ÃÛÑ¿´«Ã½

ST. LOUIS — Weeks of frenetic work to appropriate hundreds of millions of dollars in Rams relocation settlement money hit a wall again Tuesday at the Board of Aldermen.

After a couple of hours of debate, aldermen had not advanced any of the plans on the table, and some suggested they would delay action until the board convenes for a new session after elections in April.

“Scintillating, isn’t it?� quipped Alderman Joe Vollmer, of the Hill.

The inaction signaled an anticlimactic end to the first two years of debate over what to do with the money. Over the months, aldermen held hours of hearings, polled residents on ideas, and spent weeks negotiating the finer points of legislation.

Powerful interest groups lobbied hard for plans spending up to all of the roughly $290 million available.

The largest has been the region’s main business lobby. Concerned with the post-pandemic state of downtown, Greater ÃÛÑ¿´«Ã½, Inc. called for a big chunk of money for infrastructure and development in the city center, and another chunk for long-struggling neighborhoods north and south.

Meanwhile, Mayor Tishaura O. Jones, Aldermanic President Megan Green and Alderwoman Alisha Sonnier proposed their own bill calling for infrastructure and development cash for the whole city — plus new child care and college funds for the children of city workers.

Then, two weeks ago, Jones, Sonnier and Alderwoman Pam Boyd announced they had struck a deal to blend the two plans: Downtown would get $74 million. The North Side would get at least $40 million. Child care and college funds would be scaled back some.

The compromise was tenuous. Aldermen said and privately they weren’t sure it had more support than either of its predecessors.

Days later, Green, the aldermanic president, clawed back money from downtown in favor of child care subsidies, one of her top priorities.

And opponents — some supportive of more money for downtown, some skeptical the city could manage new programs, others underwhelmed by both plans — saw an opening.

At Friday's aldermanic meeting, they pitched a new plan: Scrap everything except $40 million for the city’s aging water system, a popular item whose leaders say they have more than $100 million in critical needs.

But when they tried to bring it up for a vote, a surprised Green cut off debate and rescheduled the rest of the meeting for Tuesday.

Tuesday the board came back, only to reach a similar result.

Alderwoman Anne Schweitzer, who has called for more investment in the water system since she sponsored what officials called a must-pass rate increase in 2023, said money for water was the only thing that everyone she talked to said they cared about.

“It just kept coming back,� said Schweitzer, of the south city neighborhood Boulevard Heights.

She said she was also concerned about spending the rest of the money after the federal government threatened last week to cut off grants that city budgets rely upon.

“We don’t know what’s coming,� she said.

Alderman Michael Browning, of Forest Park Southeast, seconded those concerns. He supported Schweitzer's water-only move, and said getting something done would send the right message to the public.

“It shows that we are adults in the room,� he said, “and that we can get things done for our city.�

But North Side aldermen balked at delaying action on money for their neighborhoods.

Longtime Alderwoman Sharon Tyus, of the Kingsway East neighborhood, said the deal reminded her of past promises to invest in the north side that didn’t come to pass.

Alderman Rasheen Aldridge, who represents part of downtown and neighborhoods north of there, said if the board was going to give $40 million to the water system, it should add $100 million for the North Side at the same time.

“This is not a compromise,� he said. “It’s a slap in the face.�

Then Alderman Shane Cohn, of Dutchtown, said if aldermen were going to appropriate money for the North Side on Tuesday, they needed to find money for his part of town, too.

Alderman Bret Narayan, who opposed all of the plans, cheered the shift toward punting. The money will just continue to gain interest, he said.

“All we have to do today to be successful,� he said, “is nothing.�

The dam broke when the sponsors of both Rams bills, Sonnier and Boyd, of Walnut Park West, agreed to put their bills aside for the time being.

And after the meeting, Sonnier said it was likely they would stay there for at least a couple of months.

She said that would be a good thing. Aldermen, she said, will get time to cool off and build consensus around a new plan.

Browning, meanwhile, groused that the board wasn't doing its job. 

“We could have gotten something done today,� he said. “We chose not to. And I think that reflects poorly on all of us.