Chesterfield approves $17.3 million purchase of commercial building | Chesterfield

A high-profile proposal to purchase the Mass Mutual office building on Main Circle Drive for $17.3 million was approved by the Chesterfield City Council on Aug. 18. 

Following a 6-2 vote on the first reading of the bill on Aug. 4, the council repeated that vote to purchase property at 16150, 16290 and 16301 Main Circle Drive.

While the majority of the speakers on Aug. 4 were opposed to the purchase, on Aug. 18 proponents packed the house with supporters, changing the balance of opinions to be more evenly divided.

Former Mayor Bob Nation said the uses and justifications for acquiring the building have been “exaggerated, if not fabricated,” including the claim that an additional 422 parking spots would be gained from acquiring the parking structure on the site.

“The city has always had the surface spaces all around the building,” Nation said. 

He pointed to the various assessments made on the property over the last six years, including a recent appeal from the property owner granted by St. Louis County at just $12 million.

“So, I ask, why would the city of Chesterfield pay $17.3 million?” Nation said. 

However, former Mayor Fred Steinbac, believes the building purchase makes sense. He said the appeal is not the true value of the building and that the owners could get the asking price on the marketplace.

“I sincerely believe, as a former mayor, that it’s in our best interest to buy this building,” he said.

Resident Ben Murphy said he felt Chesterfield is deviating from its normal due diligence.

“Chesterfield has never been a city that does things halfway,” he said. “This proposal runs against that tradition, to spend $17 million-plus to solve a temporary parking issue or retrofit a secondhand office building into a community center or a police substation or whatever … it compromises the standard Chesterfield has always held itself to.”

Linda Green-Metzler said she was fine with the purchase, calling it a “sound proposal.”

Even though the fully leased building will provide financial profit for the city right away, she believes that many of the benefits will be realized in the future.

Likewise, Kim Hotze said this is “prime real estate” and with the location of the property, it won’t likely go down in value.

“I don’t think you get a second chance in purchasing something like that,” she said.

Prior to the vote, an amendment was sought by Council member Barb McGuinness (Ward 1) to put the issue regarding the purchase on the ballot, so residents could vote on the matter.

City Attorney Chris Graville said the city can’t put an advisory issue on the ballot with a simple “yes or no” vote as it is non-binding for the council. Instead, it would have to be a funding or bond issue referencing what it would be used for.

The motion failed, with McGuinness and council member Pat Tocco (Ward 2) voting in favor.

Tocco said there was no justification for buying the property. With the wide range of appraisals, the $17.3 million purchase price is too high, she believes.

In regard to the real estate tax property tax, while state statute provides for exemptions, it should not be for private investment or profit, Tocco said.

“Only that portion that’s used for public purposes would be exempt from property tax,” she said. “So, the city is obligated to pay real estate taxes based on a percent of the non-public use of the building.”

Tocco also announced she has submitted a complaint on violations of the Sunshine Law allegedly committed by city officials, but did not mention any specifics. 

She then made a motion to postpone the proposed transaction indefinitely due to the cost, not allowing citizens to vote, pending Sunshine Law complaint investigations and unanswered questions. Tocco’s motion failed by a vote of 2-6.

In an Aug. 15 press release, State Rep. Ben Keathley (R-District 101), a former Ward 2 council member, said he stands with Tocco in opposing the proposed purchase of the commercial office building. Keathley criticized the city’s year-long closed-door negotiations, questioning whether the process complies with Missouri’s open government laws.

In support of the action to purchase the building, council member Lane Koch (Ward 3) said her priorities are safety and increased funding for the police. She pointed out that even at a 50% lease rate, the building would still be profitable.

Council member Merrell Hansen (Ward 4) added that the city is in a great position right now, but it also has some challenges.

“I think we have an obligation to look at the assets and the pieces of our town that draw youth in because we need more youth coming to our place,” she said. 

She added that the vote will correlate to the success of Central Park.

“We need to make this place continue to be the most major crown jewel we could ever imagine,” she said.

The final vote on the bill was 6-2 in favor, with Tocco and McGuinness voting against.