Nice Work If You Can Get It
Last week gossip columnist Deb Peterson reported:
DOWNTOWN COMMITMENT: Downtown Now topper Tom Reeves and his bride of nearly a year, Kathy Brown Reeves, former head of St. Louis’ Community Development Agency, have recently bought a new house on the manicured grounds of the Bellerive Country Club in tony Town & Country. Reported purchase price: $1.23 million.
Wow, cha-ching.
It is my understanding Reeves did quite well in the banking business before taking the head job at Downtown Now! on a pro bono basis. His defenders also say they have a downtown loft in addition to the new suburban Town & Country place.
Somehow I’m supposed to feel better about this because he has a second place downtown and works for free. Hmmm, not working.
This affirms my opinion of organizations like Downtown Now! and the Downtown St. Louis Partnership. Namely, they are tools of the rich. “Look at us, we are helping the city.”
A quick glance of the boards of both organizations and you’ll see it is elected officials and the people that paid to get the officials elected. The two organizations stay busy giving each other awards.
I can imagine it is hard for the board to complain about the fact the organization’s website still has a “what’s happening in 2004” logo on their main page when the executive director works for free. What are they going to do, fire him?
But pro bono doesn’t mean the job doesn’t have any perks.
As an example, Apple Computer’s Chairman and CEO Steve Jobs takes a salary of only $1 per year. Yet a few years ago he got a new gulfstream jet valued at something like $80 million. He has also received massive amounts of stock. The point? Steve Jobs is considered one of the highest paid executives in silicon valley despite his $1 annual compensation.
I have no idea what kind of perks Mr. Reeves may or may not be getting either directly or indirectly. I just know that in the real world of politics and big business they have ways of making things look noble on the surface and well compensated otherwise.
What is painfully clear is that someone that can afford to work for free, have a downtown loft and a million dollar McMansion in the ‘burbs probably can’t relate to the the needs of downtown residents and start-up business owners. Reeves certainly can’t manage to keep a website updated…
Read my prior post on Downtown Now! here.
[UPDATE 2/7/06 @ 10:30am. On the next post I report that Tom Reeves is not working pro-bono at Downtown Now. His base salary is $187K. – SLP]
– Steve
This is absolutely disgusting. Our many counties and the highways that take you there are, in my opinion, one of the most destructive forces in the CITY of St. Louis. It’s not the “crime” or the “blacks” or the “violence” or whatever pathetic push-off excuse you can come up with, it’s people who refuse to stand up for their city and choose instead to run and hide. If people actually gave a damn about the city they would’ve stood up to the issues and not ran to hide under the bed cover of St. Louis county. There is no excuse here, anyone who feels passionately about the city and is worth our while in a place of leadership would not have a house in Town & Country on principle alone. End of story.
I’m a believer in the “big tent” theory . . . while you might not agree with Downtown Now’s methods, at least they’re trying to do something. What’s the alternative – do nothing?
Much like this blog, there’s room for more than one opinion. Honest and prinicipled discussion generates a better end product. Apathy is worse than bad ideas. If nobody cares, nothing gets done. Generating interest and building consensus is the first step in getting any project done.
And so what if a rich guy wants to have a second home outside the city? At least he’s willing to try and make the city a better place. He could just be playing golf in Scottsdale or boating in Ft. Lauderdale. It takes money to get things done, and getting suburban (and urban) rich folks interested in investing in St. Louis’ redevelopment is not a bad thing.
As you’ve pointed out previously, a bigger challenge is getting past some of the entrenched local ward politics. Because of (or in spite of) a lot of peoples’ efforts, downtown St. Louis is experiencing a resurgence, especially with all the new lofts. The challenge will be channelling this momentum to other parts of the city that need it, and that includes getting the private sector (i.e. rich people) to invest in these projects!
[REPLY – The organizations in question are, in my opinion, extensions of the entrenched political system. The Downtown Partnership has been around for decades doing more harm than good. Local grassroots efforts are locked out of the system. If these groups didn’t exist it would allow residents and small business owners to actually take charge of their own futures. – SLP]
Tom is a good guy, is responsible for making sure many good things get done in St. Louis, including the city’s neighborhoods, and is a guy you can enjoy an intelligent conversation with or a sandwich and a beer.
Tom is a doer, a financial wiz, down to earth and very pro-city and downtown.
Downtown has a rich, smart ally. Let’s attack him.
Downtown Now does seem like an aging dinosaur; perhaps Reeves is working behind curtains I can’t peek through to make good things happen, but I don’t get to see it.
You lose me when you attack the DTSLP, though. I think we’re lucky to have the organization (it’s not as if most of the members would be doing anything productive for the neighborhood with their dues otherwise), and Jim Cloar is an effective leader for it.
“Downtown has a rich, smart ally. Let’s attack him.”
LOL. How much did you get paid for that one?
I think a big problem in St. Louis is that some people have this “it could be worse so let’s leave it alone” attitude, and I think some of the posts here reflect that. I find it disturbing that Reeves buys a home in Town and Country. I have a hard time believing that he spends a whole lot of time in his downtown loft. I don’t care if he is paying Downtown Now to work there. We have every right to be critical.
But the most recent thing Reeves said that had me upset was in this article in the south city journal: http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/neighborhoods/stories.nsf/oakville-mehlvillejournal/story/702203335F35B2128625710600754AC5?OpenDocument
He claims that downtown is “open to all income levels.” Really? That just shows how out of touch is is with the majority of the population. My boyfriend and I are both college educated and have halfway decent jobs- and our combined incomes couldn’t get us a loft downtown. That’s fine- but why can’t Reeves just admit that the downtown market has reached a point where middle income people can’t afford to live there?
