Politics & Government

University City Rejects Sunshine Request For TIF Analysis

The city will also limit attendance at the next public hearing to 350 people. The ACLU says that may violate the open meetings law.

J. Ryne Danielson's profile picture
J. Ryne Danielson, Patch StaffVerified Patch Staff Badge
|

UNIVERSITY CITY, MO — University City has rejected a sunshine request from local activist Clair Antoine seeking an independent TIF analysis by St. Louis Development Corporation financial analyst Jonathan Ferry.

Ferry has done similar work for projects in St. Louis City, and his reports typically show a range of projected rates of return for projects with and without public assistance. He grades each project on tax revenue, economic value and the amount of public assistance needed, among other criteria, coming up with a final grade for the project that indicates whether the amount of TIF assistance requested is appropriate for the overall project.

"TIF money is a public subsidy of a private development," Antoine said at a public hearing May 23. "As soon as tax dollars are involved, the public is as much an investor as the developer."

Find out what's happening in University Cityfor free with the latest updates from Patch.

But the city seems to be planning on withholding Ferry's grade from the public until after the contract with the developer Novus has been signed.

"The document you requested is a closed record at this time pursuant to Section 610.021(12) RSMo because it relates to a negotiated contract that has not been executed," city clerk LaRette Reese wrote to Antoine on Friday.

Find out what's happening in University Cityfor free with the latest updates from Patch.

Antoine and others have called for a Community Benefits Agreement to protect communities in the path of the planned development, but the city has expressed little interest in negotiating such an agreement with the developer.

Community development director Rosalind Williams said the city will work to develop a community benefits plan after the TIF is approved. But, a community benefits plan is not the same as a legally-binding Community Benefits Agreement, which activists say they want upfront.

The city will hold another public hearing on the development Wednesday at 7 p.m. at the Mandarin House Banquet Hall located at 8004 Olive Boulevard. But, according to information from the city, only people who did not speak at the May 23 hearing will be allowed to address the commission, and the city will limit attendance to 350 people — about half of the number who attended the first hearing.

In addition to the estimated 700 people who packed the Mandarin House two weeks ago, more than a hundred people were turned away from the four-hour meeting by the fire marshal.

"On the matter of limiting the number of people to 350 into the venue on June 6, 2018, this is being done in an effort to make the public hearing a more pleasant experience for our residents," said city manager Gregory Rose in an email June 4. "Limiting the number of people in the facility should improve air circulation and prevent the need to block critical fire exit doors. In regards to improving the sound quality, I have authorized the rental of a sound system in order to make it easier for speakers to be heard. These few improvements will make this a better experience."

Rose said the city was not at liberty to change the venue of the hearing to a larger space, explaining, "The laws governing the procedures used for receiving public comments on our proposed TIF require that if a public hearing is continued, it must be time, date, and location certain."

Second-ward Councilmember Paulette Carr made the same argument in a newsletter published Monday.

"Although many have suggested that Mandarin House is too small to accommodate the expected crowds, there are legal reasons why it must be held here," Carr, who also serves on the TIF commission, wrote. "If those who do not live or own property or business [sic] in University City will allow those who do to enter and be seated first, I believe the location will be adaquate [sic]. There will also be an enhanced audio system."

Now, the American Civil Liberties Union is weighing in on the issue.

“University City officials must abide by the Sunshine Law by not moving forward with a public hearing unless it is held at a place that accommodates everyone who wishes to attend," said Tony Rothert, legal director of the ACLU of Missouri. “Limiting the number of people at a public meeting about an issue that most directly impacts communities of color not only violates the open meetings law, but defeats the law’s promise that all members of the public may participate in this debate.”

Carr also used her newsletter to challenge the "people and forces outside of University City" who she says are threatening to derail the project. One of those people is Katherine Russ, a Sunset Hills resident who says her community was nearly destroyed by a similar Novus development several years ago.

Russ wrote in an op-ed for the St. Louis Business Journal last week that Sunset Hills also hired PGAV Planners to consult on the viability of its TIF-funded 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..."

Sunset Hills approved Novus' development plan against the advice of their TIF commission, Russ said, 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."

Carr blamed many of those problems on Sunset Hills residents themselves, saying homeowners who opposed to the development "got exactly what they fought for."

Russ, whose married name is Tripp, owns a residential cleaning business and says she cleaned Carr's house until a few weeks ago, when Carr fired her for writing a letter challenging the Olive development project. Carr published text messages from Russ in her Monday newsletter, accusing her of using a false name — her maiden name.

Russ said Carr refused to discuss the development with her and fired her as an "emotional response" to her public criticism, adding that she believes Carr can't provide an unbiased vote on the TIF commission since she was responsible for early negotiations that brought the developer to University City in the first place.

Novus President Jonathan Browne also challenged Russ' claims in an email to TIF Commission chairman Gerry Greiman dated May 22, saying, among other things, "Many people take offence to the term 'blight', rather than understanding it is simply a legal definition."

Browne said the owner of Crestwood Plaza, the site of the planned Sunset Hills development, leveraged "grass-roots backlash of public furor caused the the Kelo Case over eminent domain..." to kill the project, and that while eminent domain was approved by the city of Sunset Hills, Novus did not actually use it.

He too blamed homeowners for their "unfortunate and unauthorized action[s]" that left many homes in a state of disrepair after Novus' contracts fell through.

Read Browne's full response here.

This story has been updated with a comment from the ACLU.

A map of the proposed development:

Another public hearing is scheduled for Wednesday, June 6 at 7 p.m. It will again be held at the Mandarin House (8004 Olive Boulevard).

To catch up before the next public hearing, read Patch's previous reporting on the proposed Olive development below:

Read other coverage here:

Public documents can be found here:

Photo by J. Ryne Danielson/Patch

Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.

More from University City