Council names city developer for RPA 3; members and residents press for TIF transparency over Main Circle purchase

The Chesterfield City Council voted to designate the city as the developer for projects in redevelopment project area RPA 3, a measure tied to the city's Chesterfield Regional Tax Increment Financing (TIF) plan. The ordinance's second reading passed 6-2 after several council members and a resident urged clearer, itemized project descriptions and budget figures for the TIF work that will follow.

Council member Tocco criticized the documentation accompanying the vote, saying the description tied to the agenda "doesn't even correspond with the TIF project list nor does it define or quantify the dollar amount involved." She asked the council to publish an updated TIF project list with final dollar amounts and a timetable before approving projects that implement the plan.

The discussion tied directly to the Main Circle property acquisition, an item identified in the redevelopment plan with a $24,000,000 line on the TIF project list. Resident Ken Cott, who spoke during public comment, told councilors he was concerned about the financial consequences if property-tax-exempt status tied to ownership did not apply: "If you don't get that property tax exemption, this could be a a financial fiasco," he said. Cott also raised questions about a confidentiality clause in a lease and how public disclosure of tenant leases could affect negotiations.

City Administrator Geisel and other staff framed the ordinance narrowly: the measure before council designates the city as the developer for this specific RPA 3 project and does not itself adopt the project budgets or final implementation agreements. Geisel said individual projects will go through the required statutes, execution steps and oversight "that's required by the city in its execution of any project."

The city attorney noted precedent in which entities can own tax-exempt property across jurisdictions and observed that a county or other municipality could acquire property with tax consequences similar to those raised in public comment. The attorney referenced a case discussing tax treatment for property owned by one political entity in another jurisdiction.

Council member Tocco asked staff to prepare more detailed project paperwork, including a legal description of the selected areas, implementation method (cooperation agreement or city-as-developer), subproject budgets and an estimated timetable. The measure to designate the city as developer passed on the second reading by roll call, 6 in favor and 2 opposed; council members Tocco and one other voted no.

Why this matters: The RPA 3 designation is an early, administrative step that enables the city to lead acquisition and redevelopment work under the TIF plan. Council members and residents said more transparent, project-level budgeting and public timelines are necessary before approving subsequent contracts or spending tied to the redevelopment plan.

What happens next: Staff and legal counsel will prepare the further documentation and implementing agreements for any individual RPA 3 projects; those individual actions will return to council for approval as required. The council did not change the actual TIF plan in this vote; it designated the city as the project developer for the RPA 3 items.

Sources and attribution: Statements and questions in this article are taken from council discussion and a public comment by Ken Cott during the Chesterfield City Council meeting (transcript). Quotations are attributed to the speakers who used the words in the meeting record.