“My boyfriend and I are both college educated and have halfway decent jobs- and our combined incomes couldn’t get us a loft downtown . . .”
You need to spend a little time at urbanstlouis.com Some of the posters there — many of them young, college-educated, middle-income types — can give you some leads.
Guidestar (www.guidestar.com) shows the tax returns for not for profit groups. The 2004 Downtown Now return shows Reeves salary at $187,000.
Hey Public Eye,
Is your comment inspired by any possible business affilation you may have had with Downtown Now, or maybe by your live-in girlfriend? Since Downtown Now is not much more than a mouthpiece for the mayor, I can see why you want to defend Tom Reeves. You both do much the same thing–except that you don’t get as many awards. Oh wait! Didn’t you get some recognition from the RFT for being Jery Berger’s “inspiration”?
Reeves draws a salary?
I thought that Reeves worked for free and we all should be grateful for his donation.
Hmm… affordable options downtown?
Paul Brown “affordable” option:
1 bedroom: $615
2 bedroom: $754
Merchandise Mart “affordable” option:
1 bedroom: $630
2 bedroom: $805
Max income to qualify:
1 person household: $27,660
2 person household: $31,620
Last year, my household income was about $32,500 for 2 people. Hence, slightly too high to qualify.
I pay $364 a month for my mortgage on our entire two-family building with 1 bedroom in one unit and two in the other.
I’ll think I’ll stay on the Southside, thank you very much. 😉
So because mr.reeves doesnt live downtown and chooses to live where he wants to he’s some how ineffective or not working for the cause? Give me a break. It sounds like this guy has the means to effect change in st.louis and thats money. Plain and simple. If he surrounds himself with the the behind the scene players that get things done then whats the problem?
I do agree that they could definetly make some headway in revamping the website as well as making themselves a little more known within the community.
Middle income levels? Whats your middle? Lofts over off of Jefferson are going for $125k which is middle income to me- especially since I paid alot more for a house in Clifton Heights and I consider myself teetering on the lower end of the “Middle Income Levels”
j
So people without obscene amounts of money should not be considered serious players for change?
Man, it’s amazing how easily people accept the status quo — not simply as something that is toohard to change, but as something that does not need to be changed.
Reeves could have chosen the CWE or Compton Heights for a toney less-dense part of town. That he chose one of the most suburban of the suburbs raises serious questions about his leadership. This isn’t 1996 — it’s 2006 and downtown not only has great housing almost all of it is overpriced. He is drawing money like water but he won’t invest his $1.2 million in the city?
Meanwhile, folks like Joe and Susan can’t afford downtown and have limited means but are putting the money that they have into city homes.
What a wonderful world!
The fact is that it takes corproate money and folks who do have obscene amounts of money to effect the change for the city (and a wee bit of government help)
That is not to say that middle income folks dont have a say or are accepting of the status quo, they go about change differently. They work in the neighborhood associations or they work for those large companies advising folks like Reeves and keep them informed of whats going on both pro and con.
Would it have been a boon for Reeves to put 1.2 Million into a house in CWE? Oh yeah it would send a great message but who are you or even me to say where he “should” be living?
Personally I think the lofts will go bust in the next coupla years anyway and downtwon will have to figure something else out. More people like susan and joe will still invest in the city but it will be in places like Holly Hills or Dogtown- it’s still the city and they are still contributing to the city in a major way by simply living here.
^ I don’t even know where to start with that. Holly Hills and Dogtown? I couldn’t afford to live in Holly Hills, probably not even dogtown, and neither of those places need me to invest. And I would consider people who can afford a $125,000 loft to be upper middle class.
But my real point was that Reeves said downtown is “open to all income levels”. But it is not open to people like me who make under $30,000 and it’s really not even open to people who make under $60,000. It is definately not open to a single mom who makes minimum wage. But that’s fine- I’m not really lamenting the fact that I’m not living downtown. I’m making a greater contribution by living in a neighborhood that is truly in need of investment. The problem is when the executive director of Downtown Now is so out of touch with what is happening in the area he is supposed to be an expert in.
But why should he be involved or in touch with downtown? He isn’t compensated for his work! I know if I don’t do my job, I’ll get fired. Now Reeves, probably not. There’s no incentive, no system of checks and balances. He can do pretty much whatever he wants. And when someone says “do your job! update your website!” people want to make excuses for him, overlook incompetence just because he doesn’t ask for a paycheck!
As a community development professional, I have to say living in the same community where you work is difficult to do. You need to leave and go home for a little bit. You need to be refreshed and that can be as simple as the things you see on your ride home.
We all have our professional lives and our personal lives. What someone does in their personal life (as long as it is not illegal!) should be not be used to judge them professionally. That goes for where the person chooses to live.
There are so many things not known about Tom Reeves, like where his kids go to school, or where he grew up, or where his mother lives…get the point? Living in Town and Country is his personal choice. And you gotta give him credit, he is willing to make the darned commute down highway 40 everyday! More than I would do!
Attacking people and the way they do their job is one thing, but lowering to the level of personal attacks, such as where one chooses to live, etc. . .just because you do not agree with them, is very innapropriate in this type of forum. I enjoy reading the posts here because most of the time they are thought provoking and seek out solutions, fighting the inertia we often face in this town. Stick to the problem solving and leave the personal comments for your friends over drinks. You will erode your credibility if you continue to make posts such as this one about Tom Reeves, and that would be a terrible shame and a big loss to the thought pool of our town.
