SEDD's TIF Denied S

Tensions and emotions were high at the Tuesday, October 11, 2022 meeting for Monroe city council, as a resolution asking Mayor Ellis to reconsider SEDD’s response to the mayor’s Tax Increase Funding (TIF) offer was denied. It was an unexpected reaction for SEDD members and many in the community who came to voice their concerns. But even before any items on the agenda were brought for discussion, Council chairwoman Kema Dawson(District 5) made it abundantly clear that she "did not block” TIF from the agenda as had been rumored. Dawson continued by saying that Mayor Ellis made the proposal to SEDD, not the council and that the council does not work out those agreements, but it must be done by the mayor and his administration. Dawson also offered that because there was no agreement, there was nothing to put on the agenda and that it had to be approved before she would put it on the agenda. Then what may have been perceived as sarcasm to many in attendance, Dawson said that she hoped no one believed the little people accusing her of trying to kill the dream because she always supports her district. When the TIF item did come before council members, Dawson said that the council had been asked to remove the item due to the agreement expiring; the issue was moved by District 1 councilman Doug Harvey. When asked for a second by Dawson and District 4 councilman Carday Marshall said he would second the motion but wanted everyone in attendance to know that a meeting had been scheduled with Mayor Ellis for the following week. District 3 councilwoman Juanita Woods(who sponsored the resolution to be on the agenda) wanted to be clear that the TIF item, indeed, had been taken off of the agenda, saying that she didn’t realize the council had an expiration date. Dawson stated it shared that Mayor Ellis sent out a letter, but SEDD did not accept a TIF agreement. A city attorney noted that the mayor sent out a letter saying that the agreement had a deadline of 5:00 PM, Monday, October 10, 2022 to which SEDD did not respond.

There appeared to be some confusion if a meeting had really been set, as expressed by Marshall, with Ellis saying that his administration was in the process of setting up a meeting, met by audible groans from the audience. Woods asked Marshall if he was going to second the motion, and he said that he wanted to give those in the audience an opportunity to speak before a vote, which was met by applause from supporters of SEDD. When pressed if Marshall would second, enunciating that it was to remove the item, further confusion seeped in, and Dawson seconded the motion. Comments were deemed to relate to the removal, as speakers were only allowed to comment on the removal of the item. SEDD board member Marty Campbell reminded those in the audience that Ellis said that the only way he would give SEDD a TIF was if SEDD gave up its taxing ability that was given to them by a legislative act. Campbell also said that despite several meetings, Ellis had not kept his word concerning the TIF. State Senator Katrina Jackson said SEDD, to her knowledge, asked for an extension in a timely manner. As a representative of Districts 3,4, and 5, Jackson asked the council to take it upon themselves to place on the agenda a resolution to remove the language that prohibits and disenfranchises the voters of Districts 3, 4, and 5 on voting to help themselves. When asked if a meeting would be held with SEDD, Ellis responded saying that when he met with SEDD for the first time, it was in the middle of a pandemic, and the organization was trying to raise a half-cent sales tax in south Monroe. He said the group had no projects on the table but was asking for funding. Ellis said that his “biggest concern” was that in a year, we would be here with gas prices through the roof and didn't want an extra burden for the people. He continued offering that the tax was already being collected in south Monroe and that SEDD has had the ability to tax for 20 years. Ellis asked to name one individual who has benefitted from over $750,000 that SEDD has received in funding. There was silence, to which the mayor said, "exactly,” receiving groans of disapproval from many in the audience. When the resolution came up for a vote, it passed 3-1, with Harvey voting no. District 2 councilwoman Gretchen Ezernack was absent.

In other business, southside residents asked council members to reject an application by Family Dollar on Winnsboro Rd. for a new 2022 Class D Alcoholic Permit. Supporters against the permit said there are enough alcoholic beverage stores in a confined area. They continued with their argument, offering that it is heavily traveled by pedestrians and that there should be a moratorium on the number of businesses that sell alcohol. It could be a deterrent to businesses that want to locate on the southside if one sees many businesses selling alcohol. The city attorney said that standards for operating businesses like those such as not being around schools, churches, etc. As long as businesses met the city criteria, as Family Dollar appears to meet that criteria, however, they can sell wine and beer, not hard liquor. When asked for legal ramifications from Family Dollar, the city runs the risk of being “arbitrary and capricious” against the business. Then there was the question of where the stores are located, typically not in the affluent areas. There was talk of strengthening moratoriums in the city. The vote was 4-0 to deny Family Dollar’s application. When did tax money have an expiration date? It's time to step up for your voters in city council Districts 3, 4, and 5. Anytime the state's big politicians are in attendance at a city council meeting, it's serious. Does anyone see the carnage in city council districts 3, 4, and 5 besides the residents? Where is the crime plan or do residents in Districts 3,4, and 5 count?