 Home
News
and Information
Editorials
Meeting
Notes
How
Did They Vote?
Editor/Contact
|
|
|
Editorials
Dollars and Sense
05/05/2012
Here are the bullet points:
- The capital plan for the next five years includes $10.6 million for projects and $3.9 million for debt service.
- The $750,000 energy efficiency project has been dropped and replaced by a $250,000 project plus a $20,000 energy audit..
- The capital plan for 2012-13 will be funded by $1.9 million sales tax revenue, $0.8 million grants, and $0.4 million transferred from the General Fund.
- The total projected subsidy from the general fund over five years has increased from $1.4 million to $1.85 million. At least one resident suggests that transfers from the General Fund be eliminated.
- The city should apply financial management techniques used in the private sector in prioritizing, managing, and accounting for capital projects.
- The city should explore options for reducing/using the operating surplus, including tax reduction and investing in the pension fund.
Here are the details:
City Administrator Mark Perkins unveiled the 2012 – 2017 capital spending plan at recent P&Z and City Council meetings. The plan presented at the 3/15/12 P&Z meeting totaled $10,303,015. After the P&Z meeting, Mr. Perkins added $42,000 to the City Council chamber renovation project, $20,000 for an energy audit, and $217,000 for Chasselle Lane reconstruction. The City Council approved the revised $10,581,535 total on April 23. Over $8.4 million of this amount is designated for streets and sidewalks. The Council also approved $3.9 million for Millennium Park debt payments scheduled for the five-year period.
The $20,000 energy audit replaces a $750,000 energy efficiency project listed last year. (About $250,000 has been allocated to replacing the boiler and other utility projects at City Hall.) The $750,000 project would have required major third-party financing. This creative financing could have affected the city’s credit rating and financial flexibility. It would probably have been lucrative to the third party. CCV prefers this year’s DIY approach, which allows the city more flexibility in picking the projects it wants to undertake and the contractors which will be used. The city has a well-paid professional staff; it should not be necessary to spend the entire $20,000 for consulting input.
The capital spending program (and debt service) is funded by the 0.5 percent sales tax, grants (federal, state, county), and by transfers from the General (operating) Fund. For the 2013 fiscal year, the sales tax revenue is estimated at $1.9 million, grants at $0.8 million, and General Fund transfers at $0.4 million. Interest income and proceeds from equipment sales account for the balance. City staff has done a good job in securing grants. Over $0.8 million was secured last year and the current plan includes $420,000 for Ladue sidewalk improvements and $318,000 for West Olive lighting in the $814,000 total.
The plan assumes a $400,000 per year transfer from the General Fund for the next three years and a $1.85 million total for five years. This is up from a $1.4 million 5-year total projected last year. This increase is possible because of the 0.25 percent sales tax that voters approved under the misleading keep our trash free campaign. This tax increase is not being used for trash collection; it is being used in this case to increase capital expenditures. We wonder if the tax would have been approved if the truth had been told.
Mr. Bob Kent recently made a presentation to the City Council recommending that the General Fund transfers be eliminated and that capital spending be limited to the restricted sales tax revenue plus grants. Staff was not asked for, and has not presented, an analysis of the pros and cons of delaying some of the projects that this strategy would require. In the recent past, transfers from the General Fund have been mostly based on spending whatever was left over after operating costs were covered. By approving this capital plan, the City Council is implicitly approving spending a large part of the operating surplus on additional capital projects.
Mr. Kent also made some solid points on prioritizing and managing capital projects. The city nominally uses a street condition rating system to prioritize the street repairs and improvements. Mr. Kent recommended that quantitative techniques (financial analysis) also be used to prioritize cost saving and revenue projects. For example, Mr. Perkins says that the $20,000 energy audit will help the city prioritize future energy improvement projects and (calculate) payback periods for these projects. Mr. Kent would also like to see this type of analysis extended to other types of expenditures such as fleet management in the Police and Public Works Departments. He recommends analyzing the savings that could be realized by investing in equipment powered by natural gas.
How about analyzing the cost of running the speed trap on Lindbergh Blvd. vs. the revenue that is generated?
Once projects are funded and implemented, Kent points out that project cost accounting methodology used in the private sector is not always used by the city. He cites as an example the installation of the monument sign for the golf/course/ice rink. Council approved $25,000 for the project but much of the work was done by Public Works employees and using Public Works equipment, with these costs being charged to the Public Works Department. So the true cost of the sign was understated and the true cost of running the Public Works Department was overstated. This kind of accounting easily leads to budgeting more than is necessary for Public Works in the future.
As previously mentioned, the City Council was able to casually increase capital spending as a result of the operating surplus which is being generated and projected. CCV, Mr. Kent, and Mayor Glantz have all recommended serious consideration of managing and/or reducing the surplus- not just spending it. CCV has recommended eliminating the property tax. This would clearly be better than short term investing for a 1-2 percent return. If the property tax is needed in the future it can be put to a vote. Creve Coeur residents voted for a sales tax that was not needed; they will surely vote for a property tax when it is needed. If residents are to trust their political leaders then the leaders must also trust the residents!
If our leaders are too timid to eliminate the property tax there are many options available that are better than low return investing. For example, if spending a dollar on a street now will save spending $2 in the next five years, that would be a good cost saving project. Similarly, if contributing an extra dollar to the pension fund- where it can earn a much higher return- will save money in the long run (It will!), then that option should be ranked as well. Creve Coeur should not be sitting on an underutilized cash hoard. Our leaders need to get to work on managing our tax money at a higher level of financial sophistication.
Building a Trust-Based Process
04/14/2012
No single factor better explains the differential success of societies than the moral beliefs of the people who comprise them. …. Professor David C. Rose.
We are all familiar with the importance of the concept of trust in human activities. Take assembly line manufacturing as an example. Productivity is maximized by specialization at each step in the line, but the line will fall apart if one or more people in the line can’t be trusted to complete their part. Similarly, the most successful sports teams exhibit a high degree of mutual trust. Military teams- armies- provide vivid examples.
Trust is undermined by opportunistic behavior. We chuckle at the basketball player who takes a difficult shot rather than pass to a teammate with a lay-up. Such behavior reduces the productivity of the team and its chance of winning. A more destructive form of opportunistic behavior is that which is undertaken with the intent to make one member of the group look better at the expense of another- a salesman who nabs a commission that could/should have been earned by another. People who engage in opportunistic behavior do not inspire trust, and in so doing they diminish the differential success of their group.
In societal situations it is one thing to get people to do what needs to be done. It is a more difficult thing to get people to refrain from opportunism. This seems to be particularly true in the realm of election politics. Candidates know that they must put forth a positive image of themselves. They put their best foot forward. And they make campaign promises. Unfortunately, many politicians also jump on any mistake by their opponent, no matter how minor or irrelevant, thinking that they will look better if their opponent looks worse. Issuing a press release criticizing an opponent over a technical matter would be an example. Or a candidate might directly or indirectly encourage attacks on their opponent’s character, even if such attacks are frivolous or unsubstantiated.
In the recent Town & Country municipal election, candidate Dorothy Cooke posted a public notice telling residents that she did not support a postcard mailed out painting a negative picture of her opponent, saying, There has recently been some negative material circulated in Ward 1 concerning my opponent… Neither I, nor anyone in my campaign, authorized or distributed this information. (My opponent) and I have spoken and we both remain strongly opposed to negative campaigning. She went on to identify the person who initiated the postcard. CCV applauds Ms. Cooke and TownAndCountry-ManchesterPatch, which posted her note.
In our recent Mayoral election there were two negative mailers attacking candidate Laura Bryant. In the first case (see editorial Disgraceful) Mr. Glantz called the mailer distributed by his campaign powerful. This perhaps encouraged an even more hateful attack. In this second case (see editorial Dill Pickles), Mr. Glantz sent a note to CCV and CreveCoeurPatch disclaiming any association with the mailer, which quoted his own mailer. CCV posted his note as headline news; CCV can’t find a post in the CreveCoeurPatch archive. CCV has urged Mr. Glantz to investigate the second postcard and identify the person behind it. This is important to 1) prove Mr. Glantz’ disclaimer and 2) subject the responsible person to the disapproval of the community that will discourage similar behavior in the future.
The application of guilt is one way to discourage destructive opportunistic behavior. That is one reason we have institutional mechanisms such as sunshine laws and ethics commissions to drive up the cost of opportunistic behavior. Unfortunately these institutional remedies act after much of the harm has been done- not all of the harm because we are diminished as a society by the act no matter the short term result.
We need more than institutionally applied guilt, something that works even without any chance of detection, something internalized. We are normally reluctant to victimize/harm others because we shirk losing self respect- part of a guilty feeling. But in the rush of political situations, particularly the desire to win, such reluctance is too often rationalized away- such as the ends justify the means. The candidate may feel that the self respect gained from winning exceeds the self respect lost from harming others. Or the candidate may succumb to the greater good rationalization- that being the belief that more good can eventually be done for the group in the long run than the harm done to one individual in the short run. That rationalization is always wrong. If it were really true, the harmful behavior would not be required.
Rationalization and the lack of empathy rob guilt’s natural ability to combat opportunism through moral restraint. The key to solving this problem is for moral beliefs to attach guilt to the negative actions themselves rather than just to their consequences. In other words, we have to believe that doing certain things is inherently wrong even if no one is harmed. This produces principled moral restraint. (1)
Candidate Laura Bryant said it this way: That is the kind of mayor I want to be. The kind who does the right thing even when no one is looking. Who builds trust by admitting honest mistakes. And who finally puts an end to dirty politics and negative campaigning ... because our hometown and our friends and neighbors deserve so much better, not only from their candidates but also from their community leaders.
As residents and voters, we own our politics in Creve Coeur. We cannot be proud of what we own at this time. Voters have been subjected to opportunistic, misleading, harmful political maneuvering too many times. Recent examples, such as the misleading Keep Our Trash Free campaign and the hate mailer attacking Ms. Bryant have overlapping origins- a printer in Overland (Mr. Glantz’ printer) and a few individuals/power brokers. Opportunistic political behavior has produced a sales tax that we did not need and has left us divided and ineffective.
We must aspire to have a trust-based process in choosing our elected leaders. If we can’t trust our leaders to refrain from destructive campaigning, how can we trust them to lead in office? CCV will continue to work to build a trust based election process in Creve Coeur. We call on all of our elected officials to join in. And, most essentially, residents must join CCV in creating an environment of principled moral restraint in which opportunistic, negative campaigning is not rewarded. Those who would mislead and diminish us must know that it will not work.
(1) The sociological framework of this editorial was inspired by a lecture by Professor David C. Rose, University of Missouri St. Louis, entitled The Moral Foundation of Economic Behavior presented by the Show-Me Institute. Dr. Rose has authored a book with the same title.
A.J. Wang Statement
04/04/2012
Six years ago, when I ran for city council, the big issues were eminent domain and the concern that condominium/apartment complexes surrounding the golf course were under threat from commercial encroachment. I believe other issues now sit on the front burners.
The economic downturn has affected everyone and we as a city are definitely not immune. So far, thanks to the good work of city staff, we are handling finances better than expected. I sit on the finance committee and consequently tend to focus more on the financial issues.
Of particular concern to me is the prospect of a big box development coming to the Orchard Lakes Subdivision right behind Weber Chevrolet. THF realty is reportedly working towards building a major retail center anchored by a big box store. Due to good visibility from Highway 270 this would be a premium location for retail development. My concern is that this would bring an inordinate amount of traffic onto Olive near I-270. Furthermore, a store such as a Costco or Sam’s will have a definite impact on other businesses in Creve Coeur. Since the Orchard Lakes subdivision is in unincorporated St. Louis County, the city of Creve Coeur will not benefit from the sizable sales tax revenue a development such as this can generate. Also, we as a city would have limited say in the development as it is just outside the city limits. We need to follow this situation closely in the years to come.
Over the years we have also become more reliant on the revenue generated by utility and phone taxes to the point where they are at roughly the same level as the sales tax revenue. This puts the city in a somewhat odd situation where we benefit from higher utility rates and energy wastage. As anecdotal evidence I offer up my personal experience. Due to the mild winter this year combined with the new windows I put in, I noticed that my heating bills were almost halved compared to the previous year. I also dropped my land line since I do not use it anymore and so I am no longer paying phone taxes. My point is that city revenues can fluctuate for a variety of reasons. Therefore controlling expenditures is vital and the city has done a commendable job at that.
Our residents are accustomed to the high levels of service thanks to the excellent workforce we have. A good example is the snow-storm the area experienced on January 12, 2012. Supposedly the weather conditions were such that nothing much could have been done about the road conditions. There was gridlock everywhere as roads and highways were impassable. Curiously enough, our city crews were able to get most of the city’s streets such as Mosley Road passable. We must strive to continue and improve the services we provide.
I thank the outgoing mayor for his long service to the city and look forward to working with the new Mayor.
Dill Pickles
04/01/2012
I was talking to someone at a retiree luncheon the other day and I asked them what they thought about Creve Coeur. He said it was very nice and he particularly liked what we had done around the lake. So now we have this nasty mailer attacking Mayoral candidate Laura Bryant, paid for by a person who apparently has never lived in Creve Coeur- or established residence VERY recently. All of the google searches show her still living in Maryland Heights. She is 67 and enjoys cooking, soaps, and making jewelry. She lists a Maryland Heights PO box on the flyer. And our researchers can’t find her name on the list of registered Creve Coeur voters. Yet she says, As a Creve Coeur resident …. Well, perhaps living out by the lake counts. She is not listed on any Creve Coeur board or committee. Perhaps she was on the Creve Coeur Cares committee, but we wouldn’t know about that- the membership was secret. CCV attempts to write down the name of every person who speaks at City Council and P&Z meetings, and I can’t find her name since CCV started coverage in 2007. If Mr. Glantz is elected, maybe she will show up at his inauguration and take a bow. The point- if you think Creve Coeur Lake is in Creve Coeur you don’t know much about Creve Coeur geography and if you never set foot in a City Council meeting you don’t know much about Creve Coeur government. And you really don’t know much about Ms. Bryant.
The mailer tries to give the appearance of documentation with some footnotes, one of which is the Leaders For A Better Government flyer which CCV has previously addressed in Disgraceful. CreveCoeurPatch.com is also used as a reference, and the articles cited only report the previous Glantz campaign assertions- a circular and meaningless reference. One footnote claims she rarely attended the Creve Coeur Parade- if we had only known that! CCV offers as its documentation four plus years of Meeting Notes, research, and Editorial content. Ms. Bryant has reference after reference cited on her website.
The mailer says, Do not be fooled by Laura Bryant’s appearance. I actually like the picture of her with her reading glasses, looking intent and serious, better than her campaign photo. But I digress. The point I want to make is, don’t be fooled by the appearance of this mailer. While it tries to appear as an independent effort, it has all the appearance to me of another orchestrated negative attack by the Glantz campaign. It was mailed with the same postal permit as all the other Glantz campaign materials. It was sent to the same mailing list, with the same people receiving it and NOT receiving it. It follows up on some of the same false accusations that the Glantz campaign has previously made. The only difference is this time they had to get some little old lady to be their spokesman. I hope she enjoys the lake.
Oh, and I never liked dill pickles. Give me the sweet relish. It doesn't leave a bad taste in your mouth- after you vote.
Choosing a Mayor- Twinkle, Twinkle
03/31/2012
Unless your television is tuned to channels from another planet you know the story: Where’s Timmy? Look, he’s up on the stage and he’s playing the piano. We hear a few one-finger notes. Then, all of a sudden, the hall is filled with beautiful harmonies and counter-melodies as the ten nimble fingers of the master pianist join in. It’s uplifting; the theme is encouragement- pass it on. It’s inspiring- at least for a moment. But then the spot is over, and we are back in reality. If we have to judge Timmy as a piano player, we have to recognize that he was only playing a few notes and all of the sound was coming from someone else. So too, in our Mayoral race, there has been a lot of sound not coming from the candidates. Unfortunately, some of these sounds were not melodious as in the TV spot. They were off-key and rancorous. One candidate played along anyway, and even praised the awful noise as powerful. One of the noise makers sent a copy of the lyrics of this deceitful song to parishioners, a shameful juxtaposition of church and state, and even tried to work a few notes into an invocation. He still does not realize how bad this noise sounds. One, whose name had been listed in the choir, now says that it was done without his permission. The candidate has not explained this, and we are left to wonder what we can believe and who we can trust. But the noise goes on; it’s now ringing in our ears. CCV tries very hard to listen only to the words sung by the candidates, but when a candidate’s voice does not rise above the din and clamor that’s hard to do.
So, to hear what the candidates had to say for themselves, CCV attended the candidate forum sponsored by www.crevecoeur.patch.com and the Chamber of Commerce on Thursday. The Q&A session covered a wide range of topics, and Patch has posted selected remarks this weekend. Most of the questions concerned issues that CCV has previously analyzed- taxes, development, downtown, etc. However, one question in particular deserves some additional analysis. The candidates were asked about how they would address conflicts of interest with their day jobs. Ms. Bryant, an employee of Enterprise Corp., said that any conflict would be unlikely unless Enterprise, which is headquartered in Clayton, had some future matter for approval in Creve Coeur. Mr. Glantz, who is an architect and runs his own firm, said that he worked with developers and builders who did business in Creve Coeur on a regular basis, and that he had always disclosed such connections and recused himself if appropriate. (Editor’s note: Ms. Bryant and Mr. Glantz have been offered an opportunity to provide any additional information on this topic for publication on CCV.)
CCV has reviewed our meeting notes since we began coverage in October, 2007. Ms. Bryant has had no significant conflicts which limited her ability to participate in City Council deliberations. Mr. Glantz has had one significant conflict which bears discussion. On April 20, 2009, when the Delmar Gardens company first came to the Planning and Zoning Commission to present its plans for a large office building complex on Country Manor Lane, the spokesman was Mr. John King of the Lathrop and Gage law firm. According to the official meeting minutes, Mr. Glantz stated he would be abstaining from this issue because his office is represented by the firm of Lathrop and Gage. As an observant CCV reader has pointed out, Mr. Glantz did not attend any subsequent meetings of the Planning and Zoning Commission when the Delmar Gardens matter was on the agenda. [On August 9, 2009 the DG project failed to garner the four votes necessary for a positive recommendation, with Commissioners Neidringhausen, Saunders, and Eberhardt voting FOR and Commissioners Hoffman and Moskowitz voting AGAINST. After extended public comments at City Council meetings the project was WITHDRAWN on November 9, 2009.]
Ironically (or fittingly), it was Ms. Bryant who took the opportunity at that November 9, 2009 meeting to bring up the process by which the DG project had been advanced, particularly the informal vetting process where developers meet with elected officials before a project becomes public knowledge. Such questioning of the process is one example of the polarizing behavior for which she has been wrongly criticized. At the last City Council meeting W-3 Council Member Charlotte D’Alfonso asked all the other Council Members to pledge that they would not meet privately with DG this time around, building on the foundation that Ms. Bryant laid in 2009.
Delmar Gardens still owns the property on Country Manor, and now owns the 28 acre undeveloped property on Ladue Road. The St. Louis Business Journal recently reported that DG plans to seek approval for a mixed-use project on Ladue. The property is currently zoned one-acre residential. At the candidate forum, Mr. Glantz said (paraphrase necessary, CCV does not do shorthand) that he did not want to limit development but that the property should remain one-acre residential because people were passionate about it. People were passionate in opposition to increasing the density of the Enclave development, but Mr. Glantz voted for it. But the more important point is what difference does it make if Mr. Glantz does not participate in the debate, or maybe skips the meeting entirely. Ms. Bryant said that DG was a well respected corporate citizen and that any proposal should be handled in an open process and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comp Plan is due for a complete border to border review, for which the Planning and Zoning Commission is primarily responsible. Delmar Gardens recently requested that the Comp Plan for the 28-acre property be updated. The Mayor recommends appointments to P&Z and will play an important role in the Comp Plan update process. CCV has concerns about Mr. Glantz’ participation- in an elected capacity- in the Comp Plan update.
Mr. Glantz will likely encounter a conflict of interest as the process of tear-down and rebuild residential construction resumes in Creve Coeur- when the economy recovers. Mr. Glantz is a prominent participant in such projects. (Customers must like his work based on the yard signs at McMansions around town.) City staff has taken the position that additional regulation may be needed to balance the benefits and negatives associated with such projects. For example, a staff proposal has been advanced to require rain gardens be installed with these projects. While CCV agrees with Mr. Glantz in opposing the rain garden proposal, our opposition is based on preserving property rights and on a cost vs. benefit analysis, not on the impact on the development community.
In Choosing a Mayor (3/17/2012), CCV quoted Mr. Glantz saying he was sympathetic to the development community when he cast the lone vote for the Enclave developer’s high density proposal. But we must acknowledge that the majority of his votes have been balanced and fair. At the candidate forum he reiterated that he was pro good development. This would be an improvement to the all of the above, any development is good development approach which has sometimes been embraced in the past. So is Ms. Bryant anti-development, anti-business? At the candidate forum she was asked to name her greatest accomplishment in office. The words golden rule were already written down on our notes when she paused and surprisingly answered that her greatest accomplishment was standing up for the BP gas station owner against the eminent domain threats of the Olive TDD. Later, we pulled out the endorsement she received from George Weber of Weber Chevrolet, which concludes, … Laura continues to focus on property rights and financial transparency on behalf of businesses as well as residents- which is the best way to protect property values, promote long-term private investment, and support city infrastructure and services in Creve Coeur. One can only conclude, after an objective review, that Ms. Bryant’s voting record has been fair to Creve Coeur business owners and developers while insisting on transparency and adherence to the proper process.
Ms. Bryant’s published endorsements from business people and residents contrast with Mr. Glantz’ endorsement from self proclaimed Leaders For A Better Government, who constitute a self-perpetuating political class of people who endorse, appoint, congratulate, and campaign for each other. Mr. Glantz’ biggest conflict of interest, if he becomes Mayor, might not be his connections to the development community. It could be his connections to Leaders For A Better Government. Watch out, the next negative campaign could be against you. (Editor’s note: Don’t get me wrong. There is a lot to like and respect about these folks individually, and I don’t mind admiring it and reporting it. They devote a lot of time and effort for Creve Coeur for little or no pay. I will contribute to any tribute party. It is the political groupthink, ends justify the means approach, and negative campaigning that I don’t like. Get it?)
For those of you still reading, apologies for the length. (A benefit and pitfall of the internet- you never run out of space.) Let’s close by returning to the concert. The piano man has left the stage. The audience is ready for the next act- that one shining moment performance. Now we hear a familiar voice with a familiar song. Let’s sing along. Encourage her- pass it on- April 3.
Choosing A Mayor
03/17/2012
As I started to say, before I was so rudely interrupted by the mailer, there are some things I like about both candidates for Mayor of Creve Coeur. As voters we should ignore the yard signs, slogans, jabs, and most of the campaign clutter. CCV’s obligation and mission is to provide informed, objective, and respectful analysis. That is why we attend all the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council meetings, read their materials, keep track of votes, research the issues, and follow the editorial golden rule. With that in mind, this analysis will focus on the candidates’ responses to our Kitchen Table Talk editorial and on their voting record.
Mr.Glantz has made a good call on the property tax issue, saying it should not be an issue to eliminate it and demonstrate to our citizens that we can be responsible, respectful stewards of their tax dollars. Ms. Bryant takes a more cautious approach saying property taxes- small as they are- at least help offset what I fear could develop into an even greater reliance on volatile sales taxes over the long term. Should Mr. Glantz become Mayor, CCV will constantly remind him of his statement. Should Ms. Bryant become Mayor, CCV will try to convince her that the citizens have the power to reinstate the property tax if it is needed/justified in the future.
Both candidates are weary and leery of TDD’s. Glantz says projects should be independently studied and judiciously discussed. Bryant takes a harder line that a TDD should be a means of funding important and well-planned infrastructure improvements from one end of Olive to the other … Bryant indirectly makes a point that TDD’s are most costly and inefficient when used for small projects. Glantz is opposed to access fees for infrastructure because it is a hindrance to future development and adds an additional layer of bureaucracy to local municipal government.. CCV believes such fees on developers would be appropriate for small and mid-size projects and would add infinitely less bureaucracy and cost than a TDD. Also, access fees would focus more of the cost of needed improvements on the property that would benefit the most.
On the trash issue, Mr. Glantz would like to see the city explore the option of standard curbside pickup with the added option (paid for by the homeowner) of valet (rear) pickup if cost becomes an issue. Cost already is an issue- if you believe the Creve Coeur Cares committee- but we have a two year contract (at a reduced cost) which includes the valet service. Whether residents who do not use any particular city service should subsidize those who do is an important question that Mayoral leadership could address. For example, Mr. Glantz says we need to make the (golf course/ice rink) stand on their own financially and not be subsidized by taxpayer dollars.
On budgeting and the surplus, CCV agrees with Mr. Glantz that we look at reducing our taxing structure rather than spending down our surplus. We also agree that the pension plan needs a hard look by stakeholders and experts.
Ms. Bryant’s editorial is by her own words short on legislative priorities and proposals. Instead, my focus is, and always has been, on the process .. While historical perspective is important, and we must learn from past mistakes, we can’t drive by looking only in the rear-view mirror. We hope that Ms. Bryant will let us know more about her thinking on the trash issue, the town center, the golf course, the budget surplus, the pension plan, etc. Voters have not had an opportunity to hear her speak on these issues. Much of this can be handled in a bullet format.
Turning to the voting record, it is important to note that most votes at P&Z and City Council are unanimous. Differences are discussed, and resolutions are modified and amended before they come to a vote. It is when differences can’t be reconciled that votes become relevant.
Mr. Glantz has generally made a positive contribution to the deliberations of the Planning and Zoning Commission. However, one of Mr. Glantz’ votes stands out. In March of 2010 the developer of the Enclave at Bellerive came before the Planning and Zoning commission with an application to increase the density of that development, adding attached homes with front entry garages. Over a dozen residents spoke against the proposal pointing out that it conflicted with the Comprehensive Plan. One of the speakers was then-Council Member Laura Bryant. Then-Commissioner Glantz said he was sympathetic to the development community and voted in favor of the proposal. The other five Commissioners present all voted against the proposal, including then-Commissioners Robert Hoffman and Scott Saunders, who are both now City Council members.
As CCV noted at the time (Meeting Notes- March 15, 2010), Mr. Glantz has often stated his connections to the development community. In this case he let his connections sway his judgment and his vote. The Mayor leads the discussion and has the tie-breaking vote on matters that affect development. Mr. Glantz said he was against access fees because they would hinder development. He listed a Comprehensive Plan update first in his legislative priorities. (The Delmar Gardens organization recently requested a Comprehensive Plan update for its Ladue Road property.) Voters should evaluate how closely Mr. Glantz’ approach to development reflects their own preference.
CCV’S tracking of Ms. Bryant’s votes began in 2007 when she opposed an early version of the Walgreen’s Graeser development. Her first attempt to move the Golden Rule zoning amendment failed in February, 2008. After failing multiple procedural votes, the Golden Rule was finally approved in July, 2008 by a 7-1 (Kreuter) vote. She voted for the Walgreens development after the Golden Rule was adopted. Again in the minority, she voted against relaxing certain zoning standards in September, 2008. In October, 2008 she voted against funding the Walgreens project via a TDD. (This is the TDD which was recently bailed out by the city.) In 2009, she voted against increasing the property tax rate in a tie vote, which was broken by Mayor Dielmann to increase the rate. In 2010 she voted against placing the trash tax on the ballot, favoring an alternative parks tax which would have had a sunset provision. She has consistently favored measures, often in the minority, which would increase transparency and establish higher ethical standards. Before she left office as a result of term limits, she was able to push through a measure to begin the orderly termination of the failed Olive Blvd. TDD.
Overall, Ms. Bryant’s voting record reflects putting her constituents and all Creve Coeur residents first, above unfairly accommodating developers and business interests. She has shown a great commitment to the Comprehensive Plan and transparency in the conduct of city business. She should not be criticized for using her voice and political tools to these good ends. Even Mr. Glantz, in a recent CreveCoeurPatch.com interview, said, When she’s a champion for a cause, there’s no greater person to have on your side”
CreveCoeurPatch.com also reported, concerning the disgraceful mailer attacking Ms. Bryant, that Mr. Glantz said it was a powerful piece and a collaborative effort. This mailer was no independent, rogue action. It was approved by Mr. Glantz and paid for by his campaign. Mr. Glantz showed poor judgment by listening to his political advisors. Again, CCV will post any communication received from a signator to the mailer. If CCV can accomplish anything to improve the electoral process in Creve Coeur it would be to rid us of the negative campaigning which has too often been used in our elections.
This editorial will not conclude with the typical endorsement. Many of you know that Ms. Bryant has acted as a valued mentor for this writer; she is considered a good friend. And Mr. Glantz and his father have both performed architectural work for the writer going back to 1976; Mr. Glantz is also considered a friend. Creve Coeur voters should look at the facts and consider the records and platforms of these candidates. The candidates are invited to submit additional information to CCV before March 30, when CCV will wrap up its coverage.
Sensible Options
03/15/2012
by City Council Member Charlotte D'Alfonso
03/13/2012, Hello neighbors,
At the March 12 City Council meeting, a group of citizens asked the Council to approve $1500 for a retirement party for Mayor Dielmann, to be held at the new Chaminade Performing Arts Center. They also wanted permission to solicit local businesses for donations for this party, which is expected to cost around $6000 in total. The cost of admission for this party would be $30 a person. If they received enough donations or ticket sales, they would not need the $1500 from the city.
I told the citizens I thought it was lovely that they wanted to volunteer their time to throw a party for the mayor. I pointed out that if it was a city event it should be held in the similar manor that we honor past mayors, our police, and city staff. The Mayor’s picture would go up on the wall; a reception in the government center with cake and punch is appropriate; a gift for his years of service is a great idea. A private party that his friends and family throw and attend is completely acceptable. [Editor's note: The city policy for retirement gifts is $10 per year of service.]
Having a $6000.00 city event at Chaminade, for which the city asks Creve Coeur businesses to sponsor to honor the Mayor, is not appropriate. In addition, people and officials from other cities are expected at the party. This party is not a city-wide event. It is a party for an individual. No determination was made on what would happen if more money were collected than the party actually cost.
One of the Council Members said that the Mayor has given 20,000 hours of service to this city. I pointed out that our policemen and women have given even more of their time. They said the mayor is a volunteer position. The Mayor is an elected paid position. Various projects throughout our city have his name on them recognizing his contribution. The city’s recreation complex is named after him. [Editor’s note: It was also noted that Mayor Dielmann has served 28 years. If the 20,000 hour estimate is correct, it would be about 13.7 hours per week. The Mayor’s salary is $138.46 per week The Mayor also receives certain expenses.]
If this is a city-wide event, I feel the city should be the one throwing the party. Putting tickets for sale in the city newsletter does not make this a city-wide event. Other Council Members said that we solicit funds for other events such as Flicks on the Fairways and the Creve Coeur 5k race. I do not think a retirement party for one individual is the same as those two events.
I am happy to honor the Mayor for all of his service. I would like to be invited to his retirement party. I strongly feel soliciting our local businesses to pay for this party is wrong. I think putting our elected officials above our police officers and women and our hard working city staff is wrong. I was one of only two (Jeanne Rhoades was the other) Council Members who voted against giving approval for the solicitation. [Editor’s note: The solicitation of 25 businesses was approved by a 6-2 vote. The requested $1500 did not come to a vote.]
Residents are not always going to agree with me, or any council person for that matter. I chose to run for office because I thought residents were not being heard—and my primary purpose for being on this Council is to be a voice to represent the citizens and businesses of Creve Coeur. At this meeting I felt that I was speaking to a brick wall. This is not an issue for me of whether Mayor Dielmann deserves a retirement party. It is a fundamental issue on how our city is run and doing business.
Agree with me or not, I welcome you to share your thoughts on this issue with me.
Sincerely,
Charlotte D’Alfonso, City Council Member (W-3)
Disgraceful
03/13/2012
Just when I thought that this year’s mayoral campaign was going to set a high standard for integrity and honesty, the Creve Coeur Cares crowd had to come along and spoil it. [Your editor is speaking personally this time, and I will not hide behind the editorial we.] I was digesting the thoughtful responses CCV received from the two candidates to the Kitchen Table Talk inquiry and preparing to write about the things I liked about their answers. Then I received a mailer from something called Leaders For A Better Government. It is disgraceful!
You remember the Creve Coeur Cares (CCC) folks. They are the ones who told us that we had to pass a sales tax to Keep Our Trash Free They took money from Allied Waste to promulgate their propaganda. Then, after the tax passed, the facts came out. The cost of trash pickup was not going up- it was going down! With the sales tax figured in, the city suddenly had a surplus of almost a million dollars! CCC tricked Creve Coeur residents into voting for an unnecessary sales tax. And now some of the same CCC folks, whose names now appear as leaders for a better government, are playing dirty again. And others have knowingly or unwittingly associated themselves- you should know better.
I hate to even reprint the statements that appear in this hit piece, but I have to in order to point out the misleading elements and the absurdity of some of them.
Sam Page: Barry is the right leader for our city, bridging past successes with an even brighter future. He has an open mind, and the ability to listen closely.”
Are we to infer that Ms. Bryant has not been successful, does not have an open mind, and does not listen? She was named legislator of the year and was re-elected four times by her Ward 4 constituents. Among her accomplishments, she was instrumental in rooting out the fact that Mr. Page filed an anonymous complaint with the Missouri Ethics Commission, a dirty trick, which was thrown out as having no merit. Does this have anything to do with Mr. Page’s endorsement? We now have some new rules and more transparency thanks in part to Ms. Bryant.
Tara Nealy: The Mayor needs to be able to work with everyone and not become a polarizing factor. That’s why I am voting for Barry.
We do not need the go along- get along mentality in a Mayor. We need a leader who thinks for themselves. Was it too polarizing that someone stood against Transportation Development District proposals which never made good on their promises, overran their budgets and/or schedules, and had to be bailed out by the taxpayers? Was it too polarizing for Ms. Nealy that someone stood up for our neighbors in St. Louis County and pushed for implementation of the Golden Rule in our zoning ordinances? Is it too polarizing for Ms. Nealy that someone points out and documents mistakes that have been made in an effort to avoid repeating them? If we had a Mayor who had used the veto pen now and then Creve Coeur would be better off today.
Harold Dielmann: We live in a great city and I can unequivocally say that Barry is the only choice for Mayor if we want to maintain our high quality of life.
