[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-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],{"_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",6180548,"mediaKeyId","5117506-348d1e7c73163d636b05756f8288394a","parentId",5117506,"title","St. Louis committee adopts update to rental code, exempts children under 6 from occupancy counts","audioSeconds",2846,"startMs",321000,"endMs",3167000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5117506-348d1e7c73163d636b05756f8288394a&start=321&end=3167","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5117506-348d1e7c73163d636b05756f8288394a/thumbnail_321000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6180548/St-Louis-City/St-Louis-County/Missouri/St-Louis-committee-adopts-update-to-rental-code-exempts-children-under-6-from-occupancy-counts","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6180548-e1e84cf2622df9ba5dc477ca1ee35fc5/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448607&Signature=iZfdtjulvek1xbJMhEqILTmRNP5528~8hc6YKwLKXDvqKsPMLDWn2ksOZ4uUxHgvRr31q1z9rDEsFPb0loXcdYl2mkXPe3vIlc8dNdM1eVyPxHP3oWMQfoFJWUAzErkz6I9SoglC7mnBgA~yv0luS5Ywy2JbBNBNcvKD~Pka6zNQi7ROwFKKU~2f2jY5Dknu7yYNmuEGGfAEoP0pqv5ulOlsh7-wJG4y9iNPaaXsOorpywha-DnGspdIO0jCJ~8~XURGCIa-40SGp5pNt7fWhgVkf-FffVFsxI1ch1GWhyjKEZIPfndVL-iF4Dg1KXlLVbsiETSMUEXJHoOQ~J5ZMw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of St. Louis, MO","date","2025-07-01T20:11:45Z","article","Board Bill 18, which updates the city's housing conservation code and occupancy rules, passed the Board of Aldermen's Housing, Urban Development and Zoning (HUD) committee on a 6-1 vote, with the committee giving a 'due pass' recommendation.

The bill, introduced by Alderwoman Daniella Velasquez, does two things: it places interior housing-safety requirements (previously listed only in an exhibit to the rental-registry ordinance) directly into the code, and it changes occupancy rules to better accommodate multi-generational and larger family households. Under the change, the primary (\"master\") bedroom will no longer be required to be the largest sleeping room, the rule restricting two occupants in the main bedroom is removed, and children under age 6 will not be counted when calculating whether a dwelling exceeds allowed occupancy.

Why it matters: Sponsors and administration officials said the updates are intended to modernize code language, make enforcement easier and support family housing options for immigrant and multigenerational households. Alderwoman Velasquez and the mayor's Office of New Americans framed the change as an incremental tool to help the city attract and retain families.

Key details

- Codification: The bill moves interior safety and habitability standards that had lived in an ordinance exhibit into the body of the municipal code so inspectors and the public can find them in one place.

- Occupancy changes: The ordinance no longer requires the primary bedroom to be the largest room; the numerical cap specific to the primary bedroom was removed; and children under 6 years old are excluded from the headcount used to compute occupant limits.

- Enforcement: Building Division Commissioner Edward Ware told the committee the building-division's safety standards (smoke detectors, means of egress, structural, mechanical and electrical requirements) remain unchanged. He said the division does not expect a dramatic change in inspection workload from these code tweaks.

Debate and implementation concerns

Committee members pressed the building division on enforcement capacity. Commissioner Ware and later testimony from staff acknowledged the division inspects properties when a permit is pulled or when a complaint is filed; the city does not conduct routine, block-by-block proactive housing inspections.

Alderman Steve Cohn said the division is short-staffed and asked how the city would verify children's ages during overcrowding investigations. Ware and administration witnesses said code-enforcement officers rely primarily on on-site observation and the inspectors' professional judgment; there is an existing notice-of-violation and appeals process by which property owners can submit documentation in response to a citation.

Committee members and witnesses also cited division data on overcrowding complaints: the building division reported fewer than 100 overcrowding complaints in recent years; for 2024 staff identified 19 distinct addresses for which overcrowding notices were recorded, and about one-quarter of those resulted in notices or fines. Commissioners noted some investigations found no evidence or were unable to gain interior access.