RL’E
[REPLY – I agree with your comments Rachelle. My original post focused on how I don’t believe that Reeves can relate to the needs of the area and how the organizations are a tool of the rich. Both are valid points for this forum. – SLP]
“The fact is that it takes corproate money and folks who do have obscene amounts of money to effect the change for the city (and a wee bit of government help)”
This fact shows a failure on the part of our city’s political structure. However, Steve Patterson and other activists are increasingly successful in their efforts to turn the failure on its head — they are effecting change without deep pockets and without corporate money (often without any budget at all).
Steve’s larger point has great relevance to discussions of what direction downtown in headed. Reeves has a lot of power and is a political player — one can disagree with the attacks made on him without conceding that his social status is relevant because of the nature of his job and the stances he has taken publicly. He may live in Town and Country, but he is working in the messy and political public sphere. As citizens, we have the responsibility to consider all aspects of the forces that are shaping our lives.
To Rachelle and many others,
You’re missing the point here. This is not a personal attack on Reeves, it is a question of his ability to fully understand the needs of downtown or the city of St. Louis.
I would not live in the county because I have a strong conviction that the big box, McMansion suburbs are a dangerous example for the city of St. Louis. Over the last 65 or so years we’ve seen a vibrant, thriving downtown with just as much potential as Chicago or any other city dwindle to near nothing. We’ve seen hundreds upon hundres of buildings and urban city blocks turn to faceless buildings or parking lots. The Jefferson Memorial park alone took over 300 buildings.
If someone who is willing to accept or settle for the big box, mcmansion style of life, what does that say about how they might treat these types of prospects downtown? It frankly scares me. It’s not a matter of “personal preference” it’s a matter of principle.
As much as I love St. Louis and want to see it prosper, I’ve all but given up on it by now because so many people, like many of the posters here, are willing to SETTLE for less when you should be demanding more.
I’m moving to New York in September because the lifestyle I’ve longed to have in St. Louis doesn’t exist here and as long as people have these kinds of attitudes it never will. I truly hope that one day there’ll be a true urban environment in St. Louis where a lot of people live and can walk from place to place without passing through the graveyards of a former metropolis.
And by the way, I hardly consider commuting down Highway 40 to be a virtue. Thousands of people do it every day and it’s the reason why St. Louis is not what it could be.
I don’t care where Tom Reeves chooses to live.
I do care, however, about the embarrassing fact that Downtown Now’s website is still asking us to ponder the question, “What’s Happening in 2004?”, almost four months after Steve’s original post on the subject.
And we still have a “progress report” that lists Clarence Harmon as the current mayor.
These aren’t attacks on Tom Reeves. They’re simply points about common sense, especially as it applies to an organization that includes the word “Now!” in its name.
I agree with Rachelle, I also think Reaves would be willing to accept constructive criticism about Downtown Now and the organization. Has anyone contacted Mr Reaves to give him any feedback or are we mad at him because he has a house in West County.
To urbanist, I find it ironic in your diatribe about how St. Louis has deteriorated because of those suburbanites abadoning the city you so love, you are abandoning the city for New York because it does not live up to the expectations of your “urban utopia”. You are no better than those that have abandoned our fair city for the suburbs. As they have given there lame excuses about how the city doesn’t meet their needs at least they reside in the same metro (hardly a consolation)whereas you abandon the whole city for greener pastures. Here is a newsflash for you, St. Louis is NEVER going to be New York or Chicago, its St Louis and its going to be awesome in its own unique way. So just follow in the footsteps of the other St Louis expatriates and dont let the door hit you on the way out.
[REPLY – Oh the good old “we are not Chicago or New York” response. Many of us are seeking a level of urbanity that simply doesn’t yet exist in St. Louis. We have great potential here to be a wonderful urban St. Louis but we it will take some hard work to please us urbanists. We’ve been showing urbanists the door for so long that many other cities have residents that should be here. We can’t keep losing urbanists because that is exactly who is willing to live in the city.
BTW, I’m not hopeful that someone buying a house in Town & Country either understands where we need to be or how to get us there. – SLP]
Okay, Steve, I see what you are saying, I went back and re-read your original post…it still has the mild flavor of a personal attack but I get your point. While Tom Reeves is the head of Downtown Now! there also other organizations working in Downtown that weren’t mentioned, nor were their leaders.
Tom Reeves was on the board of my former organization, RHCDA. He was also on the executive committee. He was one of the board members who always went to bat when he was needed. He came to all of our events, including our projects on the North side.
He also invested a great deal of money into his loft Downtown. Who cares how often he is there? It is one less building that is vacant downtown and it has been put to good use. When people see someone like him investing in an area they are apt to follow…he is a former banker, he doesn’t just throw away money?…that is the perception.
Why doesn’t somebody make a list of where all the downtown players live? Perhaps a person should resign from their job if they live outside a certain radius of downtown because that is proof that they don’t know what the heck is going on and how could they possibly contribute? Maybe the Bommarito’s should sell Tony’s because they live west of Skinker and that is way too far away from Downtown, despite all of the investment and attention their business has brought Downtown.
A couple of years back, I attended UMSL’s Livable Communities Symposium and the last line of the final presentation was, “think regionally!” If Downtown doesn’t open up and let some air out, it is going to implode. You have got to keep Downtown connected to other parts of the region and keep bringing people in and out of the area.
I lived Downtown and I worked Downtown. I saw it go from a nothing to a something. It was not one person but it was many people coming from all different walks of life and socio-economic backgrounds that made it happen.
If it is time to hand the reins over to someone new, then Downtown Now! and the Downtown Partnership need to be convinced of that. I bet you would be surprised to find taking the reins wouldn’t be much of struggle.
