Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Senate perfects Modesta 2 package to extend downtown development incentives in Kansas City, St. Louis

Missouri Senate · May 5, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Senators perfected a consolidated substitute for Senate bills 16‑94 and 16‑88 (Modesta 2) that modernizes and extends development incentives focused on downtown Kansas City and St. Louis, preserves a separate rural program and adds project safeguards; debate focused on geographic targeting, fiscal notes and competitive procurement.

The Missouri Senate perfected a consolidated substitute for Senate bills 16‑94 and 16‑88 — commonly described on the floor as "Modesta 2" — advancing changes to the state's economic development incentive toolkit aimed at attracting and retaining large investments in downtown Kansas City and St. Louis.

Sponsors described Modesta 2 as bipartisan modernization of an existing program that expands the set of eligible downtown projects, allows limited expansions of previously certified projects (for example, Ballpark Village and Power & Light expansions), and authorizes two additional projects downtown on each side to be competitively bid. "It modernizes incentives, provides greater certainty to businesses looking to invest in our state, and ensure that we remain competitive," a sponsor said on the floor.

Several senators pressed both policy and procedural questions: critics asked why the bill emphasizes two metropolitan downtowns rather than broader statewide eligibility and called for clearer fiscal analysis and a review of selection criteria; supporters pointed to an existing separate rural economic stimulus program and said Modesta 2 intentionally targets large, downtown catalytic projects that require scale and city partnership. The sponsor repeatedly emphasized competitive bidding requirements and that the state would not pay unless projects produced new, incremental tax revenue.

The body debated and adopted multiple amendments and eventually perfected and ordered printed the substitute. Senators asked administration and Department of Economic Development officials to produce detailed fiscal notes and to clarify the definitions and procurement safeguards that will govern awards under the program. The perfected substitute will move through enrollment and the conference process as required.