Housing, Urban Development and Zoning Committee Meeting – March 5, 2026

The Housing, Urban Development and Zoning (HUDZ) Committee of the St. Louis Board of Aldermen met on Thursday, March 5, 2026, with six members present (quorum). The meeting included approval of minutes, consideration of three board bills, a presentation on ARPA closeout, a development update from SLDC, and public testimony.

Consent Calendar

• Minutes Approval: Unanimously approved the minutes from the February 24, 2026 meeting. Motion by Alderman Cohn, seconded by Alderman Browning. Approved on a 6‑0 roll‑call vote.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Board Bill 155 (Sports and Entertainment District): Three public speakers testified:
  • John Siegel, a downtown resident (14th Ward), expressed support for the bill and asked to be added as a co‑sponsor.
  • Robert Failing, president of Failig Brothers Box and Lumber Company, asked whether the district would impose land‑use restrictions on his former property. Sponsors replied that the SID would not add any restrictions.
  • Michelle Robinson, a downtown homeowner and event planner, testified in full support and urged inclusion of smaller stakeholders on the district’s board.
• No public testimony was offered for Board Bill 161 or Board Bill 66.

Discussion Items

Board Bill 161 – ARPA Fund Reallocation (Committee Substitute)

• Summary: The bill reappropriates unobligated American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds, primarily for revenue replacement in the Water Division. This was the third committee hearing on the bill. Alderwoman Schweitzer, the sponsor, led the discussion.
• Presentation: Casey Milberg, Chief of Staff from the Mayor’s Office, provided an overview of the ARPA closeout period. She reported that the city received approximately $498 million in ARPA funds; the obligation deadline (contracting) was December 31, 2024, and the spending deadline is December 31, 2026. As of March 2026, about 60% of funds had been spent. She emphasized the need for stringent monitoring to avoid clawbacks and that the administration’s goal is “not to send a single penny back.”
• Committee Substitute Changes: Several organizations originally slated for reallocation were removed from the bill to allow further discussion: Covenant House, Guardian Angel, North Aportion, Urban League, Direct Support, the Forward Program, and Northside Youth and Senior Services. The sponsor noted that removal does not guarantee they will not face future reallocation, but provides time for dialogue.
• Questions/Comments: Committee members thanked the sponsor and city staff for diligence. No substantive questions were raised.
• Vote: Moved by Vice Chair Sanye, seconded by Alderman Cohn, to pass BB161 committee substitute with a “do pass” recommendation. Approved 7‑0 (all present voting aye).

Board Bill 155 – Sports and Entertainment District (SID)

• Summary: The bill establishes a Sports and Entertainment District (SID) in downtown St. Louis, as enabled by state legislation passed in 2025. The district covers about 1,000 acres (from the river to Jefferson Avenue, and from Cole to I‑64/40). The SID has no taxing authority; it can only receive state appropriations (up to $2.5 million per year for the first five years, then $4.5 million for the remaining 22 years, total 27‑year term). Funds must be used for public safety, beautification, lighting, maintenance, and attracting entertainment/sports events.
• Presenters: Co‑sponsors Alderman Cox Ansley (7th Ward) and Alderman Aldridge (14th Ward) introduced the bill. David Richardson (Husch Blackwell) explained the legal framework. Representatives from key stakeholders spoke in support: Bob O’Laughlin (Lodging Hospitality Management/Union Station), Jim Mann (St. Louis SC), Mike Whittle (St. Louis Cardinals), Brad Dean (Explore St. Louis/CVC), and Chris Zimmerman (St. Louis Blues/Enterprise Center). All emphasized that the SID will make the city more competitive for major events and improve public perception.
• Questions/Comments:
  • Alderwoman Schweitzer asked about the funding mechanism – the $2.5 million annual amount is based on projected positive net fiscal impact, to be certified annually by DED.
  • Alderman Browning sought specifics on security upgrades (additional patrols, cameras, lighting). Sponsors confirmed the SID would supplement existing efforts, not create a “fortress.” He also asked about the five‑year financing plan (total ~$10 million).
  • Vice Chair Sanye expressed support but requested future board composition be revisited to include smaller stakeholders. She was added as a co‑sponsor.
• Vote: Moved by Vice Chair Sanye, seconded by Alderman Browning, to pass BB155 with a “do pass” recommendation. Approved 7‑0.

