Public’s comments on north side proposal now available

By Audrey Spalding
Show-Me Institute

On Sept. 23, when the Saint Louis Tax Increment Finance (TIF) Commission met to consider a proposed $8.1 billion development of the city’s north side and a portion of downtown, more than 500 people showed up. But only a little more than 200 people could attend the hearing, held in room 208 of City Hall. The rest loitered outside the packed room, and many left.

At that hearing, more than 70 handwritten comments were submitted to the commissioners, but those comments were neither read out loud during the public comment portion of the meeting, nor did the commissioners have enough time to read them before voting. Commissioners did listen to two hours of public comment, but did not reply directly to speakers’ concerns. The commission spent little time debating the project before voting unanimously to recommend the Board of Aldermen award $390.6 million in TIF monies to the development company, NorthSide Regeneration, LLC.

The written comments were not made available to the press at the Sept. 23 meeting. However, Policy Pulse obtained the electronic copies after requesting them under the state public records statute. You can view typed comments and letters from the city mayor, comptroller, and others here. You can read the handwritten comments here.

Of the handwritten comments, 49 were against the project, and 11 were in favor. The rest of the commenters wrote either that they were “neutral” or wrote to request that the meeting be held in a larger venue.

“Whomever was in charge of planning this meeting did a really horrible job of providing space for the number of affected & interested people,” wrote Ben Schartman, a resident of the city’s north side. “It is embarrassing & disrespectful that at a meeting to decide something of great import — millions of public dollars to be spent — that no effort was made to make this meeting open to the people & citizens who will be affected. I am opposed to granting McEagle TIF financing. I am opposed to the idea of spending public dollars on a decision that has such little public support.”

“To me, it was a waste of my time,” wrote Delores Cauley, whose home on Bacon Street is included on the property list of 4,609 properties submitted to the city on Sept. 8. “It took a half a hour just to get in. Now we are just in the hallway waiting to get in to the meeting. So what was the purpose of all these people coming down. And we have not heard anything. How in the hell can we make comments when we have not heard anything. To me this was just a ploy to waste our time because people were not going to show up. Now we are just out here hot and upset. You all knew exactly what you all were doing.”

Those who wrote against the project wrote about concerns of the use of eminent domain, a perceived lack of engagement with the current residents, a need for more information about the project, and the use of public dollars for private profit.

“A church is a place of worship. We as a church have been here for 50–60 yrs. We are a part of the community,” wrote Doreen Alexander, writing on behalf of Shining Light Pentecostal Church, which has six properties listed within the development application, including the church itself, its parking lots and two vacant properties. “We have dreams and plans to help in our community and feel it is not right to take our property for your profit. It is against God’s will I believe!”

Of the 11 who wrote in favor of the project, the focus was on the promised jobs that the large-scale development would bring.

“I represent the St. Louis Baptist Ministers Union; St. Louis Clergy Union and the West Side Missionary Baptist Church,” wrote the Rev. Ronald Bobo. “We support this development due to the job and housing needs in this community. It is sorely needed and wanted.”

Others in favor wrote simply “Jobs Jobs,” or “Need jobs and development.”

This entry was posted on Wednesday, September 30th, 2009 at 2:30 pm. Both comments and pings are currently closed.