Gimme a break Mr. Mayor. This is absurd on its face. You have been a tireless and effective Mayor, but I do not give you, any Mayor, the City Council, the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Beautification Committee- or all of them put together- credit for my quality of life. I will give the Police Department some of the credit.
These quotes, and others not repeated here, contain innuendos demeaning Ms. Bryant. But let’s get to the really disgraceful part of this mailer, signed by 34 individuals.
The difference between Barry and his opponent is clear. Barry’s opponent has a long history of being embroiled in controversy and turmoil. She has wasted valuable city resources by engaging in divisive political actions. It is our strong belief that Barry has the experience, knowledge, commitment, vision, and temperament that we need as a Mayor.
This is a declarative statement, presented without evidence, which is false and misleading. It is hard not to become embroiled in controversy and turmoil when the controversy and turmoil is created by political opponents who do not stop short of making personal attacks to achieve their goals, even going to the extreme of making bogus ethics accusations. We applaud Ms. Bryant for going the extra miles to engage in political actions to represent not only her constituents, but all of the residents of Creve Coeur, even County neighbors. As to temperament, we are electing a Mayor, not a judge.
This mailer follows the common political axiom- define your opponent as an unacceptable choice. I hope it doesn’t work. I will get around to analyzing the candidates’ experience, voting records, vision, and positions on issues. I will have positive things to say about both candidates. And I will disagree with both candidates on some things. Meanwhile I call on Mr. Glantz to disavow this mailer. I will post any statement to that effect, from Mr. Glantz or any of the leaders for a better government. I will lose some respect for those who continue to associate themselves with a dirty, negative campaign. Do not succumb to the allures of political power and take the low road to that destination.
I call on Ms. Bryant to continue her positive campaign. Her mailers have focused on her achievements and have not attacked her opponent.
I urge Creve Coeur voters to throw this mailer in the garbage where it belongs.
Health Care Decisions for City Employees
03/13/2012
By Lynn Berry
As a citizen of Creve Coeur, are you fully informed about the amount of money the city pays each year for employee and family health care insurance? If not, you should be. As citizens, you need to be aware of how our city compares with other cities of the same population. The following analysis provides some interesting facts for comparison.
What are Other Municipalities Doing to Reduce Cost?
In the January 10, 2012 Health Reform Net News, Wolters Kluwer (a law and business firm), cited a recently released survey by the International City/County Management Association (ICMA) discussing health care costs. They state that to reduce health care expenses/claim costs, the majority of local governments has
-increased the share of total health care costs paid by the employee,
-audited or reviewed eligibility or enrollment in the health plan,
-actively managed communication to educate customers on health care costs and living a healthier lifestyle, and
-significantly increased pharmacy co-payments, deductibles, or coinsurance.
In the survey, which was for municipalities and counties with a population of 10,000 or greater (Creve Coeur had a population of 17,833 in 2010), for those policies in which the policy premiums were shared between the employer and employees, 75 percent of those reporting noted that the average premium amount paid by the employee was 21 percent.
What has Creve Coeur Done to Reduce Cost?
While it is true that Creve Coeur selected a high deductible plan to reduce costs, (and we commend them for that) the employee cost for the Creve Coeur plan is not in line with the 21 percent for the average employee cited above.
For the period from 7/1/2011 – 6/30/2012, the cost sharing for employees ranges from 15 percent for a single participant to 18.3 percent for full family coverage. The average premium cost for all participants is 17.5 percent, while the city pays 82.5 percent. The city’s current share of employee health insurance amounts to $874,987.
In addition, the city also pays for some retiree health benefits (for those retiring before 2001 that are pre-Medicare); with the city’s share totaling $111,997. The average premium cost to the retirees is 17.1 percent of the total cost. Again, this is less than the 21 percent national average for current employees.
Why is Creve Coeur paying a larger share of the health care premiums than 75 percent of the municipalities of the same size across the nation?
On another note, while other municipalities reduced total costs by increasing deductibles, our city administration decided this would be too much of a hardship. Creve Coeur pays a majority of the employee deductibles. The city potentially may pay:
- $1,100 of the single participants $1,500 deductible (33 employees + 6 retirees X $1,100) or $42,900.00
- $2,200 of all other participants $3,000 deductible (64 employees + 8 retirees X $2,200) or $158,400
This is a total potential reimbursement of $201,300 that could be incurred by the city for deductibles alone. Although not all participants reach their full deductible, lowering the city’s actual cost for deductibles, the principal involved is still flawed. Does your employer reimburse you for your deductible or a significant part thereof? The answer is probably no. The deductible and co-pays are usually paid by the plan participant, not the employer!
How Could the City Further Reduce Costs and still Remain Competitive?
Total cost to the city for employee health plans and retiree health plans (the city’s share) as noted above is currently $986,984.00 plus potential deductible reimbursements of $201,300 for a total exposure of $1,188,284.
If the employee and retiree cost share was increased to 20 percent across the board (still less than the surveyed cities average) the city would save $31,541 in hard cost. Eliminating the reimbursement for deductibles could save as much as $201,300 for a total potential savings of $232,841, which the city could then allocate to other city services for the citizens.
What Else Can the City Do?
It can take the lead from other cities and ensure that the employees understand the benefits of their medical savings accounts. It can ensure that the plan has good wellness benefits with lower co-pays and no deductibles for certain benefits such as childhood vaccines, and it can look into plans with incentives for employees who are non-smokers or quit smoking or who reduce and maintain a lower body mass index to encourage healthy living. It can compare the current plan, which is one shared with several other St. Louis County cities, with other plans and select the most economical option, while still giving the employees good benefits.
Why is this Important Now?
The new employee health plan to be presented to the city will be for FY 2012-13 beginning July 1, 2012. What generally happens is this: the city administration recommends a plan to the City Council at a very late date (usually June) and the Council summarily approves it without much debate. They do not delve into the details of the plan, even when it is brought to their attention as it was last year because we must pass this now to be timely and discuss it later. Later never seems to come. The later from last year is NOW! [Editor's note: sounds like what we heard in Washington We have to pass it so we can find out what is in it.]
It is time the City Council heard our voice and began early to debate on the percentage to be paid by the city for employee health plans and whether or not the city will pay a portion of employee deductibles.
We all know that health insurance is going up. Mercer, a consulting /outsourcing/ investment company, estimated in November 2011 that there would be an increase in health insurance costs of 5.7 percent for 2012. It could go higher as health care costs increase with physicians and hospitals incurring greater costs for mandated electronic medical records and some of the regulations for employers that will take effect with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Creve Coeur must be responsible to their citizens to keep the costs as low as possible and still remain competitive with other cities. This can be done with a simple change to the employee/employer percentage paid and by not reimbursing employee deductibles for them as noted above.
What Can You Do?
Encourage your council members to embrace this change.
Ask our mayoral candidates to state their position on this issue.
Be proactive! This is your city!
Editor: CCV thanks Lynn Berry for this thoughtful editorial. Lynn is a Creve Coeur resident who is a health care consultant.
Barry Glantz Response
03/08/2012
Legislative Priorities:
-Comprehensive plan update
-Financial analysis of Creve Coeur’s golf course/ice rink
-Re-invigorating the city’s commitment to sidewalks for a walking/biking community
Appointments:
In 1992, when I was first elected to the City Council, I proposed the three person appointment committee (mayor, council president, committee chairperson). The recent introduction of an interview process makes sense, enhances the policy, and should be expanded to most/all committee appointments.
Controversial Issue #1 – Trash:
This is one of the most important services that the city provides. Involvement of the Horticulture, Environment, and Beautification Committee early in contract negotiations will be of paramount importance. I would like to see the city explore the option of standard curbside pick up with the added option (paid for by the homeowner) of valet (rear) pick up if cost becomes an issue.
I would like to see more input, data, and analysis to decide whether or not the sales tax was or was not needed, and if the sales tax should or should not be repealed.
Currently, all citizens of the city have access to the valet service, but for a wide variety of reasons, not everyone chooses to use it. The issue is not one of subsidizing other people’s services, but rather opting for something other than what the current contract stipulates.
Controversial Issue #2 – TDD’s:
While I am not opposed to the TDD concept, I think that projects utilizing this method of financing should be independently studied and judiciously discussed in regard to whether or not it is an appropriate means of funding a public project for the betterment of Creve Coeur.
A super-majority vote should not be necessary for a TDD project, but I would insist on a politically independent board comprised of a wide variety of community stakeholders to thoroughly analyze and administer the project (if approved).
The comprehensive plan should be a top priority of the Planning and Zoning Commission – to guide future development (and re-development) in our city, and provide a framework for investment in our community. The mayor’s personal involvement should not be the basis of influence, but it is his job to bring community stakeholders together to help formulate the best solutions for our city.
Vision – Downtown:
Conceptually, the Town Center is a good idea – but it will be difficult to implement in this economic environment. That said, I would favor / envision a mixed-use area, with a balance of residential options, small office, and boutique retail shops, combined in a high-end design setting. In addition, this area should be pedestrian friendly and provide open gathering spaces.
Vision – Olive:
The business community should provide complimentary services to our residential neighborhoods. While market forces will typically shape the face of Olive Street Road development, our major roadways need to be well-lit, provide for bicycle/pedestrian traffic (and crossing opportunities), should have aesthetically pleasing medians, and bus shelters.
I am not in favor of access fees for infrastructure because it is a hindrance to future development and adds an additional layer of bureaucracy to local municipal government.
Budgeting, Capital Expenditures:
If the city continues to have surplus revenue, I would propose that we look at reducing our taxing structure rather than spending down our surplus.
Funds for capital projects (street repair, building maintenance or upgrades, etc.) should remain separate from operating funds (salaries, supplies, etc.) and should not be commingled.
The operating budget should absolutely be tied to a benchmark that is easily identifiable such as inflation, population, etc.
Property Tax:
Many years ago, when I was on the city council (1992-2000), I proposed the elimination of the property tax, but was rebuffed each time I brought it up. The property tax is considered a very small portion of our budget, and therefore not an intrusive, overwhelming tax burden. If that is the case, then it also should not be an issue to eliminate it, and demonstrate to our citizens that we can be responsible, respectful stewards of their tax dollars.
Pension Fund:
Creve Coeur is not immune to the financial struggles that make headline news day in and day out. We absolutely need to rethink our pension strategy to secure the future of our employees, while also respecting our taxpayers. We can no longer afford to ignore this issue and should assemble a task force comprised of financial experts, employees, residents, and all other relevant stakeholders, whose charge would be to find an equitable solution to the issue.
Subjects of Choice:
Golf course/ice rink:
These are great community assets that have not lived up to financial expectations. We need to find a solution and make these amenities stand on their own financially and not be subsidized by taxpayer dollars.
Community Survey:
According to the 2011 Creve Coeur Resident Survey, 98.3 percent of respondents rated Creve Coeur as a good to excellent place to live. Residents also gave rave reviews to the quality of services provided by the city. Our police services consistently rank at the top of this survey. Part of the mayor’s role is to maintain and improve these amenities, while also listening to and addressing the concerns of citizens who feel that other areas significantly lag in comparison.
Deer Management:
I attended all relevant meetings on this topic. The city did a wonderful job of analyzing the issue, obtaining the expertise necessary to come up with a logical solution that is not a financial burden to the taxpayers.
Annexation:
In the mid 1990’s, as a member of the city council, I was proud to vote in favor of the annexation of the western portion of our city. This is an outstanding community, with wonderful amenities such as world class businesses, medical and life science facilities, residential areas, parks in every ward – to name just a few - and there would have to be a compelling reason to consider further annexation. I have met so many residents throughout our community, while walking neighborhoods during my mayoral campaign. It would be difficult to have the same level of personal contact in a city much larger.
Website: www.glantzformayor.com
Kitchen Table Talk
02/18/2012
CCV approached Mayoral Candidates Laura Bryant and Barry Glantz suggesting that they participate in a structured back and forth Q&A discussion/debate on the electric pages of CCV. Neither candidate was receptive to this approach, so we invite them to engage in a conversation as if they were sitting down at our kitchen table. If we interviewed the candidates, our side of the conversation might go like this.
Thank you for taking the time to discuss the future of Creve Coeur for the next three years under your leadership. You both have significant experience on the Planning and Zoning Commission and on the City Council. You are both highly qualified, educationally and professionally. You are both great assets to our community. Thank you both for coming forward to lead us. Creve Coeur Voters want to know how you would lead and where you would lead us. Let’s make the discussion issue oriented. Let’s just talk about Creve Coeur.
Legislation Priorities
The Mayor rarely votes on legislation, but can have a great deal of influence through planning, proposing, and spearheading a legislative agenda. What are the first two or three matters that you would like to see come before the City Council?
Appointments
The Mayor also has a great deal of influence through the appointment process, which was recently changed to foster more transparency. Do you favor additional changes in the process and/or the committee structure? What changes?
Let’s talk about a couple of the most controversial issues facing Creve Coeur in the next three years.
Controversial Issue #1- Trash
The campaign to pass a new sales tax as a way of maintaining the existing level of trash service and the subsequent renewal of the trash hauling contract with Allied Waste was controversial- as documented by CCV. The current contract will expire during your term. What steps will you take to insure that future trash service will be affordable and appropriate? CCV asserts that the added sales tax was not needed to maintain the trash service. Would you favor repeal of the sales tax? Some say that those who utilize the valet service are being unfairly subsidized by those who don’t. Your response?
Controversial Issue #2- TDD’s
Much has been said and written about the failure of the Olive Blvd. Transportation Development District (TDD) and the Olive/Graeser TDD to accomplish all their plans (and promises) on time and within budget. At times these TDD’s generated discord in the community in the way that that they went about their business. But TDD’s and other similar creative financing techniques are legal in Missouri and stimulate development. As TDD’s, by law, must be approved by the host municipality, what additional regulation, controls, and/or governance would you favor in Creve Coeur? For example, would you favor a) requiring independent feasibility/impact studies, b) requiring long term financing commitments before approval, c) board composition requirements, or d) a super-majority vote by Council?
While on the subject of development, the Comprehensive Plan is due to be updated. The Planning and Zoning Commission is primarily responsible for managing this project. What role will you play in the process? Is it important for the Mayor to lay out a vision for the city to guide the Comprehensive Plan? What is your vision in the following two areas?
Vision- Downtown
The current Comp Plan envisions the area bounded by Old Ballas, New Ballas, and Olive as a mixed use (residential, retail, office) town center. The Planning Department has been working on a new zoning ordinance to guide the development for years, but previous versions have encountered problems with traffic projections. The current zoning would actually allow development that would be more intense than envisioned by the Comp Plan, but development has been stymied by the economic conditions and the lack of direction. What is your vision for this key part of Creve Coeur?
Vision- Olive Blvd.
The TDD’s previously discussed, and other individual projects, have highlighted the lack of a practical, cohesive plan for development along Olive Blvd., our Main Street. For example the TDD’s implemented minimal MoDOT standards for street lighting, medians, landscaping, etc.- not Creve Coeur standards. Other projects have been treated individually with respect to buffer requirements, etc. The current Comp Plan has loopholes, such as allowing a 14,000 square foot “house” that would actually be an office building. What is your vision for Olive Blvd. development? What standards would you favor for public infrastructure? Would you favor instituting access fees for infrastructure improvements on Olive?
If Creve Coeur is successful in attracting development, the financial impact is important. This leads to the subject of the City’s finances. The new sales tax has provided the City an annual surplus for the time being, and forecasts beyond a couple of years have historically been less than perfect. The City has a more than adequate reserve.
Budgeting, Capital Expenditures
With a surplus there is a temptation to expand expenditures. The City Administrator said that the surplus could be used for capital projects. How would you manage the surplus? Would you favor limiting the increase in the operating budget to inflation/and or population growth?
Property Tax
CCV has advocated reducing or eliminating the property tax at this time and putting it before the voters if it is needed in the future. While the tax rate is low, reducing it would give some relief to residents and provide an incremental stimulus to developers and home buyers. Your thoughts?
Pension Fund
The cost of trash service, police, and other city services has not increased significantly over the last few years. In fact salaries were frozen for a while. The cost which has increased significantly is the defined benefit pension fund, which covers approximately 150 employees and retirees. As a result of the stock market performance, the annual contribution (cost) had more than doubled over the last five years from less than $0.7 million to more than $1.4 million. Two significant steps have been taken to address the situation: 1) One of the two investment managers was terminated, which saves about $50,000 per year in fees. 2) An employee contribution was instituted, which will provide about $150,000 per year to the fund when fully implemented. The Pension Board, a voluntary committee, is struggling with issues such as a) Should the remaining fund manager be retained? b) Should the fund invest in commodities, real estate, index funds, etc.? c) Should a professional advisor be hired to address such strategic issues? The Board has not addressed issues such as a) Should benefits be capped at some point in the future? b) Should the retirement age be increased? c) Should participants be offered “buyouts” and be moved to the defined contribution plan which is in place for new employees? Governments at all levels are struggling with the same issues across the country. Do you believe Creve Coeur should be doing more to secure the future for its employees and for taxpayers? Should a special task force of employees, residents, and experts be formed?
This is taking a lot of your time, and we’re getting deep in the weeds with the pension stuff. So let’s wrap it up with a comment or two on subjects of your choice. Here are some of the things that residents have asked about:
Traffic reduction
Impact of teardowns/ policy recommendations
Storm water management/ rain gardens
Golf course/ ice rink
Reflections on community survey
Red light cameras/ speed traps
Deer management
Building inspectors’ responsibilities
Home occupancy inspections
Annexations
Fast food development restrictions
Once again, thank you for talking to us. Is there anything else you would like to say? Of course, what is your website?
Delayed and Denied
11/27/2011
The November 21 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting was cancelled with a notation on the city website that there were no applications to be reviewed. This announcement is discouraging and is a reminder of a lesson learned years ago. There is an inscription on the rim of the clock in Brookings quadrangle at Washington University which reads, Cedavent Horae, Opera Manent- the hours pass, work remains. As an engineering student in the 60’s one did not have to be reminded.
By law, the Planning and Zoning Commission- not the City Council- is the keeper of our Comprehensive Plan, which is the guiding document for development and zoning in Creve Coeur. One reason for this responsibility is to insulate the long range planning from transient political influence. Every developer who comes before the Commission with an application, be it for a conditional use permit or a major rezoning, must defend the request against the zoning ordinance, which is ultimately inspired by the Comprehensive Plan. Every resident who objects to the proposal in a public hearing (now conducted at P&Z meetings) must rely on the Comp Plan to make their argument. The Comp Plan should be thorough, contemporary and plain spoken in a way that residents do not have to hire lawyers to make their arguments and that the Commission has a basis to fairly act as judge and jury.
The Comprehensive Plan was published in 2002, and included implementation recommendations that the Planning and Zoning Commission should revisit the Implementation Recommendations annually … and conduct an ongoing, cyclical review of the Comprehensive Plan …. With the plan approaching its 10-year anniversary this process has been essentially ignored. Many of the planning goals have not been achieved. Over the last year or so, high profile projects, such as the Delmar Gardens office buildings, have highlighted the need to strengthen the plan in some areas. On the other hand, the paucity of successful development in other areas, particularly in the so-called Downtown District and along the east Olive corridor (Spoede to Mosley), indicates the failure of the plan to produce progress in Creve Coeur.
In the Downtown District, bounded by New Ballas, Old Ballas, and Olive, there has been no development in years. When CCV was launched in 2007, the Planning Department had already been working on a mixed use plan for years. The version which was presented to the City Council was flawed and ultimately shot down by a discouraging traffic study. Back to the drawing board, the Planning Department has since been working for many months on a new plan patterned after one adopted by Farmers Branch, Texas, an inner suburb of Dallas. CCV visited Farmers Branch a while back and found that the zoning ordinance has not inspired a single substantial development project. There are other examples across the country of failed mixed-use zoning models (Should we say missed-use?), and some local developers have discouraged this approach. Is this really what Creve Coeur residents want for our downtown? Are there viable alternatives in office, retail, or medical uses? We say (1) go back to the people and ask again, and (2) don’t place a bet on an approach with a spotty track record. The Planning and Zoning Commission must lead this project, and it begins with a Comp Plan review.
Two recent applications passing through P&Z highlight the need for a Comp Plan review for the east Olive Blvd. corridor. First, P&Z recently recommended, and the Council approved, a rezoning of the former Rose Hill Masonic Temple property from residential to General Commercial to accommodate the opening of Goddard School. This is one of numerous properties along Olive (generally between Spoede and Mosley) which are zoned residential but can be used for commercial purposes so long as the residential character is maintained. This anachronistic zoning ordinance, inspired by the Comp Plan, has put a kibosh on meaningful development of these properties. Near Spoede, one owner established an accounting office in a house, which brought all of a paint job and some awnings as the development. At the other extreme, near Mosley, a developer once proposed to construct a new 14,000 square foot house with an underground garage, to be used as an office building- a contortion to comply with the ordinance. Neither project resulted in real development- opportunities lost.
The recent P&Z approval of the Rose Hill Masonic Temple rezoning portends what is likely to happen in the long run. These properties will either remain underutilized, in some cases eyesores with low property values, or they will eventually be rezoned and developed piecemeal with hearing after hearing, never-ending uncertainty, lawyers, and all the attendant problems. Development will be inconsistent and not of the highest and best standards achievable. The future P&Z Commissions will react to applications, but the current commission will not have done its job. Planning delayed is planning denied.
CCV recommends the development of a Special Commercial District ordinance for the east Olive corridor which will inspire creative, appropriate development along this our Main Street. This ordinance must have real teeth in its protections for nearby residential areas- such concepts as pushing structures closer to the street with parking in the rear buffered by sound resistant masonry walls. The second recent P&Z decision provides an example. The Valvoline Instant Oil Change business applied to have Sunday hours and a neighboring resident objected based on the noise factor. There was no discussion about the Comp Plan, and the commission required a plastic fence even though Paul Langdon, Director of Community Development, cited the fact that it would not stop the noise. This case shows why the Comp Plan needs to be reviewed and strengthened as a first step. An Olive Corridor Special Commercial zoning ordinance must be rooted in a strong Comp Plan to provide clarity and certainty to residents as well as direction to developers. Speaking of developers, the ordinance should prohibit removing street lights and should require providing sidewalk lighting. An incremental approach will not produce the best results for either residents or developers.
The lack of good, timely planning for Olive and the Downtown has delayed and denied the betterment of Creve Coeur in these key areas.
CCV recognizes that the Planning & Zoning Commission has experienced significant turnover over the last year or so and needs some time to gain its footing. However, this needs to be accomplished in 2012 so the planning will be in place as the economy recovers. Also, both of the announced candidates for Mayor, Laura Bryant (W-4) and Barry Glantz (W-1) have significant P&Z experience. CCV calls on both to come forward with an agenda for P&Z, specifically with respect to the Comp Plan review and update.
Trick or Treat
10/31/2011
It seems like October is Trick or Treat month for Creve Coeur residents with our trash collection as well as Halloween. Last year we were told that we had to vote for a new sales tax if we wanted to keep our trash collection free- Trick or Treat. We soon found out that the goblin behind the scary costumes of some elected officials (the Creve Coeur Cares Committee) was our own trash contractor, Allied Waste, as Allied paid the postage to get the T or T message out. Then, when the budget was unveiled, the threat was proved a lie, as all of a sudden there was a $900,000 surplus created by the new tax. The city coffers got the treat, the taxpayers got the trick.
This October Allied showed up at city hall screaming Trick or Treat again. This time they didn’t hide behind a mask. We could either renew the contract early (it expires June 30) for another two years and get a treat- an immediate $10,000 per month reduction. Or we could wait and put it out for bids, which would presumably cost $80,000 for the eight months between now and June 30. Of course, by extending the contract, we don’t get to see competitive bids. Trick or Treat. The City Council passed the extension- two years with another three year option- and did not even consider seeking a competitive bid to see if the potential savings over the full five years would offset the short term $80,000 treat.
Residents who follow city hall affairs are understandably frustrated, exasperated, and to some extent disgusted. Bob Kent wrote in his 10/25/11 newsletter:
At last night’s Council meeting you knew the fix was in when Mr. Perkins in his opening remarks suddenly stated that after some reflection he believed a two year extension of the contract (with an additional three year option) was the right answer. It soon became clear that, although a number of other waste haulers were willing to bid on both curbside and rear-yard pickup, the Council was not about to open it up to bidding at this time- although much lip service and agonizing regrets were expressed. …..
Despite a plea by an Allied competitor for an opportunity for a competitive bid it went on deaf ears. A question about the propriety of the Creve Coeur Cares gang (Kistner, Kreuter, Wang, and Dielmann), who solicited the funds from Allied to mail the tax advocacy flyers, now voting on the extension without a competitive bid also fell on deaf ears. Although in Ms. Kistner’s lexicon it was a red herring.
After the vote was actually taken, Mr. Kent wrote on 10/30/11:
It just goes to show you that if you (Allied) will pay for the mail, this Council will deliver it to you. The Council has put the trash in the can on the biggest city contract and sent it rollin’ down the road to 2015. Creve Coeur profiles in courage, chapter one. Yes, Allied is going to reduce the price $10,000 per month for the services that probably should not have been charged in that manner in the first place, but how much more could have been saved by bidding out the contract will not be known.
Mr. Kent has also pointed out that the extension perpetuates the conundrum of rear-yard trash and curbside recycling. Residents are paying, through their taxes, for rear-yard service when they still have to take the cumbersome recycle bins to the curb. Some residents are not able to handle the bins and some don’t want to be bothered. The result- some recyclable material gets thrown into the trash and we all pay for a recycle service that is not used universally. (There may be some Missouri law that impacts the situation- a law that libertarians should oppose.) Nonetheless, hiring consultants to conduct surveys will not make the combined trash and recycling service more efficient or less costly. Although the Finance Committee presumably endorsed the Allied extension, Chairman Stan Edlestein recommends (we suppose speaking as an individual resident this time) dropping the rear-yard service for those who don’t pay a premium. So now we have two years to resolve the conundrum. Let’s see which of our elected officials, or which candidate, steps up to the plate.
[Aside- did you know that rear-yard service means you (theoretically) don’t have to take your trash to the curb if you have a front or side entry garage- just shove it out the door. They don’t publicize this for some reason.]
Then we come to the issue of the budget surplus, which now soars to over one million dollars per year with the $120,000 per year treat from Allied. At the October 10 Council meeting mayoral candidate Laura Bryant asked what was going to be done with the extra funds. The Council members did not respond. The City Administrator said that more projects from the wish list of capital projects could be funded. These could be street projects, storm water projects (which are the responsibility of MSD), a public works garage, a community message board, etc. If you like conspiracy theories try this on. If you have friends or relatives in Kirkwood you may have heard that a surprise project to purchase some downtown properties and turn them into a parking lot has stirred controversy. There is a question on the current Creve Coeur community survey about an indoor recreation facility, but there is no such project listed anywhere in the wish list. The Council refused to zero out the property tax despite a budget surplus- another Trick for October 2011. If the survey can be massaged, will a recreation complex be dangled as a Treat for October 2012?
ONE MORE DOMINO
10/21/2011
This Meeting Note is being posted as an Editorial due to the importance of the subject matter- a rezoning proposed on Olive Blvd. The first few paragraphs recap the proposal and the public hearing. This is followed by CCV’s comment.
*** Rezoning 11122 Olive to General Commercial ***
The applicant desires to establish a Goddard School for Early Childhood Development at 11122 Olive, previously the Rose Hill Masonic Temple. The building will be improved with a new façade, entry, and minor additions. Other improvements include removing the eastern entry, a new sidewalk and drop off area, replacing part of the rear parking lot with a playground, and landscaping on Olive. (There are approximately 400 Goddard facilities in the US.)
The site is currently zoned Single-Family Residential [C]. This zoning requires a 3-acre site to establish a day-care center or school. As this site is only 1.5 acres, the applicant requested a rezoning to General Commercial [GC], where a day-care center is a permitted use. The property to the east is currently zone GC. The properties to the south and west are currently zoned Single-Family Residential; however, the property to the west has been converted to a commercial use as permitted under zoning rules which preserve the residential character of the site..
The staff report prepared by Whitney Kelly, City Planner, concludes that the proposal meets with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan as a neighborhood-oriented business. The report recommended a significant revision in the proposed site plan to establish a 15-foot wide landscaped sidewalk corridor and some other minor changes.
An official public hearing was conducted at this P&Z meeting. Most of the discussion concerned the location of the sidewalk. The applicant planned to leave the sidewalk at the curb of Olive, whereas the staff recommended that the sidewalk be dropped back into the 15-foot corridor per the city pedestrian plan. Ms. Kelly noted that a rezoning to GC would permit a large range of uses should the Goddard facility close at some future date.
No speakers opposed the rezoning or the project. The commission voted unanimously (Commissioner Kramer was absent.) to recommend approval of the rezoning and the site development plan to the City Council.
Comment: The proposal will be a significant and desirable improvement to this underutilized property. While CCV agrees with the recommendations of the staff report concerning the site development plan, the rezoning to GC opens up too many undesirable uses in the long term. Not too long ago residents in Ward 3 objected when the prospect arose that the zoning granted to the Parc Provence development could allow offices or other commercial uses- different from the original plan- on the remaining undeveloped property. This rezoning could form the basis for the same scenario, should the Goddard School close down in the future.
Fortunately, there is a better way. A simple text amendment, reducing the minimum lot size from three acres to 1.5 acres, for day-care centers in Residential Districts would accommodate the Goddard proposal nicely. If there is a concern that this could have a negative affect in other residential areas, a restriction could be included that a site less than three acres have access to an arterial street.
There is another important reason to refrain from hasty rezoning of this property at this time. It is clear that residential zoning on Olive is anachronistic; something should be done. However, it should not be done one domino at a time. CCV recommends a review of the Comprehensive Plan, including town-hall meetings of nearby residential subdivisions, and the creation of a new Special Commercial District along Olive which not only enhances the prospects for creative development along Olive but also protects the residential areas and thoroughly addresses the traffic issues. Such a zoning classification would have carefully crafted buffer provisions and be restricted to uses which fulfill the best interests of the residents.
Say No to Property Tax
09/08/2011
The assessed value of residential property in Creve Coeur has declined from $465 million in 2010 to $448 million in 2011. This includes new construction put on the rolls during the year. The commercial property declined from $352 million to $350 million. Now the City Council must determine the property tax rate for the year. While there are many technical considerations, the bottom line is set by the Hancock amendment- taxes may not be increased without a vote. However, the council may increase the rate to compensate for the decline in the assessment without a vote.
The property tax rate should not be increased. The property tax should be phased out completely.
The FY2012 budget projects $687,800 revenue from the property tax, contributing to a $912,562 surplus projected for the General (operating) Fund. The property tax is not needed to balance the budget.
The promotional campaign for the 0.25 percent sales tax on the ballot last year emphasized that much of the tax would be paid by visitors to Creve Coeur, not the residents. While this argument did not make much sense to CCV (residents still pay the tax even though somebody else does too), the voters were hoodwinked into passing the tax by a threat of trash fees. Now the sales tax dollars are rolling in and the property tax is not needed. And the benefit of eliminating the tax would go straight to Creve Coeur residents and property owners.
City officials say that Creve Coeur taxes are low compared to other communities. Well, Town and Country and Maryland Heights have no- zero- property tax. And Chesterfield has a $0.030 rate compared to the $0.087 rate proposed for Creve Coeur. (Note: the notorious Creve Coeur Cares political committee put out a chart which said Chesterfield had a $0.30 rate- a convenient misplacement of the decimal point.) Olivette and Frontenac have higher rates, but they have their own fire departments. So Creve Coeur is surrounded by lower overall property tax rates.
Much has been said about the need for economic development in Creve Coeur. We want to attract businesses and homebuyers. Elimination of the property tax would make investment in a home or business property in Creve Coeur immediately more attractive. The publicity can be effective, as it was for Chesterfield when the rate was reduced. This would generate more economic activity- and probably some more sales taxes too.
Eliminating the property tax is the fair thing to do. While Creve Coeur is wealthier than most communities, it is also older and more dependent on savings and retirement income. Home values, the major measure of wealth in many households, have declined. It is asking too much to pay the same tax on a declining asset. In this continuing and demoralizing economic environment, every little bit helps.
Finally, eliminating the tax is not irreversible. If the tax is needed in the future, let the voters decide.
Behind Closed Doors
07/02/2011
The City Council debated the so-called informal vetting process at length during the June 27 meeting. Charlotte D’Alfonso (W-4) placed the topic on the agenda as a result of inquires she had received about the potential Chich-fil-A restaurant at Olive and Dautel. (See News, Cluck-Cluck in CC?, 6/4/2011) Several of her constituents asked if she was one of the City Council members who had met with the company and were said- by the company representative- to support the proposal. D’Alfonso asked the Council to discuss a policy covering meetings with developers which would make the actions of the Council members more transparent to residents. She started the discussion by saying that her policy would be to include someone from the city staff if she met with a developer.
Ward 1 CP’s David Kreuter and Beth Kistner disclosed that they had met with the Chick-fil-A developer last October. Kreuter said he thought the project had gone away. Kistner said such meetings were rare and that she employed an open door/open mind policy. Kistner emphatically defended her policy and actions and said that whatever she did was to advance Creve Coeur. She said, in her normal dignified and articulate way, that she would never seek or accept any financial benefit from a developer. She did not speak specifically about campaign finance contributions, but Kreuter said, in his normal jocular and straightforward style, the he would take (campaign) money from anybody! [Whenever we report on Mr. Kreuter we remind ourselves that, according to Mr. Kreuter, Creve Coeur residents are unfairly taxed too low. He almost never meets a tax, fee, or expenditure that he doesn’t like.]
Dr. Robert Hoffman (W-3) said his policy was to handle discussions outside the Council chambers on a case by case basis. He tried to draw an analogy between meeting with a developer about a zoning issue and meeting with a resident about the rain garden ordinance. Jeanne Rhoades (W-4) did not buy that comparison. She seemed to favor including city staff in such meetings, citing a policy in Wildwood, and asked City Administrator Mark Perkins for his input. Perkins said he or a member of his staff would certainly participate if asked, but he was not ready to say it should be mandatory. He said that city staff routinely received inquires from developers and that the policy was not to forward such inquires to elected representatives.
Former W-4 Council member and 2012 mayoral candidate Laura Bryant was present and pleaded with the Council to be completely transparent. She warned that such dealings behind closed doors can lead to too many misrepresentations and misunderstandings, which ultimately result in unnecessary confrontational situations with residents. Planning and Zoning Commissioner and 2012 mayoral candidate Barry Glantz was present but did not speak. Mayor Dielmann, a proponent of the informal development process, was absent due to an eye infection.
