Most Don’t Yet Have A REAL ID

Missouri only began issuing the new REAL ID earlier this year, so it’s no surprise most still don’t have one yet.

Here are the results of the recent non-scientific Sunday Poll:

Do you have a new ‘REAL ID’?

• No: 19 [65.52%]
• Yes: 8 [27.59%]
• Unsure: 2 [6.9%]

My husband had to renew his driver’s license in July so at that time we got the additional documents together so he could get a REAL ID instead of a regular license. The cost was the same.

My license is up for renewal in February 2020, I’ll get a REAL ID at that time. It’s been five years since either of us has flown, but we do hope to fly somewhere in 2020. After October 1, 2020 anyone hoping to fly domestically will need either a state-issued REAL ID or a passport.

Here’s summary of the legislative history of the REAL ID Act:

The Real ID Act started off as H.R. 418, which passed the House in 2005 and went stagnant. Representative James Sensenbrenner (R) of Wisconsin, the author of the original Real ID Act, then attached it as a rider on a military spending bill, H.R. 1268, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005. The House of Representatives passed that spending bill with the Real ID rider 368–58, and the Senate passed the joint House–Senate conference report on that bill 100–0. President Bush signed it into law on May 11, 2005. (Wikipedia)

Click the link about to see more detail, including links to the votes. Several votes I checked indicated Representative Clay (D) voted “no” each time. Democratic efforts to repeal the law failed.

People mentioned costs, especially if their current ID has a few years left before expiring. So say your license or state ID is valid through say May 2022 — the fee will be waived so you can get a REAL ID before October 1, 2020.

What is the cost of obtaining a REAL ID-compliant driver license or nondriver ID card?

Transaction and processing fees for new and renewal applications will be the same as they are currently.

Click here for detailed fee information. You may also apply for an early duplicate license or ID card outside of your regular renewal period (which is six months prior to the expiration of your license or ID card).

Missouri law allows for a one-time waiver of the duplicate transaction fee for persons who have not been issued a REAL ID-compliant license or ID card. License office processing fees, however, will not be waived and are $6 (three-year issuance) or $12 (six-year issuance). Personal information may be changed as part of a duplicate one-time waiver transaction, but if you are applying for a different class of licensure or to add any endorsements or restrictions, the one-time waiver will not apply. (Missouri REAL ID page)

Illinois’ REAL ID page is here. If you want to fly, or enter secure federal facilities, then you need a REAL ID before October 1, 2020.

— Steve Patterson

St. Louis’ MLS Stadium Will Be Built On Site I Proposed In February 2016

In 2015 St. Louis officials were proposing razing historic buildings/districts in the North Riverfront area, between Laclede’s Landing and the Stan Musial Veterans Memorial Bridge, to build a new NFL stadium to keep the Rams in St. Louis.  It never happened, in early January 2016 the Rams officially applied to relocate to Los Angeles.

The next month it was announced a group had formed to attempt to get a Major League Soccer (MLS) team in St. Louis — they were scouting for sites. I’d opposed the North Riverfront as a site for an NFL stadium, I also felt it wasn’t the best site for a smaller MLS stadium.

I weighed in:

The site they shouldn’t consider is the North riverfront one previously targeted for a significantly larger NFL stadium — we shouldn’t tear down buildings when we have vacant land available. We have land, mostly state owned, without any buildings and a target for redevelopment for years already. I’m talking about the 22nd Street Interchange area — an area on the West side of downtown I’ve written about numerous times over the 11+ years.

In that February 8, 2016 post I imagined fitting a stadium in between Pine, 20th, Market, and the hotel to the west. Busch Stadium fits in a space 2 blocks x 3 blocks, so a MLS stadium with less seating should fit in a smaller footprint. I emailed my post to a contact at St. Louis Development Corporation (SLDC)

That first group proposed a stadium in the 22nd Street Interchange area, but south of Market Street, not north. I don’t know if they were already looking at this location prior to my post & email, but the entire year before development officials were so focused on the North riverfront I can’t help but think they wanted to stick with what they knew and had so much time invested in.

