When I think of Ballwin...

Recently I was catching up with some fellow business people from the area at the Chesterfield Starbuck's at the corner of Clayton Road and Baxter Road, and ran in to Diane Robinson, wife of Ballwin Alderman Jim Robinson. We have known each other through the old Hill Trail Swim Club that closed a few years back--likely in part and in the wake of the county park tax payer financed Ballwin Swim Complex. Diane mentioned that Jim was running for alderman again, a post he has held for quite a few years now, and not always without controversy. I said that I had read about the challenges facing Ballwin lately and that, while I am no longer a resident, my business is located there, at the Barn at Lucerne, and incidentally, he should read my piece on Lewis Greenberg, one of Ballwin's larger than life characters. As an Alderman, I am sure Jim is familiar with Lewis.


I don't find it all that interesting reading the minutes of Board of Alderman meetings, but there is a certain cynical helplessness that seems to resonate from Ballwin's archive. The history and actions of the board are starting to create an image that is not so flattering and I suppose I find it necessary to comment. Be it known that I do own a business in Ballwin, along side a handful of other independent businesses owners carving out a living, doing what we do, including the community in who we are and where we work. We visit with each other from time to time, eat lunch together, discuss issues that effect our condition. We most always come to the topic of Ballwin City Government, and the challenges that the (lack of) tax revenue presents to its residents. By the way, Ballwin relies on taxes for up to 50% of their revenue. Not necessarily a standard to be considered balanced.

All signs point to the fact that the city is on a managed decline, a leaky retail commerce base packing up and heading to the valley, and soon to be Town and Country, for years now. The Manchester corridor is visibly taking on the early stages of a blighted economy, record amounts of retail space are just sitting, waiting for leasing (or-redevelopment). This while the Ballwin Board of Alderman find it important to spend meetings limiting the terms of future Mayors, drawing more negative attention to an already sceptical community, conducting business in private quarters to discuss "pending litigation" and putting limitations on potential businesses (smoking restrictions) seeking to locate their businesses there.

The common theme with the Ballwin Board of Aldermen is that they don't seem cohesive enough to develop or know how to present a "real plan", if they truly have one at all. What would a fly hear on the wall of one of the "closed door meetings"? Would it hear the desperation, the varying degrees of confidence, posturing, personal agenda activists shooting from the hip? What is the deal here fellas? What is the agenda and why can't it be intellectualized in an open forum? Is it a reality that we are depleting our resources to the point where hopefully enough businesses bail out, then you can get some help from a utility tax, then you will convince residents that property tax increases are simply necessary for the basic fulfillment of services. Then when the corridor is depleted enough, use eminent domain, most likely a component of the Manchester Corridor overlay, to force out the rest of the independent business owners and allow for the re-development of the 4-5 retail tax generators: Ballwin Plaza, etc? Is that what the deal is?

One has to wonder. What is to come of this city if left up to the current situation? And with what plan will they garner support in order to turn it around? Have they honestly consulted the opinions of the business leaders, the residents, those left to pay the increased property taxes and suffer the limited services that will undoubtedly become the standard? Taxes are on the rise. The utility tax, to be used as a last resort, without voter approval, will be a certainty but only as a last resort (as mentioned by Robinson , if the voters don't approve other tax increases). There are likely a handful of board appointed tax increases that will take place should the community decide against a property tax increase.

The big question, as retail tax revenues began the decline, was there an adequate consideration by the board to head off leakage of our businesses? Why were laws passed to limit the types of businesses that might consider coming to Ballwin? It seems a little random enforcing limitations on business development when the tax base is on the wrong side of the eight ball. Again, the smoking issue.

I visited the Ballwin City Government Website to take a peak around. There it is on the same page as the candidate filings for Alderman: LIMITED! Right on the front page, bold font, NO SMOKING RESTRICTIONS INFORMATION from 04, scroll a little lower and get the entire bill.


Now, do we really need that on the city portal? Is it really necessary to shove this in the face of every query? Do you have to send a message to those interested in doing business, renting retail space, setting up shop, that we are a high maintenance community of bureaucrats? What is next? Again, a real public relations issue here.

Personal agenda, poor public relations and the inability to externalize a plan is the issue. Combine this with the lack initiative to battle retail leakage has been quite a recipe for disaster for the Board of Alderman of Ballwin. And now they are in the midst of figuring out how to delicately present the property tax as a needed resource for continued services . Of course, there really were only a handful of businesses affected by the smoking ban, and we know that those were restaurants and/or bars, some consider these businesses less than necessary. But many of them were independent business owners, who are no longer in business. They will argue that this was not the case--that the ban did not effect the businesses--that it really did nothing statistically to the tax revenue base. We know it is simply not true.

The good ole boys on the board should come clean on the real agenda if there is one. Finding ways to re-develop parcels of land to attract "real" cash producing revenues. This is tricky stuff. Politics won't play much of a role here. What ever happened to the re-development overlay from the mall consultant? When is the next meeting? Smells of eminent domain and maybe it is necessary. And if it is, the Ballwin city residents and business owners should be allowed to openly intellectualize the concept instead of the concept incubated by the board hiding behind closed doors?

Come clean Jim Robinson, others on the Ballwin City Board, those challenging the incumbents. What is your agenda as you run for re-election? Business as usual just isn't good enough.