BJC/Forest Park Lease is Simply Par for Course

St. Louis has a serious lack of leadership at the top. Following the lack of a second yesterday on a motion to accept the BJC/Forest Park Lease Mayor Slay indicated he was “disappointed.” Well, Francis, welcome to my world. I am disappointed daily by you and pretty much every other elected official out of city hall.

I am disappointed in fellow members of the Board of Estimate & Apportionment, Jim Shrewsbury and Darlene Green. I’m not disappointed because they wouldn’t go along with the current deal, but because they, like the Mayor, are reactionary. Board President Candidate Lewis Reed and all his followers on the Boad of Aldermen are no better. BJC is not really the bad guy here, nor is Shrewsbury or Green. The culprit is how we do business in this town.

The notion of having to maintain Forest Park cannot possibly have been a new concept in 2006 when BJC floated this idea past the mayor’s office. Forest Park Forever, the non-profit group that raised so much money for the restoration of the park, was started in 1986 — two decades ago! Did nobody stop to think, “hey we are going to need to find a way to maintain all these improvements” along the way?

The lack of leadership from City Hall has brought us to this point today. BJC is now issuing threats to the citizens that they will look elsewhere if they don’t get their way. Maybe BJC is the bad guy too. Don’t threaten me, I don’t care how big you are. Take your ugly buildings, your closed off streets and those aweful parking garages you’ve littered the landscape with and hit the road. Yeah, that’s right. Get lost you big f*cking bully. I’m calling your bluff — something the spinless folks at city hall would never do. Proof? The St. Louis Cardinals got a new stadium downtown.
Sometime in the last 20 years we should have had a discussion about paying for Forest Park, and all our parks frankly. Does anyone recall Mayor Slay making this a priority during his 2005 re-election campaign? What about Ald. Roddy? Nope.

Good leadership would have said, “OK folks, we’ve invested millions in the renovation of Forest Park but now we need to find a good way to keep it up for the long haul.” A panel could have been formed to investigate options, a town hall could have been held. Something, anything. Instead they waited until re-elected and then turned BJC land-grab into a immediate crisis, designed to scare voters into submission. You know, something President Bush might do.

I’ve never come out fully against the idea of BJC getting that land for future expansion — it was the process I disliked, not the basic land concept. Again, good leadership from city hall would have told BJC, “We can’t take this to the people until we figure out how & where to replace the open space lost and ammenities.” You can’t take away over 9 acres of park used by nearby residents without figuring out how to accomodate their needs. Yet, when this came up last year the issue of replacement park land was one of those “oh we’ll figure that out later items.” Uh, no! We’ll figure it all out or we won’t do it at all. The Kiel Opera house was one of those “later” projects that still hasn’t happened.

Our city operates in a vacuum, looking soley at a project at a time. Whether it is paying for park maintenance or a master plan for a blighted section of South Grand we simply don’t plan ahead. We sit back or wait for a sweet-looking deal to arrive and push for it. Ald. Florida was all in favor of a McDonald’s drive-thru without once doing a master plan for a mile-long stretch of Grand blighted some 10 years earlier. What is the true cost to maintain our parks and if we did the BJC lease would that solve everything? Doubtful. We need to have discussions about commercial cooridors and park funding before we have an impending proposal on the table.  Only then can we possiblly hope to have a rational discussion about the future of our city.

Given the way our leaders continue to operate, I don’t give this city much of a future.  The potential is here, but we continually squander what we have and push those with creative thinking to other cities.  This region is not growing, at least not by much.  Sure, we are building stuff on the edge of the region but that is not the same — I’m talking population and jobs, not sprawl.  The city has to fight with the Census annually to show we’ve stabilized our population rather than continue the decades-old downward spiral.  Other regions in the U.S. have their act together while this region sticks its collective head in the sand.  We are so far behind and all the folks we elect can do is point fingers at each other.  Well, I’ve got a finger for them…

Board of Alderman “Perfects” Controversial BJC Lease

Today two board bills were passed perfected by the St. Louis Board of Aldermen related to a section of Forest Park. The area located between Kingshighway and Euclid has been under lease by BJC since the 1970s for use as an underground parking garage. Above the garage is a green park with mature trees, racquetball courts, a playground and tennis courts. If the new proposal is approved by the city’s Board of Estimate & Apportionment BJC will be granted the rights to develop what is now a park.

Citizens opposed to the plan have obtained the signatures required to require a citizen vote whenever leasing or selling park land. Today’s vote is an attempt to get this deal done prior to the citizen vote in April to consider such a requirement.

The usual 29 members (28 Aldermen + President of the Board of Aldermen) is only 28 these days since 19th Ward Alderman Mike McMillan resigned to assume his new role as the city’s License Collector. Only two voted against the deal — Board President Jim Shrewbury and Jeffrey Boyd (D-22).

