Tag: St. Louis Police

STL City Budget Hearing Fail, Public Denied Opportunity to Speak

Old black and white photo of St. Louis City Hall

The Budget Committee of the Board of Alders (BOA) had a public hearing today, June 5th, 2024, on the 2025 Budget for the City of St. Louis. The hearing, per its City Calendar Notice, was to include public testimony both in person at City Hall and by Zoom. At least two Alders participated by Zoom.

6th Ward resident and local government transparency advocate Gerry Connolly planned to testify by Zoom. He confirmed his participation with BOA staff. He wrote his notes. He logged on to the hearing.

The hearing began with Mayor Tishaura Jones presenting on her office’s budget. Then it was time for public testimony. But Budget Chair Cara Spencer announced a recess. People who had taken time off from work to make their voice heard were told they would have to wait 39 minutes.

When the Budget Committee reconvened, Alders heard in person public testimony. Then it was time for testimony by Zoom. It was Gerry’s turn. I’m not sure how many others had planned to testify via Zoom.

But Gerry was not allowed to speak. No Zoom testimony was taken. No explanation was given. It was yet another Sunshine Fail, Transparency Fail at City Hall.

Gerry was told he could submit comments by email. He was angry, and rightfully so, but he hurridly transformed his notes for three minutes of testimony into written, expanded comments.

Since Gerry’s testimony is not available as a part of the online public record, and while the Budget Committee Chair may not be interested in what he has to say, others may be interested. I asked him if I could publish his testimony on my blog and he agreed. I have made a few edits for formatting purposes and add links.

Below is Gerry’s testimony on 2025 Budget for City of St. Louis which he submitted by email.

———-

Gerry Connolly.
6th Ward resident
38xx Botanical Ave
St. Louis, MO 63110

June 5, 2024

Honorable members of the Budget and Public Employees Committee,

I had planned to provide this testimony via Zoom at today’s Budget Committee meeting. However, due to the fact the committee failed to take any public testimony today via Zoom, I am submitting my comments in writing. 

Public Testimony in opposition to Board Bill 1

I am testifying against Board Bill 1. The City should allocate financial resources from within the budget as recommended by the Board of E and A necessary to implement the policy recommendations described in items 1 through 7 below.

  • 1) Fix the City’s “Sunshine portal, The Public Records Center, which hasn’t been consistently functional for 6 months. Make the responsive records of all city government bodies available in the Public Records Archive. The St. Louis Development Corporation (SLDC) and St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department (SLMPD) currently do not make records available to the general public in the Public Records Archive. Only requesters may view responsive records via their portal user accounts.There may be additional City entities that do not make records available to the general public.
  • 2) Open government and transparency must be consistent across city government. The Board of Aldermen (BOA) must update the decade old transparency ordinance:
    1. Post meeting recordings to Youtube for government entities currently missing. These include the Airport Commission, Affordable Housing Commission, Mental Health Board and Senior Fund.
    2. Standardization of meeting notices, both physical and online. The official agenda (not just the text) must include the resolutions to be voted upon. The meeting packet must include the draft minutes of prior meetings, if applicable. All other documents utilized during a meeting should be posted online. The BOA’s posting of many budget presentations on the BB 1 webpage should serve as a model for all departments.
    3. The following city bodies do not operate consistently in a transparent manner: Board of Estimate and Apportionment (E and A); Charter Commission, Reparations Commission and Detention Facilities Oversight Board. The persistent violation of Missouri Sunshine Law by the Board of E and A is cause for alarm. The Board of Aldermen’s silence on the Sunshine violations by the Board of E and A has been noted.
  • 3) Continue to reform of how development incentives are awarded. Ordinance 71620 was a step forward in the system for awarding tax breaks to development projects. However Ordinance 71620 (BB 64 in the 2022-23 BOA session) had major flaws that subsequent legislation has only addressed in part (See BB 98 and BB 236 in the 2023-24 BOA session). More changes to the ordinance are needed.  All provisions in Ordinance 71620 must be enforced by the BOA. SLDC did not follow the mandated procedures for the 15 projects, with development costs over $10 Million, that were approved in the 2023-24 BOA session. The non-compliance included a failure to consult St. Louis Public Schools (SLPS) and affected tax districts. Every effort must be made to shield SLPS from the impact of tax breaks.
  • 4) All development incentives must be authorized by an ordinance approved by the BOA. Incentives that presently do not require approval by ordinance include, but are not limited to:

    1. Bond issuances authorized by the Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority (LCRA), Planned Industrial Expansion Authority (PIEA), Industrial Development Authority (IDA) and Port Authority.

    2. Certain tax abatements authorized by the Port Authority Commission (PA) and Enhanced Enterprise Zone Board (EEZB).

    3. New Markets Tax Credit (NTMC) program, currently authorized by the SLDC board of directors.
  • 5) The Land Reutilization Authority’s lot sales policy must be modified. In 2023, the Land Reutilization Authority adopted new sales policies for LRA-owned property, per the recommendation of SLDC staff. In the category of sale of lots for the purpose of building one home, a lot whose area is less than 4,000 sq. ft. is ineligible for sale under the new policy. LRA eliminated the opportunity to provide housing, strengthen the fabric of a neighborhood and grow the city’s tax base.