RL’E
[REPLY – Check again Rachelle because I do mention Downtown Partnership in the original post although I don’t mention the director, Jim Cloar, by name.
Your sentence, “When people see someone like him investing in an area they are apt to follow…” is correct. You used it in relation to Reeves having a downtown loft but the same can be said of others following his investment in Town & Country. Same logic applies!
I’ve known neighborhood executive directors that felt they needed to live in the city, although not necessarily within their group’s area. While I don’t think we need a formal litmus test I think it is valid to look at where these individuals live. They are in the public and I have some expectation of leading by example.
My peeve is not so much with Reeves as an individual. I’ve never met him in person and as you indicate he may very well be a fine person with the best of intentions. I have strong reservations about the effectiveness of the organization he leads as well as the Downtown Partnership. I’m going to continue looking into both groups. – SLP]
The loft Reeves owns is probably valued at more than my house and your house and several other of the poster’s houses combined (except of course, public eye’s,ha-ha!) So, how can you use the “where he lives” model in this case, given that he has invested more in the City and Downtown than any of us?
I don’t worry about places like Town and Country (or Frontenac or Ladue), they are for a certain socio-economic group and I just don’t see how you can compare that to anything that is within the reality of what your average or even a bit above average person could afford. It is the St. Charles and the O’Fallon’s with the “build cheap/sell cheap attract the masses” that I’d worry more about as a movement eroding our city and inner ring foundations.
Back to Downtown: as for continuing to delve into the Downtown groups and their effectiveness, I say, “Go for it!”
Bright, new leadership is what this City needs and I truly wish you the best and the greatest success with this endeavour!
RL’E
People who can afford a $125k loft upper middle class?! You have got to be kidding me, I consider that lower middle class. I am a very recent college grad from a top ten institution and I was able to afford a downtown loft with ease. If you are whining about being a college grad and not being able to live downtown, you should knw that all colleges are not created equal. If you work hard from a young age and go to a good instituton in a good major then you will be able to buy a loft. However if you slack and go to UMSL or SMS….you see where I’m going with this?
Mike: What else should we “knw”?
I’m consfused by your post, even though I went to a “good instituton in a good major.” (I’m really glad that my college was located inside of my major, but the poor old soldier is stuffed silly!)
I was quite blown away by Mike’s comments as well. He’ll soon learn once he is actually in the workplace that even though he and the other stuffy degree-holders think they deserve a higher salary, they rarely have the abilities of those poor SMS & UMSL-type alumns.
Now, back to the original subject. I don’t think it is too much to ask that the people out there in the public forum pushing downtown as the place to work, live, and play shouldn’t do the same. To begin with, it sets a bad example, period. Secondly, he is contributing to the disinvestment of our urban core, yet on the flip side he is promoting it as the place to be.
And speaking of those who only have downtown lofts or apartments for casual use, this really pisses me off. It is prevelant, and only takes away from what we want, a living breathing twenty-four hour environment. If people continually see these developments as investments only and don’t live here full time, than what is the point.
And lastly, to the comment on the lofts downtown “going bust” in a few years, I say not a chance. We have only seen the tip of the iceburg in terms of development (residential and office) to happen downtown.
Uh oh, here he is ladies and gentlemen, the infamous grammar/spelling corrector on forum guy. Watch as he picks apart every sentence you post in an attempt to embarass you…..just when you thought you were safe to have a typo, kaboom he’s right there to call you out! I love you guys, always correecting instead of having an actual rebuttal and all. Come on guy you knew exactally what I meant.
Let’s see Mike, I went to a good college, got good grades and got a master’s degree. I guess by studying historic preservation I didn’t pick a “good major” or by working at a job I like at a non-profit instead of following the money I made a foolish choice. I guess if I had picked a good major like urban planning instead of preservation I might be living in a loft by now!
If you reread what I wrote, I wasn’t whining about not being able to afford to live downtown. And I don’t know Joe nor am I able to speak for him, but from his website I think he is a PhD. candidate at Wash. U. and I was surprised by just how little money he makes. I wouldn’t tell him the reason he can’t afford downtown is because he picked the wrong school or major.
Sorry Steve-this has wandered a bit off topic-I guess it’s good you’ve got some Republicans reading the site?
As much as I respect Joe Frank, that is exactally why he cannot afford a loft. He went to UMSL for his undergrad and then wasted subsequent years getting degrees that are making him no money. But he loves what he does, that does count for something and he never complained about not “having downtown accessable” to him. Yet when a guy who supports downtown buys a second home, all of the lazys are in an uproar about how two of their incomes can’t buy them a single residence downtown. Nothing in life is free, and living in urban cores is expensive. Get over it.
[REPLY – Wow, I’m just amazed. Lazys huh? If you can’t afford a $125K home you are lazy. I guess I’m lazy then. I went to a state university rather than a big 10 school. Never mind I had to work at Toys R Us and Dillards to pay for my tuition. I guess if I wasn’t so lazy I would have worked harder to have afforded a better school. Or perhaps if my parents weren’t a lazy carpenter and waitress they could have paid for me to go to college at a better school?
I respect people not for how much they make but the make-up of their character. – SLP]
Attn: the financially struggling – you are not working hard enough.
