Developers present MOU for Ozark Mountain Sports Complex expansion; board asks for more time before incentives analysis

Developers and their advisors presented a memorandum of understanding outlining proposed public-private incentives for an expansion of the Ozark Mountain Sports Complex that would add fields, a training facility and a hotel. The board placed the MOU (bill 3699) on its first reading and opened discussion but did not approve any incentive measures; aldermen asked staff to return with economic and legal analyses before any binding action.

Kurt Peterson, advising the developer team, described four financing tools the developers requested the city and project partners evaluate: Chapter 100 sales- and property-tax relief including a 25-year property-tax abatement on the hotel component; a 1% community improvement district (CID) sales-tax to be collected within the project for up to 27 years; a 1% transportation development district (TDD) sales-tax focused on parking and transportation elements for up to 25 years; and a 10-year sharing of the city’s 1% general sales tax on incremental new sales at the project. Peterson said the developer’s current budget estimate for the phase before the board is about $38,000,000 and that the MOU would authorize staff and the developer to commission the required analyses and documentation.

City counsel and economic advisers emphasized the MOU is not a final approval and does not bind the city. Senior counsel Sarah Granath told aldermen the MOU is a framework that enables the city’s consultants to prepare a "but for" financial analysis and a blight study where required, and that those documents would inform whether any incentives meet the city’s economic-development policy and legal standards. Peterson said the Chapter 100 abatement and sales-tax tools are "imperative" for viability, and that the developers intend to proceed quickly if the board supports the MOU; some aldermen said they wanted time to review and did not support expedited action at that meeting.

Board members voiced general support for the concept but asked for more detail. Alderman Campbell said he was supportive but asked staff to explain the blight finding and the city sales-tax sharing in more detail; several aldermen reiterated that the next step should be a Baker Tilly "but for" analysis and a public presentation of the fiscal impacts before the city would consider any approvals. Staff said the city owns an approximately six-acre parcel adjacent to the existing complex used for detention; the MOU contemplates conveying that parcel to the project and replacing the detention work as part of the public improvements paid by the project.

Public commenters at the hearing said they support the project and urged the board to proceed with the MOU so that required studies can begin. No final incentives were approved at the meeting; the board placed bill 3699 on first reading and held the item over to a future meeting pending the formal analyses, statutory notices and a more detailed financing plan.

Clarifying details from the presentations include: a current developer budget estimate of approximately $38,000,000 for the phase outlined in the MOU; requested tools are a Chapter 100 package (sales tax exemption on construction materials and a 25-year real-property tax abatement for the hotel portion), a 1% CID, a 1% TDD and a 10-year city sales-tax sharing agreement on incremental new sales; the city owns a roughly 6-acre parcel adjacent to the existing fields that the MOU contemplates conveying for project use in exchange for a replacement detention facility paid by the developer; next analytic steps are a "but for" analysis and a blight study required by statute for any public sales-tax sharing decision.