Support and opposition

Supporters included Alderwoman Velasquez, the mayor's Office of New Americans (Gilberto Pinella testified) and administration staff (Casey Milberg testified remotely) who said the change will help families and is administrable within existing enforcement processes. Opponents and skeptical members (notably Alderman Cohn) warned that limited inspection capacity could leave the city unable to detect or control abuse by negligent or predatory landlords who might overcrowd units, resulting in health and safety risks for tenants and neighbors.

Formal action

- Motion: Pass Board Bill 18 out of committee with a due-pass recommendation.
- Mover: Alderman Brandon Browning (moved). Second: Vice Chair Saulnier (seconded). (Recorded at the committee roll call.)
- Vote: 6 yes, 1 no (the roll-call record shown in the transcript lists six aye votes and one no vote).
- Outcome: Approved by the HUD committee; the bill will proceed to the full Board of Aldermen for consideration.

What to watch next

- Enforcement practice: Council members asked the administration for data on inspection staffing, complaint-handling and how the division will apply the new child-age provision in field investigations.

- Appeals and evidence: Staff noted the city's existing appeals process allows owners to present documentation if cited; committee members asked for clarity on how documentation and verification will work in practice.

Speakers (at committee)

- Daniella Velasquez, Alderman and sponsor (city government)
- Edward Ware, Commissioner, Building Division (city government)
- Gilberto Pinella, Director, Office of New Americans (city government)
- Casey Milberg, Mayor's Office (city government; testified remotely)
- Alderman Steve Cohn (questioner)
- Alderman Brandon Browning (moved the motion)
- Alderman Autumn McComb (recorded as opposing vote)

Discussion vs. decision

- Discussion items: How inspectors will determine ages in the field; the building division's staffing and whether the division does proactive inspections; data on past overcrowding complaints and enforcement outcomes; how the law might affect renters and landlords in lower-income neighborhoods.
- Direction/assignments: Committee members requested additional data and follow-up from the building division on staffing levels, complaint volumes and enforcement outcomes.
- Formal decision: The committee voted to pass the bill out with a due-pass recommendation (approved in committee).

Clarifying details extracted from the hearing

- Data: Building division reported fewer than 100 overcrowding complaints in any recent year; for 2024 the division identified 19 addresses recorded as overcrowding complaints; roughly 25% of those led to notices of violation or fines; about 23% were repeats; some investigations yielded no evidence or could not gain interior access.
- Enforcement practice: City inspects properties on complaint or when a permit is pulled; block-to-block proactive surveys were suspended pending staffing improvements.
- Appeals: Owners cited for overcrowding may submit documentation during the existing appeals process.

Authorities referenced

- ordinance: \"Ordinance No. 71835\" (referred to in committee as the prior rental-registry ordinance / Board Bill 180, 2023-24). Referenced_by: [\"Daniella Velasquez\",\"Casey Milberg\"]

Proper names

[{\"name\":\"Office of New Americans\",\"type\":\"agency\"},{\"name\":\"Building Division\",\"type\":\"agency\"},{\"name\":\"City of St. Louis\",\"type\":\"other\"},{\"name\":\"Ordinance No. 71835\",\"type\":\"other\"}]

Community relevance

- Geographies: City of St. Louis (citywide impact)
- Impact groups: Immigrant families, multigenerational households, renters in high-occupancy units
- Funding sources: Not applicable to this bill (regulatory/code change)

Meeting context

- Engagement level: Multiple administration witnesses and six aldermen spoke; significant line-by-line questioning on enforcement capacity (moderate to high engagement)
- Implementation risk: Medium — changes rely on field application by inspectors and on department staffing; policy changes are dependent on administrative enforcement practices
- History: The bill corrects an omission from the 2023-24 rental-registry update (some interior standards had been placed only in an exhibit rather than in the code)

Searchable tags:[\"housing\",\"occupancy\",\"rental registry\",\"code enforcement\",\"immigrant families\",\"St. Louis City\",\"HUD committee\"]