Board Bill 66 – Codification of Economic Justice Index (EJI) and Development Scorecard

• Summary: The bill amends the existing development incentive scorecard ordinance (Board Bill 64 from a previous session) to codify the Economic Justice Index (EJI) as a required component. SLDC already uses the EJI and scorecard; this legislation makes it a statutory requirement and requires any future scorecard amendments to be reviewed by the HUDZ committee. A committee substitute was adopted.
• Presenters: Sponsor Alderman Cohn explained that the bill standardizes evaluation criteria (jobs, neighborhood plan alignment, geography, etc.) and ensures transparency. Zach Wilson (SLDC) and Janika Hayden (President’s Office) confirmed SLDC supports codification and that the bill reflects existing practice.
• Questions/Comments:
  • Alderwoman Schweitzer asked about the provision requiring SLDC to bring scorecard changes to HUDZ for approval. Ms. Hayden clarified that this ensures the baseline criteria are maintained if administration changes.
  • Alderman Browning voiced concerns that the bill adds bureaucratic oversight and may reduce flexibility. He cited examples where projects that scored well on the scorecard were killed by behind‑the‑scenes demands. He asked why more rules are needed if the scorecard is not being followed. The sponsor responded that the board retains discretion under state law, and that the EJI helps address historic disinvestment.
  • Alderman Aldrich asked about the cause of development slowdown. SLDC Director Otis Williams noted that high construction costs, low rents, and investor perception are major hurdles, not the scorecard itself. Alderman Browning argued that the political process, not the scorecard, is the problem.
  • Alderwoman Keys stated she was “upset” that her bill was modified without her input, but supported the committee substitute.
• Vote: Moved by Alderman Aldrich, seconded by Vice Chair Sanye, to pass BB66 committee substitute with a “do pass” recommendation. Approved 5‑1‑1 (Alderman Browning voted no; one abstention).

Discussion Item – Development Update from SLDC

• Presentation: SLDC interim President Otis Williams, along with developers Steve Smith (Lawrence Group / New & Found) and Doug Rasmussen (Steadfast City), provided an overview of the current development climate. Key points:
  • Construction costs in St. Louis are similar to the region, but rents are lower, creating a financing gap that incentives must fill.
  • The city faces a shortage of experienced developers and a negative perception among out‑of‑state investors. Mr. Smith noted that equity for his major projects came from outside St. Louis because local investors are risk‑averse.
  • Mr. Rasmussen described the extreme volatility in the market (COVID, interest rate hikes, bank failures, tariffs) that has made projects harder to underwrite.
  • Both emphasized the need for predictability and partnership from the city, both at the front end (incentive approval) and back end (compliance). Mr. Williams identified prevailing wage administration and M/WBE reporting as specific implementation challenges.
• Committee Response: Members thanked the presenters. Alderman Browning highlighted the City Foundry example where a change in the TIF agreement cost the project an out‑of‑state investor. Alderwoman Schweitzer raised concerns about prevailing wage enforcement and the importance of trust. The discussion did not result in any formal action but was considered an informational update.

Key Outcomes

• Consent Calendar: Unanimously approved.
• Board Bill 161 (ARPA Reallocation): Passed out of committee with a “do pass” recommendation (7‑0). The bill will now go to the full Board of Aldermen.
• Board Bill 155 (Sports & Entertainment District): Passed out of committee with a “do pass” recommendation (7‑0). The bill will now go to the full Board.
• Board Bill 66 (Scorecard Codification): Passed out of committee with a “do pass” recommendation (5‑1‑1). The bill will go to the full Board. One member (Alderman Browning) voted no; one member abstained.
• Co‑Sponsors Added: Alderwoman Keys was added to BB161; Alderwoman Keys and Alderman Browning were added to BB155; Alderman Aldrich was added to BB66.
• Development Update: No formal action taken. The committee received information and will continue discussions on how to improve the development climate.