When the state & city residents opposed public funding a of soccer stadium the ownership group was out.  When the current ownership group entered the picture in October 2018 they’d privately finance a stadium in the 22nd Street Interchange area many, including myself, assumed it’d also locate south of Market St.  In April 2019 they showed some renderings, but no site plan. Again, many of us assumed the larger area south of Market St.

We were wrong, it will be the area I’d proposed in February 2016! However, instead of stopping at Pine the site will go one more block north to Olive. A few buildings would be razed, businesses are already being forced to relocate on short notice.

I reviewed the ownership records for these and the remaining buildings to the west, none showed a recorded change of ownership — yet. I don’t like seeing businesses and/or residents forced to move. Hopefully they’ll be offered a financial package to compensate for their time, trouble, and loss of business.

I’m also not a fan of closing streets, though Pine has been an awful one-way street for decades. Hopefully the one-way couplet (opposite directions) of Chestnut & Pine will both be returned to two-way traffic as a result of the existing on/off ramps going away.

I still want to see an official proposed site plan. Despite holes from parking lots, Olive has clung to a urban feel with multi-story buildings on both sides. I also wonder if we’ll see a revised I-64 on/off ramp that ends at Market Street — I’d be disappointed, but not surprised.  Even if that happens, a lot less land could be devoted to highway on/off so the area would support additional development and tax revenue.

— Steve Patterson

Sunday Poll: Do You Have A ‘REAL ID’?

In 2005 congress passed the REAL ID Act, but adoption has been slow. Missouri just began issuing REAL ID-compliant licenses this year. Three states (New Jersey, Oklahoma, and Oregon) still aren’t compliant.

What’s the big deal?

On October 1, 2020, travelers will need a “REAL ID-compliant” driver’s license, US passport, US military ID or other accepted identification to fly within the United States.

The REAL ID Act established minimum security standards for the issuing of state licenses and their production.
It also prohibits federal agencies from accepting licenses from states not meeting those minimum standards for certain activities. That includes boarding federally regulated commercial aircraft, entering nuclear power plants and entering federal facilities.

To get a REAL ID-compliant state driver’s license, the US Department of Homeland Security requires applicants provide documentation showing their full legal name, their date of birth, their Social Security Number, two proofs of address of principal residence and lawful status. (States may impose more requirements.) (CNN)

The REAL ID Act faced widespread opposition from numerous groups, states.  The final deadline is now less than a year away. If you have a passport, however, you can fly after October 1, 2020 without a REAL ID.

Today’s poll is very straightforward:

This poll will close at 8pm tonight. Wednesday morning I’ll share how you can tell if your license/ID is REAL ID-compliant or not.  Can’t wait?

• Illinois REAL ID page
• Missouri REAL ID page

— Steve Patterson

St. Louis Board of Aldermen: New Board Bills Week 17 of 2019-2020 Session

The St. Louis Board of Aldermen meet at 10am today, their 17th meeting of the 2019-2020 session. As previously noted, they have the first two meetings labeled as Week #1, so they list this as week/meeting 16.

Today’s agenda includes six (6) new bills. Two are interesting, potentially controversial — one regarding criminal history of job applicants (120). The other regarding residency requirements for city employees (121).