Provenance

[{\"block_id\":\"321.96503\",\"local_start\":0,\"local_end\":79,\"evidence_excerpt\":\"Alright. With that, we've successfully approved the minutes from 06/17/2025. We'll move forward in the agenda and recognize the woman Velasquez on board bill 18.\",\"reason_code\":\"topicintro\"},{\"block_id\":\"3161.01\",\"local_start\":0,\"local_end\":66,\"evidence_excerpt\":\"Alright. With that, congratulations. You have successfully passed board bill 18. Thank you, members of the committee. Thank you.\",\"reason_code\":\"topicfinish\"}]","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Housing, Urban Development and Zoning Committee /Tansportation & Commerce Committee - July 1, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Housing, Urban Development & Zoning committee advanced Board Bill 18 on June 30, placing interior housing safety standards into the city code and revising occupancy rules so primary bedrooms no longer have to be the largest sleeping room and children under 6 do not count toward occupancy limits.","taxTitle","St. Louis City, St. Louis County, Missouri","taxId",2587,"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},6180538,"St. Louis creates voluntary registered-neighborhood organization registry and requires targeted notices to registered groups",2365,5987000,8352000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5117506-348d1e7c73163d636b05756f8288394a&start=5987&end=8352","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5117506-348d1e7c73163d636b05756f8288394a/thumbnail_5987000.jpg","/articles/6180538/St-Louis-City/St-Louis-County/Missouri/St-Louis-creates-voluntary-registered-neighborhood-organization-registry-and-requires-targeted-notices-to-registered-groups","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6180538-6e1c5f77cde81cae732e6fe718a4080c/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448607&Signature=RUHy4BqPB2957HwgKyYEEnDOET6krjzSpjIN4Z9mXClPNWALVOhf250VEc1ORw6OsxoK1Psr9byzCb6SzpmleSMmHjx68tXJk237~rBiLv-fgD5-3xVMhqcxJqwwdPFkMeVXaJti3pG0Bf7nOeQYtRNWu5MQn47zeFdiKKWca~sYFanAgI~uWtDLW~kDLhzm8zfKb-kUgxuoMHH9us0knSAKk0XoQFyWTytQixlhAMn2bnV6lyl4XSap~8fd0XMbS5QUJwhFdxJ019GCj2D~WDOLAeLnH~6R~olpSXwvFX8yIwcfn7OoqHM55gHaWcTJOyxK~Zt8kdPhGmULZWajQA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Housing, Urban Development & Zoning committee voted unanimously to approve two bills creating a voluntary registered-neighborhood organization (RNO) registry and requiring targeted notice to registered groups. Board Bill 44 establishes eligibility and a public registry; Board Bill 45 lists the notices agencies must send to registered neighborhood organizations. The committee adopted a technical amendment to add conditional-use public hearing notices to the list and passed both measures with a due-pass recommendation.

What the bills do

- Board Bill 44 (registry): Directs the Neighborhood Stabilization Division (NSD) to create and maintain a public registration process and database of resident-led neighborhood organizations. Eligibility criteria are intentionally simple: a defined geographic boundary, documented meeting frequency and public-engagement practices, and a short written governance statement (bylaws or similar) so the public can understand how the organization functions. Registration is voluntary and requires annual renewal to keep contact information current.

- Board Bill 45 (notice requirements): Requires city divisions to send defined public notices (zoning filings, land-use hearings, certain permit notices and other items) to registered neighborhood organizations that represent the affected geography, plus an additional 200-foot buffer for notifications.

Nut graf: why this matters

Supporters said the package is a practical, low-cost way to centralize neighborhood contact information, reduce missed notifications and strengthen civic engagement. Testimony from community leaders, community development corporations and nonprofit legal counsel emphasized that many neighborhood organizations lack a stable place to find each other or to receive consistent notices from departments; a public RNO registry would make outreach more transparent and easier for both residents and city staff.

Key points from testimony

- Resident voices: Several neighborhood association leaders and community development organizations told the committee the registry will help them find collaborators and ensure timely notice of hearings and permit applications.

