ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

St. Louis Alderman Joe Roddy, who chairs the Housing Urban Development and Zoning (HUDZ) Committee, said he isn’t hearing bills granting development tax breaks until his committee passes a resolution setting .

He admits the tactic is to “create a sense of urgency� at St. Louis Development Corp., the city’s economic development office, to finish its review of the . He wanted more clarity on certain provisions open to interpretation.

“I’ve been really trying to get them to button it down,� said Roddy, who represents the Central West End and Forest Park Southeast.

But the holdup in his committee is tying up at least one bill being pushed by Alderman Megan Green, which would grant for a 26-apartment, mixed-use project on Morganford Road.

Green, who represents the Tower Grove South neighborhood, said her bill never should have been assigned to Roddy’s committee because tax abatement bills are generally heard by the Neighborhood Development Committee.

In emails obtained by the Post-Dispatch about the matter, the head of the Neighborhood Development Committee, Shane Cohn, also asks why the bill isn’t in his committee.

“I am curious myself how/why this got assigned to HUDZ vs Neighborhood Development?� he wrote. “I was told that (it) would be in my Committee and I specifically scheduled a meeting to hear this to accommodate (Green’s) timing concern only to find out it was later assigned to HUDZ, which typically wouldn’t hear a tax abatement bill.�

Green blames Board of Aldermen President Lewis Reed for assigning the bill to Roddy’s committee and said the developer can’t close on financing until the abatement is granted.

Green has been a critic of the city’s use of tax incentives in stable neighborhoods. As a condition for sponsoring the tax break, she said she spent months negotiating a community benefits agreement between the developer and the Tower Grove South Neighborhood Association.

“Lewis Reed is who is preventing this development from moving forward in the city, and I think he’s doing it in an intentional way because he does not want to see a community benefits agreement be successful,� Green said.

Reed’s chief of staff, Tom Shepard, called that “ridiculous,� and said Reed “has passed legislation with what is now termed as community benefits for years.�

In a statement, Shepard, said HUDZ is the appropriate committee because it is also the committee where — one from Green and one from Reed — are assigned.

“It would be inappropriate to move the legislation from that committee and try to fast track it as Alderwoman Green has suggested,� Shepard wrote. “The chairman of HUDZ has made it clear he will give the bill a public hearing so that citizens can truly be heard.�

Asked about a larger holdup in Roddy’s committee, Shepard said no other alderman “has voiced any kind of concern or complaint about what’s going on in the HUDZ Committee.�

Green argued the community benefit agreement for the Morganford Road project is a private contract and is not even mentioned in the bill.

The agreement with the Morganford developer was approved last month with a 60-23 vote by members of the Tower Grove South neighborhood, according to the neighborhood’s website. on the site with a $6.4 million, three-story apartment building that includes ground-floor commercial space.

Under the agreement, the developer committed to donating $60,000 to a nonprofit that Green said the neighborhood wants to put toward developing affordable housing. It also agreed to pay at least $10 an hour to employees and participate in a local-hiring program. The effort, Green said, is similar to the type of process she wants to see for all developments requesting tax breaks.

“We have an opportunity here to pass a project that is new, that is cutting edge and really sets a precedent for what sustainable development looks like,� Green said.

Roddy, though, said that her bill should be heard by his committee because of the community benefits agreement.

“Ald. Green please be clear — unless a majority of the HUDZ Committee finds fault with the above logic, I will oppose any attempt by you to remove the bill from the HUDZ committee or have it treated any differently than the other incentive bills awaiting a HUDZ hearing,� he wrote in an email.

Robert Maltby, a member of the development group, said he was “not really� concerned about the abatement being held up by aldermen but declined to comment further.

This isn’t the first tax abatement bill to be held up in Roddy’s committee.

In July, Roddy held a bill for restaurant on Chouteau Avenue pushed by Alderman Christine Ingrassia. He was upset that she had voted against some projects in his ward but also wanted a commitment that she would follow the incentives guidelines being drafted.

Roddy said he hoped to have a hearing on the guidelines next week and pass them this month. Parts of the proposal will still need to be finalized, he said, including a citywide map identifying the amount of incentives developers can expect based on the strength of a neighborhood. Other bills should start moving after that.

“Obviously, I don’t want to kill all these deals,� he said.

Longer term, he and others are pushing for funding for that would provide even more clarity on the city’s use of incentives.

In the meantime, Roddy said, the guidelines are needed to “level the playing field� and offer some certainty to the process.

“If people are going to continue to set their own rules on which projects they’re going to be voting for, that just encourages chaos down there,� he said. “We need some consistency.�

Green, for her part, said she has been a vocal proponent of incentive reform and sees the guidelines as a “step in the right direction.�

“But I think holding up development activities to get your personal bill passed isn’t the way to do it.