Downtown is at a crossroads and has been for a while now. The national stage is starting to notice how inexpensive it is to live here (yes its very inexpensive) and we have (gasp) LOFTS- woo hoo. gotta go get me one of those. Now you have corporate entities buying them as write offs and perks for their execs, and guys who also have houses in the country- albeit town and country, but for August Busch who worked downtown and had some land in the country (grants farm) that was a pretty good trip back in the day. I am concerned for one that these people who are buying lofts do not live there. How are they going to support businesses after 5pm if they are not living down here. Mabye we need some 2nd and 3rd shift companies downtown to keep the life going after 5pm. I have a family with kids and the loft life isnt for us with privacy needs and stuff, even though I would love to live in one, but this isnt the point. Its not about how many lofts there are, or who owns them, or that some guy who makes alot more than I do decides he needs two places one in an expensive suburb. Its about people championing downtown and those with more money garner more attention, so let them come and praise downtown, even if they only do it on the surface and are not as active behind the scenes. Or maybe they are just to busy to update the website. Our company hasn’t updated our website for 5 years, it doesnt mean we are not busy working at our craft, it just means we have been overwhelmed at the amout of business that we could not get to it. We dont need a website to be effective, and I dont think Downtown Now does either. Face the future, people are interested in St. Louis as a region for its affordability, rich housing stock, quaint downtown with an urban feel, and abudnance of activities and restaurants. We are a very diverse region with lots of potential, situated at a junction of major road, river, and train lines any company would be crazy not to think of St. Louis as a ditribution and business hub. Thank god they havent realized it yet, or else I wouldn’t be able to afford to live here. I know I couldnt afford New York or San Francisco, but we can still do business with those people, and for alot less money also!!
Thanks Steve for allowing us to have this forum. You are one of the cities champions that I refer to, even though you are not rich, powerful, or glamorous (okay mabye glamorous). Sorry for the rant- thanks for pointing out that this guy while not earning a salary can still afford the good life. I hope to be able to do the same some day. I would love to have both types of residences since I could never convice the wife to live in a loft, but she might agree to visit if we had one.
J
[REPLY – Jason, thank you for your passionate response! I was with you up until not updating the web site. We are trying to attract two things to St. Louis — people and jobs.
An organization using millions of dollars of public money to get people into downtown (residents or workers) needs to project a certain image to outsiders and having a non-working link to 2004 events is just downright embarassing. The coasts already think we are behind the times, we don’t need to give them proof! Or on the Partnership’s website where documents are downloaded as Word docs rather than online PDF documents.
Many businesses can survive on word of mouth and therefore don’t need a current website. Marketing downtown and the city to people all over the US does require something current. At the very least make it date neutral so that people checking out the site don’t realize it hasn’t been updated in a while. – SLP]
So paying 50K a year at WashU will get you a loft Downtown and a McMansion in Town & Country. It all makes sense now!
Mike:
I’ll never make it. I know I won’t. I didn’t go to the Top Ten, I actually learned how to write a coherent sentence (what a useless and unprofitable thing to do!) and I cannot afford a loft downtown.
I’m hopeless!
I am going to get fired today so that I can get on unemployment and food stamps. And I will apply for Section 8 housing, Aid to Families with Dependent Children and so forth.
That way, I won’t have to embarass myself by failing to make lots of money. I won’t be trying half-way; I will not be trying at all.
I am so glad that I have found a way to make you happy. And with yout Big Ten income, you can surely pay a lot of taxes to make sure all of us lazys can stop embarrassing ourselves.
Can I kiss your boots?
Wait, that’s probably illegal since you are still a kid!
Gee, I guess my life is a house of cards ready to collapse at any moment. I have a great job and live in a wonderful neighborhood in the City. All from an UMSL education. Thank you Mike for pointing out how lazy I am for my 8 years of Military service to pay for a useless education from a hick school.
[REPLY – I guess it is better you found out now that you were lazy for going to UMSL and serving the military. This saves you the embarrasment of thinking you are a productive member of society simply because your income doens’t meet with Mike’s standards. – SLP]
Just to clear this up, I was on academic scholarship all the way through school, daddy didn’t pay my way through college. I studied while all of you druggies drank and partied throught high school. You all made your choices, so don’t complain because you’re poor now and downtown is “too expensive” when actually on a national scale is is VERY cheap to live there.
P.S. Nice job there correcting my spelling while having mistakes in your post as well “Poor Man”. You keep you english degree from UMSL and you sub par pay.
[REPLY – So now all of us that can’t afford downtown housing are drunk druggies in addition to being lazy. Wow! Can you dig your hole just a tad deeper?
A prior post of mine revealed my first time trying pot — at age 38! I did not drink in high school where I was an honor role student. Someone needs an attitude adjustment and it is not me. – SLP]
[EDITED FOR YOU LAGUAGE WHOARS]-your english degree from UMSL and your sub par pay.
That’s the last time I post my annual household income in a public forum. 😉
By the way, when did I get an English degree?
I got a full scholarship to UMSL. The extra cash enabled me to buy my first house. Granted, I didn’t exactly finish the rehab job on that one.
But then I sold it and used the funds for a down-payment on my current, somewhat-more-habitable house.
Anyway, I’m not really complaining about how little money I make. I’m a helluva lot better off than most people.
Ok, maybe I am whining a little bit – but not because I can’t live downtown. I like hanging out downtown, but I don’t think I’d feel comfortable living there full-time. Part of what’s cool to me about the Benton Park / Benton Park West area is that, I learned a few years ago, my family goes back four generations in the area.
Well, except for that 50 year gap after my grandfather moved to Affton and then my parents to Oakville. 😉
Joe Frank
Again, you (Mike especially) are missing the point. The question of Tom Reeves and Town & Country (to me) has nothing to do with how much money he makes or that he can afford a loft downtown. It has to do with his urban philosophy. How can you fully understand the needs of a community unless you immerse yourself in it? Yeah, people may need a break from their jobs, but as someone involved in community development I was people who immerse themselves in the community, not people who think of it as “a job”. People who are passionate about the community and can understand it because they deal with it every day.
to funny..
