Records request · by attachment name
Getting the File That Was Before P&Z on August 18, 2025
50 Roelker Road · drafted August 30, 2026
The City has never identified the plan set P&Z considered, and has confirmed no application exists for it. But the correspondence produced to me contains three emails from 2025 that name their attachments in the header. Named attachments can be requested by name, and a named request cannot be answered with a general denial.
The three emails, and why they matter
June 19, 2025, 5:06 p.m. — applicant to three engineers at BFA
“It was requested that I send you a copy of our SWPPP for the Magruder Paving portable asphalt plant location in Wright City, MO.” Sent to BFA, not to the City. Two months before the vote.
June 28, 2025, 3:05 p.m. — engineer to the Building Inspector, and forwarded July 9
“See attached our current design set for construction.” Then, on July 9, 2025 at 3:24 p.m., the Building Inspector forwarded it to the Clerk with the line “This is the Magruder Civil plans.”
This is the important one. Six weeks before the vote, the official responsible for the review sent the plans to the official who assembles the packet, identifying them as the Magruder civil plans. That forward is the most likely path by which a plan set reached P&Z.
The same email also asserts “We have preliminary approval from the fire department” — a document never produced — and reports a water district submittal, an easement to loop the water main north, and a railroad water line crossing application.
August 27, 2025, 12:55 p.m. — applicant to the Clerk, nine days after the vote
Forwards the June 19 BFA email and lists five attachments, 4 MB, by filename. States stormwater permit G491622 was obtained in April 2025, that “BFA has had plenty of time for review and comment since June 19, 2025,” and asks: “Maybe, it is possible for me to present this to the Alderman rather than postponing the meeting.”
The request — six items
Under Chapter 610, RSMo, I request the following records. Each is identified by the filename or description appearing in the City’s own produced correspondence.
1.
The attachment to the June 28, 2025, 3:05 p.m. email from Matthew Marschke to the Building Inspector, subject “Magruder Asphalt Plant Site Work,” described as “our current design set for construction” — the complete set, every sheet, with sheet numbers, dates, and revision numbers as received.
2.
The attachment to the July 9, 2025, 3:24 p.m. forward from the Building Inspector to the City Clerk, subject “Fw: Magruder Asphalt Plant Site Work,” described as “the Magruder Civil plans” — as forwarded, so the two can be compared.
3.
The five attachments to the August 27, 2025, 12:55 p.m. email from Duane Mueller to the City Clerk, named in that email’s header as:
Magruder Paving Plant 418 Wright City SWPPP June 2025.docx
mog491622-magruder-paving-llc-20250424-op-warren-cw.pdf
Wright City SWPPP Site Info Map June 2025.docx
Appendix 4 - MoDOT BMP Details.pdf
Appendix 5 - Standard BMP Specifications.pdf
4.
The August 18, 2025 P&Z agenda packet as distributed to commission members, including every plan sheet and attachment, and the date it was distributed. If the packet was distributed by email, the transmitting email with its attachment list.
5.
Every document handed to or displayed for commission members during the August 18, 2025 meeting that is not in the distributed packet.
6.
The preliminary fire department approval referenced in the June 28, 2025 email, and any subsequent fire department review of this site, including of fuel storage.
Two closing asks. Please provide any “no responsive record exists” answer item by item rather than as one blanket sentence. And where a plan set is produced, please produce it as received, with sheet numbers, dates, and revision numbers intact, so it can be compared against the set approved June 11, 2026.
Why this request works
Every item is named in a record the City has already produced. The City cannot say it does not know which documents are meant, and cannot answer that no plan set exists — its own Building Inspector called them “the Magruder Civil plans” in writing. Either the attachments are produced, and the file before P&Z is finally established, or the City states in writing that emails its own officials sent and forwarded have no retained attachments.