Construction of the New Busch Stadium as of February, 2005. (Chris Lee/P-D)

Barring a successful appeal, the last potential obstacle in the construction of the new stadium downtown for the Cardinals - a suit seeking a public vote in St. Louis County on appropriations to pay bonds - has ended with a judge's ruling.

And St. Louis County's bond rating, facing potential downgrading if the county reneged on the appropriations payment, is likely to remain at AAA, keeping the county one of 30 or 40 jurisdictions in the nation with the top grade.

Judge Barbara Wallace ruled Thursday that Proposition A, a charter amendment approved in November by voters, cannot be applied retroactively to the baseball stadium for the Cardinals and only applies if public funds are sought for a future sports facility for professional teams.


Stadium opponents wanted Wallace to put a measure on the ballot April 5 that would allow county voters to decide if the county should appropriate annual payments on the $45,760,000 of bonds the county has issued for the stadium.

Backers of the downtown retro ballfield going up in the shadows of Busch Stadium wanted Wallace to declare Proposition A null and void. They filed suit in November just 15 days after 70 percent of the voters approved the charter change.

As an alternative, attorneys Edwin L. Noel and Alan Popkin asked Wallace to rule that it was too late to apply Proposition A to the stadium under construction. That was the approach Wallace took Thursday.

"Without deciding the issue whether Proposition A is constitutional, the court finds that Proposition A operates prospectively only, if at all, and therefore does not impact" the bond sales and various agreements between government agencies, the Cardinals and the county, she said.

The Coalition Against Public Funding for Stadiums opposes philosophically the concept of taxpayers supporting public stadiums that benefit private sports team owners.

Of the estimated costs of the $398 million stadium, the agreements call for the Cardinal owners to pay $310 million; the city to provide tax breaks; the state to kick in $42 million in highway improvements; and the county to loan $45.7 million via the bond sale. The county would get its money back in 2046.

To pay the $45.7 million, the County Council is appropriating $2.7 million each year from an existing hotel and motel tax of 3.5 percent on room rentals. The Coalition Against Public Funding wanted voters to decide if that $2.7 million should be spent.

Wallace dismissed that portion of the suit. She noted that the bonds were sold in December 2003; the money from them has already been paid; and the funds have at least been partially spent. The only entities affected by a negative vote would be the people who bought the bonds and the county who guaranteed to pay them off.

St. Louis County Executive Charles Dooley said Thursday that the decision is consistent "with what we've been saying all along.

"We have always believed this was legal."

The county need take no further action this year, Dooley added, because the money is already in the budget and would not require another vote for approval.

The Coalition Against Public Funding's Fred Lindecke referred questions about an appeal to the coalition's attorneys. One of them, Christine Hart, said Thursday that she was disappointed in the judge's order but felt the coalition had legal grounds for an appeal that could result in a different ruling at the next judicial level.

Besides the issue of retroactivity, Wallace said also that Proposition A conflicted with that portion of the state constitution that bars the passage of laws impairing the obligation of contracts. The county entered into a series of contracts involving the stadium 10 months before Proposition A passed.

At a hearing last month, James Baker, the county's chief of staff, and Laura Radcliff, a public finance investment banker, testified that the county has never reneged on a bond contract and enjoys an AAA rating. That rating would plunge if there were a default on the stadium bond payments, they said.

The judge said in her order that their testimony was uncontradicted and credible.

Clay Barbour of the Post-Dispatch contributed to this report.

Reporter William C. Lhotka
E-mail: blhotka@post-dispatch.com
Phone: 314-615-3283