Should Walmart come to Shrewsbury?

Tony Rivera January 8, 2013 at 11:14 pm

Wrong question IMO. A better one is:
"Should we give $15 million to a property owner and property manager who have allowed their property to rot to the point of becoming uninhabitable and a public health menace, so that they can make their property more valuable, while offering no incremental tax benefit to the city for 23 years, which is the approximate age of the decayed Kenrick Plaza?" It's a long sentence, but it pretty much sums up what Shrewsbury is doing here.

Kurt Odenwald January 9, 2013 at 06:41 pm

Until the state legislature changes the law, TIFs are here to stay--for better or worse. I do not like TIFs, but the alternative is frightening. Without a TIF, there is no redevelopment given the current state of the law in Missouri. Cities like Shrewsbury could say, we do not like these rules, take our ball and go home, and not play in the game. That may make us feel good for a while. But that good feeling soon will give way to financial constraints facing cities lying with in the inner suburban corridor. The real issue here is not whether a Walmart should be located on this property. The property is already zoned commercial and the proposed use of the property is consistent with the current zoning. The real issue is not whether Shrewsbury should use a TIF to attract redevelopment of an admittedly blighted commercial property--the current state laws mandate that Shrewsbury do so if Shrewsbury is serious about redevelopment. The only real question before the TIF Commission is whether this particular redevelopment proposal merits the City's use of a TIF. Of course, when the debate is limited to that issue, most of the emotional arguments about how terrible TIF's are simply have no merit. So tonight, I urge the TIF Commission to focus on the real issue and evaluate this redevelopment proposal on its merits. The Commission should move forward for the betterment of our community. Approve the TIF proposal and replace the blighted eyesore that is a drain on our city.

Chris P January 12, 2013 at 02:47 pm

Glad Odenwald is no longer in the County Council if he believes that state law MANDATES (!!) that Shrewsbury hand over millions of dollars in public financing to a property owner who allowed his property to deteriorate to the point of becoming blighted. Yikes. That sounds like the cynical, almost corrupt attitude that I might expect from the current County Exec., not someone who speaks for the good of communities and the County as a whole.

Kurt Odenwald January 12, 2013 at 06:19 pm

Chris,
State law does not mandate TIFs, but the harsh reality is that unless the state law changes, redevelopment in the inner suburban core is very unlikely without a TIFs as long as state law allows for them. The redevelopment of Grasso Plaza in Affton is a perfect example. When the National Foodstores closed, the Plaza struggled. National was the main anchor for the Plaza. A country western bar went in which eventually flopped. Citizens wanted an Old Navy to move in---but Old Navy didn't bite. Extensive effort went in to wooing potential tenants --but to no avail given the deteriorated condition of the Plaza due to the lack of rental income to support repairs and maintenance. Sound familiar? Only after a TIF was proposed to make infrastructure and lighting improvements was the Plaza able to attract tenants such as The Bread Company and Save-a-Lot--which then attracted other smaller tenants. Yes, it would have been preferable to have the redevelopment without TIF dollars, but the sad reality under our current state law made that unikely. Today, few people in Affton, including the Affton school district, would prefer the empty Grasso Plaza to what is there today. No corruption involved. No cynicism -- just concerned elected officials trying to do what is best for the community. The purpose of that TIF, like the TIF proposed for Kenrick Plaza , is to improve our community not to reward developers.