Jefferson County voters may get a chance to vote on a sales tax to fund park improvements in April 2020, but the chief backer of the idea doesn’t like the direction the proposed ballot measure has taken.
The Jefferson County Council voted 5-2 at its June 24 meeting to give preliminary approval to place a 3/8-cent sales tax proposal, to be called Proposition P, on the April 7, 2020, ballot.
The proposed ballot issue specifies that money generated by the new tax would be shared with cities for their parks. Each city’s share would be determined by a formula based on population.
Councilman Brian Haskins (District 1, High Ridge) has pushed for the proposal, with hopes of building a recreation center with a pool in the House Springs area.
About 90 people packed the meeting room in the Jefferson County Administration Center June 24 to show support for a vote on the sales tax. During the public comments section, 30 people spoke in favor of the proposal, and five said they were against it.
Haskins, as well as many in the crowd, were surprised when the council voted 4-3 to approve an amendment Councilwoman Renee Reuter (District 2, Imperial) proposed that would prohibit any money generated by the sales tax being used for recreation centers, pools or water parks.
A final vote, if the ordinance is not further amended, could be taken July 8. Another amendment would mean the earliest a final vote could be taken would be July 22.
“I proposed this amendment for a couple of reasons,” Reuter said. “The first reason is that I believe the things that would be removed would take a significant amount of money and there wouldn’t be anything left for regular parks.
“Secondly, there is a significant amount of property in my distict that has had multiple floodings over the last three years. This will allow us to have more money for buyouts and we could use that land for walking and biking trails and greenways.”
Councilman Charlie Groeteke (District 4, Barnhart) agreed.
“I’ve heard a lot of comments this evening about biking trails and different venues around the county that need development also,” he said. “I believe this is probably a good amendment and I believe I will support it.”
Councilwoman Tracey Perry said she didn’t appreciate not knowing anything about the amendment until Reuter read it at the meeting.
“I don’t like to have an amendment handed to me five seconds before (a vote) to review it without being able to consult with our legal counsel,” she said. “The master plan that (was approved) includes these things.”
Haskins said he didn’t understand why the council members, even if they didn’t want to build a pool immediately, would want to hamstring all future development.
“This is a permanent thing,” he said. “You’re handicapping all future parks staff and parks boards.”
Haskins also said the amendment is unnecessarily restrictive because council members would have control over what the sales tax money is used for. They also would need to approve any purchase of property for a recreation center or pool, and would have to vote on the financing for such a facility.
He said the amendment would prevent cities from using any of the money they would receive from the tax for any water-related projects.
“There are 52,000 children in Jefferson County,” he said. “They don’t vote. Why would we deny them the chance to learn to swim? This sounds like this also would prevent the county or the cities from putting in a splash pad, which is very inexpensive and doesn’t require a lifeguard. Many places have them, but we wouldn’t be able to.
“This seems to me to be an overreach by you to make it harder for the citizens to have a vote on this,” Haskins said.
He reluctantly voted yes on the amended version of the ordinance.
“On this amendment, I very strongly disagree,” he said. “But I’m voting for it because I think for 52,000 kids, this is a step in the right direction.”
Haskins, however, wasn’t finished, and later in the meeting, used his time during the “reports and comments from council members” section to further express his displeasure.
He pointed out that the areas Reuter and Councilman Phil Hendrickson (District 3, Arnold) represent are served by the Arnold Recreation Complex, which has a public pool.
“The folks who have a pool say the rest of us can never have a pool,” Haskins said. “That’s very interesting. I’m embarrassed to think there are some of us who think our children should never have a pool, a recreation center or splash pad in our county,” he said.
Haskins then took Reuter to task for proposing a last-second amendment.
“Renee, we had the first discussion on this 5 1/2 years ago, and I find it compelling that you couldn’t share this amendent until 30 seconds before we were to vote on it. I can promise you I will never, ever bring an amendment to my fellow council members without having it reviewed by our counsel.
“I’m embarrased to sit at this table at this moment to think that this was your tactic. But you were successful, so congratulations,” he said.
“Are you finished bullying me?” Reuter responded.
“Bullying? You got your vote,” Haskins replied.
Reuter was next, and other than pointing out that a pool also is in Festus (the Jefferson County Family YMCA), she did not respond to Haskins.
After the meeting, Reuter said only, “I think it was unprofessional,” when asked whether she wanted to comment about what Haskins said.
Groeteke and Dan Stallman (District 6, De Soto) cast the two votes against the amended ordinance.
“They don’t have a plan on what the tax would be spent on,” Groeteke said. “I don’t think it has much potential (to be approved by voters) without a plan. I would support having a very good proposal to put before the people.”
Stallman had a different reason for his dissenting vote.
“I voted against it because of the amendment,” he said. “I don’t think that amendment was valid.”
Haskins, Perry and Stallman voted against the amendment.