ST. LOUIS • A property tax break for a 26-unit apartment building is not a request that would typically spark a lengthy debate at the ºüÀêÊÓƵ Board of Aldermen.
ºüÀêÊÓƵ officials , and 25 city aldermen on Friday voted in favor of this one: 90 percent abatement for 10 years, for a $6.4 million plan to replace a car wash on Morganford Road with a three-story apartment building that includes ground-floor commercial space. Several aldermen spoke Friday about the merits of the project for the Tower Grove South neighborhood.
But this particular proposal has prompted political sparring and reinvigorated the debate over community benefit agreements, or legal contracts under which developers agree to pay for some sort of public good in exchange for receiving public subsidies.
People are also reading…
At issue is a privately negotiated community benefit agreement, under which the developer has committed to donate $60,000 for affordable housing programs.Â
Sponsoring Alderman Megan Green, 15th Ward, is among a number of progressive lawmakers who have hailed the potential of these kinds of contracts. But her past criticism of tax incentives hasn't sat well with some of her colleagues.
Last month, some members of the Housing Urban Development and Zoning Committee for the Morganford project. The committee later passed her plan, but like the one laid out in Green's bill, citing their potential for abuse, until a broader city policy on the matter could be developed.Â
Because of new wording preventing the project from moving forward without the repeal of the community benefits agreement, approval by the board on Friday doesn't guarantee the apartments will be built. That will hinge on a , where members will vote on whether to nullify the agreement.
"While I'm happy (the bill) passed today, because, unlike some projects that pass out of the Board, it has a strong financial analysis, I am also saddened that the voice of our community in negotiating a community benefit agreement was silenced," Green said in a statement.
HUDZ committee chair Joe Roddy, 17th Ward, railed against Green on Friday, arguing she had been dishonest in vowing the agreement would be voided during a committee hearing. She clarified Friday that two of the three parties involved had agreed to nullify it, and they were waiting on the vote by the neighborhood association.
Tension has simmered between Green and some of her colleagues for more than a year, after she made allegations of bribery in 2016 when an aldermanic committee advanced a plan to finance construction costs for a new football stadium. Federal and local officials found the accusations lacked merit.Â
Roddy cited the bribery allegations in his criticism of Green, who refused to yield to his questions — a rarity at the Board of Aldermen. But he ultimately voted for the plan.
"Despite the alderwoman's objection to projects in other people's wards, I think this would be good for the city," he said.
Green told the Post-Dispatch she would continue to vote against projects that don't demonstrate a strong need for incentive, and advocate for community benefit agreements negotiated by the community and not elected officials.
Meanwhile, some aldermen lamented time wasted on politically motivated accusations flying back and forth.
"Work needs to be done on behalf of the citizens, not on behalf of personal agendas, to move forward. That's not what we're here for," said Alderman Marlene Davis, 19th Ward.