Home » Events/Meetings »Politics/Policy » Currently Reading:

Is the City of Sunset Hills Violating Missouri Sunshine Laws?

August 20, 2005 Events/Meetings, Politics/Policy 4 Comments

I received the following notice via email today:

The Sunset Hills Board of Aldermen called a special meeting today to consider giving Novus Corporation an extra 20 million in TIF funds in addition to the 42 million it has already voted. This meeting is in direct violation of the Missouri Sunshine Law and the Attorney General’s office should be notified. It was posted yesterday afternoon which is not in in accord with the Law. All those throughout the metro area are encouraged to come at 4:00PM to the Sunset Hills Municipal Building at 3939 S. Lindbergh. The announcement can be found on Page 14 of today’s Post-Dispatch.

The applicable section of the Sunshine Law is ” 610.020 #2″ related to notice of meetings. “Notice …shall be given at least 24 hours ,exclusive of weekends and holidays when the facility is closed, prior to the commencement of any meeting of a governmental body unless for good cause such notice is impossible or impractical….”

What municipalities won’t do for big developers…

– Steve

 

Currently there are "4 comments" on this Article:

  1. Becker says:

    This person who sent you that email is very misinformed on the issue and what the meeting was about.

     
  2. Brian says:

    Well, it looks like the spinsters are at work, commenting on the Sunset Hills development in this week’s Biz Journal:

    http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stories/2005/08/22/editorial2.html

    My biggest beef is the spin that NOVUS is “creating a new and successful retail development serving a well-established area.”

    Matt Brauer’s recent applied thesis project (http://www.krombachpartners.com/documents/SellingSt.Louis-Capstone_000.pdf) showed that only a handful of area ZIP codes in St. Louis County account for much of the retail serving greater St. Louis. Looking at Brauer’s map (Figure 7), it appears most areas have demand (household income density) outweighing supply (retail square footage), while the lucky few have excess supply. By the way, it would be extremely interesting to reproduce the data by municipality instead of ZIP codes.

    As for Sunset Hills (roughly 63127), there already is excess supply, but it looks like NOVUS will make Sunset Hills look even more like Crestwood (roughly 63126), which already appears to have the most retail for the least income density in the County (maybe the region, or a close second to Fairview Heights).

    As a result of this TIF-driven game across our fragmented jurisdictions, sales taxes that could have been captured by residents shopping within their own community often benefit another community with an excess supply of retail. And not surpringly, everyone is shopping in a handful of places (the many fake commons, bluffs or valleys).

    Density of household income is highest in the City and inner-ring suburbs. But aside from Mid-County, most retail is located far from these areas rich in purchasing power. But as long as folks in Southwest City, for example, are willing to drive out I-44, developments like the latest by NOVUS will still be market-driven.

     
  3. Rob says:

    Letter I sent to Bill McClellan (St. Louis Post-Dispatch) today:

    Dear Bill:

    I think you should do a story that focuses on the irony of a large corporate entity (Westfield Mall) coming to the aid of homeowners who normally get run over in eminent domain proceedings precisely because they cannot put together the kind of fight that is currently going on in Sunset Hills.

    The Post articles are making Westfield out to be the villain for all the homeowners who are ready to move but now can’t. The truth is that 1) Novus is taking on projects far larger than any they have attempted before, both in Sunset Hills and Rock Hill. They are going for the brass ring but now seem poised to fall face-first in the dirt. 2) They do not have an investor backing them, which I’m told is highly unusual for developments of this size. Instead they are relying entirely on TIF money and bank loans. 3) Their property acquisition methods are unusual to say the least. Rather than wait to purchase property when all the ducks are in a row, they have already spent money to buy some property in Sunset Hills with more scheduled to be purchased this week (now on hold). In addition, a large number of properties are just now entering into condemnation proceedings, which could take 6-8 months to resolve. Furthermore, the legality of those proceedings is the subject of active litigation. Why would anyone tie up investment dollars in a project that will be delayed and may in fact never be allowed to start?

    A similar situation exists in Rock Hill, albeit on a smaller scale. Novus closed on the majority of the homes last month but will be unable to acquire the remainder until sometime in 2006, when condemnation proceedings are completed. They had to scramble to find funds at the time of the closings, and one wonders how they are carrying the debt load on several million dollars worth of empty homes.

    Novus Development and the City of Sunset Hills need to share the burden of blame for the plight of those homeowners who are now all packed up with no place to go.

    Rob

     
  4. Jason says:

    Just read a post-dispatch editorial on this that novus lost funding for its sunset hills fiasco. This after people who agreed to sell their homes and have contracts on new ones, now wont be getting paid for the homes they were supposedly selling to Novus for the development.

    http://makeashorterlink.com/?A25B22DAB

    maybe you already knew this, but I didnt realize the bank pulled out after all of the opposition regarding eminent domain and some influence from westfield.

     

Comment on this Article:

Advertisement



[custom-facebook-feed]

Archives

Categories

Advertisement


Subscribe