- Administration support: Drafting was informed by a working group convened by the St. Louis Vacancy Collaborative; NSD will administer the registry and said it can be implemented with existing staff.

- Inclusion and capacity: The eligibility criteria were deliberately minimal to avoid excluding informal groups; written governance could be a short one-page statement for newer groups. Speakers said the registry is an empowerment tool, not a gatekeeping mechanism; groups that do not register will still receive notices via existing channels.

- Requests from stakeholders: Some groups (community improvement districts and CIDs, community development corporations) asked to be included in notices; committee members and witnesses agreed the registry would not preclude agencies from also sending notices to other community entities and some members flagged adding CIDs or similar groups to the notice list as a technical fix at perfection if necessary.

Formal action

- Motion: Pass Board Bills 44 and 45 (45 amended to add conditional-use public-hearing notices) out of committee with due-pass recommendations.
- Vote: Both bills passed the HUD committee unanimously (recorded aye votes across attending members).

Discussion vs. decision

- Discussion: How to balance a simple, low-bar registration process with the need for transparency (written governance statements and meeting frequency); whether community improvement districts and other quasi-public business groups should also be recipients of notice.
- Direction: NSD will implement the registry and the administration will continue outreach to neighborhood groups; committee members asked that the working group remain engaged in implementation.
- Decision: Committee passed the bills and sent them forward to the full Board.

Clarifying details

- Renewal: Registration requires annual affirmation so contact and eligibility data stay current.
- Eligibility: Written governance can be as simple as a short, public statement of purpose and basic meeting rules; groups may be incorporated nonprofits or informal resident associations.
- Notices: The notice list (Board Bill 45) was amended to explicitly include public hearings on conditional-use permits after staff review.

Speakers (selected)

- Alderman Clark Hubbard (sponsor)
- Dana Malcus (facilitator, Vacancy Collaborative working group)
- Peter Hoffman (Neighborhood Advocacy Program, Legal Services of Eastern Missouri)
- Representatives of neighborhood associations, community development corporations and the Brickline North CDC

Proper names

[{\"name\":\"Neighborhood Stabilization Division\",\"type\":\"agency\"},{\"name\":\"Vacancy Collaborative\",\"type\":\"organization\"},{\"name\":\"Brickline North CDC\",\"type\":\"organization\"},{\"name\":\"Legal Services of Eastern Missouri\",\"type\":\"organization\"}]

Community relevance

- Geographies: Citywide registry; notices targeted to affected neighborhood boundaries plus 200-foot buffer.
- Impact groups: Neighborhood associations, residents, community development corporations, small-business improvement districts.
- Funding sources: Implementation to be handled within NSD existing staffing (no new line item identified at committee).

Meeting context

- Engagement level: High. Multiple neighborhood leaders testified and the HUD committee members discussed inclusion and practical implementation details.
- Implementation risk: Low to medium — main risks are administrative (ensuring annual renewals and accurate data) rather than legal or budgetary.
- History: Working group convened by local vacancy/civic stakeholders and NSD informed the bills' drafting.

Searchable tags:[\"neighborhoods\",\"civic engagement\",\"NSD\",\"public notices\",\"St. Louis City\"]