Four Aldermen were either absent from the meeting or abstained from voting on the bills related to this lease: Charles Quincy Troupe (D-1), Jennifer Florida (D-15), Terry Kennedy (D-18) and Frank Williamson (D-26).  Update #2 1/26/07 5pm — Troupe & Florida were not present for the meeting today.  Kennedy & Williamson, although present for the meeting, were not present for this particular vote.

The following aldermen voted in favor of the bill(s):

• Dionne Flowers, (D-2)
• Freeman Bosley, (D-3)
• O.L. Shelton, (D-4)
• April Ford Griffin, (D-5)
• Lewis Reed, (D-6)
• Phyllis Young, (D-7)
• Stephen Conway, (D-8)
• Kenneth Ortmann, (D-9)
• Joseph Vollmer, (D-10)
• Matt Villa, (D-11)
• Fred Heitert, (R-12)
• Alfred Wessels, (D-13)
• Stephen Gregali, (D-14)
• Donna Baringer, (D-16)
• Joseph Roddy, (D-17)
• Craig Schmid, (D-20)
• Bennice Jones-King, (D-21)
• Kathleen Hanrahan, (D-23)
• William Waterhouse, (D-24)
• Dorothy Kirner, (D-25)
• Gregory Carter, (D-27)
• Lyda Krewson, (D-28)

Update: [The bills will come up again next week for final approval. If approved,] the Board of Estimate and Apportionment (E&A) will determine if this deal goes through. The three members are Mayor Francis Slay, President Jim Shrewsbury and Comptroller Darlene Green. Slay has announced he will support the deal while Shrewsbury has indicated he will not (and judging by his no vote today I think it would be odd to flip flop). So, this puts the decision of the park in the hands of one person — Darlene Green. Right now she holds all the cards so I’m guessing there are some backroom conversations and deals being hatched right now. The old what will it take to get your vote?

If Green supports the plan she will be upsetting voters who have worked to place the issue on the ballot. If she votes against the plan she risks getting shut out of the political establishment backing the deal. From my perspective, Green can’t help but play politics somewhat but I think she tends to come down on the side of good fiscal policy. The question becomes, is this deal now good enough in her mind?

Last week her office sent out the following statement:

The comptroller believes people on both sides of this issue have strong points. On one side are the citizens and taxpayers who want to protect their parks and have a say in plans to develop park land. On the other side is the city’s largest medical facility that serves thousands of disadvantaged residents each year and is an economic engine for the community.

The comptroller intends to move forward in an effort to bridge the gap on these two very valid viewpoints and hopefully reach a compromise solution. She is working now to hold meetings beginning next week with both sides that focus on common ground and building consensus instead of rehashing differences. This issue is too important to our community on a number of levels for us to settle for anything less than a mutual agreement.

“The comptroller is reserving comment on the new lease plan revealed today until after these meetings and, hopefully, a compromise is reached.

I just asked the Comproller’s office if they have a new statement in light of today’s vote — I’ll let you know when they respond.

The next debate is if this will, or will not, affect the upcoming race between incumbent Jim Shrewsbury and challenger Lewis Reed. Shrewsbury is opposing the current lease while Reed supported it.

NOTE: I updated this post roughly 30 minutes after originally posting. I had indicated the bills had passed when in fact they had only been “perfected.” They will be brought up again next week for final passage. I adjusted a bit of the above language to reflect this as well as adjusting the headline.

Board Bills Related to BJC Deal Posted, Then Pulled

Today Three Board Bills relating to the controversial proposal to grant a long-term lease to BJC Healthcare for a section of Forest Park were posted on the Board of Aldermen’s site. However, seven hours later these three were replaced with three non-related bills.

The above image is from my RSS reader, showing three bills posted between 10:24am and 10:32am this morning (the lower three). The numbers in question are 371, 372 and 373. Later in the day the same numbers were used again. Clicking on the links for the three earlier bills takes you to a blank board bill page — the three bills had been pulled.

At first glance you might not think the lower one, BB371, is related to Forest Park as it has to do with rezoning. But, if you look up city block 2022 it is the parcel in question. Was the decision made by Ald. Roddy to pull the bills from consideration this week?
Opponents of the plan have gathered the required signatures to require a city-wide vote in order to lease or sell park land. It is possible we may see some not-so-good old fashioned machine politics at work this week to shove this through the pipeline before we as citizens get a chance to vote on the ballot measure.

Based on my understanding of the rules, the board cannot introduce and pass the measure all in the same day. However, it could be introduced Friday for its “first reading” and then come out of committee in a coming week and get its second and third readings all at once (requires suspending the rules which is done although usually not for something so contentious.

Jake Wagman of the Post-Dispatch had more to say on this subject today on Political Fix. For more information on the grassroots citizens group fighting the proposal visit ProtectForestPark.org.