As the discussion continued for almost an hour it became apparent to CCV that the real problem was not the lack of a policy but too many policies. Several Council members spoke to their policies. Mr. Perkins has a policy. Mayor Dielmann’s policy is well known. Add the policies and activities of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Economic Development Committee (which Mr. Mel Klearman characterized as a black hole) and the result is a hodge-podge. It is not surprising that developers seek early buy-in on their projects from elected officials. Developers need their vote, not information or advice!
If our elected officials want to effectively improve Creve Coeur they should work to hone the development process by defining the roles of all the participants and play to their respective strengths and capabilities. Such a process does not have to limit free speech or political activity. But it should be much more open, so that all members of the team- including residents- can pull together. In this process the primary role of our elected officials is to represent the residents. They can do this best in the sunshine, not behind closed doors.
Welcome to Creve Coeur
05/05/2011
Editor’s note: Please pardon the following diversion and chalk it up to spring fever.
Everybody has some favorite scenes or dialog from old movies- those words you can’t forget, like We’re going to need a bigger boat. Well, last Saturday night Channel 9 aired the 1965 classic, Dr. Zhivago. It has one of our favorite political history scenes. The title character, Yuri Zhivago completes his service as a medical officer in World War I and makes his way to Moscow to join his wife Tonya and their child. The Russian Revolution has changed the entire political landscape. The Leninists are in charge and collectivism has begun. Yuri, exhausted, stumbles up the front steps and into the arms of Tonya. Shortly the front door of the mansion opens and they enter. There are 20 or more people wearing winter coats standing in the front room. Tonya turns to a man and speaks first.
Tonya: This is comrade Yeltsin, our local delegate. He lives here.
Zhivago: How do you do? Welcome!
A middle aged woman dressed in black approaches.
Tonya: Comrade Katrygina
Zhivago: Welcome!
Katrygina (in a stern voice): It is not for you to welcome us.
Tonya: Comrade Katrygina is the chairman of the residents’ committee.
Katrygina (almost scolding): There was living space for 13 families in this one house.
Zhivago (sheepishly): Yes, this is a better arrangement. More just.
With this statement Zhivago, a poet and idealist, forsakes property rights without objection. Only when Katrygina tells him that he will get his ration book when he starts work does he show a little backbone as he snaps back, I have always worked.
Of course, there is no direct analogy from this scene to life today in Creve Coeur, Missouri. But let’s start with this- the majority of Creve Coeur residents have worked most of their lives and have owned property at some point in time. What a blessing it is to have had the opportunity to work and have the right to own property. What an achievement it is- by our founders and forefathers- to break the bonds of another way of life and to preserve the American way for 235 years. But, as Ronald Reagan would say, this could all be lost in a generation or two. Our work is not done; it will never be done.
The work does begin at the local level. This is why we fight against eminent domain abuse. This is why we support Golden Rule zoning regulations. This is why we opposed the smoking ban on private property and will continue to oppose mandatory rain gardens. This is why we oppose government mandates and actions without the consent of the governed. And why we oppose taxation without representation by Transportation Development Districts. And why we stand for truth in spending. And why we must be vigilant.
Now more than ever we must also engage the battle at the national level. This year more than 50 percent of our population will not pay any federal income taxes; we have reached the tipping point. The concept of shared sacrifice has now reached the point that the fair share of the burden for half of us is zero- or less. We are beginning to hear echoes of Katrygina in the national political discourse- It is not for you to welcome us. Governments at all levels are pushing for more revenue while those who propose steps to cut spending or reform unsustainable programs are often met with catcalls. It is not for you to welcome us. Politicians slot people into groups, deceive them with half truths, and pander for contributions and votes. It is not for you to welcome us. Media is biased and does not tell the whole truth. It is not for you to welcome us. Educational institutions present a distorted, politically correct version of American history (if they teach it at all) and teachers skip class to protest against reform. It is not for you to welcome us.
We must stand up for our heritage and values- in Creve Coeur, in Missouri, and as American citizens. We must engage with our elected officials and candidates in a bipartisan way. Encourage them to respect American principles and our heritage. We must engage with educators to communicate history and civics in a way that respects our values. We must support organizations* which promote the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense. We must not flinch in this struggle. Every generation must be the greatest generation. Stand up; stand up for our heritage- now.
*If you would like information on two respected organizations contact CCV.
Dr. Scott Saunders- Ward 4
03/11/2011
Dr. Scott Saunders is a candidate for City Council for Ward 4. He is a 13-year resident of Creve Coeur and resides on Chasselle Lane. Dr. Saunders is Associate Professor of Pediatrics and Developmental Biology at the Washington University School of Medicine. We thank Scott for responding to our questionnaire. Here is his response:
Creve Coeur residents deserve a City Council member with broad experience in issues facing the city and with a proven track record of careful analysis, public discussion, and thoughtful decision-making related to those issues. My candidacy for City Council is a natural progression of over ten years of appointed service that I believe reflects just those qualities.
Given the current economic climate and immediately foreseeable forecast I believe that careful financial management of this city will be a critical area for our City Council to demonstrate ongoing commitment and leadership. That management involves the careful balancing of expenditures (the budget-of which contributions to the Employee Pension Plan is but one component) against revenues.
The residents recently approved a 0.25 percent sales tax increase to enhance city revenues. While I agree with reviewing all of our various fees on a continuing basis to insure that we are fairly recouping fees due to the city in comparison with surrounding communities, I am also very much in favor of promoting an environment that both attracts new businesses to Creve Coeur and helps our existing businesses attract more sales, thereby further increasing revenues at the existing tax rate.
Expenditures I believe are where our City Council has the greatest responsibility to insure that we carefully spend each dollar now so as to protect city services in the future. While I believe that every area of the budget should be scrutinized for potential reductions in expenditures, I think that there are two approaches deserving our immediate focus of attention.
The first approach to controlling expenditures is by reviewing essential city services for areas where reorganization of the delivery of those services might allow for direct reductions in the budget. A recent promising example of this is our own Police Department entering into a shared dispatching facility agreement that is predicted to yield a significant reduction in expenditures.
The second approach would be directing our attention specifically to identifying and addressing non-essential city services that are currently displaying the greatest ongoing losses. For example, Creve Coeur operates a municipal golf course that as in the case of many other municipalities is not self-sustaining and operates at a significant deficit. City staff is currently exploring mechanisms to improve the financial health of the golf course. We need to accelerate those efforts and set timetables and goals to assess the effectiveness of those efforts while keeping open consideration of all possible options.
The Employee Pension Plan is one unique area of expenditure. The city made a major move to control costs several years ago by changing to a Defined Contribution (DC) Plan from a Defined Benefit (DB) Plan for newly hired employees. However the city continues to have, and will have for many years to come, a contractual obligation to expenditures for members of the DB Plan. The City of Creve Coeur has an existing Employee Pension Fund Board consisting of residents with financial expertise and employee representatives. This Board has recently been discussing and considering a number of options with respect to the DB Plan. I believe that we should start by fully supporting and enhancing those efforts, providing them with additional expertise if necessary, before the creation of an independent Task Force.
The Olive Blvd TDD I believe is an issue that needs to be definitively resolved in a timely manner and I am personally willing to discuss and consider any viable options. Critical to that consideration is recognition that MODOT has ultimate authority in the issuance of permits as Olive is a part of the State roadway system and therefore will have significant impact in determining which potential options may indeed at this point be viable.
Several discussions have arisen during the process of the current TDDs on Olive Blvd. regarding fundamental elements of the roadway including medians, streetlights, and issues of general streetscape. What is apparent to me from those discussions is that we do not have enough clearly defined standards regarding these critical elements of what is our Main Street. I would support during the process of reviewing and revising the Comprehensive Plan that P&Z direct attention to developing these standards.
The proposed Downtown I believe is an area of critical importance to the City of Creve Coeur. The land in question currently contains land for sale, vacant land, and land currently relatively underdeveloped. In the current economic climate development has slowed but this will change as the economy improves. Now is the time to discuss and put in place the zoning necessary to insure that redevelopment of these properties will ultimately proceed in a manner that is most beneficial to and desired by the residents of Creve Coeur.
Key issues are that redevelopment should provide desirable space for public activities and gathering, be pedestrian friendly, and, critically, that the size and scope of the development is appropriate such that the roadways can handle the traffic while achieving these other objectives.
Achieving these goals requires City Council leadership with experience in city planning, zoning, and traffic mitigation.
Both of the final two questions related to transparency in government speak to the issue of trust. As a physician who specializes in the care of newborns in an intensive care setting, I am astutely aware of the trust that the families of the patients that I care for place in me and the importance of maintaining that trust in order for me to serve them. I think the same relationship exists between elected officials and their constituents. Our behavior at all times should be governed first and foremost based on how it relates to our respect for and continued preservation of that trust.
More information about by background and experience can be found at www.electsaunders.com and I may be contacted at electsaunders@yahoo.com or by phone at 314-579-9101.
Charlotte D'Alfonso- Ward 3
03/10/2011
Charlotte D’Alfonso is a candidate for City Council for Ward 3. She is a 6-year resident of Creve Coeur and resides on Ladue Oaks Drive. Career highlights include management positions with Sherwin Williams and Cargill. We thank Charlotte for responding to our questionnaire. Here is her response:
Priorities- What are the 2-4 major issues/concerns for Creve Coeur? What is the major issue/concern for your own Ward?
First, a major concern for Creve Coeur is traffic. I will discourage commercial zoning from encroaching into residential neighborhoods and negatively affecting traffic. It is imperative to have council people who can and will protect the residents. My opponent’s business relationships require him to recuse himself on too many issues directly affecting Ward 3 (Delmar Gardens) which will likely have major impact on residential property values and traffic flow. Not having to recuse myself on major issues, I am best qualified to advocate for our residents.
Second, as a city, we need to keep our tax rates under control. While we have a low sales tax, the addition of property taxes and TDD’s raises the overall taxes we pay. The Olive Blvd TDD (of which my opponent is a long-standing member) raised our sales tax rate without voter approval. The result so far has been a drastic cut in scope of project improvements promised to the community. I will encourage fiscal responsibility by exploring the privatization of some of our highly subsidized programs (i.e. the golf course), adhering to our comprehensive plan, and creating a favorable environment for businesses that could contribute to our sales tax base. The revenues from such endeavors would contribute to maintaining our high level of services (i.e. trash and leaf pick- up).
A third concern is to have transparency in municipal dealings. I would like to pass an ordinance that has a code of ethics for our elected officials, putting an end to informal vetting and back door promises.
Finally, the fact that my opponent ignored a petition of 450+ Ward III voices in choosing their own representation is of concern. Representatives are there to represent us. I believe freedom of expression and the right to petition and be heard by your government should always be allowed and encouraged.
Budget- What areas of expenditures offer the most potential for cost savings? How would you guide staff in pursuing these? (direct suggestions, Council work sessions, form special task force/committee, other)
I would request that the city administrator ask staff to look into more privatization and regionalization of services. The results from the past indicate that they do an excellent job in these areas. The employee pension plan needs to be reviewed and monitored. I would also pay close attention to our expenditures. For example, a recent council discussion centered on whether to spend $25,000 or $35,000 on a sign to direct people to the golf center. While I appreciate directional signage, I would rather investigate golf course privatization, creating a revenue-producing operation rather than an expense.
Employee Pension Plan- Would you favor establishing a special task force of experts, residents, and employees to consider options with respect to the defined benefit plan. Absolutely. Especially today, employee pensions are increasingly complex and potentially very expensive. It makes sense to bring in a combination of stakeholders and experts to review options and make recommendations that serve the best long-term interests of the city.
Revenue- With the passage of the 0.25 percent sales tax, do you support additional revenue initiatives? (increase business license fees, review application/inspection fees annually, hotel tax, more cameras, increase fines, other)
I do not support additional taxes, especially without sunset clauses in this economic time. The proven best way to bring in revenue is to create a favorable business climate with companies that works in conjunction with residents. More businesses and happy residents equals more revenue.
TDD/CID- Do you support Council Members sitting on TDD/CID boards? Would you support guidelines for TDD proposals beyond those set by statute? (maximum duration, maximum tax rate on a business, other) Specifically with regard to the Olive TDD, what course of action do you recommend? (keep seeking additional funding opportunities, close-out the current TDD and move toward a new approach, other)
Having council members (which includes my opponent) sit on TDD/CID boards is a conflict of interest because it gives the businesses involved a false sense of confidence, while lacking objective oversight. A city staff member would be a more objective overseer. I believe we need to develop an immediate exit strategy for the current Olive TDD. $6 million, with an additional $4 million expected, is a significant amount of money for 6/10 of a mile. The project has been a failure in cost/time management, producing a drastic cut in scope for improvements promised to the community.
Olive Blvd- Specifically with respect to Olive Blvd. beautification, would you sponsor and support the development of a comprehensive plan, to include standards for medians, sidewalks, lighting, and landscaping, before any additional TDD/CID projects are approved.
We spent a lot of time and money on the comprehensive plan to make sure it represented many different viewpoints. While the plan could be simplified, a completely new plan is not needed. We should adhere to the priorities set in that original plan. Standards should exist for sidewalks, lighting and landscaping, so that everyone knows the expectations and requirements during the planning phase of a project, not after millions of dollars have already been spent.
Downtown- The current newsletter requests input from residents. What guidance would you give staff and P&Z? (reduce the area, stick closer to current district development parameters, move quickly to eliminate the uncertainty, other)
Resident input is essential to successful business development outcomes. I would ensure that e-mails are read and entered into council meeting records. We should eliminate uncertainty by establishing and following standards. I support realistic development of a downtown area, but not at the cost of increased taxes, fewer services, and the threat of eminent domain to our long-standing business partners.
Transparency- What is your thinking about the so-called informal vetting process with respect to zoning? Are any rules needed? For example, should previous meetings between applicants and elected officials be listed on the zoning application? Or should such meetings be routinely disclosed at the public hearing? Are you aware of zoning matters in your own ward that are likely to require you to recuse yourself?
I would like to pass an ordinance that has a code of ethics for our elected officials, putting an end to informal vetting and back door promises. Previous meetings should be disclosed at public hearings. We deserve the right to know what our elected officials are offering or promising to individuals and businesses. Instances of informal threats to use eminent domain by people in authority have been well documented. We need to stop practices that keep residents uninformed and result in costly zoning battles with businesses and developers.
I am not aware of any situation that would cause me to recuse myself. Not having to recuse myself on major issues, I am determined to advocate for our residents.
Political- If a situation similar to the Creve Coeur Cares political committee came up, would you oppose seeking donations from city vendors/contractors? Do you accept donations from vendors/contractors/developers for your own campaign?
I have not and will not accept donations from city vendors, contractors or development corporations. Seeking or accepting such donations puts both parties in a compromising position. In addition, I have formed a candidate committee that is entirely made up of residential supporters.
I look forward to the opportunity to represent the citizens of Creve Coeur and I ask for your vote.
For more information see www.charlottedalfonso.com
Breaking Down the Capital Plan
03/07/2011
City Administrator Mark Perkins recently released the first draft of the proposed Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for review by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. A public hearing will be held in April.
The CIP covers all the projected sources and uses of funds for capital projects and debt service over the next five years. The projected capital project outlays for the 2012 fiscal year, beginning July 1, 2011, are about $3.7 million. Debt payments, mainly for the Millennium Park bonds will be $1.1 million, bringing the total CIP for the first year to $4.8 million.
The major funding source for capital projects is a 0.5 percent sales tax, part of the 7.675 percent total sales tax in Creve Coeur. Perkins projects these revenues to be $1.85 million for 2012, up from the 2011 projection. Funding is also provided by federal, state, and county grants for some parks and road projects. A $584,000 federal grant will pay 80 percent of a $730,000 project for Conway Road. Another federal grant will pay 60 percent of a $530,000 Olive lighting project west of I-270. But there is no money, federal or otherwise, to restore the lighting east of I-270 where it is needed. The grant money for 2012, a total of over $1.6 million, increases the 2012 CIP to an abnormally high level. Mr. Perkins and staff have done a good job of securing grant funding for Creve Coeur within the rules. These are not earmarks bestowed by our Washington representatives. Creve Coeur was one of the first municipalities to receive funding from the local E-911 sales tax which went into effect last year. Unfortunately, outside money is not always available for some of our highest priority projects. For example, this type of funding is generally not available for Transportation Development District projects.
The major new project ($750,000) introduced in this plan is a comprehensive overhaul of the mechanical systems at the government center and the Dielmann ice rink. A much needed project to replace the 60-year-old boiler ($200,000) was delayed and incorporated into this project. About $500,000 of the project will be “creatively financed” with a private company to guarantee that the project will generate cost savings to pay for the cost of the upgrades. The preliminary projected energy savings are $50,000 per year, a 10-year payout. Mr. Perkins should be prepared to explain the justification for the project and the way it is to be financed, just as a business or homeowner would analyze such a proposal.
Much of the CIP is a mundane recitation of street repairs and equipment purchases. This generally receives a perfunctory review. These expenditures should be scrutinized more closely and benchmarked against other cities. For example, the Public Works Department plans to purchase a 2-ton dump truck with plow and salt spreader for $108,000. A similar truck was purchased recently. However, Maryland Heights chose to purchase a 1-ton truck with plow and spreader for $61,000. According to one expert, the 2-ton truck is a good price but is not necessary. It is the same size that MoDOT uses for interstate highways; the 1-ton truck would do the job and save $47,000.
Dr. Robert Hoffman- Ward 3
02/23/2011
My name is Bob Hoffman, candidate for Council Member Ward 3, running for the one year unexpired that I was appointed to last fall. Since being seated on the Council I have met many constituents of Ward 3 and the city in general. The major concern that I have encountered is zoning. The major issue that got me involved in city politics was the attempted rezoning of the Thompson Center. I learned much about the process and was involved in many meetings. While we were successful in the blocking of a large development proposed several years ago, I am sure the issue for the site will come forward again. I am strongly committed to continue the present -A- zoning for the site.
My priority for Ward 3 is to maintain the present zoning and development in accordance with our Comprehensive Plan. There are several parcels of land that may come before P&Z and City Council .I am a firm believer in the Comprehensive Plan. The feeling of many people that I have spoken to is that maintaining the residential quality of our neighborhoods is the highest priority.
Regarding our budget, I would like to see us explore more cooperative efforts similar to the dispatching services soon to go live with neighboring communities. I believe that this will be the best option going forward to save dollars. Regionalization will become necessary for the entire area to survive. I think it would be worthwhile for all departments to examine their options.
I believe that the framework to oversee our pension plan is already in place. As with any business entity, this plan needs to be reexamined with regularity, especially in light of our present economic environment.
At present I do not support any new tax revenues. I do believe that businesses and private citizens alike need to pay their fair share of fees and inspections. Increasing revenue was never the goal of red light cameras. The purpose of the cameras remains safety. The behavior changes that have occurred in regards to red light running are already apparent. We should continue to monitor the intersections and adjust the placement of cameras to decrease the number of crashes.
I voted against the recent proposals for two CIDs because I believe that citizens should have a direct voice in increasing taxes. The present TDD needs a rapid exit strategy. If additional funding cannot be obtained, we need to find a quick and effective way to end the TDD.I am greatly concerned that lighting has been removed along Olive. We should never sacrifice control of such matters to a TDD board without direct oversight. The resultant lack of lighting, proper medians and other beautification need to be addressed. I understand that the funding is lacking for such amenities, but alternative funding must be explored.
In regards to a downtown area, I believe we need to look at a central theme or idea to bring people to the area. It should be pedestrian friendly and have bike racks to minimize auto traffic.
Regarding informal vetting: There is a need to have preliminary discussions with developers in order to bring in the commerce necessary to maintain the high quality of service our residents demand. With that said, disclosure is a must even if it occurs in executive session. We have the means per our Charter to discuss delicate matters in private session and this is where it may belong. With the advent of electronic data, all of our records are public and accessible. It will be interesting to see how the public hearings work out at P&Z.
Politically, I did recuse myself at P&Z for the issue of the Ronald McDonald House. While I am not paid by St. John’s Hospital, I am a practicing pediatrician and use St. John’s as a major admission facility for my patients. In the future, I see no other conflicts on the horizon. I have not received any contributions from anyone who does business in the city. I do not oppose seeking such donations along with complete disclosure.
My contact information is: Hoddman@aol.com
Home phone: 314-576-4885
Thank you, Bob Hoffman Council Member Ward 3
TDD's Flub Again
02/21/2011
The new traffic light at Graeser and Olive will be turned on around March 1 according to City Administrator Mark Perkins. The light and the related alignment of Graeser with Dautel Lane are being provided by a Transportation Development District (TDD) funded by a one percent sales tax at Walgreens and other stores in the immediate area. The City of Creve Coeur contributed $200,000 to the project and made a commitment to fund an additional $55,000 per year if the TDD sales tax receipts fall short of the amount needed for the annual debt service payments. (The annual payments won’t be necessary if rumors of a major new retail development at the southwest corner of the intersection come true.)
The improvements on Olive at Graeser and between Craig and Old Ballas have not been cheap and have not come without some unintended consequences. By turning the financing and management of the projects over to independent TDD’s, the City added millions of dollars of interest and overhead costs to the projects and also gave up some control of the results. Both the Olive Blvd. TDD and the Olive/Graeser TDD have made design decisions which fall short of residents’ expectations. For example, both TDD’s have elected to reduce street lighting to the minimal requirements of MODoT. Olive is a State highway and MODoT requires street lighting only at intersections. Gone are the traditional street lights on both sides of the street, resulting in a very dark drive along parts of Creve Coeur’s Main street.
The reduction of lighting between Craig and Old Ballas is particularly disappointing, as four City officials- Mayor Dielmann and City Council members Beth Kistner, David Kreuter, and Robert Haddenhorst- control the Board of Directors of the Olive Blvd. TDD. They should see to it that the lighting is restored. The Olive/Graseser TDD is controlled by the Pace Development organization, but the City has considerable influence with its financial commitment. The street lighting should be restored here too. And, to prevent this problem in the future, the City Council should establish design standards for lighting, medians, landscaping, and other elements of street improvements on Olive. Better still the City should not turn its job over to TDD’s in the first place.
Sorry, John
01/29/2011
Observers got a bit of a history lesson as well as a peak at the possible future last Monday night when the City Council deliberated the proposed Community Improvement Districts. (See Meeting Notes January 24, 2011 and December 13, 2010- Part 2 for background.)
City Administrator Mark Perkins told us how Mr. John Capps, representing Plaza Motors, wrote to him in October, 2009 proposing a CID which would fund improvements and expenses for the Plaza Motors campus. Missouri state law provides the authority for Community Improvement Districts, permits such separate political entities to impose sales taxes, and limits the use of the tax receipts. The law also requires such districts to gain the approval of the host community, Creve Coeur in this case.
Since October 2009, we do not know what discussions took place between Mr. Perkins, Mr. Capps, and the Board of Directors of the Olive Blvd. TDD, which includes Mayor Dielmann (Chairman) and Council Members Beth Kistner (W-1), David Kreuter (W-1), and Robert Hadenhorst (W-3), but when Mr. Capps’ CID came up for approval Monday night it was accompanied by another CID proposal. This additional CID would provide $800,000 to remove nine utility poles on the north side of Olive- work that was originally promised by the Olive Blvd. TDD. As we know from various reporting, including Fox 2’s Elliot Davis, the Olive TDD is millions over budget and years behind schedule. Mr. Perkins explained that this utility burial could not be accomplished at this time without the additional CID funding. (The total cost to the taxpayers would be considerably more, with interest and administrative costs for the CID.)
As the discussion continued, Council Member Laura Bryant (W-4) provided historical context explaining her intent to vote FOR the Plaza Motors CID. She remembered how previous city planners (before Mr. Paul Langdon) and city officials had unfairly rebuffed Mr. Capps in the early 2000’s when the company wanted to expand in the downtown area. For example, in a 2001 letter Scott Haley, then Director of Community Development, said, It is my opinion, and the opinion conveyed by several members of the Planning & Zoning Commission, that your continued expansion onto other under-utilized parcels in our core area is not the best, long-term decision for the community. This off-the-record vetting process by unnamed members of the Planning & Zoning Commission was inappropriate and unfortunate. Mr. Capps did not get a proper hearing, and eventually the Plaza Motors collision center was located in Maryland Heights, subtracting many thousands of dollars of future sales tax revenue from Creve Coeur. CP Bryant said that she would vote for the Plaza CID as a gesture of fairness. However, she emphatically denounced the additional CID as a self-serving scheme (of the Olive TDD directors) to bail out the failed TDD. To avoid confusion we will refer to the additional CID as the TDD bail-out.
After CP Bryant spoke it seemed that the Plaza Motors CID would be approved, as Bryant would vote for it and the three TDD directors would vote for both CID’s to implement the TDD bail-out scheme. Those four votes would at least set up a tie-breaking vote by Mayor Dielmann. Approval of the TDD bail-out was less predictable. Without Bryant, which of the remaining Council members would provide a fourth vote? It would have to be A.J. Wang (W-2), who is not up for re-election this year, Tara Nealey (W-2), who is unopposed on the ballot, or Robert Hoffman (W-3), who also is unopposed. Both Kistner and Hadenhorst are opposed in this April’s election, as reported elsewhere in CCV. Looking forward, and also to be considered in the political machinations, Bryant has announced her intent to run for Mayor in 2012 and both Kistner and Hoffman have been rumored to have similar plans. (Mayor Dielmann is not eligible for another term.)
A possible turning point in the deliberations came when CP Hoffman stated his concerns about taxation without representation and said that private businesses could pay for their own security. After being appointed by Mayor Dielmann to fill David Kassander’s seat until the April election, some Ward 3 residents questioned Dr. Hoffman’s independence. He is now running unopposed for a one-year term and will be closely watched by constituents. We will not judge whether his vote was more policy based or more politically based. As we said in Meeting Notes, if the issue really is taxation without representation, then the Council member, as the representative of the voters, must base his vote on his best understanding of the voters’ will. Dr. Hoffman met that test in this case.
Residents made strong policy-based arguments against both CID’s. There was an attempt by Mayor Dielmann and Mr. Capps to make a point in favor of the CID’s by pointing out that 90 percent of the customers paying the sales tax come from outside Creve Coeur. This argument does not hold water, because the Creve Coeur residents who patronize these businesses do pay the full tax. Any way it is positioned, it is a tax on Creve Coeur residents. The tax on these residents is not any less because someone else also pays the tax. The inevitable result, at the extreme, of the policy implication would be that all communities would keep increasing taxes ad infinitum because someone else would pay 90 percent of them.
Mayor Dielmann also reminisced about the compliments that he had received on the I-270 overpass and other development achievements. He is a strong advocate of the Just Do It approach and should be respected for his energy and persistence. Hopefully, his upcoming lame-duck year will be smooth and non-controversial. While we disagree on policy details and his political approach at times, his body of work is indeed admirable.
When the first vote was taken, the Plaza CID received only two yes votes, Bryant and CP Kreuter. Kreuter also cast a lone vote for the TDD bail-out. His current term will expire in 2012. Voters will know where he stands on taxes, as he said in an email supporting Proposition C, the 0.25 percent sales tax, we have a tax rate that is unfairly lower than most of our neighboring cities. Kreuter has been in favor of every tax increase possible over the last few years, including the Olive/Graeser TDD, the one percent economic development tax in 2008, and a 0.5 percent stormwater/parks tax.
It is certainly premature to make sweeping generalizations, but Creve Coeur governance may reflect the national scene. There has been a significant increase in grass-roots activity. CCV is proud to have been a part of it. Transparency has become a dominant theme. The informal vetting process has been challenged. Citizen candidates are emerging; we have already heard of 2012 possibilities. And it would appear from Monday’s proceedings that the era of formality votes may be over. After the final vote, as Mr. Capps made his way to the exit, Mayor Dielmann said two memorable words, Sorry, John.
A New Year Night's Dream
01/01/2011
By Robert Kent
Betty and I finished our bottle of champagne and, after watching the fireworks on TV, went to bed. The champagne hit me and soon I was fast asleep. I awoke to find myself in the middle of Millennium Park (so named because, hopefully, you only make this kind of deal once every 100 years) surrounded by a huge group of people on a gray and cold day. Although the crowd only filled about three of the 25 acres, I quickly realized the people were the 17,000 over-taxed citizens of Creve Coeur. (Editor’s note: according to Council Member David Kreuter, the citizens are unfairly taxed too little) They shouted out, Oh Mighty Robert, if we grant you the esoteric ectoplasmatic persona of the Mayor and the Council will you give us the resolutions for 2011? I jumped up on a water barrel from the deserted community garden and addressed the crowd, Done- and here are our City of Creve Coeur Resolutions for 2011!
- We will not solicit funds for advocacy groups secretly from our city vendors.
- We will not only ascribe to ethical behavior of veracity, sagacity, and the highest integrity, but we will broadcast it from the highest hill in the city- the Mond de Internet.
- We will enter into rehab at St. John’s Mercy Hospital for our sales tax addiction. We will seek mightily to be cured of CID’s, TDD’s, Stormwater and Park taxes, and especially taxes disguised as user fees (a la Trash) and the imposition of mandates on property that cost you much money to install. (another Editor’s note: Robert, didn’t you notice, the trash fee is not even revenue, much less a tax. It is just a reduction of public works expense.)
- We will direct the City Administrator to examine and justify every penny and line item in the budget.
- We resolve not to pass the buck to the City Administrator for every tough question made to us by the over-taxed and unwashed citizens.
- We promise to enforce the ordinances on big developers and residential owners with the same degree of urgency and fairness. And we resolve to have as few ordinances and as simply written as possible.
- We resolve to inspect buffer plantings between commercial and residential properties and make sure they are maintained by the developers. And we will at least make sure developers’ escrow monies are properly invested and do not expire before the project is completed.
- We resolve to get out of money losing enterprises that are best operated by the private sector, like golf courses and ice rinks.
- We resolve to privatize public works and other activities that can be operated more efficiently by the private sector.
- We resolve to not infringe on our public service colleagues’ territories of the Monarch and Creve Coeur Fire Protection Districts’ and the Metropolitan Sewer District’s powers of authority, and call it policy.
- We resolve not to pass any tax increases without putting them on the ballot as public propositions to be voted on by you. Triple double dare!!
A might cheer went up from the crowd. I continued.
- We promise to make the hard decisions to balance the pension plan. Regardless.
- We resolve not to approve any budget that is not balanced and reduced to compensate for any excess expenditure from the prior year and we will strive to increase the surplus every year.
- We resolve to put any surplus in a lock box to be opened only in the case of emergencies created by acts of God (also known as the federal and state governments). The lock box will be secured at the bottom of Creve Coeur Lake in a waterproof chest, its GPS location known only to the Director of Finance and Chief of Police.
- We resolve not to build any more monuments and name them after ourselves and assistants and call them parks (which have little or no automobile parking to park at the park).
- We resolve to find ways that citizens who provide services and collect no sales tax can contribute to the common good.
And then the crowd cried Oh, Mighty Robert, tell us the legend of Creve Coeur. And I told them that the legend had it that the City of Creve Coeur was named for a beautiful Indian maiden (Editor- Bob, its native American) who, being spurned by her lover and suffering from a creve coeur, jumped off a cliff at Creve Coeur Lake and died. However, I shouted to the crowd, I have examined the Police Chief’s, correction, the Indian Chief’s report of the incident, and found that a voluptuous French mademoiselle, a rival from Ladue, may have pushed her off the cliff. Oh NO cried the tax-burdened crowd, weighed down by taxes and sadness. And then the Sunshine Law came out and the crowd was happy again and exclaimed, Oh Mighty Robert, let us help you with the resolutions. And I responded, we will listen to your suggestions and implement them, and if not, will tell you why not. We will not ignore you!
And then I really woke up with a sharp pain in my ribs and Betty said, What’s with all this Oh Mighty Robert crap?
Happy New Year
Who Cares?
12/17/2010
KEEP OUR TRASH SERVICE FREE!- Creve Coeur Cares-Stan Edelstein, Treasurer, 10/28/2010 postmark
Let’s face it, politics is largely the art of deception, and political rhetoric is largely the art of misstating issues. Why is so much deception necessary if your case is good?- Thomas Sowell
Neither a sales tax increase nor a trash fee is necessary at this time. When the budget was approved in June, the projected shortfall in the General Fund was projected to be less than $200,000 without this tax or a trash fee. The sales tax is projected to raise over $700,000, the trash fee over $500,000. And the City’s reserve balance is considerably larger than necessary to withstand a year or more of continued economic weakness. City Director of Finance Dan Smith reported to the City Council on October 20 that Utility tax revenue is already up over $244,000 this year. License and building permit revenues are up over $57,000. And sales tax revenues are up 8 percent. This is not the entire story, but these indicators are good evidence that hiking taxes and fees on residents is not necessary at this time.- crevecoeurvoter.com, 10/31/2010 editorial
All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered. The point is to discover them.- Galileo
What has been discovered?
The Creve Coeur Cares committee, Stan Edelstein Treasurer (CCC), hitched its wagon to a deceptive and misleading slogan, solicited a political ally and a major city vendor for money, and rode to a political victory in November. CCC promoted an unnecessary sales tax with no sunset provision, a tax which will take about $800,000 per year from ordinary citizens and put that money under control of the Creve Coeur City Council. In so doing they advanced a tax and spend approach to our city government.
The facts as we know them are that (1) Mayor Dielmann solicited a printing company (Mark’s Quick Printing) that he and Council Member Beth Kistner had used for previous campaigns to provide the Creve Coeur Cares campaign materials free of charge and then (2) the printer (Mr. Mark Brown) solicited Allied Waste to pay the postage for the campaign mailers.(3) CP’s Kreuter and Wang have admitted participation in Creve Coeur Cares; CP’s Hadenhorst and Hoffman have indicated they were not involved with the committee. Mr. Edelstein has said several Council members were involved. That leaves CP Kistner, whose name appeared on the handout.
Why would an Overland based printer provide free materials for a Creve Coeur election, especially when campaign materials are an important part of its business? Does the donut store give out free donuts with no reason? It is fair to assume the printer anticipates future business from the CCC participants and perhaps others who endorsed the tax.
