ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

ST. LOUIS — Less than a week after negotiators for the NFL, Rams and local governments agreed to a $790 million settlement in a lawsuit over the team’s 2016 relocation to Los Angeles, a new round of negotiations has yet to start.

How to divvy up the roughly $500 million among St. Louis, St. Louis County and the Regional Convention and ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ Complex Authority?

Even before the three parties in the lawsuit decide how to spend the settlement — of which $276.5 million plus expenses will go to pay attorney fees — they’ve got to decide how much each one receives.

St. Louis Mayor Tishaura O. Jones said Monday those talks have yet to start, and there is no “preexisting formula� on how any settlement to the lawsuit, filed in 2017, would be divided between the three plaintiffs.

“Those meetings haven’t been scheduled, but I do know that I have a great working relationship with (County Executive) Dr. Sam Page, and I don’t expect those conversations to be adversarial,� Jones said in an interview.

The settlement provides that the check from the Rams and the NFL — who have not said how they will share the cost — must be handed over to the three plaintiffs and their attorneys by Dec. 24.

It’s unclear how long the discussions on allocating the money will take, but Jones said she was “confident we can all come to an equitable agreement.�

Page, during a news conference Monday morning, said the settlement was just a few days old and “we still have some discussions about how that will be divided amongst all the plaintiffs. We’ll work through that with the attorneys.�

“All the parties in this settlement have a good working relationship, have a lot of respect for each other, and we’ll find a path forward that’s fair to all the (plaintiffs) and put this money to work in St. Louis County,� Page said.

The city and county legislative bodies likely won’t be involved until actual spending decisions on the money are made. A spokesman for Page said the County Council won’t be involved while the three parties negotiate the allocation of the settlement, a process likely to take the next few weeks. Likewise, Jones said she doesn’t believe the St. Louis Board of Aldermen will be involved in negotiations over the city’s share of the settlement, and Board of Aldermen President Lewis Reed didn’t dispute that.

The other party to the suit, the Convention and ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ Complex Authority, actually owns the team’s old venue, now known as the Dome at America’s Center. Its chairman, lawyer and former St. Louis Board of Aldermen President Jim Shrewsbury, signed the agreement on behalf of the authority. He did not respond to a request for comment.

The Dome authority’s executive director, Brian McMurtry, said in an email that discussions on dividing up the settlement haven’t happened yet and declined to discuss it further, saying there was a gag order from the court.

Some parties could argue they are due more of the settlement than others. St. Louis County, for instance, was not included in the financing plan for the riverfront stadium proposal floated in 2015 in an effort to keep the NFL franchise here. The county executive at the time, Steve Stenger, opposed involvement without a public vote, something backers of the effort ruled out, citing time constraints.

Because of that stance, the NFL and Rams argued at one point in the lawsuit that St. Louis County shouldn’t be part of the lawsuit.

“The County did not participate in the planning or funding of the new stadium project,� the NFL and Rams wrote in a filing in June. “In fact, the County’s charter prohibited it from participating in stadium development or funding ‘without a vote of the people,’ which the County declined to hold.�

Attorneys for the plaintiffs, however, argued the county was rightfully a party to the lawsuit because it had lost hotel-motel tax revenue because of the Rams departure.

Jones declined to say whether she thought the city should receive a larger share of the settlement. But Reed, the Board of Aldermen president, said he thinks the city should.

“I don’t think it should be one-third each,� Reed said Monday. “When you look at the loss, the city of St. Louis we obviously would have lost more than the Rams leaving than either of the other two entities. Our hotels took a hit, our restaurants took a hit, our entire tax base took a hit from the Rams leaving.�

The $18 million in public funds spent on the attempt to build a Mississippi Riverfront stadium to convince the Rams to stay came from Dome authority. The spending was directed by a two-man task force named by then Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon: former Anheuser-Busch executive Dave Peacock and Bob Blitz, whose law firm co-led the litigation that resulted in last week’s settlement.

However, the Dome authority’s revenue comes from the city, county and state. The city and county each contribute $1 million a year for upkeep of the Dome, and Missouri contributes $2 million.

Another $10 million from the state and $5 million each from the city and county went to pay off the bonds issued to build the Dome. That debt was retired this year, and the financing agreement between the parties ended in August, though each government has committed to making maintenance payments into 2024, according to a Dome authority audit.

The Dome authority’s board makeup could also influence negotiations — and how its share of the money is ultimately spent. Five of the Dome authority’s members, including its chair, are appointed by the governor. Three commissioners are appointed by the St. Louis County executive and three appointed by the St. Louis mayor.

Ben Frederickson and Joel Currier of the Post-Dispatch contributed to this report.