UPDATE 1/18/07 – 7am

I received an early morning return phone from President Shrewsbury with answers to questions I had reqarding this situation. Here is the story. The bills were submitted to the clerk yesterday but apparently someone wanted to make some changes so they were pulled from the agenda. Mr. Shrewsbury indicated the deadline for the printed agenda is 10am today so we will see in the next few hours if they are resubmitted.

Mr. Shrewsbury indicated two will be sent to the Parks committee, chaired by the bills’ sponsor Ald. Roddy. The third bill, relating to zoning, will be sent to the HUDZ (Housing, Urban Development & Zoning) committee chaired by Ald. Wessels. Apparently the two bills going to Parks do not require a public hearing, but the zoning bill will.

So despite a successful cititzen group getting the question of the sale or lease of parks on the ballot for all of us to vote on, Ald. Roddy is going to attempt to shove this through prior to that vote. While the zoning change may come in the next session they are trying to get the two bills related to the lease structure approved ahead of a citizen vote on the issue. As has been the case all along with the BJC deal, the process stinks. Something is wrong in the way the entire issue has been handled from day one. It is not getting any better.

I’ve not seen a report from the aldermen the mayor selected to be on a committee reviewing the lease terms. I’ve not been invited to a public forum to talk through and educate the public on the exact terms of the deal.

Please contact your alderman immediately! I would also ask that you contact President Shrewsbury as well as 6th Ward Alderman and candidate for the President’s seat, Lewis Reed. Let both of them know how you feel about them voting on this issue prior to a citizen driven ballot initiative. Time is of the essence folks, if you are concerned as I am about how deals get done in this city you will speak up now.

8am — let BJC know what you think too (contact form);

Some Kudos for the Board of Aldermen

Usually I am complaining about what our elected representatives are not doing, or in some cases things they should not be doing.  They seem to provide an endless supply of material.  Every so often, however, are some good things that deserve recognition.

Two bills warrant such recognition:

The first is Board Bill 175 sponsored by Ald. Matt Villa (D-11th) and Ald. Charles Quincy Troupe (D-1st):

An ordinance pertaining to parking for disabled persons; amending paragraph (A) of Section 17.76.020 of the Revised Code, as enacted in Section One of Ordinance 65142 in order to add “Blindness” to the list of disabilities; and containing an emergency clause.

This came about because the city’s Office on the Disabled would not renew a blind woman’s parking designation in front of her house.  Of course, she didn’t drive but her husband did.  By having a designated parking space it allowed her the comfort of knowing how to get in and out of the house.  Mayor Slay called the woman to apologize on behelf of the City.  The bill, introduced last July, was fully passed and sent to the Mayor for signature.
Board Bill 323 was introduced by Housing and Urban Design Chair Ald. Fred Wessels, (D-13th) on December 15, 2006:

An ordinance directing the Board of Public Service to adopt Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building rating system for all newly constructed and renovated city-owned facilities.

Signed on as co-sponsors were seven other aldermen: April Ford-Griffin (D-5th), Phyllis Young (D-7th), Stephen Gregali (D-14th), Joe Roddy (D-17th), Craig Schmid (D-20th), Bill Waterhouse (D-24th) and Jim Shrewsbury, President of the Board of Aldermen.   This, I believe, is an important step by the city.  The bill, if passed and becomes law, would require new facilities greater than 5,000sf to acheive the silver level.

So kudos to the aldermen listed above for taking some important steps in the right direction.  The first alderman to introduce a bill establishing a new pro-urban form-based zoning code will become my first Alderman of the Year award.

New Rules from EPA on 2008 Cars & Medium Duty Vehicles

Via Green Car Congress: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued its final ruling on how fuel economy is calcuated and posted for new cars. The methods, last revised in 1984, are now supposed to provide closer to real MPG for most drivers. This means, ta da, the estimates posted for the cars will be dropping.

Compared to today’s estimates, the city mpg estimates for the manufacturers of most vehicles will drop by about 12% on average, and by as much as 30% for some vehicles. The highway mpg estimates will drop on average by about 8%, and by as much as 25% for some vehicles.

The decreased fuel economy, the EPA took pains to point out, is not a result of a change by the automakers, but in the agency’s methodology for estimating performance.

This will have an impact on the perception of hybrids as well:

In vehicles that achieve generally better fuel economy, such as gasoline-electric hybrid vehicles, new city estimates will be about 20 to 30% lower than today’s labels, and new highway estimates will be 10 to 20% lower, according to the EPA.

The nature of current hybrid technology—the addition of a battery as a second source of on-board power, sophisticated control systems, and sometimes a smaller engine—makes a hybrid’s fuel economy more sensitive to certain factors, such as colder weather and air conditioning use.

The new calcuation method and posting of information will be on all 2008 models, including for the first time medium-duty trucks. And the auto industry being what it is, you can expect some 2008 models in showrooms in the first few months of 2007.