A crowd of more than 100 people showed up for the Thursday, July 23, Wright City Board of Aldermen meeting, with many voicing their opposition to a planned asphalt plant during a lengthy public comment period.
“I just want to help you understand that because this item is now under litigation, the board will not be responding to comments,” Mayor Michelle Heiliger told the standing-room-only audience at the start of the meeting.
Despite this disclaimer, numerous members of the public made their views known, the vast majority in opposition to the planned asphalt plant. The first to speak, however, was attorney Matthew Warren with the law firm Husch Blackwell appearing on behalf of Magruder Asphalt, the company developing the plant.
Warren noted that the Wright City Planning & Zoning Commission approved Magruder’s site plan on Aug. 18, 2025. “This was after being in conversations with Magruder Asphalt since the year 2024,” he said.
“That vote was a unanimous 7-0 vote, and now 11 months later, after this board itself voted 3-1 just a few weeks ago to approve the site plan, the board is being asked to question and reverse that decision.”
Magruder has already met four of five conditions the city required for its approved site plan, Warren said.
“The one remaining condition is a consolidation plat that requires subsequent Planning & Zoning approval,” he said, adding that Magruder has submitted the plat. The Planning & Zoning Commission is scheduled to review it Aug. 17, he said. If approved, it will then come back to the Board of Aldermen for a final vote.
Warren said Magruder has relied on previous city approvals in proceeding with plans for its asphalt plant.
“To rescind the site plan approval now, without any changed circumstances, and without any legitimate ground, whether that is in fact or in law, would be an arbitrary and capricious action on behalf of the city,” he said.
Although Warren said that “all comments for and against the site plan have been considered and the votes have been cast,” following his remarks, the Board of Aldermen heard more than an hour and a half of additional public comments, almost entirely opposed to the asphalt plant.
Luis Quintero said he is not a current resident but is under contract to have a house built in Wright City.
“I do agree with and support the growth of the city, and I know it’s inevitable, but this was a mistake,” he said of the asphalt plant.
Several residents expressed safety concerns about the plant.
“However safe they say this is going to be, or however safe they say what it produces will be, it can never, ever be safe enough for our citizens,” said Michele Cash.
“We don’t know any of your suppliers that you’re asking us to trust to tell us that an asphalt plant is safe,” said Rita Key, addressing the Magruder attorney. “Just by your word, I don’t feel that’s sufficient.”
Cathy Uhl said that, based on a “five-minute Google search,” it seemed the asphalt plant should not be allowed in an M-1 light industrial zone.
“An asphalt plant is classified as heavy industrial because of their continuous heavy truck traffic, loud machinery, large operational footprints and specific air quality regulations,” she said. “These facilities are restricted to heavy industrial zoning districts rather than light.”
Jackie Ramey, a leader of the effort to get the city to reconsider its approval of the plant, spoke during the meeting by phone and also questioned the zoning.
“Magruder stated that the city determined this asphalt operation is permitted by right in M-1, but upon asking for records and determination of that, the city has not been able to produce a record showing that determination and how it was made,” she said.
In making his argument that the zoning was appropriate, Warren, the Magruder attorney, said that asphalt “is a product that is composed of different semi-finished materials,” but Ramey also questioned this claim.
“Magruder has suggested that because materials come from another location, that they come here and then they’re mixed, that they’re not raw materials,” she said. “Respectfully, the fact that the materials come from somewhere else doesn’t automatically make them semi-finished for M-1 zoning purposes.”
Other public comments touched on topics ranging from environmental concerns to property values. Joyce Wheeler said asphalt plants can be built to burn natural gas instead of oil. Ryan Petras, who another speaker credited with leading the campaign against the asphalt plant, said he was unaware that the matter was under litigation.
“I’m just surprised about the amount of people speaking up that had no idea about what was going on,” said resident Alex Osborne, “and I was just kind of thinking if you guys mailed out something to each residence and asked for feedback, that might be a good idea.”
At the end of the regular meeting Thursday, the board voted unanimously to hold a closed session “for the purpose of dealing with matters relating to Subsection 1: legal actions, causes of action, litigation or privileged communications between the city’s representatives and its attorneys; Subsection 12: hiring, firing, disciplining or promoting employees; and Subsection 13: individually identifiable personnel records, performance ratings, or records pertaining to employees or applicants for employment.”
