Sedalia officials clarify Chapter 353 tax‑abatement rules for Midtown redevelopment; no vote taken

City Attorney Joe Valero explained the legal framework for using Missouri Revised Statutes Chapter 353 tax abatements to support the Midtown Residential Area redevelopment plan during the Sedalia City Council’s Community Development committee presentation on Jan. 6. Valero told council members the program can provide property‑level tax abatements to encourage rehabilitation, increase homeownership and remediate blight in a large area the city adopted by ordinance in May 2020.

Valero said the statutory tool requires two elements: an urban redevelopment corporation and a redevelopment plan. He summarized the tax mechanics: up to 100% abatement on improvements for the first 10 years and a second tier that can provide at least 50% abatement for up to 15 additional years, subject to the plan’s terms. To trigger abatement under Chapter 353, title to the parcel must transfer to the redevelopment corporation and may be immediately transferred back under a prearranged contract, Valero said. He also noted the program requires individualized tax‑impact statements and public hearings for property owners seeking abatement.

Why it matters: the Midtown Residential Area plan is intended to spur private investment in older neighborhoods that the city found to meet the statutory blight definition. Under Sedalia’s code (Chapter 42) and the plan (adopted by Ordinance No. 11168, May 2020), property owners inside the redevelopment area can apply for either direct city funding set aside by the redevelopment corporation or for tax abatement under Chapter 353.

Key details Valero presented include: the Sedalia Redevelopment Corporation serves as the program’s implementing body; the corporation’s board is composed of three council members, the Sedalia public school superintendent and one citizen‑at‑large; the city is the corporation’s sole shareholder; and directors are not paid for that service. Valero said there are roughly “1,400 to 1,500” properties in the plan area and that each property can pursue a small, individualized plan under the umbrella redevelopment plan.

Eligibility and minimum work: Valero said properties must be inside the designated redevelopment area, must not have outstanding property maintenance citations or delinquent taxes, and must demonstrate a minimum investment. The program guidelines set a minimum investment equal to 6.5% of the net present value of the 10‑year abatement or a floor investment (stated in the presentation as $35,100), whichever is greater. Eligible improvements include structural repairs, energy efficiency upgrades, electrical and safety work, repaired sidewalks and basic landscaping.

Questions and public response: Council members asked for clarity on board compensation, ownership and the transfer requirement. Valero reiterated that directors are not owners and are forbidden to receive compensation; the city is the sole shareholder. He said the required transfer of title is a statutory trigger and that banks are typically cooperative when mortgages are involved because the work increases collateral value. Chairwoman Foster asked for clearer public materials, and several residents who spoke afterward — including David Grossman and a resident identified only as Tina — thanked staff for the clarification and urged the city to publish a simple street list and application steps.

Council direction: no ordinance vote occurred on the Midtown plan during the meeting. Multiple council members and Valero encouraged staff to prepare clearer public materials, including a list of affected streets and an easy‑to‑follow application process, and to bring any proposed additions to the redevelopment area back to council at the next meeting. Valero and members urged that tax‑impact statements and public hearings will be done on an individualized basis when a property owner seeks abatement.

Votes at a glance (other business during the meeting): The council approved several unrelated ordinances and resolutions by roll call or voice vote. Those actions were not part of the Midtown discussion but were taken later in the same meeting: Buffalo/Bothell Regional Health Center MOU amendment (Bill No. 2025‑1, final passage — roll call recorded as yes votes), a budget amendment and resolution to fund executive recruitment (Resolution No. 2121; Bill Nos. 2025‑2 and 2025‑3 — approved), ratification of an emergency IT purchase for the central wastewater plant SCADA upgrade (Bill No. 2025‑4 — approved), amendments to the personnel regulations manual to align police suspension/demotion procedures with state law (Bill No. 2025‑5 — approved), and a mutual aid agreement for fire and emergency services with the Missouri Department of Conservation (Bill No. 2025‑6 — approved). A new liquor license for The End Zone (3129 W. Broadway) was also approved by voice vote.

What’s next: Valero said staff will return with clarifying materials and the council is likely to consider adding properties to the Midtown portfolio at the next meeting; any tax abatement for a particular parcel will require its own tax‑impact statement and public hearing before approval. Residents and property owners in the Midtown area were urged to monitor council materials or contact city staff for the street list and application instructions.