Mr. Greenberg - Thank you for addressing the changes to the PUD in greater detail and clarity. If we must have a QT on that corner, it is good that so much work has been done to satisfy all parties. The addition of 2601 Big Bend seems like a vast improvement to the original PUD.

I find it interesting that with these new improvements to the proposed plan the referendum committee has no comment. I have thought all along that even though child safety is at the forefront of the referendum committee's agenda, they are using that one single measure to roadblock progress.

I am quite confused. As I understand it, we are voting on the PUD that was approved by the City Council in November, not something that has the possibility of being approved next week. Mr. Greenberg, you are urging voters to vote yes on an amended PUD that has not actually been amended. Presuming that the City Council approves amendments next Tuesday, how will all of this information be fully available to voters on April 2? How will this be reflected on the ballot?

I am confused as well, if the PUD is amended and everyone is happy, why are we voting?

Here are a few things I would like to point out on the subject...

• Maplewood, MO Population: 8,044 (2011)
• 1,100 is the number of registered voters in Maplewood who signed the referendum
• If the amended bill does end up passing QT would now have to make even more concessions to pedestrian safety and the high school (this would have NEVER happened WITHOUT the REFERENDUM)

The total population of Maplewood, MO is approximately 8,044. How many of these people are older than 18 and registered to vote? My guess would be approximately 3,000 registered voters. If I am correct that would mean 1 out of every 3 registered voters in Maplewood in oppose this project.

Now let's also pretend that half of Maplewood's registered votes don't really care one way or another on the subject, that means 1 out of every 1.5 registered Maplewood voters are opposed to the move.

Even if the above math is not even close to correct 1 out of every 8 of Maplewood's Adults, Teenagers, Children, Toddlers, and even babies residents oppose this move!

This is not a group of 4-5 opposed to this move. It is a community trying to tell their elected officials that we don't think this is the best move for Maplewood. The Referendum has already created more (proposed) concessions for the community that would have never been made if the city council's bill had just simply passed.

I'm happier with the revision and I'll vote yes. If it were an historic building, I would have voted no, but that building is not the original building on that site. In fact from what I've read, none of the corners have the original buildings that were on those sites. Wow, to think our vote tells the owner of the property what s/he can or cannot do with the property. Free enterprise and democracy at work.

Nick, please do not speak for ALL of the community.

Nancy you are correct. The referendum gives people the opportunity to vote on the issue. Without the referendum the QT move would have had the blessing of the city and moved forward. Since the referendum passed and now there is a vote of the people the city council has once again met with QT. This time they have added more concessions for the school and pedestrian safety. I believe this would have never happened without the pressure of the looming referendum.

As I stated during the meeting mentioned above, there were 1,144 registered Maplewood voters who opposed the move & wanted the issue on the ballot. Each voter has their own concerns/reasons for opposing this development. The traffic concerns are only one small segment. Others feel QT is a bad fit for that corner for a variety of reasons - Aesthetics, lack of City Planning, Environmental concerns & leaving of a vacant QT site at Big Bend/Flora. These same voters tried bringing their concerns, feelings & thoughts to their City Council Representatives/elected officials & felt disregarded & ignored.

A "Final" vote on the PUD was rushed through the Council in November, thus triggering the start of the referendum process. (That was the time to make changes.) Once the number of signatures was reached & submitted, the Council had the opportunity to withdraw the PUD & start over, but they refused. Instead they voted to push the issue to the ballot & force a vote.

There are several questions regarding whether or not the changes they are now trying to implement are even legal & binding. If folks vote Yes, & the changes are not legal, will the PUD revert back to the original? Where do we stand? What happens then? A true legal opinion has not been given.

Because of these questions, many voters fear that if they "vote yes", the Council will revert to the orignal PUD - which even they admit was flawed - or make even worse changes to it. That fear = VOTE NO.

I've lived in Maplewood since 1993, and I have worked along side with parents, students, community members, and staff to ensure that the MRH School District offers a first class education to the children of our community. MRH has become a destination district, which means that families move to Maplewood and Richmond Heights because of the schools. It only makes sense that the leaders and council members of both cities celebrate and collaborate with their school district. I attended Maplewood City Council meetings from August until November, and was surprised that the Council members and the School Board never actually sat around the table to talk about the QT issue. When I asked council members, "Where will the school buses go?" the response was, "That's not our problem." The Council voted yes on a controversial PUD, and the mayor ended the meeting by saying, "I'm done working with the School District." This is NOT ACCEPTABLE. Now weeks before the election a meeting is called and the PUD will supposedly be revised. Is this legal? Legal or not, we need to have a greater vision for Maplewood's most prominent corner than a gas station. Take a look at neighboring cities - they do not have gas stations next to their city halls and schools. Why? SAFETY AND PRIDE! Vote NO on Prop Q.

Gary - For your situation I'll rephrase. 1,144 voters, for whatever reason, felt strongly enough about the situation to want to vote on it. That is what the referendum committee and volunteers did with the petition.

Since that became a reality, and some of the Council wanted to amend the PUD, the committee has been waiting for the formsl legal opinion to be shared with us regarding the legality of those actions. We don't know if what was done really changed anything or if it was just a smoke screen to confuse voters.

When the Council asked us to withdraw our petition we had to decide whether we were willing to nullify all of our hard work or continue on. During the discussion one of the committee members stooped the conversation by saying, "Who do you think you are? Over 1,100 people signed this petition. How arrogant we would have to be to stop the process and break our promise. - our promise that these voters will finally have their day and be heard. "

Those words really hit home. It was arrogance, a lack of planning and unwillingness to see the big picture that got us all here.

Will I still Vote NO? Absolutely. I do not feel this project has been properly planned and I still do not believe the "new" PUD is legal. But even if it was, I do not trust that the Council will not change their mind and amend it again. We have already seen that a final vote is not really a final vote.

Sorry, I simply do not agree with you.

And the great thing is that you don't have to. We can each, respectfully, have our opinions, as can the 5,000+ registered voters in Maplewood.

My greatest concern right now is that we all have a full disclosure of the situation and the legality of the amendment so each voter can make a fully informed decision.

I've been attending the council meetings for the past year, in part because the QT issue serves as a wonderful primer on how things get done (or not) in the city. The council has, in my opinion, done their best to balance all sides of this divisive issue.

Some basic facts to keep in mind as we go to the polls:

1. QT is going to move. The question is where. If not in Maplewood, then we will certainly lose the substantial tax revenues QT generates and will end up with a vacant building at the present location (and probably at the corner in question)
2. The only reason this matter came up at all is because gasoline tanks require a zoning variance. Current zoning would without any hearing permit a cheap tobacco store, car wash, liquor store or coin laundry. Sometimes the devil you know is better than the one you don't.
3. The intersection of Big Bend and Manchester is zoned AB (arterial business), anything that goes in there will likely be interested in attracting auto traffic--that's what AB means. While we all may wish otherwise, the corner of Manchester and Big Bend will remain one of the busiest in the metro area, with or without QT.
4. The property is privately owned. The owner has a right and an expectation to make use of the property in ways that meet her needs, balanced against the least intrusive requirements imposed by the city.

Let me encourage everybody: please carefully consider the matter and take personal ownership of this issue at the polls.

Well said William.