Why would Allied Waste run the CCC mailers through the company postage meter? They have a fixed contract with the city. However, it will run out in less than two years. CCV believes, very thankfully, that we have a professional city staff that will manage all bid processes ethically and fairly. However, from the trash man’s point of view, what is the down side for being on the good side of the Mayor and six City Council members. And five of these six CP’s had rammed through legislation to guarantee a trash fee if the sales tax failed. Allied Waste would have to collect those fees from residents. What is a couple of thousand to avoid that hassle? (Question to the IRS- are those postage costs a tax deductible business expense?)
Who discovered it?
Council Members Laura Bryant and Jeanne Rhoades brought the actions of Creve Coeur Cares to light. In a documented timeline of the events Rhoades states, … I asked Mayor Dielmann if he knew who had funded the Creve Coeur Cares committee expenses … He stated that, I believe Allied Waste pitched in on it. Rhoades and Bryant followed up by checking the CCC finance reports on file with the Missouri Ethics Commission. When the amount reported appeared to be inexplicably low, and did not mention Allied Waste at all, Bryant and Rhoades questioned CCC Treasurer Edelstein, who had signed and filed the reports. There followed a series of exchanges between Rhoades/Bryant and Edelstein in which Edelstein refused to make an effort to explain or correct the report and criticized Bryant and Rhoades for asking questions and making suggestions.
Rather than file a formal complaint with the Missouri Ethics Commission, Ms. Rhoades publicly submitted the correspondence with Mr. Edelstein, and the documentation, during the November 22 City council meeting. (See Meeting Notes 11/22/2010.) Under the Missouri Sunshine Law, the City Council cannot discuss appointed officials’ conduct in closed session. Two days later Mr. Edelstein filed a corrected report with a total of $3060, which still seems low to some observers.
The discussion continued at the December 13 Council meeting. (See Meeting Notes, 12/13/2010 Part 1) Resident Karol Plawski said she encountered Mr. Edelstein at the polls on November 2. As she tells, Mr. Edelstein encouraged her to vote for the tax. She told him that she was against the tax and mentioned that she had read about it in CreveCoeurVoter (CCV). Mr. Edelstein responded that she should not pay any attention to CCV. He doesn’t have his facts straight. We beg to differ. CCV presented a thoroughly researched editorial on the sales tax. Creve Coeur Cares and Mr. Edelstein presented a misleading slogan and essentially none of the facts. And it was Mr. Edelstein who did not have his facts straight on the finance report until he was put under pressure from Bryant and Rhoades. As chairman of the city’s Finance Committee, responsible for advising the Council on important financial matters, he did not exhibit the level of expertise and diligence which should be expected from a finance expert in his performance as CCC Treasurer.
Some question whether Mr. Edlestein should have acted in an advocacy role as Finance Committee chairman. In an early memo he said that he was acting as a citizen in advocating the tax. But during his conversation with Ms. Plawski he said that he was an expert on the subject because he was chairman of the Finance Committee. CCV believes that the First Amendment applies in this case, but we wonder why Mr. Edelstein initially qualified his role. The advocacy of some City Council members is more troublesome. They are elected to represent the people. A more appropriate behavior would have been to let the people decide, via the vote, and then implement their decision. The Council members, and Mayor Dielmann, worked hard to influence their constituents. It is one thing to sell a piece of legislation; it is another to influence a referendum. The extraordinary effort of elected officials via CCC indicates a hidden tax and spend agenda which goes beyond the trash collection issue.
What will be done about it?
Six current City Council members endorsed the tax with their names printed on the CCC handout. At the December 13 meeting one of those, CP Hoffman, said the Council should move ahead in an open fashion. Bottom line, it is likely nothing will be done about the CCC campaign tactics. No laws were broken. Once Mr. Edelstein amended the report, there is no longer any basis for a complaint to the Missouri Ethics Commission. CP Rhoades has suggested adopting a measure to require full disclosure of all solicitations of city vendors for political campaigns. This would be good. but would not cover solicitations of developers and other connected people. Only the election of representatives with a different mentality will eliminate such hanky panky.
A personal anecdote comes to mind. Years ago a visit to Disney World included a stop at the It’s a Small World ride. The 45 minute wait in line featured hearing the title song about 15 times. When we finally reached the front of the line we asked the young attendant, doesn’t that song drive you crazy? She responded, what song?
Creve Coeur fits this story in two ways. First it is indeed a small world where a print shop and the trash company pay for the election campaign. On another level the song has played so many times that most residents are oblivious. The trash, leaves, and limbs are picked up and the police are friendly and effective. Of course, traffic is congested sometimes and there is the occasional zoning controversy. A few people show up to complain. Most residents could care less about the golf course and ice rink- they either belong to a private club or don’t participate. And isn’t the overpass lovely? Who cares about city government?
The threat of a trash fee was about the only way a sales tax could be passed in the current economic environment. The mayor and five City Council members skillfully maneuvered that ultimatum to the ballot. Only Bryant, Rhoades, and former CP Kassander voted against putting the sales tax on the ballot. Mayor Dielmann, several council members, and Mr. Edelstein put Creve Coeur Cares together and Mayor Dielmann pulled the political/financial strings. CP Kreuter shockingly opined that Creve Coeur residents are unfairly taxed too low. Kreuter and five other council members endorsed the tax via CCC literature. It is likely that some of them honestly convinced themselves that the trash fee or the tax was necessary. Others simply joined the majority, so to speak.
CCV and opponents of the sales tax must accept most of the blame for its passage. We did not get out our message or get out the vote. The Creve Coeur Cares campaign had no organized or funded opposition. We must work harder to inform our friends and neighbors about important city issues. We have an election in Creve Coeur every year- sometimes we even have challengers to the incumbents. Above all we should look to candidates whose priority is to represent the people, not perpetuate the status quo.
It will be interesting to watch the city finances once the sales tax money comes rolling in. It will be tempting for some to fund pet projects and spend, spend, spend. CCV will keep you informed.
You Paid For It- A Nice Road
11/22/2010
Following is a transcript of KTVI’s November 21, 2010 9 PM news broadcast, featuring Eliot Davis. There is commentary at the end. First the transcript:
Straight ahead on You Paid For It, a dream project in West County becomes a nightmare. Why an Olive Blvd. beautification may cost tax payers $9 million for one mile of work.
A troubled West County beautification project with an ugly price tag for tax payers. We head to Creve Coeur to shine a bright light on this deal in tonight’s You Paid For It.
This beautification project was supposed to transform this stretch of Olive Blvd. in Creve Coeur from just a dull, dry road to a shining example of tax dollars at work. Instead officials are stuck trying to regroup and figure out just which way to proceed on this beautification dream that’s turned into a nightmare.
I talked to Creve Coeur Mayor Harold Dielmann. He also sits on the board in charge of the projects.
Eliot Davis: What was the initial budget?
Mayor Dielmann: $5 million
Davis: So what do you anticipate it’s going to cost?
Dielmann: $9 million
Davis voice over: And how much beautification would you now get for that $9 million?
Davis: How many miles of this road are you improving?
Dielmann: Approximately a mile.
Not only will this deal cost almost double what it was supposed to, it’s several years behind schedule. And some of what was promised may not happen. A mile of Olive was supposed to be widened. That may not happen now. The median down the middle of the street is iffy.
Creve Coeur resident David Caldwell says you were supposed to have new lighting all along Olive along with the new sidewalks.
Caldwell: They have tore down streetlights that they (don’t) have not put in money in the project to replace the street lights.( (Editor- pardon my grammar- there’s a reason I write this blog instead of speaking it.)
Davis voice over: Caldwell criticized the plan when it was first rolled off the City Hall drawing board saying it was ill-conceived, ill-planned, and under-funded.
Caldwell: I don’t think they engaged the proper amount of professional input.
The project is funded through an Olive Transportation Development District or TDD. Sales taxes generated from businesses and customers in the area were put into a fund to pay for the beautification. Things went wrong from the get-go. They couldn’t widen the street as planned. That affected the new sidewalk. They found they couldn’t bury the unsightly utility lines after all. And everything ended up costing more than the city thought.
Dielmann: The whole project has changed totally since its begin and that’s why it’s behind schedule and over budget.
Davis: Somebody didn’t do all their homework.
Dielmann: We did our homework, but when you change the rules it changes the project.
Still the mayor is confident the city will eventually be finished with the project- with a lot more time and, of course, a lot more of your money.
Davis: Right now you see it as a failure?
Caldwell: Yes, I see it as a failure.
Davis: You think overall this thing has been a good deal for tax payers?
Dielmann: Yes, they’re going to have a nice road when it’s all done.
Davis: How do you answer critics who say this project has been a disaster?
Dielmann: Well, it hasn’t been a disaster …(cut off)
To have your say here's the person to call- Creve Coeur Mayor Harold Dielmann- 314-432-6000. Tell him what you think. After all, You Paid For It.
Commentary:
So much to say and so little time to say it- and then it gets edited. That’s a fact, not a complaint. We thank Eliot Davis for covering this matter. He listened to both sides and did his homework. Mayor Dielmann and CCV have plenty of time and opportunity to make their case without being on TV. Mayor Dielmann would like to explain in detail the problems caused by MoDOT and the delays caused by the I-64 shutdown, among other things. And we would have liked to have heard the completion of his explanation why the project was not a disaster, which was cut off in mid-sentence. Probably he would point out a few things which did get done. CCV would like to talk more about the sidewalk to nowhere and the high overhead cost of doing anything via a TDD. Some would like to talk about the timeline and all the political misdeeds of the project, such as the eminent domain threats and anonymous mailers which disrupted the city for months.
Creve Coeur residents deserve complete transparency on the Olive TDD now, as the city officials who sit on the TDD board recently pushed through yet another plan to downsize the project and keep spending money. There is approximately $2 million of the original $5 million which has not been spent. Ward 4 Council Members Laura Bryant and Jeanne Rhoades wrote in the November Creve Coeur Newsletter, Given these recently acknowledged problems, along with the lack of funding and necessary right-of-way, it may be high time to seriously consider an exit strategy for the Olive Blvd. TDD, and look for a way to best utilize the remaining funds, pay off all bonds and then shut it down. CCV agrees. If $3 million has been spent, and spending another $2 million is just a step along the way to spending $9 million- and we will bet anything that it will go higher- is that what Creve Coeur residents want to do to get, as Mayor Dielmann says, a nice road when it is all done?
Nov. 2- CC Sales Tax
10/31/2010
PROPOSITION C
Shall the City of Creve Coeur, Missouri impose an additional sales tax at a rate of one-quarter of one percent?
CCV recommends a NO vote.
Neither a sales tax increase nor a trash fee is necessary at this time. When the budget was approved in June, the projected shortfall in the General Fund was projected to be less than $200,000 without this tax or a trash fee. The sales tax is projected to raise over $700,000, the trash fee over $500,000. And the City’s reserve balance is considerably larger than necessary to withstand a year or more of continued economic weakness. City Director of Finance Dan Smith reported to the City Council on October 20 that Utility tax revenue is already up over $244,000 this year. License and building permit revenues are up over $57,000. And sales tax revenues are up 8 percent. This is not the entire story, but these indicators are good evidence that hiking taxes and fees on residents is not necessary at this time.
City Administrator Mark Perkins and his staff have done a good job of controlling expenses over the last few years. However, additional opportunities for cost savings are just kicking in or have not been investigated. For example a recent consolidation of pension fund managers will save over $50,000 per year. Mr. Perkins is working on forming a consortium of communities to consolidate police and fire dispatch functions which could save $100,000 per year. The building division fees have not been increased since 1999 and are going to be increased to recover cost. The business license fee revenues have increased due to new collection policies which should continue to pay off. Mr. Perkins recently acknowledged that opportunities exist to reduce maintenance costs for Millennium Park and the Olive-270 overpass, after touring the sites with CP Laura Bryant (W-4). CCV and residents have suggested privatization and out-sourcing opportunities, such as leasing out the golf course and ice rink. (Maryland Heights recently leased out its outdoor recreational complex, eliminating a $225,000 annual deficit.)
The sales tax has been positioned as an ultimatum- either increase sales taxes or pay a trash fee- and promoted as providing city services such as leaf and limb pick-up and police protection. Sounds sort of like the casino tax will be used for education. This amateur-hour presentation led the Post Dispatch to say, If police costs can’t be met, the city should consider contracting with St. Louis County for police services. The PD recommended a NO vote, arguing that a user fee was a better and fairer way to proceed.
Mailers and the city newsletter also present information comparing Creve Coeur sales taxes to other communities. These comparisons are incomplete and misleading. First, some communities, such as Olivette have a fire department supported by tax revenue, while Creve Coeur residents pay taxes directly to a Fire Protection district. The comparisons do not address utility taxes, property taxes, etc. Also the comparisons conveniently omit unincorporated St. Louis County, which would have a 0.75 percent lower rate than Creve Coeur. (Many stores on the north side of Olive are just outside the city boundary in St. Louis County.) Promotional materials also do not mention that about 20 percent of the sales taxes collected in Creve Coeur would be passed on to St. Louis County under the applicable revenue sharing formula. Finally, some promotional materials do not mention the Transportation Development District sales taxes which increase the rate by 0.5 to one percent in parts of Creve Coeur. And there are more TDD taxes, which do not have to be approved by the voters, on the way! While we agree that the cost of Creve Coeur city government is relatively low, the objective should be to remain exceptional. And the proponents of the sales tax should not be rewarded for trying to hoodwink the residents.
One thing we know for sure based on history- if the sales tax is passed it will never go away. We can still oppose the trash fee, or it could be eliminated in the future. The current contract with the hauler has less than two years to go. At that time, a better deal may be available. Residents should be given more choices. The current contract provides city-wide rear yard service for trash and curbside service for recyclables. Recycling was originally provided as a free service- now it has resulted in a large additional cost which is to be passed on to the residents. And many residents do not benefit from rear-yard service. Also, the proposed trash fee has been structured in such a way that it may fall unevenly on condominium residents. Residents should have more of a say in what services they want before any fee is imposed. Our representatives should get this process started immediately.
CCV has been informed that in a recent court case the judge ruled that St. Louis County could not enforce a contract between a homeowner and a third party trash hauler. This ruling seems to provide an opt-out opportunity. There could be legal problems with the entire arrangement, including a Hancock amendment challenge. This could result in more legal costs than the whole thing is worth.
The proponents say, Keep Our Trash Service Free! This is a lie. Our trash service never has been free and never will be free. We pay for it with our taxes when we buy a loaf of bread or turn on a light. We can save taxpayers millions of dollars by turning down this tax.
Sources: stltoday.com, marylandheights.com, public documents. Thanks to R.W. Kent for additional input.
Editorial Policy
10/20/2010
The Mission of CCV as stated since 2007 on the home page is as follows:
The mission of CCV is to provide timely, useful information and informed commentary about the governance of Creve Coeur. CCV’s objective is to inform the public on the issues and decisions affecting everyday life in Creve Coeur and the direction that the City is taking for the future. CCV believes that an informed public will be better prepared to influence the governance of Creve Coeur through feedback to elected officials and through the political process.
At election time CCV provides information on candidates, analysis of their positions and qualifications, and endorsements. The rest of the year, CCV focuses on policy, not politics. CCV admires organizations such as the Heritage Foundation and the Show Me Institute and tries to follow their example- documented facts and thoughtful analysis. CCV tries to be a think tank for Creve Coeur. We are proud of the contributions that we have been able to make via analysis and suggestions. We are even more gratified that residents, more and more, are taking the time to get educated and actively participate in the process.
Recently, emails regarding Creve Coeur matters have been broadcast by anonymous authors. Articles by anonymous authors have appeared on Missouri Political News Service (www.mopns.com). CCV editor David Caldwell is not Creve Coeur Resident, Mark Twain, or mopns. The policy of CCV is full disclosure, whether on the public record at public meetings or on the electronic pages of CCV. Since CCV started we have not been asked to retract, correct, or apologize for anything on that record. We hope to maintain that record and continue to make a contribution to Creve Coeur. Sincerely, dc
Listen to the People
10/03/2010
City Council member (W-3) David Kassander has resigned and Mayor Dielmann will soon nominate someone to fill the position until the election in April 2011. The nomination must be ratified by the seven continuing members of the Council. Charlotte D’Alfonso has campaigned for the appointment (see News and Info, June 29, 2010) and has submitted a petition with almost 500 signatures supporting her. In a Sept. 2, 2010 blog A Tale of TOO Many Cities, Missouri Political News Service (mopns.com) the author wrote:
Charlotte spoke with the mayor shortly before her petitions were presented to the City Council. The mayor expressed his position by demanding that she vote with the majority on council if he appointed her. He wanted someone that would not question his authority or threaten his relationship with large developers. Charlotte, a strong-willed mother of three, would have none of it. The result has been a backdoor attempt to undermine her support by sending out the mayor’s choice with a similar petition to the one Charlotte used ...
CCV has been informed that Dr. Robert Hoffman, who Dielmann appointed to the Planning and Zoning Commission in July 2009, is the individual with the similar petition.
Much can be said and written about the composition of the City Council and city hall politics; CCV prefers to focus on policy, not politics. It is well known that Mayor Dielmann participates in Ward politics through the appointment process and by recruiting Council candidates, particularly against incumbents who have disagreed with his policies. CCV does not doubt that he would condition any appointment on getting support for his policies. Even though D’Alfonso will most likely be elected in April, Dielmann may view this lame duck period as an opportunity to push through an agenda that would not be possible with her vote. Dielmann will not be eligible to run for re-election in 2012 and Ward 4 Council Member Laura Bryant has let it be known that she intends to run for Mayor. Sometimes it gets ugly when a politician clings to power too long, even when the overall record is a good one. We encourage Mayor Dielmann to mellow out and put on the Doobie Brothers:
Don’t you feel it growin’,
Day by day
People
Gettin’ ready for the news
Some are happy
Some are sad
Wo, we got to let the music play
Wo, oh yeah
What the people need
Is a way to make ‘em smile
It ain’t so hard to do if you know how
Gotta get a message
Get it on through
Oh now mama’s goin’ to after a while
Wo, oh, oh listen to the music
Wo, oh, oh listen to the music
Wo, oh, oh listen to the PEOPLE
All the time
Our He\art Will Go On?
09/25/2010
A Yahoo story today says that the Titanic actually sunk because the steersman panicked and turned the wrong way. Author Louise Patten, granddaughter of the Titanic second officer, made this revelation to the press and in a new novel, Good as Gold. Her story gets even better. Once the ship hit the iceberg the Chairman of the ship’s owner persuaded the Captain to keep sailing as if nothing was wrong. If the ship has sat still in the water it could have stayed afloat until the rescue ship arrived and no one would have perished. And why is this coming to light 100 years after the fact? The most senior officer to survive the shipwreck covered up the errors for fear of tarnishing the reputation of those who made the fateful errors and decisions.
This tale provides lessons in leadership. Don’t panic and turn in the wrong direction. When mistakes are made don’t magnify them. Pretending nothing is wrong won’t make things better. Ask for help when you need it. Sometimes it is better to stop instead of going on. Cover-ups don’t work in the long run. Apply these lessons to the Olive TDD. The Board of Directors of the Olive TDD knew in 2007 that the ship had hit an iceberg. This board, controlled by the Mayor of Creve Coeur and three City Council Members called an emergency meeting of the City Council to approve a new deal. The story was that the original estimate was wrong- like a bad weather forecast. The project would have to be split into two phases. But much of the good stuff could be done- the cruise would end at the next to last port and the passengers could find their way home from there. The rest of the project could be done later- if the City could find additional financing. (Remember, the whole thing was supposed to be financed by a 0.5 percent sales tax in the district and by voluntary property assessments.) There was no public hearing; there were three members of the public there at the Saturday afternoon meeting. The minutes of this 3.5 hour meeting are posted on the city website under September 8, 2007. Not being offered legitimate alternatives, the council members who were not on the TDD board had little choice but to go along. The ship was turned in the wrong direction.
After this meeting the TDD ship steamed on. It did not stop to let a real rescue materialize. A realistic course was not charted. The ship was still taking on water, but the facts were not communicated. City Council members and the public asked for information and got essentially nothing. Behind the scenes there were lawsuits, negotiations, and problems that are still not resolved. There were elections and other distractions. And the ship listed more and more. Now three years have passed since the new deal was approved, and the situation cannot be covered up any longer, as discussed in our last editorial, Let There Be Light.
After the situation was aired out at the September 13 City Council meeting, some positive steps were taken. The minutes of two board meetings were published. As CCV reported, the board met for 48 minutes on March 18 and 32 minutes on June 8. There was another meeting in August. However, the minutes provide little information and little insight. CCV must wonder how much can be accomplished in these short meetings. The board is apparently acting in a perfunctory role. If it is doing more that that, then it is not being disclosed.
The project was also returned to the Planning & Zoning Commission as CCV recommended. A good staff report was provided and the discussion was productive. The staff report lays bare facts which are (deliberately?) obscured in the legal language presented to the City Council for approval. The TDD will not plant a single flower, bush, or tree on Olive. The proposed median will be so small that future plantings can’t be expected to survive. The street lights which were removed between Craig and Old Ballas will not be replaced. The sidewalk at Craig and Olive (in front of Trader Joe’s) will be removed to widen Olive and will not be replaced; the new sidewalk will be behind Trader Joe’s. The voyage which was billed as a luxury cruise to a beautiful port of call has turned into a cargo haul to the freight docks.
While P&Z made a proper recommendation to improve the project scope in certain areas and attempt to restore the missing street lights, there is a bigger picture. The project, as now proposed, would widen Olive over a certain distance, but would leave it the same to the east and west. Bottlenecks would therefore remain; the Creve Coeur Fire District adamantly refuses to grant right of way. To get this limited widening the aforementioned defects would have to be accepted with no certainty of future correction. Meanwhile, property owners to the east and west have created, or want to create, their own improvement districts, which would eventually produce a patchwork all along Olive. Council Member Laura Bryant (W-4) has advocated that a citywide TDD – from the east end to the west city limits – not only would be more effective and transparent, but better coordinated and strategically planned.
Bryant says, the entire Olive Blvd. TDD project was presented as a means to expedite certain infrastructure improvements that neither the City nor MoDOT deemed as priorities – which is precisely why these particular improvements were not part of Creve Coeur’s regular capital improvement process. So the scope of the project was never subject to the normal public review. The project scope was defined by the TDD property owners and its board.
Bryant continues, once the TDD funding and management began to fail so miserably, then the elected officials sitting on the TDD board began to talk and vote as if these improvements had been critical all along and should become a major transportation priority not just for those businesses operating within the TDD, but for the entire Creve Coeur community. What would be better for the community and serve the businesses as well- to have extra lanes for less than a mile or to restore the streetlights and complete the sidewalks?
What would happen to the current TDD, the one that has failed to keep its promises, the one that created the eminent domain controversy, the one that has attempted to cover-up its failings, the one that wants to make the city staff responsible for managing the sinking ship, the one that will eventually seek a costly bail-out? It could easily be shut down. It has enough money ($2.1 million)to restore the street lights, finish the traffic signals, connect the sidewalks, and clean up the area in general. The bonds could be paid off, especially with the support of the CVS store. This would end the current fiasco. Then a new master project could be properly organized, planned, financed, and implemented with citizen input and first class leadership. Stop the ship, don’t continue circling the iceberg.
Let There Be Light
09/14/2010
Once upon a time, way back in 2003, a group of commercial property owners, led by The Koman Group, developer of the beautiful, legendary City Place, approached the rulers of Creve Coeur to create a Transportation Development District (Little TDD). The original goal was to provide a variety of enhancements to Olive Blvd. including widening, sidewalks, medians, streetscapes, and lighting. This vision proved to be the fairy tale- the yellow brick road (YBR). The city entered into an agreement with Little TDD, taking the role of the Queen of Broken Hearts with four of the board’s seven members. Little TDD issued over $5 million of bonds in 2005 and would tax all its shoppers for many years. Little TDD, and its board, took the form of various characters as it moved very slowly along the YBR. Little TDD became the Wicked Witch of West Olive as it passed through the Land of Eminent Domain. At various times Little TDD appeared to be the Scare Crow, without a brain, as poor decisions were made. Little TDD was the Cowardly Lion when it came to dealing with the developers. Little TDD became a Monty Python character as it was cut to bits by the evil knight, MODOT. Little TDD has also been bested by Trader Joe, the Ameren army, and the inhabitants of the little red brick firehouse. Each of these tales is a chapter in a lengthy book, tales that have not been told, as our hero has kept these tales secret as much as possible. But the story is not over as, like Freddie and the Terminator, Little TDD has survived. Little TDD now wants to turn the YBR into a big, dark slab of concrete and finish the book. A new author, the residents and taxpayers of Creve Coeur, are being asked to write another book, to be titled Phase 2- Exhibit F to provide the final happy ending.
If you want to know more details about the travails of Little TDD, your scribe CCV will tell them to you, but there is no time now. Little TDD proposed to seal their new Agreement last Monday night and CCV rose to object, saying:
Mr. Mayor and Council Members, as you have had five years to implement the Olive Blvd. TDD may I please have five minutes to talk about it. I have looked at this project from a google-earth perspective. It runs from the east edge of the West Oak center to Orchard Lakes Drive. It consisted of two so-called transportation projects and a developer project. After over five years and over $5 million what has been accomplished? I see from the public documentation that almost all of the developer project has been or will soon be completed. The developers will have their driveways, access roads, traffic signals, and other improvements on their property. However, very little of the transportation projects, the people’s projects, has been completed. There are no medians, no streetscapes, and many if not most of the utility poles remain. In fact street lights have actually been removed, making a portion of Olive as dark as the Light Industrial District. And, after all this time, the creation of a sidewalk to nowhere was still recently a possibility? Will pedestrians have to cross Olive twice or cut through a parking lot to go two blocks?
This project has failed to deliver its promise to the people of Creve Coeur and its guests. A very large part of the promise has been pushed to Exhibit F, the Remaining Phase II, for which there is no schedule and no money. Even the replacement of the street lights which were removed has been dumped into Exhibit F. This is a disgrace and is unacceptable to the people of Creve Coeur.
Part of the failure of this project may have been due to unforeseen circumstances. However, an objective observer must conclude that a large measure of this failure is due to poor leadership and supervision. And one must conclude that the board of this TDD has attempted to hide and cover up its performance. For example, when has the board produced an annual report? By my count the board has held at least three meetings in 2010, but the last board minutes published on the city website is for November, 2009. And no recordings of 2010 meetings are available on the website. The most recent correspondence published on the website is the October 2006 Supplemental Funding presentation to the City Council. Is the publication of meeting minutes the responsibility of the Secretary, who is present tonight? (Editor’s note: the minutes and recordings were posted on Tuesday, September 14.)
The board resolutions are published on the website. One of these was the June 30 approval of the budget. This resolution contains an obvious error, as the budget was approved for the wrong year. Are our City representatives even reading these resolutions if an error so obvious passes through?
On June 21, 2010 the City Engineer made a presentation to the P&Z Commission. At that time a number of problems with the construction plan were identified, such as the proposed median curbs being of inferior quality. The Commission asked questions and asked for answers. If they ever got the answers I must have missed it; I don’t think I did. Yet this council is being asked to approve a new agreement without the benefit of the Commission’s full review. It appears that they were not supposed to ask questions, just rubber stamp the plan.
Unlike proceedings in Washington, at least we do not have to approve these new agreements to learn what is in them. We can finally see in black, white, and red-line what has been done and what is not getting done. The chickens are coming home to roost. Now, three of you want to stand as judge and jury of yourselves. But five of you have an opportunity to take a small step on behalf of the people. I urge you to withhold approval until an acceptable minimum of transparency and accountability is provided:
1. All minutes, correspondence, plans, and other documents of the TDD should be made public.
2. The agreements should include an assurance that all such documents will be provided on a timely basis in the future.
3. The Planning and Zoning Commission should complete its review and a full staff report be provided.
4. The financial statements and plans of the TDD should be reviewed by an independent party to determine if the TDD has met its obligations with respect to the financing plans which have been previously approved by this body.
5. The impact of the CVS opening and other recent developments should be analyzed by an independent party to determine if the proposed reduced scope of the project as defined in the agreement is appropriate.
6. At a minimum the streetlights which were removed should be replaced in the Phase I project. Other items identified by the staff and P&Z which are below standard should also be addressed. The TDD and the City should investigate hiring a project manager from the private sector and produce a report on its findings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CCV is pleased to report that CP Tara Nealey (W-2) made a motion, which passed, to defer the vote on the proposed TDD agreements to allow time for study. CCV urges the City Council to amend the agreement before passage. First, let the figurative light shine on this project by ensuring that all past and future actions and plans of the TDD Board will be shared with the public in a timely way. Also turn on the literal light and restore the street lights to Olive.
Redistribution in Creve Coeur
08/31/2010
Ward 4 Council Member Laura Bryant has suggested that the Ward 2 Council Members take the lead in appropriating funds received if Fountain Park is sold. After all, Ward 2 would be losing a park space, so should other Wards benefit? Is this not just another application of the Golden Rule, which CP Bryant so energetically and forcefully advocated in the rezoning process for the Graeser/Olive Walgreens? And Bryant also injected a comment based on the golden rule during the recent debate relative to increasing sales taxes, noting that the argument that non-residents would pay a lot of the taxes was bothersome to her.
Our leaders at all levels should have a strong moral commitment to fairness. It is the crux of many issues and decisions. What is fair to residents and developers? What is fair to one resident and his neighbor down the street? What is fair to Ward 1 and Ward 4? What is fair to the business owner and the residents? What is fair to the city employees and the taxpayers?
Residents have rightly complained about the proposed trash collection fee. CCV’s analysis is that the fee is not needed to balance the budget, but most of the complaints centered on the issue that the contract pays for rear-yard service which some residents don’t need or use. Rear yard service is largely a holdover from the days when Creve Coeur was smaller and consisted mostly of large lots. It is used more in Wards 1 and 2 than in Wards 3 and 4. When the contract is put out for bids the next time will a uniform level of service across the city be more efficient and less costly? Or will we pay more in total to have choices on the level of service we receive and to force everyone to pay their fair share? Will fairness be worth the cost?
Some Ward 3 and 4 residents may see the trash fee as an unfair redistribution of cost from east to west. But other expenditures may look like redistribution in the opposite direction. The cost of Millennium Park- maintenance and debt service- is one on the largest slices of the city budget, much larger than the older parks. The maintenance cost of the Olive/270 interchange is infinitely more than the Olive/Lindbergh interchange. And look at the median on Lindbergh and Olive east of 270 vs. west of 270. (The commitment to the Olive/270 interchange was a huge mistake, but it is what it is for the foreseeable future.) What can we conclude from these examples? It is not fair to be narrow-minded when looking at current or prospective expenditures.
There are many examples of redistribution in Creve Coeur. The ice rink and golf course are not free to residents, and surveys show they are never used by many residents, but they are subsidized operations. (This should not go on much longer.) Many small businesses in Creve Coeur pay a business license fee between $30 and $1000, but doctors are exempt. (This is a state law which should be changed.) Developers and commercial property owners can form a District and tax their customers for their infrastructure without a vote- taxation without representation. (This is also a result of state law, but the City Council has veto power.)
Aside from CP Bryant’s concern, there are major inequities in the collection of sales taxes for municipal revenues. Kohl’s and many stores on the north side of Olive are not in Creve Coeur and do not collect the Creve Coeur sales tax. On the other hand, businesses in the Light Industrial District who ship merchandise to out-state Missouri customers must collect Creve Coeur sales tax. People in Sikeston and Moberly are paying for your golf course, folks. And the greatest inequity is that sales taxes on interstate e-commerce are based on an honor system that is not enforced. This has placed a tremendous burden on local merchants and is a major cause of reduced sales tax revenues.
Our elected officials should always strive to maximize fairness and minimize inequities. Unnecessary inequities should be avoided and eliminated. The proposed rain garden ordinance, which is still in the hopper, is a case on point. The perceived problem is that commercial and residential development has caused (past tense) damaging erosion, which may affect some property values. The proposed solution is that individual homeowners will pay (future tense) for expensive rain gardens to minimize the problem. Never mind that MSD is collecting an ever increasing fee to address the same problem on a regional basis. This is a clear case were the proposed action does not pass the fairness test. It is an unacceptable redistribution.
Some communities elect City Council members on an at large basis; each member represents all of the residents. CCV does not recommend this approach. However, City Council members must understand that they have a duty to all of the residents. And voters should take an interest in other Wards to support candidates who exhibit an understanding of the golden rule. CP Bryant’s suggestion regarding a Fountain Park sale certainly meets the fairness test in a way, and she is to be commended. However, CCV disagrees. Given the time, the circumstances, and the choices, any unexpected revenue should be put to the highest and best use for all of the residents.
Bell Does Not Echo Here
08/13/2010
California Attorney General Jerry Brown has ordered past and present officials of Bell, California to turn over their financial records in a widening investigation of a salary scandal in the Los Angeles suburb. (AP, 8/9/2010) Bell made the national news last month when the LA Times published an investigative report which revealed the exorbitant compensation of Bell officials. The city of less than 40,000 residents was paying its City Manager almost $800,000 per year and its Police Chief almost $500,000. Subsequent reports pegged the City Manager’s total pay and benefits package at about $1.5 million per year. The part time Mayor and City Council Members were drawing almost $100,000 per year paychecks. The AG investigation will also probe voter fraud and other misconduct, in particular with respect to the election which authorized Bell to bypass State compensation rules as a charter city.
The Wall Street Journal reported on 8/10/2010 that large pensions in California were not limited to fraudulent activity. The California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility lists 9,111 retired California government workers receiving pensions in excess of $100,000 a year, topped by the former City Administrator of Vernon (population 91- that’s 91, not 91,000) at $510,000.
Creve Coeur is fortunate to have a different caliber of elected officials. In 2009, the City Council eliminated its pension plan and set the Council Member salary at $400 per month. The Mayor’s salary was set at $600 per month. The Chairman of the Planning and Zoning Commission makes $150 per month; the Commissioners make $45 per meeting. The Board of Adjustment members also make $45 per meeting.
Salaries of the City Administrator, the Police Chief, and other top city employees are not publicized. CCV has not made a Freedom of Information request for this information; it should not be necessary. CCV recommends the disclosure of compensation for the top five paid employees on an annual basis. This would be consistent with proxy disclosures for public corporations required by law. Salaries of top paid employees of non-profit organizations are also public information.
The pension plan for City employees is bifurcated. Employees hired before June 2006 are eligible for a defined benefit plan; newer employees are eligible for a defined contribution plan. CCV recently requested information on these plans. Director of Finance Dan Smith provided the following information.