Provenance

[{\"block_id\":\"9570.285\",\"local_start\":0,\"local_end\":26,\"evidence_excerpt\":\"Thank you, madam chairwoman. You're to speak to board bill number 44.\",\"reason_code\":\"topicintro\"},{\"block_id\":\"13103.495\",\"local_start\":0,\"local_end\":48,\"evidence_excerpt\":\"It was moved by the alderman from the fourteenth, seconded by the alderwoman of the first, that we pass board bill 44 with a due pass recommendation.\",\"reason_code\":\"topicfinish\"}]","The Board of Aldermen HUD committee unanimously approved two bills establishing a voluntary registry for resident-led neighborhood organizations and a requirement that city agencies send certain public notices to registered groups.",{"_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},6180543,"St. Louis committee advances airport permit rules for peer-to-peer car rentals after changes to protect existing contracts",3391,2901000,6292000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5117506-348d1e7c73163d636b05756f8288394a&start=2901&end=6292","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5117506-348d1e7c73163d636b05756f8288394a/thumbnail_2901000.jpg","/articles/6180543/St-Louis-City/St-Louis-County/Missouri/St-Louis-committee-advances-airport-permit-rules-for-peer-to-peer-car-rentals-after-changes-to-protect-existing-contracts","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6180543-845a655dac8397ae149b3f450ce713ed/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448607&Signature=XaQklG3z~DCq8cSuiH4HYUAPpqF0plv~x0boiCTaiPRhoPmp1EJ2RM8q5ONw8mj1qBqbLPbLth~WiqkD8dTY4ez-3LjXysIaoU4971SYfDTCfHbPApUFFKQZTnkaHwdNnl4APNIoCfjVGkQqNTdDypEWIZXcydDnSGUF-a-s0Q6S9WUlHQD7TZIPgSLR4QyR-9UyfQ31rv8mttKaiOJOAG5vHBCezc1NAFqzLGU3ioEcQx3n9WhuH8HHodqY70ECC~efvnKAaZc9YBcB~jx-p4PtBgMCV5iHcORhOL5xMvcVZqPLfzOiOsMUd4okSh89Y~I2IOzEVtZtEN2VjquUFw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Transportation & Commerce committee approved a committee substitute for Board Bill 25 with amendments that narrow its immediate effect and remove a controversial placard requirement for peer-to-peer car rental vehicles operating at Lambert'St. Louis International Airport. The committee voted to send the measure to the full Board with a due-pass recommendation.

What the bill would do

Board Bill 25 would establish a permitting framework for peer-to-peer car rental operators (firms that facilitate rental of privately owned vehicles) at the St. Louis airport. The draft permit discussed by airport staff would have required a per‑trip or percentage fee (the airport staff told the committee the draft used a proposed 10% of gross receipts), standard insurance and indemnity provisions, and operational limits such as whether vehicles could access curbside areas or only the garage and shuttle lots. The airport presented a one-year permit in the draft to allow the airport to evaluate how operations worked before a longer arrangement.

Committee action and amendments

- Amendment 1 (adopted): Clarifies that currently existing rental- and non-rental contracts are not impaired by the new fee provisions, and preserves the airport's ability to structure future competitive bids for on-airport concessions.
- Amendment 2 (adopted): Removes a provision that would have required a placard inside each peer-to-peer vehicle; airport staff said the placard requirement raised privacy and safety concerns and that comparable airports limit placards to curbside exchanges only.

Why it mattered to the committee

Airport staff (Rhonda Neabrook, airport director) told the committee the draft permit intentionally limited curbside access and did not give peer-to-peer operators access to Terminal 2 curbside; instead, the draft anticipated garage or shuttle-lot pickup with shuttles for remote lots. The draft included a 10% gross‑receipts fee and a one‑year term so the airport could observe operations.

Rental‑car companies and industry groups (Enterprise, American Car Rental Association and others) testified in opposition, saying peer-to-peer companies operate differently from commercial rental concessions and that allowing walkable pickup or preferential placement would be unfair to concessionaires that negotiated multi-year agreements and minimum annual guarantees (MAGs).

Airport and finance officials warned the committee about legal and revenue risks. Airport legal staff told the committee that certain provisions in earlier drafts would have conflicted with the airport's existing concession agreements (each concession has different MAGs and payment structures), and airport officials cautioned the committee that changes to airport contracting practice could have implications for federal grant assurances and ongoing airline negotiations on a planned terminal project.

Turo (a prominent peer-to-peer platform) and its representatives appeared remotely. A Turo representative apologized for earlier inaccurate descriptions to the committee about whether the platform was operating at the airport and said the company is willing to continue negotiating a permit in good faith.

Formal action and outcome

- Motion: Pass Board Bill 25 committee substitute as amended with a due-pass recommendation.
- Mover: President Megan Green; Second: Alderman Narayan (recorded as the seconding committee member).
- Vote/outcome: Committee adopted both amendments and passed the committee substitute out with a due-pass recommendation (previous-rule used; no sustained objection recorded in the transcript).

