Council Procedural Vote On Walmart TIF Passes

Amid a heated back and forth between Ellisville Mayor Adam Paul, Sansone Group representatives and an attorney for a resident suing the city over a conditional use permit issued for a proposed Walmart project, city council members Wednesday night gave first round approval to an ordinance which would authorize the city to issue Tax Increment Financing or TIF notes for the big box retail project.

Before the 4-3 vote, City Council members heard from residents and property owners on both sides of the issue before turning to the issue of an "enabling ordinance" which gives the city of Ellisville the ability to issue the TIF notes. 

While critics of the project contend that the developer has not yet come forward with acquisition of the property required for it or a signed lease from Walmart, James Sansone told council members his company can't take the next steps with the project until it knows the money will be there for it.

"We can't incur those costs until we know that if we do you have to give us a note to be in compliance with the agreement. If we incur those costs $50 million dollars and we don't get a TIF note we can't do the deal, it's the whole reason we came here, but for TIF, we can't do the deal," Sansone said.

Mayor Adam Paul repeatedly cited the redevelopment agreement's provision that  TIF notes can't be issued until Sansone proves acquisition of the property and a signed lease from Walmart, and asked why the city needed to pass legislation for something already articulated in the redevelopment agreement.

When Paul asked for another month to consider the situation, Sansone responded quickly. "No way, absolutely, unequivocally. I want to make that clear, that's unacceptable, completely unacceptable beyond reasonable."

The Sansone team said there were no date specific requirements of the city in passing the "enabling ordinance" other than that it needed to happen before the project's next steps could be taken. 

The Sansone Group has claimed since November that the property acquisition and lease benchmarks which were set to happen by June 1 were not in effect because of a lawsuit filed to challenge the conditional use permit for the project.

The plaintiff's attorney in that case, Jane Dueker, was back in front of council Tuesday to state her belief that the challenge was to the CUP and not the redevelopment agreement, meaning Sansone could claim forces beyond its control were enough to delay those benchmarks.

But Sansone attorney Rob Golterman defended the claim Wednesday saying  "without the CUP, without the Walmart, there is no redevelopment project."

After the vote, council members held a worksession that was slated to discuss in part, the possibility of rescinding the redevelopment agreement all together. But talk quickly turned to when the second vote on the enabling legislation would take place, as Mayor Paul objected to a second reading Wednesday.

Sansone and Paul sparred again, this time over if the city would call a special meeting before the end of the month for the second reading, prompting something of a shouting match between the two.

"You don't come into our chambers and tell me what to do," Paul said. "We're on the same team," Sansone responded. "No, I'm not, I've never been on your same team," Paul retorted.

Ward 1 Councilman Matt Pirrello said he would move to attempt to arrange for a special council session Monday night for second reading of the ordinance, which could also include an opportunity for city council members and others to submit questions of Sansone and Walmart representatives, although that was not immediately clear Wednesday night.

Representatives from Sansone declined reporters questions Wednesday.