I had a feeling this would come up. Don’t worry, there’s an answer but I didn’t feel like wasting page space if no one was going to bring it up.
There is a big difference between leaving an urban environment for a surrounding suburban environment that exists for the sole purpose of supporting those who don’t want to live in the urban environment and leaving a less urban environment for a more urban environment.
In the former situation, you make your money in the city and then go spend it at your local suburban Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Big box retailer and support businesses and retailers outside of the city. Are you going to drive 35 miles just to go buy your groceries downtown, or a table or what not? Hell no, because even us arrogant “urbanists” thrive on the concept of convenience. But when you live in a suburb and work in the city you effectively steal money from the city and spend it in the county which helps the suburbs continue to grow and keeps the city from growing as fast as it could. Yeah, he’s only one person, but he’s an example as a public figure.
In the latter situation… moving from a somewhat urban environment like St. Louis to a more urban environment like New York, you may be relinquishing your support altogether but you open up that space for more people to work and LIVE in St. Louis. You don’t continue to work downtown St. Louis and spend that money in New York. You work in New York and support New York.
It is in good part due to people like you who say “St. Louis is never going to like New York or Chicago” who keep this city from being all it could be. You tell an underprivilaged kid in the ghetto all their lives “You’re never going to be a _____”, chances are you’re going to make it happen and they’ll spend the rest of their lives uneducated, making minimum wage, or dealing drugs for a living.
Most people who live in New York by choice are proud to live in New York, they know that they live in the greatest city in the world and that everything they do contributes to its greatness. They don’t say “New York will never be Bombay, Shanghai, or Istanbul”.
And besides, yeah, Chicago is never going to be St. Louis and New York is never going to be L.A. because it’s physically impossible. I’m not asking for a replica, I realize St. Louis is different and has its own unique characteristics which is important but so many of those unique characteristics are constantly torn down and replaced with ground level parking that it’s no longer worth it to me. I’m worried St. Louis is never going to be ST. LOUIS. The urban fabric of this city is minimally existant where is used to be very thick and rich. I want to be able to walk a block from my apartment to get my groceries, not drive three miles to the nearest Schnucks. As an individual in a creative field I want to be able to be inspired to new levels daily by the friendly sense of competition and collaboration that results from being in an environment like New York.
There IS a major difference between abandoning a city for a suburb and abandoning (if you have to use that word) for a place that is more urban.
(SP) “never going to BE like New York or Chicago”
sorry, I was typing fast.
I don’t have an English degree from UMSL.
Nice job avoiding my statement while picking at small points — just like you criticized others for doing.
Apparently the Top Ten can load you with money but will not teach you critical thinking, rhetoric, writing or debate. Mike shows us that all of our institutions of higher learning have let their standards for admission and for graduation slip.
I mean, c’mon: “LAGUAGE WHOARS”?!
Not exactly the work of someone who is thinking before he types. I could care less if Mike made the occasional spelling error, but his writing is so remedial and his arguments so weak that I can’t ignore it. The again, with his “druggies” accusation he has buried himself pretty deep into a hole and raised some doubts as to whether or not he really is a college graduate with a good job.
Perhaps he is a character created by one of Downtown Now’s PR consultants. He has totally diverted the discussion into an unproductive series of attacks and defenses, taking attention away from the problems with Reeves and Downtown Now!.
So…to wade through the umpteen posts about grad school, lower middle class, and spelling-
I have to disgaree with Urbanist about the fact that the relevance of Reeves having a home in da County is detrimental to him leading Downtown Now! I understand that by being the Pres that he is sending a message but honestly, I’m more concerned about his leadership qualities and what he can bring for the entire region. Shouldnt that be the most important piece of this discussion? Or am I missing something here?
Sad to see you go Urbanist but I hope you find what your looking for.
Hey, it’s nice to see that we’ve come back to some civil discourse here. Thanks Josh! haha.
Just to be clear, I’m not stating that it is without question detrimental that he owns a home in the county. But I am stating that it raises serious questions about his urban philosophy and his ability to lead and accurately understand the needs of downtown and/or the city of St. Louis.
The money he spent on his town and country home was quite a chunk that could’ve been well invested in a city home. And not only would he have invested his money in the city, he would’ve also have been investing his interest. As much as I respect guys like Rollin Stanley, for instance, if he chose to live in Town and Country I’d be having serious questions about his judgement as well, but he proudly resides in Soulard.
Your choices about whether to live in city or county are a reflection of your urban philosophy… and if you even have one at all. If he bought that place as a getaway where he spends a weekend every month or so, that might be a bit more understandable (though not much). But I don’t think we know the answer to that and furthermore, if he is choosing to LIVE in Town and Coutnry and work downtown, he will inevitably start to think of Downtown Now from the perspective of Downtown as a place to “go” and “work” and not as a place to live.
BTW, the message this sends is “I work downtown, but I don’t really like city life that much.” How can we settle for that mentality? I want someone in charge who is IN LOVE with the city and the urban lifestyle. period.
I could care less where Tom lives. What concerns me is that Downtown Now grew out of St. Louis 2004, which grew out of Civic Progress and the Danforth Foundation. But 2004 has past, hardly being the present, or “now.” And while St. Louis 2004 was put out to pasture, Downtown Now is the cow that won’t come home.
Plus, we have Downtown St. Louis Partnership with its own director, staff and budget, supported by member dues, like a chamber of commerce. In other words, what does Downtown Now actually accomplish, especially post-2004, that the Partnership can’t? And if speaking of the corporate community having significant impact on downtown, I think combined resources would have greater impact than two competing organizations.