Discussion vs. decision

- Discussion: Whether peer-to-peer operators should be treated the same as traditional rental-car concessionaires; how fees should be calculated (percentage vs. adjusted gross receipts); differences among existing concessions and MAGs; privacy and safety concerns about placards; whether the airport's federal grant assurances or airline negotiations could be affected.
- Direction: Airport staff and the administration will continue talks with peer-to-peer operators and other stakeholders; the committee adopted targeted amendments to address immediate legal and operational concerns.
- Decision: Committee approved the committee substitute as amended and advanced the bill to the full Board of Aldermen.

Speakers (selected)

- Rhonda Neabrook, Director, Lambert-St. Louis International Airport (airport staff)
- Rob Solerano (airport legal/operations staff) (transcript name)
- Tim O'Connell, American Car Rental Association (opponent)
- Brian Routhree, Enterprise Mobility (opponent)
- Aaron Baraza, Turo representative (apologized for earlier comments; said willing to negotiate)
- President Megan Green (moved the final measure)

Authorities and legal references

- code/regulation: Title 18, Section 18.1030 (City airport code referenced by airport legal staff)

Clarifying details

- Proposed fee: Airport briefed committee on a proposed 10% fee on gross receipts in the draft permit; airport noted that other peer airports have used similar percentage fees in some arrangements.
- Placard removal: The committee removed a requirement that each peer-to-peer vehicle display a placard; airport staff said Kansas City requires a placard only for curbside exchanges.
- Existing concessions: Airport counsel warned that concession agreements have differing MAGs and revenue terms; language tying peer-to-peer fees directly to proportional fees could conflict with concession-bid processes.

Proper names

[{\"name\":\"Lambert'St. Louis International Airport\",\"type\":\"facility\"},{\"name\":\"Turo\",\"type\":\"business\"},{\"name\":\"Enterprise Mobility\",\"type\":\"business\"},{\"name\":\"American Car Rental Association\",\"type\":\"organization\"},{\"name\":\"City of St. Louis Title 18\",\"type\":\"code\"}]

Community relevance

- Geographies: St. Louis Lambert Airport and airport-adjacent neighborhoods
- Impact groups: Travelers, airport concessionaires, peer-to-peer vehicle hosts and local rental-car businesses
- Funding sources: Potential revenue to airport operating funds; federal grant-assurance implications noted

Meeting context

- Engagement level: High; multiple outside industry witnesses, airport staff and elected officials took part; substantial legal and operational questioning.
- Implementation risk: Medium to high — risk centers on legal conflicts with existing concession contracts, MAGs and potential FAA grant-assurance questions
- History: Issue follows national trend of municipalities grappling with peer-to-peer operators at airports; committee asked for further negotiations and amended to preserve existing contracts.

Searchable tags:[\"airport\",\"peer-to-peer\",\"Turo\",\"rental car\",\"concessions\",\"Lambert Airport\",\"transportation\"]

Provenance

[{\"block_id\":\"4756.37\",\"local_start\":0,\"local_end\":34,\"evidence_excerpt\":\"I'm Don Lefebvre with American Car Rental Association. Thank you. We're here in support of board bill 25, the committee substitute.\",\"reason_code\":\"topicintro\"},{\"block_id\":\"8690.215\",\"local_start\":0,\"local_end\":52,\"evidence_excerpt\":\"Board bill 25 committee substitute as amended passes out of committee with a due pass recommendation.\",\"reason_code\":\"topicfinish\"}]","The Transportation & Commerce committee advanced a committee substitute for Board Bill 25, which would create a permit framework for peer-to-peer car rental operations at Lambert Airport. The measure was amended to clarify that existing airport contracts are not impaired and to remove a proposed vehicle placard requirement; it moves to the full","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

St. Louis committee adopts update to rental code, exempts children under 6 from occupancy counts

St. Louis creates voluntary registered-neighborhood organization registry and requires targeted notices to registered groups

St. Louis committee advances airport permit rules for peer-to-peer car rentals after changes to protect existing contracts