Home » Site Info » Recent Articles:

Football stadium poll #2

February 28, 2010 Downtown, Sunday Poll 3 Comments
Above: Edward Jones Dome
Above: Edward Jones Dome

The post/poll two weeks ago asked where you thought the next facility for the St. Louis Rams NFL franchise should be located.  After the poll was finished it was clear to me I needed some different answers to better gauge reader sentiment.  So in a first here, I am repeating a previous poll topic with a revised question and answers.

For the purposes of this poll assume the St. Louis Rams pay 100% of the costs to build a new facility.  Most likely they will be bound to the Edward Jones Dome through 2025

– Steve Patterson

 

Readers want to keep the Rams playing downtown

ABOVE: Edward Jones Dome
ABOVE: Edward Jones Dome

The poll last week asked about where to put a new football stadium and most readers feel a new facility should be downtown:

Q: A future facility for the STL Rams (NFL) should be located in:

  1. downtown St. Louis: 72 [32.3%]
  2. City of St. Louis (outside of downtown): 39 [17.5%]
  3. As long as it is open air or has a retractable roof I don’t care: 29 [13%]
  4. Metro East (Illinois): 27 [12.1%]
  5. St. Louis County: 19 [8.5%]
  6. Other answer… 17 [7.6%]
  7. Unsure/don’t care: 10 [4.5%]
  8. anywhere in the region is OK: 6 [2.7%]
  9. Jefferson County: 3 [1.3%]
  10. St. Charles County: 1 [0.4%]

From the comments on the original post I realize I should have had different choices.  “Metro East” is too vast.  One answer should have been the East side of the river with elsewhere on the East side another.  Also I should have defined “downtown” and provided a downtown-adjacent answer.   The other answers were numerous and I’ve divided them into two groups:

The first group is a mix of answers:

  • Somewhere in the City, open air / retractable roof
  • north city
  • Franklin County
  • Los Angeles
  • Mars
  • privately funded…like the patriots

The question was about where, not how funded.  The second group all had a common theme:

  • keep refurbishing the current facility
  • They should use the same facility they have now. It’s the “green” thing to do.
  • Don’t move.
  • exactly where it already is

So we have the keep it in place view.  I believe somehow we will get past the 2015 deadline. Either the team waives the requirement to stay in the top 25% or the CVC finds the money to upgrade the facility.  But come 2025 the lease expires.  At this point the facility will be over 30 years old.  Some say rip off the roof of the current dome.  I asked some local architects about the feasibility of reworking the dome in such a way to give it another 20-30 years of life.  The responses were mixed from it can be done to it wouldn’t work.

Razing the then 30 year old dome and building new is the only viable option on the current site, in my view.  When the new Busch Stadium was built they were able to build much of the new facility next door while the team continued to use the old stadium.

But there is no next door spot available.  The window between games is nine months — not enough to raze and build a new facility on the site.  One option might be for the Rams to play home games for one season at another facility such as the University of Missouri in Columbia.  What about other locations downtown?

A facility easily consumes four city blocks.  Additional acres are needed for parking and other game day activities.  Such a facility just doesn’t fit into a Central Business District based on the enormous size.  Doesn’t matter, no site big enough is currently available.  Will a site be available by 2025?  I hope not!  I would not wish for such a hole to open up.

The site closest to downtown I can think of is the old Nooter site at 2nd & Rutger.  Development of this site may happen over the next 10 years so even it may not be available in the future. The long vacant Pruitt-Igoe site will be developed if Paul McKee’s NorthSide project works.  The potential sites are few. Rebuilding on the current site requires the team to play elsewhere for a season.  Even if the team funds a new facility without taxpayer assistance the options in the core are very limited.

– Steve Patterson

 

Would local control of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police reduce corruption?

When St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay was sworn into his third term last year he mentioned local control of the St. Louis Police as a priority. For those readers not aware of the back story, during the Civil War pro-Confederate Missouri took control of the police in pro-Union St. Louis.  The state has yet to return control of the police to the local citizens. Four out of five police commissioners are appointed by the governor, the 5th is the current mayor.

ABOVE: St. Louis Metropolitan Police HQ
ABOVE: St. Louis Metropolitan Police HQ

Last week we learned that Police commissioner Vince Bommarito made a phone call and his nephew was released from police custody after he was arrested.

On Thursday Democrat Jamilah Nasheed asked Governor Jay Nixon to take the action following news that Bommarito used his influence to have his nephew freed from jail Saturday following an arrest on suspicion of drunk driving.Nasheed is sponsoring a bill that would return the St. Louis police department to local control after a century and a half of state oversight.  (KWMU: State Rep. wants police board member removed)

I support local control of the St. Louis Police but I don’t think it will lesson any potential corruption. It may, in fact, increase it.  But problems big or small need to be handled from within, by the people we elect to represent us.  Yes, the Missouri governor represents us, but the rest of the state as well. Maybe the state will make a deal — give us back our police if we reform our own city charter?  The current city structure would do no better a job with the police than the state government.  The state has an interest in seeing the city revise it’s outdated city charter.  The ransom demands might include eliminating an excessive number of elected offices, cutting out wasteful partisan primary elections, and doing away with the Board of Estimate & Apportionment.

