Photography courtesy of HOK
The backers of a proposed new NFL stadium for St. Louis won a big court battle Monday, defeating the backers of a proposed new NFL stadium for St. Louis.
In what was essentially a judicial intra-squad game, the Regional Convention and Sports Complex Authority (RSA) and the city of St. Louis feigned a legal battle over the RSA’s power to fund a new NFL stadium in St. Louis. Given that Mayor Francis Slay’s top priority is for the RSA to build said stadium, suffice it to say that the city’s legal effort to oppose it wasn’t likely to be the most vicious litigation on record.
Actually, it gave new meaning to staging a “friendly” in football.
At “issue” were two questions: 1) whether a city ordinance requiring a public vote on stadium financing would apply to stadium financing in St. Louis; and 2) whether the RSA should be limited in scope to funding the stadium for which it was created (the Edward Jones Dome).
Judge Tom Frawley gave the two “combatants” their shared victory when he ruled that the RSA is within its rights to use its dome bonding authority to finance an entirely new stadium project, on its own volition. And he decreed that the city ordinance didn’t apply to the RSA’s fiefdom.
The most important hurdle that stadium backers have to clear was a reference in the legislation authorizing the RSA that its work be limited to facilities "adjacent" to the convention center. Frawley ruled that the word "adjacent" legally can mean many different things and, in effect, the RSA was free to extend the bonds on the last stadium to the next one.
Far be it from me to question Frawley's legal analysis on the technicalities. But as one who was around for the last debate (and who was supportive of funding the dome), let's be clear about this: The RSA was established for one project and one project alone. The notion that former Gov. John Ashcroft and the legislature intended to create a perpetual stadium-funding machine is ludicrous. Great moment in jurisprudence: The RSA won on a technicality.
What a glorious triumph for the RSA’s legal team, which had to overcome the fierce opposition of City Counselor Winston Calvert (who admittedly might have lost his job if he’d won this case). Is it really a surprise that the judge issued the one ruling that both parties to the lawsuit desperately wanted?
Rather than have the decency to slink away quietly from a charade so obvious that it would make pro-wrestling promoters blush, Slay’s administration doubled down with one of the most hilarious press releases in history:
“Today’s ruling is very disappointing. We put our best and strongest arguments forward,” said Mary Ellen Ponder, Slay’s chief of staff. “Although the court will not allow us to hold a public vote, the city will honor the spirit of the ordinance to the extent it can. There will be public meetings and other opportunities for public participation regarding financial assistance for a new stadium. We will also ask the Board of the Aldermen to consider a new ordinance that requires a public vote for future projects and can survive a judicial challenge.
“The city is on a tight timeline to remain an NFL city. The statutory deadline to put the issue before voters this November is August 26, 2015. The NFL has indicated that it will make a decision by the end of the year.”
Let’s dissect this majestic piece of work:
- “Today’s ruling is very disappointing.” Really? The mayor is “disappointed” that his No. 1 economic priority is a step closer to realization? Was he similarly “disappointed” when he was re-elected?
- “We put our best and strongest arguments forward.” Methinks thou doth protest too much. Isn’t it sort of a given that parties put their best arguments forward in court? Who says that after losing a lawsuit? Only someone who was reluctantly fulfilling a statutory duty to represent a position with which they disagreed.
- “The court will not allow us to hold a public vote?” What? Did Judge Frawley outlaw democracy in St. Louis? He said your ordinance doesn’t govern the RSA’s activities. He didn’t say anything about not “allowing” a vote.
- There will be “opportunities for public participation regarding financial assistance for a new stadium.” As long as the “participation” occurs long after the fact of Slay’s done-deal commitment to the stadium project.
- “We will ask the Board of Aldermen to consider a new ordinance that requires a public vote for future projects and can survive a judicial challenge.” Now, that’s chutzpah. After helping disembowel the current public-vote ordinance, you want to make sure that future generations don’t have a similar fate befall their ordinances? Why, you might even oppose funding the new football stadium slated for the year 2035 as a replacement for the one you just helped railroad through.
- "The city is on a tight timeline to remain an NFL city.” And, oh darn, we’re out of time to stop it. Oops, you just stepped out of character. This was supposed to be a press release in which you were lamenting that the stadium was getting built despite what you claimed in court was an illegal overreach by the RSA and a violation of your citizens’ ordinance demanding a public vote. The stuff about staying an NFL city was for another press release.
Memo to Mayor Slay: Look, everyone gets it. You’ve got a city overrun with financial woes and image problems, and it’s not every day that someone presents a project that claims to be bringing something like $900 million in outside investment to a blighted area of the city. And organized labor, your largest source of political support, is over the moon in anticipation of the thousands of jobs it will create. Of course you’re for this stadium. Of course you want St. Louis to fight to keep the NFL in town. Even those of us who are skeptical of this project understand that. But do yourself and all of us a favor: Don’t pretend you fought in court to keep your top priority from happening, and now that you “lost,” you’re “disappointed” it might become reality. Don’t pretend you weren’t part of writing this entire script.
You’ve got to be better than that.
SLM co-owner Ray Hartmann is a panelist on KETC Channel 9’s Donnybrook, which airs Thursdays at 7 p.m.