The retirement age for uniformed police officers is 55 and for all other employees is 65. (Reduced early retirement is available at age 50 with 20 years of service.) The formula for the defined benefit is a percent, either 2 or 1.7, times the years of service (not to exceed 30) times the monthly salary (excluding overtime) based on the highest consecutive 60 months of wages. Only employees hired before 2001 are eligible for the 2 percent formula, Employees hired after that date but before June 2006, and employees who elected the 1.7 percent formula, receive an additional 3.0 percent contribution to an individual pension plan. Employees hired after June 2006 receive a maximum 8.0 percent contribution to a defined contribution plan which offers multiple investment options.
This formula seems reasonable. The defined benefit tops out at a monthly benefit equal to 60 percent of final pay at age 55/65. The total defined contribution for a 30 year employee would equal 240 percent of actual pay. At a compound growth rate of 2 percent over inflation the fund would grow to about 3.25 times final pay after 30 years. This would provide a 20-year annual annuity of about 30 percent of final pay. By this rough calculation, the defined contribution plan provides significantly less than the defined benefit plan. How does this compare with your employer plan?
The defined benefit plan, with the decline in the stock market, is a major factor in the city’s current and projected budget deficit, as required contributions to fund future benefits have increased substantially. There are opportunities to substantially decrease the money management costs of this fund which are not being implemented. And the fund should be restructured over time to emphasize fixed income investments as the employee population ages. This process, immunization, would reduce or eliminate the volatility of the fund and lock in the future benefit payments. However, it is very difficult to implement this approach in the current low interest rate environment.
Monday Night Fight
08/08/2010
Pro-development and pro-community forces will clash again Monday night at the City Council meeting. CCV has received an e-mail from Creve Coeur Resident, largely reprinted below, which lays out the battleground. CP David Kassander has proposed a text amendment to the Planned Community (PC) zoning ordinance which would limit the commercial development of PC districts under 40 acres. There is currently only one of these, the Parc Provence property. Mr. Kassander’s purpose is to prevent unwanted and inappropriate future development through misuse of PC zoning. Kassander has structured the amendment to allow the Parc Provence development to be completed as originally envisioned, but would block the future development of the remaining vacant property for commercial purposes such as office buildings, strip centers, etc. The amendment would also limit the use of PC zoning for properties under 40 acres in other areas of Creve Coeur. This is important because the Planned Commercial District (PCD) zoning, which starts at 3.5 acres, is now available only for properties which directly access Olive, Lindbergh, etc. Developers who would have sought PCD zoning will now ask for PC Zoning for properties starting at 15 acres.
Mr. Charles Deutsch, the Parc Provence developer, has strongly objected to the text amendment. His primary argument is that it would limit the flexibility for future development of the property. In his public comment he vaguely alluded to financing. One interpretation of this comment is that the vacant land has a lower loan value if its future uses are restricted. Mr. Deutsch makes dramatic arguments about all that he has done for the neighborhood and for Creve Coeur, all of which are unfortunately irrelevant. He may have done a wonderful job, but should he be forced to sell the vacant property unacceptable outcomes could result.
Mr. Deutsch also argues that any future plan would have to be approved by the City anyway. This is barely correct. According to Mr. Paul Langdon, Director of Community Development, a site plan revision, with any of the commercial uses currently allowed, would only require approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission. No Public Hearing and no City Council action would be required. And the P&Z Commission would have to base any rejection on tangential matters, such as traffic studies, not on the proposed use of the property. In this respect, Mr. Kassander’s text amendment protects the city officials as well as the residents. The Council should take up a text amendment to require all PC plans and plan revisions to have a public hearing and be approved by the City Council. The protest provision procedures and protections should then apply to the properties surrounding the district.
Speaking of the Planning & Zoning Commission, Monday night’s agenda also includes the appointment of former W-1 City Council member Dr. Michael Barton to the Commission to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Ms. Marcia Niedringhaus. CCV will miss Ms. Niedringhaus. Dr. Barton’s appointment will make the Commission an all-white-male body with three doctors. Creve Coeur deserves a more balanced Commission with more diversity and variety of experience and perspective. Dr. Barton wrote to Mayor Dielmann, Short of a culture in the P&Z that supports and facilitates quality development in our community being the voice of citizens that may not appreciate the impact, both aesthetic and economic, of future projects is equally important. This sounds like code language to CCV, as if the citizens do not know what is good for them. Our notes, beginning in 2007, do not indicate Dr. Barton’s attendance or participation as a resident in any P&Z or City Council meetings. He may be just a little surprised at the level of knowledge and participation that residents have gained since 2006.
Following are portions of the e-mail circulated by Creve Coeur Resident:
Dear Creve Coeur Neighbors,
There is a very important zoning issue before our Creve Coeur City Council on Monday evening August 9th. The Council meeting begins at 7:00 PM in the council chambers at the Creve Coeur City Government Center at 300 N. New Ballas Rd.
This will be one of those cases where a large turnout and coherent statements about the zoning amendment could make a difference in the outcome. Your presence and support for this amendment on Monday night would make a statement to our Council that Creve Coeur residents do not want additional commercial development encroaching into residential areas. Without this text amendment properties in Creve Coeur, including along Ladue Rd and Coeur de Ville are at risk of commercial development. Per, Councilman Kassander, the text amendment sponsor, in his opening comments at the July 12 council meeting,
Some areas that could be developed using the smaller PC district could be the Balmoral subdivision, Belle Maison (Thompson Center), Elks lodge, and other areas throughout the city. Each of these and other areas have problems and benefits…, but the broad brush of residential and commercial uses that can be placed on these or other smaller areas with great flexibility will make it enticing for developers to seek the PC zoning for these areas.
Councilman David Kassander is sponsoring a proposed change to the Planned (PC) zoning district such that districts from 15 to 40 acres in size would be limited to residential and senior care uses only. Districts over 40 acres would be unchanged. Specifically, Bill No. 5257 - An Ordinance To Amend The PC Planned Community Zoning District By Deleting Certain Permitted And Conditional Uses For District Areas Less Than 40 Acres And Clarifying Certain Regulations.
History/Background: The planned community (PC) district minimum acreage requirement was changed from 40 to 15 acres to allow the Parc Provence project to use a 16 acre assemblage of previously residential zoned land back in July 2000. This reduction in minimum acreage, however, was done without changing any of the permitted uses of the previously much larger 40 acres required. As a result in a 16 acre PC district that was created for the Parc Provence, uses such as retail stores, banks, food stores, drug stores, liquor stores, dry cleaners, barber shops, offices and more are allowed without conditions. That is they are permitted uses in this zoning district and, as such, denial for any of these uses would be difficult, if not impossible. Since the site on Coeur de Ville is currently zoned PC (changed from residential zoning for the Parc Provence development, any of those uses could be put on that property and little can be done to stop it. When the Parc Provence and the then associated independent living facility, Le Domaine was approved, it certainly was not intended that all these types of uses would go on that property but at this point it could.
Another issue is 15 acres is relatively easy to aggregate and the city has already shown they are willing to take residential areas and make them something else. Since a PC district was originally designed to create a multi-use district to provide shopping and services to the residents in that area, 15 acres is just too small for those sorts of uses. However, it does create the potential for that smaller land to be used for a significant amount of business use with great flexibility and little restriction. We have a number of properties and areas in the city that this could be applied to if it is the will of the council in place at the time and it could have far reaching impacts to areas that may not be foreseen.
It should be noted that this is a zoning issue and does not relate to the Parc Provence as such. The zoning text amendment sponsored by Councilman Kassander is specifically written to allow the plans they had originally received approval on, even though they have expired and would now have to be reapproved, to be built as planned. In addition, it does not impact the 40 acre + site that is currently part of Westgate.
The owners of the Parc Provence property and the properties that make up the PC district that includes Westgate have filed a protest petition. This petition appears to be valid and will require 6 of the 8 council members to vote in favor of the text amendment for passage.
Passing The Trash
06/14/2010
***A Public Hearing on the 2010-2011 Budget will be held Monday, June 14 at 7 PM.***
In 1940, as Hitler’s storm troopers advanced across Europe, President Franklin D. Roosevelt said, For those who would not admit the possibility of the approaching storm, the past weeks have meant the shattering of many illusions. FDR was speaking of war and events which changed world history, but the thought applies to our daily lives in personal relationships, business, personal finance and more. It also applies to politics and governance at all levels. As we approach November, we will apply FDR’s observation to the national picture. This day we will narrow the focus to Creve Coeur’s financial situation as the annual budget is put forward.
Residents have received a mixed message on the financial situation, and some illusions may have been created. On the one hand, Mayor Dielmann’s campaign materials in 2009 indicated the city had a $1.5 million surplus, which may have created some overly optimistic illusions. (In reality, revenue has been bailed-out by one-time legal settlements with cell-phone service providers.) On the other hand, City Administrator Mark Perkins has consistently projected future deficits in newsletter presentations. These perhaps lead to an overly negative illusion, as Mr. Perkins’ projections are conservatively, and correctly, based on a continuation of the operating policies and plans which have been approved by the City Council. This year the budget includes the imposition of a residential trash collection fee for the first time, a measure that had been suggested by the City Council. The illusion that Creve Coeur’s free services were untouchable has been shattered.
Last June, in an editorial entitled The Budget- Much Mulch, CCV presented a detailed explanation of the budget structure and its provisions for the 2009-2010 fiscal year. Readers who have an interest in details are encouraged to review this material at this point. It is equally applicable today.
Back to the role of the City Administrator and the City Council, City Council Member (W-4) Laura Bryant recently offered a good summary, saying that the City Administrator operates like the CEO of Creve Coeur, professionally managing annual budgets, as well as staff employees and all construction projects, on a full time basis and on behalf of our residents and businesses. She continued, However, the City Council does formally review and vote on every annual budget. That means all eight Council members, individually and collectively, have the responsibility and authority to make lasting, important financial decisions (like the trash service issue). CP Bryant did not include the office of the Mayor in this statement. While technically explicable (The Mayor supervises the City administrator but does not vote on the budget.), Council Members should expect leadership from the Mayor on financial matters, and those who have Mayoral ambitions should exhibit it.
The current budget does not exhibit an entrepreneurial approach which could better serve residents. The trash fee has been brought up time after time. Its adoption is merely taking the path of least resistance. No voter approval is required. No institutional changes are required at City Hall or any of the operating departments. The impact is buried as a decrease in Public Works expenditures, which is correct accounting, but is the same as a $511,940 (estimated) tax increase. Unlike a tax increase, it does not require a vote.
The trash fee is fair in that residents in multi-family units and most businesses are already paying for trash removal directly or indirectly. Free trash pick-up as well as leaf and limb processing are perks reserved for single family homeowners which are paid by general revenue. That being said, other alternatives to reduce this cost may not have even been considered. For example, recycling is good for the environment but at what cost? Two pickups obviously cost more than one. Is voluntary recycling an option? How about bi-weekly pickup? The solution proposed is the most simplistic one- straight from residents’ pockets.
If the trash fee is required, which is debatable given the City’s reserves and the conservative forecast, it must be instituted and managed as a temporary remedy. These cost savings must not be diverted to wasteful spending in payroll, perks, political payoffs, and pet projects. And the pressure to find other cost savings must not be reduced. As revenues exceed the budget projections they should be used first to reduce debt and then the trash fee should be reduced or eliminated. The City Council must assume the responsibility to oversee this process over the five year budget projection. If the financial situation worsens, proposals other than mindlessly increasing the trash fee must be ready.
Mr. Perkins has done a fairly good job of managing expenditures within his authority. Council Member Jeanne Rhoades (W-4) recently cited his leadership in joining with other municipalities to create a health insurance consortium as an example. However there is only so much he can do. When the City Council tells him to maintain one of the most expensive overpass landscapes in the entire Interstate Highway System, what can he do but pay the bills? When he is told to maintain a golf course and ice rink, which are used more by non-residents than residents, what can he do? And when it takes two hearings and a vote by the City Council to adjust the rates or approve promotional expenditures at these facilities, how fast can he respond to market conditions or opportunities? These facilities should have a more independent management, which could be afforded by outsourcing, and the subsidy provided by residents could be eliminated.
There does not seem to be a lack of financial thinking in the community. At a recent City Council meeting, and in an email, resident R.W. Kent made a number of suggestions including privatization and/or outsourcing of various programs. A Creve Coeur resident, employed by another municipality, noted that Creve Coeur does not have a PILOT (Payment in Lieu of Taxes) program, which would generate revenue from businesses which do not collect sales taxes. CP Rhoades says this will be studied- now that the budget process is over. CCV has made a number of recommendations, including common sense changes in the business license amnesty program which were adopted. But last year CCV recommended reducing the use of consultants in general and changing management of the pension fund to reduce fees. What was done? Another consultant was hired to study the pension fund and no changes were made!
[Regarding the defined benefit pension program, the retirement age for uniformed police officers is 55 and for all other employees is 65. The formula for the retirement benefit tops out at 60 percent of the highest five years’ salary for 30 or more years of service. CCV is not advocating changes in the benefits at this time, although buyouts and voluntary conversions could make sense for the City and the employees as time goes by. Significant opportunities to reduce the cost of managing the fund exist.]
The budget situation was well known twelve months ago, and has only worsened. Over these months the elected officials, appointees, and staff have not developed an entrepreneurial financial plan for Creve Coeur. Mayor Dielmann seems to have an illusion of prosperity as he recently included a recreational complex, including a gym, swimming facilities, workout equipment, and meeting rooms in his vision for the next decade. This kind of big picture thinking does not help the City Council navigate through the current financial storm. Neither has the Council been particularly well advised by the appointed committees, which have adopted a small picture approach and have not provided business insight or creative thinking. The Finance Committee has consistently recommended and endorsed more taxes, including the rejected Economic Development Tax and the costly Transportation Development District tax, more fees, and simplistic measures such as the trash collection fee. The next Mayor (Mayor Dielmann is serving his last term.) should strengthen the committees; qualified business people should step forward and volunteer.
CP (W-4) Jeanne Rhoades said in a recent e-mail, The need for the Council to now make tough choices – including asking citizens to share high-cost expenses such as trash service – has actually been on the table for more than the last couple years. It is disappointing that this is the only option still on the table, as it is not clear that this is the direction that residents would choose. One illusion which should be shattered is that the trash fee was/is inevitable and will be eternal. If this budget is passed, the Council should also adopt resolutions to insure that the trash fee is minimal and temporary, that more resident input is obtained, that other choices are fully considered, and that the Council devotes more attention to financial management on a regular basis. The Council should do more than just pass the trash.
Residents Speak Up on Regulation
06/08/2010
The proposed regulations requiring residents to install rain gardens when expanding their homes generated a significant response from residents via calls, letters, and attendance at the May 24, 2010 City Council meeting. Following is a statement presented by Mr. David Henshel, a Ward 1 resident, at the City Council meeting:
***** Mr. Henschel *****
I started to read the letter about runoff problems from the city and thought it was a joke letter. I asked other neighbors and the two other trustees if they’d received it but none did and I wondered why. Wouldn’t it have been better to send such important information to all households? We may be on a lane and have trustees, but there are so many others who are not, and have no idea what has been proposed.
Then I read the entirety of the letter. Are they serious, I thought? Maybe the city didn’t want all the residents to read the letter. A rain garden! My neighbor, who is very familiar with these, explained it is nothing but glorified swamp- welcome mosquitoes. And, besides, what an outrageous added cost, plus a fee to the city. And the city would exact a fee for yearly inspections!
So experts will descend upon a prospective project and tell the family where the rain garden is to be located. That’s great. What if it’s in the middle of a beautiful front yard, a driveway, a swimming pool? What if they have to uproot a tree? Are they to tear up the property to add this thing? What is the homeowner to do if it disrupts an irrigation system, a gas line, a water main, or an underground electric line?
Then there are all those residents who’ve improved their property. Are we next to be inspected and a fee exacted? What if a rain garden is ordered for us?
The city began in the late 1940’s. There were a few houses, a few businesses, and a few insignificant and small runoff creeks.
Fast forward to July, 1967. We moved to Chilton Lane. Before the move we planned to improve the property when we saved enough money. In our back yard was one of these insignificant small creeks. Our children jumped across it and searched for crawdads among the rocks.
Fast forward a few years. With our backyard nearly destroyed, our house threatened, my wife and I started a twenty-five year struggle to save our property. The reason for this we discovered was that Monsanto especially and other businesses from Warson Road west built structures and asphalted hundreds of acres without a thought as to the threat to homeowners to the south. The city acquiesced to developers, allowing development of commercial property not only on Olive but along other thoroughfares. There were no detention basins of rain gardens back then.
Fast forward to June, 1985. With no options left, we filed a lawsuit against the city, Monsanto, et al. Finally, in 1993, work began restoring other vanished back yards and saving threatened homes, including ours, along one of those insignificant creeks. Construction in back of our house was 100% effective against even the greatest of storms.
There are less than 17,000 residents in the city living in condos, apartments, and houses ranging from bungalows to monstrosities. This is a small town. Many of the homeowners have improved their property already. The city letter blames us. We are the evil-doers who caused the problem. There are others and they dream of some day improving their property; to add a bedroom, a sunroom, a patio, a garage. Council members- we didn’t cause the problem. Look to the source- your commercial developers, specifically those honored with city allowances to build without protecting residents’ property. Why weren’t they highlighted to improve land with rain gardens?
In the scheme of things, this proposed ordinance is possibly the city’s most odious. If a poll was taken, and the proposal given full light, it would be dramatically opposed.
But possibly, could this be a ploy for more city income? Possibly, if a homeowner cannot sell his property because the ordinance is facing a potential buyer, the city developers will rush in with a low-ball offer, thus preparing fro more commercial development.
Eminent Domain- In Your Back Yard
05/15/2010
General George Patton said, If everybody is thinking alike, then somebody isn’t thinking. The City Council’s reaction to the first reading (April 26) of the proposed Residential Storm Water ordinance seemed to indicate a groupthink of approval. Only W-4 Council Member Rhoades’ comments indicated the possibility of a less than unanimous approval. Several Council Members voiced praise for the ordinance and its perceived benefits. This came as a surprise, as the Planning and Zoning Commission rejected the proposal by a vote of 5-1 on February 16. Perhaps the Council Members had not had time to read the ordinance. They should stop, look, study, analyze and think long and hard before approving this measure.
The ordinance would affect all residents who remodel their house in such a way that increases the impervious footprint (roof, driveway, patio, etc.) by 500 square feet. A room addition, driveway expansion, or any project exceeding 499 square feet would require stormwater management via an underground tank, a bio detention facility, or a rain garden. And it would trigger a regulatory process which can only be described as horrendous. Skip the next few paragraphs if you’re bureaucracy-phobic or have a weak heart.
To summarize the 22 page regulation in an intelligible way is impossible. It starts with a Pre-submittal Consultation Meeting and an On-Site Meeting with a City official. Then comes the submission of the Stormwater Management Concept Plan (SMCP), which must include a description of the plan consistent with the Creve Coeur Stormwater Design Manual, a document which does not yet exist but will be extracted from voluminous MSD papers. Never mind that residents can’t find or understand the technical stuff; they must hire a professional engineer for the next step anyway. The City has 10 days to accept the SMCP and another 30 days to review it. The SMCP shall utilize, to the maximum extent practical, site planning and design techniques that mitigate against increased (relative to pre-existing conditions) runoff rates …blah, blah, blah, all very subjective.
As the song lyrics say, we’ve only just begun. Next comes the Stormwater Management Design Plan (SMDP), which must be certified by a licensed professional engineer. This document flushes out the SMCP with maps, charts, graphs, tables, photographs, narrative descriptions, explanations, citations blah, blah, blah consistent with the Stormwater Design Manual. The City once again has 10 days to accept the SMDP and 30 days to approve it. Prior to approval the applicant must also submit a Stormwater Maintenance Agreement and Plan (SMAP) to ensure the continued performance of the maintenance obligations required by the (ordinance) … and shall include a list of inspection and maintenance tasks, a schedule for routine inspections and maintenance tasks blah, blah, blah and other items listed in the Stormwater Design Manual. The SMAP shall be recorded by the City in the office of the recorder of deeds and shall run with the land and shall pass the responsibility for such maintenance to successors in title and shall grant the City … the right of entry for the purposes of inspecting … in perpetuity.
Finally- no, nothing is final in this- applicants are required to submit as-built plans certified by a professional engineer and pass a final inspection.
Fellow Creve Coeur residents, this ordinance is nothing more than an exercise of eminent domain, disguised as regulation, in your back yard. The point is confirmed by the ordinance itself in that it provides that the homeowner may offer for dedication any such stormwater practice … In other words the ordinance provides for appropriation of property in your back yard for general public use. Whereas a building code protects property owners, emergency personnel, and the public from unsafe and unscrupulous building practices, this ordinance aims to protect the condition of state and (U.S.) waters for all reasonable public uses and ecological functions among other lofty sounding goals which sound an awful lot like the justifications for eminent domain takings. And the goals and objectives are essentially the same list which MSD uses to impose its stormwater fee on every property owner. MSD has not (yet) deemed small residential additions worthy of regulation.
Still want that 2-car garage addition? Better make it 24 x 20 (480 square feet). Otherwise, you will have a rain garden: Application fee- $300. Engineering cost- $2000. Installation cost- $2,500 plus. Annual inspection- $30. Maintenance cost- unknown and unlimited. The ordinance will increase the cost of a 500 square foot addition by at least $10 per square foot.
Aiming higher, perhaps a 1000 square foot master suite? Better add a second floor. Otherwise you are looking at $7500 plus to comply. And it’s not deductible. To top it off, to make sure that the City can come in and do the job at your expense, the ordinance requires a 100 percent cash escrow which can be kept for up to two years at the discretion of the City Engineer.
According to Director of Public Works Jim Heines, this ordinance was initiated following resident complaints regarding storm water runoff from adjacent properties, particularly teardown/re-builds. What do those who are accused of causing the problem pay per this ordinance? Zero. What will this ordinance do to reduce the rate of erosion? Nothing. It may mitigate an increase in runoff if future projects do not work around the 500 square foot trigger. The ordinance will actually encourage future teardown/rebuilds to build higher, not wider, which may not reflect the character of the neighborhood. Will this ordinance coordinate with current and future MSD regulations, projects, and fees? No, the ordinance is much more intrusive and costly to residents than any current MSD regulation. Residents will get no credit applied to the MSD fees.
This ordinance makes Creve Coeur less competitive with other communities for home improvement projects and will encourage homeowners to move rather than to improve. Rain gardens will not increase the resale value of a house. And the lifetime requirement for maintenance and inspections will reduce the marketability. The Home Builders Association of St. Louis has voiced major concerns with the proposal, saying in a letter, In an economy where the housing industry is significantly down, flexibility and maintaining affordable prices is key. The HBA recommended that the City be more consistent with MSD’s regulations. For example, the City of O’Fallon adopted a regulation in 2008 based on management of 1.14 inches of rainfall whereas Creve Coeur’s proposed regulation is based on 2.5 inches of rainfall. The Planning and Zoning Commission also recommended working with area wide regulations from MSD.
Creve Coeur should lead by working with MSD, not by going alone with burdensome and costly regulations that penalize a very small minority of Creve Coeur residents who want to improve their property- all for unpredictable and negligible benefit. One thing which Creve Coeur could do to work with MSD and actually reduce the rate of stormwater runoff immediately would be to promote rain barrels. (*) Installation of one rain barrel at 10% of Creve Coeur houses at a cost of $65 per house (about $36,000 total) would equal or surpass the capacity of approximately 42 rain gardens at a cost of over $190,000. Besides being more cost effective, this approach would spread the cost more fairly and have more immediate, distributed, and predictable results. Creve Coeur officials should also work to see that Creve Coeur residents are getting their money’s worth from the fees that are already paid to MSD for stormwater control and creek maintenance.
Tear down/rebuild problems should be addressed by revisions to the zoning ordinance and building code such as coverage and height limitations. This is a project that is needed and is already listed on the goals of the Planning Department.
(*) MSD is holding its Spring Cash and Carry Rain Barrel Sale on Saturday, June 19 at the Hampton & I-44 location. The sale runs from 8:00 AM until noon. The cost is $65 cash or check. Sewer bill or photo ID is required. See www.stlmsd.com for more info.
Proposition O
03/31/2010
Creve Coeur residents who live in the Ladue School District (essentially all of Ward 1) have an opportunity to consider Prop O at the polls on April 6. Prop O would authorize the District to borrow $32 million to purchase and develop the Westminster Christian Academy campus. If the proposition is approved, the property tax levy of the district would increase by an estimated $0.12 per $100 of assessed valuation. Let’s go through the math. Each $100,000 of home value is assessed at $19,000, or 190 units of $100. Then multiply 190 units times $0.12 and the tax increase is $22.80. The increase for a $250,000 house would be $57 per year. It is our understanding that the resulting property tax for Ladue District residents will still be less than that for Parkway residents.
Of the $32 million, approximately $18 million would be used to purchase the Westminster campus. The remaining $14 million would be used for new construction. Most of the existing buildings and improvements on the campus would be kept and used by the District. Only the oldest wing of the original Ladue Jr. High School building would be demolished to make room for a new Ladue Early Childhood Center (LECC). If you have not received one of the mailers describing the District’s situation and plans, go to www.ladue.k12.mo.us and click on the Prop O icon.
CCV recommends a vote for approval of Proposition O. Simply as an insurance policy, the tax increase is a good investment to preserve and increase property values in the area. While property values in Ward 1 already benefit from being in the Ladue School District, Spoede School is the only facility actually located in Creve Coeur. The LECC will be a state of the art facility. (Creve Coeur families outside the District will have an opportunity to enroll in the LECC programs, as space is available, at a nominal nonresident charge.) The rest of the existing facilities offer a number of alternatives for usage by various grades, as described in the District’s materials. The convenience of the campus can only be an asset to Creve Coeur. Combined with the improvements underway at Chaminade, De Smet, and Missouri Baptist University, Creve Coeur will rise to the top in its educational facilities.
The possible alternative for this 30+ acre property is a nightmare. Although zoned one-acre residential, any residential development would undoubtedly be pursued under the Planned Zoning Development (PZD) ordinance approved by the City Council in 2008. (Both Ward 1 Council Members voted FOR this ordinance.) The ordinance allows up to six housing units per acre! The development-friendly faction of the City Council holds 4-5 of the eight votes, and ties are broken by the ultra-development friendly Mayor. Even allowing for a favorable vote by the Council to deny a rezoning proposal, a legal challenge by developers could prevail- so long as the PZD ordinance remains law. This property must be preserved as an institutional use. A better outcome than the Ladue District plan cannot be imagined at this time.
It is fair to point out that the District should have completed its longer range plan for the facilities BEFORE this vote. Voters should have had a better definition of the longer term plan. The District’s publicity is also vague about the cost of the LECC. Of the $32 million bond proceeds, $18 million is designated as the purchase cost of the property; this appears to be reasonable. However, if the remaining $14 million is all spent on the LECC, a 50,400 square foot structure, the $278 per square foot cost is stunning. The District should take another look at this design and extract some savings for future capital needs. The District should have made more of the cost savings that will result from purchase of existing classrooms, etc. vs. new construction and should tone down its future expenditures accordingly. One Taj Mahal on this property is enough.
CCV encourages the District to give Creve Coeur families outside the District a preferred status for nonresident enrollment in the LECC programs.
Disclosure: CCV editor is a property owner in Westwood Place, which is adjacent to the subject property.
Over-Ride Metro
03/26/2010
The St. Louis Post Dispatch closes its editorial supporting Proposition A, the 0.5 percent Metro sales tax, as follows:
We stand with St. Louis’ biggest employers, entrepreneurs, developers, scholars, students, political leaders, Democrats and Republicans, caregivers to the sick and elderly, artists, entertainers and sports teams. We stand with St. Louis’ disabled citizens who are living independent lives. We stand with St. Louis’s priests, preachers, rabbis and other people of faith. We stand with St. Louis’ working men and women who catch the bus to push a mop and empty trash cans to support their families. We all are on this ride together.
So there you have it. It seems the April 6 vote will only be a formality since everybody with half a brain is for it? Perhaps it’s because supporters are indeed only using half of their brains or only looking at half of the facts. What is the big picture?
Since last November, when the same tax increase was defeated, we are told Metro has sputtered along by cutting services and trimming overhead, along with an infusion of stimulus money. The retirement age was increased from 60 to 65. Wow! However, we still see very large, smoky buses carrying one or two people. MetroLink operates at a very large deficit, even with 81 Cardinal games per year. Taxpayers provide quite a bargain to fans with $50 tickets; they can ride MetroLink for $2.25 and save gas and a $20 parking fee! No wonder the tax increase is supported by Cardinals’ ownership! But we digress.
The anecdotal evidence all says that Metro is irretrievably caught up in a societal sea change. Creve Coeur offers a case on point. Creve Coeur desires to offer residents an opportunity to live close to work and shopping and is doing a pretty decent job of it overall. Multiply this by all the suburbs of St. Louis and the picture begins to appear. The density of the City of St. Louis is a small fraction of what it was when the streetcars were thriving. The workplace is no longer concentrated at all. In this century, transit must evolve to a new model which is more targeted and flexible. No amount of taxes will turn the clock back. It will only prolong the life support. Metro must develop an entirely new model- hardware and software- to survive. We have not seen an inkling of that. In fact the proposition would expand MetroLink to less populated areas.
Now we are told that the system will essentially shut down without this tax increase. This means that the funding mechanism must change along with the transit model. Washington University purchases transit passes for its employees and customers (students). This is a good example and should be an inspiration for a private-public partnership of creative financing. Large employers should step up to provide more direct funding to Metro as they benefit directly from its service; if Metro did not exist the cost of maintaining and transporting a workforce would certainly increase. Smaller employers having Metro service can contribute proportionally. Businesses with a large number of customers who benefit from Metro, such as the aforementioned St. Louis Cardinals, should also be expected to contract with Metro to continue the service. And St. Louis County, where the tax will be collected, already collects billions of dollars, a portion of which could be directed to Metro. This is only a matter of prioritizing the tax dollars that are already collected. The taxpayers carelessly approved a 0.1 percent tax increase which will perpetually provide the best in communications equipment to first responders throughout the County. This tax will provide $16 million per year which will relieve the County and municipalities from expenditures which were previously part of their annual budgets and capital plans.
A cursory review indicates that the Post Dispatch mostly stands with special interests, such as large employers, developers, sports teams, etc. The PD stands with entertainers- give us a break. And we can hardly imagine that people of faith wouldn’t provide transportation to fellow worshipers. CCV stands with all the taxpayers. The PD bemoans that service cuts would hit lower-income workers, students, and disabled people. More thoughtful analysts, such as the Show-Me Institute, have pointed out that the tax increase is itself regressive and would disproportionately take from the poor. And increasing sales taxes has demonstrably driven consumers to sales-tax-free e-commerce, which only hurts local small businesses.
Enough is enough. The previously mentioned 0.1 percent E-911 tax will go into effect appropriately on April Fools ’ Day. So will the one percent sales tax in the Olive/Graeser Transportation District. Property taxes have not been reduced in spite of declining market values. MSD deferred a 21 percent increase in its stormwater tax late last year, but this will be imposed along with a series of increases which the voters do not get to approve or reject. We have all heard about the coming taxes to fund the so-called health reforms. And only Heaven and the Washington Democrats know what taxes will be imposed to prevent bankruptcy of the country. Whatever they are, the Post Dispatch and the entertainers will no doubt approve. (Editors note: I just can’t help it.) Voters can take a big step in November. They can take a baby step April 6 by voting NO on Proposition A and over-riding this tax.
DREAMERS
03/18/2010
Creve Coeur residents recently had the opportunity to get a look at some interesting dreams and visions for the future of Creve Coeur. Delmar Gardens CEO Gabe Grossberg, in an interview with St. Louis Business Journal, described the plans for the defunct Belle Maison project as the company’s next dream project. Delmar Gardens bought the property in 2009. Then, when the company sought to rezone the nursing home property on Country Manor Lane for office buildings, its spokesmen said that DG planned to move the nursing home operation to another location in Creve Coeur. CCV and residents speculated and feared that the other location would be the Belle Maison property. (See 7/4/2009 Editorial, If a Tree Falls.) The Journal article confirms the plan. Grossberg said, We hope to one day have a beautiful senior campus there. The Journal article reports that 10-12 one-acre lots would remain single family homes. That leaves 16-18 acres for the senior living development. It is likely that the single family homes would be situated along Ladue Road, to preserve the character of the area, with the high density senior complex tucked in behind. It’s a dream for Mr. Grossberg, a nightmare for many residents.
Delmar Gardens will most likely seek rezoning of the Ladue Road property to a Planned Residential Development (PRD). PRD zoning was created as part of the same ordinance which established Planned Commercial Zoning (PCD), which Delmar Gardens requested for the office complex. This Trojan Horse ordinance is rapidly becoming an anathema to Creve Coeur residents who respect the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and want to constrain development. Residents’ grass roots efforts forced Delmar Gardens to withdraw its plan for Country Manor. And another group of residents won a negative vote from the Planning & Zoning Commission against the proposed PRD plan for The Enclave at Bellerive. PRD zoning allows up to six housing units per acre, and PCD zoning allows up to 60 percent coverage, not counting common areas such as parking garages. These density limits are so great that projects proposed so far have not even approached them. The senior living campus is likely to come closer. CCV will refer to this zoning as AAAA zoning- Anyone Anything Anywhere Anytime.
Just when we were beginning to wake up from our vicarious experience with Mr. Grossberg’s dream, we slipped into a semi-coma when we opened the city newsletter (March) to Mayor Dielmann’s vision for our next decade in Creve Coeur. It was as if we were Scrooge, haunted by one ghost after another.
Mayor Dielmann has pursued and modified his vision for Creve Coeur over his terms as Mayor. The vision has three common themes- development, more development, and even more development. This version suggests more questions than answers.
The vision includes a new downtown area with a major anchor business surrounded by various restaurants and boutiques and numerous condos and apartments. This description, with the exception of the anchor business, seems to be the same one that was deemed to be impractical by the city’s professional planner due to the congestion that it would create. The Planning & Zoning Commission hopes to come up with a new approach this year. It would be nice to have a hardware store as an anchor business, but we can do without the numerous condos and apartments.
The utility poles along Olive Boulevard will be placed underground. Some poles (between Craig and Ballas) were removed by the Olive Transportation Development District (TDD). Others will remain indefinitely due to mismanagement of that TDD. And when the Graeser/Olive TDD was debated, the removal of poles in that area was never brought up until suggested by CCV. But funds were not included.
