphasize directing light where it is needed, minimizing glare, and reducing unnecessary light spill.
When asked about the specific types of lighting currently used throughout Manchester, the presenter was unable to provide that information. The Mayor indicated that the topic would be revisited at a future meeting.
Jessica Green’s Perspective
This is an important issue with long-term potential to set Manchester apart environmentally and improve public safety. Manchester often highlights its commitment to environmental stewardship, and thoughtful lighting standards could meaningfully support that goal while also enhancing visibility and safety for residents.
Future discussions would benefit from clearer, Manchester-specific data so residents and officials can better understand how proposed standards would apply locally. With proper preparation and community input, this topic presents an opportunity for Manchester to lead thoughtfully rather than reactively.
Public Participation & Commission Updates
Manchester residents are encouraged to attend Board of Aldermen meetings, which are open to the public. Meeting agendas are posted online the Friday before Monday meetings, giving residents the opportunity to review upcoming items and prepare questions or comments over the weekend.
While this transparency is important, it is also worth noting that residents do not receive the same level of detailed background materials provided to elected officials ahead of meetings. As a result, members of the public often must rely solely on the posted agenda when forming questions or providing input. Public participation during meetings is currently limited to three minutes per speaker total. By contrast, there are no formal time constraints placed on presenters, the Mayor, or members of the Board of Aldermen during discussion.
Residents can also locate agendas and approved minutes for specific City commissions online, allowing them to follow discussions and actions taking place outside of Board meetings. These include the Audit & Finance Commission, Board of Adjustment, Planning & Zoning Commission, Tree Advisory Commission, and Veterans Commission.
Why This Matters
Public meetings work best when residents have adequate information, meaningful time to speak, and confidence that their participation is valued. Clear agendas, balanced use of meeting time, and regular commission reporting all help ensure that local government remains accessible, transparent, and responsive to the community.
Upcoming Items
At the February 17 meeting, the Board is expected to consider Resolutions 26-1050 through 26-1052, which relate exclusively to approving submissions to the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission for Highway Safety and Traffic Enforcement Grants totaling $29,500.00. These grants would apply specifically to covering overtime expenditures. They are also potentially scheduled to vote on both the Social Hosting Ordinance and the Solid Waste Code.
Comments