The poll this week asks how local control would change corruption.  Please vote in the poll in the upper right corner and share your thoughts on the topic below.

– Steve Patterson

 

Most readers don’t give change to homeless on the street

February 18, 2010 Homeless, Sunday Poll 5 Comments

Over 250 people responded to the poll last week:

Q: When a homeless person asks you for change, do you give it to them?

  1. never: 143 [56.3%]
  2. sometimes: 87 [34.3%]
  3. frequently: 20 [7.9%]
  4. n/a — I don’t visit places where there are homeless: 4 [1.6%]
  5. always: 0 [0%]

Four people live sheltered lives if they don’t go where they may encounter a homeless person. The majority do not give change to the homeless.  While I count myself among those who do not give change,  I do give other ways.  It is important to note is not every panhandler is homeless.  But often the homeless do panhandle to raise money.   Here is a story of the homeless:

‘I asked what he meant and heard a story that was to be repeated to me by many people. Each person I asked told me essentially the same thing: they were ignored as if they did not exist.

A pattern began to emerge. First was the loss of work, then housing, going begging to GA (General Assistance, welfare) where they were treated like second class citizens and beggars. Not finding a bed at the shelter, they are hassled on the streets by police. Then finally they get the courage, yes I mean courage, to ask others for a little change.

A person must feel awfully low inside to have to resort to panhandling as a way of getting money for food and a place to sleep, let along clean clothes and phone change. (Bus money to look for work is about as far as GA money goes).

A person gets tired of sleeping on the streets. I know. Men are lucky to get a shelter bed once or twice a month. Women fare a little better with a couple of nights a week, but even that gets tiring. After a while you need to sleep in a real bed, have some privacy, and take a bath alone. But you do not have money for a hotel room. Where do you get the money? Your last resort, panhandling. When you begin to see what a person must go through day after day, month after month, you gain a little understanding.

But you ask what you could do.

The reason why I was not yelled at was that I acknowledged panhandlers. I let them know I knew they existed. It was not much, just a look saying that I cannot help. I would look at them, pat my pocket, and show an empty hand, or I pointed behind me with my thumb indicating I gave what I could to the last one who asked me. Sometimes I have just said “sorry.” I have also said “not this time,” “I wish I could help,” or “I just gave to the last guy.” All of which was true; I would never lie.

When I did these small things I said a lot more than my words did. I said to them, “I acknowledge you exist, I do not look down on you, you are no less a human being than I, and I respect you as a person.” All that in a gesture or a few words.

A person who is down on their luck needs a little dignity left inside. If you look, you can even see the depression in their eyes. Panhandling is their last resort as it takes the loss of a lot of self respect to do it. And courage to look someone in the face and say, “I need your help.”  – Rae Chamberlain’

Acknowledging the homeless takes very little effort on my part but it means so much to them to not be ignored. Here are some other tips:

  • Don’t ignore them. say hello, good afternoon or just make eye contact.  It is okay to give them dignity.
  • Buy What’s Up magazine (or the street newspaper in your city)
  • Give money to and/or volunteer at organizations that work directly with the homeless in your community.

Resources:

An interesting way to give change is located in the  Central West End:

“The Central West End Association and the City of St. Louis have announced the launch of the “Real Change” campaign. The goal of the campaign is to discourage the random giving of money to panhandlers while encouraging contributions to local social service providers. The campaign is conjuction with a new city ordinance restricting panhandling.

Parking meters donated by the St. Louis Treasurer’s Office have been installed at four locations in the Central West End. These meters will be used to collect change that will be distributed to area service providers. In addition, neighborhood businesses will distribute cards informing residents and visitors of the campaign and encouraging participation in “real change.” (Real Change program)

Homelessness continues to exist primarily in urban areas but that is changing:

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s annual survey last year found homelessness remained steady at about 1.6 million people, but the percentage of rural or suburban homelessness rose from 23 percent to 32 percent. The 2009 HUD report, which reflected the 12 months ending Sept. 30, 2008, also found the number of sheltered homeless families grew from about 473,000 to 517,000.  (NY Times: Suburban Homeless: Rising Tide of Women, Families)

Suburban & rural communities need to address homelessness and the plan can’t be dropping them off at the closest urban center. Thanks to Jay Swoboda of What’s Up for his help with resources for this post.

– Steve Patterson

 

TO EXIT: depress red button and push door simultaneously

Leaving a parking garage recently I encountered a security measure I hadn’t faced since my stroke.

But there was the sign, just push the button and the door at the same time.   My left hand isn’t too useful and in my right is my cane.  I often hold the cane with the left while I do things with my right hand.  I ended up leaning against the door handle then pressing the red button with my right to exit onto the sidewalk.  So much in society assumes all are able bodied.

– Steve Patterson

 

Advertisement



[custom-facebook-feed]

Archives

Categories

Advertisement


Subscribe