Price To Be In The Know at SLDC: $17/month!
For only $17/month you too can know what is happening with seven different public boards operated by the St. Louis Development Corporation (SLDC). Yes, the SLDC operates seven different boards but the only way to know what they are talking about it is look for the agendas posted at 1015 Locust or pay $17/month to have them sent to you via U.S. Mail. Yes, in 2007 a major entity of city government is incapable of posting agendas online or even having an email list where they are sent out electronically.
From the SLDC website:
St. Louis Development Corporation (SLDC) is an umbrella, not-for-profit corporation organized under Chapter 355 of the Missouri State Code with the mission of fostering economic development and growth in the City through increased job and business opportunities and expansion of the City’s tax base.
SLDC is directed by its own Board of Directors, and its employees serve as staff support for the City’s seven economic development authorities:
Industrial Development Authority (IDA)
Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority (LCRA)
Land Reutilization Authority (LRA)
Local Development Company (LDC)
Planned Industrial Expansion Authority (PIEA)
Port Authority
Tax Increment Financing Commission (TIF)
The Executive Director of SLDC is also Executive Director for each authority. The agency’s department directors make policy recommendations to the authorities, the Mayor, Board of Aldermen, and the business community.
I had sent an email request under Missouri’s Sunshine Law to SLDC Director Rodney Crim asking to receive the agendas at the same time as the board members. It was my assumption, at the time, that this information was sent out via email. Monday I received a phone call from SLDC Legal Director Leslye Mitchell Yancey responding to my request, informing me of the price to know about public information.
I do understand that preparing and mailing out information doesn’t come free, I’m not asking to get something for nothing. Still, I’d kinda like to know the various issues they are addressing without having to make numerous trips to 1015 Locust each and every month. I enquired about receiving just three (3) agendas a month and I was quoted a price of $7.25. Basically it is pro-rated. The more you know, the more it costs.
As an example, the Industrial Development Authority (IDA) is meeting this afternoon at 1:30pm at 1015 Locust. Do I want to attend? I’m not sure, I have no idea what they are reviewing. I’m sure those seeking approval certainly know what is on the agenda. Those who have managed to make it to 1015 Locust to see the official posting know. For the rest of us we are left in the dark.
I should point out that the SLDC is perfectly compliant with Missouri’s Sunshine Law regarding meeting notices, they are posting meetings as required. Of course, there is a big difference between minimal compliance and open & responsive government. SLDC has a long way to go toward the latter.
I had to make sure it was indeed 2007. One would think such a large agency would be able to post these agendas online. Of course, I couldn’t find their annual report online to actually demonstrate how large of an agency they really are. I went to their press release section and noticed the most recent was from April 2005 — the only press release that year. Clearly the management issues for SLDC extend far beyond the posting of meeting notices.
Well maybe if Jim does not win he can work for SLDC and get them online. After all he has gotten the BOA online as well as meetings on time. Maybe that really is an achievement in this City?
Just another example of two cliche’s – “we’ve met the letter of the law” and “it’s a whole lot easier to get things done outside the view of meddling outsiders”. Part one – if the posting requirements aren’t keeping up with the computer age, then the folks in Jeff City need to be convinced to change the law – expecting an agency to change the way they do business, especially for the benefit of a potential adversary, ain’t likely. Part two – much of what SLDC tries to do, in many cases, is best accomplished “behind the scenes”, especially with many of their preliminary negotiations. The development community has many more options than the city has “opportunities”. For (re)development to succeed, especially on “challenging” city sites, you can’t go in with a low-bidder mindset nor can you attach too many constraints, restrictions or add-on’s. Sure, having the neighbors (and other hangers-on/”interested parties”, who have no direct financial stake in the project) involved from the start MIGHT result in a more urban-friendly project, but it’s much more likely to scare potential developers away. This is a classic example of representative government at work, where, if you don’t trust the appointed board members, you need to get different, “better” representatives!
Douglas, actually that is a very good suggestion.
Steve, volunteers are needed to gather this information so someone can post it online in a timely manner.
Steve, if the agendas are typed out in Word or Pagemaker, that means they exist in digital form. My understanding of the Sunshine Law (based on the links you sent me – thanks) is that you can request them in the format of your preference. Since they already exist as digital files, SLDC would probably be required by this law to send them to you by e-mail.
If $17 covers the cost of printing and mailing them, forwarding the digital file to an e-mail address should be less costly – it certainly takes less time.
I wonder if the copies come hot off the city’s new-fangled mimeograph machine.
My guess is that they’ve progressed to the point of using Microsoft Word (and have sent the IBM Selectrics to the back room), so creating an e-mailable file is certainly a simple task. It all boils down to a willingness to share basic information that should be readily available to the public – they’ve complied with the letter (if not the spirit) of the law by posting it at 1015 Locust. Bottom line, if the board members direct staff to put the agendas online, they’ll be online. If the board members direct them not to, they won’t. You can a) try and persuade one or more board members of the wisdom of your position, b) convince the mayor (or whoever appoints them) to tell them they should post agendas online, or c) you can try and get the legislature to “pry the doors” open a bit more . . . . . . From experience – another state, similar situation, not so long ago (2004) – I served on an official board where one member was computer illiterate and/or phobic, so our “official” means of communication/internal notification was government-issued fax machines!
Perhaps this is one of the questions to ask aldermanic candidates on your aldermanic questionnaire. “Will you support requiring all city meetings of public boards to post their agendas online at least a week before the meeting?”
This closed government policy is precisely why St. Louis has been in decline for so many years. It is a stretch to call St. Louis a democracy, this government would do well under Putin in Russia.
“I wonder if the copies come hot off the city’s new-fangled mimeograph machine.”
Sorry, that would require first upgrading from the Flintsone’s bird pecking at the stone tablet method….
I don’t know the exact number of people that work for SLDC, but I do know we’re pretty big. We take up the top 2 floors of the building.
This is important and remains out of the main stream of news for obvious reasons. These types of organizational arrangements between government and quasi-governmental entities always leads to suspicion, and rightly so. Back-room deals allow for the requirements of the Sunshine Law to be circumvented and not providing needed information on-line is absurd. Elected leaders and others we trust with public resources have learned rather adroitly how to avoid accountability while simultaneously handing out public awards. Perhaps everything is above board but I wouldn’t bet on it. Stay on it and the citizen oversight idea is good.