ST. LOUIS — Two largely procedural ÃÛÑ¿´«Ã½ Board of Aldermen bills related to Green Street ÃÛÑ¿´«Ã½â€™ Armory development would have, in another era, entered their legislative existence unremarked.
But the bills introduced Friday drew attention not so much for what was in them but for who introduced them.
“I was surprised to see that board bill on the agenda,†said Alderman Tina Pihl, whose 17th Ward includes the 1930s Armory building Green Street has been working for years to redevelop. “This caught me by surprise.â€
The legislation, which extends the deadline in Green Street’s development agreement with the city and lets them tap some development tax breaks aldermen authorized years ago, was introduced by Alderman Marlene Davis, whose 19th Ward is just to the east of the Armory.
Davis’ introduction of the bills affecting a project in another ward represents a break with the city’s long tradition of “aldermanic courtesy,†where aldermen control legislation for projects in their wards.
People are also reading…
It’s also another example of a developer hoping to build within the desirable Central West End and Grove areas of the 17th Ward unable to reach a deal with Pihl. Cortex, the nonprofit tech district made up of some of the city’s largest institutions such as Washington University and BJC HealthCare, has also said it’s been unable to broker a deal with Pihl to extend a development incentives package the city granted to it a decade ago.
“Maybe we need to push back on aldermanic courtesy,†Davis said Friday. “We’ve held (the Armory) up for almost a year.â€
Whether the move amounts to a crack in the old city tradition of aldermanic courtesy or is just a one-time maneuver around an impasse with Pihl remains to be seen. Regardless, it hasn’t been tried in years.
“Historically, that would be viewed as a pretty aggressive move,†said former Alderman Joe Roddy, who chaired the development-centric Housing, Urban Development and Zoning committee and represented the 17th Ward for over 30 years before Pihl was elected in 2021. “It’s very unusual.â€
It’s not completely unprecedented. Former Board President Lewis Reed handled bills related to the new Major League Soccer stadium, rather than Alderman Christine Ingrassia whose ward it was in. And in the mid 1990s, Freeman Bosley Jr.’s administration went around Alderman Sharon Tyus when she wouldn’t agree to bills allowing Schnucks to build a store on Natural Bridge Avenue.
“I would think this would be an indication that the administration has recognized that the project needs incentives, and there’s probably a break with the alderperson at this point,†Roddy said.
The ÃÛÑ¿´«Ã½ Development Corp., which vets and negotiates development incentives, has broken with Pihl before. In June, it moved ahead with a project subsidy — also for Green Street — despite Pihl’s protests.
An SLDC spokeswoman pointed out the Armory bills don’t change the scope of the incentive package agreed to five years ago and that the legislation was “time-sensitive†because of a deadline that had passed in the 2017 development agreement.
“One alderman’s approval should not be the sole determinant for a development project to move forward,†SLDC spokesman Sara Freetly said in a statement responding to questions sent to her and SLDC Director Neal Richardson. “It should be considered by the full Board of Aldermen.â€
Aldermen in 2017 approved a tax increment financing package worth up to $10.4 million for the redevelopment of the historic Armory building, including $4.7 million for the first phase. Green Street has had trouble getting the project going and was forced to drop plans for office space during the pandemic. But now it plans to open a recreation venue there by the end of the year and needs legislation authorizing the TIF incentives for the first phase.
A spokeswoman for Green Street declined to comment.
Pihl was elected last year on a platform that included taking a tougher stance on developer incentives. The message was similar to that from Mayor Tishaura O. Jones, who was elected at the same time and whose administration initially worked with Pihl to renegotiate some development agreements.
Green Street, SLDC and Pihl were finalizing a package that included a developer contribution of $470,000 to city schools or affordable housing as part of an agreement to move legislation forward, Pihl said. But she conceded it had been a “couple months†since she last discussed the agreement with SLDC or the developer.
Pihl said she received no notification from Richardson, SLDC or the mayor’s office that Davis would be introducing the bills, which don’t include the contributions to public schools or affordable housing.
“That’s not economic justice,†Pihl said. “That’s not equity for the city. ... It just disenfranchises the voters.â€
SLDC’s statement said that “community benefits can take many shapes and forms.â€
“SLDC has and will continue to negotiate with developers, including Green Street, to require, structure and document community benefit agreements in the manner most appropriate for each project,†the agency said.
Davis noted that part of the Armory development area is in her ward, and she has co-sponsored past Armory legislation with Roddy. In any case, Davis said aldermen should be willing to listen to the “experts at SLDC,†who professionally vet development projects.
The federal indictment in June of three aldermen for using aldermanic courtesy and official letters of support to solicit bribes in exchange for development incentives has also prompted a rethinking of aldermanic involvement in development, Davis said. Legislation under review at the board now may make some of those changes, she suggested.
“Maybe sometimes (SLDC) won’t even ask an alderman for a letter of support,†Davis said. “And if you think about it, maybe that’s OK.â€
Editor's note:Â This article has been updated to clarify that Pihl said she did not receive notice from Davis that she would be introducing the bills.Â
