Aldermen May Have Saved Us More Than the $100,000 Grant When They Backed Away From an Ice Cream Parlor In The Red Cedar

By Pauline Masson – 

It costs money to run a soda shop and ice cream parlor. 

To try to recoup some of the cost of operating the city museum and visitor center officials proposed renovating the old Red Cedar Inn Bar on the east end of the building to offer for sale to visitors hand dipped ice cream, soda and espresso coffee.

From the outset, some officials and some citizens questioned the economic viability of the museum eatery – especially in a building that is closed on holidays when families might out looking for a treat. Backing away from the project may have done citizens more good than harm.

This part news report/part opinion piece was triggered by citizens lambasting the aldermen for sending back a $100,000 grant that was to be used to renovate the bar and build a modern ice cream shop. It should be said, right up front, that he city did not actually receive any money and it send back. 

The city applied for a grant to renovate the old bar in the Red Cedar Inn and build a modern soda shop and ice cream parlor.

The thinking was that the sale of ice cream would both be inviting to visitors and would generate some revenue to help offset the cost to operate the museum and visitor center.

A plan for the project and grant detailed the work to be done and the operation of the proposed ice cream shop.

Labor workers would tear out and. remove the built-in cabinetry, shelving, existing wood bar top, and ceiling tile in the bar. They would patch the drywall, patch and paint historic log wall, install metal stud framing at the underside of the bar, add new ceiling, tile, new countertops at the log wall, new flooring, three compartment sinks, handwashing, and electrical power outlets at the bar area.

The city would also have to purchase commercial ice cream shop equipment, including an array of refrigerators, freezers, blenders, tables and chairs, barstool, ice cream bar, food holders, microwave, ice cream cone dispenser, coffee-tea maker and dispenser.

“The shop will start with offering six different flavors, including chocolate, vanilla, strawberry, two to four additional flavors,” the plan said. ”The ice cream may have an option of adding toppings such as hot fudge, caramel chocolate sauce, whip cream, and or sprinkles.

One part time employee would be hired to serve the hand scooped ice cream, soda and espresso. Ice cream would be served in a cone or a cup. The employee, hopefully aided by two volunteers, would be trained to observe St. Louis County Health Department food service regulations, and “ensure that our visitors get the special one on one feeling that they might experience at a high-end ice cream shop.”

The St. Louis County Parks Grant Commission liked the idea and said they would fund up to $100,000 of the $110,000 project. The City would have to put up $10,000.

So .  . . what the city received was the promise of grant money to be awarded after the city spent funds to complete the project  In other words, the city had to build the ice cream parlor first. The amount of the grant was not to exceed $110,000, which included the city’s $10,000 match. The city would be reimbursed for the amount it spent on the parlor, up to $100,000

Which, as the detractors said, would have been free money. 

But  .  .  There were some specific rules that went along with the grant. If the city saved money on any of the itemized construction or equipment purchases for the project, the savings could not be applied to other parts of the project.

Any cost overruns would have to be paid for by the taxpayers. To put that in perspective, it might be good to review the change orders and cost overruns that were incurred on the multi million dollar cost to renovate the old Red Cedar building and install the museum and visitor center fixtures.

After rethinking the whole idea aldermen decided against more renovations in the old building and operating an ice cream shop. 

No money was received. No money was returned.

What has been missing from the ongoing debate for or against declining the $100,000 grant was a serious look at the complexity of one trained city staffer and two anticipated volunteers operating a food service business during the limited hours of operation of the visitor center.

It would not be open in the evening.  And all ice cream lovers know that if you drive past Hoffman’s Corner at First and St. Louis streets on any warm evening families are lined up for ice cream.

All due respect to the granting commissioners, the manpower to operate the eatery seemed woefully short. No endorsement from a local restaurant or (soft) ice cream shop owners said, “Yes. This could be done.”

So I applaud officials for passing on the ice cream shop and the grant.

After observing the July 9 Tourism Commission Meeting, I think I should add that there are things the citizens can do to help the visitor center –  and the city – according to Kelly O’Malley, City Tourism Director. The visitor center is soliciting ideas from the public on how to prepare Pacific as a ‘Must Stop’ during the 1926 Route 66 Centennial celebration.

Speaking at the July 9 Tourism Commission meeting, Ms O’Malley said a small group has been meeting for the past several weeks to discuss ideas for a city-wide centennial marketing plan.

She said she would like to see many, many volunteers, citizens, businesses and civic groups share their ideas of how to promote aspects of the city that might entice Centennial motorists to stop in Pacific for a few hours to eat, shop and visit local landmarks – or stay overnight.

Anyone who doesn’t want to join a committee, but has an idea, is urged to come by the visitor center and discuss it with Ms. O’Malley, or email her at [email protected]. She promises that every idea will presented to the committee and discussed.

.