Post-Dispatch Editorial Board Is Opposed To U City TIF

UNIVERSITY CITY, MO — "Should University City give away $70.5 million in tax increment financing, uproot residents and destroy a close-knit, middle-class African-American neighborhood to bring in a new big-box store?" the Post-Dispatch editorial board asked Wednesday. "Does a developer really need such a sweetener to make a project work at the busy intersection of Olive Boulevard and Interstate 170?"

The editorial board clearly thinks the answer to both of those questions is no, arguing that similar projects have decimated minority communities across St. Louis County.

It's just the latest opinion on the controversial plan to redevelop a section of University City's third ward. Though the development will displace 67 homes, 58 apartments, 7 property owners who rent to dozens of businesses, two churches and a school, the retail anchor could bring more than $100 million of taxable sales to the area.

Taxpayers, in turn, would foot more than $70 million for the new big box store (read: Costco) and about $15 million for improvements to the third ward, including home renovation grants and loans.

But some are skeptical on the developer's ability to deliver. In an article in the St. Louis Business Journal, Sunset Hills resident Katherine Russ argues that University City's preferred developer, Novus, has a poor history in the area. Russ writes that the Olive/I-170 development closely mirrors a failed development by Novus in Sunset Hills.

"It's hard to believe that nearly 13 years ago, my neighborhood (Sunset Manor) in Sunset Hills was nearly bulldozed much in the fashion that University City plans to do in its city," she says.

In that case, Russ said, Sunset Hills also hired PGAV Planners to consult on the viability of the project, saying that the consultant group's specialty is "dressing up zoning infractions as blight that gives developers the right, according to the law, to ask for taxpayer subsidies..."

Russ writes that Sunset Hills approved Novus' development plan against the advice of their TIF commission, and homeowners began to gut their homes in preparation of the deal. But just days before Novus was to close, its funding fell through, and Novus walked away from the project, leaving homeowners with only broken promises and neighborhoods resembling "demilitarized zones."

More than 50 U City residents (the ones who could get into the overcrowded Mandarin House) shared their own opinions May 23 at the first of two public hearings on the plan.

Matt Stiffelman, who previously owned Vernon's BBQ until it closed earlier this year, summed up many of the comments voiced at the public hearing.

"There are good developments, and they win. And there are bad developments, and they screw everything up," he said. "Everyone who has a complaint, you all need to listen. Because every complaint is what's wrong with your plan.

"I can tell you for sure that the city is doing a bad job explaining this. I have a thorough knowledge of TIF and I don't understand what they're saying. They understand what they're saying, but they're not explaining it to us well. I'd like to help you guys communicate and translate, but you have to call on the citizens to help you if you want the citizens to be involved."

Stiffelman said the third ward has been neglected for decades and the city needs to re-earn its trust. "We don't trust the city because the city has left us hanging while we watch the first and second ward get the treatment they deserve. So, I'm glad the money is going to the third ward. We need to make sure everything they say is contractually bound and there's no way they can get out of it.

"I'm not for or against this project. I'm for the right project in U City and nothing less."

Some citizens are calling for a Community Benefits Agreement to protect communities in the path of the planned development. Community development director Rosalind Williams said after the TIF is approved, the city will work to develop a community benefits plan. But, that's not the same as a legally-binding Community Benefits Agreement, which activists say they want upfront, not after the TIF is approved.

(If you would like to submit an op-ed on the new development, either for or against, Patch would be happy to run it. Submit pitches to ryne.danielson@patch.com)

A map of the planned development:

Another public hearing is scheduled for June 6 at 7 p.m. It will again be held at the Mandarin House unless a better venue can be found.
To catch up before the next public hearing, 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
• Local Government Watchdog Accuses TIF Chairman Of Conflicts Of Interest
• TIF Public Hearing Gets Heated In University City

Read other coverage here:

• Editorial: University City shouldn't give away $70.5 million for a big box store
• Commentary: University City development proposal mirrors failed Sunset Hills plan
• 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
• County Let University City Choose Some Appointees For Commission Weighing $70 Million Big-Box TIF
• U. City Has A Chance To Be An Innovator On TIF Development

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

Photo by J. Ryne Danielson/Patch