Mayor Dielmann envisions replacing all of the houses between Mosley and Spoede with business/residential type buildings. While this concept (businesses in residential type buildings) is allowed by the Comprehensive Plan, most projects which work their way through the informal vetting process, through P&Z, and to the City Council are of a more commercial nature. A rezoning of the houses adjacent to the Mobil station to straight commercial (The Ones) is currently before P&Z. We doubt that the Mayor will work against this project.
A recreational complex as Mayor Dielmann describes has never appeared in any plan approved by the residents or their representatives to our knowledge. The City Council recently refused to add a discussion of it to the agenda. We have a golf course, an ice rink, numerous tennis courts and sports fields, and a small gym in the government center. All are subsidized by taxes on the residents.
The vision included The Enclave at Bellerive being completed as designed. We wonder if the Mayor was dreaming about the original design or the new design which was rejected by P&Z. The original design resulted in a failed project; the new design conflicted with the Comprehensive Plan and was repulsive to the residents.
We turned the page and drifted into a series of daydreams. All of the future leaders of Creve Coeur will represent the residents without reservation. The Comprehensive Plan will be updated to reflect the residents’ vision and build on experience. No PRD’s or PCD’s will be approved and the ordinance will be repealed. No more TDD’s will be approved in Creve Coeur. Sales taxes and property taxes will be reduced. The ice rink and golf course will be outsourced to a private business and no longer require a subsidy. The employee pension fund will regain its value and be managed more appropriately and at a lower cost. The vacancies in our existing commercial buildings will be filled. The Light Industrial District will evolve to what it was intended to be, not an irrelevant eyesore. There will be no more apartments built in Creve Coeur. Property values will increase because the demand for property in Creve Coeur exceeds the supply. The residents who fought for their own interests will not drift away but will help other residents. Crevecoeurvoter.com will become unnecessary and irrelevant.
Creve Coeur's Sex District
03/17/2010
The City Council is considering adoption of an ordinance regulating sexually oriented businesses (SOB). The ordinance carefully defines such terms as Adult Media Store, Hard-Core Material, Sex Shop, and Sexually Oriented Business. The ordinance then specifies that no sexually oriented business can be located within 1000 feet of a religious institution, school, hospital, nursing home, child care center, park, government building, residence, city boundary, business with a liquor license, or any other sexually oriented business. The ordinance then addresses requirements related to parking, lighting, landscaping, signage, etc. After all this, the Ordinance states:
The Zoning Code shall be amended to expressly provide that sexually oriented businesses are only allowed in the Light Industrial zoning district.
The Light Industrial District (LID) is basically the area which is bounded by Lindbergh, Old Olive, Warson, and Baur. It is the home of Creve Coeur’s industrial and distribution businesses. There are no retail businesses in the LID. Motion picture and live production theaters are not permitted uses in the district.
The intent of this ordinance is to discourage SOB’s from opening in Creve Coeur in a way which would stand up to a legal challenge under the First Amendment. The 1000 foot separation requirement is the key element of the ordinance. The city’s Director of Community Development, Paul Langdon, has applied this test across the entire map of Creve Coeur and has determined that it would limit SOB’s to the LID. Indeed, it would limit SOB’s to nine or ten properties in the LID:
1185 Research Blvd.- Peistrup Paper Products
1201 Research Blvd.- currently vacant (formerly DaTile)
1235 Research Blvd.- IDN, H. Hoffman, Inc.*
1255 Research Blvd.- Offices
1265 Research Blvd.- B.C. MacDonald & Co.
1285 Research Blvd.- Consumer Contact Co. (currently listed by Hutkin Real Estate)
1289 Research Blvd.- Alternative Woodwork & Stair
1250 Ambassador Blvd.- IBP (Industrial Battery Products)
1226 Ambassador Blvd.- O.C. Schueddig Machine Co.
10812 Ambassador Blvd.- Red Card Systems
*This lot may not meet the requirement to have 100 foot frontage on the street.
Why are these particular properties singled out? Why are potential SOB operators given a roadmap within the ordinance via the language previously quoted? City Attorney Carl Lumley said in the public hearing that the language was inserted to prevent a false fear that SOB’s could legally proliferate in the city. Instead, the language establishes a true fear that SOB’s will be attracted to the safe harbor provided and advertised.
The specific language involving the LID should be removed from the ordinance. Further, the ordinance should be refined to decrease its reliance on the separation approach and increase other protections such as limits on hours of operation. The separation approach also limits the number of SOB’s to one, as the second one would be within 1000 feet of the first. CCV is not qualified to pronounce a legal opinion, but it would seem that a more balanced ordinance would be more likely to stand up to a legal challenge than one which specifically limits SOB’s to one which must be on one of nine or ten specific properties in the entire city.
The city’s proactive approach is good. However, it should not wind up casting a shadow over an important part of the city’s diversity.
Disclosure: CCV editor David Caldwell owns a property in another part of the LID.
An Open Door
01/31/2010
The Delmar Gardens office complex proposal last year inspired a grass roots citizen response. This determined group of Ward 3 residents formed a citizen committee, set up a website, developed an e-mail information exchange, established media contacts, attended numerous P&Z and City Council meetings, made presentations, sent letters, hired an attorney, and solicited support throughout the city. Their hard work eventually paid off when the project was withdrawn. For their effort and achievement this group is hereby declared the 2009 CCV Citizens of the Year.
As the background details of the project development history unfolded, questions arose about the involvement of elected officials at early stages. Who knew what and when did they know it? Who inspired the rezoning approach? Was this potential project part of an undisclosed agenda when the Planned Zoning ordinance was debated, defined, and approved? Were promises made? Although one City Council member recused himself from the Council deliberations, was his prior involvement relevant? When the residents constructed a detailed timeline these and other questions and concerns were illuminated.
Rather than fade away, content with their victory over Delmar Gardens, the residents have now come forward to share their knowledge and experience with the rest of the city. Led by Christy McCollum, Pattye Taylor-Phillips, and Paul Kutz, they have proposed changes in the way projects are reviewed and approved. These were presented to the City Council on January 25:
Transparency Enhancement Policies for Future Creve Coeur Rezoning/Development Proposals
1. The City of Creve Coeur will establish an additional menu item on the city website Planning and Zoning page to provide current information regarding rezoning requests, conditional use permit requests, and development proposals when received. The city will provide a subscriber provision on this new page to allow Creve Coeur citizens the opportunity to sign up and receive updates.
2. The City Planner will submit a 20 year property zoning history to the Planning & Zoning Commission with all development/rezoning proposal submissions for that affected property.
3. When rezoning or development proposals are officially submitted to the City of Creve Coeur the proposals, with staff reports and revisions, will be scanned and entered on the city website, and sent via email to a subscriber list created for Creve Coeur citizens prior to Planning & Zoning meetings. This would afford residents the opportunity to analyze the data prior to the meetings.
4. All discussions between elected Creve Coeur officials, Planning and Zoning Commission appointees, and developers seeking rezoning of their property shall be registered with the City of Creve Coeur. If conflicts, note why P&Z ignores those conflicts. Creve Coeur citizens will have access to this registration information via the website.
5. The Planning & Zoning Commission must document how development and rezoning proposals comply, or conflict, with or fulfill each enumerated item in the Comprehensive Plan before voting whether to approve development and rezoning requests. Creve Coeur citizens will have access to this document via the Creve Coeur website.
6. After public discussions or town meetings, two public hearings at the Planning and Zoning Committee meetings are required for rezoning proposals. These preliminary opportunities would make residents aware and alert them to attend the formal public hearings. While ward meetings might seem appropriate, many of the potential proposals affect the entire city via traffic congestion, tax consequences (TIF, TDD and CID), and trust.
***
Implementation of these proposals would go a long way toward leveling the playing field between developers and residents. CCV has observed the process unfolding on multiple projects. On project after project the residents have little information to counter developers’ slick presentations. Often developers have worked with city staff to present their proposals in the most favorable way. The staff reports and recommendations are typically not available to residents until the projects are presented at the P&Z meeting. Although the P&Z Commission is to be commended for its openness to public comment, official public hearings are not held until the City Council meeting. By this time developers may have had numerous private meetings with elected and appointed officials. These informal meetings can essentially constitute mutual coaching sessions. Council Member Laura Bryant has noted examples of proposals which mysteriously changed from one public meeting to the next. She has also lamented on numerous occasions the fact that residents are forced to hire attorneys in order to defend their property rights.
The residents assert that too much of the development process happens in rooms behind closed doors, rooms with shuttered windows. They want to open those windows to the light of day, to the disinfectant of public scrutiny. Even better they may open the door, the door to another room- the room for improvement. A wise person once said the largest room in the world is the room for improvement. The City Council should accept the invitation to step in.
Keep Our Parks Alcohol-Free
01/05/2010
The Creve Coeur newsletter for December contained an article, Alcohol Consumption Policy in City Parks Under Review. According to City Administrator Mark Perkins, the Parks and Recreation Committee and the City Council will consider the feedback received to date on this article at their next meetings. CCV believes that a recommendation, much less a decision, in January would be premature. Limiting citizen input to the holiday period is not sufficient.
CCV recommends continuing the ban of all alcohol products in city parks, including Millennium Park, with the exception to alcohol consumed at events at the Tappmeyer House. This policy has served Creve Coeur well over decades. Because of the policy there has not been a single alcohol related injury on park property or on nearby streets. The only upsides to allowing alcohol are the service provided to residents who wish to consume alcohol in the parks and the collection of very minimal revenue from pavilion permits. The downsides are too horrible to imagine.
Several variations of a new alcohol policy are under consideration. One would allow only beer and wine. A variation of this variation would not allow glass containers, which would limit wine to plastic containers. These options do not provide any meaningful benefit, as high levels of intoxication can be achieved by beer consumption. Aside from the obvious threat of DUI related incidents, even lesser levels of beer consumption can result in rowdiness and other behavior unbecoming to the historic family-oriented environment of Creve Coeur parks.
Another option under consideration is the allowance of alcohol only in conjunction with pavilion rentals. This option would not change any of the possible undesirable outcomes, but would only identify a person who applied for the permit. If this option were selected, the number of persons covered by the permit should be limited and provided with event badges. And such a permit should only be issued to residents. Even with these restrictions, CCV does not recommend this option. Enforcement would be problematic and downsides would not be diminished.
One option not mentioned in the article is the allowance of alcohol only at Millennium Park. (It has been allowed due to an oversight since the park was established.) Only Millennium Park and Beirne Park have pavilions suitable for group events. Millennium Park is in a primarily commercial/institutional neighborhood and has ready access to Olive. Beirne Park is located in a residential neighborhood and can only be accessed via a narrow, winding residential street. Alcohol consumption is a more serious threat to public safety in this situation. This option would preserve a family-oriented environment in one park for those residents who, due to religious beliefs or otherwise, do not want their children exposed to public drinking.
CCV encourages the Ward 1 Council Members, David Kreuter and Elizabeth Kistner, to conduct a door-to-door canvas of the residents in the vicinity of Beirne Park before any ordinance allowing alcohol is adopted.
PD Readers Say Bah-Humbug
12/17/2009
This editorial is contributed by the general public, well, more specifically by some of the folks who get their Post Dispatch on-line (stltoday.com) and take the time to make comments on the news. The PD reported this Tuesday on the launch of the Olive/Graeser Transportation Development District, which is covered elsewhere in CCV. The article was one of the most commented upon articles. What does the public think about Creve Coeur, Olive Blvd., taxes, etc.? Here for your entertainment and edification are some excerpts.
fireburt102: Yeah, great .. yet another traffic interruption in that dung-hole of a city.
Underwhelmed: Holy crap! Another signal on Olive! Why not just remove Olive Blvd. You can’t drive on it anyway; you are always stopped at a light.
devilcat: Gee, more corporate welfare for PACE. Why would anyone want to shop here and pay an extra 1% in sales tax- you know like a total of 8%. (CCV: Dear devilcat- Many municipalities have similar or higher sales taxes. Thank 711 proud Creve Coeur residents for voting down the 0.5 percent economic development tax in 2008. Sales taxes are lowest in unincorporated areas.)
jinx1966: brought to you by big oil, more ways to make u use more gas. Time them right and traffic flows but not in constipated stlouis, let’s stop people at every light and back things up.
weiss2727: ….I avoid Olive as much as possible. The unsynchronized signals make Olive one of the worst places in the county to drive. Rush hour is a nightmare. The downside for the businesses there is that I refuse (I assume others agree) to stop along Olive to spend money. Too danged hard to get back onto Olive. I eat and get gasoline somewhere else. I guess I won’t contribute to their 1% tax increase. (CCV: Dear weiss2727- the lights ARE synchronized. It works great when there is not much traffic. And weiss2727, do you have a relative who works for Creve Coeur?)
jjk: can someone tell me why a Judge established this TIF district? Since when do judges impose taxes? (CCV: Dear jjk- It’s worse than that. It’s the DEVELOPERS who impose the taxes.)
Dwight Wannabe: Yeah. Great. It only takes 40 minutes to drive six miles as it stands.
semo mom: You’ve got to be kidding … there are too many stoplights between Lindbergh and 270 as it is. Since 40 closed I’ve zig-zagged thru subdivisions to avoid lights at Craig, Dierbergs, and Mosley. Creve Coeur, your attempt to be a 1st class city like Clayton, has failed miserably. (CCV: Dear mom- What subdivisions do you use to avoid the lights in Clayton?)
suzyjax: Wow! Is there a solid block on Olive without a traffic light? It is already a torture to drive. This stuff is what sends unnecessary traffic onto side/residential streets. (CCV: Dear suzyjax- the folks at Delmar Gardens would like to talk to you.)
2keysmatt: Another traffic signal is the last thing we need on Olive. I go from Shulte to 170 and back every day. The new light would barely be 300 ft. from the one at Shulte. Who thinks this is a good idea? (CCV: Dear 2keysmatt- So now you can cut through the Cambridge subdivision and Rainbow Village and come out at Dautel and skip the light at Shulte. suzyjax will show you the route.)
Mickey: Poorly handled. Yet another tax district and for what? (CCV: Dear Mickey- Have you been reading CCV or what?)
Mr.FluffyPants: I thought Creve Coeur was goin to put them under Olive on 270. Then add cameras and make a fortune. (CCV: Dear MFP- Where have you been? We have the cameras and have given out over 27,000 tickets! If you read CCV you would know that another camera is going in on Olive at Ballas. We should install one at Graeser to pay off those TDD bonds!)
cmnsns: Pretty soon people will be referring to Olive as The Other Manchester.
See more at stltoday.com. It is funny. But it is discouraging at the same time. Our city leaders should take note. Does perception become reality? Development can have many unintended consequences. Residents want to have a suburban community. Residents want low taxes. That is CCV’s mission. Stay tuned.
Upcoming in CCV. Our Annual Report and Citizen of the Year.
Have a wonderful Holiday!
N is for NO
10/30/2009
This is about Proposition N on the Nov. 3 ballot:
Shall the Revised Ordinances of St. Louis County be amended by enacting and adding thereto a prohibition of smoking in enclosed public places in St. Louis County, all as set forth in Exhibit A ….?
Exhibit A runs six pages. A reading of the ordinance reveals that it is all about politics and property rights, not about health. The casino gaming area exemption has been well publicized. Smoking lounges at Lambert are exempt. Other exemptions include designated hotel rooms, cigar bars and tobacco stores, private clubs, and private rooms in nursing homes. The exemption for drinking establishments is worth a closer look. Businesses seeking this exemption must (1) be in existence before the effective date of the ban (January 2, 2011), (2) certify that food constitutes less than 25 percent of sales, and (3) be isolated from non-smoking areas. Bowling centers, restaurants, and other businesses have a little over a year to hire lawyers and contractors to retrofit their establishments to squeeze through this needle. Open up after 1/2/2011 and you are out of luck.
Proponents of the smoking ban dismiss property rights with apples and oranges arguments. The St. Louis Post Dispatch proclaims, Should we also allow them (restaurants) to serve tainted food from unsanitary kitchens or block fire exits or disable fire sprinklers? (See Sidebar below.) This bogus logic equates bad acts of a property owner with the personal behavior of individual customers. It is one thing to prevent a property owner from endangering the public with his own acts. It is another to require the property owner to enforce nanny-state regulations, with penalties to the property owner, not the smoker.
The County Department of Health is charged with enforcement. The ordinance allows that asking the smoker to stop and leave the establishment shall be an affirmative defense to an alleged violation. The speakeasy returns. Mr. Inspector, better check that late league at Bowl-a-rama. Or will the next step be photo-enforcement? In any event more work is likely for lawyers. All the possibilities, obvious and absurd alike, are to be expected when big government attempts to trample over the free market and individual liberty.
Thomas Jefferson said (and Ronald Reagan quoted), The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground. By constructing contorted regulations such as this is for government to ignore one of its vital functions- to protect liberty, including economic liberty or property rights. The free market, with a big assist from tax policy, has provided economic solutions and market choices to the smoking problem. There are no-smoking restaurants, no-smoking bowling leagues, segregated smoking lounges, etc. Government could encourage more of these with licensing requirements, building codes, and other common sense measures. Instead voters are being asked to approve a behavior regulation loaded with loopholes and political favors, not to mention one that will diminish economic activity and destroy businesses and jobs.
CCV recommends a vote against Proposition N.
Sidebar
The P-D editorial frames the issue superficially as right vs. wrong, WE (the good, clean people) vs. THEM (the greedy property owners and dirty smoking addicts). This attitude conforms to the belief many have today that a majority consensus establishes morality. However, this is not a moral issue and cannot be decided on a morality scale. Applying the iron hand of government is not the way to address the issue. Those who profess commitment to minority rights should be sensitive to the minorities in this case. Smokers and property owners could use a helping hand, not a fist.
Full disclosure- your CCV editor is a life-long non-smoker.
Vote NO on E-911
10/23/2009
This is about Proposition E-911 on the Nov. 3 ballot:
Shall St. Louis County establish an emergency communications system fund to establish, operate, and maintain an emergency communications system and for which St. Louis County shall levy a sales tax of one-tenth of one percent, to be paid into the fund for that purpose?
CCV recommends a vote against this tax. Taxpayers already fund St. Louis County and its included municipalities and fire districts to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars annually. If this project is so important, and CCV does not argue against its importance, then it should have already been funded. Every good idea (emergency communications improvement) and every bad idea (Metrolink expansion) does not constitute a legitimate reason to create a new tax in perpetuity. Every crisis does not create a reason to increase taxes. When the proponents say, We can’t save you if we can’t find you, are they really threatening, We won’t save you if we can’t tax you?
St. Louis County created the Emergency Communications System Commission, a board appointed by the County Executive, to evaluate the existing systems and administer the acquisition, construction, and operation of a new countywide system meeting all federal mandates. The commission is made up of the County Police Superintendent, a municipal police chief, two fire department chiefs, and three at-large commissioners. This Commission is empowered to administer and control all funds. Creve Coeur would receive no tax money. Any improvements in Creve Coeur would be subject to definition, approval, and appropriation by the Commission.
The estimated initial cost of the total program is $100 million, consisting of $80 million for an interconnected radio system, $10 million for 911 call centers which locate cell phone calls, and $10 million for the tornado siren system. The tax is estimated to generate $16 million annually. The funds would be used to pay off a $100 million bond issue for capital costs plus provide funds for ongoing operations and maintenance. The tax would continue in perpetuity, but the revenue could not be used for other programs- theoretically. In reality, the structure sets up a system where tax money would be doled out by an appointed commission forever. This tax-borrow-spend-tax-spend perpetual motion machine does not make good business sense. At the projected revenue rate a 0.005 percent tax could essentially solve the problem in one year! But this is not the way government thinks. Solving the problem does not perpetuate bureaucracy and control. The government way is to tax and spend forever.
Note: The $100 million project is being sold largely on the 911 call centers, which are only ten percent of the total project. Numerous elected officials are all too eager to jump on this bandwagon and endorse the tax increase rather than step up to re-prioritize their fiefdoms’ budgets.
Last November CCV and the St. Louis Post Dispatch recommended against- and voters rejected- a 0.25 percent tax increase proposal which included the communications project and a number of pork expenditures. Now the P-D says, Proposition E-911, unlike its predecessor, is narrowly focused and deserves public support. However, the P-D goes on to observe that the project perpetuates the wasteful multiplicity of public safety agencies in St. Louis County. The proposed sales tax would thus be subsidizing a lot of duplicative communications costs. The P-D concludes that taxpayers should demand aggressive efficiencies. We wonder how taxpayers demand efficiencies by funding their perpetuation and adding another layer of government unaccountable to the voters. Better that the Commission define what needs to be done and lead the 64 police agencies, 43 fire agencies, and 26 emergency call centers to work together within their existing budgets to create these efficiencies rather than putting an additional burden on the taxpayers.
Land of Opportunity ?
10/20/2009
Going- going- wait, it’s not gone. According to a CCV industry source, nobody submitted a bid for the Reuther Auto property. Bust- that’s the word going around. Sealed bids were due September 15. The countdown at www.oliveopportunity.com now reads minus 35 days. Lechner Realty Group is the listing agent for the property.
The aforementioned website contains a great deal of information about the property and about Creve Coeur, especially the downtown plan. The online brochure suggests that up to ten properties abutting the Reuther property could be accumulated to launch a major mixed-use development of the so-called Creve Coeur town center or downtown. The Reuther property is 4.92 acres; the other properties total approximately 8.9 acres. Much of this land is relatively lightly developed.
Does the mixed-use downtown plan offer an opportunity, or is it an impediment to development? While the property is currently zoned Core Business, any typical CB development proposal would be subject to political attack for non-conformance with the mixed-use format of the downtown plan. The recent CVS pharmacy proposal was criticized for not exactly fitting the downtown concept; luckily it was just across the street from the official downtown boundary.
CCV has been following the downtown story since 2007 when the Downtown Overlay zoning district was proposed. This proposal specified just about everything about what kind of construction could be approved including the proportion of retail and residential space, leaving very little except for superficialities to the imagination or creativity of the developer. CCV asked for higher standards and less density for the residential spaces; these were refused by Planning and Zoning and City Council. However, the City Council reached a consensus that the ordinance should not be approved without a traffic study and appropriated $22,000 for the study. The study came back several months later and confirmed that the street system, particularly the Olive-Balls intersection, could not support the density. The Downtown Overlay zoning now sits in limbo. Director of Community Development Paul Langdon did say for the record that the plan was going in the wrong direction.
What do developers think about the mixed use downtown concept plan? Two prominent developers, Mr. David Hutkin (Hutkin Development) and Mr. Tom Stern (Solon Gershman) opposed the Downtown Overlay at a Work Session of the City Council. (These meetings are open to the public but are not recorded and there are no minutes published. Click on Meeting Notes for 2/25/08 for details.) Among their comments, they objected to the parking garage approach and did not think Creve Coeur could support the additional retail space. Moving on, Mr. Ron Denardo, an out-of-town developer managing the CVS projects in St. Louis, told the P&Z Commission that the urban concept did not work He also emphasized the need to have parking convenient to the storefront. Finally, at the same Economic Development Commission meeting where the members discussed how the closing of Reuther’s might be the catalyst to start the downtown plan, Mr. Ted Levis, T&C Crossing developer, told the EDC that no one (developer) is building multi-use developments outside of urban areas these days because they have not been very successful. He recommended that the city research the viability of the multi-use concept.
There is significant anecdotal evidence that the current administration’s stubbornness with respect to the downtown vision may be putting a damper on property values in the area and hindering development- thus no bids on the Reuther property. When asked by the St. Louis Business Journal (10/10/08)if developers had expressed an interest in the plan, Mayor Dielman said, We’ve had several that have come forward. I’d rather not mention them right now. Two of them are local; they’re substantial developers. It is unfortunate that the Mayor can only refer to secret meetings while the Reuther property sits. Hopefully the secret developers will step forward publicly with a proposal that makes more sense than the city’s current plan. Meanwhile the Planning and Zoning Commission should launch a review of the downtown plan with the objective of removing obstacles to redevelopment along Olive. For example, property within 300 feet of Olive could be made exempt from the stringent requirements of the urban concept.
Speaking of secret meetings, the City Council has held several closed meetings recently. Such meetings are restricted by law to matters pertaining to litigation, personnel, and real estate. At least one of these meetings was related to real estate, prompting speculation that the city might be interested in the Reuther property as a future site for a new government center. This would make sense under the keeping up with the Joneses theory, as Frontenac, Clayton, and other St. Louis County municipalities have announced their plans for new government edifices. There goes our future tax dollars. Another rumor is that land is needed to improve the street grid in the area. This makes more sense, but the cost should ultimately be passed on through access fees to the developers and businesses which will reap the financial benefit.
Our Zoning Bill of Rights
09/23/2009
The following is a word for word text from the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Creve Coeur:
Section 26-2 Purpose and Intent
This Chapter is adopted for the following purposes:
A. To protect, provide for and promote the public safety, health, convenience, comfort, morals, prosperity, and general welfare of the residents of the City of Creve Coeur, Missouri.
B. To encourage the most appropriate use of land, to conserve and enhance the value of property, to provide adequate open spaces for light and air, to prevent undue concentration of population, to avoid excessive congestion of streets, to secure safety from fire, flood and other dangers, and to assist in the provision of adequate community utilities and facilities such as transportation, water, sewage, schools, parks and other amenities in the City of Creve Coeur.
C. To guide the future growth and further development of the City within the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan or current land use plan with variations requiring public disclosure and rational.
D. To protect and conserve the value of buildings and improvements, and to minimize the adverse impact of development on adjoining or nearby properties.
E. To establish a beneficial relationship between the uses of land and buildings, and the public street system; to require the proper location and design of streets and building lines; and to make adequate provision for pedestrian traffic circulation.
F. To encourage the wise use and management of natural resources; to provide adequate and safe recreational areas; to maintain the natural beauty and topography of the City, and to ensure appropriate development with regard to these natural features; to minimize the pollution of air, ponds and streams; to ensure the adequacy of stormwater drainage and detention.
End quote. These points provide a frame of reference to which CCV analyzes and judges the actions of our City government with respect to zoning and development matters. We note that this document does not say anything about maximizing the profitability of commercial activities or bailing out private businesses. It does not mention increasing tax revenues. It does not subscribe to a goal of using property to its highest and best use, a phrase that often comes up.
This is our Constitution and Bill of Rights with respect to zoning. It was established to mold commerce to the needs and best interests of the people, not the other way around. Do our elected officials understand this? You be the judge.
The Devil in PZD
09/15/2009
How many times have we heard the expression, The devil is in the details. As the Delmar Gardens office complex continues to occupy center stage at the government center, that devil is meddling with the quality of life in Creve Coeur again. We have to dig down into the legislative timeline to understand the situation, so here goes.
Bill 5158 - An ordinance to amend the code of ordinances of the City of Creve Coeur, Missouri by inserting new language into Appendix C – Zoning for the creation of Section 26-46, Planned Zoning Districts. Final Reading and Passage. So reads the agenda of the September 4, 2008 City Council meeting. This bill was the culmination of a months’ long process to address the concerns of condominium owners in the Old Ballas neighborhood. They were concerned that they were living in an area zoned commercial and that their homes could be a target of an eminent domain attack. The idea behind creating a Planned Zoning District was that such a district would by definition allow both residential and commercial properties, the composition of the district would be defined as it was created, and the property owners would be protected from an unwanted change in the character of the district. Thus the immediate problem was solved, but a Pandora’s Box was opened.
A public hearing on the Planned Zoning District zoning was held on August 11, 2008. CCV argued at the hearing that the proposed PZD ordinance put residential neighborhoods at risk because the eligibility and design criteria were too weak and the allowable density was too high. (See 8/11/2008 meeting notes and 8/10/2008 editorial, For Those Who Care Enough.) CCV continued to advocate maintaining density standards at the August 25, 2008 City Council meeting. (See 8/25/2008 meeting notes.) The Council voted unanimously to defer the vote until staff took another look at the standards.
Planning Director Paul Langdon reported back to the Council at the aforementioned September 4, 2008 meeting. He incorporated several density standards into the draft ordinance. The standard which is most pertinent to the current situation is the allowed FAR (Floor Area Ratio) for a Planned Commercial District (PCD). Mr. Langdon recommended a 0.4 FAR for a PCD. This FAR is equivalent to the General Commercial Zoning allowance; it would allow a 100,000 square foot building on the Delmar Gardens property. Former Ward 2 Council Member Jill Schupp questioned Mr. Langdon if this was the correct number from a professional planning perspective. CCV has great respect for Mr. Langdon and we do not believe he would have put the number in the report if he did not think it was the correct number. He answered Ms. Schupp’s question by saying (we paraphrase) that a higher number might be better in the core business (downtown) area but added that a PCD could go anywhere in the city and each project would be a decision of the character of the community and drawing a balance.
After a lengthy discussion of the Bill, Ward 1 CP Kreuter moved, seconded by Ward 1 CP Kistner to amend the Bill to change the allowable FAR from 0.4 to 0.6. With this change, the 100,000 square foot building becomes a 150,000 square foot building. Ward 4 CP Bryant, with great foresight, said that the 0.6 FAR would be a bigger issue on Olive as opposed to an area like Lindbergh and did not agree with it. Ward 3 CP Kassander said that the FAR should not be changed from what Mr. Langdon had proposed without a better understanding of the full impact. Somehow CP Kistner concluded that Mr. Langdon, an expert, supported the 0.6 FAR. CP’s Kistner (W1), Kreuter (W1), Wang (W2), Schupp (W2), and Haddenhorst (W3) voted in favor of 0.6 FAR, delivering the required five votes to pass the amendment. CP’s Kassander (W3) and Bryant (W4) voted NAY. CP Rhoades (W4) was absent and CP Nealey (W2) was not on the Council at that time.
It is interesting to note that CP Hadenhorst has now recused himself from the Delmar Gardens matter, citing a conflict of interest. This vote took place on September 4, 2008. Should Mr. Haddenhorst have recused himself from that vote? What did he know and when did he know it?
Considering the nature of Wards 3 and 4, any CP voting in favor of higher density would not be effectively representing their constituents. And Ward 1 and 2 CP’s were not thinking about residents, they were thinking about developers. CP Kassander said he would be proposing changes to the ordinance through the Planning & Zoning Commission. This has not happened. As CCV has said all along, the Planned Zoning Ordinance threatens all of Creve Coeur. The Delmar Gardens project may be the tip of the iceberg.
Residents Oppose Delmar Gardens
09/03/2009
Ward 3 residents in neighborhoods near the proposed Delmar Gardens office building complex are writing letters to the Mayor and City Council in opposition to the project. CCV is pleased to reprint the letter below by Karol Plawsky. Ms. Plawsky touches on an important point. In some communities, e.g. Kirkwood, City Council members are elected at large. In Creve Coeur our City Council members are elected in individual Wards, but their actions affect ALL Creve Coeur residents directly and indirectly. CCV has witnessed individual residents or small groups of residents come forward to object to various projects. Sometimes they are successful, sometimes not. The vote of a City Council member from another ward may make the difference. Residents in all Wards should pay attention to this project. Here’s the letter:
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rezoning of the Delmar Gardens property at 850 Country Manor Lane and 12152 Olive Blvd. My husband and I have been residents of Creve Coeur for the past ten years and reside on Country Manor Lane in the Creve Coeur Place Addition Subdivision. I am disappointed to learn that the proposed redevelopment of the Delmar Gardens property has actually been in the negotiation/discussion phase for over a year with surrounding commercial properties. As a resident and tax paying citizen of Creve Coeur, it is disillusioning that I am now just hearing about this. The possible approval of this redevelopment project is alarming at several levels:
1. Traffic: When my husband and I moved to Creve Coeur there were issues with cut-through traffic-- even a decade ago. Attempts to limit this traffic have been unsuccessful and, if anything, I have noticed a steady increase in traffic along the corridor of Country Manor Lane, Royalwood Drive and Royal Valley. Of equal concern is the increased traffic on Pulaski Center Dr. and Cross Creek. It is an everyday occurrence to see drivers running stop signs, making illegal u-turns and speeding. As a resident, I don’t even attempt to make a right turn onto Olive Blvd. from Country Manor Lane—it is just too dangerous. I now have two teenage drivers in the family and I am concerned every day for their safety when they have to navigate our neighborhood and the congestion at Cross Creek and Olive Blvd. on their way to school.
This is a neighborhood where families and their children safely live and play—it is why my family moved here. We appreciated the tranquility of a treed, established residential community—then and now. The additional traffic this project will generate will make this neighborhood community unsafe to walk or bike ride with our children and pets—there are too many blind spots for drivers in a hurry to avoid pedestrians. How would you square this with Creve Coeur’s desire for a walk-able community? If this rezoning is approved, how would the city feel if an adult and/or child were injured or killed as a result of the increased traffic?
As a full time, licensed Realtor, I am also keenly aware of the negative impact traffic has on our property values in an already difficult housing market. Those of us who are continually updating and improving our homes will ultimately be penalized by this commercial development that deeply encroaches into our neighborhoods. In a real estate market that has already seen a decline in home sale prices and increased days on market, not to mention the increase in foreclosed properties and short sales, I would hate to add the negative impact of more traffic for those residents needing to sell their homes in an already difficult time.
2. Changed nature of our neighborhoods: Aside from the obvious traffic issues, it is inevitable that the personal safety and sense of security in our neighborhood will be impacted by the construction of a multi-level parking garage. And no matter how attractive, a five story office building will not enhance our neighborhood or create a homogenous environment for its residents. I am not opposed to commercial development in our city if it is done in a careful and responsible way. This project, however, involves a second deep encroachment in this area alone. And when you look at the overall development in Creve Coeur, it’s been one incursion after another. I am concerned with the over-development here for the sake of commercial expansion and ultimate revenue generation at the expense of its residents. In this case, it is NOT responsible. It is reckless.
At last count, I found over 100 commercial sites in our city for lease or sale. Is a project of this magnitude truly a necessity during this economic time and downturn in the real estate industry? Especially when our city has an excess of commercial space available? Do we need another retail office space sitting vacant right now? If Delmar Gardens wants to update their facility, why not rebuild a nursing home on the current site that will complement the current residential neighborhoods surrounding it?
3. Zoning Issues/Conflicts: After I read through numerous documents on record dating back to the late 1980’s, it became apparent to me that the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council went to great lengths at that time to ensure that the Delmar Gardens property be operated only as a nursing home. This is evident by the detail of Bill 1402, Ordinance 1384 and the imposed Conditional Use Permit restrictions. I am puzzled that a title search appears to indicate that Delmar Gardens never filed the deed restrictions as required back in 1990. Where is the due diligence here?
