St. Francois County commissioners put a proposed industrial development agreement on an advisory committee for further review after identifying ambiguous contract language and unanswered funding questions.

During discussion, a commissioner summarized a clause in the draft agreement that appeared to require the county to pay $800,000 if the roadways associated with the development are not completed on schedule. The chair (identified in roll call as Mister Kader) said the matter needed attorney review because different sections of the contract appear to conflict about whether sales‑tax revenue could be used for reimbursable expenses.

Commissioners and staff discussed the scale of the development and its potential to increase the county’s sales tax base through new retailers (references were made to potential anchors such as Target and Academy Sports). Staff noted infrastructure near the site is not currently adequate and emphasized the need to complete road improvements before full development. One commissioner said the county will receive half the initial sales tax revenue and the other half would be used to repay development costs under the proposed structure.

Given the contract ambiguity and potential county exposure (estimated by staff at roughly $500,000 in county share, with the contract estimating a $1,000,000 total cost), the commission voted to place the agreement on an advisory committee, consult MoDOT as needed, and have the county attorney resolve conflicting language before bringing the measure back for formal approval.

No formal vote to approve the contract occurred at the meeting; commissioners instructed staff to seek clarifications and possible revisions to protect county interests.