Local Watchdog Accuses TIF Chairman Of Conflicts Of Interest

UNIVERSITY CITY, MO — Local watchdog Tom Sullivan is calling on the chairman of University City's TIF commission, lawyer Gerald Greiman, to withdraw from deliberations involving the proposed development at Olive Boulevard and Interstate 170, citing what he believes are several conflicts of interest — chiefly that Greiman has represented Second Ward Councilmember Paulette Carr and Mayor Terry Crow in his private practice.

According to a biography on his website, Greiman "concentrates his practice in areas of business disputes, trust and estate disputes, and other complex civil litigation."

According to Sullivan, Greiman is also a longtime friend of the mayor and has contributed to his campaigns. Crow and Carr, as well as most other councilmembers, have come out in favor of the proposed $200 million development, about $70 million of which will be paid for with public money.

Greiman has also represented the Torah Prep School, which currently sits in the middle of the planned development. The school has long sought to buy the Ronald E. McNair administration building from the University City School District. Now the planned development seems contingent on that sale, with Novus Development saying that the site is necessary to relocate the school.

Novus has been in talks to buy the building on behalf of Torah Prep for about a year with little public involvement.

Read Greiman's response to Sullivan's accusations below:

Mr. Sullivan:

Regarding your e-mail to me and the press release you issued today suggesting that I recuse my myself from matters before the University City TIF Commission relating to the proposed Olive/170 development, no proper basis exists for such recusal. Neither my past representation of Mayor Crow and Councilwoman Carr, my campaign contributions to University City candidates for office, nor my friendship with Mayor Crow warrants recusal.

Also, your presumption that I still represent Torah Prep School is wrong. I represented Torah Prep in 2012 but do not currently represent the school, and have not represented it for many years. Nothing about my past representation of Torah Prep requires recusal.

Finally, with respect to your assertion that at last week’s TIF Commission meeting, I made it clear I am not going to handle all public comments in a fair manner, that assertion lacks any foundation whatsoever. I will not dignify it with further comment other than to say that the record of the TIF Commission meetings held to-date completely refutes your assertion.

Gerald Greiman

But Sullivan isn't convinced. "Gerald Greiman has a considerable conflict of interest and needs to withdraw from any business of the TIF Commission relating to the Olive/170 project," he said. "There has been quite a lot of covering up and deception involved with the development."

Sullivan said he has requested copies of Carr's emails concerning the development, but that she has refused to provide them. She has also refused to provide a timeline for her involvement in the project, according to Sullivan.

Carr says her response wasn't a refusal, but rather a prompting to submit a Sunshine Law request to the city clerk.

Carr and Third Ward Councilmember Bwayne Smotherson were responsible for early work that brought the developer to University City, with acting community development director Rosalind Williams serving as an unofficial adviser, Carr told Patch previously. Novus was the only developer to respond to the city's request for proposals issued earlier this year.

Williams, herself, has a long history with the developer and has submitted a private proposal to "to guide the City through the TIF approval process," according to a document Patch obtained from the city manager. The proposal was submitted before Williams was appointed as acting community development director.

That document makes it clear that Williams' private community development group, WITH, is in favor of the project and stands to make several thousand dollars in fees if the project is approved by the city.

Asked if the proposal represents a conflict of interest, City Manager Gregory Rose said last month that it does not, because it has not been accepted by the city. Asked if the city had any plans to accept the proposal in the future, Rose said: "Not today."

At a TIF commission meeting April 15, Greiman refused to answer citizen questions about eminent domain and the TIF approval process, including when a vote would take place.

(The city has said it will not use eminent domain — the government's power to take private property — in the case of owner-occupied residences, but has expressed a willingness to do so against businesses, including rental properties, which the city manager said he considers businesses.)

"The commission will hear and consider the information presented to it," Greiman told U-City residents David Harris and Jan Adams, refusing to address several of their inquiries. "That's really all I can say in response to your questions."

Greiman was also non-committal when asked whether all documents available to the TIF commission would be made available to the public prior to a vote, and repeated his initial answer several times. At least one analysis by St. Louis Development Corporation financial analyst Jonathan Ferry, about whether the amount of the TIF is appropriate for the project, has not yet been made public.

"Ms. Adams, I'll make the same answer that I gave to you previously," Greimans said last Monday. "We're really here to entertain questions to the developer and to the city. I think this is an important topic, and we've therefore indulged public comments and rhetorical questions here tonight, and we'll give you a reasonable amount of time to do that, but we're really not in a position to answer questions like this."

With a public hearing scheduled for this Wednesday, many residents say they still feel left in the dark regarding the project's specifics, such as how the city will relocate businesses and homeowners who are displaced by the development. At least one group is demanding a Community Benefits Agreement to protect residents in the development's path.

(This story has been updated with comments from Greiman and Councilmember Carr. Councilmember Smotherson, Mayor Crow, city manger Rose, and acting community development director Williams have not responded to requests for comment.)

Read Patch's previous reporting on the proposed Olive development below:

• Watch The April 15 University City TIF Commission Meeting
• Citizens Call For Community Benefits Agreement Before TIF Vote
• Mostly White TIF Commission Weighs Fate Of Minority Community
• Councilmember Smotherson Responds To Patch TIF Commission Article
• Olive Development Meeting Scheduled For 6:30 Tonight: Watch Live
• Olive Retail Anchor To Remain Secret Until TIF Is Approved
• Sale Of McNair Building, Eminent Domain Discussed Monday Night

Read other coverage here:

• Developer petitioned for Community Benefits Agreement, U. City has no minority inclusion policy for public-subsidized projects
• Curious Louis: The future of St. Louis' 'unofficial' Chinatown
• University City Big Box Plan Exemplifies All That Is Wrong
• Proposed development could change the texture of University City's gritty back door

Public documents can be found on the city's TIF informational web page.

A public hearing will be held May 23 at 7 p.m. at the Mandarin House on Olive Boulevard. Patch will be there to cover it. Follow us on Facebook and sign up for breaking news alerts to be sure you don't miss our coverage of this and other important community issues.

Photo by J. Ryne Danielson/Patch