    The LRA sales policy must be modified in order to restore the ability of homebuilders to purchase lots under 4,000 sq. ft. and construct much-needed housing.

    The Jones administration, SLDC and the Community Development Agency (CDA) frequently cite the Economic Justice Action Plan (EJAP) as a guide for City policy and program spending. SLDC included citations from the Economic Justice Action Plan (EJAP) in the LRA board resolution adopting the new sales policies.

    It is noteworthy that the EJAP planning process, conducted by consultants to SLDC, did not include the participation of the general public or Board of Aldermen. Only narrowly focussed public outreach was performed.

    I have not heard an explanation of the rationale behind the new sales policy in any setting- SLDC website, development board meetings or at BOA committee meetings. The BOA should investigate this matter.
  • 6) All fee revenues from SLDC’s Sales Tax Exemption Fund should be transferred to the City’s General Fund and included in the annual appropriation to the Affordable Housing Commission
  • 7) Eight reforms for the BOA to enact for Local Taxing Districts (LTDs). It is possible that changes to Missouri law will be necessary in order to accomplish some of the recommendations.

    1. The budgets of the 100 plus LTDs in the City likely exceed $50 Million with taxes and/or special assessments imposed on the public. The vast majority of LTDs operate routinely in violation of Missouri Sunshine law. Enact all recommendations of the 2019 Missouri Auditor’s report on LTDs. Read the audit report here (See pages 9 – 18 for recommendations)

    2. Place all policing duties funded by LTDs under the command of SLMPD.

    3. Extend community oversight of surveillance technology to all LTDs.

    4. A representative of the following must be appointed to the board of all single site LTDs: Mayor, Board of Aldermen and Comptroller.

    5. Prohibit developers from controlling single site districts.

    6. Document all City of St. Louis resources allocated to the LTDs. Such resources include:

    (i) City funds expended on projects of the LTDs.
    (ii) City staff attending LTD meetings.
    (iii) Work performed by City staff to support the activities of LTDs. (Examples of City staff: SLMPD personnel when working for the City; Neighborhood Improvement Specialists).

    7. Establish robust Conflicts of Interest regulations for people serving on the boards and committees of LTDs.

    8. Establish a limit on the number of LTD boards on which one person can serve. (Some individuals serve at least five LTD boards).

    I would be happy to discuss the above recommendations by phone, in-person or at a committee meeting. My contact information is below.

    Thank you for your consideration.

    Gerry Connolly

    cc Honorable members of the Board of Aldermen
         President Megan Green
         Clerk Terry Kennedy
         Mayor Tishaura O. Jones
         Comptroller Darlene Green
         Budget Director Paul Payne

Monday Meeting of Soulard Tax Board for Private Police

UPDATE: Sometime after 8 am Monday, September 12th, Soulard Special Business District posted a notice to its website for the 6:30 pm Monday, September 12th Soulard SBD Meeting, less than seven hours notice for a public meeting on public tax money. That Notice says the meeting has been moved to Molly’s, a venue owned by Soulard SBD Chair Luke Reynolds (also Vice Chair of Soulard Community Improvement District, sales tax district). As of 10:30 am Monday, September 12th, the meeting Notice on City’s Public Meetings Calendar had not been changed to reflect a different meeting place. That notice says the meeting is at Soulard Station. Notices and edits to City Public Meetings Calendar get time-date identification. Notices on most special tax district websites only get a date first posted.

Original blog post below.

Or not.

Soulard Special Business District is one of St. Louis City’s special tax districts that fund private policing and part of last week’s two part investigative report by Jeremy Kohler for ProPublica.

We know that as a part of their response to the ProPublica investigation, Soulard SBD’s Board voted in November 2021 to hire Husch Blackwell as legal counsel for $5,000 “to ensure the Board complies with an ongoing Sunshine request and fully complies with the Sunshine Act.”

We know that before Jack Coatar was elected to the St. Louis City Board of Alderpeople, he served on the Soulard SBD. In May 2022, as Alder, he gave the welcome and introductions at Soulard SBD Neighborhood Safety Forum. Secretary of the Soulard SBD Board is Molly Doughtery, also Treasurer of Coatar’s campaign finance committee. Coatar is on Tuesday’s special election ballot to fill the vacancy caused by resignation of Board of Alderpeople President Lewis Reed, a friend of Coatar’s.

We know there’s a meeting notice for Soulard SBD on the City of St. Louis Public Meetings Calendar. We also know that a year’s worth of meeting notices and generic skeleton agenda’s were posted by the SBD Board to the City Calendar on Dec 7, 2021.

We also know that as of 5 pm Sunday, there was no notice for a September Soulard SBD meeting on the SBD’s website.

It doesn’t matter whether they’re having a public meeting without a notice on their website or failed to cancel the meeting notice on City website. It doesn’t matter whether they don’t want questions relating to the ProPublica investigative reports or Coatar’s involvement in tax districts before Tuesday’s election. It’s all Transparency Fail.

The Soulard SBD Budget includes $18,000 for Communications Management, $50,000 for Advertising/Promotion, $25,000 for Communications, $50,000 for Marketing/Branding. You would think that one of those line items includes competent online posting of public meetings notices at both their website and the City Public Meetings Calendar.