Regarding the current rezoning before the city council, I find Delmar Garden’s offer to provide the City of Creve Coeur with an Emergency Operations Center (EOC) in their facility an absolute conflict of interest. With all of the city’s vacant office space, has the city explored other options for an EOC? Will the city council truly be able to vote on this issue with clarity keeping the resident’s concerns at the forefront with a carrot like this dangling in front of them? I wonder…
I ask that the Creve Coeur City Council listen very carefully to all the residents of the city on this issue before a vote on the rezoning of the current Delmar Gardens Nursing Home. Everyone who lives in Creve Coeur is negatively impacted by the ever-increasing volumes of traffic on Olive Blvd. and associated intersecting streets. After your careful consideration, please VOTE NO on behalf of all citizens of Creve Coeur. It is the residents of this city that have elected each of you to represent our best interests. If you are not representing our best interests, then whose interests are you representing? It is a question that all Creve Coeur residents will be considering the next time they go to the polls.
Sincerely,
Karol Plawsky
Smoking and Drinking
08/14/2009
In January, 2009 CCV reported that Creve Coeur had begun a program to inspect (from the curb) every house in the city for violations of the building code. In the first quarter 1918 houses were inspected and 255 citations were issued. By March, complaints about the program reached the point that Mayor Dielmann and City Council members publicly requested the City Administrator to back off on the program. The point of this anecdote is that the elected officials responded to citizen input on this city-wide matter, at least with an election coming.
Well, there is an election coming in Creve Coeur- we have one every year for four members of the City Council. And the Council is about to consider two measures that have city-wide implications. Ironically, the council has teed up an ordinance to ban public smoking in Creve Coeur and another to allow public alcohol drinking in city parks.
Ward 3 CP Robert Hadenhorst has led the charge to institute the smoking ban. He sponsored a resolution passed by the City Council to support a county-wide ban. Instead of passing a ban, the County Council will vote on a referendum bill which would let voters have their say in November. Clayton and other municipalities have recently passed bans without a referendum. This action has been recommended by the Recycling, Environment, and Beautification committee and is supported by CP Hadenhorst and others. Ward 1 CP David Kreuter says he does not support legislating public hygiene. Ward 3 CP David Kassander says any ban should have significant exceptions for businesses, including businesses which invest in air circulation and filtration equipment or isolation areas. This approach would at least keep our building inspectors busy and generate some revenue.
CCV agrees most with CP Kreuter. However, our primary objection to such legislation is based on property rights, not privacy rights. By analogy, concealed carry is legal in Missouri; however, property owners may override the rule on their property. Similarly, smoking is legal, but many businesses (property owners) do not allow it. Others set aside smoking areas. This free market system is working. Businesses have made choices available to consumers and the number of smokers is declining. And governments are taxing the remaining smokers into the poorhouse!
The subject of alcohol in the parks has to do with the upcoming opening of the historic Tappmeyer House in Millennium Park. The Tappmeyer House is well positioned as a venue for wedding receptions and other events, and it makes a lot of common sense to allow alcohol in such situations. However, the proposed ordinance would allow beer, wine, and other alcoholic beverages containing less than 10% alcohol in ALL city parks. Mayor Dielmann has endorsed the ordinance saying that this would generate more revenue from picnic permits. (Pavilion rental fees are $25 residents/$50 non residents for four hours.) No City Council member has yet spoken against the proposed ordinance. The ordinance would parallel most St. Louis County communities.
CCV supports the ordinance for Tappmeyer House. Other than that, no good can come from it. What official will check the alcohol on containers and in the picnic punch? Is our police force to card young adults on park premises? Are they to set up roadblocks to check drivers leaving the parks? Are families, particularly those with strong religious beliefs, to be intimidated out of our parks? (Editor’s note: growing up, my parents would never allow me to be in a setting where alcohol was being consumed. I respect this with all my heart; it never did anyone any harm.) And isn’t it ironic that smoking would be banned on private property while getting an alcohol buzz on public property and then driving away through narrow, winding residential streets (Beirne Park) would be allowed.
The official city survey has not polled the question of a smoking ban or alcohol in city parks, so the opinions of residents are not known in any quantitative sense. The platitude that Creve Coeur should be a leader does not hold water, as it can’t be applied to one subject without denying it in the other. And it is the duty of our elected representatives to represent us, not to lead other communities. Neither of these measures should be passed, with the exception of the Tappmeyer House provision, without public hearings and a referendum next April. The smoking ban should have a choice of YES, NO, or YES WITH EXCEPTIONS. The alcohol referendum should be on a park by park basis. The referendum might also encourage a better voter turnout than normal.
IF A TREE FALLS ..
07/04/2009
Delmar Gardens Enterprises seeks a rezoning approval in order to construct a large office complex at the Southeast corner of Country Manor Lane and Olive Blvd. The two phase project, when completed, would consist of two office buildings, a 5-story 90,000 square foot building and a 3-story 60,000 square foot building, with 576 surface and garage parking slots; the existing nursing home would be demolished. (See April 20 and June 1 P&Z meeting notes.)
The configuration of Olive west of I-270 prohibits a left turn onto Country Manor Lane. Therefore the project would expand the left turn at Cross Creek Drive to two lanes and add a lane to Cross Creek, circling the traffic around adjacent properties to enter the subject property from the West. Rather than using this roundabout approach, commuters coming from I-270 could easily exit at Ladue Road and short-cut through residential areas to reach Country Manor.
Much of the subject property was originally zoned residential. The current commercial zoning was approved to allow the nursing home, making this property the deepest incursion of commercial zoning south of the Olive Blvd corridor. No commercial development other than the nursing home was proposed or envisioned at the time of that zoning change. This history should not be ignored. While the Comprehensive Plan supports commercial development along Olive, it does not specifically endorse or envision deep encroachments of large scale commercial development into residential areas. While the project could ultimately achieve a larger buffer than the nursing home currently provides, so could a smaller scale project built within the current zoning.
As stated in the staff report prepared by Mr. Paul Langdon, Director of Community Development, the overall theme of the West Olive Corridor goals is the protection of the neighborhoods to the south and the management of traffic, especially on Olive Boulevard. This rezoning, which would allow a larger, denser development than the current zoning, cannot be viewed as contributing to these goals. It would exacerbate the total traffic on Olive and the congestion between I-270 and Cross Creek. The likelihood of cut-through traffic puts the neighborhoods at great risk. The scale of the project would put a figurative and literal shadow over St. Monica’s church. The staff report suggests that the large building could create an unacceptable visual disruption. In our view this is a certainty.
The requirements of Planned Commercial Development zoning include meeting certain functional and design criteria, as well as the integration of the development into the neighborhood and community at large through the provision of public amenities. A key criterion of PCD zoning is a mixed use design. The developer has paid lip service to this requirement by specifying a minimal amount of retail space. The project is simply an office building complex in disguise as a mixed-use facility. With the substantial amount of more accessible retail space available along Olive, there is no practical retail application other than one serving the employees of the building. (Ironically, the combination of an office building and a nursing home would more closely approach the intent of the PCD zoning, with the nursing home acting as a transition from the commercial area to the residential area.)
The project incorporates elements such as water features, semi-public plaza spaces, and public access to parking for St. Monica’s events to demonstrate compliance with the requirement for public benefit. If a tree falls in the forest does it make a sound if there is no one there to hear it? If the public does not desire, request, use, or even have reasonable access to a so-called public amenity, is it really a public amenity? The residents have stated in no uncertain terms that they have no need or desire for any added fountains, plazas, or parking in or adjacent to their neighborhood. And the site is certainly not readily accessible to the public at large. In fact, the reconfiguration of the property would destroy a substantial quantity of existing mature trees to the detriment of the ambiance of the neighborhood. The only trees falling here will be heard by the residents who want them to stay. And the developer misrepresents the project when mature trees which do not exist are pictured on project drawings.
The developer has also suggested providing a site for a Creve Coeur Emergency Operations Center (EOC) within the building. The need for an EOC has not been fully vetted, nor have alternative means to achieve it. In our view, working out joint or reciprocal arrangements with adjacent cities would be a better approach. Such arrangements would not create a conflict of interest.
The two phase nature of the project should concern the approving authorities. Spokesmen for the developer have been ineffective in answering questions about the economic feasibility or the timing of the second phase, which would replace the nursing home with the second building. This is suspicious. A multi-million dollar development is not started with such vague expectations. Is the rezoning request merely a strategy to build a 5-story office building that could not be built under the current zoning? The Delmar Gardens spokesman said in general that two conditions would be necessary to complete phase two, (1) the economic feasibility of the second building and (2) the acquisition of a new location in Creve Coeur for a new nursing home. Given the lack of undeveloped property in Creve Coeur, the second condition is problematic. It has been reported that Delmar Gardens has put the Belle Maison property under contract. However, this property is not zoned for a nursing home. This suggests a scenario in which the Country Manor project would not be completed until another rezoning in another part of the city was granted, putting the interests of some residents against others. This possibility should be avoided by conditioning any approval of the current project on the time-certain removal of the nursing home. It could best be avoided by not approving the current project.
The Planned Zoning District approach was approved to provide the flexibility to develop unique mixed use projects which integrate well into the city, providing something more than the ordinary commercial use. It was not intended to open a back door to approve bloated, impostor projects masquerading as a mixed use development. The criteria, qualifications, and requirements for these projects are subjective at the bottom line. The Planning & Zoning Commission has a duty to turn this project down.
The Budget- Much Mulch
06/08/2009
Those of us who manage the public’s dollars will be held to account- to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day- because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.
- President Barack Obama, inaugural address
We face significant financial challenges as we strive to continue to provide high service levels with limited resources. ….. The current recession is impacting revenues in a number of ways, including the flattening of sales tax and utility licenses [excise taxes], and a reduction in building permit fees. As a result, operating expenditures are projected to outpace revenues by $177,888 in FY10.
- City Administrator Mark Perkins, April 27, 2009
Mr. Perkins recently presented the proposed budget to the City Council. The budget information is available on the internet and a public hearing will be held on June 8. Mr. Perkins, Finance Director Dan Smith, and staff have done a good job of developing and presenting the budget in a transparent and understandable manner. The bottom line comes close to a balance, a good result given the circumstances. CCV recommends approval of the budget. However, we recommend continuing efforts to eliminate the remaining deficit during the year. Without additional cost control measures the deficit is projected to grow significantly in the 5-year timeframe and exhaust the city’s reserves. Some specific recommendations will be discussed.
BUDGET REVIEW
Creve Coeur uses the fund accounting system. The General Fund receives the bulk of the revenue and handles all the ordinary routine business of the city, particularly the administrative expenses. For FY 2010 this fund is budgeted to take in more than $14.5 million in revenue, including over $5 million from sales taxes and over $5 million from utility taxes. Expenditures for this fund are budgeted at $14.7 million, up less than $0.1 million from the current year projection. To put this total in perspective, the general fund will spend approximately $850 per resident. Town and Country, at about $950, Ladue, at about $1300, and Clayton, at about $1500, spend more per resident from the general fund than Creve Coeur. Chesterfield, at about $450, spends less per resident than Creve Coeur; however Chesterfield has a significant economy of scale with a population more than 2.5 times Creve Coeur. Creve Coeur’s expenditures cannot be characterized as excessive in a comparative analysis.
As noted, expenditures are essentially flat in this fund compared to the current year. This is accomplished primarily by a hiring freeze, a reduction in merit pay increases, and reduced longevity pay. The hiring freeze will result in a reduction of five full time positions, saving about $300,000. Minor capital expenditures (under $20,000), such as police cars, are budgeted under 2009 levels as some things are being deferred.
The Capital Improvement Fund receives the half-cent capital improvement sales tax, which is expected to generate $1.9 million in FY10. This fund is supplemented by grants received from the State and Federal government, which can be significant. The Capital Fund also receives a transfer from the General Fund as approved by the City Council; the transfer is budgeted at $400,000 for FY10. Total revenues and transfers to the fund are budgeted at $3.1 million for FY10. The budgeted outlays of the Capital Fund include building and improvement projects ($0.3 million), park projects ($0.3 million), storm water projects ($0.1 million), street and sidewalk projects ($1.6 million), major equipment purchases ($0.25 million), and scheduled debt service payments ($1.25 million). This capital program, already approved by the Council, totals $3.8 million, resulting in a $0.7 million reduction in the Capital Fund reserves. This is not a wise course.
The Municipal Enterprise Fund encompasses the golf course, ice rink, pro shop, and associated food service operations. This fund is financed by the income from the facilities and a transfer from the General Fund. The transfer is projected to be $190,000 for FY09 and is budgeted at $120,000 for FY10. The reduction in the subsidy is based partially on increasing prices and fees at the facilities; however it should be noted that the budgeted revenue is still less than the amount budgeted for FY09.
The Employee Retirement Fund is used to account for the employee pension plan. Employees hired before June 1, 2006 are covered by a defined benefit plan. Pensions are funded by a managed investment portfolio and contributions are determined by an actuarial analysis based on expected retirements and expected investment returns. The budgeted contribution for FY10 is $1.1 million, up from $0.8 million in FY09, due to the market decline. Employees hired after June 1, 2006 are enrolled in a defined contribution plan (based on payroll); a contribution of $144,228 is budgeted for FY10.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Prudent financial management practice suggests five objectives: (1) Reduce current expenditures to avoid a current deficit in the General Fund. (2) Restructure to avoid future deficits in the General Fund. (3) Maintain reserves in the Capital Fund. (4) Eliminate the subsidy in the Enterprise Fund. (5) Reduce contributions to the Retirement Fund.
Reducing current expenditures is largely under the control of the City Administrator. Mr. Perkins has done a good job to hold the increase for FY10 over FY09 to 0.5 percent. He should continue the hiring freeze and look for additional opportunities to eliminate the remaining deficit as the year goes forward. History suggests that opportunities will arise to defer discretionary expenditures, reduce the use of outside consultants, and such matters. It has also been suggested that collection of business licenses fees may be increased.
Restructuring to avoid future deficits is a more formidable challenge. Patchwork fixes implemented by the City Administrator will not do the trick. Certain fundamental changes in the Enterprise Fund and Retirement Fund can reduce the burden on the General Fund; these will be discussed later. In the General Fund itself opportunities include revenue enhancement and reducing the rate of expenditure growth.
Revenue enhancement should be pursued without seeking tax increases on the general public. Red light camera enforcement offers one example. While this revenue has declined at the existing installations, the opportunity exists to add additional sites to the program. (While the current subject is revenue, it should be noted that the primary objective of this program is to promote safety, and the program has been measurably successful in this respect.)
Business licenses have been mentioned, but improvements in collection will not have significant future impact. A restructuring of the business license program should be pursued. The current system has only two categories of businesses with a $1000 cap on the annual fee. Monsanto pays $1000, the same as a small warehouse facility. Creve Coeur has a diversity of businesses which suggest increasing the categories to include manufacturing, wholesale, retail, financial, medical, and others. The criteria for determining the rate and cap in each category should be analyzed and compared to other communities. Floor space alone should not determine the rate. To attract new businesses, initial license fees should be minimal and phased in over time.
The city has explored and should continue to seek opportunities to provide fee-based services to other communities. Conversion of most current services provided free to the residents, such as limb chipping, to a fee based system should be considered as a last resort. The tree planting cost sharing program should be discontinued.
On the expenditure side, significant restructuring opportunities exist. The Finance Committee, supplemented by resident experts, should seek to identify opportunities in the fashion that any business would review its operations.
Landscaping maintenance practices offer a case on point. Unfortunately, the Olive-270 interchange has imposed a large and increasing financial burden without a measurable benefit to the residents. This installation is a money pit while essentially nothing is spent on the Ladue-270 and Olive-Lindbergh overpasses. While recognized green installations such as the Alberici Corporation headquarters spend essentially nothing on mulch and mowing, Creve Coeur is spending in excess of $40,000 annually on mulch alone. At a minimum, future plantings should be reduced and focus on species which require much less intensive maintenance.
Much expenditure to outside consultants is wasteful. The citizen survey is a good example. This survey yields only predictable results and avoids most important issues entirely. Expenditures to outside consultants should be budgeted in an itemized manner such that the public and the Council can examine them more carefully.
The employee health insurance cost is very significant. Expenditures are rapidly headed toward $9000 annually per employee. Creve Coeur is paying at a level which has bankrupted major corporations. While the current proposal to enter a multi-city self insurance pool is probably a good step, a task force should be established to evaluate additional changes. At a minimum, future employees should receive a lesser benefit.
The Capital Fund reserves will be essentially exhausted over the next four years under the current five-year projection. And expected major repair costs for the government center building are not even listed in the plan. This is unacceptable. Unfortunately, the bulk of the capital program consists of non-discretionary items such as street repairs and debt service. This means that discretionary projects, such as an electronic message board at the government center, should receive more scrutiny. This particular project is a wasteful expenditure.
The city has a AAA bond rating. As interest rates are currently low and expected to increase, underwriters should be consulted to explore a pre-refunding of the Millenium Park debt issue so that it may be called at the earliest opportunity to save costs and spread debt service over a longer time.
The Enterprise Fund is a perennial drain on the city coffers. Operating expenses exceed revenues, this before capital expenditures and debt service are considered. While reviewing the pricing structure is an obvious measure which is being done, more significant changes are not being evaluated. A task force should be established to explore privatizing the facilities through leasing them to a professional operating entity. Based on history, leasing the facilities for only $1 per year would save millions of dollars over time by eliminating the subsidy. Residents could still enjoy a discount rate by contract.
Finally, the increased cost currently being experienced for the Retirement Fund may be reversed if certain steps are taken. As the population eligible for the defined benefit plan is limited to employees hired prior to June, 2006, it has the potential to be immunized to market fluctuations over time. The investment portfolio is currently being managed by two local institutions with relatively high fees. The bulk of the portfolio is invested in stock and bond index funds. Some would say Creve Coeur is paying Wall Street fees for Forsyth Boulevard performance. Simply reducing these fees could save $10’s of thousands per year, which would result in a reduction in the required annual contribution. Beyond that, the investment objective of the portfolio should be redefined. The portfolio is currently managed in a manner similar to an open-ended fund with an indeterminate life, with approximately 60 percent of the portfolio exposed to stock market risk. This exposure resulted in the significant losses that the portfolio experienced recently. Going forward, particularly as the stock market recovers and interest rates increase, the portfolio should be moved to longer term fixed investments which meet a return rate which would stabilize the required annual contribution at a predictable acceptable level. A new manager with a proven record in this process should be identified and hired.
Some have said that a misleading rosy scenario about the city’s financial situation has been presented; we agree. However, the election is over until the next election- we have one every year in Creve Coeur! Defending the status quo is not likely to be a popular campaign theme next year. Neither will simplistic moves, such as eliminating rear yard trash collection, as frequently suggested by Council members. We encourage our elected representatives to get on board with pragmatic changes and fundamental reforms and report positive results over the next year. Future candidates have the same opportunity.
April Election- the 270 Divide
04/24/2009
The detailed results of the recent City election are informative. Apathy was the big winner, with only 2,446 out of 12,989 registered voters coming to the polls, a miniscule 18.8 percent turnout. Perhaps, like no news is good news, the low turnout indicates a satisfaction with the status quo. The recent resident survey indicated satisfaction, but the sample in that survey was even smaller. And the survey did not even begin to address any major issue about the future direction of Creve Coeur.
A ward by ward analysis of the vote reveals an interesting pattern. Mayor Dielmann won reelection with a 51 percent majority, hardly a mandate. However he lost in two of the four wards:
Mr. Dielmann won 70 percent of the vote in Ward 1. Ward 1 covers the eastern part of the city including the streets running west off Mosley. Mr. Dielmann resides in Ward 1.
Mr. Dielmann won 55 percent of the vote in Ward 2. Ward 2 continues west from Ward 1 to I-270 plus an area off Conway west of I-270.
Mr. Dielmann got only 46 percent of the vote in Ward 3. Ward 3 continues west from I-270. (Consult the Ward map on the official City website. Click on Site Map and then go down to Mayor and City Council.) Mr. Kassander is a City Council member for Ward 3.)
Mr. Dielmann got only 36 percent of the vote in Ward 4. Ward 4 covers the western part of the city. Mr. Klearman resides in Ward 4.
So Mr. Dielmann won an aggregate 63 percent of the vote east of I-270 but only got 41 percent west of I-270. Does this result reveal a philosophical division of the city or is it merely an indication of the familiarity with the candidates and the intensity of their campaign activities? It is likely that both factors are at work. Mr. Dielmann was Mayor for many years before Ward 4 was annexed and long-term residents concentrated in Wards 1 and 2 are familiar with him. He has amassed a large number of supporters over the years through his hard work and through the appointment process. Ward 3 and 4 voters are more in tune with current issues and have faced some controversial development proposals over the last few years. And there is a mundane geographical factor in that residents west of I-270 have more dealings with traffic congestion than those who live east of I-270 and tend to commute to points east.
As mentioned, we believe that Ward 3 and 4 residents are more in tune with current issues. We want to thank CP’s David Kassander (W3), Laura Bryant (W4), and Jeanne Rhoades (W4), as well as Mr. Klearman for graciously mentioning crevecoeurvoter.com in newsletters, campaign materials, and town hall meetings. No such cooperation has been forthcoming from Wards 1 and 2.
One good thing about Creve Coeur is that we have an election every year. The current 2-year terms for CP’s David Kreuter (W1), A.J.Wang (W2), David Kassander (W3), and Jeanne Rhoades (W4) will expire in 2010. We are hopeful that residents of Wards 1 and 2 will have a choice in 2010.
Land of the Free?
03/18/2009
The next time you stand and sing our national anthem take a minute and reflect on the fact that it is largely an anthem of questions. Starting with, O say can you see …? the verse that we sing so proudly builds to the dramatic,
O say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave?
When Francis Scott Key penned those words in 1814, the question asked whether the flag was still flying over Fort McHenry. Had the brave Americans survived the British attack through the night? (PLEASE go to www.usflag.org and read the history.)
Ironically, today the lyrics are so appropriate in another way. And the question has not been answered. The flag flies, politicians drape themselves in the flag. But does it fly over a land of the free? Are we losing our freedom?
The founding fathers would be astounded by the life we live today. In the 195 years since the anthem was written there have been exponential advances in medicine, transportation, agriculture, information, construction- in every field of science and technology. Indeed, there have been transformational changes in civil rights as well- the abolition of slavery, the establishment of voting rights. Yet as the population has grown, and our society has become more complex, and the government has grown to manage our society, we have sacrificed our freedom incrementally.
As a society we have allowed and still endure a tremendous loss of economic freedom. Federal government expenditures will exceed 20 percent of our economy as far as the forecasters can see. State and County expenditures are in the billions; we’ll save the details for another time. Creve Coeur expenditures are approaching $1,000 per resident! We pay for all these expenditures, presumably to promote the heath, safety, and general welfare, with taxes- income taxes, FICA taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes, property taxes, utility taxes, business licenses, permit fees, and on and on. On April 1, sales taxes in St. Louis County, including Creve Coeur, will increase by 0.25%, 25 cents per 100 dollars, to fund certain children’s services. (This tax passed last November.) Sewer bills will continue to increase over the next few years by billions of dollars to fund storm water projects. If the new Walgreens store is built at Graeser and Olive, it will have an extra one percent sales tax, a tax imposed with no vote by the public. School districts will increase their property tax rates as property values fall. The Obama administration proposes to increase taxes on the so-called rich, but these taxes will fund only a very small part of the federal deficit. The death tax will kick back in at a high percentage.
All of this is more or less locked in. President Obama’s proposal to launch a cap and trade carbon tax faces stronger opposition in Washington, and rightfully so because it would increase the cost of gasoline, natural gas, and electricity by a double digit percentage. Of course, an increase in energy cost would increase the cost of everything that uses energy in its production or delivery! (PLEASE call Washington to oppose cap and trade.) Perhaps the ultimate federal money grab was revealed today as the Obama administration proposed charging veterans for medical services related to in-service injuries. We predict this will not happen, but it does exemplify the direction and desperation in Washington.
And we have regulations. Businesses have OSHA regulations, EPA regulations, zoning and building code regulations, and on and on. The Creve Coeur Planning and Zoning Commission recently spent several hours debating the proper way to regulate chemicals used in our local dry-cleaning businesses. And the discussion will continue at the City Council. Regulations are necessary, but there is little or no effort expended by government at any level to reduce or simplify regulations when possible. In the news recently, a doctor proposed to charge his patients a $75 per month flat fee instead of a charge for each visit. State insurance regulators threatened to shut him down as his program was construed as a violation of insurance regulations! Entire segments of our economy are now horribly and perhaps inextricably tied to government control.
Individual behavior is regulated. Of course, many activities are destructive to society and have been defined as criminal. But, in addition to speed limits, we have red light camera enforcement and now a primary seat belt enforcement law in Creve Coeur. You can be stopped for no other reason than suspicion that your seat belt is not in use. Did you know that you can’t add on to your house within 75 feet of a creek? Did you know that your house is being inspected this year to see if there is any reason to fine you for lack of maintenance? Did you know that your sewer bill may go up if you add a patio? Soon the city will distribute roller bins for recycle trash. Will there be a penalty if you do not correctly sort your trash?
We cannot leave the subject of regulations without discussing the proposed ban on smoking in public. This policy is in effect in Illinois- have you heard the Fast Eddie’s ads? In Missouri, Speaker of the House Ron Richard has said that a state-wide smoking ban will not pass. Proponents are now pushing St. Louis County to put in a county-wide ban. In Creve Coeur, CP Haddenhorst is leading the charge, and the City Council is being asked to pass a resolution supporting a county wide ban.
ccv is opposed to a smoking ban- county-wide or in Creve Coeur. Smoking is harmful. Secondary smoke is harmful. We do not debate it. However, personal liberty and property rights are more important. This country was founded to achieve and preserve liberty, not to baby sit its citizens. The free market has and will handle smoking better than government regulation. Some restaurants have gone smoke free- some have not. Some establishments have adequate no smoking areas and expensive air filtration systems- some don’t. Consumers are free to come and go and spend their money as they wish.
Enforcement of a total smoking ban would be problematic if not impossible- at a minimum a distraction from more important matters. Our society has not chosen to ban liquor (anymore) or cigarettes. In fact, all levels of government enjoy the taxes imposed on these commodities. It is more profitable and more fun for the government to take in the revenue and regulate, regulate, and regulate some more. Here’s an idea for the government to take in more money and have more fun. Enact a smoking ban with exceptions- a business can buy a license, similar to a liquor permit, to allow smoking in said establishment. That’s what is called a public-private partnership. The establishment can pay money and smoke, the government can take-in money and regulate the air filtration in the establishment. At least the free market would get a voice in the decision.
If you have read this editorial to this point, thank you. We have gone from a monumental theme to a triviality, from the morning side of the mountain to the twilight side of the hill. We close by returning to the anthem. Just as many have not contemplated the question in the anthem, most are not familiar with the last verse written by F.S. Key, It ends with these words:
And this be our motto: In God is our trust!
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave!
That’s an exclamation point, folks.
Presidential Advice
01/21/2009
Those of us who manage the public’s dollars will be held to account- to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day- because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.
............................... President Barack Obama, inaugural address
Creve Coeur elected officials should take President Obama’s advice seriously. The track record of spending wisely, reforming bad habits, and doing business in the light of day is not exemplary. The mainstream news media has covered the proposed federal stimulus extensively. How was this handled in Creve Coeur?
When the rumors of a federal spending package began emanating from Washington the subject was not mentioned at City Council meetings on November 10 or 24. However, on November 18, Mayor Dielmann sent official letters to U.S. Senators Bond and McCaskill and U.S. Representatives Clay, Akin, and Carnahan requesting funding to bail out the Olive Blvd. Transportation Development District (TDD). Mayor Dielmann was justified in seeking funding as the City Council had formerly approved seeking alternative funding for the project when it became apparent that the TDD was not willing to make good on the promises that it had made. However, it was not appropriate for Mayor Dielmann to proceed politically and unilaterally in the background when City Council and public input was available. If input had been sought, perhaps Mayor Dielmann would not have prematurely singled out this one particular project. As it turned out, Mayor Dielmann’s action prompted a December 17 letter from Ward 4 Council Persons Laura Bryant and Jeanne Rhoades to the U.S. Senators and Representatives pointing out the irregularities associated with said TDD and the need for funding other projects.
Continuing the soap opera, an emergency meeting of the City Council was called on Saturday, December 20. CP’s Bryant, Rhoades, and Ward 3 CP Kassander were unable to attend. This meeting ostensibly was called for the purpose of ratifying applications for federal funds for certain transportation improvement projects … It also provided an opportunity to criticize CP’s Bryant and Rhoades, who had acted in the interest of their constituents. The Council, with Bryant, Rhoades, Kassander absent, voted to approve a list of projects which City Administrator Mark Perkins proposed to submit to St. Louis County officials for the St. Louis County Economic Recovery Plan. The list included the Olive TDD Phase II ($6.2 million), Coeur de Ville resurfacing ($0.2 million), Conway resurfacing ($0.6 million) and a $10 million project submitted by Monsanto to improve Olive between Warson and Spoede. While the list did not include many projects on the official Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), to CCV’s knowledge the Monsanto project had never even been considered for the CIP. At the conclusion of the meeting CCV recommended that the Olive/Graeser/Dautel project be added, as it had been approved in concept and the planned TDD funding had not been initiated.
The 198 page St. Louis County Economic Recovery Plan was published on December 26, with 95 projects totaling $1.8 billion. The only project on the list submitted by Creve Coeur was the $10 million Monsanto/Olive project. Two projects totaling $57 million for the non-profit Danforth Plant Science Center were also listed. City Administrator Perkins later announced that St. Louis County was planning to publish an addendum to the list in which the other Creve Coeur projects, as well as the Olive/Graeser/Dautel project could be listed.
Separately, the U.S. Conference of Mayors published a Main Street Economic Recovery Report listing 18,750 projects totaling $150 billion. Clayton, Ellisville, and Florissant participated in this exercise listing millions of dollars of projects for downtown development, ice rink repairs, storm water control, city hall security, street repairs, signalization, and alignment. Florissant listed a $2.25 million Lindbergh streetscape project. Do these projects sound familiar- except for the location? While Creve Coeur does not participate in the US Conference of Mayors, the inputs by these cities indicate a better capital project management system and a stronger political leadership.
The U.S. House of Representatives unveiled the first cut of the $825 billion stimulus package on January 15, with approximately $75 billion targeted for transportation and infrastructure. The draft legislation includes a series of spending safeguards for the plan. Governors and mayors will have to personally certify that every expenditure under their jurisdiction is appropriate. (Wall Street Journal, January 16, 2009) How can Mayor Dielmann certify that spending $10 million on Olive in front of Monsanto or spending $6.2 million to profit a large developer are appropriate?
365 Boxes
12/23/2008
This time of year we receive calendars for the upcoming year. The arrival of a new calendar offers us a moment to reflect on the year gone by and plan ahead for the coming year. The 365 empty squares represent 365 opportunities to protect and advance our ideals. For 2009 the emphasis will be on financial responsibility. We can and should make every day count. One square, April 7, is particularly important for Creve Coeur voters. This is our election day.
Elections have consequences. In June, 2008 the so-called economic development tax was defeated. Had it passed, this 0.5 percent sales tax would now be an additional burden in a weak economy. And without this tax our Creve Creve Coeur government must do a better job of setting priorities. The upcoming annual capital project planning process will provide evidence of financial responsibility or the lack thereof. On April 7 residents must be the judge and jury based on the evidence.
As CCV has said before, it would be wonderful if our elected officials were as creative in managing the taxes they already collect as they are in proposing new taxes. Since the economic development tax was defeated, the City Council has imposed an additional one percent sales tax on the future Walgreens store and other businesses at Graeser and Olive by approving (*) a Transportation Development District without a vote by residents. This turned a $1.25 million project into a $3 million project by adding TDD overhead and financing costs to the project. On the spending side, the Council has continued to approve expenditures with no discussion of cutting back, this despite warnings by the City Finance Director that tax receipts are trending below budget. One $3,500 unbudgeted expenditure approved (*) was for radio ads to support yet another tax increase, Proposition H. So tax dollars were spent to promote increasing taxes! Fortunately, this was also defeated by St. Louis County voters.
A special Saturday meeting of the City Council was recently called to approve (*) the City’s application for federal funding for various street projects, some of which are not even mentioned in the City’s official capital plan. When will a special meeting be called to rebalance the budget?
With the outlook for development projects looking very bleak, CCV intends to have a concentration on financial analysis as we enter 2009. CCV believes that an informed public will be better prepared to influence the governance of Creve Coeur through feedback to elected officials and through the political process. Our mission is to act as a resource for information and analysis at the local level. For information at the State and National levels we are pleased to introduce and recommend our role models, the Show-Me Institute and The Heritage Foundation. We have chosen these role models carefully. Unlike politicians and political parties, whose messages may be mixed, vague, and inconsistent, organizations whose message is built on core principals inspire us to fill each of the 365 boxes on our new calendar with some action to advance our ideals. With credit to the Heritage Foundation, we end 2008 with an inspirational story of determination:
In 1991 an Army lieutenant colonel was on live-fire exercises at Fort Campbell, Kentucky with the 101st Airborne battalion that he commanded. Through a freak accident one of his men fell and his weapon fired. The bullet struck the colonel in the chest, narrowly missing his heart. He was flown to Vanderbilt University where he underwent more than five hours of surgery. His surgeon was Bill Frist, who would later be elected to the U.S. Senate.
The colonel survived the operation. Only days later, he told his doctors he was ready to be discharged from the hospital. They were understandably skeptical, but the colonel insisted. He asked them to remove the IV tubes from his arms. The colonel then dropped to the deck and did 50 pushups. The colonel, who we now know as four-star general David Petraeus, got his discharge.
Happy Holidays!
(*) Click on How Did They Vote
Tarnishing the Image
12/02/2008
Editor's note: The following editorial was submitted by Ward I City Council member Beth Kistner.
It saddens me to see an attempt to tarnish what has been until now a very positive opportunity to recognize and honor individuals who have contributed to Creve Coeur’s success as a community.
