Poll: Thoughts on the resignation of St. Louis Police Board member Todd Epsten

Last week the state controlled St. Louis police board had a leadership change:

Todd Epsten, the last Board of Police Commissioners member appointed by Governor Matt Blunt, abruptly resigned on Wednesday after he was ousted as president by a Nixon appointee, Bettye Battle-Turner.Epsten said later he believed the board’s three other appointed members acted at Nixon’s request. Nixon appointed all three, and all came on within the last 15 months.

Nixon denied personally asking his appointees to select a new president, but said he would not be surprised if his senior staff had not talked to those three members.

“I thought it moved more quickly than I perhaps thought it would, but I think it got to where it was going to get, and now my focus is on making sure that we get a quality appointment to fill out the board,” Nixon said. It will be his fourth; the board’s fifth member is fellow Democrat Francis Slay, the St. Louis mayor. Slay supported Epsten in Wednesday’s vote.

The three remaining appointed members, Nixon said, share his philosophy that day-to-day operations of the department should be left to chief Dan Isom. He would not directly answer if he thought Epsten micromanaged.

“I mean we’ve all seen stories over the many years of the police board,” he said. “Obviously I’ve been in law enforcement and elective office for many years. I just think my philosophy has been that this is a board that should provide guidance, should provide support.” (Source: St. Louis Public Radio)

The poll this week asks for your thoughts on this matter.  Do you even care? Will it matter on the street? Was Epsten micromanaging as Gov Nixon says?

– Steve Patterson

Poll results: Readers think Arizona’s immigration law is unconstitutional

The following are the results of the poll from last week:

Q: Thoughts on Arizona’s new immigration law? Pick one:

1. The law is unconstitutional. 63 [38.89%]
2. Something was needed, but this law goes to far. 40 [24.69%]
3. The law is just right, good job Arizona. 38 [23.46%]
4. The law doesn’t go far enough, should be tougher. 13 [8.02%]
5. Other answer… 6 [3.7%]
6. No opinion 2 [1.23%]

During the week the #2 & #3 answers switch places back and forth.

The “other” answers provided by readers were:

1. Pandering to angry whites; won’t be enforced.
2. Bad law, but Federal Government’s fault for not addressing immigration refo
3. Maybe we can attract more immigrants to STL instead of Arizona! We have the room!
4. unconstitutional and needs to ban any illegal immigrants from all over the world
5. Could they make the police state any more blatant?
6. It’s unconstitutional. But it highlights the failures of the Federal govern

If a silver lining exists it is that the issue may now get the proper attention in Washington.

– Steve Patterson

Poll: who would you name our new bridge after?

The new bridge over the Mississippi River has been named the Ronald Wilson Reagan Memorial Bridge. Reagan was born in Tampico, IL (4+ hours away) in 1911 but moved to California in the 1930s.

In August 2004 William Perkins and Russ Reike, members of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, gave Rep. Jerry Costello (D-IL) petitions with over 4,000 signatures supporting the naming of the new bridge “Veteran’s Memorial Bridge”. This effort is supported by Rep. John Shimpkus (R-IL) and Illinois Governor Pat Quinn. The Missouri State Legislature voted on August 28, 2005 to name the bridge after Ronald Reagan (Source: Wikipedia)

There are many others from the St. Louis area (Illinois & Missouri) that would be better to name the bridge after.  The Agnes Moorehead Memorial Bridge has some campy appeal, traffic reporters could say things like, “There is an accident on the Endora so expect delays.” Seriously, someone from the metro east would be a much better fit than Reagan who grew up more than four hours north of the metro area.

Although she was born in DuPage County near Chicago, the late Katherine Dunham often called East St. Louis her home.  The poll this week asks who you’d name the bridge after.  I’ve included a long list but you have the option to name your own answer.

– Steve Patterson

Readers support changes to laws regarding Cannabis sativa

The results of last week’s poll are interesting.

Q: What are you thoughts on Cannabis sativa? (Pick up to three)

1. Industrial hemp is not a drug and farmers should be allowed to grow the crop 97 [24.49%]
2. Possession should be decriminalized 96 [24.24%]
3. Medical marijuana should be legalized in Missouri 74 [18.69%]
4. Possession of small quantities should be decriminalized 48 [12.12%]
5. The “medical” need is abused where allowed 38 [9.6%]
6. The drug is bad and possession should remain illegal 18 [4.55%]
7. Other answer… 16 [4.04%]
8. If industrial hemp is allowed it would be used to hide the growing of the drug 9 [2.27%]

Note that people could select up to three answers. Thankfully the ‘industrial hemp is not a drug’ answer got the most votes.  But it is also clear many of the readers that voted in the poll favor some form of decriminalization.

The “other” answers were:

1. It should be legalized and taxed.
2. it doesnt do as much damage as liquor so i dont see why its not legal already.
3. don’t care
4. This seems off topic
5. Legalize It!
6. Marijuana should be 100% completely legal!
7. Full legalization
8. Full legalization for all purposes
9. It’s a slippery slope but some new options should be investigated.
10. Legalize it!
11. It should be treated like alcohol
12. Full Legalization – How whiskey is legal but weed isn’t speaks of our hypoc
13. Marijuana should be legalized and taxed.
14. Legalize all uses
15. legalize it! and i don’t even smoke!
16. use taxes from its’ sale to finance states that are bankrupt.

As attitudes about Cannabis and the drug marijuana relax, cities will need polices to deal with the change.  The next ten years will be interesting as the laws change.

– Steve Patterson

Poll: Immigration law and cities

Arizona’s new immigration  law is the new hot topic being debated nationwide and cities are getting drawn into the debate:

At least three Arizona cities are considering a lawsuit to block the new immigration enforcement law.

Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon is indicating he’s ready to go it alone and file suit to keep the law from taking effect.

Gordon criticized the measure as “economically devastating.” Councilman Claude Mattox said council approval is needed to challenge the law.

In Tucson, council members want more time to discuss whether they should take legal action.

City Councilwoman Regina Romero said it’s her belief the law is unconstitutional and urged her colleagues to challenge what she described as a misguided law.

Flagstaff council members are expected to review their legal options against the measure. (Source)

Here is a short video report from the Associated Press:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4J-mEMLp9DQ

Under the ban, sent to Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer by the state legislature Thursday, schools will lose state funding if they offer any courses that “promote the overthrow of the U.S. government, promote resentment of a particular race or class of people, are designed primarily for students of a particular ethnic group or advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals.” (source)

In some St. Louis circles, Arizona’s new law is a growing concern.  As shown above, it was the most recent cover story on the Spanish language paper Red Latina.

The poll this week asks your views on the new law. I didn’t include specifics about St. Louis or cities in general but keep that in mind as you vote in the poll (Top right) and comment below.

– Steve Patterson