“I work downtown, but I don’t really like city life that much.”
I somewhat disagree with this interpretation. I think that Reeves’ having two homes sends a different message: that suburban life is still relevant and necessary for a well-connected leader.
That message is dangerous to the current revitalization of the city, because it reinforces the second-class status many regional residents afford the city in addition to suggesting that the city alone does not offer a cosmopolitan lifestyle befitting a banker. Not good for the city’s image at all!
As an expatriate of St. Louis, it hurts when someone said we should be shown the door. Especially, when I would like nothing better than to come back. What I really like hearing is, please come home. Yet, to a degree, I can understand the resentment. I have explored the world and realize that the grass is much greener in St. Louis than I realized.
I agree with the poster, Jack. I don’t care where Reaves lives. We have no idea of his motives. But, is he doing his job? I do care that the website is out of date. That is a black eye for his organization and the city. It is right to watchdog these people, personal attacks and second guessing personal motives aside.
Just noticed there is another posting using the name Scott. I am not the same Scott that has served his country and lives in the City. Wish I could say that about myself!
Michael Allen, I definately agree with your post about the message that it sends. Very well stated.
Sorry, just posted a moment ago. But, Michael Allen, I do take your point about the message it sends. That cannot be avoide when you consider the type of job he has. Is it something like the Mayor of St. Louis living in Clayton?
Finally, the real message is written – ” I work downtown but I dont really like city life that much”
So then what kind of message do you send for those folks you are trying to lure to the city? Do you point out that there are tons of different neighbiorhoods that offer there own niche? Do you use the downtown area as your base and then spread out? Then how do you sell the infrastructure of the city? Who (or more importantly what group) frames that question is another thing to think about.
This blog and our day isnt long enough to get into that but personaly, when I show our fair city to folks from out of town they are amazed by the diversity of the neighborhoods and the vibrancy of downtown- both daytime and nighttime. The city has an enormous amount of cosmopolitan lifestyle to anyone willing to look for it. There seem to be more art openings, orchestra’s, plays, music than there has ever been in my years of living in st.louis- granted it’s not the same amount as Chicago but we dont have the population to support that much just yet.
Would this discussion never have happened if Deb had just put in her collumn that the home was bought in addition to his large loft downtown.
I find it personally embaressing that the website is so out of date and the other problems that have been pointed out over and over, but I am not quite as concerned about Reeve’s choice of where to live. Still bothers me though.
Urbanist you are a coward you see the problems of this city and you want to run away and hide. What a sad person you are. Remeber the next time you see a boarded up building that you contributed to its decay and the decay of the city. I hope you fell better about yourself now New York hot shot don’t let the door hit you on the way out and please don’t ever come back to this town agian.
Who cares where he lives, he bought a loft downtown too, case closed. He has generated alot of PR for the city so I’ll let it go. As long as I have a loft downtown and downtown keep growing I’m happy. Since a new Mike is now posting, I’ve changed my name to refelct that I am the original. Feel free to correct my grammar and spelling here all…..
Mike,
haha, thanks for the kind words. To your chagrin, my family has been here for four generations since they immigrated from Italy for reasons ultimately not that dissimilar from my reasons for moving to NYC. So I’ll definately be back. I’m really truly saddened to leave here, but trust me, I’m not cowaring. I just currently lack the financial means or appropriate educatioin and/or experience to make a real difference here. I’m confident that St. Louis will continue to grow, but unfortunately I have not chosen economics, urban planning, or business management as a career path and I can’t wait around for the market to be better here in my field. That is compounded by my need to be in an urban environment and my frustration with the endless stream of bad decisions made by those in leadership here. There’s honestly not much here for me right now other than frustration at my inability to effect change. But I do have a lot of ideas and detailed entrepreneurial plans I really think would improve this city and when I’ve built up enough money and experience in NYC I would love to give it a go again in St. Louis when I can actually make a difference.
But I applaud your vicious defense of your (and my) city.
(And Steve, perhaps we should start a seperate forum for “arguments and insults about things unrelated to the original post.”)
An impressive amount of discussion here, and I’m getting to the table a bit late.
I wanted to point out, as a native St. Louisan, that “Mike” is the exact reason why I don’t want to stay in St. Louis in the long term. I went to Stanford (how’s that, Mike?) and majored, stupidly or no, in English. I have a job in law that pays me a decent enough salary to live downtown.
But after having lived in the Bay Area (which, outside of SF itself, is decidedly non-urban) and New York City, I feel confident saying that, in terms of building stock and basic phsyical infrastructure, St. Louis DOES have what it takes to be a thriving metropolitan center on the level of the coastal cities, or on the level of Chicago.
What it sadly does not have in large supply are intelligent, open-minded, creative people, or the jobs to support those people. Instead, it has people like Mike. Mike may work at AG Edwards, which probably pays him well–even if it doesn’t require him to be able to string more than five words together in a sentence–and challenges him not one bit to think about the world outside of finance. St. Louis has three “professions”: law, medicine, and finance. More specifically, its philosophical foundations are litigation, sickness, and greed. Worst of all, it’s “small time” in each of these fields…and Mike knows it. If Mike were really where he thinks he *should* be, with his Top-10 degree, he wouldn’t be in a “B list” city like St. Louis–I wonder how he wound up here in the first place.
I digress; I rant. But I do have a couple of points.