• B.B. #118 – Roddy – An ordinance approving a Redevelopment Plan for the 3974 Sarpy Ave. Area
• B.B. #119 – Davis – An Ordinance recommended and approved by the Board of Estimate and Apportionment authorizing and directing the Director of Airports and the Comptroller of the City of St. Louis (the “City”) to enter into and execute on behalf of the City, seven (7) First Amended On-Airport Passenger Vehicle Rental (“PVR”) Concession Agreements (the “First Amendments”) at St. Louis Lambert International Airport® (the “Airport”) containing an emergency clause.
• B.B. #120- Muhammad – An ordinance prohibiting employers in the City of St. Louis from basing job hiring or promotion decisions on an applicant’s criminal history, unless the employer can demonstrate its relevance to the employment related decision, or where employers are required to exclude applicants with certain criminal convictions due to local, state, or federal law or regulation; and prohibiting employers from inquiring about a job applicant’s criminal history until after it has been determined that the job applicant is otherwise qualified for the job position, or the job applicant is a part of the final pool of candidates from which the job position will be filled and all of the applicants in the pool are asked.
• B.B. #121- Vaccaro – An ordinance submitting to the qualified voters of the City of St. Louis, a proposal to revise Section 2 of Article VIII of the City of St. Louis Charter which requires City employees to reside within the boundaries of the City of St. Louis and thus allow said employees, except for City Agency and Department Directors appointed by the Mayor, to reside outside of the boundaries of the City of St. Louis, and; providing for an election to be held for voting on the proposed revision and the manner of voting thereat and; for the publication, certification, deposit, and recording of this ordinance; and containing an emergency clause.
• B.B. #122 – Vollmer – An ordinance approving a Redevelopment Plan for the 5223 Botanical Ave. Area
• B.B. #123 – Vollmer – An ordinance approving a Redevelopment Plan for the 5476 Dempsey Ave. and 5027 Daggett Ave. Area

The meeting begins at 10am, past meetings and a live broadcast can be watched online here. See list of all board bills for the 2019-2020 session — the new bills listed above may not be online right away.

— Steve Patterson

First Look At Metro’s Revised Bus Service (aka Metro Reimagined)

I’ve only begun looking at the new “Metro Reimagined” bus service in St. Louis City & County, haven’t even ridden a bus yet this week. I do recall other riders discussing it last Friday at the bus stop. One woman, who also lives just north of downtown, was upset about the west end of the #97 Delmar bus getting cut in St. Louis County. It will mean more walking for her to get to work.

Here are the four tiers used to organize the MetroBus routes:

• Frequent: 10 high-frequency routes offering service every 15 minutes or faster
• Local: 35 routes offering 30-minute service
• Community: 6 routes that provide important connections in low-ridership areas
• Express: 6 routes providing direct connections with limited stops to key destinations

My first place to start was asking “Will I be impacted?” by this change. The short answer is yes — every bus rider will see changes to service. Some positive, some negative.

Moving from Downtown West to Columbus Square in December 2018 means I have fewer bus routes available — basically the #32, with the southbound  #40 another 1/10 of a mile further away than the southbound #32. The northbound #32 is considerably closer than the northbound #40.

Since moving I’ve rarely used the #40, the #32 is my primary bus route. Both routes are considered “local” routes, now with 30 minute frequency during weekdays. The service was every 40 minutes, so 30 minute frequency is an improvement.

The other bus I use is the #90 Hampton, when I visit my doctor 4x per year. While it’s listed as a “frequent” route with 15 minute service that only applies to the northern portion of the route from Riverview to Forest Park. From Forest Park to Gravois-Hampton service is every 30 minutes. I think service has been every 40 minutes, so another slight improvement.

Another bus I used to ride often is the #99 downtown trolley, introduced in

The recent Sunday Poll asked about this new plan:

Q: Agree or disagree: Metro’s new ‘Metro Reimagined’ with more frequent bus service will result in significant ridership increases.

• Strongly agree: 0 [0%]
• Agree: 2 [7.14%]
• Somewhat agree: 4 [14.29%]
• Neither agree or disagree: 3 [10.71%]
• Somewhat disagree: 3 [10.71%]
• Disagree: 5 [17.86%]
• Strongly disagree: 9 [32.14%]
• Unsure/No Answer: 2 [7.14%]

More than 60% didn’t think this will lead to a significant increase in ridership. That’s fair, I think the primary goal was to better serve existing riders — to stop losing ridership.

Riders in some parts of the county will see less service.  My intention is for future posts to look at what’s working well, and what’s not.

— Steve Patterson