Development Agreement Moving Ahead.

The development agreement proposed by 71A Partnership that would use sales tax revenue to pay for infrastructure improvements is being fine tuned before returning to the Budget/Ways and Means Committee.

The agreement would allow 71A Partnership to recoup costs for infrastructure which would include building a road from HH near Hazel Street to Elm Street which intersects with 571 near Bob’s Shoe Warehouse.

The City would pledge 50% of all sales taxes generated by the development above what is currently generated. The proposal would not include sales tax of any business that relocated to the development from within the City limits.

According to City Administrator Tom Short, the City could see accelerated commercial development with little risk.

The estimated cost of the infrastructure improvements, which also include water, wastewater collection, storm water detention and stop lights at HH and 571, is $706,250. There is still some discussion as to the length of time the agreement would be in place, but fifteen years looks to be a comfortable time for most Committee members.

If the agreement is approved, 71A Partnership would agree to submit plans for the improvements within 90 days of the approval and begin construction within 90 days of the plans being approved. Improvements would be completed within 180 days after construction begins. Application for annexation for any of the development property not currently within City limits would be submitted.

After construction, which would be verified as meeting all City requirements, 71A Partnership would "convey without compensation right-of-way interest in real property in which Developer has an interest as may be reasonably necessary to complete the Improvements."

Initial plans presented to the Committee anticipated the construction of a shopping center, five restaurants, three motels and other retail. The plan projected a total increase in City sales tax for the development to be $90,750 in 1999 and a total of $257,152 by the year 2009. Half of those amounts would be used to pay for the infrastructure costs. It was also estimated that City property tax, net City utility profits, and franchise and business licenses fees could net the City another $22,000 per year .

Commentary

by Bubs Hohulin

State Representative District 126

Suppose you decided to go into the moving business. You decided you were just going to move stuff between Kansas City and St. Louis with a few stops in between. To attract customers, you lowered the prices you charged to less than anyone else. In fact, you charged less than it took to even operate your business, let alone make a profit, yet you were registered as a for-profit company. Pretty soon you start to notice that you are not making any money, in fact, you are losing money. What should you do. You suddenly have a brilliant idea. You will go to the Missouri Legislature and tell them that unless they give you enough money to make up the difference you are going to quit doing business in Missouri. While you are at it you tell them that even though you are losing money every day, you are going to paint all your trucks and redo all the interiors. Oh yeah, you also expect the amount of money they give you to go up each year. What do you think would happen? Would there be even the slightest glimmer of hope you would get the money? If your business was called Amtrak and you were in the business of moving people, the answer would be yes.

We have been meeting in Budget Committee about five hours a day this week. I never cease to be amazed at some of the things we spend money on, including the above mentioned item. Last year you shelled out $3.6 million so Amtrak would run in Missouri. This year they want $4.9 million and next year, $6.2 million. I really wasn't that familiar with Amtrak, so I asked the lady that came in from Chicago to make the presentation a few questions. One of the things I wanted to know was, who owns Amtrak? Turns out you do. Even though it is incorporated as a for-profit company, all of the stock is held by the Federal Department of Transportation, making the taxpayers the owners! Think about that for a moment and it really lends credence to the argument that we ought to not let government tell businesses how they have to operate. It also demonstrates the mentality that permeates all levels of government, that if something isn't working, all we have to throw more money at it and all will be well in the universe again.

Some will argue that it is public transportation and we should just look at it as a necessary service to our citizens. The lady from Chicago repeatedly pointed out what a great and necessary service it is. That is fine, but if that is the case let's be up-front about it. Let's call it what it is and not hide behind the farce of calling it a for-profit business. What we have now is a business in name only, operated by bureaucrats, managed by bureaucrats, PAID for by the taxpayers, and SUBSIDIZED again by the taxpayers!

I suggest they may want to get their financial house more in order before embarking on a grand refurbishing plan for their cars. She reasoned that they needed to do that in order to maintain their high level of service to attract and keep their customers riding their trains. I guess it is the old argument of "Yeah, I knew I was selling at a loss, but I figured volume would take care of me!" My last question was, how did the lady get to Jefferson City? Turns out she flew.

As usual, I can be reached at House Post Office, State Capitol, Jefferson City, MO 65101 or 1-800-878-7126, or mhohulin@services.state.mo.us for your questions, comments, and advice.

I was always taught to not make judgements based on what other might think. Just look at the situation and do what ya felt was right.

That kind of thinkin’ works pretty well for those ever’day type decisions, let’s ya be an independent thinker of sorts. Let’s say ya question conventional wisdom so to speak.

But at a deeper level, there has ta be a sense of what depth of independence is acceptable to the community.

I have often wondered , as I passed through other communities, why people live there. Not that I think they shouldn’t, there must be some good reasons.

I’ve come to the conclusion that folks live in a community ‘cause there are common base values. In other words, ever’one thinks along a similar line. Ya don’t have ta worry what a neighbor thinks, ‘cause ya already know. People live in communities so they can share basic values. "Course they still like ta gossip ‘bout those who don’t.

This is some fact, but mostly, Just Jake Talkin’.

by

McCune Brooks Hospital

Health Notes.

RECANTING ON FATS? According to research done at Purdue University, cheeseburgers contain a polyunsaturated fatty acid called conjugated dienoic lioleic acid (CLA) which can inhibit skin and stomach cancer in mice; and can inhibit mammary cancer in rats. But pan fried ruminant meat (as in hamburger) and cheese contain the highest amounts of CLA.

This is just one area in which a great deal of research has to be done before we can let people loose to feast on cheeseburgers, believing they’re helping to keep the risk of skin, breast, and stomach cancers down. The fact is, if CLA is an effective cancer-fighting compound, it should be included in a diet that doesn’t also include saturated fatty acids. Also, CLA reportedly acts as an antioxidant, which stops free radicals before they can damage cells and cause many types of cancer. Free radicals are produced in large numbers via diets that contain saturated fats. Another thing to keep in mind is the evidence pointing to dietary changes as significant in the development of breast cancer. For example, it was found that women in Japan living on a typical Japanese diet of fish, rice, and vegetables, were less likely to develop breast cancer than Japanese women who moved to Hawaii, where they began to include more saturated fats in their diets.

ARCHIVES Index