1) St. Louis does have a distinctly anti-intellectual vibe, as evidenced by the defensive retorts to Mike’s ignorant posts. The truth of the matter is that St. Louis does need to cater to the best and the brightest; it does need to cater to the wealthiest. It DOES need to move beyond graduates of UMSL and SMS (not that there’s anything wrong with these schools). It needs to attract and produce entrepreneurs–not just their capital. It needs to attract the best, most well-educated young people it possibly can–and retain them–in order to improve. Washington University, one of the city’s greatest civic treasures, must have one of the lowest graduate retention rates in the country–i.e., everyone who goes there leaves. Ask their law school admissions office what they do to keep talented graduates in the area, and they’ll tell you: nothing.
2) St. Louis lacks a creative class. I’m not saying, like some have, that SF or NYC are defined by these classes. But I do believe that this city will continue to be, or at least be perceived as, a cultural backwater unless a substantial creative class, with creative industry to support such a class, emerges in this town. I mean artists. I mean graphic designers. I mean publications (if Minneapolis can headquarter major magazines, whiy can’t we?). I mean a newspaper that’s worth two shits (the Post-Dispatch is an awful, shameful rag). I don’t just mean catering to the County wealthy; I mean creative businesses that turn a profit on a national and international scale, and are based right here in St. Louis. Because of the city’s current business make-up, it’s made up chiefly of boring, uninteresting white people (like Mike), and the classes and businesses that support such boring people.
I’m sure many of the people who disliked Mike for what he said will also dislike what I am saying. But the city needs some tough love, and needs to know what’s wrong in order to improve. These are good starting points.
Michael,
Just want to say, for what it’s worth, that I agree exactly with everything you stated. Your second point is probably my biggest reason for planning to leave St. Louis. As someone in a creative field, there is really no culture to foster growth in this city. And when I say “urban” I often mean more than just the structure of the city blocks. I mean a forward thinking, progressive, creative mind-set that thrives on interaction and feeds off of new ideas.
Your points are dead on, I do hope some day St. Louis will grow in those areas. Unfortunately many of us can’t wait around for it to do so.
Well Michael,
You are the first person I even consider an equal to have responded to my post. Since you took the time for an actual rebuttal IÂ’ll respond in kind.
I too am a native St. Louisan and that is the main reason I am “stuck” in this city as you put it. You are very close to being correct on a few of your points about me, and you are correct on ALL of your points about STL. I am here because my job pays very well and in such a low cost of living area, it is easy to amass the kind of capital I will need in the coming years to get my own ventures off of the ground. Also, I just don’t have the heart to leave STL again just yet (4 years for my undergrad was enough) and I am enrolled at Wash U right now to get my first Master’s Degree. And you are right, while I don’t work at AG Edwards, my job definitely doesn’t challenge me one bit, in fact it is quite boring. You have to consider this, why would I move to one of the “trendy” areas to spend all of my money struggling too rent when here it is so easy to buy in the heart of downtown? I guess you could call it big fish in a small pond syndrome. I plan on staying here and helping STL thrive, not abandoning it as you have. These are the reasons IÂ’m “in this backwater city”.
The only reason I made that original post was because so many people kept chiming in about how impossible it is for the middle class to live downtown and how bad Reeves is for buying a second home in the suburbs, when in fact STL is very affordable and that is a main reason why I’m still here. People must realize if you work hard you are rewarded. Settling for SMS or UMSL is not working hard, it’s taking the easy way out. I can count on one hand the number of people from my high school that went to top universities, but the number that lazied out at UMSL and SMS or some other tier 3 crap school is more than I can even begin to name. These are the people whining about how “How they have decent jobs but two of their incomes combined cannot afford a loft” Pathetic. Reeves worked hard for STL and himself to get to where he is today. Give him the respect he deserves and curb all of your jealousies. That is my point.
Mike,
Man, I don’t know how many times I have to state this to make it clear… there is a big difference between jealousy and principle. If Reeves would’ve bought a multi-million dollar home near Forest Park or in the Central West End, I’d be applauding him for staying in the city. Being incharge of city development should be more than just a job, it should be in every aspect of your life. Although even if you could agree with me I assume you’ll never consider an argument of mine to be valid since I have not stated which university I attended. Like I said, he could’ve spent 10 million dollars in the city for all I care and it wouldn’t bother me one bit. The frustration here is not about how much money he spent. It is about principle, about precedent, and about the message buying a house in a faraway county sends. None of which, I assume, you learned about at your top 10 university as clearly the only principle you have is that people who did not go to your school are not worth your time and can in no way be considered an equal.
I’m really happy to know that no one has put you in charge with that attitude. But maybe you might be able to get your own talk show on the Fox News channel right between O’Reilly and Hannity… if they’ll bring their cameras here of course.
Urbanist I have no clue why I’m wasting my time talking to you…… Why would he buy another home in the city simply because one of his jobs is promoting the city? The next property I plan on buying is a lake house because it is a different environment and allows me to do different activities than I would be able to do in the city. Does not make me anti-city? Of course not, it means I donÂ’t wan to buy duplicate homes. Think about it kind of like computers. If you already own a top of the line desktop PC and you want to buy another computer what will you buy? YouÂ’ll buy a top of the line laptop that way you have more FUNCTIONALITY. One allows powerful computing capabilities, the other allows mobility. It would make no sense for him to buy two multi million dollar city homes. He loves golf, so he bought a country home on a golf course for when he feels like playing a few holes and doesnÂ’t want to drive all the way back to the city that evening. Buy you canÂ’t see past your foolish principles to understand that can you? Maybe if you use your artistic skills to paint him something, heÂ’ll hook you up with a job so you can buy as many city homes as you want. You do what you want with your money, and he can do what he wants with his.