Jill Schupp was selected as this year's Creve Coeur Citizen of the Year. I don’t know of anyone who has volunteered more of her time throughout our community – whether it was multiple times as a Parent Association president, key organizer of the Creve Coeur 50th anniversary celebration (and painter of the winning logo!), Planning & Zoning Commission member, six years on the school board, many service leadership contributions through Shaare Emeth, to name just a few, or simply being the first to respond when something needed organizing or someone needed help. Her selection meets all criteria set forth for the nominating process, it clearly stands the test of comparison to the previous 10 recipients, and meets squarely with the intentions for an award given to a deserving member of the community who has made significant contributions. And let me be clear that Mrs. Schupp had no prior knowledge of her nomination and no influence on the selection process.
It was suggested by Ms. Berry in her editorial that the intentions of the award have been badly misinterpreted. I don’t think anyone can speak more to the intentions of the award than Mayor Dielmann, who first conceived of it as a way of saying thank you to the many, often unsung, heroes in Creve Coeur by recognizing them in front of the community at our annual Holiday Appreciation event. There was no formal process to these selections other than the solicitation of nominees in the newsletter every fall. Rather, the Mayor primarily relied on his deep knowledge of the community and its history, and his sincere intention to honor others, to make the best choice. Since its inception, 10 incredible individuals have received recognition through this process. None of them were recognized strictly for their contributions in the immediate calendar year. The award has always been given for a citizen’s contributions over many years. The program has been a wonderful addition in Creve Coeur and I’ve been proud to be part of it.
This past year, although there had been no suggestion that any of the prior award recipients had been anything other than deserving, it was argued that we needed a much more formalized nomination and selection process. Although I didn’t think it was necessary, I supported it because I feared that to do otherwise would invite attack on any subsequent nominees. Unfortunately I was right about the attacks but wrong in thinking that supporting the new process would prevent it.
As Council President, I served as a member of the Nominating Committee, along with Mayor Dielmann and past Council President David Kreuter, and can attest to the fact that the new process was followed to the letter. Many nominations were made from a number of private citizens and some elected council members. Mrs. Schupp was among those nominated by a private citizen. In her nomination letter, the resident did not highlight Mrs. Schupp’s City Council service but rather a multitude of volunteer activities performed throughout the Creve Coeur community spanning more than a decade. The resident did specifically ask that Mrs. Schupp be considered this year since her City Council service was at a virtual end.
During the meeting of the Nominating Committee, we gave this resident’s nomination its due consideration, equal to that which we gave all others. Although we spoke highly of all of the nominees, including those put forward by other City Council members, the Committee unanimously felt that Mrs. Schupp’s contributions were the most meritorious.
The criticism that this award is similar to a cereal box top contest is without merit. The award is thoughtfully chosen to recognize highly deserving individuals. And given that it is for service to Creve Coeur, many of the past recipients have been recognized for accomplishments that include elected service. Elected service is certainly not a prerequisite and it’s definitely not a disqualifier either. Assuming there is agreement on this point, the only point left is one of timing. According to the reasoning of objectors, if Mrs. Schupp had resigned on November 4 immediately following her election to the Missouri House of Representatives, there would have been no cause to disagree with her selection at the subsequent Nominating Committee meeting; but because the Committee did not have her well-known and imminent resignation in hand on the day of the meeting, the whole process is being called (admittedly by just a few) self-serving, political, and lacking in integrity. All this outrage over a technicality of timing!
I am deeply disappointed that this fine and positive tradition in our community is being diminished, and for no real purpose that I can see. Mrs. Schupp doesn’t deserve this negative attention, the previous ten recipients don’t deserve to have their award tarnished, and the public doesn’t deserve misleading and vitriolic diatribes.
Beth Kistner
Perception and Integrity
11/26/2008
Editor's note: this editorial was submitted by Creve Coeur resident Lynn Berry
Perception and integrity; these two words were intertwined inexorably at the Monday, November 24 Creve Coeur City Council meeting where they voted on the Citizen of the Year Award. The first word applied to what the public sensed or saw and the second word applied to the behavior of the nominating committee for Citizen of the Year and its nominated recipient at the meeting.
The criteria for Citizen of the Year, as published in the November newsletter, was the following:
The city is seeking nominations for its Citizen of the Year award to recognize someone who has made outstanding contributions to the community. The Citizen of the Year must be either a resident of Creve Coeur, owner of a business located in Creve Coeur or an employee of a business located in Creve Coeur.
The criteria to be utilized were never provided in the request for nominations from citizens, and this sort of transparency is required in today’s society. It does not include in the definition (nor does it exclude as it should) a member of the government that makes the rules by which those citizens live.
Before this agenda item was brought forth, one member of the council (Ms. Schupp) recused herself from the voting and sat down in the public area. It was intended that the name of the nominee remain secret until the day of the presentation, but because of the circumstances (naming a member of the council for this award), it was apparent that this secrecy could not be maintained. While three council members pointed out that there finally is a system in place for nominations and that they thought the process had been improved by adding this system, it certainly was not a transparent process, and they had no idea that any member of the council could (or would) be nominated for a citizen award. As one of the council members stated, even children who have read the rules of contests on a cereal box understand the basic rule that no paid employee or their relatives, and especially no one in a position of power, should be eligible to win an honor or award bestowed on them by their peers and/or a leader in the organization for which they work.
All three of the council members objecting to the nomination pointed out that Ms. Schupp is well qualified and would be an acceptable candidate for next year, but because of her position on the council (even though she will resign before the end of the year), she should not be nominated for this year. They suggested that she could decline the nomination for this reason. However, Ms. Schupp remained silent throughout the proceedings and did not say that she would step down in favor of a citizen chosen on his/her merits for this honor. The council could have voted against this in light of the three members protesting the way in which the process was carried out, but the other council members chose not to do so and voted to go forward with this nomination.
What does this mean for the citizens of Creve Coeur? The government of Creve Coeur has been on the brink of poor public perception of its integrity many times during the last year with (1) the stalling of the Golden Rule amendment until it became apparent to those members of the council that this would be put on the ballot unless they acted; (2) the vote against the resolution requesting that the attorney general provide an opinion as to whether the Sunshine Law applies to individual members of the Missouri General Assembly; and (3) the voting record of some council members regarding various questionable development efforts. This current action on the part of the council only reinforces the public’s perception that this is all a political issue and not a fair process honoring a citizen that deserves this award. Even if there was no wrongdoing on the part of the nominating committee, the perception of wrongdoing on their part to the public will always remain. And for the mayor to state in an open meeting, that is what you get when you fix something that is not broken, was unconscionable at best.
Moreover, Ms. Schupp, by her silence, accepted this award. This could have been ignored if it was someone in any other position. But Ms. Schupp is the newly elected representative to the state legislature for the 86th District, which includes most of Creve Coeur. Does this show her constituents that she is a person of integrity? No, it provides just the opposite impression to the public and is a poor way to start any public office.
There is still time to act. The nominating committee could admit their mistake and rescind their recommendation. Ms. Schupp could do the honorable thing and refuse the nomination and allow a citizen of Creve Coeur to be nominated as is intended by the very name of the award. Perception of acting for the public good and integrity at the highest levels are expected by the people of Creve Coeur, and eventually we will be heard.
Lynn S. Berry, 626 Graeser Rd
Election Day- Things to Remember
11/01/2008
Taxes, Taxes, Taxes
The issue of taxation is woven throughout the ballot this year. At the national level, who would have predicted that the tax proposals of the Presidential candidates would attract so much attention and that foreign policy would hardly be discussed in the final days before the election. At the local level, the waiting time at the polls will certainly be increased due to the large number of propositions to be decided. From the Metro tax to the gambling limits to the First Responder Radio System, voters will be asked to approve taxes and other changes which will directly or indirectly affect their pocketbooks. It is unfortunate that our elected officials are not as creative in managing the taxes they already collect as they are in proposing more and more taxes.
CCV recommends looking at the big picture. The economic future is uncertain. Families and businesses must live within their means. Governmental bodies must learn to do the same. They must do a better job of setting priorities. (In a recent telephone survey Creve Coeur residents were asked whether they would prefer increasing taxes or cutting back on City services. Cutting back on wasteful City spending, such as telephone surveys, was not offered as a possibility.) CCV recommends a vote against all tax increase proposals. CCV also recommends a vote against increasing gambling limits, agreeing with Missouri Senator Loudon (KMOX interview) that approval would drain millions of dollars out of Missouri and that the change would not effectively prevent legislative reallocation of State education funding.
Proposition H is being advertised as a means to establish a new communications system for all first responders in St. Louis County. It is said that it would not affect residents directly as it would apply a 1.85% use tax, which is a sales tax on purchases from out of state vendors. There is an exemption for the first $2000 of purchases; individuals are on the honor system to pay the tax above $2000; businesses are audited. The educational materials in the campaign for the tax do not say that businesses must pass the tax along to customers in the price of the goods and services they provide.
It is unlikely that the ballot will explain that the tax is expected to generate more than three times the money needed for the emergency radio system in its first year and that the tax will continue after the radio system is in place. (The same tax was discontinued by a 1996 Court decision.) The bulk of the anticipated revenues will go to the St, Louis County General Fund and to municipalities. Proposition H is a bait and switch deception. (Note: the Creve Coeur City Council voted unanimously to contribute $3300 to the educational campaign for Proposition H. For more details, click on the St. Louis County Municipal League website.) CCV recommends a vote against Proposition H.
A Failure to Communicate
10/27/2008
The city recently conducted a telephone survey to obtain citizen opinions on matters concerning Creve Coeur. Mr. David Henschel spoke at the October 27, 2008 City Council meeting concerning the survey:
Mr. Henschel: I was a participant in the recent Creve Coeur telephone survey. I was asked a series of questions—examples were, concerning contracts about garbage pick-up, if I liked city services, what I thought of the city newsletter, etc. The survey lasted maybe 1/2 hour. My personal opinion, it was a waste of my time and waste of our tax dollars. As the survey ended, the interviewer explained the completed survey would be posted on the city web site and thanked me for my participation. She was very pleasant, a good person to do such an interview.
She gave me the opportunity to express my thoughts about the interview. I then explained to her I thought the questions were ridiculous, banal and a waste of my time, hers, and the city folks who would digest the information. I thought they were nothing but a series of softball questions aimed at highlighting what residents already know; the employees of the city of Creve Coeur do an excellent job. But what about the job our elected officials are doing? Continuing, I explained my guess that among our 17,000 residents, maybe 1/2 has computers. Among those, possibly a handful even knew—or cared—that there was a city web site and if so, could find anything on it without a major effort. Besides, no one would care. Better, I suggested, at least have it printed in the city newsletter; there a few of us would possibly read the results. She thought that a good suggestion and said she would refer my suggestion to Dr. Warren. I had no idea who that was but I said that was a good idea.
And that brings me to the nub of my reason for being here before you. I was one resident—with a computer—and able to wade through the entire 200 plus pages of Creve Coeur Minutes from your last meeting posted on the web site. One sentence made an immediate impression, which I cannot quote exactly: it was from Councilwoman Kistner and pretty well sums up my frustration, and sadly, the way far too few residents of this city have. I read it as Councilwoman Kistner explaining how difficult it is to get information to residents of the city.
To all of you, all elected officials sitting here expected to represent our interests as well as our hopes, desires and safety, a really good start to disseminate information would have been this phone survey: and in that respect, I would now like to pose questions I feel would have had more impact:
1. Yes or no—the city recently held a special vote for a development tax. Did you know what the funds would have been used for? And did you know it lost by a 3 to 1 margin?
2. Yes or no—can you give a brief explanation of the concept of a Transportation Development District, also known as a TDD, and what are its financial obligations, and what it is for?
3. Yes or no—are you aware of the proposed development at the intersections of Olive, Dautel and Graeser roads and the financial impact this will have on the city?
4. Yes or no—have you ever tried to make turns in your automobile onto Dautel, Olive or Graeser? If your answer is yes, did it prove to be: one, a minor problem, two, somewhat troubling, or three, a dangerous undertaking?
5. Can you tell me your two Creve Coeur City Council representatives? Do you know in what ward you live?
6. Can you tell me who is the current mayor of Creve Coeur?
7. Yes or no—did you know you could voice opinions at City Council meetings?
8. Can you tell me when the Creve Coeur City Council meets?
There would then be a final comment from the phone interviewer: This survey will be printed in the Creve Coeur City newsletter AND in it the city will give reader-friendly descriptions and answers to questions I have asked. Then she would ask a final question: Yes or no—did you know there was a Creve Coeur newsletter sent to you monthly? To quote a famous line from the movie Cool Hand Luke, starring the late Paul Newman: What we have here gentlemen… is a failure to communicate.
CCV: If you would like a copy of the survey questions, please contact CCV. CCV will comment on the results of the survey when they are available.
Taxation Without Representation
09/30/2008
The proposed Creve Coeur Economic Development Tax (0.5 percent) was defeated at the polls by a large margin last June. Now the City Council is considering a deal which would impose a one percent sales tax at some Creve Coeur stores. But in this case the voters will have no opportunity to vote. By a single vote five Council Members could allow the tax to be collected for 40 years, on top of all other sales taxes now or in the future. And the city would not even manage the expenditure of the money. Proponents will say that this is necessary to have a traffic signal installed at Graeser and Olive. But that is not correct. A common sense alternative would save over $2 million in interest and fees and provide even greater security that the traffic signal would be installed. For the short version skip the background.
THE BACKGROUND: The State of Missouri is different from most states in the way that certain property taxes and sales taxes are structured and approved by law. Approximately 40 percent of all the tax jurisdictions in the entire United States are located in the State of Missouri! (Source, Show Me Institute) From A to Z, the Art Museum to the Zoo, Missouri residents pay taxes to a virtual alphabet soup of tax collectors. Many of these were authorized at one time by the voters, but their life is essentially unlimited. Other tax jurisdictions, such as Transportation Development Districts, operate with no direct voter approval and little or no transparency or accountability to those who pay the taxes.
A Transportation Development District (TDD) may be created pursuant to Missouri Law to plan, promote, design and construct projects such as mass transit, airports, bridges and also streets, intersections, and traffic signals. A TDD must be approved by the registered voters within the boundaries of the district and by the political entity containing the district. However, if there are no registered voters within the district, such as in most commercial areas, the district may be approved by the property owners in the district. This law allows developers (property owners) to impose up to a one percent sales tax with no approval by the voters who are paying the sales tax at the stores within the district.
Since a TDD is legally a separate political subdivision, it has its own board of directors that serves as the governing body of the district. The board is elected by the voters or property owners, as the case may be, in the district. TDD’s are not required by law to include representatives of the voters on the board. Unless the host political entity demands a majority of the board seats when the TDD is formed, the voters effectively forfeit control of the TDD’s government. However, certain modifications of the TDD projects must be approved by the host political entity. Also, the TDD is subject to audit by the State Auditor.
Many TDD’s have been controversial. In Manchester, a dispute between the developer, Pace Properties, and the City has stalled progress on the city’s new police facility. The dispute may have to be settled in court. In Creve Coeur, the Olive Street TDD has been plagues by many delays, cost overruns, and controversies over eminent domain. City officials have been forced to concede that this TDD will not accomplish a major portion of the improvements that were promised to the City and the residents.
State law requires that any TDD sales tax be posted in stores for public view. This law has not been effectively enforced.
THE PROPOSAL:The Creve Coeur City Council is currently considering a TDD Agreement proposed by Pace Properties for the Walgreens project at Graeser and Olive. Pace and other property owners in the area are requesting a TDD in order to impose a one percent sales tax at the new Walgreens and other stores in the area. The TDD project would be responsible for aligning Dautel with Graeser and installing a traffic signal at the new intersection.
There have been a number of difficulties getting the TDD formed. Some of the property owners did not want to participate in the TDD or wanted to limit their participation. Several of the businesses in the proposed district, such as banks and credit unions, do not generate sales tax and refuse to make a contribution. The cost estimates to do the work keep going up due to MODoT requirements, increased administrative fees, and inflation. The bottom line is that the TDD is not projected to generate enough sales tax revenue to pay for the entire project- according to the developer. The developer has asked Creve Coeur and St Louis County to contribute $200,000 each up front to the project. And Creve Coeur has been asked to pledge up to $55,000 per year for 40 years (forty!) years to pay off the project.
Even with the City and County contributions and pledges, the developer says,
It is quite possible that it may prove difficult to issue bonds to refund the developer held notes. If we were attempting to do so today it would be impossible.
The developer held notes are the construction/bridge financing through which all the costs of the project would be collected. The developer, Pace Properties, wants to be paid 8.5% compound interest on these notes until they can be refinanced! (This construction interest is the main point of dispute between Pace and the City of Manchester.)
In addition to the aforementioned construction interest, the agreement would approve over $1.3 million of administrative costs, with no effective mechanism to prevent wasteful spending, self-dealing, and other abuse.
Stifel Nicholas has presented an analysis which indicates that the long term costs of financing a $1.25 million amount would exceed $1.3 million. Thus interest alone would double the cost of the project to the taxpayers. And there is no guarantee that $1.25 million would even cover the project cost, particularly including the cost of the construction interest. As the developer said, the ability to even secure long term financing is uncertain. In the event that long term financing is unavailable, the 1% sales tax would be used to continually pay 8.5 percent interest to the developer.
There are other problems with the proposed TDD agreement. For example, the property owners (developers) would control the Board of Directors until the long term financing is in place. This leaves the very people who are receiving 8.5% interest on their investment with little incentive to secure the long term financing. Another example, the TDD agreement is severely lacking in transparency provisions and limitations which would deter self-dealing in the areas of administration and cash management.
THE ALTERNATIVE: At one time the developer requested that the traffic signal installation be removed from the project, leaving the developer responsible only for rebuilding Dautel to align with Graeser. The traffic signal could then be installed by the City. The City Council refused to accept this approach, and approved the Walgreens project with the condition that the developer both relocate Dautel and install the traffic signal. This was a bad decision, and some Council members seem reluctant to admit it. While the street relocation alone could be handled by the TDD sales tax revenue, the developer is now attempting to extract an exorbitant premium to keep the traffic signal as part of the project.
By insisting that the developer/TDD finance the traffic signal the Council is putting it on a riskier and more costly path to completion. The difficulty of obtaining financing for the TDD has already been cited. The City could easily integrate the cost into the Capital Improvement Program by deferring other wish-list projects. And the City could easily obtain financing if needed. The agreement with the developer provides no incentive to complete the project on-time and on-budget, as the developer is to be reimbursed no matter how much the project costs and no matter how long it takes.
On the current course the TDD is in a bailout situation before it even starts. The City Council should modify its course, divorce the traffic signal and associated Olive improvements from the TDD, and add them to the Capital Improvement Plan for installation as soon as the streets have been aligned. The downsized TDD can then finance itself and align the streets as a turnkey project. Once the streets are aligned, no one can argue that Creve Coeur is too poor, too cheap, or too ignorant to install the signal.
FOR THOSE WHO CARE ENOUGH ..
08/10/2008
Creve Coeur residents will have an opportunity to see a manifestation of the vision of their city officials as two significant measures wind their way through city hall. Currently under development and review by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City-wide Buffer Standards text amendment and the Planned Zoning District ordinance will soon move on to the City Council for public hearings and approval. These two proposals could have a far-reaching impact on property values and the quality of life in Creve Coeur.
Planning Director Paul Langdon has presented a proposal to the Planning and Zoning Commission for new buffer standards which would replace the existing collection of regulations scattered through the zoning code. They include requirements for buffers between commercial and residential properties which would apply for all redevelopment along both sides of Olive and Lindbergh. The standards allow developers to trade off the minimum separation distance provided for additional landscaping and fences or masonry walls. The standards appear to be tougher than the existing regulations in most cases. Mr. Langdon said that the draft standards were tougher than other cities in the study.
Unfortunately, the P&Z Commissioners appeared to back away from the tough standards at the August 4, 2008 meeting. Two factors seemed to influence the commissioners’ comments, a concern about the impact on developers and a fear of handling unforeseen or special situations. Commissioners should not worry about either of these factors. Tough standards will not discourage redevelopment so long as there is a fair and open process for addressing circumstances on the ground. Developers are well financed and experienced with working through the approval process. But residents, who experience a redevelopment proposal affecting their property once in a generation, are not prepared to defend their property rights. Thus they often must resort to hiring lawyers, a costly process for everyone. With tough standards and a fair review process, the burden of proof should be on developers to demonstrate that the buffer standard is ineffectual. If they have a better idea, they can sell it to the officials and the affected residents.
Creve Coeur trails its neighbors, Westwood, Ladue, Town & Country, Frontenac, and Clayton, in the median value of its housing stock. And Chesterfield is narrowing the gap. Allowing commercial redevelopment to get by with minimal buffer requirements would reduce the value of adjacent residential properties and discourage high quality residential redevelopment. Creve Coeur should not sell its premium location and amenities for anything less than premium redevelopment.
The Planned Zoning District (PZD) is a mechanism which can be used to inject high density commercial/residential developments throughout Creve Coeur. A PZD can be zoned as a Planned Residential District (PRD) or a Planned Commercial District (PCD). A PRD or PCD may be superimposed within an existing district. Thus an area of 5 acres can be carved out of an existing single family home district and redeveloped as multi-family housing with a density of 20 units per acre. The PRD allows a single family density of six units per acre, and the units may be attached. A PRD can also contain commercial developments, such as convenience stores, to a limited extent. Although PRD’s must meet certain architectural and design criteria, such as the inclusion of public spaces, the criteria are subjective and weak. Most of the private and public amenities would be provided in the ordinary course of developing an apartment or condominium building. There is nothing in this proposed ordinance which would prevent a cul de sac of single family homes anywhere in Creve Coeur from being converted to a high density multi-family development- other than the subjective rejection by the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council. This cannot be tolerated, as these bodies may be influenced or controlled by over-zealous developers at any point of time in the future.
A Planned Commercial District must be only 3.5 acres within an existing commercial district. In addition to commercial uses it may contain multi-family housing- WITH NO LIMIT ON DENSITY! Thus a 3.5 acre area on Olive or Lindbergh could contain 400 small apartments! This is unacceptable. Creve Coeur already has a population density greater than Westwood, Town & Country, Ladue, Frontenac, and Chesterfield. Published statistics indicate that cities with higher density of population than Creve Coeur and/or high density commercial development, including Clayton, Olivette, Kirkwood, Richmond Heights, and Des Peres, all have a higher crime rate than Creve Coeur. Des Peres, with a population density about 17 percent greater than Creve Coeur, has a crime rate more than twice that of Creve Coeur. Clayton, with a density about three times Creve Coeur, has four police officers per 1000 residents versus about three per 1000 in Creve Coeur; Clayton has approximately 50 percent more crime than Creve Coeur.
Proponents of the Planned Zoning District will say that the concept provides a great incentive for imaginative redevelopment in Creve Coeur. However, it provides incentive only in the direction of greater density and a lower quality of life for Creve Coeur homeowners. Proponents will say that it could provide substantial tax revenue to the city. But the city budget is in surplus and will be for the near future. And there are many opportunities for cost saving and alternative revenue generation. The wrong kind of development will only deteriorate the financial condition as it places increased demands on police and city services.
Creve Coeur officials have not been penny-pinchers when it comes to major taxpayer funded projects. Creve Coeur residents and commuters drive over perhaps the most luxurious overpass in the entire Interstate Highway System. And they will drive over a $10 million mile along Olive Blvd. if it is ever completed. The parks, golf course, ice rink, and public property have significant capital expenditures every year. Taxpayers should expect the same commitment to quality from developers. Creve Coeur will be a better place to live and own property if the emphasis is placed on quality, not the quantity of units which might be more profitable for developers. The economic law of supply and demand dictates that the small amount of land in Creve Coeur which could be redeveloped should not be sacrificed for any development other than the very best.
and Justice for All?
06/07/2008
Each meeting of the City Council begins with the Pledge of Allegiance. After proclaiming justice for all for the last 196 days some members of the Council, led by Council Person Beth Kistner, have chosen to ignore that pledge. They have refused to pass the Golden Rule Text Amendment that would give all property owners along the borders of Creve Coeur the same protections that are provided to Creve Coeur property owners by the City’s ordinances. And they have used every procedural tactic within their power to deny proponents of the measure an opportunity to even speak publicly on the matter.
Justice delayed is justice denied.
At the May 27 meeting of the Council the Golden Rule amendment was once again voted off the table, off the agenda, out of sight, and out of mind for an indefinite period by a 5-3 vote. In a perverse inversion of the old saying, the Council thus voted to hear no good, see no good, and do no good. The three members of the Council standing up for the Golden Rule were David Kassander (Ward 3) and Jeanne Rhoades and Laura Bryant (Ward 4).
The vote at this meeting was forced as the Planning & Zoning Commission unanimously recommended the text amendment to the Council for the second time! Public speakers reminded the Council that the amendment had been endorsed by the Chamber of Commerce, the St. Louis County Council, the American Planning Association, and various organizations, as well as many residents. Stephen L. Kling, Jr., an expert attorney said, This is one of the most egregious and discriminatory interpretations of the zoning law I have seen in my 25+ year career as a lawyer.
Council Person Kistner moved to table the bill, seconded by Council Person Jill Schupp. CP Kistner said that nobody had been hurt by the delay in passing the amendment, and, catching the implication of the statement, proposed a moratorium on approving other projects. In truth, everybody has been hurt by the delay. Residential and business property owners have been unable to plan ahead. Property values have been depreciated by the delay. Costly lawsuits have been protracted. Individuals who want to do the right thing have endured needless stress. And every Creve Coeur resident who wants to be proud of our City has been embarrassed and disappointed by this folly.
No to New Taxes
05/29/2008
Creve Coeur voters will have an opportunity to approve or reject a half-cent (0.5 percent) sales tax increase at the polls on Tuesday, June 3. The revenue, about $2 million per year, would be used for economic development purposes.
CCV recommends a NO vote on this tax increase.
This is not the time. Additional tax increase proposals are coming in November, including an additional 0.5% St Louis County transportation tax. On top of that, the implementation of approved and planned projects in Creve Coeur will require additional Transportation Development Taxes up to 1%. Voters have no say on these TDD taxes. It all adds up.
The proposed spending is poorly defined. The city administration has laid out a project list approaching $70 million, offering a cookie jar of projects to tempt every voter. The revenue from this tax will not make a dent on the list, insuring that additional taxes and fees will be coming. Voters deserve a realistic plan.
The proposed spending is mostly wasteful. A large part of the project list involves the planned Downtown District bounded by Old Ballas, New Ballas, and Olive. The taxpayers would fund new streets, sidewalks, plazas, and parking garages for high density residential and retail buildings. Approval of this plan has been held up pending a traffic study to determine if it is even feasible. Prominent local developers have stated publicly that the plan is not practical.
The tax proceeds would be used to bail out Transportation Development Districts which fail to make good on promises. The ordinance specifically states that the proceeds could be used to complete projects originally envisioned by Transportation Development Districts, meaning that developers would not be held to commitments to fund infrastructure needed for their developments. Taxpayers should not be asked to subsidize the profits of developers.
The tax increase would impair the competitiveness of Creve Coeur businesses. Creve Coeur’s rate is currently one half percent (0.5%) above the unincorporated St. Louis County rate. A half percent economic development tax would double this differential. It would also put the Creve Coeur rate equal to Chesterfield. This would make Creve Coeur businesses incrementally less competitive with nearby businesses in the County and Chesterfield. Creve Coeur merchants would also become less competitive with on-line dealers, where no sales tax is charged. The sales tax increase would not attract business and would encourage merchants to relocate in low sales tax jurisdictions.
The stated plans for spending the revenue would skirt the intent of the Missouri law authorizing economic development taxation. Beautification projects, such as building one of the most expensive overpasses in the Interstate Highway System, have had essentially no effect on economic development. Similar beautification projects on Lindbergh would have the same result. At a time when police department requests for additional staffing are denied, the 2009 budget includes $45,000 for mulch! This is not economic development. Similarly, subsidizing the building of apartments and condos for thousands of additional residents in a 40 acre area of the city would have little impact on economic development.
The current administration has demonstrated an insatiable appetite for unchecked commercial development, trampling residents’ property rights in the process time after time. Now they are asking residents for a helping hand to fill developers’ coffers, increase congestion, increase the cost of living, and make Creve Coeur a less livable community. Creve Coeur still has a chance to exist as a small oasis in a sea of commercial excess. Vote no to preserve that chance.
Double-Crossing at Graeser
03/10/2008
Has Creve Coeur been double-crossed on the Walgreens project at Olive and Graeser? The City approved the Crossing at Graeser project with the condition that the developers would guarantee the realignment of Dautel with Graeser AND the installation of a traffic signal at the new intersection. Now the developers have come back saying that the installation of the signal would be too costly for the project and asking for approval without the signal. The revised proposal could not gain a majority at P&Z and will go to the City Council without a positive recommendation.
First let’s examine the claim that the traffic signal is too costly. The developer stated at P&Z that the estimate for the installation of the traffic signal had increased from $1.3 million to over $2.2 million. This does not mesh with the preliminary budget provided to the city on August 3, 2007, which totaled $1.268 million hard and soft construction cost for the entire project, including the traffic signal and the relocation of Dautel. The ability of the Walgreens project to support the street relocation and signal should be examined in relation to the best independent estimate of the total cost that can be obtained. The developer did not disclose the new total at P&Z. The scope of the work has not been detailed either. Does it include the cost to bury the utilities along Olive? All of the numbers need to be on the table.
CCV sympathizes with the developer regarding the lack of cooperation by the commercial neighbors. No other property owners in the area have agreed to participate in the Transportation Development District which would finance the public improvements via a one percent sales tax. Although we don’t have the numbers, it is clear that there is a point at which the cost could not be financed by Walgreens sales taxes alone. And it would not be fair to require Walgreens customers to fund the entire project. Also, the neighboring property owners object to the Olive street median which would be required by MoDoT, something over which the developer has no control.
On the other hand, the developer continues to claim that it is contributing land worth $800,000 for the new street. CCV has previously discussed this fallacy in the October 22, 2007 meeting notes. By the time the developer takes over the space occupied by the old street, the net land contribution is minimal. No aspect of this project should be approved until this question is resolved publicly.
City officials and residents should be thankful that the developer has come forward at this stage, not years later as happened in the case of the Olive Street TDD. This provides an opportunity to avoid another embarrassing situation. Once again, the key is to have an independent estimate of the cost. An independent estimate is imperative to minimize the potential for abuse and overruns.
CCV recommended on October 8 that the City take over the traffic signal portion of the project, put it on the Capital Improvement Program, and eliminate wasteful spending as an offset. The current situation reinforces this recommendation. The City government is in a much better position than the developer to coordinate the signal and Olive Blvd. improvements with County and State authorities and to offer incentives to nearby property owners to cooperate.
The above being said, the Walgreens project should not be approved again unless it conforms to the community standards, including an appropriate buffer on the north side, much improved landscaping, and attention to the issues raised by the 24-hour drive through. It was a mistake to allow the traffic signal to become a hostage of the project. This mistake should not be repeated.
Dis'ed
02/09/2008
In the aftermath of the tragedy in Kirkwood, we interrupt the series of articles laying out the duties and responsibilities of our city government. We will get back to the mechanics of city government operation. At this time it is appropriate to take a wider view. The Creve Coeur website states:
The City Council is the elected governing body of the city of Creve Coeur,
which enacts legislation and establishes city wide policies to protect the
health, safety, and general welfare of the community.
This is the most visible statement of the mission and responsibility of the elected officials found on the website.
Creve Coeur is governed by a representative body- the City Council, led by the Mayor. Each ward has two representatives. While most candidates emphasize their experience in public service and their profession at election time, they are being elected to represent their constituents and reflect the constituents’ beliefs- within the context of the mission statement. It is important that voters have an understanding of the vision of the candidates. What positions will a candidate assume to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the community? How will the candidate represent the resident? Creve Coeur voters have a responsibility to elect representatives who represent. A major goal of crevecoeurvoter.com is to provide information to voters that can guide this analysis. CCV will analyze the voting record of incumbents and question candidates about their vision.
In order to represent their constituents a Council Member must have knowledge of their views. And the residents must communicate their views. This can easily be done through emails. Each Planning and Zoning Commission meeting and City Council meeting provides citizens with an opportunity to speak on any subject. Formal public hearings are held on many subjects. You do not have to be directly impacted by the subject to speak! P&Z Commissioners and City Council members may equate silence with agreement. Public officials must not accept apathy and must proactively seek public input.
So we come around to the relevance of the Kirkwood tragedy. In an interview with the Post Dispatch, Florissant Mayor Robert Lowry said,
Every city has people on the edge. We have 25 or 30 who think that everything
bad that’s happening to them is the government’s fault. And the closest government
to them is City Hall.
Mayor Lowry installed metal detectors in Florissant City Hall when he became Mayor. How sad. There are so many avenues to conflict resolution short of metal detectors and bullet proof glass. It is not our role to pass judgment on the Kirkwood murderer or on the actions of the Kirkwood government. CCV’s goal is to make a small contribution to a better Creve Coeur government. In this context, the relevance of the Kirkwood killings to Creve Coeur is not to think about beefing up City Hall security. It is to think about why and how conflict between government and residents starts, how it festers, and how it can be prevented.
The most important element of conflict prevention is that officials recognize, as described herein, that they are representing the residents. They do not represent developers, large taxpayers, campaign contributors, or any special interest. They do not represent the city bureaucracy, the Planning Department, the Police Department, or any part of the government. Officials must also demonstrate a commitment to this principle publicly. CCV noted a good example of this commitment at the November 5, 2007 P&Z meeting.
No less important than recognition of the principles of representative government is the acceptance of responsibility for the mission. The mission statement is to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the community. It is not to increase population. It is not to fill empty lots with commercial development. It is not to tear down buildings and replace them with bigger buildings. It is not to compete with other communities. And it is not to increase tax revenue except as such revenue is demonstrably used to improve the general welfare. And the general welfare of the community must include the general welfare of a minority of the population or perhaps even a single citizen in some cases. Can an elected body be trusted to protect one group if it will not protect another?
Aside- Should the city risk the expense of a lawsuit from a Chicago landlord to protect the general welfare of Creve Coeur condominium owners? Yes, after all alternatives have been exhausted.
As a regular observer of Creve Coeur public meetings, CCV has seen residents feel dis’ed- disappointed, disillusioned, and disgruntled. However, when actions are taken and decisions are made with the guidance of the mission, and when the time is taken to explain them, these dis’ed feelings are minimized. Because this is the norm, Mayor Lowry’s generalization is not applicable to Creve Coeur. However, if an action, a decision, or a vote cannot be justified in the context of the general welfare dis’ed feelings are exacerbated. Worst of all, when a representative is not fulfilling his or her duty to represent constituents, a more serious dis’ed feeling, disenfranchisement, may take root. That’s when people may get on the edge.
|
